In India, individuals whose human rights have been violated have several avenues for legal recourse under constitutional law, statutory law, and tort law. The Indian judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, plays a significant role in protecting these rights through its judgments and proactive measures.
Incorporation of Human Rights in Fundamental Rights in India
The Constitution of India, enacted in 1950, embodies a comprehensive framework for the protection of human rights through its Fundamental Rights, which are enshrined in Part III (Articles 12-35). These rights are essential for ensuring individual dignity and freedom, and they reflect the core principles of human rights recognized globally.
Constitutional Remedies
1) Article 32: This provision empowers citizens to directly approach the Supreme Court if their fundamental rights are infringed. The Supreme Court can issue writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari to protect these rights. Article 32 is a cornerstone of the Constitution, ensuring the enforcement of fundamental rights. The Supreme Court's power under Article 32 includes both preventive and remedial measures for rights violations. The Supreme Court has also interpreted its powers to allow it to consider cases suo motu, eliminating any requirement for standing or even the need for a case to arise as necessary perquisites of its writ jurisdiction.
2) Article 226: Similar to Article 32, Article 226 allows individuals to approach the High Courts for the enforcement of their fundamental rights and other rights.
3) Constitutional Torts: The Supreme Court has developed the concept of "constitutional torts," enabling monetary compensation for human rights violations. This route allows the Supreme Court or High Courts to use their writ jurisdiction under Article 32 and Article 226 to enforce fundamental rights. Monetary compensation awarded under the constitutional tort model has both compensatory and punitive elements.
Statutory Remedies
1) Human Rights Commission (NHRC): A complaint can be filed with the NHRC, a statutory body, which possesses powers similar to a civil court to inquire into human rights violation complaints. The NHRC can summon witnesses, examine documents, and recommend compensation to victims.
2) State Human Rights Commissions (SHRC): Similar to the NHRC, SHRCs operate at the state level to address human rights violations.
3) Specialized Courts and Tribunals: Depending on the nature of the violation, individuals can approach specialized courts and tribunals such as the National Green Tribunal, Labour Courts, or the Industrial Tribunal.
Tort Law Remedies
Civil Courts: Claims can be pursued in civil courts or district courts based on the subject matter and jurisdiction.
Important Supreme Court Judgments
1) Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985): This landmark judgment recognized the right to livelihood as an integral part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
2) Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020): The Supreme Court held that the internet is a fundamental right under Article 19, emphasizing that any restrictions on rights must be reasonable and justified.
3) Peoples Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India: The Supreme Court held that non-payment of minimum wages violates Article 21 of the Constitution because it denies workers the right to live with basic human dignity.
4) Policing Judgments: The Supreme Court has delivered key judgments relating to human rights and policing, including the rights of arrested and imprisoned persons. These rights include protection against self-incrimination, torture, and unlawful detention. The court has condemned custodial violence and instances where police fail to follow criminal procedures, conceal evidence, and manipulate records.
5) Rudul Sah v State of Bihar: The Supreme Court held that there was a necessity to award remedies that could offer relief for victims in certain instances of fundamental rights violations in a way that other remedies could not.
6) Nilabati Behera v State of Orissa: The Supreme Court highlighted the distinction between the liability in tort and the constitutional liability of the State for violating the victim’s fundamental rights that merited an added obligation on the courts to adequately remedy the violation.
Addressing Rights Violations
Despite these legal remedies, challenges remain in ensuring accountability for human rights violations in India. These challenges include:
1) Enforcement Issues: Laws and institutions providing remedies may not be adequately enforced.
2) Impunity: Certain laws can grant immunity from prosecution to state actors who commit abuses, compromising victims' rights to justice.
3) Procedural Obstacles: Difficulties in prosecuting police officials for custodial crimes, including concealing evidence, can impede justice.
Conclusion:
To address these issues, promoting awareness of available remedies and strengthening enforcement mechanisms are vital. Extreme poverty is also a denial of human rights.
Print Page
No comments:
Post a Comment