The Unenumerated rights are the legal rights inferred from the other rights that have been implied by the existing laws, such as our written constitution. This is the responsibility of the judiciary to interpret the fundamental laws of the land. The Unenumerated rights in the constitution are mainly inferred from Part III and Part IV of the constitution. The judiciary has therefore evolved the various approaches to carry out this onerous responsibility.
Part III deals with the Fundamental Rights and Part IV deals with the directives principles of State policy. Fundamental rights is considered as the basic human rights of all citizens. The Fundamental Rights includes; equality rights; freedom of speech, expression, assembly, association, movement and choice of work rights; the right to life and personal liberty; the right against exploitation; the right to freedom of religion; the minority rights; and right to the constitutional remedies. While Part IV deals with the adequate means of livelihood; fair distribution of the resources; equal pay for equal work; equal justice and free legal aid; etc. The Directive Principles have helped to bring the Indian society closer to Constitution’s goals of the social, economic, and political justice for all.”
The Supreme Court has very much expanded the scope of the enforceable rights from a restrictive and narrow definition especially interpreting the protection of life and personal liberty enumerated in Article 21 of the constitution. This is particularly striking to note that pivot of the Indian judicial approach to the expansive and the proactive interpretation of the fundamental rights has been Directive Principles, which is considered to be the non-justiciable rights.
In the case of Maneka Ghandi v. Union of India; (AIR 1978 SC 597) the Court has interpreted that the right to life stated in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution also implies the right to travel abroad. This case was marked as the historic defining moment for Indian judiciary as well as for the protection of human rights in the years to follow. This case had broadened the scope of Article 21 and this has been felt in the areas of ecology, criminal justice, judicial review, contracts, the fundamental rights including education, the legal aid, a pollution-free environment, the right to livelihood and the human dignity. The proactive approach of Indian judiciary has interpreted and included social justice, individual liberty, labour rights etc. in the fundamental Human Rights.
In the case of Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation; (AIR 1986 SC 180) the petitioners (slum dwellers) petitioned against forcible eviction by the defendant corporation, alleging violation of right to life (Article 21). The Supreme Court stated right to life includes the right to livelihood, and eviction of slum dwellers will withdraw them from their livelihood. The court explained had explained the basis of Olga Tellis case decision as the right to life conferred by Article 21 is very wide and far-reaching. The important facet of life is that no person can live without the means of living, e.g. livelihood. If right to livelihood is not treated to be part of constitutional right to life, it would make human being life impossible to live.
In the case of Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi, (AIR 1981 SC 746); the court declared: “We think that the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, namely, the bare necessaries of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter over the head and facilities for reading, writing and expressing oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing and commingling with fellow human beings.”
The Indian judiciary has consistently interpreted the articles and included various rights necessary for decent human life. In the case of Samity v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1996 SC 2415; where the petitioner suffered serious cerebral injuries due to a train accident. The Supreme Court observed that as per Article 21, he had the right to “timely medical treatment.”
The scope of Article 21 has been explained by court in the case of Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P.; where the apex court has provided a list of some rights covered by Article 21 of the constitution based on some earlier pronouncements which include; right to go abroad, right against solitary confinement, right to shelter, right against handcuffing etc.
The case of Panikulangara v. India, AIR 1987 SC 990 laid down that access to medical treatment is an integral part of right to life under article 21 of the Indian Constitution. In the case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802, the Supreme Court has read the Article 21 in conjunction with Articles 39 (e), (f), 41 and 42 to state that the bonded labour constitutes the “gross and revolting violation of the constitutional values.”
The effect of unenumerated rights of the constitution and its interpretation from enumerated rights has also been seen in fields of industry, labor and trade practices. In the case of Randhirin Shri Literam Sugar Co. Ltd. v. UOI; (1990) I SCR 909, the supreme court citing directive principles, held that price control on the foodstuffs was in the public interest.
The method of steadiness and clearness with which the Indian judiciary has been administering the social justice through the efficacious protection of ‘implied’ rights in the Indian Constitution has led scholars to proclaim that after the judgment of Maneka Gandhi; the Court has begun to apply fair and reasonable requirements of law not only to the deprivation of life but in the well-ordered concept of the human dignity and life.”
* The Author has completed her Masters in Constitutional and Administrative Law from National Law Institute University (NLIU), Bhopal and B. Com. LL. B. from Mody University of Science and Technology, Lakshmangarh.
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author and not to the Jurisedge Academy.
Readers may submit his/her blog for publication. Click Here or Scan the QR Code to submit your Manuscript.
Saurabh Kumar
Share post:
Author- Anchal Sahu*
The Unenumerated rights are the legal rights inferred from the other rights that have been implied by the existing laws, such as our written constitution. This is the responsibility of the judiciary to interpret the fundamental laws of the land. The Unenumerated rights in the constitution are mainly inferred from Part III and Part IV of the constitution. The judiciary has therefore evolved the various approaches to carry out this onerous responsibility.
Part III deals with the Fundamental Rights and Part IV deals with the directives principles of State policy. Fundamental rights is considered as the basic human rights of all citizens. The Fundamental Rights includes; equality rights; freedom of speech, expression, assembly, association, movement and choice of work rights; the right to life and personal liberty; the right against exploitation; the right to freedom of religion; the minority rights; and right to the constitutional remedies. While Part IV deals with the adequate means of livelihood; fair distribution of the resources; equal pay for equal work; equal justice and free legal aid; etc. The Directive Principles have helped to bring the Indian society closer to Constitution’s goals of the social, economic, and political justice for all.”
The Supreme Court has very much expanded the scope of the enforceable rights from a restrictive and narrow definition especially interpreting the protection of life and personal liberty enumerated in Article 21 of the constitution. This is particularly striking to note that pivot of the Indian judicial approach to the expansive and the proactive interpretation of the fundamental rights has been Directive Principles, which is considered to be the non-justiciable rights.
In the case of Maneka Ghandi v. Union of India; (AIR 1978 SC 597) the Court has interpreted that the right to life stated in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution also implies the right to travel abroad. This case was marked as the historic defining moment for Indian judiciary as well as for the protection of human rights in the years to follow. This case had broadened the scope of Article 21 and this has been felt in the areas of ecology, criminal justice, judicial review, contracts, the fundamental rights including education, the legal aid, a pollution-free environment, the right to livelihood and the human dignity. The proactive approach of Indian judiciary has interpreted and included social justice, individual liberty, labour rights etc. in the fundamental Human Rights.
In the case of Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation; (AIR 1986 SC 180) the petitioners (slum dwellers) petitioned against forcible eviction by the defendant corporation, alleging violation of right to life (Article 21). The Supreme Court stated right to life includes the right to livelihood, and eviction of slum dwellers will withdraw them from their livelihood. The court explained had explained the basis of Olga Tellis case decision as the right to life conferred by Article 21 is very wide and far-reaching. The important facet of life is that no person can live without the means of living, e.g. livelihood. If right to livelihood is not treated to be part of constitutional right to life, it would make human being life impossible to live.
In the case of Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi, (AIR 1981 SC 746); the court declared: “We think that the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, namely, the bare necessaries of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter over the head and facilities for reading, writing and expressing oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing and commingling with fellow human beings.”
The Indian judiciary has consistently interpreted the articles and included various rights necessary for decent human life. In the case of Samity v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1996 SC 2415; where the petitioner suffered serious cerebral injuries due to a train accident. The Supreme Court observed that as per Article 21, he had the right to “timely medical treatment.”
The scope of Article 21 has been explained by court in the case of Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P.; where the apex court has provided a list of some rights covered by Article 21 of the constitution based on some earlier pronouncements which include; right to go abroad, right against solitary confinement, right to shelter, right against handcuffing etc.
The case of Panikulangara v. India, AIR 1987 SC 990 laid down that access to medical treatment is an integral part of right to life under article 21 of the Indian Constitution. In the case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802, the Supreme Court has read the Article 21 in conjunction with Articles 39 (e), (f), 41 and 42 to state that the bonded labour constitutes the “gross and revolting violation of the constitutional values.”
The effect of unenumerated rights of the constitution and its interpretation from enumerated rights has also been seen in fields of industry, labor and trade practices. In the case of Randhirin Shri Literam Sugar Co. Ltd. v. UOI; (1990) I SCR 909, the supreme court citing directive principles, held that price control on the foodstuffs was in the public interest.
The method of steadiness and clearness with which the Indian judiciary has been administering the social justice through the efficacious protection of ‘implied’ rights in the Indian Constitution has led scholars to proclaim that after the judgment of Maneka Gandhi; the Court has begun to apply fair and reasonable requirements of law not only to the deprivation of life but in the well-ordered concept of the human dignity and life.”
* The Author has completed her Masters in Constitutional and Administrative Law from National Law Institute University (NLIU), Bhopal and B. Com. LL. B. from Mody University of Science and Technology, Lakshmangarh.
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author and not to the Jurisedge Academy.
Readers may submit his/her blog for publication. Click Here or Scan the QR Code to submit your Manuscript.
Share this:
Related