INDIA'S ASPIRATIONS FOR THE UNITED NATION'S SECURITY COUNCIL VETO POWER AND THE WAY FORWARD

Introduction

“Getting into Security Council is a very big thing. Precisely, because it will not happen easily. The world in reality is not particularly a generous place. You know…Countries have to struggle for what they get and the current structure was formed in 1945; It reflected an outcome of the World War II. The 5 Winners of the World War II are in a way are the current permanent members. Now since then in the 77 years that have passed the fact that world has changed dramatically, at that time the actual members of UN have gone up for full; There are large parts of the world which are not represented. Very soon you will have a situation where the most populous country in the world is not in the Security Council, where the third largest economy of the world is not in the Security Council. So how credible does that make the Security Council?” [1]

- S. Jaishankar

This statement made by the former Foreign Secretary and the present External Affairs Minister of India, reflected the country’s aspiration for a bigger role at the United Nations (UN), while at the same time highlighting how difficult can the process be for a country like India in securing permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) with a Veto power. The country, currently celebrating its diamond jubilee of independence[2], is poised to take up the role of a mediator[3] and pacifier[4] in the post-cold-war conflict in Ukraine between Russia and the West. However, at present, it is handicapped in the most powerful organ of the UN by a belligerent nuclear power to its North, which from time to time has posed trouble for India, mostly by indirect opposition[5] and the use of Coffee Club Diplomacy as a tool for blocking India’s entry to the Permanent-5 Nation States (hereinafter referred to as P-5)[6]. At the international level, every state pursues its interests, something Kautilya expounded through his Mandala Theory[7], and thus, there is no illegality in the actions of China and its dependent Pakistan when it comes to their opposition to India’s aspirations at the UNSC.

UNSC – A Battle Royal between the West and Russia

The UNSC, right from its foundation, has always been a battleground for suzerainty[8] between the erstwhile Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and the West led by the United States of America (USA)[9] on the issues of the spread of Communism and Capitalism on each other’s turf, i.e., in West Europe and East Europe, respectively. While the countries in Eastern Europe had been readily adopting Communism as their mode of running the government[10], post-World War II (WWII), the countries in Western Europe were getting unnerved by the spread of Communism in their backyard and had begun leaning more towards the USA. In the process of conflict, Vetoes were used indiscriminately in the UNSC by the USA and the USSR. A report published in the year 2020 titled ‘UN Security Council Working Methods’ by the Security Council Report, showed that the USSR had invoked the Veto the highest number of times; having invoked it 120 times out of the recorded 293 times, as per the data taken up to 2020. Though the USSR/Russia has been an ‘early invoker’ of the Veto in the preliminary stages of the UNSC, primarily for protecting the interests of the Communist countries or countries in its bloc, it is the USA which has off late become the ‘late invoker’ of the Veto in the UNSC, primarily to safeguard the interests of Israel in the apex organ of the UN[11].

Although the UNSC had played a significant role in the prevention of a WWII scenario, multiple impasses occurred throughout the cold war period, notably, the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 which could have escalated into a full-time war, only to be averted at the last moment due to the pulling away of the rival forces, the USA, and the USSR[12]. Throughout the history of the UNSC, there have been many instances, when there had been issues with wider ramifications, which could have forestalled the operation of the UNSC due to conflicts among the P-5. During the Korean War in the 1950s, the USA was able to pass a resolution for military action in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) because Russia had been boycotting meetings. This was due to the UNSC not allowing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to joining the P-5, and instead giving the obligation to the Republic of China (ROC) as the authorised Chinese representative[13]. Incidentally, the decision of the USA to drag its feet onto the Korean War had been inspired by its fear of the global spread of Communism[14] and to ensure its presence in the Sea of Japan (East Sea). However, on account of the continuous exercising of the Veto power by the USSR, one of the good developments that occurred during the Korean War, was the introduction and adoption of the Uniting for Peace (UFP)[15] resolution. The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) through the UFP resolution, bestowed a mechanism to be followed in case the UNSC fails to fulfil its obligations of maintaining world peace. The UFP Resolution gave the power to the UNGA to step in if the P-5 fails to reach a unanimous decision at the UNSC. At such a juncture, the UNGA assumes power, to decide on the ways of dealing with the issue and overseeing military action, if required[16]. This reaction by the UNGA, at the behest of the USA, to act, rather than only discussing war and peace, is a big remedy against the misuse of the Veto by the P-5. Initiatives like these send a message to the P-5 about the sanctity of the Veto.

Russia exacted its revenge on the international body through the invocation of the Emergency Special Session of the UNGA (5th Special Session[17]), due to the six-day war of Israel. Despite the exchange of the salvos by the two prominent blocs in the international body(s) on UN intervention, both the USA and Soviet Republic/Russia had taken selective approaches when it comes to taking erring countries to the UN and/or the UNSC in its effort to bring peace. Russia took an opportunistic view on the Iraq War in the UN, and this can be attributed to Russia’s interest in maintaining a cordial relationship with the USA for economic reasons[18]. The hobnobbing of Russia with the USA, thus not taking part in ensuring that Iraq is not attacked under a false pretext, shows the necessity for a third-world country to be a part of the UNSC as a neutral balance to Russia and the USA. The selective action of taking up an issue at the UNSC and/or UNGA can also be seen on part of the bloc led by the USA when it came to preventing the humanitarian crisis during the Syrian War, which has been raging on for the past decade. The conflicting stands taken by the P-5, in violation of the principles laid down in the UN Charter and the obligations of the UNSC, calls for reform in the international body, keeping in mind the growing prowess and demography of a country and its history of commitment towards maintaining world peace. The claim of India, for the coveted seat at the UNSC, is thus acquiring legitimacy with every passing day[19].

India’s contribution towards the foundation of the UN and maintaining world peace

India had been one of the Founding Members of the UN, having signed the Declaration in the middle of WWII in Washington on January 01, 1942[20]. Thereafter, India participated in the Conference in San Francisco and had gone on to play a valuable role in the implementation of the UN Charter for the next 75 years of its existence and beyond[21]. India’s contribution to the growth of multilateralism through the UN, its affiliated organization and similarly placed international organizations has repeatedly been commended by international scholars and diplomats alike, which Mr. Kofi Annan has beautifully summed up in one of his public speeches made as UN Secretary-General[22]. Mr. Kofi Annan commended India for its contribution to the UN, in terms of the scholars, diplomats and soldiers provided for the sake of the growth of the UN and upholding the principles of maintaining world peace and stability, as laid down in the UN Charter. India, despite its meaningful contribution to the world, for the development of the UN and for promoting world peace, never took a partisan position between the West and the USSR and its legatee Russia. As mentioned by renowned scholar John Quigley[23], the West and Russia were always at loggerheads when it came to shaping the international agenda of the UN and the enforcement of international law. Since the inception of the Cold War, the two powers had been in a continuous power struggle, which had been a source of groupism and the fallout reached India too, who to be equidistant to both the warring parties, adopted the Non-Aligned Movement as a third world response to the conflict between the West and Russia[24]. India’s adoption to take a third path was to ensure support[25] for India from both the centres of power[26], which remained and remains in conflict.

India, its tryst with Non-Aligned Movement and the way forward

India got its independence at a critical juncture when the world was at a crossroads between the Communists led by the USSR on one hand, and the democratic, Capitalist System led by the USA, both of whom had been waging an ideological supremacy war. India had just become free from the yoke of the United Kingdom and had been wooed to join either of the two camps of the world[27], both possessing the resources and technology that a nascent country had wanted. However, India, through its charismatic leaders, had been able to contemplate the future and the fallout/risks of joining one camp over the other. In its attempt to ensure equal help from both sides, the country had decided to pursue its objective, equidistant from both the warring parties, without giving away its freedom to any one of them. Accordingly, India refused to be a part of either of the two blocs, with the similar-minded countries who had decided to pursue a middle path i.e., the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). Established in the year 1956, the bedrock of NAM had been based on the Nehruvian foreign policy[28] of Panchsheel or Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence[29].

Despite India’s stance on peaceful co-existence, India since its independence has seen five wars with its neighbours of the north and has also witnessed multiple border confrontations[30], the root cause of many of which could not be solved through bilateral diplomatic talks, as a means for upholding the peaceful co-existence. India, despite being attacked by its infamous Northern neighbours, has never been involved in any border violations and has repeatedly used multilateralism as an option to mitigate those disputes. India embraced multilateralism by founding and joining organizations like BRICS[31], the Asian Development Bank[32], the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), and Group of 77[33], to name a few.

Even though India had been romanticizing the concept of non-alignment since its independence in the early-20th century, there had been a seismic shift in its approach[34] towards the later part of the 20th century, when for the first time, India displayed its intention to be a part of the P-5. Doing so, India resuscitated the call for reformation of the UNSC which it had first given in the 1970’s[35].

India, despite its progressive outlook for the world, has long not been taken seriously in world politics. India acquired this seriousness only after the fall of the Soviets in the Cold War[36] when the USA had lost its archenemy. The focal point of the victor, shifted to that of the Indo-Pacific, in fighting autocratic powers and Islamic terrorism. India, being committed to its democratic values and its struggle with Islamic terrorism brought the two countries closer, as can be seen in increasing US-India co-operation[37] and significantly in the India-US Nuclear Co-operation Agreement, also known as the 123 Agreement[38]. Due to the USA’s increasing confrontation with neo-Communist China, the focus of the USA is currently on the Indo-Pacific[39], as can be manifested by the inclusion of pro-Russia India into the Quad[40][41], and the refusal of the USA to put India into Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CATSAA)[42][43].

India has garnered a reputation through its regular engagement on the issues concerning third-world countries in the UN bodies and through the contribution of the forces in various UN-led peace-keeping missions, notably in South Korea, Sinai, Yemen, Sri Lanka, Lebanon, Bosnia, Congo[44], etc. and went on to leave a mark overall as peacekeepers[45]. India in comparison with China, one of the P-5, had contributed about 74,000 troops as of 2006, against China’s contribution of around 3,800 personnel[46] and the same has been recorded in various statistics, more aptly stated by Mr. Kofi Annan[47]. The stark difference in the quantum of the contribution of the armed forces to the UN Missions, despite China being the country with the highest population and one of the largest armed forces, shows how devoted India is to world peace in line with its 21st-century diplomatic slogan of Vashudaiva Kutumbakam, which translates to mean that the World is one Family[48].

India has attained the centre stage in terms of importance and has become an important partner, when it comes to maintaining global order, for the leading nations and most of the P-5, all except China, which considers India as its arch-nemesis for global power projection. India, despite not being a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)[49] and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)[50], has been given a leeway to become a part of the prestigious Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Curving an exception for the same country which prompted the formation of the said groups, proves how much admiration India commands from most of the powerful countries of the world.

UNSC – Necessity of a balance in the body?

As seen in the past in various incidents, the UNSC of today is an unbalanced group of countries, misrepresented through its demography, economic power and fighting for ideological hegemony, thereby prolonging wars and not taking efforts to resolve the factors which had led to such conflicts. Thus, in the recent past, there has been a sudden spate of regional conflicts, many of which are continuing with no signs of resolution, notably multi-front wars between several forces in Syria[51], and Yemen[52], the conflict between Russia and Ukraine on the issue of annexation of Crimea and current conflict over the Donbas region. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine shows no signs of respite since both Ukraine and Russia[53] have intensified their operation.

The helplessness of the UNSC has been exposed repeatedly due to the lack of a neutral or balancing force amongst its Permanently Veto-wielding nations, which are always in conflict, thus reducing the efficacy of the UNSC, as the magic potion for ending world conflict. In one of the recently concluded sessions of the UNGA, the issue of lack of inclusiveness came up[54] and the necessity of a country like India in the UNSC was reflected by the senior representatives of the countries like USA and Russia, an admission by the two warring countries of the lack of balancing forces in the Council.

Band-aids to Wounds – Stop-gap arrangements to contain Veto

Due to the lack of a third voice, the UNGA had to step in, to rein in the powerful P-5, as can be seen from the Veto Initiative by Liechtenstein, calling for emergency UNGA Meetings in the event Veto is exercised by any of the P-5 in the UNSC resolutions[55]. One of the P-5, France, in association with Mexico has launched the Political Declaration on Suspension of Veto in Cases of Mass Atrocity, to impose an embargo on the P-5[56] to prevent the casting of veto in cases of mass atrocity and thus prevent another Syria or Yemen. However, the said declaration is yet to be fructified and may get shelved too, since the same has been tabled without prior discussion among the P-5, many of which have a chequered history of committing atrocities. The repeated failure of the UNSC to maintain global order, the most recent being Russia’s aggressive limited strike against Ukraine[57], calls for reform in the body itself, in line with the demographical, social, political, and economic demands of the 21st-century world.

Conclusion

India, being one of the most stable countries, with the vision of an inclusive world, has been contributing since the World Wars to maintaining world peace and global order. For India to be a part of the UNSC, will offer a terrific opportunity for the world to prevent a global meltdown. The inclusion of India, the leader of a third-world country, shall help bring the much-desired balance in the UNSC, the lack of which has plagued it since its foundation years and can help bring the much-needed sanity in the otherwise insane and cruel world.

[1]Hindusthan Times Youtube Channel, ‘How credible is UNSC?’: Jaishankar on why permanent seat for India is ‘difficult dream’ (13 August 2022) <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhqMNxfyR-4> accessed 21 August, 2022 [2]Staff Reporter, ‘PM thanks World Leaders for their greetings on 76th Independence Day’ PIB (Delhi, 15 August 2022) <https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleseDetail.aspx?PRID=1852116> accessed 1 September 2022 [3]ANI Asia, ‘Open to India mediating in Ukraine crisis: Russian foreign minister’ Business Standard (Delhi, 01 April 2022) <https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/open-to-india-mediating-in-ukraine-crisis-russian-foreign-minister-122040100942_1.html> accessed 05 September, 2022 [4]AFP, ‘India's Modi Tells Putin Now Is 'Not a Time For War' The Moscow Times (16 September 2022) <https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/09/16/indias-modi-tells-putin-now-is-not-a-time-for-war-a78815> accessed 30 September 2022 [5]Siddhant Sibbal, ‘India-led G4 nations call out China, 'coffee club bluff' on UNSC reforms’ Zee News (New Delhi, 01 September 2020) <https://zeenews.india.com/india/india-g4-call-off-chinas-bluff-on-unsc-reforms-2306935.html> accessed 22 September 2022 [6]Press Release, ‘Uniting For Consensus’ Group Of States Introduces Text On Security Council Reform To General Assembly’ United Nations Meetings Coverage and Press Releases (New York, 26 July 2005) <https://press.un.org/en/2005/ga10371.doc.htm> accessed 30 September 2022 [7]Deepshikha Sahi, Indian Scholarship on International Relations and Multilateralism, Economic and Political Weekly (2013) Vol. 48, No. 5 PL 50 [8]SCR, ‘The Veto’ (Security Council Report, 16 September 2020) <https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/un-security-council-working-methods/the-veto.php> accessed 03 October 2022 [9]John Quigley, Soviet Legal Innovations and the Law of the Western World, Cambridge University Press, 2007, Ch. 19 Protecting Sovereignty,160 and 161 [10]Kristen D. Burton PhD., ‘Cold Conflict’, (The National WWII Museum New Orleans) <https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/cold-conflict> accessed 08 October 2022 [11]SCR (n 8) [12]Bertrand G. Ramcharan, ‘Preventive Diplomacy at the United Nations’, (UN Chronicle) <https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/preventive-diplomacy-united-nations> accessed 08 October 2022 [13]Quigley (n 9) 161 [14]Geoffrey Warner, ‘The Korean War’, (1980), Vol 56, OUP on behalf of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, International Affairs P 98 [15]Press Release, ‘General Assembly – Fifth Session’, United Nations Repertoire of the Practice of the Security Council <www.un.org/en/sc/repertoire/otherdocs/GAres377A(v).pdf> accessed 09 October 2022 [16]Quigley (n 9) 160 [17]Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, ‘1967 war – GA – Draft resolution’, United Nations Information System on the Question of Palestine (UNISPAL) <https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-176762/> accessed 09 October 2022 [18]Galia Golan, ‘Russia and the Iraq War’, (2004), Vol. 37, No. 4 University of California Press, P 429 [19]Bhaswati Mukherjee, ‘India and the UN: Reform and Role in a Globalised World’, (2017), Vol. 12, No. 2, Indian Foreign Affairs Journal P 119 [20]Archis Mohan, ‘India and the United Nations: the quest for equity’, (MEA Public Diplomacy, 20 September 2013) <https://mea.gov.in/in-focus-article.htm?22231/India+and+the+United+Nations> accessed 09 October 2022 [21]Ibid [22]Kofi Annan, ‘In Larger Freedom - the changing role of the United Nations’, (United Nation’s Secretary General, 28 April 2005) <https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2005-04-28/secretary-generals-public-lecture-india-international-centre-larger> accessed 09 October 2022 [23]Quigley (n 9) [24]Atul Bhardwaj, ‘Modi’s Multi-alignment and Nehru’s Non-alignment’, (2020), Vol. 55, No. 4, Economic & Political Weekly <https://www.epw.in/journal/2020/4/strategic-affairs/modis-multi-alignment-and-nehrus-non-alignment.html> accessed October 10 2022 [25]H.Laxminarayan, ‘Indo-US Food Agreement And State Trading in Foodgrains’, (1960), Vol. 12, No. 39, The Economic Weekly<www.epw.in/journal/1960/39/special-articles/indo-us-food-agreement-and-state-trading-foodgrains.html> accessed October 10 2022 [26]Dhiraj Kumar, ‘Ukraine crisis: Nehru’s Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) doctrine beckons India’, The Times of India (Delhi, 04 March 2022) <https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/everything-under-the-sun/ukraine-crisis-nehrus-non-aligned-movement-nam-doctrine-beckons-india/> accessed October 09 2022 [27]Dr. Stephen P. Cohen, ‘India and America: An Emerging Relationship’, (2000), Brookings <www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/kyoto.pdf> accessed October 09 2022 [28]Bhardwaj (n 24) [29]External Publicity Division, ‘Panchsheel’, (MEA, 2004) <www.mea.gov.in/Uploads/PublicationDocs/191_panchsheel.pdf> accessed October 10 2022 [30]Lieutenant General Vijay Oberoi, PVSM, AVSM, SM, VSM (Retd), ‘India’s Wars since Independence: A Concise History’, (The United Service Institution of India, October 2020) <https://usiofindia.org/publication/usi-journal/indias-wars-since-independence-a-concise-history/> accessed 09 October 2022 [31]Devesh Kapur, ‘India and International Financial Institutions and Arrangements’, in Waheguru Pal Singh Sidhu, Pratap Bhanu Mehta, Bruce Jones (eds.) Shaping the Emerging World, India and the Multilateral Order (Brookings Institution Press 2013) P 242 [32]Waheguru Pal Singh Sidhu, Pratap Bhanu Mehta, Bruce Jones (n 31) P 240 [33]Ashoke Kumar Mukerji, The Impact of Multilateralism on India (2018) Vol. 13, No. 4, Indian Foreign Affairs Journal, P 335 [34]Manoj Kumar Mishra, ‘India's Permanent Membership of The U. N. Security Council: Changing Power Realities and Notions of Security’ (2006) Vol. 67, No. 2, The Indian Journal of Political Science, P 343 [35]MEA (n 29) [36]Cohen (n 27) [37]Oliver Stuenkel, ‘Farewell to Multilateralism?’, (2013), Vol. 8, No. 4, Indian Foreign Affairs Journal, P 413 [38]Mukherjee (n 19) 119 [39]Sameer Lalwani, ‘Reluctant Link? India, The Quad, and the free and Open Indo-Pacific’, (2019), German Marshall Fund of the United States [40]Suhasini Haidar, ‘Russia says U.S. playing Quad ‘game’ with India’, The Hindu, (Delhi, 09 December 2020) <https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/russia-says-us-playing-quad-game-with-india/article33291351.ece>, accessed 09 October 2022 [41]PTI, ‘Quad countries accepted India's position on conflict in Ukraine: Australia’, The Economic Times (21 March 2022) <https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/quad-countries-accepted-indias-position-on-conflict-in-ukraine-australia/articleshow/90345321.cms?from=mdr> accessed 10 October 2022 [42]Chet Lee, ‘A CAATSA Waiver for India: What’s Really at Stake’, The Diplomat (14 July 2022) <https://thediplomat.com/2022/07/a-caatsa-waiver-for-india-whats-really-at-stake/> accessed 11 October 2022 [43]Manu Pubby, ET Bureau, Russia terms CAATSA waiver for India a sign of US 'weakness', Economic Bureau (20 August 2022) <https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/russia-terms-caatsa-waiver-for-india-a-sign-of-us-weakness/articleshow/93683577.cms> accessed 10 October 2022 [44]M.H. Faridi, ‘India's Role in The United Nations Peace-Keeping Operations Since 1990s’, (2008), Vol. 69 No. 3, The Indian Journal of Political Science P 577 [45]Ibid [46] Mishra (n 34) 343 [47]Annan (n 22) [48]WPS Sidhu, ‘Vasudhaiva kutumbakam’ for the 21st century’, Mint (22 May 2017) <https://www.livemint.com/Opinion/p8mFadX0wkkPJNRWH4hEWK/Vasudhaiva-kutumbakam-for-the-21st-century.html> accessed 10 0ctober 2022 [49] Bharath Gopalaswamy, India and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: To sign or not to sign? (SIPRI Policy Brief, January 2010) <www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/SIPRIPB1001.pdf> accessed on 11 October 2022 [50] World Nuclear Association, ‘India, China & NPT’, (World Nuclear Association, December 2016) <https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/non-proliferation/india,-china-npt.aspx> accessed 11 October 2022 [51]Zachary Laub, ‘Syria’s Civil War: The descent into War, (Council on Foreign Relations, 17 March 2021) <https://www.cfr.org/article/syrias-civil-war> accessed 11 October 2022 [52]Manon Quérouil-Bruneel, Between Life and Death in Yemen, (TIME) < https://time.com/yemen-saudi-arabia-war-human-toll/> accessed 10 October 2022 [53]Andrew Roth, ‘Russia appoints notorious general to lead Ukraine offensive’, The Guardian (Moscow, 08 October 2022) <www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/08/russia-appoints-notorious-general-sergei-surovikin-ukraine> accessed October 11, 2022 [54]Edith M. Lederer, ‘What is impeding the long-advocated growth of the U.N. Security Council?’ Associated Press / PBS (United Nations, 26 September 2022) <https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-is-impeding-the-long-advocated-growth-of-the-u-n-security-council> accessed October 11, 2022 [55]Ben Donaldson, ‘Liechtenstein’s ‘Veto Initiative’ Wins Wide Approval at the UN. Will It Deter the Big Powers?’ (PassBlue) <https://www.passblue.com/2022/04/26/liechtensteins-veto-initiative-wins-wide-approval-at-the-un-will-it-deter-the-major-powers/> accessed on 10 October 2022 [56]Staff Reporter, ‘In Hindsight: Challenging the Power of the Veto’, (Security Council Report, 29 April 2022) <https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/monthly-forecast/2022-05/in-hindsight-challenging-the-power-of-the-veto.php> accessed on 10 October 2022 [57]Iliya Kusa, ‘Russia-Ukraine War’, (2022), Vol. 19, No. 1, Policy Perspectives, Pluto Journals, P 7

Cover Image: Spencer Platt/ Getty Images

About the author: Rounak Biswas is an experienced & dedicated professional with a strong sense of business ethics and a proven record of work experience in varied areas of the legal industry. He had been an alumnus of Symbiosis Law School Pune, having graduated from the prestigious law school in the year 2018. He had been a passionate learner right from the beginning of his law school days and had a knack for taking up challenging work, learning new work and completing the work effectively and innovatively. He had interned at 12 different organizations in five years during law school, learning various intricacies of the law. Thereafter, following his graduation he had a PQE of more than three years at two law firms, a company and as an independent consultant in the domains of dispute resolution, Intellectual Property Rights Law and Insurance Law. He is a fast learner and can fulfil the targets given to him. As a lawyer, he had played an active role in several high-profile cases and the colleagues and seniors who have worked with him hold him in high regard owing to his never-dying attitude and a strong sense of ethics. He is currently pursuing Residential LL.M. course (Cohort of Corporate & Financial Law & Policy) at the prestigious Jindal Global Law School, Sonipat and is looking for meaningful opportunities in the domains of Corporate and Financial Law.