Submitted by Team 6 :

• Samridhi Raju, Pari Sehgal, Lerato Silvia Mahau, Stefane

CONSTITUTIONAL MORALITY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS

1. Introduction to Constitutional Morality and Individual Rights

“A constitution is not the act of a government, but of a people constituting a government.” Thomas Paine (1737–1809) – Rights of Man (1791)

The concept of Constitutional Morality and Individual Rights is deeply intertwined with the principles of democracy and human dignity. Constitutional Morality are fundamental freedoms guaranteed by a country’s constitution, designed to protect individuals from government overreach and ensure a fair and equitable society. These rights are often codified in documents like the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, which includes freedoms such as speech, religion, and the right to bear arms (Constitutional Morality and the Constitution, 2022). Similarly, in India, the Constitution guarantees a set of fundamental rights that safeguard individual liberties and promote social justice, reflecting a balance between legal protections and moral responsibilities (Wikipedia, 2023). Moreover, these constitutional protections are complemented by Individual Rights, which refers to personal ethical codes that guide behavior and decision-making. Personal ethics can be influenced by upbringing, experiences, and societal norms, and they play a crucial role shaping how individuals interact with their Constitutional Morality (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2023).

Constitutional Morality are not merely legal constructs but are rooted in philosophical ideas about human dignity and the inherent worth of individuals. The Enlightenment period, for instance, saw a significant emphasis on individual rights as people began questioning the role of government and asserting their inherent rights (Liberty Fund, 2020). This philosophical underpinning is reflected in constitutions worldwide, including India’s, which aims to balance government authority with individual freedoms through its fundamental rights (Indian National Bar Association, n.d.). The U.S. Constitution, in particular, has evolved over time to include protections not only in the Bill of Rights but also in amendments like the Fourteenth Amendment, which ensures due process and equal protection under the law (Justia Law, 2021). Individual Rights complements these legal protections by providing a personal framework for ethical decision-making, ensuring that individuals respect both their own rights and those of others (Study.com: Morality Definition, 2022).

The relationship between Constitutional Morality and Individual Rights is dynamic and reciprocal. On one hand, Constitutional Morality provide a legal framework that protects individual freedoms, allowing people to live according to their personal moral codes without undue interference. On the other hand, Individual Rights influences how people exercise these rights, encouraging responsible behavior and respect for the rights of others. This interplay is essential in maintaining a balanced society where legal protections and personal ethics work together to promote justice and equality (OpenStax: Constitutions and Individual Liberties, 2022). Understanding this relationship is crucial for fostering a society that values both legal rights and moral responsibilities.

2. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND THE CLASH BETWEEN THE TWO

2.1 WHAT ARE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS?

Individual rights are the kind of rights that are needed by each and every individual so as to live a life of freedom, dignity and equality. These rights ensure that there is no unjust interference of the state or society in the personal affairs of an individual. Not only that but these rights also ensure that the dignity, freedom, and personal autonomy of an individual are protected. Simply stating, these rights give an individual the right to make their own choice in each and every matter of their lives where they won’t be forced or influenced by the state or the society

Now, in a democracy these rights play a very imperative role and are often considered fundamental as without the presence of these rights, democratic values like the freedom of speech, religious choice and personal liberty can not thrive. The perfect example for this is the fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution of India discussed in the next section:

2.1 FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

The Indian Constitution provides six fundamental rights:

• Right to equality (Articles 14-18): These rights guarantee equality before the law and also prohibits discrimination and untouchability.
• Right to freedom (Articles 19-22): These right include freedom of speech, expression, assembly, and movement and empower the citizens with the freedom to choose.
• Right against exploitation (Articles 23-24): These rights prohibit exploitation of the citizens as it prohibits forced labor, human trafficking and child labor.
• Right to freedom of religion (Article 25-28): This ensures religious freedom of the citizens and prohibits forced conversions.
• Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29-30): Protects the rights of minorities and ensures that their cultures are preserved.
• Right to constitutional remedies (Article 32): This right allows the citizens to move the courts if their rights are violated

2.3 WHY THESE RIGHTS ARE NECESSARY FOR PERSONAL FREEDOM AND DIGNITY?

Now, the question arises as to why are these are rights so necessary and the simplest answer to this question is that these rights not only give the citizens the platform to speak and express them freely but at the same time they empower them to live a life of dignity, choose their own beliefs and ensure that their voices are heard. Without these rights, people could be denied their freedom, discriminated and oppressed. These rights make sure that the personal freedom or liberty of an individual is not hampered with and also makes sure that a balance is maintained between the interests of the individuals and the greater good of the society.

2.4 THE CLASH BETWEEN THE CONSTITUTIONAL MORALITY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS

While individual rights are something that empower the citizens and their personal liberty, constitutional morality on the other hand makes sure that these rights align perfectly with values like justice, equality, and democracy. Now there are various instances where conflicts arise when there is contradiction between the traditions, religion, or societal norms. Following are some of the case studies:

• SABRIMALA TEMPLE CASE India (Right to worship vs. Religious Tradition): The Sabrimala Temple in Kerela had denied entry into the temple to women aged 10-50, citing religious customs. This became a huge issue and was taken to the Supreme court which in Indian Young Lawyer Association Vs. State of Kerela (2018), ruled out that this action by the temple violates the women’s right to equality and religious freedom. Here, while the devotees argued for religious freedom, the constitutional morality made sure that gender equality is upheld.

• SECTION 377 VERDICT (LGBTQ+ Rights Vs. Societal Norms): The Section 377 of the IPC (Indian Penal Code) criminalized the same se relationships. In Navtej Singh Johar Vs. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court of India decriminalized homosexuality under the right to privacy, dignity and freedom of expression. Here, while the conservative sections were against this change, the constitutional morality made sure that personal liberty and non-discrimination was upheld.

• RACIAL EQUALITY VS. SEGREGATION LAWS: In the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education (USA, 1954), the Supreme Court struck down the racial segregation practiced on schools and ruled that ‘separate but equal’ violated the 14^th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Here, the individual rights of the black students were being violated and this ruling made sure that racial equality was prioritized over the segregationist traditions.

3. THE ROLE OF JUDICIARY AND THE NEED FOR BALANCE

Constitutional morality in India represents a framewo rk where the judiciary upholds the foundational values of the Constitution—equality, liberty, dignity, and justice—to protect individual rights against societal prejudices and state overreach (Rajput, 2021). Rooted in the spirit of the Constitution, this principle requires institutions to prioritize constitutional guarantees over majoritarian norms, ensuring that laws and policies align with the moral compass of transformative constitutionalism (Jain & Bala, 2024). The judiciary, as the guardian of constitutional morality, plays a pivotal role in interpreting laws through the lens of Articles 14, 21, and 38, which collectively mandate equality, protect life and liberty, and obligate the state to reduce inequalities (Vandana Mahalwar, 2023).

For instance, in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court decriminalized consensual same-sex relationships by emphasizing that constitutional morality must prevail over historical social mores, asserting that individual dignity cannot be subordinated to “popular morality” (Bhatia, 2019). Similarly, in Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017), the Court invalidated instant triple talaq, recognizing it as a violation of Muslim women’s constitutional rights to equality and dignity, thereby rejecting patriarchal traditions that conflict with constitutional ethos (Mandal, 2018). These judgments underscore the judiciary’s duty to act as a counter majoritarian force, ensuring that marginalized groups and individuals are not subjected to discriminatory practices sanctioned by societal norms.

The need for balance in the Indian Constitution arises from its commitment to both individual rights and collective welfare, mediated through a system of checks and balances. While the judiciary enforces constitutional morality, it operates within a framework that respects the separation of powers among the legislature, executive, and judiciary. Article 50 directs the state to separate the judiciary from the executive, though India’s parliamentary system allows functional overlaps, necessitating judicial restraint to avoid encroaching on legislative domains (Akhtar, 2023). However, the judiciary’s power of judicial review (under Articles 32 and 226) enables it to strike down laws violating fundamental rights, ensuring legislative and executive actions remain constitutionally compliant (Sharma, 2023).

This balance is critical in maintaining public trust, as seen in cases where courts have harmonized religious freedoms with individual rights, such as permitting women’s entry into Sabarimala Temple while respecting religious autonomy under Article 26. Challenges persist, however, including political pressures, case backlogs, and the risk of judicial overreach, which threaten the equilibrium envisioned by the Constitution (Bhavya Pankaj, 2023).

The judiciary’s role in embedding constitutional morality extends beyond adjudication; it involves shaping a legal culture that prioritizes substantive equality over formalistic interpretations. By invoking constitutional morality, courts have expanded the scope of rights, such as recognizing privacy as intrinsic to dignity under Article 24, and invalidating colonial-era statutes that perpetuate inequality(Anuja Shivraj Rane & Deepashri Sidharaj Choudhari, 2023).

This dynamic interpretation ensures the Constitution remains a living document, responsive to evolving societal values. Yet, critics argue that over-reliance on judicial discretion risks diluting democratic accountability, as unelected judges may impose values lacking broad consensus(Chandra, 2023). To mitigate this, the judiciary must balance activism with deference to legislative intent, ensuring its interventions align with constitutional text and history. Ultimately, constitutional morality serves as a bridge between individual rights and collective governance, demanding vigilance from all branches to sustain India’s democratic ethos.

4. CHALLENGES:
   
   Observing disobedience towards the duties of an individual either it’s a layperson or any authorized one, they have incredibly forgotten that they include the citizens and are bound to perform their duties otherwise it’s a ruckus overall. Due to this non-performance, the interests of an individual or rights are badly violated and this violation process has been in the play and will continue.The Paradox of Amendments vs. Unwritten Constitutional Morality: For example- The UK’s unwritten Constitution came across challenges during Brexit, where constitutional morality regarding individual rights, like freedom of movement and workers’ rights, clashed with political decisions.

   Authoritarianism Cloaked in Democracy: The Erosion of Rights Through Mandates:
   One of the diplomatic paradoxes today is the rise of authoritarian leaders who come to power through democratic processes, often curtailing individual rights once in office.

   Landmark Legal Rulings vs. Social Conservatism: For say- In India, the decriminalization of homosexuality in 2018 (Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code) marked a victory for LGBTQ+ rights. However, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, societal resistance and conservative groups still challenge the recognition of LGBTQ+ rights, particularly in rural areas and within certain religious communities.

   Laying the presented and other factors beforehand, the challenges in balancing constitutional morality and individual rights reflect the complex dynamics between evolving legal frameworks and deeply rooted social, cultural, and religious norms. Resolving these tensions requires a nuanced approach, where the law must protect fundamental rights while navigating diplomatic sensitivities, and the evolving nature of constitutional interpretation.
   

5. CONCLUSION:

Quoting from the foregoing statement of Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly, Justice Dipak Misra in a Constitution Bench decision of five judges, stated: ‘The principle of constitutional morality basically means to bow down to the norms of the Constitution and not to act in a manner which would become violative of the rule of law or reflectible of action in an arbitrary manner. It actually works at the fulcrum and guides as a laser beam in institution building. The traditions and conventions have to grow to sustain the value of such a morality. The democratic values survive and become successful where the people at large and the persons-in-charge of the institution are strictly guided by the constitutional parameters without paving the path of deviancy and reflecting in action the primary concern to maintain institutional integrity and the requisite constitutional restraints. Commitment to the Constitution is a facet of constitutional morality.’
The Constitutions specifically outline the types of society we want to build, but it can only be realized via constitutional morality. Unless the civilians will learn the Constitutional Morality, it will remain in a challenging condition. While Constitutions enshrine rights, their enforcement often depends on unwritten moral principles that evolve through societal consensus. The erosion of these principles, as seen in authoritarian shifts under democratic mandates, challenges the very essence of justice. Constitutional morality, thus, must not only guide legal interpretation but also adapt to the globalizing world while safeguarding democratic values. Its preservation requires not just legal adherence but a continuous commitment to ethical governance amidst shifting political tides.

REFERENCES:

– https://theadvocatesleague.in/assets/pdf/researches/Constitutional_Morality_as_a_Challenge.pdf
THE ADVOCATES LEAGUE: Discover the World of Law

– https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/landmark-supreme-court-cases
BRENNAN CENTRE FOR JUSTICE

– DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR’S CONSTITUTIONAL MORALITY Dr. Jay Kumar Bhongale*

Akhtar, Z. (2023). Montesquieu’s Theory of the Separation of Powers, Legislative Flexibility and Judicial Restraint in an Unwritten Constitution. Amicus Curiae, 4(3), 552–577. https://doi.org/10.14296/ac.v4i3.5616

Anuja Shivraj Rane, & Deepashri Sidharaj Choudhari. (2023). Constitutional Morality Vis-À-Vis Cultural Relativism in India. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 11(10), e1279–e1279. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v11i10.1279

Bhatia, G. (2019). Case Comment: Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India: The Indian Supreme Court’s Decriminalization of Same-Sex Relations. Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online, 22(1), 218–233. https://doi.org/10.1163/18757413_022001010

Bhavya Pankaj. (2023). Sabarimala Judgement: Result Of Resolution In Constitution? International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 5(5). https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2023.v05i05.7442

Chandra, A. (2023). A precious heritage?: The construction of constitutional identity by Indian courts. Comparative Constitutional Studies, 1(1), 140–162. https://doi.org/10.4337/ccs.2023.0009

Jain, I. B., & Bala, M. (2024). The Role of Indian Judiciary in Justifying the Constitutional Morality over Social Morality. GLS KALP: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies., 4(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.69974/hvh6vb42

Manaswi Semwal. (2023). Jurisprudential Analysis of the Right to Life in the Indian Constitution: Exploring the Essence. Journal of Mountain Research, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.51220/jmr.v18i2.35

Mandal, S. (2018). Out of Shah Bano’s shadow: Muslim women’s rights and the Supreme Court’s triple talaq verdict. Indian Law Review, 2(1), 89–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2018.1510162

Rajput, S. (2021). Doctrine of Constitutional Morality: Ammunition in the hands of Judiciary Or Instrument of Justice? CIFILE Journal of International Law, Journal, 2, 26. https://doi.org/10.30489/CIFJ.2021.272000.1027

Sharma, S. (2023). Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint: A Critical Analysis in the Indian Context. Indian Journal of Law, 1(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.36676/ijl.2023-v1i1-03

Vandana Mahalwar. (2023). LIVING CONSTITUTIONALISM’ AND THE ROLE OF INDIAN JUDICIARY. ShodhKosh Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 4(2), 1377–1382. https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v4.i2.2023.2403

Constitutional Rights and the Constitution. (2022). Retrieved from https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/intro.7-4/ALDE_00000033/

Wikipedia. (2023). Fundamental rights in India. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_rights_in_India

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2023). Morality. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/

Liberty Fund. (2020). Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution. Retrieved from http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1714/0125_Bk.pdf

Indian National Bar Association. (n.d.). Civil Liberty. Retrieved from https://www.indianbarassociation.org/civil-liberty/

Justia Law. (2021). Fourteenth Amendment. Retrieved from https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-14/05-procedural-due-process-civil.html

ThoughtCo. (n.d.). Individual rights: Definition and examples by Robert Longley Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/individual-rights-definition-and-examples-5115456

Indian Young Lawyers Association and Ors. vs. The State of Kerala and Ors. (28.09.2018 – SC)

(2019 ) 11 SCC 1

Navtej Singh Johar and Ors. Vs . Union of India ( UOI ) and Ors. 2018 INSC 790

ERALP, Y. (2010). INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS VERSUS COLLECTIVE RIGHTS. Global Political Trends Center (GPoT). http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep07680

National Archives. (n.d.). Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Retrieved from https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/brown-v-board-of-education#:~:text=In%20this%20milestone%20decision%2C%20the,1896%20Plessy%20v.%20Ferguson%20case.

Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. (n.d.). Fundamental Rights – Part III of the Indian Constitution. Retrieved from https://www.mea.gov.in/images/pdf1/part3.pdf