Revitalising Indian Agriculture and New Farm Laws: Challenges and Opportunities Ahead

This essay begins with a brief introduction of the infamous farm laws and briefly explains its various provisions. The advantages of the legislation, which the media has failed to highlight time and again, are then explored. Consequently, the evident flaws in the legislation and how it directly benefits the private sector and causes harm to the farmers, whom the bill is intended to benefit. Therefore, an understanding of both the sides of the coin are provided and it is up to the reader to ascertain the efficacy of the bills. The infamous protests orchestrated by the farmers against the legislations are also briefly touched on. Whether they are right or wrong, a procedural history of the passage of the legislations has been given to highlight the hasty and uncoordinated manner by which they were passed. The role of non-state actors and the media towards the protests must be assessed. Lastly, it would be prudent to examine the moments wherein the protestors crossed the line and chose anarchy. The paper concludes by offering a few solutions to the dilemma at hand.

The Problem of State Violence

When violence occurs, the state has an obligation to respond to and reduce the impacts of it; yet often the state originates, or at least contributes to, the violence. This may occur in a variety of ways, including through the use of force by police, pretrial incarceration at local jails, long periods of incarceration in prisons, or abuse and neglect of people who are incarcerated. This essay explores the role of the state in responding to violence and how it should contribute to reducing violence in communities, as well as in its own operations. Finally, it explores what the future of collaboration between state actors and the community looks like and offers examples of successful power-sharing and co-producing of safety between the state and the public.

Africa, 2030 Agenda and Agenda 2063

The hierarchical state-led model of governance that is used to address global policy issues has proved to be wanting on sustainable development. This chapter discusses the concept of transnational governance of sustainable development, focusing on the United Nations 2030 Agenda and Agenda 2063 in Africa. The premise is that implementation of the two agendas represents an enormous challenge to African governments in terms of resources, extent, and urgency. The chapter will make a reasonable case that transnational governance is required for active engagement of non-state actors and relevant institutions to mobilize resources to support the effective implementation and monitoring of the 2030 Agenda and Agenda 2063 in Africa.

Cold from Gold: Chinese Miners Face New Realities in Ghana

China has maintained strong relationships with many African countries, and Ghana is one such country. While the two countries have normally enjoyed good friendly relations, concerns over the involvement of Chinese citizens in small-scale mining in Ghana threaten the cordial relationship between the two countries. There is evidence of a cultural evolution and a gradual shift from a culture of enthusiastic reception of local people to the Chinese in the area of mining to one of cold reception to Chinese interests in mining communities. There is also evidence that this cold reception to Chinese miners is stimulated by non-state actors led by the media and inspires in Ghana a new paradigm of more rational engagement with China at the political level, although challenges still remain.

Extraterritorial Use of Force against Non-State Actors: PS to Hague Academy Lectures

In July 2021, the author presented a Special Course for the Hague Academy of International Law Summer Courses on the Extraterritorial Use of Force against Non-State Actors. The course focused on two bases for the extraterritorial use of force against non-state actors, namely self-defence and intervention by invitation. The lectures came to a conclusion that may, at first glance, appear contradictory. With respect to the use of force in self-defence, the lectures adopted a restrictive (non-permissive) approach in which the use of force is not permitted save in narrowly construed exceptions. With respect to intervention by invitation, the lectures adopted a more permissive approach in which the use of force is generally permitted and prohibited only in narrowly construed exceptions. This article serves as post-script (PS), to explain the apparent contradiction. It concludes that the main reason for this apparent contradiction is the application of the fundamental principles of international law—sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence—which are consistent with intervention by invitation but are undermined by self-defence against non-state actors.