Major Navdeep Singh is a distinguished legal practitioner, currently practicing at the Punjab and Haryana High Court. He has made significant contributions to military law, both in India and globally. He is also a member of the advisory committee on military justice of the Commonwealth Secretariat and an International Fellow of the National Institute of Military Justice in Washington, DC.
Additionally, Major Singh serves on the editorial board of the Forces Law Review, a journal created through a collaboration between Panjab University and the National Institute of Military Justice, USA. This journal focuses on global military law and landmarks in the field.
His leadership extends to the Armed Forces Tribunal Bar Association, where he was elected the first president. His expertise in military law is reflected in his extensive writing, including books like Military Pensions: Commentary, Case Law & Provisions, March to Justice: Global Military Law Landmarks, and In Her Defence: Landmark Judgments on Women by Supreme Court, among others. Through his scholarly work and legal practice, Major Singh continues to influence the landscape of military law.
1. What inspired you to transition from military service into law and advocacy? How has your experience as a military officer shaped your legal career?
I was always a lawyer. I was a reservist-volunteer with the Territorial Army which is an organisation of citizens who are employed or self-employed in mainstay civilian professions and who serve in uniform for a few days every year so that they can be called out of the reserves and mobilised during the times of war or national emergency. I have served in counter-insurgency and operational areas, mostly during High Court vacations, and had attained the rank of Major when I left the reserves. Hence, always being a career lawyer, there was no transition as such in my case. As far as shaping my legal career is concerned; to be frank, I do not think my military mobilisation has had any direct effect on the same. And since I anyway belong to a military family, I was very much attuned to the military way of life. If I were to see the positives of military service as far as law is concerned, I would say that it got me more in touch with the travails of soldiers and their families in their daily lives, and the issues that they face after retirement. That has helped me in assisting their causes more intently.
2. Kindly tell us about your university education and how it shaped your journey into law. Were there any mentors or experiences from your academic years that influenced your career?
I read law at the Department of Laws, Panjab University, Chandigarh. We were blessed with the wholesome experience of competent teachers and very able batchmates who were good sounding Boards for things legal. Sorry to sound boring but I do not have any mentors from my days in the University, but I was more influenced in my way of life through my passion for music, music-trivia and musical legends such as Prince. The intersection of your liking for any art form, or your hobbies with what you study is interesting in the sense of influencing your seemingly unrelated course of professional life. But then the topic requires a whole lot of words to express, which we shall save for another day.
3. What key changes in the Armed Forces Tribunal have been achieved through your advocacy? Which reforms are you still striving to bring about?
Ever since the inception of the Armed Forces Tribunal, we have been attempting small little changes to make it more independent and efficient. We have succeeded to an extent, but lots more needs to be done. The ultimate reform which the legal fraternity, and even the Government, should aspire for is that tribunals (not restricted to the Armed Forces Tribunal) must not be made to function under ministries or departments against which they have to pass orders. The same has been ruled by the Supreme Court several times but not implemented till date. One personality who has consistently helped in moving towards this aim in India is Mr Arvind P. Datar, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India. His contribution and that of the Madras Bar Association, would be precious for future generations in this field.
4. Kindly share your experience of working on the “Yale Draft”? How did this collaborative effort impact global principles governing military tribunals?
The Yale Draft was an improvement over the United Nations (UN) Principles governing military tribunals, drafted and signed at the Yale Law School in March 2018. It was drafted under the tutelage of our mentor, Professor Eugene Fidell of the Yale Law School. The focus again has been on attaining impartiality, independence and competence of the military justice system, especially courts-martial and their convergence with basic judicial principles which we follow in almost all democratic nations. Another great step toward this aim was initiated by the Commonwealth Secretariat, and that was the Stellenbosch Draft of November 2023 — The Commonwealth Military Justice Principles.
5. As an International Fellow of the National Institute of Military Justice (NIMJ), what key insights have you gained from engaging with international military law frameworks? In your opinion, what potential lessons can India draw from global military justice systems?
The issues that we face are almost the same. We must collaborate with each other to look into and imbibe the best practices from various systems. In case of India, I would say the military justice system must move with the times and global best practices as well as practices followed in the regular justice and criminal justice system in our country as interpreted by constitutional courts.
6. How did your role on the High-Level Committee to reduce litigation shape the approach of the Ministry of Defence?
The Committee of Experts was constituted under the then Raksha Mantri, Mr Manohar Parrikar, whom we lost at a young age. It was constituted in 2015 on the directions of the Prime Minister when it was experienced that the Defence Ministry’s litigation against its own employees and former employees had reached unprecedented levels. We were able to reduce litigation to a great extent. However, in recent times, there has again been an upswing in litigation. While ministries such as the Law Ministry and Finance Ministry are taking bold steps in reducing litigation, the same spirit has not yet reached the Defence Ministry. The first thing that should be addressed is, and what Mr Parrikar also used to constantly say, that litigation should not be made an egotistical prestige issue by officers or viewed only through the prism of finances. For this, the political executive needs to take charge and ensure that the officers follow the general direction of the ministers and not be allowed to remain on an auto-pilot mode. Under the Westminster model, the will of the people through their representatives must prevail and the dockets of the courts and pockets of litigants must not be burdened by unethical litigation at public expense.
7. What are the current research and writing projects that you are working on?
My book called In Her Defence on landmark judgments related to women in the armed forces, co-edited with Ms Shivani Dasmahapatra should be released in December 2024 by Penguin Random House, and another book Ability, on disability jurisprudence in India, co-edited with Professor Shruti Bedi, would be released in the first half of 2025. This one shall be published by The Browser and distributed by Simon & Schuster. Besides, I am one of the three Honorary Chief Editors of Forces Law Review, the first global journal on military law, along with my very competent colleagues — Professor Franklin Rosenblatt, the current President of NIMJ and Professor Shruti Bedi, the current Director of University Institute of Legal Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh. The first volume would be out in 2025, perhaps in the first quarter.
8. What message or advice would you offer young lawyers, especially those interested in military law?
Well first, military law or military related litigation is nothing unique and follows the same principles of jurisprudence as other fields. Especially military service matters these are the same as other service or employment-related matters with constitutional law roots. Hence, I feel young lawyers must explore this field just as other branches of law and should not feel overwhelmed or overawed. It is just as any other field and we need young bright minds in this arena. My other advice is very simple — as lawyers we should never become the mouthpieces of our clients or parties whom we represent, especially when representing instrumentalities of the State. Our duty is to truthfully and ethically assist the court in arriving at justice, everything else is secondary.
