At 75, constitutional justice and personal liberty

At 75, constitutional justice and personal liberty

Sub : Polity

Sec: Constitution

Introduction

• As India marks 75 years of its Constitution, it is imperative to critically examine the ethical and moral dimensions of its core values including liberty.

Liberty and the Constitution

• The Preamble of the Indian Constitution guarantees liberty to all citizens, which includes freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship
• Article 19 guarantees the freedom of opinion and speech, whereas Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.

Historical Context: Dissent and Personal Liberty

• A.K. Gopalan Case (1950): The preventive detention of A.K. Gopalan and the majority judgment of the Supreme Court in this case revealed early constitutional contradictions.
  • The Supreme Court interpreted “personal liberty” narrowly, confining it to “liberty of the body” or freedom from arrest and detention.
  • It held that the term “law” under Article 21 referred only to state-made law, endorsing a limited view of personal liberty.
• Puttaswamy Case (2017): The judgment reinstated Justice Fazl Ali’s dissent, emphasizing personal liberty and privacy as central to constitutional ethics.
  • The court ruled that privacy is a fundamental right that protects a person’s ability to make personal choices and control their life
  • The court ruled that privacy is an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty
• The journey from Gopalan’s detention to Puttaswamy’s privacy right underscores a growing acknowledgment of flaws in past judicial interpretations.

Current Challenges to Personal Liberty

• Proliferation of preventive detention laws, arbitrary arrests, and prolonged custody without trial, especially under anti-terror laws, erodes personal liberty.
• Examples include the Bhima Koregaon case and the anti-CAA protests, where dissenters face indefinite incarceration and systemic suppression.

Judicial Responsibility

• Courts must adopt creative constitutionalism to uphold personal liberty and justice.
• Interventions are needed to address:
  • The lack of urgency in releasing political prisoners.
  • The misuse of colonial-era laws in modern contexts.
• Upholding the Puttaswamy precedent requires embedding dissent and dignity as fundamental constitutional values.

Other Significant Supreme Court Judgments on Liberty in India

• R.C. Cooper v. Union of India (1970)
  • Overturned the narrow interpretation of personal liberty in the Gopalan case.
  • Expanded the scope of personal liberty to include the six fundamental freedoms under Article 19(1).
•  Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1963)
  • Broadened the understanding of personal liberty to encompass rights under Article 19(1).
  • The court acknowledged that personal liberty is not confined to physical detention but extends to the full spectrum of fundamental rights.
• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
  • Redefined Article 21 to ensure that the right to life and personal liberty includes the right to live with dignity.
  • The court established that any “procedure established by law” under Article 21 must be fair, just, and reasonable, not arbitrary or oppressive.
•  Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)
  • Recognized the right to livelihood as an integral part of the right to life under Article 21.
  • The court ruled that evicting pavement dwellers without providing alternative arrangements would violate their right to life and personal liberty.