| PYQ Relevance: Q) ‘Constitutional Morality’ is rooted in the Constitution itself and is founded on its essential facets. Explain the doctrine of ‘Constitutional Morality’ with the help of relevant judicial decisions. (UPSC CSE 2021) |
Mentor’s Comment: UPSC mains have always focused on ‘Scope of Fundamental Rights’ (2017) and Components of Constitutional Morality (2021).
The interpretation of personal liberty under Article 21 has continuously adapted to address emerging issues like environmental rights, gender equality, and the rights of marginalized communities.
Today’s editorial emphasizes the need to critically examine how core constitutional values are facing an ethical and moral crisis. This content can be used in your Mains Answer for presenting the challenges particularly regarding personal liberty and the Judicial efforts for its dissent implementation.
_
Let’s learn!
Why in the News?
As India celebrates 75 years of its Constitution, there is a call to reflect on the ethical and moral challenges that undermine its core values.
On account of these celebrations, it is crucial to critically examine the Right to Personal Liberty as an essential element of justice.
| What has been the evolution of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution over the past 75 years? Over the past 75 years, the interpretation and application of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution have undergone significant evolution, reflecting changing societal values and judicial perspectives. • Initial Interpretation: When the Constitution came into effect in 1950, Article 21 was interpreted narrowly, focusing primarily on the physical aspect of personal liberty. • The landmark case of A.K. Gopalan vs. State of Madras (1950) established that personal liberty was limited to the physical body, without broader implications for rights such as freedom of movement. Landmark Judgments: • Maneka Gandhi Case (1978): This pivotal ruling expanded the scope of Article 21, asserting that the right to life includes the right to live with dignity and lead a meaningful life. The Supreme Court held that personal liberty encompasses various rights, including the right to travel abroad and the right to livelihood. • Olga Tellis Case (1985): This case further broadened the interpretation by recognizing the right to livelihood as an integral part of the right to life. The court ruled that deprivation of livelihood without due process violates Article 21. • Inclusion of Additional Rights: Over time, Article 21 has been interpreted to include rights such as privacy, health, and a clean environment, reflecting a more comprehensive understanding of personal liberty. The Supreme Court has emphasized that these rights are essential for ensuring individual dignity and a meaningful existence. • Judicial Activism: The judiciary’s proactive stance has positioned Article 21 as a cornerstone of fundamental rights in India. It has led to increased scrutiny over state actions that infringe upon individual liberties, particularly in cases involving preventive detention and arbitrary arrests. Despite these advancements, issues such as preventive detention under anti-terror laws and prolonged custody without trial continue to pose challenges to personal liberty. The evolving interpretation of Article 21 remains crucial in addressing these contemporary issues while safeguarding individual rights. |
How effective has the judiciary been in upholding Constitutional justice and protecting personal liberties?
- The Supreme Court has actively protected individual rights, especially through the Puttaswamy case, which recognized privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21.
- In Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024), the Supreme Court unanimously struck down the Union’s 2018 Electoral Bond Scheme, ruling it unconstitutional for violating voters’ right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. It also safeguarded individuals from arbitrary actions by the state.
- Despite these advancements, the judiciary grapples with a significant backlog of approximately 82,000 cases. This inefficiency undermines public trust and access to justice, costing the economy around 1.5% of GDP annually due to delays in legal proceedings.
- Since Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna took over in November 2024, there has been a focus on reducing the number of pending cases, leading to a 16% increase in case resolutions shortly after his appointment. This shows a commitment to improving judicial efficiency.
- While judicial activism has led to important protections for fundamental rights, critics argue that it sometimes encroaches on legislative authority. Recent rulings have sparked debates about the separation of powers and whether the judiciary is overstepping its bounds in policymaking.
What contemporary threats to personal liberty exist and what measures can be taken to address them?
- Preventive Detention Laws: The misuse of preventive detention laws allows authorities to detain individuals without trial, often based on vague justifications. Recent Supreme Court rulings in Jaseela Shaji vs. Union of India (2024) emphasizes that preventive detention laws must be applied sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances, yet their routine use persists, raising concerns about arbitrary detention.
- Arbitrary Arrests: Law enforcement agencies frequently arrest individuals under stringent laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, often without sufficient evidence. This practice undermines the presumption of innocence and leads to prolonged custody.
- Censorship and Freedom of Expression: The government has increased censorship of media and online platforms, blocking websites and social media accounts that criticize it or document hate speech against minorities. This curtails freedom of expression and restricts right to information.
- Targeting Activists and Civil Society: Human rights activists and civil society organizations face harassment, including raids and cancellation of licenses under foreign funding laws. This stifles dissent and reduces accountability.
- Further, India has the highest number of internet shutdowns globally, which disproportionately affects marginalized communities by denying them access to essential services.
What measures are needed to address these threats?
- Reforming Preventive Detention Laws: Stricter guidelines should be established for the application of preventive detention, ensuring that it is used only in genuine emergencies.
- Strengthening Judicial Oversight: Courts should rigorously scrutinize arrests made under stringent laws to protect individuals’ rights and ensure fair trials.
- Protecting Freedom of Expression: Legislative measures should be enacted to safeguard media freedom and prevent arbitrary censorship, ensuring that journalists can operate without fear of reprisals.
- Supporting Civil Society: The government should foster an environment where civil society organizations can operate freely without undue interference or harassment.
- Ensuring Internet Access: Policies should be implemented to prevent unjustified internet shutdowns, ensuring that all citizens have access to information and essential services.
