Abstract
Seemingly unrelated two legal phenomena, the law and development movement (LDM) and the Indian public interest litigation (PIL) share some commonalities. First, they have been supported by the underlying idea of legal instrumentalism throughout their various phases. Second, they both are now facing difficulties because their substantial attempt lies in establishing both the modern law principles and their modification at the same time and in a compressed manner and it has increasingly become difficult and complex in the era of globalisation. In order to make these points clear, this essay first traces the development of the LDM from the 1960s to the current phase and extracts changing and unchanging features among the phases. Then, discussing that its difficulties ultimately lie in the compressed modernisation process that latecomer countries have to go through, the current transformation of the Indian PIL, which is sometimes dubbed ‘conservative turn’, as it is occasionally used against the poor in the very name of public interest, is examined. The experiences of the LDM and the Indian PIL show that the conundrum of the double-bind task of establishing the modern law principles and their modification differs across countries and time.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
Matsuo (2009).
- 6.
World Bank (2003), p. 1.
- 7.
This section partially draws from the author’s previous publication (Sato 2008), and is reused here with permission. Please check with original copyright owners before re-using material.
- 8.
Merryman (1977), p. 461.
- 9.
Trubek and Galanter (1974), pp. 1065–67.
- 10.
Seidman (1972).
- 11.
Trubek (1972), pp. 2–3.
- 12.
Ibid. p. 10.
- 13.
Supra note 1, Trubek and Santos.
- 14.
Supra note 11 pp. 10–11.
- 15.
Supra note 9 pp. 1079–80.
- 16.
Tamahana (1995).
- 17.
Rostow (1960).
- 18.
The development paradigm in the 1950s and 1960s also included the import substitution industrialization (ISI) policy and the stress in the role of governments and states. The LDS did not question ISI policy, which often run against democracy or free market, even though they questioned the causality from economic growth to liberty and democracy.
- 19.
Davis and Trebilcock (1999).
- 20.
Supra note 17.
- 21.
Beyond Rostow, the influence of Weber have also been widely recognised regarding modernisation theory (see supra note 11).
- 22.
Supra note 9 p. 1080.
- 23.
Supra note 16.
- 24.
Supra note 9.
- 25.
Fine and Milonakis (2009).
- 26.
Snyder (1980).
- 27.
Even so, dependency theory admitted the possibility of income redistribution function of legal system, such as land reform. To that extent, legal instrumentalism is also shared, but in a different direction from the LDM and LDS.
- 28.
Supra note 25.
- 29.
Yamada (2008).
- 30.
Trubek (1996).
- 31.
Supra note 3, Santos.
- 32.
Shihata (1997).
- 33.
Supra note 29.
- 34.
- 35.
North (1990).
- 36.
Chang (2002).
- 37.
Supra note 1, Yasuda.
- 38.
Also, the World Bank gave title “Building Institution for Markets” to its World Development Report 2002.
- 39.
The principle of liability with fault may be added as fourth principle.
- 40.
Thiruvengadam (2008).
- 41.
See the judgement in 2010, State of Uttaranchal vs Balwant Singh Chaufal and Others (Civil Appeal No. 1134–35 of 2002).
- 42.
Needless to say, as these issues are compatible and coexists, it may be said that these are types of subject matters, rather than stages.
- 43.
Singh (2014).
- 44.
Ramanathan (2014) and supra note 4.
- 45.
Saad-Filho and Johnston (2005).
References
Bhuwania, A. (2017). Courting the people: Public interest litigation in post-emergency India. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chang, H.-J. (2002). Kicking away the ladder: Development strategy in historical perspective. London: Anthem Press.
Davis, K., & Trebilcock, M. J. (1999). What role do legal institutions play in development? In Draft prepared for the International Monetary Fund’s Conference on Second Generation Reforms, November 8–9, 1999.
Divan, S. (2016). Public interest litigation. In S. Choudhry, M. Khosla & P. B. Mehta (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the Indian constitution (pp. 662–679). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fine, B., & Milonakis, D. (2009). From economics imperialism to Freakonomics: The shifting boundaries between economics and other social sciences. London: Routledge.
Golub, S. (2009). The commission on legal empowerment of the poor: One big step forward and a few steps back for development policy and practice. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 1(1), 101–116.
Hoverkamp, H. (1995). Law and economics in the United States: A brief historical survey. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(2), 331–352.
Matsuo, H. (2005). The rule of law and economic development: A cause or a result? In Y. Matsuura (Ed.), The role of law in development: Past, present and future (pp. 59–70). Nagoya: CALE Books 2, Nagoya University.
Matsuo, H. (2009). Good governance and the rule of law: A challenge of law and development. Tokyo: Nihon Hyoron Sha. (in Japanese).
Merryman, J. H. (1977). Comparative law and social change: On the origins, style, decline and revival of the law and development movement. American Journal of Comparative Law, 25(3), 457–491.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ramanathan, U. (2014). In the name of the people: The expansion of judicial power. In M. Suresh & S. Narrain (Eds.), The shifting scales of justice: The supreme court in neo-liberal India (pp. 39–58). New Delhi: Orient BlackSwan.
Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth: A non-communist manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Saad-Filho, A., & Johnston, D. (2005). Introduction. In A. Saad-Filho & D. Jonston (Eds.), Neoliberalism: A critical reader (pp. 1–6). London: Pluto Press.
Santos, A. (2006). The world bank’s uses of the ‘rule of law’ promise in economic development. In D. M. Trubek & A. Santos (Eds.), The new law and economic development: A critical appraisal (pp. 253–300). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sato, H. (2008). Book review: Law and economic development edited by Hans-Bernd Schäfer and Angara V. Raja. The Developing Economies, 46(2), 209–212.
Sato, H. (2017). The universality, peculiarity, and sustainability of Indian public interest litigation reconsidered. World Development, 100, 59–68.
Seidman, R. B. (1972). Law and development: A general theory. Law and Society Review, 6(3), 311–342.
Shihata, I. F. I. (1997). Complementary reform: Essay on legal judicial and other institutional reforms supported by the world bank. Hague: Kluwer Law International.
Singh, U. K. (2014). The judicial nineties: Of politics, power and dissent. In M. Suresh & S. Narrain (Eds.), The shifting scales of justice: The supreme court in neo-liberal India (pp. 162–182). New Delhi: Orient BlackSwan.
Snyder, F. G. (1980). Law and development in the light of dependency theory. Law and Society Review, 14(3), 723–804.
Surya, D. (2009). Public interest litigation in India: A critical review. Civil Justice Quarterly, 28(1), 19–40.
Tamahana, B. Z. (1995). The lessons of law-and-development studies. American Journal of International Law, 89(2), 470–486.
Thiruvengadam, A. K. (2008). In pursuit of the common illumination of our house: Trans-judicial influence and the origins of PIL jurisprudence in South Asia. Indian Journal of Constitutional Law, 3(2), 67–96.
Trubek, D. M. (1972). Toward a social theory of law: An essay on the study of law and development. Yale Law Journal, 82(1), 1–50.
Trubek, D. M. (1996). Law and development: Then and now. In American Society of International Law (Ed.) Proceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting, American Society of International Law (pp. 223–226).
Trubek, D. M., & Galanter, M. (1974). Scholars in self-estrangement: Some reflections on the crisis in law and development studies in the United States. Wisconsin Law Review, 1974, 1062–1102.
Trubek, D. M., & Santos, A. (2006). Introduction: The third movement in law and development theory and the emergence of a new critical practice. In D. M. Trubek & A. Santos (Eds.), The new law and economic development: A critical appraisal (pp. 1–18). New York: Cambridge University Press.
World Bank. (2003). Legal and judicial reforms: Strategic directions. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Yamada, M. (2008). Evolution in the concept of development: How has the world bank’s legal assistance extended its reach. IDE Discussion Paper (IDE-JETRO) No. 133.
Yasuda, N. (2012). The new dimension of rule of law in development studies. Kansai Daigaku Hogaku Ronshu, 61(6), 52–132. (in Japanese).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sato, H. (2019). Commonalities in the Law and Development Movement and the Indian Public Interest Litigation: Reconsidering the Roots of Their Current Difficulties. In: Singh, M., Kumar, N. (eds) The Indian Yearbook of Comparative Law 2018. The Indian Yearbook of Comparative Law. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7052-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7052-6_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-7051-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-7052-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)