The Judiciary's Role in Advancing Human Rights: A Focus on India
Preserving the dominant position of the court is one of the most important
things you can do to protect human rights. The creation of standards by the
judiciary has a substantial positive impact on improving people's lives and
making achieving government objectives simpler. The connection between the
people and their government as well as among the members of the international
community may be better understood as a result of these principles.
Human rights are those that an individual has regardless of the ruler, constitution, or legislation. People's lives would be worthless if they couldn't exercise their basic rights or express their political ideas. The courts must maintain their role as the first line of defence against citizen loss of liberty. The Supreme Court bears a specific obligation to broaden the scope and significance of fundamental rights and to promote human rights jurisprudence.
After Independence India was going through huge economic recovery and our nation played a very important role in safeguarding rights, but unfortunately could not made to implications on ground reality which leads to not incorporating detailed version of bill of rights but on other hand judiciary comes into picture in turning this loopholes into reality and therefore the Indian judiciary serves as the custodian of all basic natural or fundamental human rights. It employs an innovative interpretation and implementation of constitutional provisions, facilitating the enforcement of basic rights.
Introduction
Human rights are a collection of standards that regulate how individuals and groups are treated by governments and non-state entities based on moral precepts pertaining to what society deems essential to a decent living. Additionally human rights is referred as integral to fabric of a just and equitable society serving as a moral compass that guide government , institution and individual in their interaction and behaviour. These standards are included in national and international legal frameworks, which define the steps to be taken to hold duty-bearers responsible and offer compensation to those who may have been the victims of human rights breaches. Amartya Sen, consider human rights as a primarily ethical demand.[1]
It is general perception that if the human rights are getting violated then there is failure of recognition of human life. Even General Assembly also firstly recognised the human rights by creating universal declaration of human rights in 1948, this amalgamated both national and international channel to work on same ground which focus the basic human rights and treat every individual on same page irrespective of country and focuses on improving quality of life. Additionally constitution gave new dimension to Article 21 not only to cover merely existence but to add right to live with dignity.
As only Right to Live clearly focuses on animal existence (more than survival)but to live with all basic necessities of life including adequate nutrition ,shelter ,quality food ,free movement, should be respected and nurtured.As in assertion the human rights do not work under rulers or status but is inherited from birth to every human which underscores both fundamental and universal nature of these rights. The protection of Human Rights Act of 1993 under the section 2(1)(d) defines human rights as: "Human Rights" means the rights relating to life, equality, and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India."
The concept of human rights is well articulated which focuses on empertative to uphold dignity, equality and well being of all individual and both international and national legal framework are actually standing as fundamental tenet. Civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights are outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The majority of the rights outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are protected under the constitution.
Civil and political rights are covered in Part III of the constitution, while economic, social, and cultural rights are included in Part IV. All laws must be in accordance with the Constitution's requirements. The largest democracy on the planet is found in India. The preservation of people's fundamental rights is one of the key goals of a democratic nation. The acknowledgment and defence of human rights have received proper respect from the Indian government. The rights of the individuals are acknowledged by the Indian Constitution, which also expresses great concern for them. And it is evident that the Indian Courts and the judiciary protects the human rights or basic fundamental rights of individuals with jealousy[2].
The safeguarding of an individual's dignity is one of the principles and goals of the Indian Constitution, which is written in the preamble. The right to equality, the right to freedom of religion, the right to liberty, the right against exploitation, the right to cultural and educational rights, and the right to constitutional remedies are among the fundamental rights that are guaranteed to individuals under Part III of the constitution in order to achieve this goal.
The judiciary is ultimately responsible for defending citizens' human rights. In addition to defending the Constitution's enumerated rights, it has also expanded the definition of fundamental rights to include some unrecognised rights. By establishing the hindrances to leading life of dignity constitute human rights violation ,this perspective reinforces the responsibility of both governmental and non state entities to ensure that societal structure and policies enables individual to exercise their rights fully.it underscores the imperative of addressing issue such as poverty ,inequality ,discrimination and lack of access to basic amenities as these factors can undermine individual ability to live a life that must be standard of human dignity.
Background
The present version of human rights jurisprudence may be traced back to the time of the British administration in India. When the British governed India, the people's resistance to foreign authority expressed itself in the shape of demands for fundamental freedoms and civil and political rights, and Indians were humiliated and discriminated against by the British. The liberation movement, as well as the British rulers' severe repressive actions, fuel the battle for civil rights and fundamental freedoms. The Charter Act of 1813 was adopted in India in order to promote the interests and welfare of the native residents of India. Similarly, the Government of India Act of 1833 was enacted to grant Indians some political rights.
On November 1, 1858, Queen Victoria issued a proclamation that included certain elements of state policy that were analogous to natural basic rights. As time passed out the constitution of the Republic of India came into force on January 26, 1950, with 395 Articles and 8 Schedules and embraced the most elaborative declaration of human rights. Part III of the Constitution enshrines the judicially enforceable fundamental rights, which include all fundamental civil and political rights as well as some minority rights.
Now Part III which contains judicially enforceable fundamental rights ,become a cornerstone of protection and promotion of human rights in India. These rights encompassed not only civil and political rights but also certainly human rights ,reflecting a commitment to uphold the dignity and freedom of all citizens. As very well pointed out by the Hon‟ble Chief Justice Subba Rao in one of its rulings in Golak Nath v State of Punjab2 , "fundamental rights are the modern name for what has been traditionally known as natural rights."
Further Justice Patanjali Shastri in State of West Bengal v Subodh Gopal Bose3 referred to the fundamental rights as the great basic rights that are guaranteed and recognized as the natural rights as an inherent part of the citizen status in a free country.
The Supreme Court and the High Courts have the duty to and power to enforce the fundamental rights of the people through the virtue of article 32 and article 226. Finding from this historical and legal evolution highlights the transformative impact of struggles against colonial oppression that lead to gradual recognition of inherit rights and the deliberate integration of human rights principles into constitutional fabric.
The Indian experience underscores the importance of safeguarding human rights as means to secure dignity ,equality and justice for all citizens. this journey also serves as testament to ongoing effort to strike a balance between individual liberties and collective welfare of society , a challenge that continues to be navigated as India and world progress towards greater human rights realization.ultimately this perspective on human rights reinforces the moral imperative of treating every individual with respect ,safeguarding their dignity and starving for a world where human rights are not theoretical idea but lived realities for all.
The Magna Carta emerged in 1215 provided new dimensions and marked a milestone in acknowledging civil liberties, introducing concepts like due process and principle that authority should be constrained by law. On further legal development such as Bill of Rights 1689 it was explained that power should not be absolute and individual rights have to be protected against arbitrary rule.
The French National Assembly concluded that if human rights are disregarded then it will lead to societal catastrophe which serves a reminder of the importance of respecting fundamental rights and ignorance of rights can lead to injustice and social turmoil. by these various historical trajectories we can easily derive that there is struggle behind prevailing rights we enjoy and to extend the period there is need for endeavour that require vigilance ,education and collective commitment is needed to have equitable society.we can clearly witness that human rights are highly influenced by complex interplay of historical events ,philosophical ideas ,societal progress.
The French Declaration Of Human Rights emphasis on equality ,liberty and free speech stepped as important strategy for codifying fundamental rights of individual.the journey for recognizing universal human rights have long back story directly connecting with cultural development , religious principle and earlier philosophical discussion although after second half of 18th century it gained more recognition. concepts like the slavery movement were highlighted which led to the birth of individual rights and started abolishing the practice of treating people as property.
Human rights proclamation in countries like France and US come into force aftermath of devastating massacre and devastating massacre and atrocities faced in 1930 and 1940 which also translated human rights in international sphere. Franklin Roosevelt and other leaders pressured the necessity of human rights in the Charter of the UN, acknowledging the problem which needed to be solved related to rights.
Evolution of human rights reveals the gradual maturation of societies moral compass and their commitment for fostering justice, dignity and freedom of all. The establishment of international treaties and organizations like the UN, represents a crucial step towards fostering a shared understanding and commitment to human rights in the global world. The aftermath of world war II highlighted the urgent need to address human rights violations particularly in context of Nazi, Germany and Japanese imperialism.
These dark chapters lead to the need for a global framework that safeguard fundamental rights.even though League of Nation did not explicitly mentioned human rights in its covenant this lead to collective outrage which lead to formation of Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.this milestone set a common standard for human rights achievement across nations.
The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights marked beginning of International Bills Of Rights which included both international covenant on economic ,cultural and societal rights and international covenant on civil an[3]d political rights.these covenant passed in 1966 and in force since 1976 ,further solidified the commitment of international community to promote and promote human rights in all dimension.the establishment of International Human Right commissioned in 1946 as part of economic and social council further demonstrated the dedication of international community to addressing human right issue comprehensive and collectively.
Ultimately the ongoing pursuit of human rights is a testament of humanity's aspiration to create a world where every individual is treated with respect and fairness and where the values of equality and fairness are upheld as universal ideals.the trajectory of human rights development showcase the worlds recognition of inherit value of every individual and determination to prevent recurrence of system abuse.the journey will continue as long as society work together for realization of rights.
Litigation in the public interest or to safeguard the interests of the general public is referred to as public interest litigation. In a broad sense, it is litigation that can be brought before any court by anybody acting in the public interest, particularly by someone who has not yet approached the court.
Moreover, the phrase "when an act is done with an intention to protect or benefit the public" can be used to define an act of public interest. For example, taking action against pollution, traffic safety, terrorism, and industrial safety, among other issues. The term "public interest litigation" is not defined by legislation or law, although it has been construed by courts and is comparable to writs granted under Articles 226 and 32 of the Indian Constitution.
This idea was initially presented in India in the Mumbai Kamgar Sabha vs. Abdul Bhai Faizullah Bhai case, when Judge Krishna Iyer permitted a group of persons to submit a PIL on behalf of others. According to J. Iyer, a person or group of individuals may petition the court on behalf of others.
In the instance of Hussainara Khatoon v. the State of Bihar, a Public Interest Litigation was filed to protect the rights of prisoners[4]. The court was alerted to the ongoing legal proceedings against the accused, which led to an excessive length of incarceration that far exceeded the maximum penalty permitted by the law.
But because of the liberalisation strategy that the Central Government began implementing in the early 1990s, the idea that Indian society is fundamentally socialist is unquestionably fading. It appears that the judiciary's perspective on PIL during these three stages is a reaction to what it saw as the "issues in vogue," at least in part. In the first phase, the rights of women, convicts, pavement dwellers, and children/bonded labourers were prioritised.
In the second phase, concerns about the environment, AIDS, corruption, and good governance took centre stage. In the third phase, development and free market factors may take precedence. Thus, the responses of the courts to PILs in India are only a reflection of the public's expectations of the legal system at any particular moment [7].
The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
The "Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993," an Act that expressly addresses the preservation of human rights, was enacted in response to the necessity to safeguard these concerns on a national and worldwide scale.The objective of this Act is to give the protection of human rights an organisational framework. In order to better defend human rights and issues related to them, the Act calls for the establishment of Human Rights Commissions at the federal, state, and local levels in each of the states. It also calls for the creation of Human Rights Courts at the district level.
The Act defines human rights in Section 2(d) as "the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India." However, the National Human Rights Commission's ability to operate is constrained by the aforementioned criteria. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified, The International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and rights. There should be legislation in the nation that comply with these agreements as international covenants are not enforceable in court. As a result, the Constitution's guarantees of rights are compliant with these international agreements.
For instance, in Laborers Working on Salal Hydro Project v. State of Jammu and Kashmir[10], the Supreme Court ruled that children under the age of 14 cannot be employed, establishing significant guidelines and directions to address the issue of child labor. Children are not only subjected to sexual abuse but are also sometimes exploited as bonded laborers.
The issue of rising child prostitution was also addressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vishal Jeet v. Union of India[11]. The court directed governments to form advisory committees aimed at eradicating child prostitution and ensuring the protection and care of the victims. It emphasized the rehabilitation of minors involved in prostitution through juvenile homes and other supportive measures. Additionally, the court mandated that proceedings involving child victims be conducted in camera[12] to preserve their dignity and allowed for child victims to testify outside of the courtroom environment[13] to reduce their trauma.
Child rights encompass a wide array of protections aimed at ensuring children's well-being, dignity, and development. These rights are grounded in international agreements such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which provides a comprehensive framework for children's rights, including the right to life, education, protection from abuse, exploitation, and neglect, and the right to participate and express themselves.
The judiciary is empowered to enforce these rights by addressing violations and holding accountable those who infringe upon children's rights. Through its decisions and statements, the judiciary also raises public awareness and influences policy discussions, thereby contributing to the creation of a just and equitable society.
In summary, the judiciary's role in safeguarding child rights is essential for fostering a society where children can thrive. By interpreting laws, enforcing rights, setting legal precedents, and promoting awareness, the judiciary plays a pivotal role in protecting the rights and well-being of children, ensuring their holistic development.
When domestic legislation falls short, international treaties and standards become important references for interpreting gender equality, the right to work with dignity, and freedom from sexual harassment in workplaces. The judiciary's role in safeguarding and advancing women's rights is indispensable for achieving gender equality and social justice. Through interpreting laws, addressing discriminatory practices, and setting legal precedents, the judiciary plays a key role in promoting women's rights.
Nevertheless, challenges such as societal norms, barriers to accessing justice, and gaps in implementation highlight the need for continuous efforts to ensure women's rights are fully protected and realized. The judiciary's commitment to fairness, sensitivity, and the promotion of equality is crucial in creating a society where women's rights are respected, protected, and advanced.the judiciary is essential in promoting and protecting women's rights.
By interpreting laws, challenging discriminatory practices, and setting important legal precedents, the judiciary advances gender equality and ensures that women receive equal justice and protection from discrimination and violence. Despite challenges like deep-rooted societal norms and gaps in implementation, the judiciary's continued vigilance and sensitivity are crucial in safeguarding women's rights. Through steadfast adherence to constitutional principles and the promotion of awareness, the judiciary plays a key role in building a society that respects, protects, and upholds women's rights, contributing to a more just and inclusive future for everyone.
For instance, when a person is detained without a warrant, police officers can only handcuff the suspect if it is absolutely necessary, as per Supreme Court guidelines, and only during transport to the police station. After that, only a Magistrate can order the use of restraints[15]. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution grants the fundamental right to personal liberty, which can only be restricted through a legal process that protects the individual's human rights.
A person who commits a crime does not lose their dignity or all aspects of their life. Even while incarcerated, prisoners retain certain privileges. Article 21 ensures the right to life and personal liberty and prohibits cruel or degrading treatment, including for prisoners. Additionally, Article 14 guarantees equal legal protection for everyone. The rise in custodial violence and deaths, coupled with increasing crime rates and police brutality, highlights the need for these protections. One infamous example is the Bhagalpur blinding case[16].
In D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal[17], the Supreme Court issued several guidelines for police officers to follow when arresting or interrogating suspects or accused persons. The Court held that custodial violence is an assault on human dignity and must be stopped. In A.K. Gopalan v. Union of India[18], the Court emphasized that even when a person is detained, their fundamental rights must be respected. This case highlighted the importance of due process and protecting individual liberties, ensuring that legal procedures are followed to prevent violations of detainees' fundamental human rights.
The judiciary's role in protecting rights in criminal proceedings is crucial. By maintaining vigilance, adhering to constitutional principles, and issuing protective guidelines, the judiciary ensures that individuals' fundamental rights are respected, even during criminal investigations and police interactions. This dedication to justice and human dignity is essential for a fair and just legal system.
The judiciary plays a crucial role in safeguarding rights during criminal proceedings. By vigilantly upholding constitutional principles and issuing protective guidelines, the judiciary ensures that fundamental rights are upheld, even amidst criminal investigations and interactions with law enforcement. This commitment to justice and human dignity is essential for maintaining a fair legal system. Additionally, the judiciary reviews laws and police practices to ensure they align with constitutional protections, thereby preventing abuses of power and promoting a culture of respect for human rights within law enforcement agencies.
Moreover, judicial training programs are pivotal in educating judges on the significance of human rights protection and equipping them to handle cases involving police misconduct effectively. These initiatives aim to cultivate a judiciary that is well-informed and dedicated to defending human rights, thereby enhancing its role as a guardian of justice.
Hence protecting rights in criminal proceedings is a complex responsibility that demands an active and vigilant judiciary. Through the enforcement of constitutional guarantees, the establishment of guidelines to prevent abuses, and continuous oversight, the judiciary ensures that individuals' fundamental rights are upheld. This creates a legal environment that values and safeguards human dignity, contributing to a just society.
Universalism
Universalism holds that certain values, morals, and principles are universally applicable to all individuals, regardless of their cultural, racial, national, gender, or other social differences. This concept has greatly influenced various fields, including counseling, psychology, and social sciences, forming the foundation of many theories and practices[19].
By exploring the arguments and counterarguments of universalism and cultural relativism, a research paper can offer a nuanced understanding of how human rights can be both universally recognized and culturally contextualized.
The debate between universalism and cultural relativism in human rights highlights a significant challenge in balancing global principles with respect for cultural diversity. Universalism argues that certain human rights are fundamental and should be upheld universally, regardless of cultural differences. This perspective supports the idea that global standards are necessary to protect individuals from practices that, while accepted in some cultures, may violate core human rights.
On the other hand, cultural relativism stresses the importance of understanding and respecting human rights within the context of each culture. It suggests that imposing external human rights standards can undermine local traditions and social cohesion. By advocating for cultural sensitivity, cultural relativism aims to prevent the erosion of cultural practices and maintain community values.
Reconciling these views involves finding a middle ground where universal human rights are upheld while also respecting cultural contexts. This approach requires thoughtful application of human rights principles in ways that acknowledge and integrate cultural differences. Engaging in open dialogue between human rights advocates and local communities can help bridge gaps and promote mutual respect.
Such dialogue can lead to solutions that honor cultural traditions while addressing practices that may infringe on fundamental rights. Over time, exposure to universal human rights norms can encourage positive changes in cultural practices, leading to the adoption of new traditions that respect human dignity.
Freedom of expression is evolving with the digital landscape. While the internet facilitates open communication and the exchange of ideas, it also raises issues of censorship. Authoritarian regimes frequently use digital tools to monitor and restrict online content, as seen in China's stringent control over internet access and suppression of dissenting voices.
The digital divide underscores the disparity between those with access to digital technologies and those without. This gap can widen existing social and economic inequalities, especially in less developed areas. Bridging this divide is crucial to ensuring that everyone can benefit from technological advancements. Cybersecurity threats, including cyberattacks and identity theft, are increasingly common. The rise in these incidents highlights the need for strong security measures and international cooperation to protect both individuals and organizations from digital harm.
The growth of AI and automation offers substantial benefits but also introduces ethical challenges. AI systems, if not carefully managed, can perpetuate biases, and automation can disrupt job markets by replacing human roles. Developing guidelines and policies to manage these technologies responsibly is essential to addressing these concerns.Legal frameworks play a vital role in tackling these issues. Regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe offer significant protections for personal data, while national laws add further safeguards. The work of non-governmental organizations and international bodies is crucial in advocating for and defending digital rights.
Looking forward, improving digital literacy is essential for empowering individuals to navigate the digital world safely and effectively. Promoting ethical technology development and fostering global collaboration will be key to ensuring that technological progress aligns with and supports fundamental human rights.[20]
An oversight group is in charge of examining how the majority of[21] the major human rights treaties are being implemented by the ratifying nations. People who feel that their rights have been infringed upon may immediately register complaints with the committees that supervise human rights treaties.
Limitation clauses
So-called limitation clauses apply to a number of human rights duties. For example, using political freedoms like the right to assemble, free speech, and freedom of association comes with obligations, and as such, it may be particular procedures, guidelines, limitations, and sanctions in the name of public safety, national security, territorial integrity, disturbance prevention, moral or public health preservation, or the defence of others' rights and liberties.
Governments are required to intervene with people's enjoyment of their freedoms of speech and assembly if they are being used to create racial or religious hate, spread war propaganda, or instigate criminal activity liberties to safeguard other people's human rights. However, in a democratic society, any intervention, limitation, or punishment must be used in line with domestic law and must be required to further the respective goals and national interests. States must always show why these restrictions are necessary, and they may only adopt actions that are proportionate to achieving their justifiable objectives.
Conclusion
The judiciary's role in protecting and advancing human rights is essential for upholding principles of dignity, equality, and justice. Courts serve as a crucial check on the executive and legislative branches, ensuring that individuals can exercise their fundamental rights regardless of the political climate. In India, the judiciary has played a significant role in interpreting and enforcing constitutional provisions to safeguard basic human rights, adapting to societal changes and addressing various issues through innovative legal interpretations.
Human rights are intrinsic to every individual, transcending governmental and legislative boundaries. These rights are essential for a decent and dignified life, encompassing civil, political, economic, social, and cultural dimensions. National constitutions and international treaties form a robust legal framework to protect individuals from abuses and ensure their well-being.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, established in 1948, set a global standard for recognizing these rights.In India, the judiciary has been instrumental in expanding the scope of fundamental rights. Landmark cases have reinforced the protection of individual liberties. For example, the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution has been interpreted to include the right to live with dignity, covering adequate nutrition, shelter, and quality of life. The judiciary's proactive stance in addressing human rights issues through Public Interest Litigations (PILs) has been vital in voicing the concerns of marginalized and vulnerable groups.
The evolution of PILs in India highlights the judiciary's dynamic role in responding to social injustices. From addressing the rights of prisoners and bonded labourers to tackling environmental issues and government accountability, PILs have broadened the scope of judicial intervention. This evolution demonstrates the judiciary's adaptability in safeguarding human rights in a changing socio-economic landscape. Despite progress, challenges remain. The judiciary must navigate complex issues such as balancing individual liberties with collective welfare, addressing systemic inequalities, and ensuring effective implementation of its rulings. Moreover, the judiciary's approach has evolved, with varying degrees of assertiveness over time. The initial phase focused on social justice for marginalized groups, while later phases addressed broader governance issues and private sector accountability.
The Protection of Human Rights Act of 1993 institutionalized the commitment to human rights by establishing National and State Human Rights Commissions. These bodies play a critical role in monitoring human rights violations and ensuring accountability. However, their effectiveness depends on the judiciary's continued support and enforcement of their recommendations.The judiciary also plays a crucial role in safeguarding specific rights, such as those of children and women.
Landmark rulings have addressed child labor, child prostitution, and sexual harassment, emphasizing the need for special protections for vulnerable groups. By interpreting and enforcing laws in line with international standards, the judiciary contributes to a more just and equitable society.The debate between universalism and cultural relativism in human rights is a significant and complex discourse that seeks to balance global principles with cultural diversity. Universalism posits that certain human rights are fundamental and should be universally upheld, transcending cultural differences to protect individuals from practices that may violate core human rights.
This perspective supports the necessity of global standards to ensure the protection of these inalienable rights across all societies.
Conversely, cultural relativism emphasizes understanding and respecting human rights within each culture's unique context. This approach argues that imposing external human rights standards can undermine local traditions and disrupt social cohesion. Cultural relativists advocate for cultural sensitivity to preserve community values and prevent the erosion of cultural practices.
Reconciling these opposing views involves finding a middle ground where universal human rights are respected while acknowledging and integrating cultural differences. This balanced approach requires the contextual application of human rights principles, ensuring they are interpreted in culturally sensitive ways without compromising core values. Engaging in open dialogue between human rights advocates and local communities is essential to bridging gaps and promoting mutual respect.
Such dialogue can lead to solutions that honor cultural traditions while addressing practices that infringe on fundamental rights.In the digital age, the intersection of technology and human rights presents both opportunities and challenges. Privacy, data protection, freedom of expression, the digital divide, cybersecurity threats, and the ethical implications of AI and automation are key concerns that need robust safeguards, ethical guidelines, and international cooperation. Legal frameworks like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the advocacy of non-governmental organizations play crucial roles in protecting digital rights.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is pivotal in overseeing human rights initiatives, responding to violations, and working with treaty bodies to ensure compliance. Limitation clauses allow for certain restrictions on political freedoms to protect public safety, national security, and the rights of others, but these must be necessary, proportionate, and consistent with democratic principles. Hence the judiciary's role in protecting human rights is essential for maintaining a democratic society where the rule of law prevails.
Through vigilant enforcement of constitutional provisions, innovative legal interpretations, and proactive use of PILs, the judiciary upholds the dignity, equality, and freedom of individuals. While challenges persist, the judiciary's unwavering commitment to human rights continues to be a beacon of hope for justice and fairness in society. Navigating the balance between universal human rights and cultural relativism requires a nuanced approach that respects cultural contexts while upholding fundamental rights. Continuous dialogue, cultural sensitivity, and adherence to international standards are essential to fostering a just and equitable global society where human dignity is universally respected.
End Notes:
Human rights are those that an individual has regardless of the ruler, constitution, or legislation. People's lives would be worthless if they couldn't exercise their basic rights or express their political ideas. The courts must maintain their role as the first line of defence against citizen loss of liberty. The Supreme Court bears a specific obligation to broaden the scope and significance of fundamental rights and to promote human rights jurisprudence.
After Independence India was going through huge economic recovery and our nation played a very important role in safeguarding rights, but unfortunately could not made to implications on ground reality which leads to not incorporating detailed version of bill of rights but on other hand judiciary comes into picture in turning this loopholes into reality and therefore the Indian judiciary serves as the custodian of all basic natural or fundamental human rights. It employs an innovative interpretation and implementation of constitutional provisions, facilitating the enforcement of basic rights.
Introduction
Human rights are a collection of standards that regulate how individuals and groups are treated by governments and non-state entities based on moral precepts pertaining to what society deems essential to a decent living. Additionally human rights is referred as integral to fabric of a just and equitable society serving as a moral compass that guide government , institution and individual in their interaction and behaviour. These standards are included in national and international legal frameworks, which define the steps to be taken to hold duty-bearers responsible and offer compensation to those who may have been the victims of human rights breaches. Amartya Sen, consider human rights as a primarily ethical demand.[1]
It is general perception that if the human rights are getting violated then there is failure of recognition of human life. Even General Assembly also firstly recognised the human rights by creating universal declaration of human rights in 1948, this amalgamated both national and international channel to work on same ground which focus the basic human rights and treat every individual on same page irrespective of country and focuses on improving quality of life. Additionally constitution gave new dimension to Article 21 not only to cover merely existence but to add right to live with dignity.
As only Right to Live clearly focuses on animal existence (more than survival)but to live with all basic necessities of life including adequate nutrition ,shelter ,quality food ,free movement, should be respected and nurtured.As in assertion the human rights do not work under rulers or status but is inherited from birth to every human which underscores both fundamental and universal nature of these rights. The protection of Human Rights Act of 1993 under the section 2(1)(d) defines human rights as: "Human Rights" means the rights relating to life, equality, and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India."
The concept of human rights is well articulated which focuses on empertative to uphold dignity, equality and well being of all individual and both international and national legal framework are actually standing as fundamental tenet. Civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights are outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The majority of the rights outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are protected under the constitution.
Civil and political rights are covered in Part III of the constitution, while economic, social, and cultural rights are included in Part IV. All laws must be in accordance with the Constitution's requirements. The largest democracy on the planet is found in India. The preservation of people's fundamental rights is one of the key goals of a democratic nation. The acknowledgment and defence of human rights have received proper respect from the Indian government. The rights of the individuals are acknowledged by the Indian Constitution, which also expresses great concern for them. And it is evident that the Indian Courts and the judiciary protects the human rights or basic fundamental rights of individuals with jealousy[2].
The safeguarding of an individual's dignity is one of the principles and goals of the Indian Constitution, which is written in the preamble. The right to equality, the right to freedom of religion, the right to liberty, the right against exploitation, the right to cultural and educational rights, and the right to constitutional remedies are among the fundamental rights that are guaranteed to individuals under Part III of the constitution in order to achieve this goal.
The judiciary is ultimately responsible for defending citizens' human rights. In addition to defending the Constitution's enumerated rights, it has also expanded the definition of fundamental rights to include some unrecognised rights. By establishing the hindrances to leading life of dignity constitute human rights violation ,this perspective reinforces the responsibility of both governmental and non state entities to ensure that societal structure and policies enables individual to exercise their rights fully.it underscores the imperative of addressing issue such as poverty ,inequality ,discrimination and lack of access to basic amenities as these factors can undermine individual ability to live a life that must be standard of human dignity.
Background
The present version of human rights jurisprudence may be traced back to the time of the British administration in India. When the British governed India, the people's resistance to foreign authority expressed itself in the shape of demands for fundamental freedoms and civil and political rights, and Indians were humiliated and discriminated against by the British. The liberation movement, as well as the British rulers' severe repressive actions, fuel the battle for civil rights and fundamental freedoms. The Charter Act of 1813 was adopted in India in order to promote the interests and welfare of the native residents of India. Similarly, the Government of India Act of 1833 was enacted to grant Indians some political rights.
On November 1, 1858, Queen Victoria issued a proclamation that included certain elements of state policy that were analogous to natural basic rights. As time passed out the constitution of the Republic of India came into force on January 26, 1950, with 395 Articles and 8 Schedules and embraced the most elaborative declaration of human rights. Part III of the Constitution enshrines the judicially enforceable fundamental rights, which include all fundamental civil and political rights as well as some minority rights.
Now Part III which contains judicially enforceable fundamental rights ,become a cornerstone of protection and promotion of human rights in India. These rights encompassed not only civil and political rights but also certainly human rights ,reflecting a commitment to uphold the dignity and freedom of all citizens. As very well pointed out by the Hon‟ble Chief Justice Subba Rao in one of its rulings in Golak Nath v State of Punjab2 , "fundamental rights are the modern name for what has been traditionally known as natural rights."
Further Justice Patanjali Shastri in State of West Bengal v Subodh Gopal Bose3 referred to the fundamental rights as the great basic rights that are guaranteed and recognized as the natural rights as an inherent part of the citizen status in a free country.
The Supreme Court and the High Courts have the duty to and power to enforce the fundamental rights of the people through the virtue of article 32 and article 226. Finding from this historical and legal evolution highlights the transformative impact of struggles against colonial oppression that lead to gradual recognition of inherit rights and the deliberate integration of human rights principles into constitutional fabric.
The Indian experience underscores the importance of safeguarding human rights as means to secure dignity ,equality and justice for all citizens. this journey also serves as testament to ongoing effort to strike a balance between individual liberties and collective welfare of society , a challenge that continues to be navigated as India and world progress towards greater human rights realization.ultimately this perspective on human rights reinforces the moral imperative of treating every individual with respect ,safeguarding their dignity and starving for a world where human rights are not theoretical idea but lived realities for all.
Foundation Of Human Rights
Now evolution of human rights concept revolves around diverse cultures and historical periods with each encompassing unique element to understanding of inherit rights and liberties.even though Magna Carta undoubtedly played important role in shaping human rights but it is important to acknowledge the fact that roots of human rights are well spreaded and cannot be concluded from one source instead of various historical events. For instance Islam asserts that human rights are divinely bestowed,inherited within the very essence of humanity and therefore not attached to the whims of kings or legislative bodies. Now the distinction between domestic law and universal principles reflect the idea that some rights transcend boundaries and are grounded in natural order.The Magna Carta emerged in 1215 provided new dimensions and marked a milestone in acknowledging civil liberties, introducing concepts like due process and principle that authority should be constrained by law. On further legal development such as Bill of Rights 1689 it was explained that power should not be absolute and individual rights have to be protected against arbitrary rule.
The French National Assembly concluded that if human rights are disregarded then it will lead to societal catastrophe which serves a reminder of the importance of respecting fundamental rights and ignorance of rights can lead to injustice and social turmoil. by these various historical trajectories we can easily derive that there is struggle behind prevailing rights we enjoy and to extend the period there is need for endeavour that require vigilance ,education and collective commitment is needed to have equitable society.we can clearly witness that human rights are highly influenced by complex interplay of historical events ,philosophical ideas ,societal progress.
The French Declaration Of Human Rights emphasis on equality ,liberty and free speech stepped as important strategy for codifying fundamental rights of individual.the journey for recognizing universal human rights have long back story directly connecting with cultural development , religious principle and earlier philosophical discussion although after second half of 18th century it gained more recognition. concepts like the slavery movement were highlighted which led to the birth of individual rights and started abolishing the practice of treating people as property.
Human rights proclamation in countries like France and US come into force aftermath of devastating massacre and devastating massacre and atrocities faced in 1930 and 1940 which also translated human rights in international sphere. Franklin Roosevelt and other leaders pressured the necessity of human rights in the Charter of the UN, acknowledging the problem which needed to be solved related to rights.
Evolution of human rights reveals the gradual maturation of societies moral compass and their commitment for fostering justice, dignity and freedom of all. The establishment of international treaties and organizations like the UN, represents a crucial step towards fostering a shared understanding and commitment to human rights in the global world. The aftermath of world war II highlighted the urgent need to address human rights violations particularly in context of Nazi, Germany and Japanese imperialism.
These dark chapters lead to the need for a global framework that safeguard fundamental rights.even though League of Nation did not explicitly mentioned human rights in its covenant this lead to collective outrage which lead to formation of Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.this milestone set a common standard for human rights achievement across nations.
The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights marked beginning of International Bills Of Rights which included both international covenant on economic ,cultural and societal rights and international covenant on civil an[3]d political rights.these covenant passed in 1966 and in force since 1976 ,further solidified the commitment of international community to promote and promote human rights in all dimension.the establishment of International Human Right commissioned in 1946 as part of economic and social council further demonstrated the dedication of international community to addressing human right issue comprehensive and collectively.
Ultimately the ongoing pursuit of human rights is a testament of humanity's aspiration to create a world where every individual is treated with respect and fairness and where the values of equality and fairness are upheld as universal ideals.the trajectory of human rights development showcase the worlds recognition of inherit value of every individual and determination to prevent recurrence of system abuse.the journey will continue as long as society work together for realization of rights.
An examination of public interest litigation in India
There is no question that the concept of PIL has, for the most part, been successful in allowing the voiceless to be heard in the process of justice. So, let's learn more about PIL's theory and operation.Litigation in the public interest or to safeguard the interests of the general public is referred to as public interest litigation. In a broad sense, it is litigation that can be brought before any court by anybody acting in the public interest, particularly by someone who has not yet approached the court.
Moreover, the phrase "when an act is done with an intention to protect or benefit the public" can be used to define an act of public interest. For example, taking action against pollution, traffic safety, terrorism, and industrial safety, among other issues. The term "public interest litigation" is not defined by legislation or law, although it has been construed by courts and is comparable to writs granted under Articles 226 and 32 of the Indian Constitution.
This idea was initially presented in India in the Mumbai Kamgar Sabha vs. Abdul Bhai Faizullah Bhai case, when Judge Krishna Iyer permitted a group of persons to submit a PIL on behalf of others. According to J. Iyer, a person or group of individuals may petition the court on behalf of others.
In the instance of Hussainara Khatoon v. the State of Bihar, a Public Interest Litigation was filed to protect the rights of prisoners[4]. The court was alerted to the ongoing legal proceedings against the accused, which led to an excessive length of incarceration that far exceeded the maximum penalty permitted by the law.
The Three Phases Of PIL
It seems that there are three main phases to the PIL discourse in India, despite the possibility of oversimplification and overlap. It will be observed that these three stages are distinct from one another about the minimum of four factors: the person who filed the PILs, the PIL's subject matter or focus, the party against whom the relief was sought, and the judiciary's response to the PILs.- First phase
Lawyers, journalists, social activists, and academics were often the ones who brought PIL lawsuits during the first phase, which lasted from the late 1970s to the 1980s. The majority of the cases concerned the rights of marginalised groups in society, including women, mentally challenged people, convicts, bonded workers, and child labourers. The redress sought was against the executive agencies' actions or inactions that resulted in constitutionally mandated breaches of the Federal Register. In response, the judiciary acknowledged these people's rights throughout this period and instructed the government to address the claimed infringement. To put it briefly, it is possible to argue that during the first phase of the PIL, it really started to function as a tool for the kind of social instability or transformation[5] that the founders of the nation had hoped the Constitution would bring about.
- Second phase
The PIL had numerous notable alterations in its chemistry in the 1990s, which marked the start of its second phase. PIL lawsuits were filed more institutionally in the second phase compared to the first because a number of specialised NGOs and solicitors began bringing up issues of public interest. curiosity to the courts on a frequent basis. The scope of issues covered in the PIL also greatly widened, ranging from environmental protection to administration free from corruption, the right to an education, sexual harassment in the workplace, industry relocation, the rule of law, sound governance, and the general accountability of the government.
It should be mentioned that at this stage, the petitioners asked for assistance from both private parties and the executive branch with regard to concerns of policy and things that would obviously come within the legislative branch's purview. Compared to the first phase, the judiciary's response during the second phase was often significantly bolder and unusual. For example, in cases where there were gaps in the legislation, the courts did not hesitate to provide comprehensive recommendations.
The question of whether the state violated the FR was not addressed by the courts when they upheld FRs against private parties and provided relief to the petitioner. In addition, the courts deemed non-adherence to its directives with greater seriousness, and in certain instances, even went so far as to keep an eye on government detectives and/or fine federal officials for disobedience. The second phase coincided with the start of the concerning PIL abuse, which at times led to the courts fining plaintiffs for taking advantage of PIL for personal gain.
Thus, it is evident that the PIL debate broke new ground and explored previously uncharted territory in the second phase, going much beyond the stated goal for which PIL was intended. When necessary, the courts, for example, used judicial legislation. not shirk to approach government power facilities, attempted to broaden the protection of FRs against non-state players, shifted to defend middle class interests rather than those of the impoverished, and looked for ways to limit the abuse of PIL for malicious intents.
- Third phase
On the other hand, an individual may submit a PIL for nearly anything during the third phase, which started with the 21st century and is currently in effect. There appears to be more reasons that may be brought up in a PIL, such as recalling the Indian cricket team from the Australia tour and stopping an actress who is said to be married to a tree for astrological[6] reasons. From the perspective of the judiciary, one may contend that it is time for judges to reflect on their practices and reevaluate the goals they set for PILs. The judiciary appears to have shown greater discretion in giving the government instructions in comparison to the second phase. It's uncertain that the courts will limit the PIL's broad reach, but it might nonetheless make more restrained interventions in the future.
But because of the liberalisation strategy that the Central Government began implementing in the early 1990s, the idea that Indian society is fundamentally socialist is unquestionably fading. It appears that the judiciary's perspective on PIL during these three stages is a reaction to what it saw as the "issues in vogue," at least in part. In the first phase, the rights of women, convicts, pavement dwellers, and children/bonded labourers were prioritised.
In the second phase, concerns about the environment, AIDS, corruption, and good governance took centre stage. In the third phase, development and free market factors may take precedence. Thus, the responses of the courts to PILs in India are only a reflection of the public's expectations of the legal system at any particular moment [7].
AL Contributions Of PIL
A traditional understanding of liberal democracy is challenged by PIL in India in at least three significant ways: (1) the individual's empowerment through collective action; (2) a strong emphasis on the creation of positive rights through a broad interpretation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution; and (3) a fuzziness of the conventional boundaries of the state's authority. The Indian court has adapted the conventional paradigm of liberal democracy in several ways to meet the needs of the country's pervasive and deeply ingrained socioeconomic a[8]nd social disparities.The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
The "Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993," an Act that expressly addresses the preservation of human rights, was enacted in response to the necessity to safeguard these concerns on a national and worldwide scale.The objective of this Act is to give the protection of human rights an organisational framework. In order to better defend human rights and issues related to them, the Act calls for the establishment of Human Rights Commissions at the federal, state, and local levels in each of the states. It also calls for the creation of Human Rights Courts at the district level.
The Act defines human rights in Section 2(d) as "the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India." However, the National Human Rights Commission's ability to operate is constrained by the aforementioned criteria. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified, The International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and rights. There should be legislation in the nation that comply with these agreements as international covenants are not enforceable in court. As a result, the Constitution's guarantees of rights are compliant with these international agreements.
The Judiciary role in safeguarding child rights
Children are particularly vulnerable to exploitation and abuse, necessitating special protections for their rights. Recognizing this need, the[9] United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child was ratified in 1989, consolidating various human rights provisions specifically for children. The judiciary has consistently played a crucial role in upholding and defending these rights.For instance, in Laborers Working on Salal Hydro Project v. State of Jammu and Kashmir[10], the Supreme Court ruled that children under the age of 14 cannot be employed, establishing significant guidelines and directions to address the issue of child labor. Children are not only subjected to sexual abuse but are also sometimes exploited as bonded laborers.
The issue of rising child prostitution was also addressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vishal Jeet v. Union of India[11]. The court directed governments to form advisory committees aimed at eradicating child prostitution and ensuring the protection and care of the victims. It emphasized the rehabilitation of minors involved in prostitution through juvenile homes and other supportive measures. Additionally, the court mandated that proceedings involving child victims be conducted in camera[12] to preserve their dignity and allowed for child victims to testify outside of the courtroom environment[13] to reduce their trauma.
Child rights encompass a wide array of protections aimed at ensuring children's well-being, dignity, and development. These rights are grounded in international agreements such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which provides a comprehensive framework for children's rights, including the right to life, education, protection from abuse, exploitation, and neglect, and the right to participate and express themselves.
The judiciary is empowered to enforce these rights by addressing violations and holding accountable those who infringe upon children's rights. Through its decisions and statements, the judiciary also raises public awareness and influences policy discussions, thereby contributing to the creation of a just and equitable society.
In summary, the judiciary's role in safeguarding child rights is essential for fostering a society where children can thrive. By interpreting laws, enforcing rights, setting legal precedents, and promoting awareness, the judiciary plays a pivotal role in protecting the rights and well-being of children, ensuring their holistic development.
The Judiciary's Role in Upholding and Advancing Women's Rights
The judiciary plays a vital role in upholding and advancing women's rights, which are essential for achieving gender equality and a just society. These rights cover a wide range of issues, such as equal opportunities, protection from discrimination and violence, reproductive rights, and economic empowerment. A significant Supreme Court judgment in Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan[14] affirmed that "gender equality includes protection from sexual harassment and the right to work with dignity, which is a basic human right." This principle is widely respected.When domestic legislation falls short, international treaties and standards become important references for interpreting gender equality, the right to work with dignity, and freedom from sexual harassment in workplaces. The judiciary's role in safeguarding and advancing women's rights is indispensable for achieving gender equality and social justice. Through interpreting laws, addressing discriminatory practices, and setting legal precedents, the judiciary plays a key role in promoting women's rights.
Nevertheless, challenges such as societal norms, barriers to accessing justice, and gaps in implementation highlight the need for continuous efforts to ensure women's rights are fully protected and realized. The judiciary's commitment to fairness, sensitivity, and the promotion of equality is crucial in creating a society where women's rights are respected, protected, and advanced.the judiciary is essential in promoting and protecting women's rights.
By interpreting laws, challenging discriminatory practices, and setting important legal precedents, the judiciary advances gender equality and ensures that women receive equal justice and protection from discrimination and violence. Despite challenges like deep-rooted societal norms and gaps in implementation, the judiciary's continued vigilance and sensitivity are crucial in safeguarding women's rights. Through steadfast adherence to constitutional principles and the promotion of awareness, the judiciary plays a key role in building a society that respects, protects, and upholds women's rights, contributing to a more just and inclusive future for everyone.
Protecting Rights in Criminal Proceedings
Given the significant powers granted to the police, it is essential to have a strong system in place at the local level to protect human rights as recognized by the Constitution. Subordinate courts play a vital role in this system. Judges in these courts must be vigilant in ensuring the rights of individuals who come into contact with the police.For instance, when a person is detained without a warrant, police officers can only handcuff the suspect if it is absolutely necessary, as per Supreme Court guidelines, and only during transport to the police station. After that, only a Magistrate can order the use of restraints[15]. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution grants the fundamental right to personal liberty, which can only be restricted through a legal process that protects the individual's human rights.
A person who commits a crime does not lose their dignity or all aspects of their life. Even while incarcerated, prisoners retain certain privileges. Article 21 ensures the right to life and personal liberty and prohibits cruel or degrading treatment, including for prisoners. Additionally, Article 14 guarantees equal legal protection for everyone. The rise in custodial violence and deaths, coupled with increasing crime rates and police brutality, highlights the need for these protections. One infamous example is the Bhagalpur blinding case[16].
In D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal[17], the Supreme Court issued several guidelines for police officers to follow when arresting or interrogating suspects or accused persons. The Court held that custodial violence is an assault on human dignity and must be stopped. In A.K. Gopalan v. Union of India[18], the Court emphasized that even when a person is detained, their fundamental rights must be respected. This case highlighted the importance of due process and protecting individual liberties, ensuring that legal procedures are followed to prevent violations of detainees' fundamental human rights.
The judiciary's role in protecting rights in criminal proceedings is crucial. By maintaining vigilance, adhering to constitutional principles, and issuing protective guidelines, the judiciary ensures that individuals' fundamental rights are respected, even during criminal investigations and police interactions. This dedication to justice and human dignity is essential for a fair and just legal system.
The judiciary plays a crucial role in safeguarding rights during criminal proceedings. By vigilantly upholding constitutional principles and issuing protective guidelines, the judiciary ensures that fundamental rights are upheld, even amidst criminal investigations and interactions with law enforcement. This commitment to justice and human dignity is essential for maintaining a fair legal system. Additionally, the judiciary reviews laws and police practices to ensure they align with constitutional protections, thereby preventing abuses of power and promoting a culture of respect for human rights within law enforcement agencies.
Moreover, judicial training programs are pivotal in educating judges on the significance of human rights protection and equipping them to handle cases involving police misconduct effectively. These initiatives aim to cultivate a judiciary that is well-informed and dedicated to defending human rights, thereby enhancing its role as a guardian of justice.
Hence protecting rights in criminal proceedings is a complex responsibility that demands an active and vigilant judiciary. Through the enforcement of constitutional guarantees, the establishment of guidelines to prevent abuses, and continuous oversight, the judiciary ensures that individuals' fundamental rights are upheld. This creates a legal environment that values and safeguards human dignity, contributing to a just society.
Universalism vs. Cultural Relativism
The debate between universalism and cultural relativism in human rights revolves around whether human rights should apply universally to all people, regardless of their cultural context, or if they should be interpreted within the specific cultural framework of each society.Universalism
Universalism holds that certain values, morals, and principles are universally applicable to all individuals, regardless of their cultural, racial, national, gender, or other social differences. This concept has greatly influenced various fields, including counseling, psychology, and social sciences, forming the foundation of many theories and practices[19].
Universalism
- Fundamental Belief: In counseling, universalism is a key principle, suggesting that certain standards and practices should be universally applied. For instance, theories in developmental psychology and counseling ethics aim to be relevant and applicable across different cultures.
- Global Applicability: Historically, the prevailing view in counseling and related fields has been that theories and processes should be tested globally to validate their effectiveness. This includes concepts addressing behavioral and mental development, intended to be applicable to everyone.
- Criticisms of Insensitivity: Despite its broad acceptance, universalism has been criticized for lacking cultural sensitivity and failing to incorporate diverse perspectives. Critics argue that it can lead to biases, such as ethnocentrism, which may hinder understanding the complex and diverse nature of human experiences.
- Normative Concepts: Universalist theories propose that notions such as "normalcy," practical advice, and the characteristics of a "good" client should be universally understood. They also suggest that psychological disturbances occur similarly across all cultures, a viewpoint that has led to debates in fields like psychological testing and evaluation.
Cultural Relativism
Cultural relativism emphasizes understanding a culture on its own terms, without making judgments based on one's own cultural values. This approach aims to appreciate cultural practices that differ from those of the observer.- Cultural Context: Cultural relativists argue that human rights should be interpreted within the cultural and societal framework of each community. Practices such as arranged marriages or traditional justice systems, while potentially conflicting with international standards, are integral to certain cultures.
- Preservation of Traditions: This perspective highlights the importance of preserving cultural heritage and practices, suggesting that imposing external human rights standards can disrupt social cohesion. It often prioritizes community rights and collective well-being over individual rights.
- Critique of Universalism: Cultural relativists critique the universalist approach as ethnocentric, asserting that it reflects primarily Western values and experiences. They argue that imposing these standards can be a form of cultural imperialism and a continuation of Western dominance.
- Absolute Relativism: Proposes that all cultural practices should be accepted without question by outsiders. This extreme stance can justify harmful practices if viewed uncritically.
- Critical Relativism: Encourages questioning cultural practices, recognizing power dynamics, and considering who benefits from these practices and why.
Finding a Balance
The debate between universalism and cultural relativism is a complex and ongoing discussion in human rights. Some scholars advocate for a balanced approach, where universal human rights principles are adapted to respect cultural specificities while challenging practices that violate human dignity.- Contextual Application: This approach involves interpreting universal human rights principles in culturally sensitive ways without compromising core values. For instance, community-based solutions can promote gender equality and children's rights while respecting local traditions.
- Dialogue and Engagement: Encouraging dialogue between human rights advocates and local communities can bridge gaps between cultural relativism and universalism. Mutual understanding and respect can help find common ground and promote human rights in a culturally sensitive manner.
- Cultural Transformation: Over time, exposure to universal human rights norms can lead to positive cultural transformations. As societies evolve, harmful practices may be abandoned, and new practices that respect and uphold human dignity can emerge.
By exploring the arguments and counterarguments of universalism and cultural relativism, a research paper can offer a nuanced understanding of how human rights can be both universally recognized and culturally contextualized.
The debate between universalism and cultural relativism in human rights highlights a significant challenge in balancing global principles with respect for cultural diversity. Universalism argues that certain human rights are fundamental and should be upheld universally, regardless of cultural differences. This perspective supports the idea that global standards are necessary to protect individuals from practices that, while accepted in some cultures, may violate core human rights.
On the other hand, cultural relativism stresses the importance of understanding and respecting human rights within the context of each culture. It suggests that imposing external human rights standards can undermine local traditions and social cohesion. By advocating for cultural sensitivity, cultural relativism aims to prevent the erosion of cultural practices and maintain community values.
Reconciling these views involves finding a middle ground where universal human rights are upheld while also respecting cultural contexts. This approach requires thoughtful application of human rights principles in ways that acknowledge and integrate cultural differences. Engaging in open dialogue between human rights advocates and local communities can help bridge gaps and promote mutual respect.
Such dialogue can lead to solutions that honor cultural traditions while addressing practices that may infringe on fundamental rights. Over time, exposure to universal human rights norms can encourage positive changes in cultural practices, leading to the adoption of new traditions that respect human dignity.
Navigating Human Rights in the Digital Era
In today's digital age, the intersection of technology and human rights presents both promising opportunities and significant challenges. Privacy and data protection are major concerns as personal information becomes more exposed to misuse. The Cambridge Analytica scandal, for instance, highlighted how easily data can be misused, emphasizing the need for more robust safeguards and transparency in data management.Freedom of expression is evolving with the digital landscape. While the internet facilitates open communication and the exchange of ideas, it also raises issues of censorship. Authoritarian regimes frequently use digital tools to monitor and restrict online content, as seen in China's stringent control over internet access and suppression of dissenting voices.
The digital divide underscores the disparity between those with access to digital technologies and those without. This gap can widen existing social and economic inequalities, especially in less developed areas. Bridging this divide is crucial to ensuring that everyone can benefit from technological advancements. Cybersecurity threats, including cyberattacks and identity theft, are increasingly common. The rise in these incidents highlights the need for strong security measures and international cooperation to protect both individuals and organizations from digital harm.
The growth of AI and automation offers substantial benefits but also introduces ethical challenges. AI systems, if not carefully managed, can perpetuate biases, and automation can disrupt job markets by replacing human roles. Developing guidelines and policies to manage these technologies responsibly is essential to addressing these concerns.Legal frameworks play a vital role in tackling these issues. Regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe offer significant protections for personal data, while national laws add further safeguards. The work of non-governmental organizations and international bodies is crucial in advocating for and defending digital rights.
Looking forward, improving digital literacy is essential for empowering individuals to navigate the digital world safely and effectively. Promoting ethical technology development and fostering global collaboration will be key to ensuring that technological progress aligns with and supports fundamental human rights.[20]
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
The main authority for UN human rights initiatives is held by the High Commissioner for Human Rights. It is the High Commissioner's responsibility to take preventative measures and to react to grave human rights breaches. The hub for UN human rights initiatives is the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). In addition to other UN human rights entities, it acts as the secretariat for the Human Rights Council and treaty bodies, which are expert committees tasked with overseeing treaty compliance. It also engages in fieldwork related to human rights.An oversight group is in charge of examining how the majority of[21] the major human rights treaties are being implemented by the ratifying nations. People who feel that their rights have been infringed upon may immediately register complaints with the committees that supervise human rights treaties.
Limitation clauses
So-called limitation clauses apply to a number of human rights duties. For example, using political freedoms like the right to assemble, free speech, and freedom of association comes with obligations, and as such, it may be particular procedures, guidelines, limitations, and sanctions in the name of public safety, national security, territorial integrity, disturbance prevention, moral or public health preservation, or the defence of others' rights and liberties.
Governments are required to intervene with people's enjoyment of their freedoms of speech and assembly if they are being used to create racial or religious hate, spread war propaganda, or instigate criminal activity liberties to safeguard other people's human rights. However, in a democratic society, any intervention, limitation, or punishment must be used in line with domestic law and must be required to further the respective goals and national interests. States must always show why these restrictions are necessary, and they may only adopt actions that are proportionate to achieving their justifiable objectives.
Conclusion
The judiciary's role in protecting and advancing human rights is essential for upholding principles of dignity, equality, and justice. Courts serve as a crucial check on the executive and legislative branches, ensuring that individuals can exercise their fundamental rights regardless of the political climate. In India, the judiciary has played a significant role in interpreting and enforcing constitutional provisions to safeguard basic human rights, adapting to societal changes and addressing various issues through innovative legal interpretations.
Human rights are intrinsic to every individual, transcending governmental and legislative boundaries. These rights are essential for a decent and dignified life, encompassing civil, political, economic, social, and cultural dimensions. National constitutions and international treaties form a robust legal framework to protect individuals from abuses and ensure their well-being.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, established in 1948, set a global standard for recognizing these rights.In India, the judiciary has been instrumental in expanding the scope of fundamental rights. Landmark cases have reinforced the protection of individual liberties. For example, the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution has been interpreted to include the right to live with dignity, covering adequate nutrition, shelter, and quality of life. The judiciary's proactive stance in addressing human rights issues through Public Interest Litigations (PILs) has been vital in voicing the concerns of marginalized and vulnerable groups.
The evolution of PILs in India highlights the judiciary's dynamic role in responding to social injustices. From addressing the rights of prisoners and bonded labourers to tackling environmental issues and government accountability, PILs have broadened the scope of judicial intervention. This evolution demonstrates the judiciary's adaptability in safeguarding human rights in a changing socio-economic landscape. Despite progress, challenges remain. The judiciary must navigate complex issues such as balancing individual liberties with collective welfare, addressing systemic inequalities, and ensuring effective implementation of its rulings. Moreover, the judiciary's approach has evolved, with varying degrees of assertiveness over time. The initial phase focused on social justice for marginalized groups, while later phases addressed broader governance issues and private sector accountability.
The Protection of Human Rights Act of 1993 institutionalized the commitment to human rights by establishing National and State Human Rights Commissions. These bodies play a critical role in monitoring human rights violations and ensuring accountability. However, their effectiveness depends on the judiciary's continued support and enforcement of their recommendations.The judiciary also plays a crucial role in safeguarding specific rights, such as those of children and women.
Landmark rulings have addressed child labor, child prostitution, and sexual harassment, emphasizing the need for special protections for vulnerable groups. By interpreting and enforcing laws in line with international standards, the judiciary contributes to a more just and equitable society.The debate between universalism and cultural relativism in human rights is a significant and complex discourse that seeks to balance global principles with cultural diversity. Universalism posits that certain human rights are fundamental and should be universally upheld, transcending cultural differences to protect individuals from practices that may violate core human rights.
This perspective supports the necessity of global standards to ensure the protection of these inalienable rights across all societies.
Conversely, cultural relativism emphasizes understanding and respecting human rights within each culture's unique context. This approach argues that imposing external human rights standards can undermine local traditions and disrupt social cohesion. Cultural relativists advocate for cultural sensitivity to preserve community values and prevent the erosion of cultural practices.
Reconciling these opposing views involves finding a middle ground where universal human rights are respected while acknowledging and integrating cultural differences. This balanced approach requires the contextual application of human rights principles, ensuring they are interpreted in culturally sensitive ways without compromising core values. Engaging in open dialogue between human rights advocates and local communities is essential to bridging gaps and promoting mutual respect.
Such dialogue can lead to solutions that honor cultural traditions while addressing practices that infringe on fundamental rights.In the digital age, the intersection of technology and human rights presents both opportunities and challenges. Privacy, data protection, freedom of expression, the digital divide, cybersecurity threats, and the ethical implications of AI and automation are key concerns that need robust safeguards, ethical guidelines, and international cooperation. Legal frameworks like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the advocacy of non-governmental organizations play crucial roles in protecting digital rights.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is pivotal in overseeing human rights initiatives, responding to violations, and working with treaty bodies to ensure compliance. Limitation clauses allow for certain restrictions on political freedoms to protect public safety, national security, and the rights of others, but these must be necessary, proportionate, and consistent with democratic principles. Hence the judiciary's role in protecting human rights is essential for maintaining a democratic society where the rule of law prevails.
Through vigilant enforcement of constitutional provisions, innovative legal interpretations, and proactive use of PILs, the judiciary upholds the dignity, equality, and freedom of individuals. While challenges persist, the judiciary's unwavering commitment to human rights continues to be a beacon of hope for justice and fairness in society. Navigating the balance between universal human rights and cultural relativism requires a nuanced approach that respects cultural contexts while upholding fundamental rights. Continuous dialogue, cultural sensitivity, and adherence to international standards are essential to fostering a just and equitable global society where human dignity is universally respected.
End Notes:
- Romesh Thapar v State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 124.
- Rai, D. (2019, June 14). An Analytical Study on Public Interest Litigation in Indian Context. iPleaders.
- https://indiankanoon.org/doc/191016
- https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1373215
- http://www.judicialreforms.org/files/2%20Philosophy%20of%20SC%20on%20PIL%20%20Prashant%20Bhushan.pdf
- State of Punjab v Devans Modern Breweries Ltd, (2004) 11 SCC 26
- Zachary Holladay, Public Interest Litigation in India as a Paradigm for Developing Nations, 565 to 571 (Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Volume 19, Issue 2), 2012
- Justice J.S. Verma, Second Justice M. Hidayatullah Memorial Lecture "Protecting Human Rights through the Judicial Process" on 21 December 2002 at Raipur, available at http://nhrc.nic.in/Documents/JHidyaMemo-II.pdf
- AIR 1984 SC 117.
- Vishal Jeet v Union of India
- Sakshi v Union of India, AIR 2004 SC 3566.
- Sheba Abidi v State of Delhi, 113(2004) DLT 125.
- (1997) 6 SCC 241.
- Citizen for Democracy v State of Assam, (1995) 3 SCC 743.
- Khatri v State of Bihar, 1981 SCR (2) 408
- D.K. Basu v State of West Bengal, AIR 1997 SC 610.
- A. K. Gopalan v Union of India, AIR 1950 SCR 88
- https://www.internationalscholarsjournals.com/articles/note-on-universalism-and-cultural-relativism.pdf
- https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/human-rights
- Article 19 of ICCPR
Share this Article
Popular Articles
How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi
How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...
Increased Age For Girls Marriage
It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...
Facade of Social Media
One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...
Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...
The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...
Home | Lawyers | Events | Editorial Team | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Law Books | RSS Feeds | Contact Us
Legal Service India.com is Copyrighted under the Registrar of Copyright Act (Govt of India) © 2000-2025
ISBN No: 978-81-928510-0-6
Comments