Fundamental Rights are the bedrock of the Constitution, providing citizens with a shield against arbitrary state actions and ensuring the preservation of individual liberties. Articles 12 to 35 contained in Part III of the Constitution deal with Fundamental Rights. Fundamental Rights are justifiable and guaranteed in the form of six categories. These fundamental rights are:

1. Right to equality,
2. Right to freedom,
3. Right against exploitation,
4. Right to freedom of religion,
5. Cultural and educational rights, and
6. Right to constitutional remedies.

In this article, we will discuss “Features of the Fundamental Rights” in great details, which is an important topic for the UPSC/IAS Exam Indian Polity and Governance syllabus.

Concept of Fundamental Rights

• The Fundamental Rights are defined as basic human freedoms which every Indian citizen has, to enjoy for the proper and harmonious development of personality.
• These rights universally apply to all humans, irrespective of race, place of birth, religion, caste, creed, color, or sex, and should be guaranteed by the law of the land.
• The Rights have their origins in many sources, including England's Bill of Rights, the United States Bill of Rights, and France's Declaration of the Rights of Man.
• Originally, the Indian Constitution established seven Fundamental Rights, namely,
  • Right to equality (Articles 14–18)
  • Right to freedom (Articles 19–22)
  • Right against exploitation (Articles 23–24)
  • Right to freedom of religion (Articles 25–28)
  • Cultural and educational rights (Articles 29–30)
  • Right to property (Article 31)
  • Right to constitutional remedies (Article 32)
• The right to property, however, was removed from the list of Fundamental Rights by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978 and now, Article 300-A of Part XII of the Constitution establishes it as a legal right. As a result, there are currently only six Fundamental Rights.

Fundamental Rights at Glance

Features of Fundamental Rights

The following are the characteristics of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution:

• Some are only available to citizens, while others are available to all persons, whether citizens, foreigners or legal entities such as corporations or companies.
• They are qualified rather than absolute. They can be subjected to reasonable restrictions imposed by the state.
  • However, whether such restrictions are reasonable or not is a matter for the courts to decide.
  • As a result, they strike a balance between individual rights and those of society as a whole, between individual liberty and social control.
• They are all available in the situation of the state's arbitrary action. However, some of them are also against private individuals' actions.
• Some are negative in nature, limiting the authority of the state, while others are positive in nature, conferring certain privileges on individuals.
• They are justiciable, allowing individuals to petition the courts for their enforcement if and when they are violated.
• The Supreme Court defends and guarantees them. As a result, the aggrieved party can go directly to the Supreme Court, rather than filing an appeal against the decision of the lower courts.
• They are neither sacred nor permanent. They can be limited or repealed by Parliament only through a constitutional amendment act, not through an ordinary act.
• Furthermore, this can be accomplished without affecting the Constitution's "basic structure."
• Except for the rights guaranteed by Articles 20 and 21, they can be suspended during the operation of a National Emergency.
• Furthermore, the six rights guaranteed by Article 19 can be suspended only when an emergency is declared on the basis of war or external aggression (i.e., external emergency) rather than armed rebellion (i.e., internal emergency).
• Article 31A (saving of laws providing for the acquisition of estates, etc.), Article 31B (validation of certain acts and regulations included in the 9th Schedule), and Article 31C (saving of laws giving effect to certain directive principles) limit their scope of operation.
• The application of these provisions to members of the armed forces, paramilitary forces, police forces, intelligence agencies, and analogous services can be limited or repealed by Parliament (Article 33).
• Their use may be restricted while martial law is in effect in any area.
• The term "martial law" refers to "military rule" imposed under unusual circumstances to restore order (Article 34). It is not the same as declaring a national emergency.
• The majority of them are directly enforceable (self-executory), while a few can be enforced on the basis of a law enacted to give effect to them.
• To ensure uniformity across the country, such a law can only be enacted by Parliament and not by state legislatures (Article 35).

Fundamental Rights (FR) only for Citizens

• The following is a list of fundamental rights that only citizens (not foreigners):
  • Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth (Article 15).
  • Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment (Article 16).
  • Protection of six rights regarding freedom of : (i) speech and expression, (ii) assembly, (iii) association, (iv) movement, (v) residence, and (vi) profession (Article 19).
  • Protection of life and personal liberty (Article 21). Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions (Article 30).

Amendability of Fundamental Rights

• Any amendments to fundamental rights require a constitutional amendment that must be approved by both Houses of Parliament. A special majority of Parliament is required to enact the amended bill.
• The Supreme Court ruled in the Sajjan Singh case of 1965 that Parliament can change any portion of the Constitution, including basic rights.
• However, in 1967, the Supreme Court changed its former position when it ruled in the Golaknath case that basic rights could not be altered.
• In the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973, the Supreme Court ruled that, while no component of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, was beyond the jurisdiction of Parliament to change, the "basic structure of the Constitution could not be abolished even by a constitutional amendment."

Significance of Fundamental rights

• Fundamental Rights protect individuals from any arbitrary actions by the state or other institutions. They ensure that every individual enjoys personal liberty, freedom of speech, and expression.
• Promotion of Equality: They eliminate any form of discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth, thereby promoting social equality and justice.
• They are essential for the protection of human dignity, ensuring that no person is subjected to exploitation, inhumane treatment, or forced labour.
• They ensure social justice by providing rights such as the right against exploitation, right to education, and right to equality.
• Fosters Democratic Values: The right to freedom of speech and expression is vital for the functioning of a vibrant democracy.
• Providing Legal Remedies: Fundamental Rights are justiciable, meaning individuals can approach the judiciary if their rights are violated. The judiciary has the power to enforce these rights and provide appropriate remedies to the aggrieved individuals.
• Empowering Citizens: These rights empower citizens by providing them with the freedom to express their opinions, form associations, and participate in the political process. This empowerment is crucial for the development of a democratic and inclusive society.

Criticism of Fundamental Rights

• Excessive Limits: They are subject to an endless number of exceptions, restrictions, qualifiers, and explanations.
  • As a result, opponents commented that the Constitution gives Fundamental Rights on the one hand while taking them away on the other.
• No Social and Economic Rights: They are mostly political rights and no social or economic rights on the list
  • It excludes fundamental social and economic rights such as the right to social security, the right to labour, the right to employment, the right to rest and leisure, and so on. Citizens in advanced democratic countries have access to these rights. Furthermore, comparable rights were provided for in the communist constitutions of the former USSR and China.
• No Clarity: They are stated in a vague, undefined, and ambiguous manner. Many concepts and terminology used in the chapter, such as 'public order,"'' minorities,"reasonable limitation,' 'public interest,' and so on, are not defined.
  • The vocabulary used to describe them is extremely sophisticated and beyond the grasp of the average person.
• No Permanency: They are not sacred or immutable since Parliament can limit or eliminate them, such as the repeal of the basic right to property in 1978.
  • As a result, they can become a tool in the hands of politicians who have a majority in Parliament.
• Suspension During Emergency: Another blemish on the efficiency of these rights is the suspension of their enforcement during the operation of National Emergency (save for Articles 20 and 21).
  • This clause undermines the country's democratic system by putting the rights of millions of innocent people in constant peril. According to opponents, Fundamental Rights should be enjoyed in all circumstances - emergency or not.
• Expensive Remedy: The judiciary has been charged with defending and preserving these rights against legislative and executive intervention.
  • However, the legal procedure is prohibitively expensive, making it difficult for the average man to have his rights enforced through the courts.
  • As a result, opponents argue that the rights mostly favour the wealthy segment of Indian society.
• Preventive Detention: Critics argue that the provision for preventative detention (Article 22) undermines the spirit and substance of the chapter on basic rights.
  • It gives the state arbitrary authority and undermines individual liberty. It validates the argument that the Indian Constitution is more concerned with the rights of the State against the person than the rights of the individual against the State.
• No Consistent Philosophy: Some critics claim that the chapter on basic rights is not based on any philosophical principles.
  • Sir Ivor Jennings stated that the Fundamental Rights proclaimed by the Indian Constitution are not founded on any cohesive philosophy.

Conclusion

Fundamental Rights are indispensable for the holistic development of individuals and society. They uphold the principles of liberty, equality, and justice, forming the bedrock of a democratic and inclusive nation.

FAQs

Q1: What are Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution?

Q2: How many Fundamental Rights are provided in the Indian Constitution?

Q3: Under which part of the Indian Constitution are the Fundamental Rights mentioned?

Q4: Can Fundamental Rights be suspended?

Q5: Which body is responsible for enforcing Fundamental Rights in India?

MCQs

1. Which part of the Indian Constitution deals with Fundamental Rights?

a) Part I

b) Part II

c) Part III

d) Part IV

2. How many Fundamental Rights are there currently in the Indian Constitution?

a) Five

b) Six

c) Seven

d) Eight

3. Which of the following rights cannot be suspended even during an emergency?

a) Right to equality

b) Right to property

c) Right to life and personal liberty

d) Right to constitutional remedies

4. Under which article can an individual directly approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights?

a) Article 14

b) Article 19

c) Article 32

d) Article 21

5. Which amendment removed the right to property from the list of Fundamental Rights?

a) 42nd Amendment

b) 44th Amendment

c) 52nd Amendment

d) 74th Amendment

GS Mains Questions and Model Answers

Q1. Explain the significance of Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution and their role in safeguarding democracy.

Answer: Fundamental Rights form the cornerstone of the Indian Constitution and play a crucial role in safeguarding democracy. They ensure that every citizen enjoys basic freedoms and equality before the law. These rights, which include the right to equality, freedom, protection against exploitation, and religious freedom, help create a society where individuals can live with dignity. By granting citizens the right to constitutional remedies, the Indian Constitution empowers individuals to directly approach the courts in case of violations. Thus, Fundamental Rights act as a protective shield against the arbitrary use of power by the state and ensure that democracy functions by respecting individual rights and freedoms.

Q2. How does the suspension of Fundamental Rights during an emergency impact the functioning of a democracy?

Answer: The suspension of Fundamental Rights during a national emergency, as provided under Article 359, can have significant consequences for democracy. While such a provision allows the state to address extraordinary situations, it can also lead to potential misuse of power and suppression of individual freedoms. The experience of the Emergency (1975-77) in India, when several rights were suspended, demonstrated how easily democratic institutions and civil liberties can be undermined. However, the safeguards provided in the Constitution, such as the protection of rights under Articles 20 and 21, ensure that the state cannot arbitrarily suspend crucial rights, preserving the essence of democracy even during crises.

Q3. Discuss the importance of Article 32 in the protection of Fundamental Rights.

Answer: Article 32 of the Indian Constitution is often referred to as the "heart and soul" of the Constitution, as described by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. It grants citizens the right to approach the Supreme Court directly for the enforcement of their Fundamental Rights, making it a crucial provision for the protection of individual liberties. Article 32 not only empowers individuals to seek justice but also acts as a check on the misuse of power by the state. It ensures that the judiciary remains a key pillar in upholding constitutional rights and maintaining the rule of law. This article plays a vital role in preserving democracy by providing a mechanism for judicial redress.

Previous Year Questions on  Features Of Fundamental Rights

1. UPSC CSE 2017

Question. How does the Right to Constitutional Remedies empower citizens in India?

Answer: The Right to Constitutional Remedies, enshrined in Article 32, is a cornerstone of the Indian Constitution, empowering citizens to approach the Supreme Court directly for the enforcement of their Fundamental Rights. This provision ensures that rights are not merely theoretical but enforceable. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar described this right as the "heart and soul" of the Constitution. It provides for writs like habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, which serve as legal tools to protect individual rights. This judicial recourse ensures accountability and strengthens democracy by providing every citizen access to justice.

2. UPSC CSE 2019

Question. Explain the relevance of Fundamental Rights in contemporary India.

Answer: Fundamental Rights remain highly relevant in contemporary India by upholding individual liberties, equality, and justice. They promote social inclusivity by protecting marginalized communities and ensuring equal access to opportunities. The Right to Freedom of Speech enables the expression of diverse opinions, which is crucial in a democracy. However, challenges like misuse of social media, fake news, and national security concerns necessitate a balance between rights and restrictions. Courts play an essential role in this balancing act by interpreting the Constitution dynamically. The relevance of Fundamental Rights lies in their ability to adapt to changing societal needs while maintaining democratic principles.

---

*email: contactus@prepp.in