Every right gives rise to a corresponding duty

article 51-a says that the underlying philosophy is that discourse on fundamental rights cannot be divorced from fundamental duties or else we do a disservice to both

There is growing perception that excessive emphasis on exercise of fundamental rights by citizens diminishes the importance of performance of correlative duties. The co-relation between rights and duties has been recognised by the Bhagavad Gita which teaches us that “your duty is your right”. Gandhiji summed up the matter admirably: “I learned from my illiterate but wise mother that all rights to be deserved and preserved come from duty well done.” Similar thought has been expressed by Einstein who stated, “every day, on hundred occasions, I remind myself that my mental and physical life depends on the toil of other persons, living or dead. So I must try to repay whatever I have received and am receiving”. Walter Lippman, the philosopher-journalist, was emphatic that “for every right that you cherish, you have a duty which you must fulfil”.

It is interesting that the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man of May 2, 1948, prescribes in Chapter 1 the rights and in Chapter 2 the duties. Interestingly, one of the duties prescribed is “the duty to pay taxes”. The African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights of June 26, 1981, prescribes along with guaranteed rights duties one of which is “every individual shall have duties towards his family and society, the State and other legally recognised communities and the international community”. Again it is interesting that Article 29(6) prescribes the duty “to pay taxes imposed by law in the interest of the society”. Apparently, tax evasion has been a problem.

The thinking that every right gives rise to a corresponding duty is based on the premise that freedom without acceptance of responsibility can destroy the freedom itself, whereas when rights and responsibilities are balanced, freedom is enhanced. Our Constitution, as originally framed, did not prescribe duties to be performed by citizens. It was only in 1976 after the June 1975 Emergency that a specific Chapter IV-A was incorporated in the Constitution by a constitutional amendment and Article 51-A was enacted which lists 10 duties expressed in elegant language to be performed by citizens. Unfortunately, because of the timing, this was viewed with suspicion and regarded as an attempt to curtail fundamental rights by way of imposition of fundamental duties listed in the article. These misgivings were misplaced. A fair reading of the article reveals that the underlying philosophy is that discourse on fundamental rights cannot be divorced from fundamental duties or else we do a disservice to both.

One of the fundamental duties prescribed is to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood among all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women [Article 51-A(e)]. There are other fundamental duties which deserve emphasis viz. the duty to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform and the duty to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity, so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement [Article 51-A(h) & (j)].

There is divergence of opinion among the high courts about judicial enforceability of fundamental duties. The Supreme Court in its decision in AIIMS Students’ Union vs AIIMS ruled that fundamental duties though not enforceable judicially, every citizen of India is obligated to perform those duties. It significantly observed that though Article 51-A does not expressly cast any fundamental duty on the State, the duty of every citizen of India is the collective duty of the State. The legal sequitur would be that persistent non-performance of fundamental duties by the State would tantamount to misgovernance and arguably could warrant imposition of President’s Rule under Article 356 of the Constitution on the ground that the government of the State is not carried in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. I shall stop here and refrain from further indulging in provocative musings.

Solisorabjee@gmail.com

Sorabjee is a former Attorney General of India

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com