Criticism of Fundamental Rights

The fundamental rights are recognized by the Supreme Court of India and they are guaranteed by the same body to protect the country’s citizens. However, even though the idea of the existence of these fundamental rights seems very positive and beneficial for the general public, it also consists of a lot of flaws and thus can be criticized heavily too.

Fundamental Rights

These rights are extremely important for the intellectual and moral development of each and every individual. The list of fundamental rights of each and every Indian are as follows:

1. Right to Equality- All individuals must have the same opportunities and be treated equally.
2. Right to Freedom- The right to freedom represents the right to freedom regarding a lot of things. Among them, some of the most recognized and important tones are freedom of speech and expression, freedom to go anywhere within the territory of the country, freedom to carry out any profession or business which is legal, freedom to form any kind of association or groups, freedom to have peaceful assembly without arms, etc.
3. Right against Exploitation- It is a punishable offense to traffic beggars or any other human being. This right protects a person from any form of forced labor.
4. Right to Freedom of Religion- Every individual has the right to propagate, practice, and profess their religion and every individual must be treated equally despite their different religious backgrounds.
5. Cultural and Educational Rights- People have been given the right to develop and conserve all and any language and culture. Educational institutions can be established by them and administered to protect their language.
6. Right to Constitutional remedies- According to Article 32, a guaranteed remedy will be provided as a fundamental right itself.

Criticism and Evaluation

There are a lot of areas in the fundamental rights of India that lack in terms of conviction, real-life importance, recognition, or actual impact of any significant proportions in the country. They are as follows:

1. The existence of many limitations- There are so many limitations on each of the fundamental rights. Limitations are so excessive and confusing to such an extent that even the positivity of the right starts to seem negative because of so many pre-conditions instilled in it to exercise the rights. Many critics claim that the Constitution grants the people with these rights with one hand and that same Constitution takes them away from people with their other hand.
2. Non-existence of social and economic rights- The fundamental rights heavily focus on political rights and there are very few provisions made on social and economic rights such as the right to work, right to leisure, right to employment, right to social security, etc. Thus, this area of fundamental rights is also very much criticised.
3. Lack of clarity- There is a huge lack of clarity in these fundamental rights. Most of the rights are difficult to figure out what are the boundaries of these laws and what a person exactly can and cannot do. The rights are stated in a very indefinite, vague, and very ambiguous form. Thus, most of them are not clearly defined, to say the least.
4. Suspension during an emergency- The efficacy of the fundamental rights takes a major hit when people learn the fact that during times of national emergency (excluding Articles 20 and 21), the fundamental rights are removed until any further notice. This puts the interest and rights of the common people in absolute jeopardy.

Conclusion

The fundamental rights are recognized by the Supreme Court of India and they are guaranteed by the same body to protect the country’s citizens. With or without its weak points, they are extremely important for each individual of the country. People are given a sense of power and authority in the form of these rights. The citizens are given all the right examples in the form of these fundamental rights to do what is best for themselves and the betterment of society in general.