The Role of Judiciary in Upholding Human Rights

The judiciary plays a vital role in protecting human rights by upholding constitutional principles and ensuring justice for all citizens. In India, the Supreme Court and High Courts act as guardians of fundamental rights, safeguarding individual freedoms and addressing human rights abuses. Judicial independence is critical to enforcing human rights, providing legal remedies for violations, and protecting minority rights. Through landmark judgments and proactive interventions, the judiciary has reinforced its commitment to equality, dignity, and justice in a democratic society.

Human rights encompass inherent freedoms such as life, liberty, and equality. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution has been interpreted expansively by the judiciary to include rights to dignity, nutrition, shelter, and even humane dying conditions for terminally ill patients.
The judiciary has played a transformative role in expanding the scope of human rights. Rights to privacy, legal aid, speedy trials, and protection from torture fall under the ambit of Article 21. The judiciary’s intervention has also advanced gender equality, as seen in reforms to inheritance laws and protections against workplace harassment.

The Rule of Law: A Pillar of Democracy

The rule of law is the bedrock of a just society, ensuring governance by laws rather than arbitrary decisions. It embodies equality, justice, and dignity, as reflected in India’s Constitution through Articles 14, 19, 20, 21, and 265. Judicial review is a key mechanism through which courts uphold this principle, striking down unconstitutional legislative or executive actions. Landmark cases like Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala and I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu have cemented the rule of law as part of the Constitution’s basic structure.

Separation of powers further strengthens this framework, with the judiciary acting as a check on the legislature and executive. Public Interest Litigations (PILs) and the concept of “continuing mandamus” have emerged as tools to enforce accountability, particularly in cases of governance failures.

Interconnection Between Rule of Law and Human Rights

The rule of law and human rights are deeply interconnected. A robust legal framework ensures that human dignity is preserved and arbitrary governance is prevented. Judicial independence and impartiality are indispensable in upholding these principles, striking a balance between individual rights and public welfare.

Key Roles and Responsibilities

1. Enforcement of Fundamental Rights:
   The Constitution of India, under Articles 32 and 226, empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights. This mechanism is pivotal in ensuring that individuals can approach the courts directly when their rights are violated.
2. Judicial Activism and Interpretation:
   Through judicial activism, the judiciary has broadened the interpretation of fundamental rights. For instance, in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life) to include the right to live with human dignity. This case marked a significant shift in the protection of human rights, where the judiciary recognized rights not explicitly stated in the Constitution but inherent to human dignity.
3. Public Interest Litigation (PIL):
   The judiciary has also relaxed the rule of locus standi, allowing any public-spirited person to file a PIL on behalf of those who are unable to approach the court due to economic or social disabilities. This has been instrumental in protecting the rights of marginalized and vulnerable groups. The case of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1982) exemplifies this, where the Supreme Court allowed a broader scope for PILs, enabling greater access to justice.
4. Protection of Vulnerable Sections:
   The judiciary has been particularly vigilant in protecting the rights of vulnerable sections such as children, women, and socially and economically weaker groups. For example, in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the Supreme Court laid down guidelines to protect women from sexual harassment at the workplace, demonstrating its proactive role in safeguarding women’s rights.
5. Judicial Oversight in Human Rights Violations:
   The courts have often intervened in cases of human rights violations, ensuring that state actions are in line with constitutional mandates. The landmark case D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997), where the Supreme Court issued guidelines to prevent custodial violence, underscores the judiciary’s role in upholding human dignity even within the confines of state authority.
6. Compensation and Accountability:
   The judiciary has awarded compensation for violations of fundamental rights, particularly in cases of custodial torture or deaths. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) complements judicial efforts by addressing systemic violations and ensuring accountability.

Relevant Legislations and Bodies

1. Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993:
   This Act provides the framework for the protection of human rights in India, establishing the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and State Human Rights Commissions (SHRCs). These bodies are empowered to investigate complaints of human rights violations and recommend actions.
2. National and State Human Rights Commissions:
   The NHRC and SHRCs play a pivotal role in addressing human rights violations. They can inquire into cases, visit detention facilities, and promote human rights literacy. For instance, the NHRC took suo motu cognizance of the Gujarat communal riots in 2002, highlighting its role in addressing large-scale human rights abuses.

Landmark Cases

• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Expanded the scope of Article 21 to include the right to live with dignity.
• Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): Established guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at the workplace.
• D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997): Issued guidelines to prevent custodial violence.
• S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1982): Broadened the scope of PILs, enhancing access to justice for marginalized groups.

Challenges to the Rule of Law and Human Rights Protection

1. Judicial Delays and Pendency:
   With over 3 crore pending cases, delays in justice delivery undermine both the rule of law and human rights. Limited judicial appointments and inadequate infrastructure exacerbate the problem.
2. Threats from Terrorism and Globalization:
   Terrorism tests the judiciary’s ability to balance national security with human rights, while globalization raises concerns over labor rights and socio-economic justice in the activities of multinational corporations.
3. Corruption and Transparency Issues:
   Corruption within the judiciary and lack of transparency in processes erode public trust, weakening its role as a protector of rights.

Judicial Innovations and Reforms

1. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR):
Mechanisms like mediation, arbitration, and Lok Adalats reduce the judicial burden while ensuring timely resolution of disputes. The AFCONS Infrastructure v. Cherian Varkey Construction case highlighted the importance of ADR in enhancing access to justice.

2. Digitization:
The e-courts initiative streamlines case management, enabling online filing and real-time access to judgments. This reform makes justice more accessible, particularly in remote areas.

3. Judicial Accountability:
Balancing independence with accountability is critical for maintaining public trust. Transparent processes and ethical conduct are essential for the judiciary’s credibility.

4. Human Rights Courts and Speedy Trials:
Judicial recommendations emphasize the need for specialized human rights courts and expedited trials, particularly for vulnerable groups.

Conclusion

The judiciary’s role in human rights protection is indispensable for ensuring justice, equality, and accountability. By interpreting fundamental rights expansively and addressing human rights abuses, the courts continue to uphold the Constitution’s ideals. Judicial independence and timely enforcement of legal remedies remain essential for safeguarding human rights, especially for marginalized and minority communities. Through its constitutional mandate, the judiciary ensures that human dignity and freedoms are preserved for all.

Related Posts-

1. The Role of High Courts in the Indian Judicial System
2. Understanding the Basic Structure Doctrine: A Guide for Judiciary Aspirants
3. Principles of Fair Trial in Criminal Law

---

Frequently Asked Questions