My Lord, Ladies and Gentlemen, It is my honour to welcome you to this discussion marking the launch of The Practitioner’s Guide to International Family Law: An Indian Perspective. This Guide is not a dusty tome to be shelved—it is a living instrument, a steady lamp in the often murky corridors of cross-border matrimonial disputes, parental rights, and surrogacy dilemmas. It is designed to guide families and legal practitioners alike through some of the most complex legal thickets of our time. I begin by expressing my deepest gratitude to my father, Mr. Anil Malhotra. His decades-long commitment to legal scholarship and advocacy form the very foundation of this project. He has been my constant guide—the Krishna to my Arjuna—counselling with wisdom, intervening with verses, and offering clarity when fog of law and life cloud the path. If this Guide reflects even a fraction of his insight, it will serve not only as a reference but as a testimony to legal perseverance. It is also my privilege to welcome our distinguished speakers. His Lordship Justice A.K. Sikri, whose judicial restraint and clarity have long illumined the often turbulent waters of family law, stands as a beacon of jurisprudential balance. His reflections on Parental Alienation Syndrome and his fidelity to constitutional values have reshaped the contours of how we view familial relationships within the Indian legal framework. Senior Advocate R.S. Cheema’s advocacy, marked by surgical precision and constitutional depth, continues to strengthen the edifice of rights-based family law. Emeritus Professor Dr. Balram K. Gupta’s lifelong journey in legal theory has inspired generations to engage with law as both science and dharma. Ms. Mrunalini Deshmukh brings unparalleled mastery to the practice of matrimonial law—her approach fluid, principled, and transformative. And Shri Ramesh Inder Singh, Padma Shri awardee and former Chief Information Commissioner, reminds us that transparency is the cornerstone of family law, for secrecy too often shields injustice. We meet at a moment of profound transition. The Indian family, long shaped by joint households and enduring values, now navigates a global legal landscape: Hague Abduction Convention disputes, surrogacy regulation, cross-border custody enforcement. As the revered Tamil philosopher Thiruvalluvar once wrote, “A home where virtue resides is a true home.” That virtue today must reside not only in conduct, but in law. This Guide refuses the rigidity of static dogma. It embraces the law as an evolving force—one that must respond to both the needs of a modern diaspora and the enduring sanctity of familial relationships. Every clause, every judgment, every precedent ultimately affects the lived realities of parents and children—from Chandigarh to California. Before I conclude, I must pay tribute to my uncle, Advocate Ranjit Malhotra. As the first Indian Felix Scholar at SOAS (LL.M., 1993), and a stalwart of the IAFL, IBA, and other international legal associations, his contributions to international family law have been formidable. From co-authoring nine books with my father to presenting at Harvard on child abduction law, his work reflects integrity, commitment, and internationalism. His testimony before the Rajya Sabha on surrogacy law reform stands as an enduring public service. Staying with the theme of family, I thank my mother, my sister, and our extended family for their unwavering encouragement. Without their love and strength, this work would not have come to life. I also wish to recognise the exceptional team at Oakbridge Publishers—especially Shreesh and Vikesh—for their professionalism and dedication. Finally, I thank the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana. Your vision and meticulous planning have enabled this discussion. To everyone attending today—virtually and in spirit—I say: welcome. May our deliberations today be marked by vigour, empathy, and scholarly integrity. Let us chart new tributaries in international family law, guided always by the constitutional compass.

This in-depth legal presentation examines the enduring impact of the S.S. Lotus decision (PCIJ Series A No. 10, 1927) on the doctrines of state and commercial immunity in maritime law, with a specific focus on English jurisprudence. Delivered with academic precision, the video explores how the Lotus principle—that jurisdiction is presumed in the absence of a prohibitive rule—continues to shape judicial approaches to sovereign immunity, particularly as it relates to state-owned vessels involved in commercial activity. The discussion opens with a reference to Lord Finlay’s celebrated opinion in the Lotus case, where he observed that "The Law of Nations does not recognize the assumption of jurisdiction for ‘protection’; there never has been any such general consent by the nations of the world." This key insight reinforces the principle that jurisdiction must derive from clear legal authorization—an imperative that English law upholds through the presumption‑of‑jurisdiction default and the specific limitations imposed by the State Immunity Act 1978. Through the integration of this presumption with a precedent-based, predictive legal structure, English courts have emerged as global leaders in balancing sovereign prerogatives with the need for commercial accountability. This is particularly evident in the treatment of state-owned vessels and cargo, where the law distinguishes between acts jure imperii (sovereign acts) and jure gestionis (commercial acts). Key topics discussed in this video include: 1. Presumption-of-Jurisdiction Default in English Law: England inherits the Lotus presumption that jurisdiction exists unless expressly excluded. State immunity survives only where mandated by international or domestic law, streamlining adjudication in maritime commercial disputes. 2. Statutory-Judicial Synergy under the State Immunity Act 1978: Section 10 denies immunity to state-owned vessels engaged in commercial activity. The statute codifies the restrictive doctrine of immunity while permitting courts to interpret carve-outs against a deep well of precedent. Notable case law includes The Parlement Belge [1880], The Porto Alexandre [1920], and The Cristina [1938]. 3. Evolution of the Restrictive Immunity Doctrine: The video traces the gradual shift from absolute to restrictive immunity through major cases such as: The Philippine Admiral [1977] – introducing the commercial activity exception; I Congreso del Partido [1983] – affirming the “nature” test over “purpose”; Alcom v Colombia [1984] – distinguishing sovereign from commercial use; Trendtex v Central Bank of Nigeria [1977] – adopting restrictive immunity for commercial financial instruments; SerVaas Inc v Rafidain Bank [2012] – re-evaluating sovereign use of property at the time of enforcement; Argentum Exploration Ltd v Republic of South Africa [2024] – dissecting the sovereign versus commercial character of salvage operations. 4. Modern Judicial Trends and Maritime Implications: The presentation analyzes how English courts address questions of enforcement jurisdiction, especially in the arrest of state vessels and seizure of cargo. Courts now employ a functional, fact-based test that probes whether property is genuinely used for sovereign purposes or has crossed into commercial territory. 5. Comparative Analysis and International Harmonization: By setting a de facto standard, English case law has influenced other jurisdictions in adopting the restrictive approach. The video explores how domestic and international courts increasingly harmonize their practices by relying on England’s fusion of the Lotus principle and statutory guidance under the State Immunity Act 1978. 6. Policy Considerations in Maritime Jurisprudence: The presentation addresses broader policy concerns: granting immunity to vessels engaged in commerce risks undermining fair competition, eroding environmental safeguards, and destabilizing maritime trade. Equally, the judiciary ensures that immunity is not eroded in core sovereign functions such as humanitarian missions or naval deployments. Conclusion: The Lotus judgment remains foundational in modern international law by articulating a permissive rule of jurisdiction, subject only to clear prohibitions. This presumption is tempered by the restrictive theory of state immunity, which permits scrutiny of acts deemed commercial in nature. English law, through its legislative and jurisprudential developments, exemplifies this balance—preserving sovereign dignity while providing meaningful recourse to private claimants in maritime disputes.

This in-depth analysis explores corporate involvement in atrocity crimes, including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, while examining regulatory trends from the 1600s to the present day. Corporate complicity in such crimes has a long history, with businesses operating in conflict zones or under oppressive regimes often becoming entangled in human rights violations. Drawing from Annika van Baar’s research, this discussion outlines key legal, historical, and corporate responsibility frameworks that have shaped global responses to corporate participation in mass atrocities. Over the centuries, corporate involvement in crimes against humanity has evolved from state-sanctioned exploitation during colonialism to modern-day corporate partnerships with oppressive regimes. The lack of regulation in the early periods allowed businesses to profit from human rights abuses without consequence. However, with the rise of international law and human rights norms, efforts have been made to hold corporations accountable. From the Nuremberg Trials, which established precedents for prosecuting business leaders for war crimes, to contemporary cases like Lafarge’s involvement in terrorism financing, legal systems have struggled to consistently apply justice to corporate actors. An important aspect of corporate crime regulation is the role of international criminal justice and civil society. While legal accountability remains difficult to enforce, human rights organizations and advocacy groups have played a significant role in pressuring corporations to uphold ethical business practices. The increasing focus on corporate due diligence and human rights compliance has led to the institutionalization of regulatory norms, although challenges persist in ensuring meaningful enforcement. This video provides a structured overview of the historical and legal dimensions of corporate involvement in atrocity crimes. By analyzing key cases—including Shell’s complicity in human rights violations in Nigeria, Blackwater’s role in war crimes in Iraq, and the Lafarge terrorism financing case—this discussion highlights patterns in corporate misconduct and the ongoing efforts to establish accountability. The role of civil society and legal reform is also examined as a crucial factor in shaping the future of corporate responsibility.

Our cultural heritage is under siege—not by war or conquest, but by the insidious plunder of illicit trade. The inability of legal frameworks to effectively safeguard India's heritage has allowed invaluable artifacts, from ancient idols to modernist furniture, to disappear into the international market. Nowhere is this failure more apparent than in the case of Chandigarh’s mid-century modern furniture, designed by Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret, which has been systematically removed from government buildings and auctioned abroad for staggering sums. This is not merely a matter of aesthetics but a glaring indictment of legal shortcomings—both international and domestic—that have enabled such cultural depredation. International cultural heritage law, including the 1970 UNESCO Convention, was established to prevent the illicit trafficking of cultural property. However, the practical enforcement of these laws remains weak. India, despite being a signatory, has faced significant obstacles in reclaiming stolen artifacts, largely due to the non-retroactive nature of the Convention and the burden of proof placed on source nations. Courts in market countries often demand conclusive evidence that an object was illegally exported, shifting the onus onto India to establish clear documentation. This requirement is particularly challenging for objects like Chandigarh’s furniture, which, unlike traditional antiquities, were not historically registered or cataloged as cultural treasures. In several instances, such as the 2008 Paris auction controversy, Indian authorities have been unable to halt sales due to the lack of immediate and definitive proof of illicit export. Beyond international treaties, India’s domestic legal framework is similarly inadequate. The Antiquities and Art Treasures Act of 1972, designed to regulate the export of cultural property, only applies to objects over 100 years old. This arbitrary threshold excludes significant pieces of modern heritage, such as Chandigarh’s mid-century furniture, leaving them unprotected under Indian law. Even for antiquities that qualify under the Act, enforcement has been weak due to poor documentation, lack of awareness, and procedural inefficiencies. Judicial interpretations have further complicated enforcement, as seen in cases like *State v. Bhuwan Chand Joshi*, where legal loopholes and insufficient expert testimony led to acquittals in cases of stolen heritage. India’s challenges in enforcing cultural property laws are compounded by jurisdictional and evidentiary hurdles. Legal action against smugglers and dealers is often slow and cumbersome, allowing stolen artifacts to be dispersed across multiple jurisdictions before legal proceedings can be initiated. The global nature of the illicit antiquities trade demands stronger cross-border cooperation, yet India’s efforts have been largely reactive rather than preventive. Bilateral agreements, such as the 2016 U.S.-India Cultural Property Agreement, have provided some recourse, restricting the import of stolen artifacts into the U.S., but similar agreements with European nations remain limited. To address these deficiencies, a multi-pronged strategy is required. Comprehensive documentation and inventory of heritage assets must be prioritized to establish provenance and prevent illicit export. Strengthening enforcement mechanisms, including specialized art crime units within law enforcement agencies, can enhance vigilance at ports and borders. Legislative amendments to the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act should expand its scope to include historically significant objects regardless of age. Additionally, India must actively engage in diplomatic negotiations for stronger bilateral treaties with major art market countries, ensuring expedited repatriation of stolen artifacts. Public awareness and community involvement are equally crucial. A well-informed populace is the first line of defense against heritage theft, particularly in regions housing vulnerable cultural artifacts. Local engagement in heritage conservation efforts can deter illegal trade and foster a sense of collective responsibility for cultural preservation. The ongoing loss of India’s cultural heritage is not an inevitable fate but a consequence of systemic legal and enforcement failures. By modernizing its legal framework, strengthening enforcement, and fostering international collaboration, India can reclaim its heritage and prevent future losses. The protection of cultural property is not merely a legal obligation but a civilizational imperative—one that demands urgent and decisive action. The fate of our heritage depends not only on the strength of our laws but on the will to enforce them effectively.

Dive into the fascinating history of the Sikh Empire, the last major indigenous power in India before British colonial rule. This comprehensive exploration unveils the remarkable leadership of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, famously known as the "Lion of Punjab," whose vision transformed the Punjab region into a prosperous and united empire. Learn how this iconic empire navigated turbulent times, resisted invasions, and fostered inclusivity, unity, and progress. This video covers the rise of the Sikh Empire, tracing its origins during the decline of the Mughal Empire and the threats posed by Afghan incursions. It highlights Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s extraordinary military strategies, diplomatic acumen, and inclusive governance. Discover how he modernized his army with the help of French and Italian generals, introduced gold and silver Nanakshahi coins, and strengthened the cultural and spiritual heritage of Punjab, including the iconic transformation of the Harmandir Sahib into the Golden Temple. Explore the empire’s revolutionary water resource management, leveraging the fertile lands of Punjab’s five rivers—Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej—for agricultural prosperity. This video also discusses how these practices laid the groundwork for modern irrigation systems and influenced the region’s development under British rule. Understand the critical treaties, including the Treaty of Amritsar, that defined the Sikh Empire’s relations with the British East India Company. Delve into the conflicts, such as the Anglo-Sikh Wars, that led to the empire’s eventual annexation in 1849, marking a turning point in South Asian history. Gain insights into how the Sikh Empire’s legacy shaped contemporary issues like water-sharing disputes and the Indus Waters Treaty. From the historic Koh-i-Noor diamond to the modern implications of resource management, this video connects past and present, offering valuable lessons for leadership, sustainability, and international cooperation. If you're passionate about Indian history, heritage, international relations, and the enduring impact of visionary leadership, this video is a must-watch. Subscribe now and explore the rich history of the Sikh Empire, its achievements, and its lasting influence on South Asia and the world.

This Paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of the landmark case "Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation)" before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This case epitomizes the intricate overlay of legal frameworks addressing terrorism financing, racial discrimination, and their broader implications on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ESCR), as well as other human rights violations and crimes. The paper begins by outlining the foundational aspects of the case, where Ukraine accuses the Russian Federation of violating the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism by purportedly providing funds, weapons, and other forms of support to illegal armed groups. These groups have committed acts of terrorism in Ukrainian territory, including the tragic downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. Concurrently, Ukraine alleges violations of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, asserting that Russia has engaged in systematic discrimination against Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar communities, particularly in the annexed region of Crimea. Our analysis then delves into the procedural and substantive legal arguments presented by both Ukraine and the Russian Federation, highlighting the novel legal questions raised by the case regarding the interpretation and application of the two conventions. It emphasizes the ICJ's role in interpreting these international instruments within the context of contemporary geopolitical conflicts and the challenges posed by asymmetric warfare and non-state actors. Furthermore, the paper explores the connections between violations of the conventions and broader human rights concerns, particularly focusing on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ESCR). It argues that the financing of terrorism and racial discrimination have far-reaching implications for the realization of ESCR, as they can exacerbate poverty, hinder access to education and healthcare, and disrupt social cohesion. By undermining the economic and social infrastructure, these violations perpetuate a cycle of deprivation and discrimination that extends beyond the immediate victims. Additionally, the analysis extends to the interrelation between the alleged violations and other forms of human rights abuses, including the potential for acts of terrorism to constitute crimes against humanity, and the systemic discrimination against ethnic groups to trigger international concerns over genocide and ethnic cleansing. It critically examines how the intersectionality of human rights violations requires a holistic approach to international law that encompasses the protection of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. The paper concludes by reflecting on the broader implications of the case for international legal practice and the enforcement of international human rights norms. It underscores the importance of international judicial mechanisms in addressing complex human rights issues and the need for robust international cooperation to prevent the financing of terrorism and eliminate racial discrimination. The case study serves as a pivotal reference point for understanding the dynamic interplay between different facets of international law and human rights, highlighting the challenges and opportunities for advancing global justice and human dignity.

In this video, we explore the significance of remembrance and its portrayal through broadcasters. How do they shape collective memory, and what happens when remembrance fades? Join us as we delve into the language of remembrance—vergangugeisverithgung—and examine its role in shaping narratives, preserving history, and addressing the gaps left by a lack of remembrance.

Trade has emerged as a critical growth engine in Southeast Asia, generating welfare, creating jobs, and alleviating poverty. The dynamic growth in services trade, driven by digitalization and new technologies, presents vast opportunities in one of the world's most economically vibrant regions. However, this growth is accompanied by challenges such as regulatory complexities and geopolitical tensions. International investment arbitrations and ad hoc courts and tribunals play a pivotal role in navigating these opportunities and challenges International investment arbitrations provide a framework for resolving disputes that arise between investors and states, ensuring that foreign investments are protected and disputes are resolved impartially. For instance, the case of Sanum Investments v. Laos highlighted the importance of investment arbitration under the China-Laos Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). The tribunal's decision provided clarity on the BIT's application and underscored the role of arbitration in safeguarding investor rights in Southeast Asia. Another significant case is Beijing Urban Construction Group Co. Ltd. v. Yemen, where the investor sought redress under the China-Yemen BIT. Although Yemen is not in Southeast Asia, this case is pertinent due to the involvement of a Chinese company and reflects the broader application of investment treaties in protecting Asian investors' interests abroad, which in turn bolsters confidence in Southeast Asia’s investment landscape. Ad hoc courts and tribunals also contribute significantly to the services trade landscape in Southeast Asia. These institutions address disputes on a case-by-case basis, allowing for flexibility and adaptability in resolving complex trade and investment issues. For example, the UNCITRAL arbitration case between Indonesia and Churchill Mining demonstrated the effectiveness of ad hoc tribunals in resolving disputes involving substantial investments and state actions. This case underscored the necessity for fair and impartial dispute resolution mechanisms in maintaining investor confidence. Both international investment arbitrations and ad hoc tribunals help mitigate the regulatory complexities that characterize Southeast Asia. They offer legal certainty and predictability, which are crucial for businesses operating in multiple jurisdictions with varying legal frameworks. These institutions also play a role in managing geopolitical tensions by providing a mechanism for peaceful resolution of disputes, thereby contributing to regional stability and cooperation. The evolving economic landscape in Southeast Asia, marked by rapid digitalization and technological advancements, requires robust legal frameworks to support and sustain growth. International investment arbitrations and ad hoc tribunals are integral to this process, as they help ensure that the legal and regulatory environments keep pace with economic developments. Their role in providing a fair and efficient means of resolving disputes is indispensable for fostering an environment where trade can flourish. In conclusion, international investment arbitrations and ad hoc courts and tribunals are vital to the growth and stability of services trade in Southeast Asia. They provide the legal infrastructure necessary to navigate the region's opportunities and challenges, ensuring that trade continues to be a driving force for economic development. As Southeast Asia continues to evolve economically, the importance of these institutions in maintaining a stable and predictable trade environment cannot be overstated.