Latest news with #WorldJusticeProject
New Straits Times
3 hours ago
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Strong judiciary crucial for Malaysia's economic prospects
KUALA LUMPUR: Senior lawyer Steven Thiru paid tribute to former chief justice Tengku Tun Maimun Tuan Mat, saying under her stewardship, Malaysia made steady improvements in the Rule of Law Index. "We had a renaissance. We are doing better on the index on almost every score. Not the best, because we know we are not the best and we are still struggling, but far better than the past," he said. Malaysia ranked 55 out of 142 in the Rule of Law Index in 2023 and last year. Regionally, Malaysia also ranked seventh out of 15 countries in East Asia and Pacific over the same period. Speaking at the Public Forum on Judicial Integrity held at the Universiti Malaya Alumni Association Clubhouse on Sunday, Thiru said judicial independence was not just a concern for legal professionals but a crucial factor influencing foreign investment decisions. The Commonwealth Law Association president said the international community pays close attention to how the rule of law is upheld in each country. "The Rule of Law Index, compiled by the Washington-based World Justice Project, studies the rule of law in every country on factors such as freedom, freedom of speech, association, and so on. They also do a study on how independent the judiciary is in any particular country. "Why is the Rule of Law Index important? This is a document that is looked at by any foreign government if they want to invest in any particular country. "It wants to know, in any particular country, what is your rule of law health. "If it is not very healthy, they are not going to invest. No matter how many overseas trips you make and how much potential foreign direct investment you have, none of it is going to happen, as they will go back and ask the advisors, 'Show me the (Rule of Law) Index.' "If the index shows that you are performing badly, the advice to the government and to their businesspeople is to look somewhere else," said the former Malaysian Bar president.
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Correcting the image of the higher judiciary
Former Supreme Court judge Madan Lokur is known for his candour and courage. His occasional pungent comments on a wide array of subjects were quite a draw when he was on the Bench and also thereafter. He never minced words even when discretion and silence were an alluring option. He often publicly speaks his mind about several issues pertaining to the Indian judiciary. His criticisms often focus on the executive's attempts to tinker with the independence of the judiciary. Not everybody will agree with his criticisms, but these certainly can't be ignored or glossed over. At the recent World Justice Forum in Warsaw recently, Lokur was categorical that there were many aspects of our judiciary which should cause us concern. Pointing out India's low rank (79/142) in the World Justice Project's Rule of Law Index, he stated that this showed the country in a very poor light. The emphasis during his address was on the judiciary's relations with the executive. He threw more than a hint that governments were uncomfortable with independent judges and said delays in approving the recommendations of the apex court's collegium on judicial appointments had become far too frequent for comfort. Also, the executive was not acting fast in cases of corruption in the judiciary brought to its notice. He also referred to the huge backlog of cases in Indian courts. These criticisms need to be taken seriously because the country is doing so well on the economic front and cannot afford a poor image for its judiciary. From geopolitical standing to investment attractiveness, much will be at risk if such an image of the judiciary persists. Except for an occasional undignified debate or two, we have had a good record in respect of the higher judiciary. Even in connection with the recent episode involving Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi High Court, comments by the Supreme Court have been level-headed and dignified. The same cannot be said of the lower judiciary where there have been vituperative exchanges across the country's courts. What Lokur said in Warsaw was not anything that we did not already know. It has also been repeatedly said that in no other country are judges chosen by the judiciary itself. India is different and the Supreme Court has given itself this unique privilege. There is no point in getting exercised about it, unless it is proved that a nominee of the collegium which chooses him or her is a known dubious individual with no credentials at all. Save for a few exceptions we have had decent — if not exactly brilliant — individuals populating the Bench at the Supreme Court and the high courts. The case of Justice Varma, formerly of the Delhi HC, is more an aberration than the norm. There is a reasonably sound system of vetting of candidates for appointment to the judiciary that ensures a bad choice does not get made. If a nominee decides to be dishonest, the fault is not that of the system but that of the frailty of human nature. The same applies to partisanship. In every high court, there are individual judges with a predilection, normally subtle and occasionally unconcealed. Here again, suspicion of a bias colouring a decision is not good enough to paint a judge as unworthy. It is only fair that we should look for the legal correctness of a decision rather than hunt for misdemeanour. RK Raghavan is a former director of the Central Bureau of Investigation. The views expressed are personal.
Japan Today
07-07-2025
- Business
- Japan Today
The rule of law is key to capitalism − eroding it is bad news for American business
By Robert Bird Something dangerous is happening to the U.S. economy, and it's not inflation or trade wars. Chaotic deregulation and the selective enforcement of laws have upended markets and investor confidence. At one point, the threat of tariffs and resulting chaos evaporated US$4 trillion in value in the U.S. stock market. This approach isn't helping the economy, and there are troubling signs it will hurt both the U.S. and the global economy in the short and long term. The rule of law – the idea that legal rules apply to everyone equally, regardless of wealth or political connections − is essential for a thriving economy. Yet globally the respect for the rule of law is slipping, and the U.S. is slipping with it. According to annual rankings from the World Justice Project, the rule of law has declined in more than half of all countries for seven years in a row. The rule of law in the U.S., the most economically powerful nation in the world, is now weaker than the rule of law in Uruguay, Singapore, Latvia and over 20 other countries. When regulation is unnecessarily burdensome for business, government should lighten the load. However, arbitrary and frenzied deregulation does not free corporations to earn higher profits. As a business school professor with an MBA who has taught business law for over 25 years, and the author of a recently published book about the importance of legal knowledge to business, I can affirm that the opposite is true. Chaotic deregulation doesn't drive growth. It only fuels risk. Chaos undermines investment, talent and trust Legal uncertainty has become a serious drag on American competitiveness. A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that public policy risks — such as unexpected changes in taxes, regulation and enforcement — ranked among the top challenges businesses face, alongside more familiar business threats such as competition or economic volatility. Companies that can't predict how the law might change are forced to plan for the worst. That means holding back on long-term investment, slowing innovation and raising prices to cover new risks. When the government enforces rules arbitrarily, it also undermines property rights. For example, if a country enters into a major trade agreement and then goes ahead and violates it, that threatens the property rights of the companies that relied on the agreement to conduct business. If the government can seize assets without due process, those assets lose their stability and value. And if that treatment depends on whether a company is in the government's political favor, it's not just bad economics − it's a red flag for investors. When government doesn't enforce rules fairly, it also threatens people's freedom to enter into contracts. Consider presidential orders that threaten the clients of law firms that have challenged the administration with cancellation of their government contracts. The threat alone jeopardizes the value of those agreements. If businesses can't trust public contracts to be respected, they'll be less likely to work with the government in the first place. This deprives the government, and ultimately the American people, of receiving the best value for their tax dollars in critical areas such as transportation, technology and national defense. Regulatory chaos also allows corruption to spread. For example, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits businesses from bribing foreign government officials, has leveled the playing field for firms and enabled the best American companies to succeed on their merits. Before the law was enacted in 1977, some American companies felt pressured to pay bribes to compete. 'Pausing' enforcement of the law, as the current presidential administration has done, increases the cost of doing business and encourages a wild west economy where chaos thrives. When corruption grows, stable and democratic governments weaken, opportunities for terrorism increase and corruption-fueled authoritarian regimes, which oppose the interests of the U.S., thrive. Halting the enforcement of an anti-bribery law, even for a limited time, is an issue of national security. Legal uncertainty fuels brain drain Chaotic enforcement of the law also corrodes labor markets. American companies require a strong pool of talented professionals to fuel their financial success. When legal rights are enforced arbitrarily or unjustly, the very best talent that American companies need may leave the country. The science brain drain is already happening. American scientists have submitted 32% more applications for jobs abroad compared with last year. Nonscientists are leaving too. Ireland's Department of Foreign Affairs has witnessed a 50% increase in Americans taking steps to obtain an Irish passport. Employers in the U.K. saw a spike in job applications from the United States. Business from other countries will gladly accept American talent as they compete against American companies. During the Third Reich, Nazi Germany lost its best and brightest to other countries, including America. Now the reverse is happening, as highly talented Americans leave to work for firms in other nations. Threats of arbitrary legal actions also drive away democratic allies and their prosperous populations that purchase American-made goods and services. For example, arbitrarily threatening to punish or even annex a closely allied nation does not endear its citizens to that government or the businesses it represents. So it's no surprise that Canadians are now boycotting American goods and services. This is devastating businesses in American border towns and hurts the economy nationwide. Similarly, the Canadian government has responded to whipsawing U.S. tariff announcements with counter-tariffs, which will slice the profits of American exporters. Close American allies and trading partners such as Japan, the U.K. and the European Union are also signaling their own willingness to impose retaliatory tariffs, increasing the costs of operations to American business even more. Modern capitalism depends on smart regulation to thrive. Smart regulation is not an obstacle to capitalism. Smart regulation is what makes American capitalism possible. Smart regulation is what makes American freedom possible. Clear and consistently applied legal rules allow businesses to aggressively compete, carefully plan, and generate profits. An arbitrary rule of law deprives business of the true power of capitalism – the ability to promote economic growth, spur innovation and improve the overall living standards of a free society. Americans deserve no less, and it is up to government to make that happen for everyone. Robert Bird is Professor of Business Law & Eversource Energy Chair in Business Ethics, University of Connecticut. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. External Link © The Conversation
The Diplomat
30-06-2025
- Politics
- The Diplomat
Retreating Is Not Safety: How Cambodia Drives Women Out of Civic Spaces
In Cambodia, survivors of digital violence are increasingly disengaging from digital platforms or stepping down from leadership in women-led organizations. This retreat from civic space is not a side effect; it is the intended result of technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) against women journalists and human rights defenders. Treating this 'exit from civic space' as a form of safety only reinforces its strategy. This is the key finding in Asia Centre's baseline study, 'Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence in Cambodia: Impact on the Civic Freedoms of Women Journalists and Human Rights Defenders.' Published on May 20, 2025, the 35-page report incorporated, on the condition of anonymity, the views of 12 women engaged in public advocacy. It sheds light on patriarchal social structures in Cambodia that collectively contribute to the persistence of TFGBV in the country. The alarming shift in the Cambodian digital sphere, where visibility has become a vulnerability, points to the urgent need for policymakers, civil society, and the public to take remedial action. The severity of TFGBV in the country surpasses the ability of Cambodian legal frameworks to address the fast-evolving nature of digital violence. One informant shared that women in general are reluctant to report such incidents to justice institutions, because 'many interviews (with authorities) contain victim-blaming… discouraging survivors from coming forward.' With Cambodia ranking 141st out of 142 countries in World Justice Project's 2023 Rule of Law Index, it points to a loss of faith in the justice system, especially when it comes to the protection of women facing online harms. Hence, retreating from the public sphere has become the only remaining exit to safety for women engaged in advocacy. As such, in Cambodia, TFGBV methodically dismantles women's participation in public discourse, sowing fear in the back of their minds, 'affecting [their] confidence and [making] reporting (such incidents to authorities) much more stressful.' But the psychological harm inflicted on TFGBV survivors is not limited to personal concerns. Their systemic silencing paves the way for a culture of impunity, where public accountability wanes, investigative journalism suffers, and the truth becomes increasingly difficult to reach. In fact, the whole of Cambodian society self-censors 'difficult' issues, resulting in online harassment faced by women left largely unspoken. In Cambodia, the defensive response of withdrawing from the public sphere only concedes power to the perpetrator, further entrenching structural inequality. To protect the right to participate, survivor-centered strategies must become the reality. That means developing legal frameworks that go beyond punishment by also providing meaningful protection and digital resilience. Law enforcement, civil society, tech companies, and media must be equipped to respond not just to the violence that has already occurred, but to the new threats on the horizon. Considering the current prevalence of TFGBV in Cambodia, the region needs to be on the lookout for the growing role of AI in amplifying the issue. The risk is not limited to bots or misinformation. As a 2023 UNESCO report noted, it's also about enhanced surveillance of women's online activity, highly realistic deepfakes, and simulated harassment campaigns designed to discredit, deceive, and destroy. Survivors cannot face these evolving harms alone, and they shouldn't have to. Collective action is urgent, but it won't happen unless the right solutions are put in place. For starters, the Cambodian government needs to introduce targeted legislation that defines, criminalizes, and addresses TFGBV, drawing from international standards. These laws must be enforceable and prevented from misuse. Law enforcement officers and judges need training that bridges gender justice with digital literacy. Civil society must be resourced not only to support survivors but to keep pressure on policymakers. And technology companies that are unregulated or diluting fact-checking must be held accountable for content moderation in local contexts, with real transparency around post takedowns and complaints. That is why more evidence-based research on emerging TFGBV trends in the region and beyond is crucial. Regular capacity-building across all sectors – from judges and police officers to teachers and journalists is also needed. Awareness is the first defense, but it must be backed by legal protections, support mechanisms, and digital literacy tools that equip survivors and potential targets to respond. Even deeper than this, cultural narratives must be reframed. In a society where power imbalances are masked as 'cultural harmony,' women using digital tools to amplify their voices are not seen as participants in public discourse but as disruptors. As a representative of a female-led organization said, 'Any mistake that happens, we tend to receive a lot of attacks without any specific evidence.' With these norms framing civic expression, digital tools are distorted into weapons of punishment. As long as public morality is a shield for gender control, laws alone will fail. Cambodia must shift from tolerating online misogyny to a zero-tolerance standard, where the cost of digital violence is borne by the perpetrator, not the survivor. Safety cannot be granted through silence. The true value of any digital society is whether women can speak, lead, and exist online without being punished for it. If 'exit from civic space' becomes the only protection available, then TFGBV has already won. The future demands that we remain vigilant and act together, not react alone. This op-ed is based on Asia Centre's report, 'Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence in Cambodia: Impact on the Civic Freedoms of Women Journalists and Human Rights Defenders' Download the full report here. For more information about the Asia Centre, visit
Express Tribune
08-02-2025
- Business
- Express Tribune
A necessary evil?
Listen to article Transparency in national affairs is a prerequisite for the rule of law, prosperity, and inclusive development. As both a driver and an indicator of holistic growth, transparency fosters a responsive political culture, a pragmatic economic landscape, robust institutional and judicial frameworks, and efficient service delivery. Nations with transparent socio-economic and political systems enjoy significant international stature. For instance, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, New Zealand, and Singapore consistently rank high on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) and the Human Development Index (HDI), underscoring the strong correlation between transparency and prosperity. However, those plagued by corruption lag far behind in all aspects of life, with Pakistan being no exception. Among the myriad issues afflicting the country, corruption plays a pivotal role in perpetuating stagnation, if not outright regression. The genesis and gravity of this issue in the state is rooted in the vested interests, unconstrained authority of entrenched power structures, and the near-absolute impunity enjoyed by the deep state, dynastic political elites, and bureaucracy. This unchecked freedom to engage in corrupt practices has become so deeply ingrained in the hearts and minds of people across all socio-economic strata that they have come to view it as a necessary evil and an adaptive strategy for survival and success. This is manifested in its relatively consistent or even distressing standards on global rankings measuring transparency, rule of law, justice, and human development. With an ironic improvement of seven spots - from 140 out of 180 countries in 2022 to 133 in 2023 - in Transparency International Ranking, the country falls amongst the most corrupt socio-political settings in the world. Countries with low CPI scores, including Pakistan, typically rank poorly in the Rule of Law Index, Democratic Index, and HDI. World Justice Project's Rule of Law Index 2024 places Pakistan at 140 of 142 countries making it the third worst country in terms of law, order, and security. Only Mali and Nigeria fare worse. Pakistan also experienced the most severe democratic decline in Asia, plummeting 11 places in the Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index 2024. Its score fell to 3.25 - a downgrade from a 'hybrid regime' to an 'authoritarian regime'. Similarly, with a rank of 164 out of 193 countries on the UNDP's HDI for 2023-24, Pakistan falls into the 'low' human development and human rights. The abysmal global standards and significant downgrade in vital rankings suggest that the CPI's improvement may have paradoxical consequences, indicating a pervasive culture of corruption. The poor global metrics suggest that corruption extends far beyond the mere theft of money: it exacts a profound toll on all levels - political, social, moral and intellectual. Reluctantly, the legal enforcement framework has weakened, and the economy has faltered, exacerbating pressing issues such as unemployment, poverty, illiteracy, overpopulation, healthcare and sanitation crises, environmental degradation, food and energy shortages, brain drain, human rights abuses, gender discrimination, and criminalisation of dissent. These issues collectively erode the social fabric, creating a vicious cycle that amplifies the root problem: corruption. As both causes and consequences of corruption, these issues perpetuate its roots, leading most to view it as a necessary evil for survival. Nevertheless, the corruption remains addressable, requiring a multifaceted approach centred on the integrity and stability of the political culture, institutional overhaul, raising political consciousness and educating the people, an across-the-board accountability mechanism, responsible freedom of expression, and civic engagement. Liberating the judiciary and subjecting the institutions and people manning them to the law would act as an effective antidote to corruption. However, meaningful progress demands dismantling the entrenched power structures and vested interests that perpetuate corruption in all its manifestations. Only then can Pakistan break free from this vicious cycle and pave the way for sustainable development and prosperity.
