Despite being a major component of the Indian Constitution, fundamental rights are also subject to criticism. Give specifics
In 2023, the judgment of Kesavananda Bharati case completed fifty years. It established the principle concept of 'Basic Structure Doctrine' wherein the Parliament was restricted to overpower and amend the constitution from its base and beyond limits. The outline of the case can be traced in 1950s anRead more
In 2023, the judgment of Kesavananda Bharati case completed fifty years. It established the principle concept of ‘Basic Structure Doctrine’ wherein the Parliament was restricted to overpower and amend the constitution from its base and beyond limits.
The outline of the case can be traced in 1950s and 1960s in Kerala when to diminish the lines of inequality in resource consumption, land reforms were introduced to redistribute land to landless. The government of Kerala imposed restriction on ownership of the religious land of Edneer Mutt, headed by Sh. Kesavananda Bharti, who challenged the Act of Government of Kerala.
Meanwhile,the Parliament of India introduced three major amendments 24th,25th,29th that somehow curtail the powers of judiciary and put constraints on exercising fundamental rights of citizen as well as the operating power to amend the constitution.
Kesavananda Bharti filed a petition to dismantle these amendments as they shake the bedrock of Constitution.Hence, the Supreme Court established the iconic ‘Basic structure Doctrine’
- The largest bench case (13 judges) in Indian history, made sure to keep a check on the Parliament and that every fundamental right is practised without any unfair bonded constraints.
The milestone judgment has safeguarded the aura of democracy and other values and to uphold the supreme charisma of Indian Constitution.
See less
Fundamental rights, governed under Part III of the Indian Constitution are vital in safeguarding the liberties and freedoms of Indian citizens. These rights form the cornerstone of democratic governance protecting life and personal liberty. However, despite their significance, they are not beyond crRead more
Fundamental rights, governed under Part III of the Indian Constitution are vital in safeguarding the liberties and freedoms of Indian citizens. These rights form the cornerstone of democratic governance protecting life and personal liberty. However, despite their significance, they are not beyond criticism. The key criticisms include:
Article 12 defines “State” to include the Government and Parliament of India, each state’s legislature, and all local and municipal authorities and bodies within the territory of India. Fundamental Rights are primarily enforced against the state and not against private individuals or entities. This limitation leaves individuals without recourse where violations occur in private spheres and by non-state actors.
Article 359 of the Indian Constitution permits suspending most fundamental rights during a state of emergency. This has been criticized for potentially enabling an authoritarian governance and regime and undermining civil liberties. This was evident during the emergency of 1975-1977 which led to widespread abuse of power. The Habeas Corpus Case (ADM Jabalpur v Shivkant Shukhla, 1976) was also controversial concerning the emergency, where the right to seek judicial review under Article 21 could be suspended during an emergency.
Preventive detention laws allow the state to detain individuals without trial, which can be misused to suppress political dissent, and target activists and minority groups. This practice undermines civil liberties and fundamental principles of justice and human rights. Moreover, this violates Article 22, where individuals are detained without a fair trial or due process.
Fundamental rights do not cover social and economic rights and such rights are included under the Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV of the Constitution) and are non-justiciable. This limits their enforceability and reduces the state’s accountability in fulfilling these rights.
There is an inherent tension between Fundamental rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy where balancing individual rights with broader social and economic goals often proves challenging. Additionally, judicial interpretation of Fundamental Rights, though progressive, raises concerns about overreach and potential conflicts with the legislative branch.
Fundamental Rights play a crucial role in safeguarding personal freedoms and upholding democratic principles, yet their boundaries and susceptibility to misuse underline the need for ongoing evaluation and careful interpretation.
See less