The question of whether humanitarian intervention should override state sovereignty under the UN Charter is a complex one, with strong arguments on both sides. The UN Charter, while emphasizing state sovereignty and non-interference in domestic affairs, also recognizes the need for international action to protect fundamental human rights. The debate centers on finding a balance between these competing principles.

Yes, while the right to property is currently a constitutional right under Article 300A, it is possible for it to be elevated to a fundamental right again through a constitutional amendment. However, it would require a change in the Constitution itself, not just a change in legal interpretation.

The Supreme Court of India ruled that triple talaq is unconstitutional and does not violate the right to religious freedom. The Court held that the practice of instantaneous triple talaq was not an essential religious practice and that it violated the fundamental rights of Muslim women. The Court also stated that "what is bad in theology cannot be good in law".

Legal positivism is not inherently incompatible with social justice in a diverse democracy, but its implications and application can pose challenges. While legal positivism emphasizes the importance of formally enacted law, it doesn't necessarily address the ethical or moral dimensions of those laws. This can lead to situations where legally valid laws are unjust or discriminate against certain groups, particularly in diverse societies.

Yes, the Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) should be strictly applied to government entities, as well as private industries, when they cause pollution. This principle ensures that those responsible for environmental damage, including government agencies, bear the cost of preventing and controlling pollution, and addressing the damage they've caused.

Judicial activism, while necessary for certain instances, should be limited in a constitutional democracy to uphold the separation of powers and prevent the judiciary from overstepping its role. It is justified when the executive or legislature fails to enforce constitutional rights or acts against fundamental principles, but should be carefully exercised to avoid undermining the democratic process.

If a client wants to sue for medical negligence, the first and most crucial step is to seek legal advice from a qualified medical negligence lawyer. They will assess the case, determine if there's a valid claim, and guide the client through the legal process. It's essential to gather all relevant medical records, witness statements, and documentation of damages suffered.

To challenge environmental pollution from a factory, individuals can start by gathering evidence, contacting local authorities, and potentially organizing with neighbors or community groups. They can also explore legal options and advocate for stricter regulations and enforcement.

If fundamental rights are violated by a government authority, a person can approach the Supreme Court or the High Court of their state for redressal. The Constitution of India guarantees the right to seek legal remedies for such violations. Specifically, Article 32 allows direct access to the Supreme Court, and Article 226 allows access to the High Court.

Filing a Complaint under PWDVA, 2005: Victims can file a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. This Act offers various relief measures, including protection orders, residence orders, and monetary relief to help the victim cover medical and living expenses.