Human Rights are some of the most basic and inalienable rights which every human being is entitled to, simply by virtue of his being born as a human. This is irrespective of his/her race, caste, religion, nationality and irrespective of whether a person is rich or poor. They include certain basic rights like the right to food, water, shelter, security, education, health care facilities and most importantly freedom. These rights are necessary for the inherent dignity and development of an individual.
Article 21 of the Constitution of India, safeguards the right to ‘personal liberty’ against executive interference which is not supported by law. It protects the citizens of this country from arbitrary and unreasonable action of the executive and the legislature, especially those actions which trespass upon the inherent dignity of an individual and which deprives the citizens of their basic right to life. The article reads, inter-alia, as:
“No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law”.
Article 21 has been further elaborated and explained in a landmark judgment of the Supreme Court, in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India. In this judgment, the Court held that the procedure of law shall have to satisfy the test of reasonableness and has to be right, just and fair. The procedure mentioned in the article cannot be arbitrary, fanciful or oppressive. In a separate but concurring judgment, Justice Krishna Iyer extended the guarantee to not only ‘procedure’ being fair and just, but also tothe ‘law’ as being reasonable. Therefore, this ensures that the basic human rights are not abridged by wrongful action of the State and that these are preserved and safeguarded. The court also considered the question of what is the test or yardstick to be applied for determining whether a statute infringes any fundamental right. It concluded that the true test is whether the direct and real effect is to take away or abridge a fundamental right.
Despite the fact that India is considered as one of the fastest growing economies of the world, a vast majority of our people are still languishing under poverty and illiteracy. For them having access to the so called basic human rights is still a distant dream. People face discrimination on the basis of their race, caste and religion. Our economic growth is leading to creation of wealth, but there is a great amount of inequity in its distribution. Persons who are higher up in the social structure are reaping the benefits of economic growth. People lower down are unfortunately being left out. The rich is getting richer and the poor is getting poorer. The concept of inclusive growth is missing. And all this is further adding to the problem of human rights violation!
One solution to the above problem can be to formulate policies and guidelines so that the rights of the under-privileged and the deprived section are adequately protected and safeguarded. Numerous such policies and schemes have been framed by the Government of India. But, the fact of the matter is that all these policies and guidelines remain so only on paper and they have been more or less impotent in achieving the desired results for which they were framed. The ground reality is that these social welfare guidelines or policies have hardly been able to benefit the poor, the under-privileged, and the destitute. A classic example where the economically dis-advantaged citizens of our country were deprived of their basic right to food, is the Uttar Pradesh Food Scam which recently hogged the limelight. Food meant for distribution to the poor and the downtrodden either free of cost or at highly subsidized rates were smuggled and subsequently sold in the open markets at a higher price for profits. This is a severe infringement of human rights. Needless to say, such an act would not have been possible without the involvement and collusion of the officials of the State Government or perhaps even the Central Government.
In my view, human rights are critical for the creation of a peaceful, democratic and harmonious global order, where an individual gets an opportunity to actualize his or her full potential. It is also my firm belief that, the human rights and democracy are closely inter-linked, as on one hand it constitutes the back-bone of a democracy and on the other hand it is a democratic system of governance. The concept of human rights is deeply ingrained in Indian ethos. It has served as the beacon for our Constitution framers to respect the rights of individual and human dignity. The Parliament representing vastly divergent views has carried forward the constitutional mandate so as to play a proactive role in safeguarding the interests of the deprived and the disadvantaged sections of the society. In furtherance to its objective, the Parliament took the initiative of setting up the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in 1990 which was later replaced by the National Commission for the Scheduled Tribes by the Constitution (Eight-ninth Amendment) Act, 2003 for safeguarding their rights and upholding their interests. In pursuance of the same mandate for ensuring the socioeconomic justice to the marginalized and socially disadvantaged sections, institutions like the National Commission for Women, the National Commission for Minorities and the National Commission for Backward Classes had been set up.
In less than two decades of its existence, the National Human Rights Commission along with the State Human Rights Commissions has also played a commendable role in the promotion of human rights of our citizens. It has commendably taken suomotu cognizance of the violation of human rights on the basis of petitions. Its recommendations regarding systematic reforms in police functioning, prison administration and protection of vulnerable sections of the people have been instrumental in safeguarding human rights in our country.
I believe that, the judicial officers should be sensitized towards the concept of human rights and their protection. Although the judicial officers are generally aware of human rights of citizens, there is a need to further sensitize them. This is more critical for those presiding over the Family Courts and Magisterial Courts as these courts deal in various types of cases. A greater degree of sensitization about the rights of common man for what the courts can do to uphold the same will go a long way in ensuring an all-around development of the society.
Only when there is fair enforcement of Human Rights can there be Rule of Law, and only when there is Rule of Law can wehave fair enforcement of Human Rights. The two, i.e., Human Rights and Rule of Law, mutually complement each other. Fortunately, India as a country has always maintained the tradition of the Rule of Law. We may have some law and order issues, but on the whole there is respect for the authorities and the law of the land. Here, none is above law and the verdict of the courts and authorities are not considered irrelevant by any means! Since, there is a Rule of Law, the enforcement of human rights in the country is also by and large encouraging. I am of the view that, India has been able to maintain the Rule of Law well like many other developed countries.
The Directive Principles of State Policy are no doubt important. Some of the rights included in Part IV of the Constitution under the Directive Principles which were not part of the Fundamental Rights, have gradually become a part of the Fundamental Rights as enshrined in Part III, for instance, right to education, right to food, right to employment, right to speedy trial, etc. The reason why these rights are not included under Fundamental Rights is that nations do not have recourses or means to implement them as Fundamental Rights. But with time, all these rights have one by one become an integral part of Part III and are enforced as such.
Indian Judiciary has indeed been proactive. Apart from the Public Interest Litigation, the courts have also been very active on environmental issues, including forest issues, right to environment, amongst others. The Indian courts have never disregarded the rights of the common man.
Moving on to another spectrum, various parts of the country are also faced with the increasing menace of “honour killings”, which is a complete mockery of human rights. Young couples are being killed mercilessly by their own kith and kin for having married outside their caste, religion and against the wishes of their families. Lack of education, poverty and people not being aware of their rights are the prime reasons for such incidents. Sadly, precious little is being done to prevent such atrocities.
In light of the above mentioned scenario, the judiciary is often seen as the final hope for the citizens of the country. It has an extremely important role to play in upholding human rights and safeguarding the interests of the people. Let us examine how
The Constitution of India provides certain fundamental rights to the citizens of this country. For instance, the right to equality, right to freedom, right against exploitation, right to constitutional remedies, to name a few. Their purpose is to safeguard and protect the rights and interests of each and every citizen of this country, irrespective of their race, caste, religion and sex. Now, to make these provisions meaningful and to make sure that every citizen benefits from these provisions, we need to first make people aware that these rules or provisions exist. If people are unaware of their basic rights, then having these rules/provisions will not serve any purpose. Education is the only method through which awareness about these rights can be spread. It is here thatthe role of executive becomes critical. By effectively assuming and discharging the responsibility of educating the masses about their rights and ways and means to enforce them, half the battle can be won. Vast resources are spent on sectors like defense, but a very small proportion is being channelized towards the more important sectors like education!
The responsibility of judiciary is particularly important in situations of crisis. In such situations, the courts have to be very careful not to be carried away by certain public sentiments. Rather they should calculate and strike the right balance between human rights and national security. This is their first and foremost responsibility. Secondly, they have to perform the function of bridging the gap between the law, economy and social circumstances and of course uphold the Constitution of the jurisdiction. However, the courts have to be very careful not to trespass the provinces of the other branches of government, like legislature and executive. And that is a very careful balance that they have to strike.
It is at this stage that the judiciary has to step in and assume the role of a “watchdog”. It has to oversee and ensure that enough resources are allocated by the Government, so that, adequate infrastructure is created and people in every nook and corner of this country receive the benefits of education. Moreover, strict action should be taken against those involved in corruption and siphoning off of public funds otherwise allocated for educational purposes.
Further, even if some people are aware of their rights, more often than not, they do not approach courts because they consider it to be a tedious, time consuming and an expensive process. It is, thus, imperative for the judiciary to make itself more accessible to the people, especially to citizens in the rural and semi-urban areas. This can be done by increasing the number of courts, dispensing justice at all levels and appointing more judges. No doubt, this will also help in reducing pendency of existing cases which will in turn restore the faith of the common man in the judiciary. Cheap, effective and efficient legal services should also be made readily available to people who are not able to afford good lawyers, who are often expensive to hire. The judiciary should take upon itself the task of appointing lawyers, who will be on the payroll of the Government, but whose job would be to help people in rural and semi-urban areas get justice more efficiently and effectively.
The Supreme Court in Arunima Baruah vs. Union of India (2007) 6 SCC 120, has held that access to justice is a human right. A person who has a grievance, a forum must be provided for redressal thereof. In India, Public Interest Litigation has been one of the strongest and most powerful tools through which basic human rights have been made meaningful to the deprived and vulnerable sections of the community, assuring them social and economic justice which the Constitution guarantees. The greatest advantage of this tool is the fact that any citizen can file a Public Interest Litigation, when he or she feels that the rights and entitlements of the backward section of the society are being infringed by the rich and powerful, and especially when the backward section feels helpless about it. The apex court, in State of Uttaranchal vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal&Ors, (2010) 3 SCC 402, has stated inter-alia as:
“…Public Interest Litigation provides an occasion to examine whether the poor and the downtrodden are getting their social and economic entitlements or whether they are continuing to remain victims of deception and exploitation at the hands of the strong and powerful sections of the community, and whether social and economic justice has become a meaningful reality for them, or it has remained merely a teasing illusion and a promiseof unreality, so that in case a Public Interest Litigation is found to be true, exploitation and injustice can be routed out and ensure to the weaker sections their rights and entitlements…”
Additionally, the National Human Rights Commission, an autonomous statutory body, has been playing a pivotal role in preventing violation of human rights. It has been given the responsibility to review the safeguards provided under the Constitution or any law for the protection of human rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation. Every proceeding before the Commission is deemed to be a judicial proceeding. It has been given the powers to inquire into complaints of violations of human rights either suomoto or on a petition presented to it containing complaints of violation of human rights. Apart from this, it also has the power to intervene in any proceeding involving any allegation of violation of human rights pending before a court with the approval of such court. If the Commission is satisfied with the authenticity of the complaint, it may after recording the facts constituting the offence, forward the case to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the same. The Magistrate, shall then proceed to hear the complaint against the accused, as if, the case has been forwarded to him under section 346 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The greatest hallmark of our democratic system of governance is the presence of the ‘Rule of Law’ i.e. supremacy of law. It is this rule of law which goes a long way in ensuring that the rights of private citizens of this country are not infringed. One of the things which will further help in cementing the rule of law and ensuring that human rights are safeguarded is strict enforceability of judicial orders. Judicial orders must be enforced at all costs without any compromise in any form. It is the strict enforceability of judicial orders which differentiates our country from some of our neighboring countries where presence of a strict rule of law is questionable because of weak enforcement. Having said that, the judiciary must be fiercely independent from the executive and the legislature and it should have a completely unbiased approach. One way of ensuring the independence of the judiciary, is to ensure that the executive has no say in the appointment and removal of judges. The power, method and procedure of appointing judges should remain exclusively with the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, should make a conscious effort to appoint good judges who will uphold the sanctity of a judicial office with honesty, integrity, and diligence. This will also go a long way in ensuring that judges take a humanist approach and that basic human rights are respected and preserved.
To sum it up, a numbers of laws, rules and procedures have been formulated and enacted to protect, safeguard and uphold the rights of citizens of this country. We do not need any further paper work in the form of more legislations and rules. There are enough already in existence. What we do need to is to bring these to the notice of the citizens of this country and make them aware of the existence of these enactments. Besides this, the judiciary should also make a conscious effort to make itself more accessible to the common man. This is the only way in which faith can be restored and human rights can be upheld in a dignified manner.
www.grandmasters.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.rcls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.itlegalsummit.com | 8 Years & Counting
www.bfls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.maels.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.plcs.co.in | 8 Years & Counting
Copyright © 2020 Lex Witness - India's 1st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs Rights of Admission Reserved
