Nexus between Human rights and Fundamental Rights

The Indian Perspective on Human Rights

Human Rights in Ancient Times

The concept of human right is not from western region. It is the crystallization of the values
which are common for all the mankind. The United Declaration of Human Rights (1948) did
not come from the leaved suddenly but its a milestone on the path on which the concept of
human right is already travelling for centuries. In fact, the language of human right is the
product of European countries but the concept of human rights is as old as the Indian culture.
The humans expressed their concern towards human rights and fundamental freedom for all
since the Vedic age.

In ancient India, the trace of the concept of human rights can be paved back from the Vedas
period of the fifteen century B.C. There are wide range of stories, pronouncements found
which showed the way to the concept of human rights. In Vedas, human right is signified
with the concept of equality. The Charter of equality of all as defined in the Vedas in the
following words-No one is superior inferior all should strive for the interest of all and should
progress collectively. Kautilya beautifully sum up the concept of welfare state by saying that
the happiness of the state lies in the happiness of his subjects. Under the period, the civil and
legal rights first formulated by Manu but also added a number of economic rights. From the
fact and stories, it is truly revealed that the society under vedic period was well stimulated
and organized and committed towards human right. In fact, the importance of human rights
were well supported by Jainism, Buddhism and other minority religious group. No discussion
of human rights and their roots in the ancient period is left without giving the reference of
Ashoka. Ashoka inscribes, “All men are my children and just desire for my children that they
may enjoy every kind of prosperity and happiness with in this world and in the next, as also
as I desire the same for all men”. In fact, the king Ashoka worked day and night for the
protection of human rights. It’s unfortunate that the decline of human rights were witnessed
with the decline of Mauryan Empire.

As medieval period signifies the Muslim era in India. In the pre-mughal period the series of
1

social, cultural, political and religious rights were existed but with the advent of Mughal, the
Page

Hindus were stressed badly. The concept of human rights got lost in the dark. But with the
©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017
entry of Akbar’s (1526-1605) period , once again great regard given to the social, religious
and political rights. In his religious policy, Din-E-Ilahi (divinereligion), he tried to preach the
idea of secularism and religious tolerance. Similarly, Various religious movements like
Bhakti (Hindu) and Sufi (Islamic) made remarkable contribution to the emergence of human
rights which at times suppressed by the other Mughal Empires like Aurangzeb, Babar,
Humayun etc.

Human Rights in Modern India

This period starts from the advent of British empire. The process of Indian administration
started by the Britishers with the introduction of Regulating Act of 1773. Under it, Indian
were suppressed by the British completely in context to social, economical, political &
religious rights in all the sphere of life. They were told that they did not deserve any rights.
Basic rights such as rights to life & livelihood, right to freedom, right to expression, right to
equality, right to preach etc were denied to them.In such a atmosphere, the Indian leaders &
people feel that their rights had been lost in the hands of the colonial rule, so they thought of
diverting back to fight for their rights. Perhaps the first explicit demand for fundamentals
rights appeared in the Constitution of India Bill 1895. The Bill guaranted every Indian the
right to expression, right to equality before law, right to property, right to personal liberty,
right to education etc. A series of resolution were passed between 1917 & 1919 for
demanding civil rights & equality. Another major development was drafted by “Mrs. Besant
‘s Common wealth of 1925.” The Bill contained a list of seven fundamental rights –

(i) Liberty of person.

(ii) Freedom of conscience & free profession & practice of religion.

(iii) Free expression of opinion.

(iv) Free elementary education.

(v) Use of roads, public places, courts of justice & the like.

(vi) Equality before the Law, irrespective of consideration of nationality.

(vii)Equality of the sexes. The resolution was passed in 1927 which came into effect in May
1928, Motilal Nehru as its Chairman.
2
Page

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

It is known as Nehru Report which declared that its first concern of Indians was “to secure
the fundamental rights that had been denied to them.” Another achievement came in context
to fundamental right was the Karachi resolution adopted by the congress session held in
March 1931.The decade of 1940’s was generally marked by the emergence of fundamental
rights by the increased activities related to in by UN Assembly. The further stage of
development of fundamental rights in Indian context was the “Sapra Committee Report”
published at the end of 1945.So, after Independence, time to time various laws made,
suggestions came from the various committees to enlarge the concept of fundamental rights
by covering the entire human race. Human Rights Enshrined in Indian Constitution Human
Rights in the Indian Constitution can be found in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. In
addition to it, Part III- related to fundamental rights, Part IV-Directive Principles which
together form the core of the Constitution.

PREAMBLE:- It is the sort of introductory statement that gives the guiding purpose &
principle of the document. Preamble stated : WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly
resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST, SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC,
REPUBLIC & to secure to all its citizens – JUSTICE, social, economic & political LIBERTY
of thought, expression, belief, faith & worship. EQUALITY of status & of opportunity and to
promote among them all n FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual & the unity
& integrity of the Nation.

HUMAN RIGHTS

The term 'human rights' which is used since World War II, gained importance in
contemporary debates and became a universal phenomenon. After the adoption of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on December 10, 1948 by the United
Nations, it was seen by many as a sign of optimism for the better protection, promotion and
enforcement of human rights.

The UN defined human rights as those rights which are inherent in our state of nature and
without which we cannot live as human beings1. Human rights belong to every person and do
not depend on the specifics of the individual or the relationship between the right-holder and
3
Page

1
. Mishra, Pramod (2000) Human Rights Global Issues. Delhi: Kalpaz Publications, p. 4.

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

the right guarantor2. Human rights are the rights that everyone has equally by virtue of their
humanity. It is grounded in an appeal to our human nature. Christian Bay defined human
rights as any claims that ought to have legal and moral protection to make sure that basic
needs will be met.3 Human rights can be defined as those minimum rights which every
individual must have against the state or other public authority by virtue of his being a
member of the human family. Shree P. P. Rao said human rights are the inherent dignity and
inalienable rights of all members of the human family recognizing them as the foundation of
freedom, justice and peace in the world. For D. D. Raphael, human rights in a general sense
denote the rights of humans. However, in a more specific sense, human rights constitute those
rights which one has precisely because of being a human. 4

In the words of Michael Freeden, “a human right is a conceptual device, expressed in

linguistic form that assigns priority to certain human or social attributes regarded as essential
to the adequate functioning of a human being that is intended to serve as a protective capsule
for those attributes; and that appeals for a deliberate action to ensure such a protection.”5
These are essential for all the individuals, irrespective of their caste, creed, nationality, place
of birth, citizenship and any other status. All individuals enjoy same human rights, without
any discrimination. Human Rights are basic rights of the people that advocate fairness,
equality, freedom and respect for all. These are extremely important for the betterment of the
society, as it abolishes various practices like injustice, exploitation, discrimination and
inequality.

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

Fundamental Rights as the name suggests, are the basic rights of the citizens of a country that
are approved by the Supreme Court and recognized by the society. These are enshrined in the
constitution and they are enforceable in the court of law, in the sense that if there is any kind
of violation of the right the individual can go to the court for the protection of his/her right,
that is way they are known as fundamental rights.

2
. Coicaud, Jean Marc, Doyle, Micheal, W. and Marie, Anne (eds.) (2003) The Globalization of
Human Rights. New York: United Nations University Press, p. 25.
3
. Vincent, R. J. (1986) Human Rights and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. pp. 12-14.
4

4
. Rajawat, Mamta (2001) Burning Issues of Human Rights. Delhi: Kalpaz Publications, pp. 33-47.
Page

5
. Biswal, Tapan (2006) Human Rights Gender and Environment. New Delhi: Viva Books Private
Limited, p. 44.

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

Fundamental Rights applies to the all the people equally, regardless of their caste, religion,
gender, race, origin, etc. It ensures civil liberty, so that all the citizens of the country can lead
their life in the way they want.

The purpose of the Fundamental Rights is to preserve individual liberty and democratic
principles based on equality of all members of society. Dr. Ambedkar said that the
responsibility of the legislature is not just to provide fundamental rights but also and rather
more importantly, to safeguard them.

The fundamental rights Indian Citizens include the following:

• Right to freedom - The Right to Freedom is covered in Articles 19-22, with the view
of guaranteeing individual rights that were considered vital by the framers of the
Constitution, and these Articles also include certain restrictions that may be imposed
by the State on individual liberty under specified conditions. Article 19 guarantees six
freedoms in the nature of civil rights, which are available only to citizens of
India.6 These include the freedom of speech and expression, freedom of
assembly without arms, freedom of association, freedom of movement throughout the
territory of our country, freedom to reside and settle in any part of the country of India
and the freedom to practice any profession. All these freedoms are subject to
reasonable restrictions that may be imposed by the State, listed under Article 19 itself.
• Right to equality- The Right to Equality is one of the chief guarantees of the
Constitution. It is embodied in Articles 14–16, which collectively encompass the
general principles of equality before law and non-discrimination,7 and Articles 17–18
which collectively encompass further the philosophy of social equality. 8 Article 14
guarantees equality before law as well as equal protection of the law to all persons
within the territory of India.9 This includes the equal subjection of all persons to the
authority of law, as well as equal treatment of persons in similar circumstances. 10
• Right to freedom of religion- The Right to Freedom of Religion, covered in Articles
25–28, provides religious freedom to all citizens and ensures a secular state in India.
According to the Constitution, there is no official State religion, and the State is

6
. 6. Basu 2003, pp. 167–168 & "Right To Freedom". GKBASIC. Retrieved 2012-11-24.
7
. Basu 1993, pp. 96–97
5

8
.Basu 1993, p. 90
Page

9
. Basu 1993, pp. 93–94
10
. Basu 2003, pp. 56–57

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

 required to treat all religions impartially and neutrally. Article 25 guarantees all
persons the freedom of conscience and the right to preach, practice and propagate any
religion of their choice. This right is, however, subject to public order, morality and
health, and the power of the State to take measures for social welfare and reform.
The right to propagate, however, does not include the right to convert another
individual, since it would amount to an infringement of the other's right to freedom of
conscience. Article 26 guarantees all religious denominations and sects, subject to
public order, morality and health, to manage their own affairs in matters of religion,
set up institutions of their own for charitable or religious purposes, and own, acquire
and manage property in accordance with law.
• Right to constitutional remedies - The Right to Constitutional Remedies empowers
citizens to approach the Supreme Court of India to seek enforcement, or protection
against infringement, of their Fundamental Rights.11 Article 32 provides a guaranteed
remedy, in the form of a Fundamental Right itself, for enforcement of all the other
Fundamental Rights, and the Supreme Court is designated as the protector of these
rights by the Constitution.12 The Supreme Court has been empowered to issue writs,
namely habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari and quo warranto, for the
enforcement of the Fundamental Rights, while the High Courts have been empowered
under Article 226 – which is not a Fundamental Right in itself – to issue
these prerogative writs even in cases not involving the violation of Fundamental
Rights.13 The Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to enforce the Fundamental Rights
even against private bodies, and in case of any violation, award compensation as well
to the affected individual. Exercise of jurisdiction by the Supreme Court can also
be suo motu or on the basis of a public interest litigation.14 This right cannot be
suspended, except under the provisions of Article 359 when a state of emergency is
declared.15
• Cultural and Educational rights - The Cultural and Educational rights, given in Articles
29 and 30, are measures to protect the rights of cultural, linguistic and religious
minorities, by enabling them to conserve their heritage and protecting them against

11
. Basu 1993, p. 122
12
.Basu 1993, p. 123
13
6

. Basu 1993, p. 137

Page

14
.Austin 1999, p. 75
15
. Basu 1993, pp. 140–142

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

 discrimination.16 Article 29 grants any section of citizens having a distinct language,
script culture of its own, the right to conserve and develop the same, and thus
safeguards the rights of minorities by preventing the State from imposing any external
culture on them.17 It also prohibits discrimination against any citizen for admission
into any educational institutions maintained or aided by the State, on the grounds only
of religion, race, caste, language or any of them. However, this is subject
to reservation of a reasonable number of seats by the State for socially and
educationally backward classes, as well as reservation of up to 50 percent of seats in
any educational institution run by a minority community for citizens belonging to that
community.18
• Right against exploitation- The Right against Exploitation, contained in Articles 23–
24, lays down certain provisions to prevent exploitation of the weaker sections of the
society by individuals or the State.19Article 23 prohibits human trafficking, making it
an offence punishable by law, and also prohibits forced labour or any act of
compelling a person to work without wages where he was legally entitled not to work
or to receive remuneration for it. However, it permits the State to impose compulsory
service for public purposes, including conscription and community service.20 The
Bonded Labour system (Abolition) Act, 1976, has been enacted by Parliament to give
effect to this Article.21 Article 24 prohibits the employment of children below the age
of 14 years in factories, mines and other hazardous jobs. Parliament has enacted the
Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, providing regulations for the
abolition of, and penalties for employing, child labour, as well as provisions for
rehabilitation of former child labourers.22
• Right to Privacy - The right to privacy is an element of various legal traditions to
restrain government and private actions that threaten the privacy of individuals. Over
150 national constitutions mention the right to privacy. Since the global surveillance
disclosures of 2013, initiated by ex-NSA employee Edward Snowden, the inalienable
human right to privacy has been a subject of international debate. In combating
worldwide terrorism, government agencies, such as the NSA, CIA, R&AW,

16
.. Basu 1993, pp. 110–111
17
.23. Basu 2003, p. 325
18
.24. Basu 2003, p. 326
19
.26. Basu 2003, p. 345
7

20
.27.Basu 1993, p. 115
Page

21
.28.Basu 2003, pp. 346–347
22
. Basu 2003, pp. 348–349

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

 and GCHQ have engaged in mass, global surveillance, perhaps undermining the right
to privacy. There is now a question as to whether the right to privacy can co-exist
with the current capabilities of intelligence agencies to access and analyse virtually
every detail of an individual's life. A major question is whether or not the right to
privacy needs to be forfeited as part of the social contract to bolster defense against
supposed terrorist threats.

The Fundamental Rights are not absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions as
necessary for the protection of public interest. In the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of
Kerala case in 1973, the Supreme Court, overruling a previous decision of 1967, held that the
Fundamental Rights could be amended, subject to judicial review in case such an amendment
violated the basic structure of the Constitution. The Fundamental Rights can be enhanced,
removed or otherwise altered through a constitutional amendment, passed by a two-thirds
majority of each House of Parliament. The imposition of a state of emergency may lead to a
temporary suspension any of the Fundamental Rights, excluding Articles 20 and 21, by order
of the President. The President may, by order, suspend the right to constitutional remedies as
well, thereby barring citizens from approaching the Supreme Court for the enforcement of
any of the Fundamental Rights, except Articles 20 and 21, during the period of the
emergency. Parliament may also restrict the application of the Fundamental Rights to
members of the Indian Armed Forces and the police, in order to ensure proper discharge of
duties and maintenance of discipline, by a law made by Article33.

8
Page

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

 Right to Privacy as Human right to Fundamental Right

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

To understand the evaluation of fundamental rights in India we need not go very far the
recent unanimous judgment by the Supreme Court of India (SCI) in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy
(Retd) vs Union of India is a resounding victory for privacy. The ruling is the outcome of a
petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Indian biometric identity scheme
Aadhaar. The judgment's ringing endorsement of the right to privacy as a fundamental right
marks a watershed moment in the constitutional history of India. The one-page order signed
by all nine judges declares:

The right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty
under Article 21 and as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.

The right to privacy in India has developed through a series of decisions over the past 60
years. Over the years, inconsistency from two early judgments created a divergence of
opinion on whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right. Last week's judgment
reconciles those different interpretations to unequivocally declare that it is. Moreover,
constitutional provisions must be read and interpreted in a manner which would enhance their
conformity with international human rights instruments ratified by India. The judgment also
concludes that privacy is a necessary condition for the meaningful exercise of other
guaranteed freedoms. The judgment, in which the judges state the reasons behind the one-
page order, spans 547 pages and includes opinions from six judges, creating a legal
framework for privacy protections in India. The opinions cover a wide range of issues in
clarifying that privacy is a fundamental inalienable right, intrinsic to human dignity and
liberty. The decision is especially timely given the rapid roll-out of Aahaar. In fact, the
privacy ruling arose from a pending challenge to India's biometric identity scheme. We have
previously covered the privacy and surveillance risks associated with that scheme. Ambiguity
on the nature and scope of privacy as a right in India allowed the government to collect and
compile both demographic and biometric data of residents. The original justification for
introducing Aadhaar was to ensure government benefits reached the intended recipients.
Following a rapid roll-out and expansion, it is the largest biometric database in the world,
with over 1.25 billion Indians registered. The government's push for Aadhaar has led to its
9
Page

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

wide acceptance as proof of identity, and as an instrument for restructuring and facilitating
government services.

The Two Cases That Casted Doubts on the Right to Privacy

In 2012, Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retired) filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging
the constitutionality of Aadhaar on the grounds that it violates the right to privacy. During the
hearings, the Central government opposed the classification of privacy as a fundamental
right. The government's opposition to the right relied on two early decisions—MP Sharma vs
Satish Chandra in 1954, and Kharak Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh in 1962—which had
held that privacy was not a fundamental right.

In M.P Sharma, the bench held that the drafters of the Constitution did not intend to subject
the power of search and seizure to a fundamental right of privacy. They argued that the
Indian Constitution does not include any language similar to the Fourth Amendment of the
US Constitution, and therefore, questioned the existence of a protected right to privacy. The
Supreme Court made clear that M.P Sharma did not decide other questions, such as “whether
a constitutional right to privacy is protected by other provisions contained in the fundamental
rights including among them, the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.”

In Kharak Singh, the decision invalidated a Police Regulation that provided for nightly
domiciliary visits, calling them an “unauthorized intrusion into a person’s home and a
violation of ordered liberty.” However, it also upheld other clauses of the Regulation on the
ground that the right of privacy was not guaranteed under the Constitution, and hence Article
21 of the Indian Constitution (the right to life and personal liberty) had no application. Justice
Subbarao's dissenting opinion clarified that, although the right to privacy was not expressly
recognized as a fundamental right, it was an essential ingredient of personal liberty under
Article 21.

Over the next 40 years, the interpretation and scope of privacy as a right expanded, and was
accepted as being constitutional in subsequent judgments. During the hearings of the Aadhaar
challenge, the Attorney-General (AG) representing the Union of India questioned the
foundations of the right to privacy. The AG argued that the Constitution’s framers never
10

intended to incorporate a right to privacy, and therefore, to read such a right as intrinsic to the
Page

right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, or to the rights to various freedoms (such as

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

 the freedom of expression) guaranteed under Article 19, would amount to rewriting the
Constitution. The government also pleaded that privacy was “too amorphous” for a precise
definition and an elitist concept which should not be elevated to that of a fundamental right.

The AG based his claims on the M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh judgments, arguing that
since a larger bench had found privacy was not a fundamental right, subsequent smaller
benches upholding the right were not applicable. Sensing the need for reconciliation of the
divergence of opinions on privacy, the Court referred this technical clarification on
constitutionality of the right to a larger bench. The bench would determine whether the
reasoning applied in M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh were correct and still relevant in present
day. The bench was set up not to not look into the constitutional validity of Aadhaar, but to
consider a much larger question: whether right to privacy is a fundamental right and can be
traced in the rights to life and personal liberty.

NEXUS BETWEEN HUMAN RIGHTS & FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

Although legally different, human rights and fundamental rights have various aspects in
common. In fact, both aim at creating a legal framework in which individual and societies
can live in peace and in the respect of everyone’s equality and diversity. Some of the
similarities between the two categories of rights are listed below:

1. Both fundamental and human rights aim at protecting individuals and at creating harmonious
and just societies;
2. Both aim at providing individuals with the means to live in a dignified way and to realize
their full potential;
3. Both fundamental and human rights can be enforced by legal mechanisms and bodies –
although universal human rights can only be enforced by international bodies (i.e.
International Court of Justice, International Criminal Court, etc.);
4. Both originate from the idea of a civilized, just and equal society; and
5. Both are an intrinsic and fundamental part of our life as individuals and as members of
society.
11
Page

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

 Ground Zero || The Practical Aspect

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

The origin of the concept of Fundamental Rights, which are also known as Natural Rights or
Human Rights or Basic Rights or Inalienable Rights,^ is based on the theory of Natural Law.
The idea that people have certain rights, which cannot be taken away, began with the theory
of Natural Law. This theory states that natural order exists in the universe because all things
are created by Nature or God. Every thing has its own qualities and is subject to the rules of
Nature to achieve its full potential. According to this theory, anything that detracts from
man's human qualities, or prevents their 2 full achievements, violates the law of Nature. This
idea led to the belief that men and governments everywhere are bound by Natural Law, it
being higher than man's law. The Roman Philosopher Cicero held the view that this Natural
Law could be discovered from human reason. This theory of Natural Law created an
awareness of Natural Rights and various thinkers and philosophers started discerning the
Inherent and Sacred Rights of men in the Divine Law. Natural Rights thus led to the
formulation of Human Rights and the influence of Natural Rights can be found not only in
the English Bill of Rights (1689), the French Declaration of Rights of Man (1789), the United
States’ Bill of Rights (1791), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)., but also in
the Part III of the Constitution of India which deals with Fundamental Rights.

HUMAN RIGHTS

The Cyrus Cylinder (539 B.C.)

In 539 B.C., the armies of Cyrus the Great, the first king of ancient Persia, conquered the city
of Babylon. But it was his next actions that marked a major advance for Man. He freed the
slaves, declared that all people had the right to choose their own religion, and established
racial equality. These and other decrees were recorded on a baked-clay cylinder in the
Akkadian language with cuneiform script.

Known today as the Cyrus Cylinder, this ancient record has now been recognized as the
world’s first charter of human rights. It is translated into all six official languages of the
United Nations and its provisions parallel the first four Articles of the Universal Declaration
12

of Human Rights.
Page

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

The Spread of Human Rights

From Babylon, the idea of human rights spread quickly to India, Greece and eventually
Rome. There the concept of “natural law” arose, in observation of the fact that people tended
to follow certain unwritten laws in the course of life, and Roman law was based on rational
ideas derived from the nature of things.

Documents asserting individual rights, such as the Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right
(1628), the US Constitution (1787), the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the
Citizen (1789), and the US Bill of Rights (1791) are the written precursors to many of today’s
human rights documents.

The Magna Carta (1215)

The Magna Carta, or “Great Charter,” was arguably the most significant early influence on
the extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today in the English-
speaking world.

In 1215, after King John of England violated a number of ancient laws and customs by which
England had been governed, his subjects forced him to sign the Magna Carta, which
enumerates what later came to be thought of as human rights. Among them was the right of
the church to be free from governmental interference, the rights of all free citizens to own and
inherit property and to be protected from excessive taxes. It established the right of widows
who owned property to choose not to remarry, and established principles of due process and
equality before the law. It also contained provisions forbidding bribery and official
misconduct.

Widely viewed as one of the most important legal documents in the development of modern
democracy, the Magna Carta was a crucial turning point in the struggle to establish freedom.

Petition of Right (1628)

The next recorded milestone in the development of human rights was the Petition of Right,
produced in 1628 by the English Parliament and sent to Charles I as a statement of civil
liberties. Refusal by Parliament to finance the king’s unpopular foreign policy had caused his
13

government to exact forced loans and to quarter troops in subjects’ houses as an economy
Page

measure. Arbitrary arrest and imprisonment for opposing these policies had produced in

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

Parliament a violent hostility to Charles and to George Villiers, the Duke of Buckingham.
The Petition of Right, initiated by Sir Edward Coke, was based upon earlier statutes and
charters and asserted four principles: (1) No taxes may be levied without consent of
Parliament, (2) No subject may be imprisoned without cause shown (reaffirmation of the
right of habeas corpus), (3) No soldiers may be quartered upon the citizenry, and (4) Martial
law may not be used in time of peace.

United States Declaration of Independence (1776)

On July 4, 1776, the United States Congress approved the Declaration of Independence. Its
primary author, Thomas Jefferson, wrote the Declaration as a formal explanation of why
Congress had voted on July 2 to declare independence from Great Britain, more than a year
after the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War, and as a statement announcing that
the thirteen American Colonies were no longer a part of the British Empire. Congress issued
the Declaration of Independence in several forms. It was initially published as a printed
broadsheet that was widely distributed and read to the public.

Philosophically, the Declaration stressed two themes: individual rights and the right of
revolution. These ideas became widely held by Americans and spread internationally as well,
influencing in particular the French Revolution.

The Constitution of the United States of America (1787) and Bill of Rights (1791)

Written during the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, the Constitution of the United States of
America is the fundamental law of the US federal system of government and the landmark
document of the Western world. It is the oldest written national constitution in use and
defines the principal organs of government and their jurisdictions and the basic rights of
citizens.

The first ten amendments to the Constitution—the Bill of Rights—came into effect on
December 15, 1791, limiting the powers of the federal government of the United States and
protecting the rights of all citizens, residents and visitors in American territory.

The Bill of Rights protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to keep and bear
14

arms, the freedom of assembly and the freedom to petition. It also prohibits unreasonable
Page

search and seizure, cruel and unusual punishment and compelled self-incrimination. Among

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

the legal protections it affords, the Bill of Rights prohibits Congress from making any law
respecting establishment of religion and prohibits the federal government from depriving any
person of life, liberty or property without due process of law. In federal criminal cases it
requires indictment by a grand jury for any capital offense, or infamous crime, guarantees a
speedy public trial with an impartial jury in the district in which the crime occurred, and
prohibits double jeopardy.

The United Nations (1945)

World War II had raged from 1939 to 1945, and as the end drew near, cities throughout
Europe and Asia lay in smoldering ruins. Millions of people were dead, millions more were
homeless or starving. Russian forces were closing in on the remnants of German resistance in
Germany’s bombed-out capital of Berlin. In the Pacific, US Marines were still battling
entrenched Japanese forces on such islands as Okinawa.

In April 1945, delegates from fifty countries met in San Francisco full of optimism and hope.
The goal of the United Nations Conference on International Organization was to fashion an
international body to promote peace and prevent future wars. The ideals of the organization
were stated in the preamble to its proposed charter: “We the peoples of the United Nations
are determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our
lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind.”

The Charter of the new United Nations organization went into effect on October 24, 1945, a
date that is celebrated each year as United Nations Day.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

By 1948, the United Nations’ new Human Rights Commission had captured the world’s
attention. Under the dynamic chairmanship of Eleanor Roosevelt—President Franklin
Roosevelt’s widow, a human rights champion in her own right and the United States delegate
to the UN—the Commission set out to draft the document that became the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Roosevelt, credited with its inspiration, referred to the
Declaration as the international Magna Carta for all mankind. It was adopted by the United
Nations on December 10, 1948.
15
Page

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017

In its preamble and in Article 1, the Declaration unequivocally proclaims the inherent rights
of all human beings: “Disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous
acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which
human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has
been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people...All human beings are born
free and equal in dignity and rights.”

The Member States of the United Nations pledged to work together to promote the thirty
Articles of human rights that, for the first time in history, had been assembled and codified
into a single document. In consequence, many of these rights, in various forms, are today part
of the constitutional laws of democratic nations.

16
Page

©Legal Education Awareness Foundation 2017