Indian Jurists Shape Global Human Rights and International Law

A legacy of Indian judges and diplomats continues to shape global human rights and international law, executing major interventions in prominent global legal forums that date from the aftermath of World War II to modern international investigations.

New Delhi: Former Orissa High Court Chief Justice and Senior Supreme Court Advocate S. Muralidhar appeared before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva this week, where he presently chairs the UN Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. He stands as the sole Indian jurist directing a highly critical international probe.

Footage of the briefing delivered by Justice Muralidhar in Geneva gained widespread traction across social media platforms. He delivered the core conclusions of his investigative panel, leveling accusations of war crimes against Israel regarding its military actions in Gaza. This presentation simultaneously revived historical narratives of Indian dignitaries who steered major global legal turning points.

An early instance surfaced in 1948 during the foundational drafting phase of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at the United Nations. The initial draft of Article 1 originally stated that all men are born free and equal.

ALSO READ: Efficacy of the MoU between US and Iran: How far peace stands firm now?

India’s delegate to the Human Rights Commission, Hansa Mehta, firmly challenged this specific terminology. She contended that the text effectively marginalized women in practice, regardless of the underlying objective. Her persistent advocacy secured an immediate amendment, transforming the clause to declare that all human beings are born free and equal.

The modification appeared minor on paper, yet the revised terminology permanently transformed global human rights frameworks for subsequent generations. It successfully transitioned away from gendered phrasing, establishing an enduring benchmark that remains visible within modern international statutory texts.

During that identical year, an influential Indian legal authority actively participated in a massive judicial debate. The Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal commenced proceedings to prosecute 25 high-ranking Japanese officials following World War II. A panel of 11 jurists representing 11 distinct nations convened to adjudicate the litigation, with a majority voting to convict the defendants.

Conversely, Calcutta High Court Justice Radha Binod Pal entered a massive 1235-page dissenting opinion. He contested the structural legitimacy of the court and its selective application of justice regarding wartime conduct. He questioned how the tribunal could exclusively penalize the vanquished state while completely ignoring actions by victorious nations, such as the atomic detonations at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

ALSO READ: Gaza’s rebuilding or silent siege? How housing and aid turned into political weapons

Western authorities summarily dismissed his legal analysis, but his comprehensive dissent achieved significant historical resonance inside Japan. The text remains an active subject of study across contemporary legal institutions, and a dedicated monument stands in Tokyo to honor his memory.

These institutional interventions occurred decades apart, yet they reflect an identical underlying reality. Indian magistrates and jurisprudence experts have consistently driven pivotal developments within global legal systems. These figures have systematically reshaped foundational terminology and directly interrogated established international methodologies.

The ongoing multilateral assignment executed by Justice Muralidhar at the United Nations underscores this deep historical trajectory. His presence emphasizes how Indian legal scholars remain deeply embedded within systemic global human rights initiatives that have unfolded across multiple generations.

History of Indian Influence in Global Jurisprudence

The participation of Indian legal experts in international bodies reflects a long-standing tradition of challenging Eurocentric biases in global governance. Beginning in the mid-twentieth century, newly independent India sought to democratize international platforms. The contributions of figures like Hansa Mehta and Justice Radha Binod Pal served as early indicator events, demonstrating that non-Western legal scholars would demand equity, precision, and inclusivity. This legacy establishes a clear historical precedent for modern figures addressing contemporary global conflicts under the United Nations framework.

FAQs

Who is Justice S. Muralidhar?

Justice S. Muralidhar is a prominent Indian jurist, Senior Supreme Court Advocate, and former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court. He currently serves as the chair of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

How did Hansa Mehta modify the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

In 1948, Hansa Mehta objected to the gendered wording of Article 1, which stated that all men are born free and equal. Her intervention successfully changed the phrase to all human beings are born free and equal, ensuring gender-inclusive language in foundational human rights documents.

What was the core argument of Justice Radha Binod Pal’s dissent?

Justice Radha Binod Pal dissented from the majority at the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal by questioning its selectivity. He argued that the tribunal only judged the defeated nation while ignoring the wartime actions of the victorious Allied powers, including the atomic bombings.

Why is there a monument for an Indian judge in Tokyo?

The monument honors Justice Radha Binod Pal for his historic 1235-page dissenting opinion at the post-World War II Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal, where he challenged the legal fairness and objectivity of the proceedings.