Human Rights Violation: A Threat to Society?
Basic human rights are those, which are provided to each and every individual, regardless of their race, caste or colour. These rights are being given to them by birth until death and they can never be taken away, although they can sometimes be restricted.
The universal declaration on human rights was adopted in 1948 with the sole motive of establishing and protecting human rights, considering the necessity for these human rights. The declaration along with special covenants provided for the rights of women, children and physically disabled.
However, instances of human rights violation have become an everyday instance. Everyday instances of child abuse, man slaughter and heinous torture came before the court.
In order to avoid such instances, legislature deemed it fit to introduce The Protection of Human Rights Act, with provides for the composition of the National Human Rights Commission, State Human Rights Commission and Human Rights courts, in order to provide for better protection of human rights and the matters connected thereto.
However, even after the formation of the Human Rights Act and commissions, everyday we came across chilling instances of violence and gross violation of human rights.
Human Rights Violation in Kashmir :
Kashmir is probably the only state in this article, which is subject to gross human rights violation since the 1990s. It all started when the Government of India imposed president’s rule in the state and appointed Mr. Jagmohan as its governor. Since this imposition, the occupation forces have been carrying on a ruthless campaign against the people, who consistently lives in terror.
The most recent human rights violation being the suspension of the internet services in the State. Ever since the abolition of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution i.e. the special status of state of Jammu and Kashmir was revoked on 5th August, 2019 and the internet services were suspended in the State, and state of Jammu and Kashmir was split into two union territories viz. Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
However, Supreme Court again adopted the same stance as that of Government, when in the case titled Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, it gave direction regarding the imposition of restrictions on the internet in a phased manner in order to curb terrorism.
However, it was later clarified in the case of Foundation for Media Professionals v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir & Anr. , wherein Supreme Court upheld right to internet as a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.
Furthermore, Supreme Court clarified that since each and every fundamental right is subject to reasonable restriction, right to internet is also subject to certain restrictions as well.
Nirbhaya’s Case :
Another case of gross violation of human rights was Nirbhaya’s case. When a girl was brutally gang raped in the running bus and was later thrown out to die in the bone-chilling cold, the most basic human right to life was being taken away from that girl.
The horrifying picture does not end there. Even after stringent laws being framed and more and more awareness being spread regarding the human rights, another case of rape in Kathua district of Kashmir had shaken the core of India.
Time and again it has been held by various courts that right to life is the most basic human right of all. However, even after framing human rights commission and stringent laws, it is the grossly misused right.
Another basic human right, which closely co-exist, with right to life is right to food. Poverty is a ruthless taskmaster. It violates basic human rights such as food, clothing and shelter. Since Article 21 is the magna carta of the Indian Constitution, it strongly opposes gross violation of human rights by providing for no deprival of person’s right to life or liberty except through a procedure established by law.
Supreme Court in the case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha, held that the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes with it, namely the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition clothing and shelter inter alia. It further held that fundamental right to live with human dignity is congruous with the right to life and derives its life breath from the Directive Principles of State Policy, and particularly clauses (e) and (f) of Articles 39,41,42.
Supreme Court again clarified this position in the Olga Tellis case wherein it again held that “Right to livelihood is included in the right to life’ as no person can live without the means of living”.
Supreme Court in the case of Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P. went on to add right to education as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Taking the aid of Articles 41 and 45 it has held that every child/citizen of this country has a right to free education until he completes fourteen years of age.
CONCLUSION
Thus, Supreme Court have time and again held that human rights are the most basic in order for a society to thrive. An individual cannot live without basic human rights. However, these rights have no meaning in real sense as more than 31% of Indian population still live below poverty line. Furthermore, everyday cases of rape, murder and death due to hunger further worsen this position. For India to develop and grow, protection of citizens’ human rights must be the priority as there is no meaning of law when a person is allowed to take law into their own hands and violate other’s basic human rights. Thus, the noble ideals of Social, Economic and Political justice as embodied in the Preamble and other parts of the Constitution remain an unrealized dream for millions of our fellow citizens.