Calcutta University

Proposed Question Paper

8th Semester Examination, 2025

Paper 1 ~ Human Rights Law and Practice (2025)

Full Marks - 80
The figures in the margin indicate full marks. Candidates are required to give their answer in their own words as far as practicable.
Answer any five Questions
(a) Define "Human Rights" as provided under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. (b) Discuss the origin and development of human rights from a global perspective, culminating in the establishment of the United Nations framework.
Critically evaluate the role and functions of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in the global promotion and protection of human rights.
"The Supreme Court of India has transformed Article 21 of the Constitution from a mere guarantee against arbitrary deprivation of life into a charter for a life with human dignity." Elucidate this statement with the help of landmark judicial decisions.
Discuss the powers and functions of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) as enumerated in the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. To what extent has the NHRC been effective in fulfilling its mandate? [10+6]
(a) Discuss the salient features of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 1979. (b) Critically examine the implications of India's declaratory statement regarding non-interference in the personal affairs of any community on the objective of achieving gender justice.
Compare and contrast the nature of rights and the corresponding state obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966.
Explain the key principles that form the foundation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989. How are these principles reflected in the legal framework of India?
Discuss the relationship between the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III of the Indian Constitution and the human rights embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), 1948.
"Protective Discrimination under the Indian Constitution is a vital tool for realizing the human right to substantive equality." Discuss this statement with reference to relevant constitutional provisions and case law.
Write short notes on any two of the following: [ $8 \times 2$ ] (a) Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as a tool for enforcing human rights. (b) Human Rights Courts. (c) The International Bill of Human Rights. (d) The Right to a healthy environment as a facet of human rights.

Of course. Here is a model answer paper for the questions provided.

Model Answer Paper: Human Rights Law and Practice (2025-26)

Answer to Question 1
(a) Definition of "Human Rights"
According to Section 2(1)(d) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the term "human rights" is defined 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".[1, 2, 3]
This definition has three key components:

The Substance of the Rights: They pertain to the fundamental aspects of human existence: life, liberty, equality, and dignity.

The Source of the Rights: They must either be guaranteed by the Constitution of India (primarily in Part III as Fundamental Rights) or be part of the International Covenants. The Act specifically defines "International Covenants" as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), both adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1966.²

The Enforceability of the Rights: A crucial element is that these rights must be enforceable by the courts in India. This links the concept directly to the judicial system and the remedies available to individuals whose rights are violated.⁵

(b) Origin and Development of Human Rights: A Global Perspective
The concept of human rights, though formalized in the 20th century, has deep historical roots stretching back to ancient civilizations.⁷ The idea that individuals possess inherent rights is a product of centuries of philosophical and legal evolution.

Ancient Precursors: The origins can be traced to as early as 539 BC, when Cyrus the Great, after conquering Babylon, freed slaves and declared principles of religious freedom and racial equality, which are recorded on the Cyrus Cylinder.⁸ Other ancient legal codes, like that of King Hammurabi of Babylon (c. 1750 BC), also contained principles of justice and protection.⁷

Medieval and Enlightenment Milestones: A significant step was the Magna Carta of 1215 in England, which established the principle that everyone, including the king, was subject to the law, introducing a nascent concept of the rule of law and defined liberties.⁹ This was followed by other key documents that championed individual freedom, such as the English Bill of Rights (1689) and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789), which proclaimed that all "men are born and remain free and equal in rights".⁹

The Post-War Catalyst and the UN Framework: The modern international human rights framework was forged in the aftermath of World War II. The unprecedented atrocities of the war horrified the global community and created a powerful impetus to establish a system to prevent such events from recurring.⁹ This led to the creation of the United Nations in 1945. The Preamble to the UN Charter explicitly states erson".⁹

The UN became the principal institutional framework for advancing human rights globally.¹¹ The UN General Assembly, in one of its first acts, established the Commission on Human Rights, which was tasked with drafting an international bill of rights.¹⁰ This effort culminated in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on December 10, 1948. The UDHR was proclaimed as a "common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations" and, for the first time, set out fundamental human rights to be universally protected.¹⁰ This declaration laid the foundation for the entire modern human rights system, inspiring over 70 human rights treaties and forming the basis of the International Bill of Human Rights.¹²
Answer to Question 2
Critically evaluate the role and functions of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in the global promotion and protection of human rights.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), established by General Assembly resolution 48/141, holds the "principal responsibility" for human rights activities within the United Nations system.¹³ A critical evaluation of its role and functions reveals a complex picture of significant contributions alongside substantial challenges.
Role and Functions:
The mandate of the High Commissioner is broad and encompasses three main areas: standard-setting, monitoring, and implementation on the ground.¹³

Promotion and Protection: The core function is to promote and protect all human rights for all people. This involves speaking out objectively against human rights violations worldwide and helping to elaborate the international standards used to measure human rights progress.¹⁴

Technical Assistance and Capacity Building: The OHCHR provides technical expertise to governments on legislative reform, administration of justice, and electoral processes to help them implement international human rights standards.¹³

Support for UN Mechanisms: The office provides essential support to the various UN human rights mechanisms, including the Human Rights Council, the ten human rights Treaty Bodies that monitor state compliance with treaties, and the Special Procedures (independent experts who report on specific country situations or thematic issues).¹³

Responding to Violations: The Human Rights Council can mandate the OHCHR to dispatch fact-finding missions and Commissions of Inquiry to respond to serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, promoting accountability and countering impunity.¹³

Critical Evaluation:

Achievements and Strengths: The OHCHR has been instrumental in integrating human rights across the work of the UN and creating an enabling environment for development by focusing on the rights of marginalized groups.¹³ The High Commissioner has often played a key role in alerting the world to imminent dangers and reminding states of their legal responsibilities.¹⁵ The office's work in providing technical assistance and supporting national institutions is crucial for building sustainable human rights protection at the local level.¹³

Challenges and Criticisms: Despite its important mandate, the OHCHR's effectiveness is hampered by significant challenges:

Politicization and Selectivity: The High Commissioner operates in a highly politicized environment. The Human Rights Council, which the OHCHR serves, has been frequently criticized for political bias, double standards, and selectivity.¹⁶ A prominent example is the disproportionate focus on Israel, which has a dedicated agenda item, while severe violations in other countries, such as China, have received far less attention.¹⁸

Lack of Enforcement Power: The High Commissioner can report, advise, and condemn, but lacks enforcement power. The effectiveness of the office depends heavily on the political will of member states, who may choose to ignore its recommendations or deny access to Special Procedures.¹⁷

State Sovereignty: The principle of state sovereignty remains a major obstacle. Governments often resist what they perceive as external interference in their internal affairs, thereby limiting the OHCHR's ability to investigate and act on violations.¹⁷

Resource Constraints: The breadth of the OHCHR's mandate is not always matched by its resources. The Human Rights Council frequently tasks the office with new mandates without allocating additional funding, stretching its capacity thin.¹³

In conclusion, the OHCHR plays an indispensable role in the global human rights architecture. It is a vital advocate, a source of expertise, and a support system for the UN's human rights machinery. However, its ability to protect human rights effectively is often constrained by the political realities of the inter-state system, a lack of enforcement powers, and the persistent challenge of state sovereignty.
Answer to Question 3
The statement that "The Supreme Court of India has transformed Article 21 of the Constitution from a mere guarantee against arbitrary deprivation of life into a charter for a life with human dignity" is an accurate reflection of India's constitutional jurisprudence. Through decades of judicial activism and creative interpretation, the Court has profoundly expanded the scope of this fundamental right.
Article 21 states: "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law".¹⁹
The Initial Restrictive Interpretation:
Initially, in the case of A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950), the Supreme Court adopted a narrow and literal interpretation. It held that "procedure established by law" meant any procedure laid down in a statute, and it did not have to be fair or reasonable. "Life" was interpreted to mean mere physical or animal existence.19
The Paradigm Shift: Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
The turning point came with the landmark judgment in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978).21 In this case, the Supreme Court overruled its earlier decision and held that:

The "procedure established by law" under Article 21 must be "fair, just, and reasonable," not arbitrary, fanciful, or oppressive.²¹

The right to "life" is not confined to mere animal existence but includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it.¹⁹

The Court established a relationship between Articles 14, 19, and 21, holding that any law depriving a person of personal liberty must not only satisfy the requirements of Article 21 but also be tested against the guarantees of Articles 14 (equality) and 19 (freedoms).

The Expanded Horizons of Article 21:
Following the Maneka Gandhi decision, the Supreme Court has read a vast array of unenumerated rights into Article 21, transforming it into a repository of human rights.19 Landmark decisions include:

Right to Livelihood: In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985), the Court held that the right to life includes the right to livelihood, as no person can live without the means of living.²⁰

Right to a Healthy Environment: The Court has consistently held that the right to life includes the right to a clean and healthy environment. This was established in cases like the Ratlam Municipality case and further solidified in numerous M.C. Mehta cases concerning air and water pollution.²⁰

Right to Speedy Trial: In Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979), the Court recognized the right to a speedy trial as an essential part of the right to life and personal liberty.²⁰

Right to Education: In Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka and Unnikrishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh, the Court held that the right to education flows from the right to life, which ultimately led to the insertion of Article 21A, making education a fundamental right.²⁰

Right to Privacy: In the historic judgment of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017), a nine-judge bench unanimously affirmed that the right to privacy is a fundamental right, intrinsic to life and personal liberty under Article 21.²⁰

Right to Shelter: In Chameli Singh v. State of U.P., the Court recognized the right to shelter as a fundamental right under Article 21, stating that it is essential for a life with dignity.²⁰

Right to Marry a Person of One's Choice: In cases like Shafin Jahan v. K.M. Asokan, the Court has held that the right to marry a person of one's choice is a fundamental component of Article 21.²⁰

In conclusion, the journey of Article 21 from a restrictive provision to a comprehensive charter for human dignity is a testament to the transformative power of judicial interpretation. The Supreme Court has acted as a vigilant guardian, ensuring that the right to life is not a hollow promise but a vibrant guarantee of a meaningful and dignified existence.
Answer to Question 4
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, as a statutory body to serve as a guardian of human rights in India.²³
Powers and Functions of the NHRC [10 Marks]
The powers and functions of the NHRC are laid down in Chapter III of the Act. The key functions are:

Inquiry into Violations: The NHRC can inquire, either on its own initiative (suo motu) or on a petition, into complaints of (i) violation of human rights or (ii) negligence in the prevention of such violation by a public servant.²³

Intervention in Proceedings: It can intervene in any proceeding involving any allegation of human rights violation pending before a court, with the approval of such court.²⁴

Inspection of Jails: It can visit any jail or any other institution under the control of the State Government, where persons are detained or lodged for purposes of treatment, reformation, or protection, to study the living conditions of the inmates and make recommendations thereon.²³

Review of Safeguards: The Commission reviews the safeguards provided by or under the Constitution or any law for the protection of human rights and recommends measures for their effective implementation.²³

Study of Treaties: It studies treaties and other international instruments on human rights and makes recommendations for their effective implementation.²³

Research and Promotion: It undertakes and promotes research in the field of human rights and works to spread human rights literacy among various sections of society.²³

Support to NGOs: It encourages the efforts of non-governmental organizations and institutions working in the field of human rights.²³

While conducting an inquiry, the NHRC has all the powers of a civil court, including summoning and enforcing the attendance of witnesses, receiving evidence on affidavits, and requisitioning any public record from any court or office.²³
Effectiveness of the NHRC [6 Marks]
The effectiveness of the NHRC has been a subject of continuous debate. While it has made important contributions, it also faces significant limitations.

Positive Impact: The NHRC has acted as a crucial watchdog, bringing attention to human rights violations and advocating for marginalized groups. It has taken up significant issues such as bonded labour, child labour, custodial deaths and torture, and the rights of persons with disabilities, issuing guidelines and pushing for systemic reforms.²³ Its very existence provides a platform for victims to seek redress and puts pressure on government agencies to be more accountable.

Limitations and Criticisms:

"A Toothless Tiger": The most significant criticism is that the NHRC's recommendations are not legally binding on the government.²⁵ It can only recommend actions like payment of compensation or initiation of proceedings; it cannot enforce them. This lack of enforcement power severely curtails its effectiveness.²⁵

Jurisdictional Constraints: Its jurisdiction is limited. It cannot inquire into any matter that is more than one year old. Furthermore, its powers in relation to violations by the armed forces are restricted to seeking a report from the Central Government and making recommendations based on it.²⁵

Dependence on Government: The NHRC depends on the government for its funding and for its investigative staff, who are often deputed police officers. This dependence raises concerns about its independence and ability to conduct impartial investigations into abuses by state agents.²⁶

Lack of Recognition: Recently, the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) recommended downgrading the NHRC's 'A' status to 'B' status, citing concerns about its independence, pluralism, and failure to effectively address systemic human rights violations.²⁵

In conclusion, while the NHRC has played a valuable role in promoting and protecting human rights in India, its effectiveness is significantly hampered by its non-binding recommendations and jurisdictional limitations. To become a more potent force, it needs to be vested with greater powers of enforcement and guaranteed greater institutional autonomy.
Answer to Question 5
(a) Salient Features of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 1979

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), adopted by the UN in 1979, is often described as the international bill of rights for women.²⁷ It provides a comprehensive framework for achieving gender equality. Its salient features are:

Comprehensive Definition of Discrimination: Article 1 defines "discrimination against women" in broad terms, covering any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on sex that impairs or nullifies women's enjoyment of human rights in any field, be it political, economic, social, or cultural.²⁷

Obligation of State Parties: CEDAW legally binds State Parties to take "all appropriate measures" to eliminate discrimination. This includes not only refraining from discriminatory acts but also actively working to eliminate discrimination perpetrated by private individuals and organizations.²⁷ States are required to embody the principle of equality in their legal systems and abolish all discriminatory laws.²⁷

Substantive Equality: The Convention moves beyond formal (de jure) equality to demand substantive (de facto) equality. It recognizes that historical discrimination requires proactive measures, including temporary special measures (like reservations), to accelerate the achievement of real-world equality.²⁷

Addressing Culture and Stereotypes: A unique and powerful feature of CEDAW is its focus on the role of culture and tradition in perpetuating discrimination. Article 5 obligates states to take measures to modify social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women to eliminate prejudices and practices based on stereotyped roles.²⁹

Wide-Ranging Rights: The Convention covers a broad spectrum of rights, including equality in political and public life (Article 7), education (Article 10), employment (Article 11), health care (Article 12), and equality in marriage and family relations (Article 16).²⁷ It is the only human rights treaty that explicitly affirms the reproductive rights of women.²⁷

(b) Implications of India's Declaratory Statement
India ratified CEDAW in 1993 but made a crucial declaratory statement concerning Articles 5(a) and 16(1). The declaration states that India "shall abide by and ensure these provisions in conformity with its policy of non-interference in the personal affairs of any Community without its initiative and consent".[30, 31]
This declaration has profound and problematic implications for achieving gender justice in India:

Conflict with the Core Object of CEDAW: The declaration creates a direct conflict with the core purpose of the Convention. Articles 5(a) and 16 are central to CEDAW's mission, as they target the very cultural patterns, traditions, and family laws where gender discrimination is most deeply entrenched.²⁹ By prioritizing non-interference in personal laws, India effectively shields a significant area of women's lives from the full application of the Convention's equality principles.³²

Perpetuation of Discriminatory Personal Laws: India has a pluralistic legal system where matters of marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption are governed by different personal laws for different religious communities. Many of these laws contain provisions that are discriminatory against women. The declaration provides a justification for the state's reluctance to reform these laws, thereby perpetuating gender inequality in the private sphere.³³

Undermining Substantive Equality: The policy of waiting for "initiative and consent" from communities to reform personal laws undermines the state's affirmative obligation under CEDAW to eliminate all forms of discrimination.³² It places the onus of reform on the very community structures that often perpetuate patriarchal norms, making the achievement of substantive equality for women in family matters extremely difficult.

De Facto Reservation: Although termed a "declaration," its effect is akin to a reservation that is incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty.³² The CEDAW Committee itself considers reservations to Articles 2 and 16 to be impermissible.³⁴ India's statement weakens its international commitment and hinders domestic advocacy for a Uniform Civil Code or the reform of personal laws in line with constitutional and international standards of equality.

In essence, India's declaratory statement creates a significant barrier to the realization of gender justice, allowing discriminatory practices to persist under the guise of religious or cultural autonomy, which is contrary to the spirit and letter of CEDAW.
Answer to Question 6
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) are the two principal legally binding treaties that translate the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights into state obligations. Together, they form the core of the International Bill of Human Rights.³⁵ While they are complementary, they differ significantly in the nature of the rights they protect, the obligations they impose on states, and their enforcement mechanisms.
Similarities:

Both Covenants were adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1966 and entered into force in 1976.³⁶

They share a common Preamble and Article 1, which affirms the right of all peoples to self-determination.

Both proclaim their respective rights for all people without discrimination of any kind.³⁵

Differences:

Feature International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
Nature of Rights Protects "first-generation" rights, which are civil and political in nature.³⁷ These include the right to life, freedom from torture, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to a fair trial, and the right to vote.³⁵ Protects "second-generation" rights, which are economic, social, and cultural.³⁷ These include the right to work, the right to social security, the right to an adequate standard of living (food, housing), the right to health, and the right to education.³⁵
Nature of State Obligation Imposes primarily "negative" obligations, requiring the state to refrain from interfering with individual freedoms.³⁷ The obligation is of immediate effect; states must respect and ensure these rights without delay.³⁸ Imposes primarily "positive" obligations, requiring the state to take active steps and allocate resources to fulfill these rights.³⁷ The obligation is of "progressive realization", meaning states must take steps "to the maximum of their available resources" to achieve the full realization of these rights over time.⁴⁰
Justiciability and Enforcement Rights are generally considered directly justiciable, meaning they can be readily enforced by courts.³⁷ An individual complaints mechanism (via the First Optional Protocol) was established alongside the Covenant, allowing the Human Rights Committee to hear individual complaints.³⁵ Rights were traditionally considered non-justiciable and aspirational, with monitoring limited to a system of state reporting.³⁷ An Optional Protocol allowing for individual complaints was only adopted in 2008 and has been ratified by far fewer states, reflecting the ongoing debate about the justiciability of these rights.³⁸
Analogy in Indian Constitution The rights in the ICCPR are analogous to the Fundamental Rights (Part III) of the Indian Constitution, which are legally enforceable in courts.³⁷ The rights in the ICESCR are analogous to the Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV) of the Indian Constitution, which are fundamental in the governance of the country but are not enforceable by any court.³⁷

In conclusion, while the ICCPR and ICESCR are indivisible and interdependent parts of a unified human rights framework, their historical separation has led to distinct legal characteristics. The ICCPR focuses on immediately enforceable rights that protect individuals from state overreach, while the ICESCR outlines goals for the state to progressively achieve to ensure social and economic well-being.
Answer to Question 7
The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989, is the most widely ratified human rights treaty in history, providing a comprehensive legal framework for the protection and promotion of children's rights.⁴² Its implementation is guided by four key principles, which are deeply reflected in India's legal system since its ratification of the CRC in 1992.⁴³
Key Principles of the CRC:
The Convention is built upon four core, overarching principles that inform the interpretation of all other rights within it ⁴³:

Non-discrimination (Article 2): This principle mandates that the rights enshrined in the CRC must be applied to every child without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child's or their parent's or legal guardian's race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.

Best Interests of the Child (Article 3): This principle requires that in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities, or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.

Right to Life, Survival, and Development (Article 6): This affirms every child's . Development is understood holistically, encompassing physical, mental, spiritual, moral, and social aspects.

Respect for the Views of the Child (Article 12): Also known as the right to participation or the right to be heard, this principle ensures that every child who is capable of forming his or her own views has the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting them. The views of the child must be given due weight in accordance with their age and maturity.

Reflection in the Legal Framework of India:
India has integrated these principles into its constitutional and statutory framework:

Constitutional Provisions:

Article 15(3) allows the state to make special provisions for women and children, directly reflecting the principles of non-discrimination and the best interests of the child.⁴³

Article 21 (Right to Life), as judicially expanded, encompasses the CRC's principle of the right to life, survival, and development, including rights to nutrition, shelter, and health.⁴³

Article 21A (Right to Education) directly promotes the child's right to development.

Article 24 (Prohibition of Child Labour) and Article 39(f) (directing the state to protect childhood and youth against exploitation) are key provisions for child protection.⁴³

Statutory Laws:

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: This Act is fundamentally based on the principles of the CRC. It explicitly states that the "best interests of the child" is a primary consideration in all decisions and includes provisions for ensuring a child's right to be heard.

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012: This law provides a strong framework for protecting children from sexual abuse and exploitation, directly implementing the CRC's protection rights. It incorporates child-friendly procedures that respect the dignity and participation rights of child victims.

The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009: This Act operationalizes Article 21A and is a cornerstone for realizing the child's right to development.

In conclusion, the core principles of the CRC have served as a guiding framework for India, influencing constitutional interpretations and leading to the enactment of specific, child-focused legislation aimed at ensuring the survival, development, protection, and participation of every child.
Answer to Question 8
The relationship between the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III of the Indian Constitution and the human rights embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), 1948, is deep and symbiotic. The framers of the Indian Constitution, who were drafting the document concurrently with the UN's deliberations on the UDHR, were significantly influenced by its principles.⁴⁴ This influence is clearly visible in the direct parallels between the two documents.
The UDHR's Influence on the Indian Constitution:
The UDHR, while not a legally binding treaty, provided a moral and philosophical blueprint for the rights that a modern democratic state should guarantee its people.⁴⁶ The Indian Constitution enshrines many of these universal rights as legally enforceable Fundamental Rights, making them the cornerstone of Indian democracy.
Comparative Analysis of Rights:
Many of the civil and political rights listed in the UDHR have a direct and clear counterpart in Part III of the Indian Constitution:

Human Right in UDHR Corresponding Fundamental Right in Indian Constitution
Equality before the law (Article 7) Article 14: Equality before law and equal protection of the laws.⁴⁷
Prohibition of discrimination (Article 2, 7) Article 15: Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.⁴⁸
Right to life, liberty, and security of person (Article 3) Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty.⁴⁸
Freedom from slavery and forced labour (Article 4) Article 23: Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour.⁴⁸
Freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman treatment (Article 5) Interpreted as part of Article 21 by the judiciary.
Freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention (Article 9) Article 22: Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases.⁴⁸
Freedom of speech and expression (Article 19) Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression.⁴⁷
Freedom of peaceful assembly (Article 20) Article 19(1)(b): Right to assemble peaceably and without arms.⁴⁷
Right to constitutional remedy (Article 8) Article 32: Right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Key Differences:
Despite the strong parallels, there are crucial differences:

Justiciability: The most significant difference is enforceability. Fundamental Rights under Part III are legally justiciable, and any individual can approach the High Courts (under Article 226) or the Supreme Court (under Article 32) for their enforcement.⁵⁰ The UDHR, as a declaration, does not create legally binding obligations, though its principles have immense moral authority and have contributed to the development of customary international law.⁴⁶

Scope of Rights: The UDHR includes a broad spectrum of economic, social, and cultural rights (e.g., right to work, right to social security, right to education).⁵⁰ In the Indian Constitution, these rights are largely reflected in Part IV, the Directive Principles of State Policy, which are not directly enforceable in courts but are fundamental to the country's governance.⁵⁰

In conclusion, the UDHR served as a foundational inspiration for the Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution. While the Constitution provides the crucial mechanism of legal enforceability that the UDHR lacks, the shared principles demonstrate India's commitment to the universal values of human dignity, liberty, and equality.
Answer to Question 9
The statement, "Protective Discrimination under the Indian Constitution is a vital tool for realizing the human right to substantive equality," accurately captures the essence and purpose of India's affirmative action policies. This system is not a deviation from the principle of equality but rather a necessary mechanism to achieve it in its truest sense in a society marked by deep-seated historical inequalities.
Understanding Protective Discrimination:
Protective discrimination refers to the policy of providing special provisions, such as reservations in education, public employment, and legislatures, for historically marginalized and disadvantaged groups, specifically the Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs).⁵¹
The constitutional basis for this policy is found in several key articles, which act as exceptions to the general rule of non-discrimination:

Article 15(4): Enables the State to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the SCs and STs.⁵²

Article 16(4): Allows the State to make provisions for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State.⁵²

Article 16(4A): Permits reservation in matters of promotion for SCs and STs.⁵²

From Formal to Substantive Equality:
The core of the argument lies in the distinction between formal and substantive equality.

Formal Equality implies treating everyone the same, regardless of their circumstances. In a society with structural inequalities, this approach can perpetuate existing disadvantages.

Substantive Equality, the human rights-based approach, recognizes that to achieve true equality, it is necessary to address and remedy historical and structural disadvantages.⁵² It requires treating unequals unequally to place them on a level playing field.

Protective discrimination is the constitutional tool to achieve this substantive equality.⁵¹ It acknowledges that centuries of caste-based oppression have denied certain communities access to education, resources, and opportunities. Therefore, simply declaring equality before the law is insufficient. Affirmative action is required to compensate for these historical wrongs and ensure that these communities can effectively compete and participate in the life of the nation.
The Role of the Judiciary:
The Supreme Court has played a crucial role in shaping this doctrine. In cases like State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951), an initial strict adherence to formal equality led to the First Constitutional Amendment, which inserted Article 15(4) to explicitly legitimize affirmative action.⁵² In later judgments like M.R. Balaji v. State of Mysore (1963) and Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), the Court has balanced the need for reservations with principles of merit and efficiency by introducing concepts like the 50% ceiling on reservations and the "creamy layer" doctrine to ensure that benefits reach the genuinely disadvantaged.⁵²
In conclusion, protective discrimination is not an antithesis to equality but its most profound expression in the Indian context. It is a constitutionally mandated and judicially refined instrument designed to dismantle historical hierarchies and realize the human right to an equality that is not just formal and theoretical, but substantive and real.
Answer to Question 10 (Short Notes)
(a) Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as a tool for enforcing human rights
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a judicial innovation in India that has become one of the most powerful tools for enforcing the human rights of the marginalized and disadvantaged. It refers to litigation filed in a court of law, not by the aggrieved individual, but by a public-spirited citizen or a social action group, for the protection of "public interest".⁵³
Introduced by Supreme Court Justices P.N. Bhagwati and V.R. Krishna Iyer, PIL represents a significant relaxation of the traditional procedural rule of locus standi (the right to appear in court), which required that only the person whose right was violated could file a petition.⁵⁴ Recognizing that the poor and oppressed often lack the means to approach the courts, the judiciary allowed any person or organization to file a petition on their behalf before the Supreme Court under Article 32 or a High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.⁵³
The landmark case of Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979), which dealt with the plight of undertrial prisoners, marked the beginning of the PIL era and led to the release of thousands of prisoners.⁵⁴ Since then, PIL has been used to address a wide range of human rights violations, including issues of bonded labour, environmental pollution, custodial violence, and the right to food and shelter. It is a vital instrument for social change, ensuring judicial monitoring of state institutions and holding the executive and legislature accountable to their constitutional obligations.⁵³
(b) Human Rights Courts
Human Rights Courts are specialized courts established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, to ensure the speedy trial of offenses arising from the violation of human rights.⁵⁵ The provision for these courts is laid down in Chapter VI of the Act.

Section 30 of the Act provides that the State Government, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, may specify for each district a Court of Session to be a Human Rights Court.⁵⁷ This means that an existing Court of Session is designated to function as a Human Rights Court, rather than creating an entirely new infrastructure.

Section 31 of the Act mandates that for every Human Rights Court, the State Government shall appoint a Public Prosecutor or an advocate who has been in practice for not less than seven years, as a Special Public Prosecutor for the purpose of conducting cases in that Court.⁵⁷

The objective behind establishing these courts is to provide a dedicated and expedited judicial process for human rights cases, thereby ensuring that victims of violations receive justice promptly. They form a crucial part of the institutional machinery created by the Act to strengthen human rights protection at the district level.
(c) The International Bill of Human Rights
The "International Bill of Human Rights" is the collective name for three of the most significant documents in international human rights law. It is not a single document but a trio of foundational instruments that together define the fundamental rights and freedoms of all human beings.¹²
The three components of the International Bill of Human Rights are:

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), 1948: Adopted by the UN General Assembly, the UDHR is a non-binding declaration that sets out a "common standard of achievement" for all nations.⁴⁶ It lists 30 articles covering a wide range of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966: This is a legally binding treaty that elaborates on the civil and political rights outlined in the UDHR, such as the right to life, freedom of speech, and the right to a fair trial.³⁵

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966: This is also a legally binding treaty that details the economic, social, and cultural rights from the UDHR, including the right to work, the right to health, and the right to education.³⁵

Together, these three documents form the cornerstone of the modern international human rights system. The UDHR provides the aspirational vision, and the two Covenants translate that vision into binding legal obligations for the states that have ratified them.
(d) The Right to a healthy environment as a facet of human rights
The right to a healthy environment is a crucial human right that has been recognized in India primarily through judicial interpretation. While not explicitly stated as a Fundamental Right in the Constitution, the Supreme Court of India has read it into the expansive scope of Article 21, which guarantees the "Right to Life and Personal Liberty".⁵⁸
The judiciary has reasoned that the right to life would be meaningless without a clean and healthy environment. The right to live with human dignity, as established in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, includes protection from the hazards of environmental pollution.⁵⁹ Landmark cases, such as the numerous petitions filed by M.C. Mehta, have led to groundbreaking judgments on controlling air, water, and industrial pollution, firmly establishing the right to a healthy environment as an enforceable right under Article 21.
This judicial activism is supported by the Directive Principles of State Policy and Fundamental Duties. Article 48A directs the State to protect and improve the environment, and Article 51A(g) imposes a fundamental duty on every citizen to do the same.⁵⁸
Most recently, in M.K. Ranjitsinh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (2024), the Supreme Court explicitly recognized the "right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change" as a distinct right, integral to the rights to life (Article 21) and equality (Article 14).⁵⁸ This development solidifies the status of a healthy environment as an indispensable facet of human rights in India.

Paper 1 ~ Human Rights Law and Practice

Full Marks: 80
Time: 3 Hours

Instructions:

The figures in the margin indicate full marks.
Candidates are required to give their answers in their own words as far as practicable.
Answer any five questions.

(a) Define "Human Rights" and discuss their evolution in the Indian context. [8]
(b) How do national and international perspectives on human rights complement each other? [8]
Discuss the salient features of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948. Evaluate its impact on shaping domestic human rights laws in India. [16]
Compare and contrast the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966, with reference to their enforceability. [16]
Examine the role of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, in addressing human rights violations in India. Highlight its limitations with suitable examples. [16]
Discuss the rights recognized under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989. How has India incorporated these rights into its legal framework? [16]
(a) Explain how Article 21 of the Indian Constitution has been interpreted to include the right to a dignified life. [10]
(b) Discuss a landmark judicial decision that expanded the scope of Article 21 in the context of human rights. [6]
Analyze the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), 1979. Discuss India’s compliance with CEDAW through legislative measures. [16]
Evaluate the role of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in promoting and protecting human rights in India, with reference to at least two significant case laws. [16]
Discuss the interrelationship between human rights and environmental protection in the Indian legal framework, with reference to judicial pronouncements. [16]
Write short notes on any two of the following: [8 × 2]
(a) State Human Rights Commissions
(b) Human Rights Courts
(c) Right to Privacy as a Human Right
(d) Freedom of Speech and Expression

Of course. Here is a model answer paper for the questions provided, complete with citations and a reference list.

Model Answer Paper: Human Rights Law and Practice (2025-26)

Answer to Question 1

(a) Definition of "Human Rights" and their Evolution in the Indian Context ¹

Definition of Human Rights:

In the Indian legal framework, "Human Rights" are statutorily defined under Section 2(1)(d) of the anteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India". This definition establishes that for a right to be considered a human right under this Act, it must have its source either in the Indian Constitution or in the International Covenants (specifically the ICCPR and ICESCR) and must be judicially enforceable within India.

Evolution in the Indian Context:

The concept of human rights in India is not a modern import but has deep roots in its ancient traditions and has evolved through various historical phases:

Ancient Era: The foundations of human rights can be traced back to ancient Indian scriptures. The Rig Veda declared that all human beings are equal and should strive for collective progress.⁴ The concept of Dharma in epics like the Ramayana and Mahabharata aimed to promote the well-being of all beings.⁵ Philosophers like Kautilya articulated the principles of a welfare state, stating that a ruler's happiness lies in the happiness of their subjects.⁴
Medieval Era: During the medieval period, the advent of Muslim rule brought challenges to the existing rights framework. However, rulers like Akbar promoted religious tolerance and secularism through policies like Din-E-Ilahi, and social reform movements like Bhakti and Sufism were instrumental in furthering human dignity.⁵
Modern Era (British Rule and Freedom Struggle): The British colonial period was marked by the suppression of the rights of Indians, which in turn fueled the freedom struggle.⁴ The desire to reclaim these rights became central to the independence movement. The first explicit demand for fundamental rights appeared in the Constitution of India Bill, 1895, which guaranteed rights to expression, equality, liberty, and education.⁴ Subsequent milestones included the Commonwealth of India Bill (1925) drafted by Annie Besant and the Motilal Nehru Report (1928), which declared that securing fundamental rights was its primary concern.⁴
Post-Independence: After independence, the framers of the Indian Constitution, influenced by global documents like the UDHR, enshrined a comprehensive set of human rights in the Constitution.⁶ These are primarily located in Part III (Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy), which together form the conscience of the Constitution and institutionalize the commitment to liberty, equality, and dignity.⁶

(b) How do national and international perspectives on human rights complement each other? ¹

National and international perspectives on human rights are not mutually exclusive; rather, they form a complementary and interdependent system for the promotion and protection of human dignity.

International Law as a Standard-Setter: International human rights law, embodied in instruments like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and legally binding treaties like the ICCPR and ICESCR, sets universal standards and principles. It provides a global benchmark for how states should treat individuals, creating a framework of obligations for signatory nations. This international perspective ensures that human rights are not solely dependent on the whims of a national government and promotes a universal understanding of fundamental freedoms.
National Law as the Enforcement Mechanism: While international law sets the standards, it often lacks robust enforcement mechanisms. The national perspective, through domestic constitutions and legal systems, provides the crucial element of justiciability and enforcement. In India, the Constitution is the primary vehicle for this. Part III (Fundamental Rights) translates many international human rights principles into legally enforceable rights. The judiciary, through its powers under Articles 32 and 226, acts as the guardian of these rights, making them a reality for citizens.
Judicial Dialogue and Interpretation: The Indian judiciary frequently looks to international human rights law to interpret and expand the scope of domestic fundamental rights. In cases where domestic law is silent or ambiguous, courts have invoked international covenants to which India is a party to inform their decisions.⁷ This is particularly evident in the expansive interpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life), where the Supreme Court has read in numerous rights (like the right to a healthy environment, right to livelihood) by drawing inspiration from international principles.⁸ This judicial dialogue ensures that domestic law evolves in harmony with global human rights norms.

Thus, the international framework provides the "what" (the universal standards), while the national framework provides the "how" (the legal enforcement), creating a synergistic relationship that strengthens the overall protection of human rights.⁹

Answer to Question 2

Salient Features of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948, is a milestone document in the history of human rights.⁶ It was born from the experience of World War II, with the international community vowing to prevent such atrocities from happening again. Its salient features are:

A Common Standard: The UDHR was proclaimed as a "common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations". It is not a legally binding treaty but serves as a foundational document with immense moral and political force, setting out for the first time the fundamental human rights to be universally protected.
Universality and Inalienability: The Declaration is founded on the principle that human rights are universal and inalienable—they belong to every human being simply by virtue of their humanity, regardless of race, sex, religion, or any other status. This is enshrined in Article 1, which states, "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights".
Comprehensive Scope: The UDHR is comprehensive, containing 30 articles that cover a wide spectrum of rights. It includes both "first-generation" civil and political rights (e.g., right to life, liberty, freedom from torture, freedom of expression, right to a fair trial) and "second-generation" economic, social, and cultural rights (e.g., right to social security, work, education, and an adequate standard of living).
Foundation of International Law: The UDHR has served as the primary inspiration for the entire body of international human rights law. It laid the groundwork for the two binding covenants—the ICCPR and the ICESCR—which, together with the UDHR, form the International Bill of Human Rights.

Impact on Shaping Domestic Human Rights Laws in India

The UDHR has had a profound and lasting impact on the shaping of India's domestic human rights laws, particularly its Constitution.

Influence on the Constituent Assembly: The Indian Constitution was being drafted at the same time the UN was finalizing the UDHR. The framers of the Constitution were deeply influenced by the principles of the Declaration, and this is reflected in the inclusion of a detailed list of rights in the Constitution.
Reflection in Fundamental Rights (Part III): Many of the civil and political rights enumerated in the UDHR are directly mirrored in Part III of the Indian Constitution as justiciable Fundamental Rights. For instance:
- The right to equality before the law (Article 7, UDHR) is reflected in Article 14 of the Constitution.
- The prohibition of discrimination (Article 7, UDHR) corresponds to Article 15.
- The right to life and liberty (Article 3, UDHR) is enshrined in Article 21.
- The freedom of speech and expression (Article 19, UDHR) is guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a).
Reflection in Directive Principles (Part IV): The economic, social, and cultural rights of the UDHR, such as the right to work, education, and social security, found their place in Part IV of the Constitution as Directive Principles of State Policy. While not directly enforceable, these principles are fundamental to the governance of the country and guide the state in making laws.
Judicial Interpretation: The Indian judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, has frequently relied on the UDHR to interpret and give meaning to the provisions of the Constitution.⁷ In cases where fundamental rights were not explicitly mentioned, the Court has used the UDHR as an interpretive tool to expand their scope. For example, the entire jurisprudence of an expanded right to life under Article 21, which now includes rights to dignity, a clean environment, and health, has been heavily influenced by the principles laid down in the UDHR.⁸

In essence, the UDHR provided the philosophical and moral foundation upon which India built its robust framework of constitutional rights, making it a living and integral part of India's domestic human rights regime.⁷

Answer to Question 3

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) are two foundational, legally binding treaties adopted in 1966. While they are complementary parts of the International Bill of Rights, they were created as separate instruments due to Cold War-era ideological differences regarding the nature and implementation of rights.¹⁰ These differences are most pronounced in the nature of the rights themselves and their enforceability.

Comparison and Contrast:

Feature	International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)	International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
Nature of Rights	Protects "first-generation" civil and political rights. These are often termed "negative" rights, as they primarily require the state to refrain from interfering with individual freedoms. Examples include the right to life, freedom from torture, freedom of speech, and the right to a fair trial.	Protects "second-generation" economic, social, and cultural rights. These are often termed "positive" rights, as they require the state to take active steps and allocate resources for their fulfillment. Examples include the right to work, health, education, and an adequate standard of living.
Nature of State Obligation	Imposes an immediate obligation on states to "respect and to ensure" the rights for all individuals within their territory.¹² These rights are meant to be applied without delay.	Imposes an obligation of "progressive realization".¹¹ Article 2(1) requires states to take steps "to the maximum of its available resources" to progressively achieve the full realization of these rights over time. This acknowledges that fulfillment depends on a state's financial and institutional capacity.
Analogy in Indian Constitution	The rights are analogous to the Fundamental Rights in Part III of the Indian Constitution, which are legally enforceable in courts.	The rights are analogous to the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Indian Constitution, which are fundamental in governance but not directly enforceable by courts.

Enforceability:

The most critical distinction lies in their enforceability, both internationally and domestically.

ICCPR:
- Justiciability: The rights under the ICCPR are generally considered to be directly justiciable, meaning they are precise enough to be enforced by a court of law. An individual can claim a direct violation of their right to, for example, a fair trial.
- International Complaint Mechanism: The ICCPR has a well-established individual complaints mechanism through its First Optional Protocol. This allows individuals from signatory states, after exhausting all domestic remedies, to petition the Human Rights Committee, which can investigate the alleged violation and issue its views. This provides a quasi-judicial international remedy.
ICESCR:
- Justiciability: Historically, the rights under the ICESCR were considered non-justiciable and aspirational policy goals, largely due to their vague nature and dependence on resource allocation. It was argued that courts could not order a government to, for instance, "provide" housing for all.
- International Complaint Mechanism: For decades, the only monitoring mechanism for the ICESCR was a system of state reporting to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.¹² However, this has changed. An Optional Protocol to the ICESCR was adopted in 2008, establishing an individual complaints mechanism similar to that of the ICCPR.¹² This has significantly strengthened the enforceability of these rights, although the protocol has been ratified by far fewer states than the one for the ICCPR, and debates about the justiciability of these rights continue.

In conclusion, while the distinction is becoming less rigid, the ICCPR provides for rights that are immediately applicable and more readily enforceable through judicial means, both nationally and internationally. The ICESCR, in contrast, provides for rights that are to be achieved progressively, and their direct enforceability, while growing, remains more complex and contested.

Answer to Question 4

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is an independent statutory body established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. It serves as a crucial watchdog for safeguarding the rights to life, liberty, equality, and dignity of individuals in India.

Role and Functions of the NHRC:

The functions of the NHRC are detailed in Section 12 of the Act and are aimed at the broad promotion and protection of human rights. Its key functions include:

Inquiry into Violations: The NHRC can inquire, either on its own initiative (suo motu), on a petition, or on a court order, into complaints of (a) violation of human rights or (b) negligence in the prevention of such violation by a public servant.
Intervention in Court Proceedings: With the court's approval, it can intervene in any proceeding involving allegations of human rights violations pending before a court.
Inspection of Institutions: It can visit jails, detention centers, and other state-run institutions to study the living conditions of inmates and make recommendations for improvement.
Review of Safeguards and Laws: The Commission reviews constitutional and legal safeguards for human rights and recommends measures for their effective implementation. It also studies international treaties and makes recommendations for their domestic implementation.
Combating Terrorism: It analyzes factors, including acts of terrorism, that inhibit the enjoyment of human rights and recommends appropriate remedial measures.
Promotion and Research: The NHRC undertakes and promotes research in the field of human rights and works to spread human rights literacy and awareness among the public.
Support to NGOs: It encourages the efforts of non-governmental organizations working in the field of human rights.

While conducting an inquiry, the NHRC possesses the powers of a civil court, including summoning witnesses and examining evidence.

Limitations of the NHRC:

Despite its important mandate, the NHRC's effectiveness is significantly hampered by several structural and functional limitations:

Non-Binding Recommendations: The most significant limitation is that the NHRC's recommendations are not legally binding on the government. It can only recommend actions, such as payment of compensation or initiation of prosecution, but it has no power to enforce these recommendations. This has led to it being labeled a "toothless tiger".
Jurisdictional Constraints: The NHRC's jurisdiction is limited in several ways.
- It cannot inquire into any matter after one year of its occurrence.¹³
- Its powers regarding violations by the armed forces are restricted; it can only seek a report from the Central Government and make recommendations based on it, without conducting its own investigation.¹⁴
- It cannot investigate violations committed by private parties.¹³
Dependence on Government: The Commission is dependent on the government for its funding and for its investigative staff, who are often police officers on deputation. This raises concerns about its independence, especially when investigating abuses by state agents. For example, the involvement of police officers in its investigation wing has been flagged by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) as a factor that may compromise impartial investigations.
Lack of Pluralism and Transparency: The NHRC has faced criticism for a lack of diversity in its composition and an opaque selection process. These concerns were central to GANHRI's recent recommendation to downgrade the NHRC's accreditation from 'A' to 'B' status, which would limit its participation in UN human rights mechanisms.
Failure to Address Systemic Issues: While the NHRC has intervened in individual cases, it has been criticized for failing to effectively address systemic human rights violations or speak out on pressing issues like shrinking civic space and attacks on human rights defenders.

In conclusion, while the NHRC plays a vital role as a public forum for human rights grievances, its impact is severely constrained by its advisory nature and jurisdictional limitations, preventing it from being a truly effective enforcement body.

Answer to Question 5

The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1989, is the most widely ratified human rights treaty in history. It provides a comprehensive framework for the protection of children's rights, defining a child as any human being under the age of eighteen.¹⁵ India ratified the CRC on December 11, 1992.

Rights Recognized under the CRC:

The rights under the CRC are guided by four core principles that underpin the entire convention:

Non-discrimination (Article 2): All rights must apply to all children without discrimination of any kind.
Best Interests of the Child (Article 3): In all actions concerning children, their best interests must be a primary consideration.
Right to Life, Survival, and Development (Article 6): This affirms the child's inherent right to life and obligates the state to ensure their survival and development to the maximum extent possible.
Respect for the Views of the Child (Article 12): Children capable of forming their own views have the right to express them freely in all matters affecting them, with their views being given due weight.

The specific rights enumerated in the CRC are often categorized as follows:

Survival Rights: These include the right to life and access to the basic necessities for existence, such as an adequate standard of living, nutrition, shelter, and medical care.
Development Rights: These rights enable children to reach their full potential and include the right to education, play, leisure, cultural activities, access to information, and freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.
Protection Rights: These rights safeguard children from all forms of harm, including abuse, neglect, exploitation, torture, and violence. This covers protection for children in the justice system, those in employment, and refugee children. Article 32, for example, protects against economic exploitation.¹⁶
Participation Rights: These rights allow children to be active participants in their societies. This includes the freedom to express their opinions, to have their voice heard in matters affecting them, and the freedom of association.

Incorporation of CRC Rights into India's Legal Framework:

India has integrated the principles and rights of the CRC into its domestic legal framework through constitutional provisions and specific legislation.

Constitutional Provisions:
- Article 21 (Right to Life): The Supreme Court's expanded interpretation of this article to include the right to live with dignity encompasses many of the CRC's survival and development rights, such as the right to nutrition, health, and shelter.
- Article 21A: This article makes free and compulsory education for children aged 6 to 14 a fundamental right, directly implementing a key development right from the CRC.¹⁶
- Article 24: This prohibits the employment of children below the age of 14 in hazardous industries, aligning with the CRC's protection rights.¹⁶
- Article 39(f): This Directive Principle obligates the state to ensure that children are given opportunities to develop in a healthy manner and are protected from exploitation and abandonment.
- Article 15(3): This enables the state to make special provisions for children, supporting the "best interests" principle.
Key Legislation:
- The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: This Act is fundamentally based on CRC principles, explicitly making the "best interests of the child" a primary consideration in all decisions concerning children.
- The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012: This law provides a robust framework for protecting children from sexual abuse and exploitation, incorporating child-friendly procedures that respect the dignity and participation rights of child victims.
- The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009: This Act gives statutory force to Article 21A, creating the legal framework for ensuring the right to education.

Through these constitutional and legislative measures, India has made significant strides in domesticating its international obligations under the CRC, creating a legal architecture aimed at protecting and promoting the rights of every child.

Answer to Question 6

(a) Explain how Article 21 of the Indian Constitution has been interpreted to include the right to a dignified life. ²

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which states, "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law," has undergone a profound transformation through judicial interpretation.¹⁷ Initially viewed as a narrow protection, it has evolved into a comprehensive charter for a life with human dignity.¹⁷

The journey began with a restrictive interpretation in A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950), where the Supreme Court held that "life" meant mere physical or animal existence.¹⁷ However, the paradigm shifted dramatically with the landmark case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978).¹⁷ In this case, the Court declared that the right to life under Article 21 is not confined to mere physical survival but includes the right to live with human dignity.¹⁸

This reinterpretation opened the floodgates for the judiciary to read a host of unenumerated rights into Article 21, all deemed essential for a dignified existence. The Supreme Court reasoned that a life without dignity, freedom, and the basic necessities would be akin to animal existence, which Article 21 seeks to prevent.¹⁷ Following this principle, the Court has recognized several rights as implicit in the right to a dignified life, including:

Right to Livelihood: As held in Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, the right to life includes the right to livelihood, as it is the means to sustain life itself.
Right to a Clean Environment: The Court has consistently held that a life with dignity is impossible without a clean and healthy environment.
Right to Health and Education: These have been recognized as fundamental to the development of human personality and thus integral to a dignified life.
Right to Shelter: In Chameli Singh v. State of U.P., the Court recognized the right to shelter as essential for a dignified life.
Right to Privacy: In K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the Court affirmed that privacy is an intrinsic part of dignity and, therefore, a facet of Article 21.

Thus, through creative and purposive interpretation, the judiciary has transformed Article 21 from a negative right against arbitrary state action into a positive right that imposes an obligation on the state to ensure the conditions necessary for a person to live a full and dignified life.¹⁷

(b) Discuss a landmark judicial decision that expanded the scope of Article 21 in the context of human rights. ³

The most significant landmark judicial decision that fundamentally expanded the scope of Article 21 is Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978). This case is considered a watershed moment in Indian constitutional law, as it revolutionized the interpretation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to life and personal liberty.

Background: The petitioner, Maneka Gandhi, had her passport impounded by the government without being given any reason, which she challenged as a violation of her personal liberty under Article 21.¹⁷

The Judgment and its Impact:

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, made several transformative pronouncements:

"Procedure Established by Law" must be Fair: The Court overruled its earlier narrow view from A.K. Gopalan and held that the "procedure established by law" under Article 21 cannot be arbitrary, fanciful, or oppressive. It must be "fair, just, and reasonable". This effectively imported the American concept of "substantive due process" into Article 21, making any law that curtails personal liberty subject to judicial scrutiny for its reasonableness.
Right to Life means Right to Live with Human Dignity: The Court famously declared that the right to life is not merely about physical existence but includes the right to live with human dignity.¹⁸ This single interpretive leap opened the door for recognizing a wide array of unenumerated rights as essential components of a dignified life.
The Golden Triangle: The judgment established an interrelationship between Articles 14 (Equality), 19 (Freedoms), and 21 (Life and Liberty), holding that they are not mutually exclusive.¹⁸ Any law affecting personal liberty under Article 21 must also pass the test of reasonableness under Article 19 and non-arbitrariness under Article 14.

The Maneka Gandhi case set the stage for all subsequent expansions of Article 21, making it the bedrock of human rights jurisprudence in India. It empowered the judiciary to act as a vigilant protector of individual liberties against state action and transformed Article 21 into the vibrant, all-encompassing right it is today.

Answer to Question 7

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1979, is a comprehensive international treaty often referred to as the "international bill of rights for women". India ratified CEDAW on July 9, 1993.

Analysis of CEDAW Provisions:

CEDAW provides a detailed framework for achieving gender equality and eliminating discrimination. Its key provisions include:

A Broad Definition of Discrimination (Article 1): of sex that has the purpose or effect of impairing or nullifying women's enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms in all spheres of life—political, economic, social, or cultural.
State Obligation to Eliminate Discrimination (Article 2): The Convention places a binding obligation on State Parties to take "all appropriate measures," including legislation, to eliminate discrimination against women. This duty extends to acts committed by both state and private actors.
Focus on Substantive Equality: CEDAW moves beyond formal (de jure) equality to demand substantive (de facto) equality. It recognizes that historical and structural discrimination requires proactive measures, including temporary special measures (like quotas), to accelerate the achievement of real-world equality for women.
Addressing Stereotypes and Cultural Practices (Article 5): A unique and powerful feature of CEDAW is its mandate to modify social and cultural patterns and eliminate prejudices and practices based on stereotyped gender roles. This provision targets the root causes of discrimination that are often embedded in tradition and culture.
Comprehensive Rights: The Convention covers a wide range of rights, including equality in political and public life (Article 7), education (Article 10), employment (Article 11), health care (Article 12), and marriage and family relations (Article 16). It is the only human rights treaty that explicitly affirms the reproductive rights of women.

India’s Compliance with CEDAW through Legislative Measures:

India has enacted several laws that align with its obligations under CEDAW, demonstrating a commitment to its principles. However, this compliance is complicated by India's declaratory statement on Articles 5(a) and 16(1), which asserts a policy of non-interference in the personal laws of any community without its consent. Despite this, significant legislative progress has been made:

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act): This Act is a direct result of the Supreme Court's landmark judgment in Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan (1997). In that case, the Court, in the absence of domestic legislation, drew upon international conventions, including CEDAW, to formulate binding guidelines to combat sexual harassment. The POSH Act now provides a statutory framework for preventing and redressing workplace sexual harassment, aligning with CEDAW's principles on ensuring equality in employment.²⁰
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: This law was a major step towards recognizing and providing civil remedies for violence that occurs within the private sphere of the family. It aligns with CEDAW's goal of eliminating all forms of violence against women and holding the state accountable for protecting women from acts of private individuals.²¹
The Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023 (Women's Reservation Bill): This recent amendment, which reserves one-third of the seats in the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies for women, is a significant "temporary special measure" aimed at accelerating women's political empowerment. It directly corresponds to the obligations under Article 7 of CEDAW, which calls for measures to ensure women's equal participation in political and public life.²²

While challenges in implementation and the issue of personal laws remain, these legislative measures demonstrate India's efforts to translate its international commitments under CEDAW into domestic legal reality.

Answer to Question 8

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a powerful judicial innovation in India that has fundamentally transformed the landscape of human rights protection. It refers to litigation filed in a court, not by an aggrieved individual, but by a public-spirited citizen or social organization to enforce the rights of those who cannot approach the court themselves due to poverty, ignorance, or other disadvantages. By relaxing the traditional rule of locus standi, the Supreme Court and High Courts have used PIL as a vital tool to promote social justice and hold the executive and legislature accountable.

Role of PIL in Promoting and Protecting Human Rights:

Access to Justice: PIL makes justice accessible to the most marginalized sections of society, including prisoners, bonded laborers, and victims of state negligence, thereby enforcing their fundamental rights.
Enforcement of Constitutional Rights: PIL has given a wider description to the rights to equality (Article 14) and life and personality (Article 21), making them living realities for many.
Judicial Monitoring: It allows the judiciary to monitor state institutions like prisons, asylums, and protective homes to ensure they function in a humane manner.
Social Change: PIL has been an effective instrument for social change, addressing systemic issues like environmental pollution, gender injustice, and corruption.

Significant Case Laws:

Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979):
This case is widely regarded as the genesis of the PIL movement in India.23 A petition was filed on behalf of thousands of undertrial prisoners in Bihar who had been languishing in jail for years, often for periods longer than the maximum sentence for their alleged offenses.
- Impact on Human Rights: The Supreme Court took cognizance of the matter and, in a landmark decision, held that the right to a speedy trial is an essential and implicit part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. The Court ordered the immediate release of nearly 40,000 undertrial prisoners. This case established a powerful precedent, demonstrating that the judiciary could intervene proactively to protect the fundamental rights of the most vulnerable, even when they could not personally approach the court.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case, 1986):
This case arose from a PIL filed by environmental lawyer M.C. Mehta following a leak of oleum gas from a chemical plant in a densely populated area of Delhi.25
- Impact on Human Rights: This case had a profound impact on both environmental law and human rights jurisprudence. The Supreme Court not only affirmed the right to a clean and healthy environment as an integral part of the right to life under Article 21 but also formulated the principle of "absolute liability".²⁵ The Court held that enterprises engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities have an absolute and non-delegable duty to ensure that no harm results to anyone. If harm does occur, the enterprise is absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected, and this liability is not subject to any of the exceptions under the traditional rule of strict liability. This judgment created a strong legal deterrent against industrial pollution and firmly linked environmental protection with the fundamental right to life.

In conclusion, PIL has empowered the judiciary to act as a sentinel on the qui vive, using its constitutional authority under Articles 32 and 226 to protect and promote the human rights of all, thereby deepening the roots of justice and accountability in Indian democracy.

Answer to Question 9

The interrelationship between human rights and environmental protection is foundational, as the enjoyment of basic human rights, particularly the right to life, is contingent upon a safe and healthy environment. In the Indian legal framework, this connection has been primarily forged and strengthened by the judiciary through a progressive interpretation of the Constitution.

The Constitutional Framework:

While the Indian Constitution does not contain an explicit fundamental right to a clean environment, the judiciary has woven this right into the constitutional fabric using the following provisions:

Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty): This is the cornerstone of environmental jurisprudence in India. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the "right to life" is not limited to mere animal existence but includes the right to live with human dignity in a healthy, pollution-free environment. Any action that pollutes the environment and endangers life is seen as a violation of Article 21.
Article 48A (Directive Principles of State Policy): This article directs the State to "endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country". While not directly enforceable, courts have used this principle to guide their interpretation of Article 21 and to hold the state accountable to its constitutional mandate.²⁶
Article 51A(g) (Fundamental Duties): This article imposes a duty on every citizen "to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures". The judiciary has used this provision to emphasize the collective responsibility of citizens in environmental protection.

Judicial Pronouncements:

The Indian judiciary, through a series of landmark pronouncements, has been the primary force in establishing and enforcing environmental rights as human rights.

Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P. (Dehradun Quarrying Case, 1985): This was one of the first cases where the Supreme Court explicitly linked environmental protection with the right to life under Article 21. The Court ordered the closure of limestone quarries in the Doon Valley, recognizing that their operation caused environmental degradation that adversely affected the health and lives of the people in the region.²³
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (various cases): The numerous PILs filed by M.C. Mehta led to a series of judgments that form the bedrock of Indian environmental law. In cases concerning the pollution of the Ganga river and the air in Delhi, the Court issued extensive directions to polluting industries and civic authorities, reinforcing the principle that a clean environment is essential for the enjoyment of the right to life.²⁵ In the Oleum Gas Leak case, the Court went a step further to establish the principle of "absolute liability" for hazardous industries, making environmental protection a non-delegable duty.
Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996): In this case, the Supreme Court formally adopted internationally recognized principles like the "Precautionary Principle" and the "Polluter Pays Principle" into Indian environmental law. It held that these principles are part of the law of the land, further strengthening the legal framework for environmental protection.
M.K. Ranjitsinh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (2024): In a recent and highly significant judgment, the Supreme Court explicitly recognized the "right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change" as a distinct right under Articles 21 and 14. The Court observed that "without a clean environment which is stable and unimpacted by the vagaries of climate change, the right to life is not fully realised".

In conclusion, the Indian legal framework, driven by judicial activism, has firmly established that environmental protection is not merely a policy goal but an inalienable human right, intrinsically linked to the right to a dignified life.

Answer to Question 10 (Short Notes)

(a) State Human Rights Commissions

A State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) is a statutory body constituted in a state under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, to safeguard and promote human rights at the state level.²⁷ Currently, 26 states in India have established an SHRC.²⁷

Jurisdiction: An SHRC can inquire into violations of human rights only in respect of matters enumerated in the State List (List-II) and the Concurrent List (List-III) of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.²⁷
Composition and Appointment: The SHRC is a multi-member body consisting of a chairperson and other members. The chairperson should be a retired Chief Justice or a Judge of a High Court.²⁹ The members are appointed by the Governor on the recommendation of a committee comprising the Chief Minister (as chairperson), the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, the State Home Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly.²⁹
Term and Removal: The chairperson and members hold office for a term of three years or until they attain the age of 70, whichever is earlier.²⁷ Although appointed by the Governor, they can only be removed by the President of India.²⁷
Functions and Powers: The functions of the SHRC largely mirror those of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) at the state level. These include inquiring into complaints of human rights violations, visiting jails and detention centers, reviewing legal safeguards, and promoting human rights literacy.²⁷ While conducting inquiries, it has the powers of a civil court.²⁹ However, like the NHRC, its recommendations are advisory in nature and not binding on the state government.²⁹

(c) Right to Privacy as a Human Right

The right to privacy is a fundamental human right that protects an individual's autonomy, dignity, and personal space from arbitrary intrusion by the state or private actors. In India, after decades of judicial evolution, this right was unequivocally recognized as a fundamental right by the Supreme Court.

Constitutional Basis: While the Constitution of India does not explicitly mention a "right to privacy," it has been interpreted by the judiciary as an intrinsic part of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21 and as a component of the freedoms guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution.³⁰
Judicial Evolution: The journey of this right began with early cases like Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, where the Court was hesitant to recognize a distinct right to privacy.³⁰ The turning point was the landmark judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017).³⁰
The Puttaswamy Judgment: A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court unanimously held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right, inherent to human dignity.³¹ The Court overruled its earlier restrictive judgments and declared that privacy is an essential facet of a meaningful life.³⁰ The judgment affirmed that privacy includes various aspects, such as bodily integrity, informational privacy, and decisional autonomy.³¹
The Three-Fold Test: The Court also laid down a three-step test for any state action that infringes upon the right to privacy. The intrusion must:
1. Have a basis in law (legality).
2. Pursue a legitimate state aim.
3. Be proportionate to the objective it seeks to achieve (proportionality).³⁰

This judgment has become the cornerstone of privacy jurisprudence in India, safeguarding individual autonomy in an increasingly digital age and cementing the right to privacy as a fundamental human right.

References

The UDHR and The Indian Constitution A Comparison. (n.d.). Scribd.
Analysis and Comparative Aspects of Human Rights and Fundamental Rights Violations in India. (n.d.). Lawful Legal.
Human Rights. (n.d.). Directorate of Training, Union Territories Civil Services.
Human Rights Norms Reflected in the Constitution of India. (2024). Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, IV(II).
The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993. (n.d.). Puducherry Police.
Human Rights in India. (n.d.). MLS.
A Comparative Study of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (n.d.). SciSpace.
Protection of Fundamental Rights: A Comparative Analysis. (n.d.). IJALR.
Would the Optional Protocol Effectuate India’s Due Diligence Obligation under the Women’s Convention? (2021). Asian Journal of International Law. Cambridge University Press.
How are human rights defined in the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993. (n.d.). National Human Rights Commission India.
¹⁷ The Expanding Horizons of Article 21: A Study in Judicial Creativity. (2025). The Lawway with Lawyers Journal, 21(21).
Natural Rights – Human Rights and Fundamental Rights – A Conceptual Framework. (2018). Pen Acclaims.
A Breath of Fresh Air: Indian Supreme Court Declares Protection from Climate Change a Fundamental Right. (2025). Health and Human Rights Journal.
The Validity of Reservations and Declarations to CEDAW: The Indian Experience. (n.d.). IWRAW Asia Pacific.
All you need to know about Child Rights in India. (2017). iPleaders.
5 Most Important Differences Between ICCPR and ICESCR. (n.d.). Scribd.
³³ Sem 8, Syllabus & Question Paper.pdf. (n.d.).
How are human rights defined in the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. (n.d.). National Human Rights Commission, India.
What is Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and What is Its Importance? (2025). ClearTax.
CEDAW The Reservations And Optional Protocol. (n.d.). National Commission for Women.
CEDAW and India: Inscribing rights of gender and sexual minorities. (2019). Heinrich Böll Stiftung.
The Evolution Of Article 21 As An Umbrella Provision In The Constitution Of India. (2024). Lawful Legal.
Section 2(1)(d) in The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. (n.d.). Indian Kanoon.
The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. (n.d.). Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.
Maneka Gandhi Vs UOI: A Blueprint for Article 21. (2025). International Journal of Law Management & Humanities, 8(3).
The Right to Live In Healthy and Pollution Free Environment: A Perspective on Indian Constitution. (2024). International Journal of Humanities & Social Science Studies.
India’s Compliance with International Law on Gender Equality. (n.d.). Ignited.
Comparative Study of Universal Declaration Human Rights and Fundamental Rights of Indian Constitution. (2016). Global Journal For Research Analysis, V(IV).
Country-Specific Declarations and Reservations to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). (n.d.). In Human Rights under State-Enforced Religious Family Laws in Israel, Egypt and India. Cambridge University Press.
The Validity of Reservations and Declarations to CEDAW: The Indian Experience. (n.d.). IWRAW Asia Pacific.
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (n.d.). Wikipedia.
Public interest litigation in India. (n.d.). Wikipedia.
India’s Implementation of International Human Rights Instruments: Achievements and Challenges. (n.d.). WhiteBlackLegal.
¹² India: Domestic Report. (n.d.). In The Global Implementation of Human Rights Treaties: Law and Practice. Brill.
Evolution of Human Rights in Indian Scenario. (2017). IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 22(6).
Human Rights in India: A Constitutional Perspective. (n.d.). Vidhyayana.
²² Human Rights of Dalits in India: A Critical Analysis. (2024). International Journal of Contemporary Research in Multidisciplinary, 3(6).
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. (n.d.). United Nations.
Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). (n.d.). Permanent Mission of India to UN.
Examining the Effectiveness of the Women’s Convention in Canada and India. (n.d.). Cleveland State Law Review.
International Human Rights Law Continued. (n.d.). United for Human Rights.
Research proposal on enhancing the justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights. (n.d.). OHCHR.
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Powers and Functions. (2025). Vajiram & Ravi.
India’s Declaration to CEDAW: A Critical Analysis. (n.d.). Journal of the Indian Law Institute.
Human Rights Explained: The International Bill of Rights. (n.d.). Australian Human Rights Commission.
Human Rights Courts in India. (2024). LawCrust Legal Services.
The International Bill of Rights. (n.d.). Australian Human Rights Commission.
Article 21 in Constitution of India. (n.d.). Indian Kanoon.
Justiciability of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. (2013). University of Denver.
History of the Declaration. (n.d.). United Nations.
Human Rights Courts in India. (2024). LawCrust Legal Services.
Human Rights evolution, a brief history. (n.d.). CoESPU.
Models of Incorporation and Justiciability for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (2018). Scottish Human Rights Commission.
The Role of the Supreme Court in Protective Discrimination Under the Indian Constitution. (2025). International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research.
²⁷ State Human Rights Commission. (n.d.). Testbook.
²⁸ Powers of Commission. (n.d.). Kerala State Human Rights Commission.
²⁹ State Human Right Commission. (n.d.). Unacademy.
³⁰ The Right to Privacy in India: Constitutional Provisions, Judicial Evolution, and Future Challenges. (n.d.). IP and Legal Filings.
³¹ Right to Privacy in India: A Human Rights Perspective. (n.d.). Legal Research and Analysis.
³² Puttaswamy v Union of India: Fundamental Right to Privacy Case Background. (n.d.). Supreme Court Observer.
³⁴ Article 19 in Constitution of India. (n.d.). Indian Kanoon.
³⁵ Freedom of expression in India. (n.d.). Wikipedia.
³⁶ Article 19: Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of Speech, etc. (n.d.). Constitution of India.
³⁷ Freedom of Speech and Expression. (n.d.). BYJU'S.
²⁴ Public Interest Litigation in India: Empowering the Voiceless. (2024). Edzorblaw.
²⁵ 5 Landmark Cases of Public Interest Litigation. (2020). Knowledge Steez.
²³ Public Interest Litigation in India. (n.d.). The Legal School.
²⁶ Intersection between Human Rights and Environmental Law: The Scenario in India. (n.d.). International Journal of Law Management & Humanities.
³⁸ The Human Right to Environment in India: A Critical Appraisal. (2000). Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law.
³⁹ Environmental Procedural Rights in India: A Doctrinal Analysis. (2024). Cogent Social Sciences.
²⁰ India's Compliance with International Frameworks on Workplace Sexual Violence. (2025). IMPRI.
⁴⁰ Evaluating CEDAW Implementation in India. (n.d.). Advocate Tanwar & Associates.
²² CEDAW and Political Empowerment of Women in India: An Analysis of Women Reservation Act 2023. (2023). International Journal of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Science.
¹⁹ What is the right to live with dignity? (n.d.). BYJU'S.
¹⁸ Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India: Expands the Interpretation of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21. (n.d.). Lawful Legal.
¹⁷ The Expanding Horizons of Article 21: A Study in Judicial Creativity. (2025). The Lawway with Lawyers Journal.
¹⁶ Child Mental Health and the Law in India: A Narrative Review. (n.d.). PMC.
¹⁵ Convention on the Rights of the Child. (n.d.). Wikipedia.
⁴¹ India's (Non)Compliance with International Law on Children's Rights in Conflict Zones. (n.d.). Minnesota Journal of International Law.
¹⁴ NHRC and Associated Challenges. (n.d.). Drishti IAS.
¹³ National Human Rights Commission. (n.d.). BYJU'S.
¹³ National Human Rights Commission. (n.d.). BYJU'S.
¹² Enforceability of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. (n.d.). O'Neill Institute.
¹⁰ An Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (2007). Chatham House.
¹¹ International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (n.d.). Wikipedia.
⁷ India: Domestic Report. (n.d.). In The Global Implementation of Human Rights Treaties: Law and Practice. Brill.
²¹ India’s Implementation of International Human Rights Instruments: Achievements and Challenges. (n.d.). WhiteBlackLegal.
⁸ India: Domestic Report. (n.d.). In The Global Implementation of Human Rights Treaties: Law and Practice. Brill.
⁴ Evolution of Human Rights in Indian Scenario. (2017). IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 22(6).
⁶ Human Rights in India: A Constitutional Perspective. (n.d.). Vidhyayana.
⁵ Human Rights of Dalits in India: A Critical Analysis. (2024). International Journal of Contemporary Research in Multidisciplinary, 3(6).
⁹ HUMAN RIGHTS: National- International Perspectives. (2023). AG Publishing House.
⁴² India 2024. (n.d.). Amnesty International.
⁴³ Dialogue with India: Experts of the Human Rights Committee Commend Legislation. (2024). OHCHR.

Feature	International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)	International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
Nature of Rights	Protects "first-generation" rights, which are civil and political in nature.³⁷ These include the right to life, freedom from torture, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to a fair trial, and the right to vote.³⁵	Protects "second-generation" rights, which are economic, social, and cultural.³⁷ These include the right to work, the right to social security, the right to an adequate standard of living (food, housing), the right to health, and the right to education.³⁵
Nature of State Obligation	Imposes primarily "negative" obligations, requiring the state to refrain from interfering with individual freedoms.³⁷ The obligation is of immediate effect; states must respect and ensure these rights without delay.³⁸	Imposes primarily "positive" obligations, requiring the state to take active steps and allocate resources to fulfill these rights.³⁷ The obligation is of "progressive realization", meaning states must take steps "to the maximum of their available resources" to achieve the full realization of these rights over time.⁴⁰
Justiciability and Enforcement	Rights are generally considered directly justiciable, meaning they can be readily enforced by courts.³⁷ An individual complaints mechanism (via the First Optional Protocol) was established alongside the Covenant, allowing the Human Rights Committee to hear individual complaints.³⁵	Rights were traditionally considered non-justiciable and aspirational, with monitoring limited to a system of state reporting.³⁷ An Optional Protocol allowing for individual complaints was only adopted in 2008 and has been ratified by far fewer states, reflecting the ongoing debate about the justiciability of these rights.³⁸
Analogy in Indian Constitution	The rights in the ICCPR are analogous to the Fundamental Rights (Part III) of the Indian Constitution, which are legally enforceable in courts.³⁷	The rights in the ICESCR are analogous to the Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV) of the Indian Constitution, which are fundamental in the governance of the country but are not enforceable by any court.³⁷

Human Right in UDHR	Corresponding Fundamental Right in Indian Constitution
Equality before the law (Article 7)	Article 14: Equality before law and equal protection of the laws.⁴⁷
Prohibition of discrimination (Article 2, 7)	Article 15: Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.⁴⁸
Right to life, liberty, and security of person (Article 3)	Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty.⁴⁸
Freedom from slavery and forced labour (Article 4)	Article 23: Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour.⁴⁸
Freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman treatment (Article 5)	Interpreted as part of Article 21 by the judiciary.
Freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention (Article 9)	Article 22: Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases.⁴⁸
Freedom of speech and expression (Article 19)	Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression.⁴⁷
Freedom of peaceful assembly (Article 20)	Article 19(1)(b): Right to assemble peaceably and without arms.⁴⁷
Right to constitutional remedy (Article 8)	Article 32: Right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Ticker

Suggestions Paper 1 ~ Human Rights Law and Practice

Calcutta University

Proposed Question Paper

8th Semester Examination, 2025

Paper 1 ~ Human Rights Law and Practice (2025)

Of course. Here is a model answer paper for the questions provided.

Model Answer Paper: Human Rights Law and Practice (2025-26)

Paper 1 ~ Human Rights Law and Practice

Model Answer Paper: Human Rights Law and Practice (2025-26)

References

Posted by S.Basak

Post a Comment

0 Comments

Subscribe Us

Most Popular

Ancient Olympic and modern Olympic

CBSE PHYSICAL EDUCATION 300 MCQ FROM UNIT I,II,III

UNIT-I Changing Trends and Careers in Physical Education CBSE 11

Facebook

Tags

Categories

Report Abuse

Search This Blog

Random Posts

Various committees involved in sports events management and their responsibilities before, during, and after the event.

CBSE CLASS 12 PHYSICAL EDUCATION QUESTION PAPER WITH ANSWER

Functions of Sports Events Management: Planning, Organising, Staffing, Directing & Controlling

Popular Posts

Ancient Olympic and modern Olympic

UNIT-I Changing Trends and Careers in Physical Education CBSE 11

CBSE PHYSICAL EDUCATION 300 MCQ FROM UNIT I,II,III

Footer Menu Widget

Contact form

Ticker

Ad Code

Suggestions Paper 1 ~ Human Rights Law and Practice

Calcutta University

Proposed Question Paper

8th Semester Examination, 2025

Paper 1 ~ Human Rights Law and Practice (2025)

Of course. Here is a model answer paper for the questions provided.

Model Answer Paper: Human Rights Law and Practice (2025-26)

Paper 1 ~ Human Rights Law and Practice

Model Answer Paper: Human Rights Law and Practice (2025-26)

References

Posted by S.Basak

You may like these posts

Post a Comment

0 Comments

Social Plugin

Subscribe Us

Most Popular

Facebook

Tags

Categories

Search This Blog

Random Posts

Popular Posts

Footer Menu Widget

Contact form