UNIT – II Fundamental Rights

 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW UNIT – II

• Fundamental Rights : Its meaning, nature & significance;
• Relationship of Fundamental Rights and Human Rights
• State: Definition and Judicial Interpretation
• Law: Meaning of Law and Judicial Review;
• Laws inconsistent with, or in derogation of Fundamental Rights;
• Doctrine of Eclipse; Doctrine of Severability

Understanding the Importance of Fundamental Rights

In today’s world, Fundamental Rights are crucial for upholding human dignity and ensuring justice within democratic societies. These rights act as a shield against the arbitrary actions of the State, allowing every citizen to live confidently and freely. They include rights such as the right to equality, freedom of speech, and protection from discrimination. In this post, we will unpack the concept of Fundamental Rights, their deep connection to Human Rights, the function of the State, and the role of judicial review in protecting these vital entitlements.

Fundamental Rights: Meaning, Nature, and Significance

Fundamental Rights are the essential liberties everyone possesses, typically outlined in a nation’s Constitution. They protect individuals from oppression and are seen as universal entitlements.

These rights are primarily defensive; they ensure that the State or other entities cannot infringe upon personal freedoms. For example, in India, Fundamental Rights include:

• Right to Equality: This right ensures that every citizen is treated equally and prohibits discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

  

• Freedom of Speech and Expression: Citizens have the right to express their opinions freely, which is vital for a functioning democracy.

Fundamental Rights are more than just legal terms; they shape the moral framework of society, allowing citizens to challenge unfair laws. For instance, the Indian Supreme Court recently ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry, thereby reinforcing individual dignity and equality.

Meaning: Fundamental Rights are the basic human freedoms guaranteed to individuals to ensure a dignified life. Enshrined in Part III of the Indian Constitution (Articles 12 to 35), they are enforceable by courts and act as limitations on the powers of the state.

Nature:

• Justiciable: Can be enforced by courts.
• Negative in character: Most rights impose limitations on the State (e.g., the State shall not deny...)
• Subject to reasonable restrictions: Not absolute, may be restricted for public interest.
• Universal in application: Apply to all citizens equally (some exceptions like Article 15, 16).

Significance:

• Protects individual liberties and human dignity.
• Acts as a check on arbitrary state action.
• Ensures equality, justice, and the rule of law.
• Upholds democracy and constitutionalism.

The Link Between Fundamental Rights and Human Rights

Although they are distinct, Fundamental Rights and Human Rights are deeply interconnected. Fundamental Rights are enshrined in national legislation, while Human Rights are universal principles like the right to life and freedom from torture.

Fundamental Rights serve as the legal embodiment of Human Rights within a specific nation's framework. They not only safeguard these universal principles but also ensure that citizens have legal avenues to defend them. For instance, while international conventions set guidelines for Human Rights, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, enforcement often relies on national courts where people can seek redress for violations.

• Fundamental Rights are constitutional rights specific to a country (India, in this case), while Human Rights are universal rights recognized internationally (e.g., UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights).
• Fundamental Rights in India incorporate many core human rights.
• Indian courts have often interpreted Fundamental Rights in line with international human rights standards.

Understanding the State: Definition and Judicial Interpretation

The State refers to the political body that governs a defined territory and population, exercising legislative, executive, and judicial power. It plays a vital role in the administration of laws and the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Judicial interpretation is essential in defining the scope of State authority concerning Fundamental Rights. Courts interpret constitutional provisions to ensure that State actions do not violate these rights. Notably, in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala, the Supreme Court of India established the "basic structure" doctrine, which protects the Constitution's core principles against amendments that would infringe Fundamental Rights.

An important component of this relationship is State liability. If a State entity exceeds its constitutional authority, it can be held accountable in court. This accountability is crucial for maintaining the balance of power and protecting individual rights.

As per Article 12 of the Indian Constitution, "State" includes:

• Government and Parliament of India.
• Government and Legislature of each state.
• All local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India.

Judicial Interpretation:

• Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib (1981): Laid down a test to determine if a body is "State" under Article 12, including factors like financial assistance, deep and pervasive control, etc.
• Zee Telefilms v. Union of India (2005): BCCI was not considered "State" under Article 12, although it performed public functions.

Law: Definition and the Role of Judicial Review

Meaning of Law (Article 13): Includes any Ordinance, order, by-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom, or usage having the force of law in India.

Judicial Review:

• Power of courts to examine the constitutionality of laws and executive actions.
• If found inconsistent with Fundamental Rights, they can be declared null and void.
• Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): Judicial review is part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

Law represents a system of rules created by governments and enforced to maintain order. It governs behavior, ensuring societal stability.

Judicial review is a critical process through which courts assess the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions. For example, if a law contradicts the Fundamental Rights outlined in the Constitution, courts can invalidate that law. This process, vital for upholding the rule of law, prevents any law violating Fundamental Rights from being enacted.

Laws Inconsistent with, or in Derogation of Fundamental Rights

• Article 13(1): Pre-Constitutional laws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights are void to the extent of inconsistency.
• Article 13(2): The State shall not make any law that takes away or abridges Fundamental Rights; such laws are void.

Laws in Conflict with Fundamental Rights

Laws that compromise or contradict Fundamental Rights face scrutiny in courts. If found inconsistent, such laws can be declared invalid. This principle emphasizes the judiciary's role in protecting Fundamental Rights and preserving the democratic ethos described in the Constitution.

The Doctrine of Eclipse

The Doctrine of Eclipse is a legal principle that applies when laws conflict with Fundamental Rights. Instead of being void, these laws are put "on hold." For example, if a law that infringes on Fundamental Rights is passed, it can be "eclipsed" but not completely invalidated. This allows for amendments that can bring the law back into alignment with constitutional standards, promoting a balance between legislative needs and individual rights.

• Applicable to pre-constitutional laws.
• If a law is inconsistent with Fundamental Rights, it becomes inoperative (not void ab initio), meaning it is eclipsed.
• The eclipse is removed if the inconsistency is removed (e.g., through constitutional amendment).
• Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of M.P. (1955): Applied this doctrine.

The Doctrine of Severability

In contrast, the Doctrine of Severability allows for parts of a law to be invalidated without impacting the entire statute. For instance, if a specific section of a law violates Fundamental Rights, only that section can be removed. This doctrine ensures that the valid provisions of the law remain effective, preserving the legislative intent while protecting individual rights.

• If a part of a law is unconstitutional, only that part is invalid, not the entire statute, provided the rest is separable and functional.
• A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950): Early case on severability.
• Courts analyze whether the valid and invalid parts of the law can stand independently.

Fundamental Rights – Summary Table

Topic	Key Points
Meaning	Basic freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution (Articles 12–35)
Nature	Justiciable, not absolute, enforceable, mostly against the State
Significance	Ensures liberty, equality, democracy, limited government
Relation with Human Rights	FRs are national implementation of international human rights (e.g., UDHR)

Fundamental Rights vs. Human Rights

Aspect	Fundamental Rights	Human Rights
Source	Indian Constitution	International instruments (UDHR, ICCPR)
Enforceability	Enforceable in Indian courts	Not always legally enforceable
Nature	Specific and limited	Broad and universal
Suspension	Can be suspended (except Art. 20, 21)	Generally inalienable

Article 12 – Definition of State

Includes	Examples
Central & State Government	Ministries, PMO, State Secretariat
Parliament & Legislatures	Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, State Assemblies
Local Authorities	Municipalities, Panchayats
Other Authorities	PSUs, statutory bodies (e.g., LIC, ONGC, DU – if under State control)

✅ Tests: Agency Test (Ajay Hasia case)

Law & Judicial Review (Article 13)

Law Includes	Ordinances, bye-laws, rules, regulations, customs, usages
Judicial Review	Courts can strike down laws violating FRs (basic structure)
Art. 13(1)	Pre-constitutional laws void if inconsistent with FRs
Art. 13(2)	Post-constitutional laws violating FRs are void to that extent

Key Doctrines

Doctrine	Meaning	Key Case
Eclipse	Pre-constitutional law violating FRs becomes inactive (can revive)	Bhikaji Narain v. State of MP
Severability	Only the unconstitutional part of a law is struck down	RMD Chamarbaugwala v. Union of India

The Path to a Just Society

Fundamental Rights are crucial in modern democracies, representing the values of justice, liberty, and equality. Understanding their connection to Human Rights highlights a universal pursuit for dignity and fairness.

By exploring concepts such as the State, law, judicial review, the Doctrine of Eclipse, and the Doctrine of Severability, we recognize the complex landscape of legal interpretation and individual rights.

Engaging with these ideas empowers citizens to better understand their rights and responsibilities within a democratic framework. Ultimately, a thorough understanding of Fundamental Rights can nurture a more engaged and informed society, committed to justice and equality.

This journey is not just an academic endeavor; it is essential for promoting democracy and protecting individual freedoms in our communities. Individuals, legal experts, and organizations must work together to uphold these rights, ensuring a fair and just society for all.