In the last ten years, two landmark judgments in India are: Aadhaar Judgment (2018): In the Puttaswamy judgment (2018), the Supreme Court of India ruled that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. The court also held that the Aadhaar scheme, a biometricRead more
In the last ten years, two landmark judgments in India are:
- Aadhaar Judgment (2018): In the Puttaswamy judgment (2018), the Supreme Court of India ruled that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. The court also held that the Aadhaar scheme, a biometric identification program, is constitutional but only if it meets certain conditions, including the requirement of consent and the data must be used for the purpose it was collected.
- Sabarimala Verdict (2018): In the Indian Young Lawyers Association vs. State of Kerala judgment (2018), the Supreme Court of India lifted the ban on women’s entry into the Sabarimala Temple in Kerala, allowing women of all ages to worship at the temple. The court ruled that this restriction was unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 (equality) and Article 25 (freedom of conscience) of the Indian Constitution.
Now, about the NOTA Judgment in 2013:
NOTA Judgement (2013): In 2013, the Supreme Court of India ruled in the case of People’s Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India that a voter has the right to exercise a “None of the Above” (NOTA) option in an election. This option allows voters to choose NOTA if they are dissatisfied with all the candidates contesting an election. The court held that this option is essential for democratic governance and would help to ensure that voters are not forced to vote for a candidate they do not want.
The NOTA option was introduced by the Election Commission of India through an amendment to Rule 49(0) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, in January 2013. The option is available to all electors, except those who are voting by postal ballot or proxy.
See less
It will have a multi-faceted approach to safeguarding a constitution against amendments that may undermine the basic rights. Some of the key strategies include: Constitutional Safeguards Rigid Constitution: The rigidity of a constitution can be enhanced by making amendments in the constitution by spRead more
It will have a multi-faceted approach to safeguarding a constitution against amendments that may undermine the basic rights. Some of the key strategies include:
Constitutional Safeguards
Rigid Constitution: The rigidity of a constitution can be enhanced by making amendments in the constitution by special majority or through a referendum. This makes it difficult to change fundamental rights.
Judicial Review: A strong and independent judiciary can review the constitutionality of laws and amendments, thus not violating the fundamental rights.
-Fundamental Rights: The constitution can be difficult to amend in a way that erodes fundamental rights if they are clearly defined and protected.
Public Awareness and Participation:
-Civic Education: Educating the public about the importance of fundamental rights and the role of the constitution in protecting them.
-Active Citizenry: Encouraging citizens to participate in public discourse and hold governments accountable for upholding constitutional values.
-Civil Society Organizations: Supporting civil society organizations that monitor government actions and advocate for human rights.
Institutional Mechanisms:
Independent Commissions: Setting up independent commissions to oversee the implementation of fundamental rights and investigate violations.
Parliamentary Committees: Strengthening parliamentary committees to scrutinize legislation and government policies that may affect fundamental rights.
Media Freedom: Protecting media freedom to ensure independent reporting and public scrutiny.
Combining these strategies can, therefore, be effective in protecting a constitution as well as taking care of fundamental rights from degradation to build a just and fair society.
See less