Fundamental Rights are an essential part of our constitution that gives us the power against the state. This is enforceable in the court if violated. In this article, we will understand the Criticism of Fundamental Rights and Criticism aspects of Fundamental Right. Here are some arguments of the critics-
Criticism aspects of FR:-
1. Excessive Limitations
They are subjected to innumerable exceptions, restrictions, qualifications, and explanations. Hence, the critics remarked that the Constitution grants Fundamental Rights with one hand and takes them away with the other. Jaspat Roy Kapoor went to the extent of saying that the chapter dealing with the fundamental rights should be renamed as ‘Limitations on Fundamental Rights’ or ‘Fundamental Rights and Limitations Thereon’.
2. No Social and Economic Rights
The list is not comprehensive as it mainly consists of political rights. It makes no provision for important social and economic rights like the right to social security, right to work, right to employment, right to rest and leisure, and so on. These rights are made available to the citizens of advanced democratic countries. Also, the socialistic constitutions of the erstwhile USSR or China provided for such rights.
3. No Clarity
They are stated in a vague, indefinite, and ambiguous manner. The various phrases and words used in the chapter like ‘public order, ‘minorities’, ‘reasonable restriction’, ‘public interest and so on are not clearly defined. The language used to describe them is very complicated and beyond the comprehension of the common man. It is alleged that the Constitution was made by the lawyers for the lawyers. Sir Ivor Jennings called the Constitution of India a ‘paradise for lawyers’.
4. No Permanency
They are not sacrosanct or immutable as the Parliament can curtail or abolish them, as for example, the abolition of the fundamental right to property in 1978. Hence, they can become a play tool in the hands of politicians having majority support in the Parliament. The judicially innovated ‘doctrine of basic structure’ is the only limitation on the authority of Parliament to curtail or abolish the fundamental right. (Criticism of Fundamental Rights)
5. Suspension During Emergency
The suspension of their enforcement during the operation of National Emergency (except Articles 20 and 21) is another blot on the efficacy of these rights. This provision cuts at the roots of the democratic system in the country by placing the rights of millions of innocent people in continuous jeopardy. According to the critics, the Fundamental Rights should be enjoyable in all situations-Emergency or Emergencies.
6. Criticism of Fundamental on basis of Expensive Remedy
The judiciary has been made responsible for defending and protecting these rights against the interference of the legislatures and executives. However, the judicial process is too expensive and hinders the common man from getting his rights enforced through the courts. Hence, the critics say that the rights benefit mainly the rich section of the Indian Society.
What is Writ in Indian Constitution (Article-32 and 226) and Type of Writs
What is Fundamental Duty in Indian Constitution
Borrowed features of Indian Constitution from other countries
7. Preventive Detention
The critics assert that the provision for preventive detention (Article 22) takes away the spirit and substance of the chapter on fundamental rights. It confers arbitrary powers on the State and negates individual liberty. It justifies the criticism that the Constitution of India deals more with the rights of the State against the individual than with the rights of the individual against the State. Notably, no democratic country in the world has made preventive detention an integral part of their Constitutions as has been made in India. (Criticism of Fundamental Rights)
8. No Consistent Philosophy
According to some critics, the chapter fundamental rights is not the product of any philosophical principle. Sir Ivor Jennings expressed this view when he said that the Fundamental Rights proclaimed by the Indian Constitution are based on no consistent philosophy. The critics say that this creates difficulty for the Supreme Court and the high courts in interpreting the fundamental rights.
These are all the Criticism of Fundamental Rights? Criticism aspects of Fundamental Right. Below we are giving the Significance of fundamental Rights.
What is the Significance of Fundamental Rights?
significant In spite of the above Criticism of Fundamental Rights and shortcoming the Fundamental Rights are in the following respects:
- They constitute the bedrock of cratic system in the country.
- They provide necessary conditions for the material and moral protection of man.
- They serve as a formidable bulwark of individual liberty.
- They facilitate the establishment of rule of law in the country.
- They protect the interests of minorities and weaker sections of society.
- They strengthen the secular fabric of the Indian State.
- They check the absoluteness of the authority of the government.
- They lay down the foundation stone of social equality and social justice.
- They ensure the dignity and respect of individuals.
- They facilitate the participation of people in the political and administrative process.