Liberty in India

The Preamble to the Constitution of India is an introductory statement that outlines the guiding principles and philosophy of the Constitution. It reads as follows:

“WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:

JUSTICE, social, economic and political;

LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;

EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;

and to promote among them all

FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;

IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.”

Liberty, as a concept, is fundamental to both Indian law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). However, the interpretation and application of liberty differ in the Indian context and under the UDHR. Here is an explanation of the differences:

1. Definition and Scope

Liberty in India:

• Constitutional Provisions: The Indian Constitution, particularly through the Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III, provides a broad definition of liberty. Article 21, which states “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law,” is central to this.
• Judicial Interpretation: The Indian judiciary has expansively interpreted the concept of personal liberty to include rights such as privacy, the right to travel, the right to a fair trial, and other dignified aspects of life.

Liberty under UDHR:

• Article 3: The UDHR states, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”
• Broad Human Rights Framework: Liberty under the UDHR is part of a broader framework of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, emphasizing freedoms such as freedom from arbitrary arrest (Article 9), freedom of movement (Article 13), and freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (Article 18).

2. Legal Force and Implementation

Liberty in India:

• Legal Binding: The Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution are legally binding and enforceable by courts. Any violation of these rights can be challenged directly in the Supreme Court or High Courts.
• Legislation and Policies: The Indian government and judiciary have established various laws and policies to protect and promote these liberties, with detailed procedural safeguards.

Liberty under UDHR:

• Declaratory Nature: The UDHR, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, is a declaration and not a legally binding document. It sets out aspirational standards for human rights.
• Influence on National Laws: While the UDHR itself does not have legal force, it has significantly influenced international human rights law and national constitutions and laws, encouraging countries to adopt and implement these principles.

3. Cultural and Societal Context

Liberty in India:

• Cultural Specificity: The interpretation of liberty in India takes into account the country’s diverse cultural, religious, and social context. Issues like freedom of religion and caste discrimination are particularly nuanced within the Indian framework.
• Balancing Rights and Duties: Indian legal discourse often emphasizes a balance between individual liberties and societal interests, including public order, morality, and the sovereignty and integrity of India.

Liberty under UDHR:

• Universal Standards: The UDHR establishes universal standards of liberty applicable to all individuals regardless of their cultural or national context.
• Global Applicability: The rights outlined in the UDHR are meant to be applicable globally, promoting a universal understanding of human dignity and freedom.

4. Enforcement Mechanisms

Liberty in India:

• Judicial Review: The Indian judiciary has robust mechanisms for enforcing liberties, including judicial review and public interest litigation.
• Constitutional Remedies: Articles 32 and 226 of the Indian Constitution provide the right to constitutional remedies, allowing individuals to approach the Supreme Court and High Courts for the enforcement of fundamental rights.

Liberty under UDHR:

• International Pressure and Advocacy: While the UDHR itself cannot be enforced in courts, it provides a basis for international advocacy and pressure on governments to uphold human rights.
• Human Rights Treaties: The principles of the UDHR have been incorporated into binding international treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which have enforcement mechanisms through bodies like the Human Rights Committee.

Conclusion

While both the Indian concept of liberty and the UDHR emphasize fundamental human freedoms, the Indian framework is legally binding and specifically tailored to the country’s socio-cultural context, whereas the UDHR provides universal, aspirational standards aimed at promoting global human rights. The Indian Constitution enforces liberties through judicial mechanisms, while the UDHR influences international norms and national laws through advocacy and moral authority.

Liberty vs. Freedom: What’s the difference?

Liberty and freedom are often used interchangeably in the United States, but they have distinct meanings. Understanding the difference between the two concepts is important because it sheds light on the philosophical underpinnings of American society.

Liberty can be defined as the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views. It emphasizes the rights of individuals to be left alone and make their own choices without interference from the government or other institutions. The idea of liberty is enshrined in the United States Constitution, which guarantees a number of fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press.

Freedom, on the other hand, refers to the ability to act or think as one wants without being hindered by outside forces. It is often associated with the idea of self-determination and the pursuit of happiness. Freedom is a more general concept that can be applied to a wide range of activities, from economic freedom to personal freedom.

The distinction between liberty and freedom is important because it highlights the different ways in which these concepts are valued in American society. Liberty emphasizes the importance of individual rights and the limitations of government power, while freedom is more focused on the ability of individuals to pursue their own interests.

In practice, this can lead to different political ideologies and policies. Libertarians, for example, prioritize individual liberty and limited government intervention, while progressives may place greater emphasis on social and economic freedoms that allow individuals to achieve their potential.

The debate over the relative importance of liberty and freedom in American society is ongoing, and there are no easy answers. However, understanding the difference between these two concepts can help us to better appreciate the complex philosophical foundations of American democracy.

K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)

 

The landmark judgment of K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) fundamentally reshaped the landscape of constitutional law in India by affirming the right to privacy as a fundamental right. This decision by the Supreme Court involved a detailed analysis of the scope of privacy rights and established a framework for assessing restrictions on such rights.

 

Question of Law:

 

Is the right to privacy a fundamental right under the Constitution of India?

 

The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether privacy is protected as a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. This question arose due to conflicting precedents and the need to clarify the legal standing of privacy in the context of constitutional rights.

Observations:

Recognition of Privacy as a Fundamental Right:

The Supreme Court unanimously declared that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. This recognition aligns privacy with the other fundamental rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution.

Privacy as a Comprehensive Right:

Privacy was acknowledged as a multi-dimensional concept that includes bodily privacy, informational privacy, and privacy of choice. It encompasses personal autonomy, bodily integrity, and the right to make personal decisions without unwarranted interference.

Overruling Previous Judgments:

The Court overruled previous decisions in M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1954) and Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1962), which had stated that the Constitution did not explicitly protect the right to privacy. The Puttaswamy judgment firmly established that privacy is constitutionally protected.

Privacy and Human Dignity:

The judgment emphasized the intrinsic connection between privacy and human dignity, stating that privacy is essential for the exercise of personal autonomy and dignity. It highlighted that privacy underpins the ability of individuals to shape their own identity and make personal choices.

Impact of Technology:

Recognizing the challenges posed by technological advancements, the Court acknowledged the need to protect informational privacy in the digital age. The judgment stressed the importance of safeguarding personal data against unauthorized collection and use.

Three-Fold Test:

To determine the constitutionality of any restriction on the right to privacy, the Supreme Court articulated a three-fold test. This test ensures that any infringement on privacy rights is justified and proportionate. The three components of the test are:

Legitimate Aim:

Any action that infringes on the right to privacy must pursue a legitimate state aim. This means that the purpose of the action must be lawful and necessary in a democratic society, such as protecting national security, preventing crime, or securing public health.

Proportionality:

The principle of proportionality requires that there must be a rational connection between the aim sought to be achieved and the means used to achieve it. The measure taken must be necessary and should not be excessive. The state must demonstrate that the chosen measure is the least restrictive option available to achieve the intended objective.

Procedural Safeguards:

Adequate procedural safeguards must be in place to prevent arbitrary or excessive infringement of privacy rights. This includes ensuring transparency, accountability, and the availability of legal remedies for individuals whose privacy rights are affected.

Application of the Three-Fold Test:

The three-fold test established by the Court is a crucial framework for evaluating any laws or actions that potentially infringe on privacy. It requires the state to justify any such intrusion and ensures that individual rights are not overridden without sufficient cause and appropriate safeguards.

Conclusion:

The K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India judgment is a seminal case in Indian constitutional law that unequivocally establishes the right to privacy as a fundamental right. By articulating a clear and structured three-fold test for assessing privacy infringements, the Supreme Court has provided a robust framework to protect individual liberties against arbitrary state actions. This judgment not only safeguards privacy but also reinforces the broader principles of personal autonomy and human dignity, aligning India with global human rights standards.

Dear Members,

In light of the landmark judgment in the Puttaswamy v. Union of India case, it is crucial to understand and protect your right to privacy. The Supreme Court of India has affirmed that privacy is a fundamental right, integral to personal liberty and dignity.

Key Takeaways:

– Fundamental Right:

Privacy is now a constitutionally protected right, ensuring that your personal information cannot be arbitrarily infringed upon.

– Aadhaar Usage:

Be aware that while Aadhaar can be used for government welfare schemes and tax purposes, its use cannot be mandated by private entities like banks or telecom companies without specific legislation.

Actions to Protect Your Privacy:

1. Be Informed: Stay informed about your rights and the permissible use of Aadhaar.
2. Exercise Caution: Be cautious about sharing your Aadhaar details and ensure it is only used for legitimate purposes.
3. Seek Redress: If you feel your privacy rights are being violated, seek legal redress or report to the appropriate authorities.

For more information or assistance, please contact 7800958009 or reach out to the undersigned.