Advertisement

An activist working among the poor says that the poor don't need Fundamental Rights. What they need are Directive Principles to be made legally binding. Do you agree with this? Give your reasons.


The most immediate requirement of the poor people are fooding, clothing and shelter. The activist is partly correct in saying that the poor don't need Fundamental Rights.

Reasons:  Directive Principles contain several non-justiciable rights like the Right to Adequate Livelihood. Equal Pay for equal work (for men and women), rights against Economic Exploitation which if made justiciable can help in improving the economic conditions of the poor. Recently Right to work has been partly made justiciable. In rural areas which is bound to have positive effects on the conditions of the poor. However the fundamental rights are important which guarantees the right to life, right to employment and right against exploitation.
345 Views

Advertisement
Which of the following is a violation of Fundamental Rights and why?
(a) Not paying minimum wages.
(b) Banning of a book.
(c) Banning of a loudspeakers after 9 pm.
(d) Making a speech.



A petition by a human rights group drew attention of the court to the condition of starvation and hunger in the country. Over five crore tonnes of food grains was stored in the godowns of the Food Corporation of India. Research shows that a large number of ration cardholders do not know about the quantity of food grains they can purchase from fair price shops. It requested the court to order the government to improve its public distribution system.
a. Which different rights does this case involve? How are these rights interlinked?
b. Should these rights form part of the right to life?


Which of the Fundamental Rights is in your opinion the most important right? Summarise its provisions and give arguments to show why it is most important? 

Read the statement by Somnath Lahiri in the Constituent Assembly quoted in this chapter.

Somnath Lahiri's statement in the Constituent Assembly 'I feel that many of these fundamental rights have been framed from the point of view of a police constable....you will find that very minimum rights have been conceded and are almost invariably followed by a provision which takes away the right almost completely. What should be our conception of fundamental rights?.....we want to incorporate every one of these rights which our people want to get'.

Do you agree with him? If yes, give instances to prove it. If not, give arguments against this position.

First 0 1 2 Last
Advertisement