Fundamental Rights vs. Human Rights – A Comparative Analysis

Introduction

The ideas of Fundamental Rights and Human Rights lie at the heart of modern democratic societies. Both concepts aim to preserve the dignity, liberty, and equality of individuals — yet they differ in their origin, scope, and enforceability.

While Human Rights represent the universal moral and legal standards applicable to all human beings, Fundamental Rights are the specific rights guaranteed by a nation’s constitution to its citizens. India, as the world’s largest democracy, recognizes both — incorporating global human rights principles into its constitutional fabric while tailoring Fundamental Rights to its own social and historical context.

This comparative analysis explores the key similarities and distinctions between Fundamental Rights and Human Rights, highlighting their interrelationship and significance in the Indian legal framework.

Meaning and Origin

Human Rights

Human Rights are the inherent rights that every individual possesses by virtue of being human. They are universal, inalienable, and indivisible, transcending national boundaries or political systems.

Their philosophical roots can be traced to the Natural Rights Theory — the belief that all humans are born with certain basic rights that no authority can take away. The modern articulation of human rights emerged after World War II, with the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly.

Human Rights encompass civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights — such as the right to life, freedom of speech, education, health, and equality.

Fundamental Rights

Fundamental Rights, on the other hand, are rights that a State constitutionally guarantees to its citizens and, in some cases, to non-citizens. In India, these rights are enshrined in Part III of the Constitution (Articles 12–35) and were inspired by several sources — including the American Bill of Rights, the Irish Constitution, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Fundamental Rights are legally enforceable and justiciable, meaning individuals can approach the courts for their protection under Article 32 (right to constitutional remedies).

Nature and Scope of Rights

Legal Framework in India

India’s approach to rights is unique — it bridges international human rights obligations and constitutional guarantees.

1. Fundamental Rights (Part III of the Constitution):
   These include:

   • Right to Equality (Articles 14–18)

   • Right to Freedom (Articles 19–22)

   • Right against Exploitation (Articles 23–24)

   • Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25–28)

   • Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29–30)

   • Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32)

   These rights are enforceable in the Supreme Court and High Courts.

2. Human Rights Act, 1993:
   The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, established the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and State Commissions to safeguard human rights and investigate violations. The Act defines “human rights” as rights relating to life, liberty, equality, and dignity guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in international covenants such as:

   • The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

   • The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966)

   • The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966)

Judicial Interpretation and Convergence

Indian courts have often blurred the distinction between Fundamental Rights and Human Rights, interpreting the former in light of the latter.

• In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the Supreme Court relied on the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) to formulate guidelines on workplace sexual harassment, even before specific legislation existed.

• In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) to include the right to live with dignity — aligning domestic law with global human rights principles.

• Similarly, in People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (1997), the right to privacy and health were recognized as extensions of human dignity.

Through such landmark rulings, the judiciary has harmonized India’s Fundamental Rights with the spirit of universal human rights.

Relationship Between Fundamental and Human Rights

Although distinct in form, Fundamental Rights and Human Rights are interdependent and complementary.

• Fundamental Rights are the legal expression of Human Rights within the constitutional framework of a nation.

• Human Rights act as the moral and philosophical foundation upon which Fundamental Rights are built.

• Many Fundamental Rights — such as the right to equality, liberty, and protection against discrimination — are directly derived from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Thus, while Human Rights set the universal standards, Fundamental Rights provide domestic mechanisms to realize those standards.

Criticisms and Limitations

Fundamental Rights

• Can be suspended during a national emergency (except Articles 20 and 21).

• Often limited to citizens only, excluding foreign nationals in certain cases.

• Implementation may depend on judicial interpretation and political will.

Human Rights

• Lack of direct enforceability — international declarations are often non-binding unless incorporated into domestic law.

• Enforcement mechanisms like the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) depend on state cooperation, limiting accountability.

Despite these limitations, both frameworks continue to evolve through legislation, advocacy, and judicial activism.

Conclusion

The distinction between Fundamental Rights and Human Rights lies primarily in their scope and enforceability, not in their essence. Both serve as essential instruments for protecting human dignity, ensuring justice, and upholding democratic values.

While Human Rights embody a global moral vision, Fundamental Rights represent the legal manifestation of that vision within national boundaries. India’s constitutional design — influenced by international human rights norms — stands as a testament to this synthesis.

Ultimately, the true measure of a society’s progress is not just in the rights it enshrines on paper but in the freedom and dignity it guarantees in practice. Both Fundamental and Human Rights must, therefore, work in tandem to create a world where equality, liberty, and humanity are not ideals — but lived realities.

Also Read:
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India