INTERNATIONAL

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

PROJECT REPORT
ON
UNIVERSAL
DECLARATION OF
HUMAN RIGHTS

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Dr. Jasneet Walia Gargi
UILS 138/16
Panjab University B.Com llb. (Hons.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CASES..............................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................2
HISTORY.............................................................................................................3
NATURE OF THE DECLARATION..................................................................4
WITHOUT OBLIGATION...............................................................................4
PREAMBLE OF UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS........5
STRUCTURE OF UDHR.....................................................................................5
ARTICLES GENERAL IN NATURE..............................................................6
ARTICLES PROCLAIMING CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS.................6
ARTICLES PROCLAIMING ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL
RIGHTS.............................................................................................................9
CONCLUDING ARTICLES...........................................................................10
UDHR AND CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW..................................10
INFLUENCE OF THE UDHR...........................................................................11
INFLUENCE OF UDHR ON THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION...................12
JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF UDHR IN INDIA...................................13
CONCLUSION...................................................................................................14

TABLE OF CASES
Cases
I.C. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab.....................................................13
Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala....................13
Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration..................................13
S.P. Mittal v. Union of India..............................................................13
 INTRODUCTION
Beginning with the phrase “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,”
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) proclaims its purpose of establishing
global human rights from the outset. As a common standard of achievement for all signatory
nations, the UDHR constitutes an essential cornerstone in the modern history of human rights
by drawing upon ancient to contemporary philosophies, responses to the heinous crimes of
World War II, and various visions for future human rights standards. Despite diverging
viewpoints from many of the drafting parties and states, the UDHR eventually transcended
conflict to form the underpinnings of a moral compass for all of humankind.
UDHR adoption in December 1948 marked a major ‘milestone’ in the geopolitical events of
the world at the time which was slowly emerging from the horrors of the second world war.
Because of its profound significance, it is also termed as the ‘Magna Carta’ of all mankind.
The Declaration outlines 30 rights and freedoms that belong to all of us and that nobody can
take away from us. The rights that were included continue to form the basis for international
human rights law. Today, the Declaration remains a living document. It is the most translated
document in the world.1
HISTORY

Shortly after the UN Charter came into effect, on November 23, 1945, the Executive
Committee of the Preparatory Commission of the UN, which was responsible for presiding
over the first session of the UN’s primary organs, mandated that “an international bill of
rights” be formed. This requirement became the starting point for the drafting of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.2
The various meanings of the term “international bill of rights” triggered controversy that
perplexed those involved in drafting the UDHR. They found that there were three possible
approaches to the bill: the first was a morally compelling declaration, the second a legally
binding document, and the third, regarding implementation, an international institution to
protect human rights.3
In February 1946, the first session of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
established a temporary Commission on Human Rights, which was charged with proposing
suggestions for a permanent Commission on Human Rights. 4 With Eleanor Roosevelt as
chairperson and nine other distinguished members working collaboratively, the commission
offered several suggestions as “preparatory work” for the development of the International
Bill of Rights.5 The bill, as these members expected, “might become one of the cornerstones”

1
Universal Declaration of Human Rights Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/universal-
declaration-of-human-rights/ (last visited on December 1, 2020)
2
Duan, Fengyu, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Modern History of Human Rights,
Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3066882 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3066882) (last visited
December 1, 2020)
3
Ibid.
4
Olivier De Schutter, International Human Rights Law: Cases, Materials, Commentary 16 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2014).
upon which world peace would rest and would be drafted by the full commission as soon as
possible.6
In this regard, they suggested a preference for a morally compelling declaration. 7 This group
proposed that the definitive commission comprise eighteen independent experts rather than
governmental delegates. Furthermore, they suggested that the final commission should have
roles not merely in drafting legal texts but also in monitoring the practice of human rights.
Lastly, the commission envisaged “equitable geographical distribution” along with the
guideline of “personal qualification” when considering nominees for the full commission,
ensuring that larger and smaller states would have an equal say.8 This final suggestion was
accepted, contributing to the perceived universality of the commission.9

NATURE OF THE DECLARATION

The minutes of the first session of the drafting committee meeting held on 1 July 1947
documents the discussion about the nature of the document that would become the
cornerstone of IHRL. In Chapter III, paragraph 19, the minutes state that “the Drafting
Committee acted on the assumption that the international community must ensure the
observance of the rights to be included in the International Bill of Human Rights”. 10 The
minutes do not state the names of the State parties that objected to the draft human rights
instrument becoming a binding legal instrument of IHRL. It simply states in Part III, para
19(1)(a) that “that a Declaration of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in a resolution
of the General Assembly would in itself have considerable moral weight.” This observation
reveals the tensions between the diverging geopolitical views concerning human rights at the
time of the framing of the UDHR in 1947.11
Hence, UN human rights instrument became a non-binding ‘declaration’ and not a
‘convention’ or a codified legally binding instrument of international law.
Two countries were allowed to propose and submit drafts for consideration by the committee
drafting the UDHR. The countries were the US and the UK. The UK’s draft was presented by
Lord Dukeston.12 The draft submitted by the UK concealed in its language in its comments
for Article-II, the UK’s constitutional principle of the supremacy of UK Parliament. It states
that “No enactment can be given any greater authority than an Act of Parliament, and one
Act of Parliament can repeal another Act of Parliament.”

5
United Nations, Report of the Commission on Human Rights to the Second Session of the Economic and
Social Council, UN Doc. E/38, at 3 (1946).
6
Supra note 2.
7
United Nations, Report of the Commission on Human Rights to the Second Session of the Economic and
Social Council, 6
8
United Nations, Commission on Human Rights, Summary of Meetings, UN Doc. E/HR. 9, at 5 (1946).
9
Supra note 2.
10
History of the Document available at: https://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/history-
document/index.html (last visited on December 1, 2020)
11
Ibid.
12
Supra note 10.
Thus, the foundational document for the IHRL moved away from the possibility of an
internationally enforceable legal instrument of IHRL to a mere ‘declaration’ of human rights
that is non-enforceable and non-binding on UN member states. UDHR is an aspirational
document that seeks to appeal to the UN member states on the ‘moral plane’ the necessity to
uphold and respect human rights.
PREAMBLE OF UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

The preamble of any legal instrument is the key to open the minds and contains the ideals and
the aspirations or the objects which the makers intended to be realised by its enacting
provisions.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights pointedly notes in its preamble that “it is
essential if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against
tyranny and oppressions, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.”
Recognising the inherent dignity of all the members of the human family the preamble
provides that “the equal and inalienable rights...is the foundation of freedom, justice and
peace in the world” and a little later:
“whereas the peoples of the United Nations have Charter reaffirmed their faith in
fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of human person and in the equal rights
of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of
life in larger freedoms…”. Article 1 takes up this theme and provides: “all human beings are
born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and
should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”13
The preamble proclaimed it as a common standard of achievement for all the peoples and for
all the nations.
STRUCTURE OF UDHR

The UDHR consists of a Preamble and 30 Articles, setting forth the basic human rights and
fundamental freedoms to which all men and women, everywhere in the world, are entitled,
without any discrimination. The rights specified therein encompass both civil and political
rights and economic, social and cultural rights. Proclaimed by the General Assembly as a
‘common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations’, the UDHR is addressed to
every individual and every organ of the society that they shall strive to promote respect for
and to secure the universal and effective recognition and observance of the rights and
freedoms enumerated in it.14
Explaining the structure of the Declaration for the benefit of persons accustomed to simple
lists or “bills” of rights, René Cassin compared it to the portico of a temple. The seven
clauses of the Preamble are the steps leading up to the entrance. The basic principles of
dignity, liberty, equality, and brotherhood, proclaimed in the first two articles,15 are the
13
Jatinder Kumar Das, Human Rights law and Practice 50 (PHI Learning Private limited, New Delhi, 2016)
14
Morsink, Johannes, “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, Drafting, and Intent”
(University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999).
15
Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and
conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
foundation blocks for four columns of rights: rights pertaining to individuals as such; rights
of individuals in relation to each other and to various groups; spiritual, public and political
rights; and, finally, economic, social and cultural rights. Crowning the portico is a pediment
consisting of three concluding articles that place rights in the context of limits, duties, and the
social and political order in which they are to be realized.
Based on the content and the nature of the rights enumerated therein, the 30 Articles of the
UDHR can be broadly classified into four categories.
ARTICLES GENERAL IN NATURE

Articles 1 and 2 of the UDHR come under this category. Both the Articles provide the
philosophical assumptions upon which UDHR is founded.
Article 1 proclaims that ‘All human beings are born free and are equal in dignity and
rights’16. It emphasizes that humans are endowed with reason and conscience and they should
act towards each other in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2 states that everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in the UDHR,
without distinction of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national
or social origin, property, birth or other status. It further states that ‘no distinction shall be
made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or
territory to which a person belongs’.17
In brief, Article 2 incorporates the principles of equality and non-discrimination and states in
a negative way what Article 1 states in positive terms.
These two articles assure that human rights are the birth right of everyone and not privileges
of a select few. All human beings are entitled to these rights, not because of any State or
international organization, but simply because of their common birth into the human family.

ARTICLES PROCLAIMING CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

This category comprises the largest number of Articles. Articles 3 to 21 of the UDHR set
forth the civil and political rights to which everyone is entitled. Articles 3 proclaims that
‘Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person’, i.e., the right to live and to live
in freedom and safety.
The rights recognized in Article 3 sets the base for all following political rights and civil
liberties, enumerated in the UDHR.
Article 4 provides that ‘No one shall be held in slavery or servitude’ 18. It further prohibits all
forms of slavery and slave trade. Thus, not only slavery but slavery-like practices, e.g.,
servile marriages in which women have no rights to refuse marriage or may be transferred
from one person to another upon the death of the husband, are also proscribed by this Article.

Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of
any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,
property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political,
jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be
independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
16
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
17
Ibid.
18
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 5 proclaims the individual’s right not to be subjected ‘to torture or to cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment’.19
The right ‘to recognition everywhere as a person before the law’ 20 is guaranteed to everyone
under Article 6 of the UDHR. The phrase ‘person before the law’ refers to the recognition
which States should accord to the right of all individuals to make, e.g., agreements or
contracts which courts will enforce, and start proceedings before courts to ensure that their
legal rights are enforced.
Article 7 declares that every individual is equal before the law and is entitled to equal
protection of the law without any discrimination 21. Thus, it ensures non-discrimination in the
application of the law in general, i.e., essentially, national laws.
The Article further states that everyone is entitled to equal protection against any
discrimination in violation of the UDHR and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8 of the UDHR aims to create a right of recourse to a domestic tribunal or a court for
a person whose constitutional or legal rights have been violated. Thus, it emphasises on the
point that no situation should ever arise where a person is without a remedy when his or her
rights are violated.22 However, the Article stresses that the person concerned should approach
to the ‘competent’ court.
The word ‘competent’ refers to court which have been designated for a certain purposes (thus
a person who claims that his or her intellectual property rights have been infringed should
petition to a court specialized in this question and not to a court which deals, e.g.,
environmental law).
Article 9, together with Articles 10 and 11, constitute fundamental legal safeguards which all
legal systems should offer to individuals, viz., freedom from arbitrary arrest, the right to fair
and prompt trial and the presumption of innocence.
Article 9 first of all proclaims that ‘no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or
exile.’23
The term ‘arbitrary’ is open to two possible interpretations. Firstly, an individual may only be
arrested, detained or exiled in accordance with legal procedures; and secondly, nobody should
be subjected to arrest, detention or exile, where there is no likelihood that he or she has
committed an offence. The second interpretation is the valid one, as laws often allows
sweeping power of arrest and because legal procedures may often themselves be arbitrary or
abused.
Article 10 provides for the basic right to a fair trial in both civil and criminal matters. 24 The
Article guarantees a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal to all
those who appear in court.
Article 11 paragraph 1 creates 3 rights in favour of persons charged with penal offences.
Firstly, the presumption of innocence, i.e., anyone who is charged with a criminal offence
shall not be treated as being guilty until his or her guilt has been proved; secondly, the right to
a defence, i.e., he or she must have all the guarantees necessary for his or her defence; and
thirdly, the right to a public trial, i.e., his or her trial must not be held in secret. The second
right imposes obligation on States to ensure that an accused person has both legal
representation and proper possibilities to establish his or her innocence, including the right to
call witness. The third right cast a duty on States to show that the law is being fairly and
properly applied.

19
Ibid.
20
Ibid.
21
Ibid.
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid.
24
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 1125 paragraph 2 provides freedom from the application of ex post facto laws and
penalties in cases related to penal offences. It means that a person shall not be punished for
those acts which were legal when they were committed and it also means that, if an act was
punishable in one way when committed, a later change in the law cannot increase the
punishment given.
Article 12 lays down the individual’s right to freedom from arbitrary interference with his
privacy, family, home or correspondence or attacks upon his honour and reputation. It further
provides everyone the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.26
The right ‘to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State’ 27 is
recognized in Article 13. It also proclaims the individual’s right ‘to leave any country,
including his own, and to return to his country’.
Article 14 guarantees the right ‘to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from
persecution’28.
However, it further clarifies that this right cannot be invoked ‘in the case of prosecutions
genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and
principles of the United Nations’.
Article 15 provides that ‘Everyone has the right to a nationality’ and one shall not be
‘arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality’29.
Article 16 paragraph 1 proclaims that men and women of full age have the right ‘to marry
and have family’. Further, they are entitled ‘to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage
and at its dissolution’.30
Paragraph 2 emphasizes that ‘Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full
consent of the intending spouses’31.
The use of the word ‘free’ is intended to eliminate any compulsion by parents, by the other
spouse, by the authorities, or anyone else. Paragraph 3 recognizes that the family, whatever
its nature is, e.g., nuclear, single parent or extended, is the ‘natural and fundamental group
unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State’.
The right ‘to own property alone as well as in association with others’ 32 is recognized in
Article 17. It also states that one shall not be deprived of his or her property arbitrarily.
Article 18 proclaims the individual’s right ‘to freedom of thought, conscience and religion’ 33.
This right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom to manifest his
religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance either alone or in community
with others and in public or private.
Article 19 recognizes the right ‘to freedom of opinion and expression’34. This right includes
freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information
and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
The right to ‘freedom of peaceful assembly and association’ is recognized in Article 20. It
further states that one cannot be ‘compelled to belong to an association’.

25
Ibid.
26
Ibid.
27
Ibid.
28
Ibid.
29
Ibid.
30
Ibid.
31
Ibid.
32
Ibid.
33
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
34
Ibid.
Article 2135 of the UDHR proclaims important political rights. Paragraph 1 of it declares that
an individual has the right ‘to take part in the Government of his country, directly or through
freely chosen representatives’.
Paragraph 3 further declares that the ‘will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of
government’ and requires ‘periodic and genuine elections’ by universal and equal suffrage
and to be held by secret vote for the expression of such will.
Paragraph 2 of Article 21 provides that ‘Everyone has the right to equal access to public
service in his country’.

ARTICLES PROCLAIMING ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS

Articles 22 to 27 of the UDHR form part of this category.

Article 2236 is the cornerstone of the economic, social cultural rights enumerated in the
UDHR. It starts with the proposition that everyone, as a member of society, is entitled to
realization of ‘the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the
free development of his personality.’ In order to achieve these aspired rights, the article
emphasises that national efforts and international cooperation should be taken and each
country must take into account its own resources and priorities. The Article then proclaims
the individual’s right to social security.
Article 2337 sets forth a series of rights. Paragraph 1 of it proclaims the individual’s right to
work, to ‘just and favourable conditions of work’, to ‘free choice of employment’ and to
‘protection against unemployment’. It further states that everyone has the right to ‘equal pay
for equal work without any discrimination’ (paragraph 2) and to ‘just and favourable
remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and
supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection’ (paragraph 3).
It also recognizes the individual’s right ‘to form and to join trade unions for the protection of
his interests’ (paragraph 4).
The right ‘to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic
holidays with pay’ is recognized in Article 2438.
Article 2539 paragraph 1 of the UDHR provides that everyone has the right ‘to a standard of
living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family’. This includes
food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services. It also recognizes the
individual’s right ‘to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood,
old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control’. Paragraph 2 of the
Article 25 acknowledges that ‘Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and
assistance’. It also states that all children shall enjoy the same social protection, whether born
in or out of wedlock.
Article 26 paragraph 1 deals with the right to education. It states that education shall be free
in the elementary and fundamental stages and that elementary education shall be
compulsory.40
It further states that technical and professional education shall be made generally available
and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. Paragraph 2
declares that the aim of education shall be ‘the full development of the human personality’;

35
Ibid.
36
Ibid.
37
Ibid.
38
Ibid.
39
Ibid.
40
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
‘the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms’; and the promotion
of ‘understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups’.
Paragraph 3 of Article 26 recognizes parents’ prior right to choose the kind of education that
shall be given to their children’.
Article 27 of the UDHR prescribes the enjoyment of cultural rights. 41 Paragraph 1 of it insists
that everyone has the right freely to participate in all forms of cultural life of the community.
They have also the right to be benefitted from scientific and technological progress.
Paragraph 2 proclaims the individual’s right ‘to the protection of the moral and material
interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production which he is the author’.
Paragraph 1 can be interpreted as prescribing both group rights and individual rights.
Paragraph 2, on the other hand, clearly prescribes individual rights.

CONCLUDING ARTICLES

Articles 28 to 30 of the UDHR, which constitute the fourth and last category, provide a
larger framework in which all human rights are to be universally enjoyed.
Article 28 declares that ‘Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the
rights and freedoms set forth in the UDHR can be fully realized’.42
Article 2943 is the only provision in the whole UDHR which speaks of duties. Paragraph 1 of
it acknowledges that, along with rights, every human being also has duties ‘to the community
in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible’.
Paragraph 2 of the Article 29 recognizes that the rights proclaimed by the UDHR are not
absolute but subject to limitations. It permits a state to enact laws limiting the exercise of
these rights, provided their sole purpose is to secure ‘due recognition and respect for the
rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order
and the general welfare in a democratic society’.
Paragraph 3 further states that these rights cannot be exercised contrary ‘to the purposes and
principles of the United Nations’.
The last Article of the UDHR, namely, Article 30, spells out a rule of interpretation. It states
that the UDHR should not be used as a pretext for violating rights in any circumstances. This
rule applies not only to States, but also to groups and individuals. Thus, no one may take an
article of the UDHR out of context and apply it in such a way that other articles would be
violated.44

UDHR AND CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW

It is, of course, unanimously agreed that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was not
viewed as imposing legal obligations on states at the time of its adoption by the General
Assembly in 1948. In the words of Eleanor Roosevelt, Chair of the UN Commission on
Human Rights during the drafting of the Declaration, and a United States representative to
the General Assembly when the Declaration was adopted:
‘In giving our approval to the declaration today, it is of primary importance that we keep
clearly in mind the basic character of the document. It is not a treaty; it is not an
international agreement. It is not and does not purport to be a statement of law or of legal
obligation. It is a declaration of basic principles of human rights and freedoms, to be

41
Ibid.
42
Ibid.
43
Ibid.
44
Ibid.
stamped with the approval of the General Assembly by formal vote of its members, and to
serve as a common standard of achievement for all peoples of all nations.'45
With time, the Universal Declaration has itself acquired significant legal status. Some see it
as having given content to the Charter pledges, partaking therefore of the binding character of
the Charter as an international treaty. Others see both the Charter and the Declaration as
contributing to the development of a customary law of human rights binding on all states.
It is clear that principles initially considered by the international community to be "only"
goals or aspirations can develop into binding norms over time, if they become accepted as
customary international law.46
During the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights, Malta called on all states "to
implement and enforce in a concrete manner the principles and purposes of the UN Charter
and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," thus implying equality between the two
documents and the binding nature of both.'
On the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration, a major international
conference of non-governmental organizations proclaimed unequivocally that the Universal
Declaration "constitutes an authoritative interpretation of the Charter of the highest order, and
has over the years become part of customary international law."47
A governmental conference held in the same year, at which 84 states were represented,
observed that the Declaration "constitutes an obligation for the Members of the international
community," although there was no elaboration of the precise nature of this obligation.'
The International Law Institute adopted a declaration in December 1969 which affirms that
there is an "obligation" on states to guarantee respect for human rights that flows from the
recognition of human dignity in the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.'
In 1994, the International Law Association observed that the Declaration "is universally
regarded as an authoritative elaboration of the human rights provisions of the United Nations
Charter” and concluded that "many if not all of the rights elaborated in the Declaration are
widely recognized as constituting rules of customary international law."48

INFLUENCE OF THE UDHR

The UDHR has exercised a profound influence, both internationally and nationally, since its
adoption. The UDHR provided the framework, upon which the two international human
rights covenants, i.e., ICCPR and ICESCR, were constructed and adopted by the UNGA on
16 December 1966. It has been the source of inspiration and has been the basis for the UN in
making advances in standard setting as contained in number of international human rights
treaties.49 The core international human rights instruments make reference to the UDHR. It
has inspired a number of declarations and international conventions concluded under the
auspices of the UN and of the specialized agencies. The UDHR as a whole or its different
articles have been frequently quoted in the resolutions of the UNGA as justification for
actions taken by the UN. The UDHR has also inspired major regional human rights
instruments. These instruments refer to the UDHR in their preambles.
45
Hurst Hannum, “The UDHR In National And International Law” 25(Georgia Journal of Comparative Law)
Available at https://cdn2.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/125/2014/04/16-Hannum.pdf (last visited
December 2, 2020)
46
Ibid.
47
Ibid.
48
Ibid.
49
Mary Ann Glendon, “The Rule of Law in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights” 2 (Nw. J. Int'l Hum.
Rts., 2004). Available at http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njihr/vol2/iss1/5(last visited December
2, 2020)
The practical importance of the UDHR has been demonstrated through its invocation by the
international as well as by the regional courts as an aid to interpretation of relevant human
rights treaties.
Although, there is a disagreement pertaining to legal effect of the UDHR, but its importance
within the context of human rights law cannot be disregarded. And this point has been
emphasized by the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, 1993, when it referred to
the UDHR as the ‘source of inspiration’ and the basis for the UN ‘in making advances in
standard setting as contained in the existing international human rights instruments’. Through
the Vienna Declaration, Representatives of 171 countries affirmed by consensus their
commitment to the UDHR.50

INFLUENCE OF UDHR ON THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

At same time when the Universal Declaration was being made, the Constitution of India was
also in making. Part III and Part IV of the Constitution were specifically created, with an
interest of providing for the Human Rights in the Constitution itself and on a further
comparison of the two documents, it is found that the two are conspicuously similar and tend
to give effect to promote the standard of the Human being as such and also to secure him the
natural rights, which formed a part of his right to live a peaceful and amicable right.
Many similar rights were incorporated in our Constitution under the headings Fundamental
Rights and Directive Principles of the State Policy in Chapter III & IV respectively and these
rights have a great significance for the Indian people as they have enabled every citizen of
India to live freely and honourably. A human being gets full freedom to develop himself
mentally and physically.51
The declaration of Fundamental Rights in the Constitution serves as a reminder to the
Government in power that certain liberties and freedoms essential for all the people and
assured to them by the Fundament Law of the land are to be respected.
The Fundament Rights that are guaranteed under the Constitution have a close similarity with
those in the UN Declaration of Human Rights which is clear from the following table:52

Name of Rights Universal Indian Constitution

Declaration
Equality before Law Article 7 Article14

Prohibition of Discrimination Article 7 Article 15(1)

Equality of Opportunity Article 21(2) Article 16(1)

Freedom of Speech and Expression Article 19 Article 19(1)(a)

Freedom of Peaceful Assembly Article 20(1) Article 19(1)(b)

Freedom to form association or unions Article 23(4) Article 19(1)(c)

50
Ibid.
51
Syamantak Sen, “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights- Foundation, Scope and Impllications”
available at: https://lexisnexisindia.wordpress.com/2018/06/21/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-
foundation-scope-implications/ (last visited December 2, 2020)
52
H.O. Aggarwal, International Law and Human Rights 790 (Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 20th edn.)
 Freedom of movement within border Article 13(1) Article 19(1)(d)

Protection in respect of conviction for Article 11(2) Article 20(1)

Offences
Protection of life and personal liberty Article 9 Article 21

Protection of slavery and forced labour Article 4 Article 23

Freedom of Conscience and religion Article 18 Article 25(1)

Remedy for enforcement of rights Article 8 Article 32

The Economic, Social and Cultural Rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights and also in the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are included in Part
IV of the Indian Constitution and are known as the Directive Principle of State Policy. The
Constitution therein directs the State to provide adequate means of livelihood, equitable
distribution of material resources, equal pay for equal work, a living wage for all workers,
just and human conditions of work, unemployment cover for all people in old age and
sickness, and free and compulsory education for children.

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF UDHR IN INDIA

The Hon’ble Court, while interpreting the provisions of the constitution, has not limited the
scope of the various articles to what was laid and understood by the constitutional framers (as
reflected in the Constitutional Assembly Debates) and for the betterment and well being of
the Country as a whole, the Court has read the Directive Principles of State Policy in the
Fundamental rights. In this process of deciding case after case on the aspect of human rights
of the citizens, the Court has consistently read the scope of Human Rights as in consonance
with the provisions of the Universal declaration, along with the other International
Covenants, to which India is a party.
In the celebrated case of I.C. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab 53 , The Hon’ble Supreme Court,
while discussing the constitutional validity of a provision, observed that ‘the importance of
Fundamental Rights in the world of today cannot be lost sight of.’ The Court, considering the
various aspects of Human Rights that the Constitution contemplated, also observed that ‘the
Declaration represented the civil, political and religious liberties for which men have
struggled through the centuries and those new social and economic rights of the Individual
which the Nations were increasingly recognising in their Constitutions. The Court also laid
that the Declaration was intended to give a key to social progress by envisaging rights to
work, to education and to social insurance.
In the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala54 , with the
text of the judgement running in hundreds, an important aspect of human rights was involved.
The issue that came up before the Court was that whether rights remain inalienable if they
can be amended out of existence?
One of the judges held that as the Preamble and the Articles of the United Nations Charter
provided the basis for the elaboration in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it
53
(AIR 1967 SC 1643)
54
(AIR 1973 SC 1461)
seemed a definite analogy, in view of Article 51 of the directive principles that the Court
must interpret language of the Constitution in the light of the United Nations Charter and
solemn declaration subscribed to by India.
The Court also considered the argument of Mr. Palkhivala, who contended that apart from
Article 13(2) fundamental rights were based on Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
being natural rights, were outside the scope of amendment. On this basis and on comparison
of the position of the Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution, the Court propounded
the theory of basic structure and came to hold that the Fundamental rights were also a part of
the basic structure and being as such, thus were inviolable and could not be curtailed by any
amendment what so ever.

In the case of Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration55 J. Krishna Iyer categorically
stated that in interpreting the constitutional and statutory provisions the Court must not forget
the core principle found in Article 556 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
1948.The court held that the ambit of personal liberty protected by Article 21 is wide and
comprehensive. It embraces both substantive rights to personal liberty and the procedure
provided for their deprivation and the handcuffing was a violation of right to live with
dignity, unless restricted in the interest and security of the state.
While considering the case of S.P. Mittal v. Union of India57, when the Court tried to
understand the basis of Fundamental Rights, it referred to the Universal Declaration. The
Court was precise in laying that Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India do not confer
any fanciful rights. They conferred rights, which were elementary for the proper and effective
functioning of a democracy and were universally so regarded, as being evident from the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Court laid that many countries in the civilised world had parted with their sovereignty in
the hope and belief that their citizens will enjoy human freedoms and they preferred to be
bound by the decisions and decrees of foreign tribunals on matters concerning human
freedoms. Therefore, the Court assertively laid that had Articles 14 and 19 been put out of
operation in regard to the bulk of laws which the legislatures are empowered to pass, Article
32 would be drained of its life-blood. Also that it was not possible to fit fundamental rights
and directive principles in two distinct and strictly defined categories, but it was to be stated
broadly that fundamental rights represent civil and political rights while directive principles
embody social and economic rights, representing the broad spectrum of human rights, as
contemplated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which contained not only rights
protecting individual freedom (Articles 1 to 21) but also social and economic rights intended
to ensure socioeconomic justice to everyone (Articles 22 to 29).
Therefore, it can be found that the Court tried to advance and present the model of Human
Rights, as laid under Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles in the Indian
Constitution, on the basis of the model of Human Rights as laid in the Universal Declaration
in two parts, as laid by the Court above.

CONCLUSION
The significance of the UDHR is clear from both a legal and a moral perspective. The legal
imperatives of the declaration, which were initially neglected but are gradually evolving,
have been justified through its role informing international customary law as well as its
incorporation into various national legislations. Meanwhile, the UDHR’s moral imperatives
not only inform human rights activism, as illustrated through humanitarian NGOs’ practice of
55
(AIR 1980 SC 1535)
56
Art. 5 --No one shall be subject to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
57
(AIR 1982 SC 149)
naming and shaming, but also inspire changes in the geopolitical landscape, evidenced by the
decolonization process and fading of the long Cold War. Perhaps most importantly, the
UDHR is observed to embrace many different types of interpretation and, hence, offers great
potential for growth over time. Indeed, it is a living document that is adaptable to the
changing world more than six decades after its adoption. However, there remain two core
challenges to the UDHR: its enforceability and the concept of cultural relativism. These
difficulties, far from weakening the relevance of the declaration in today’s society, prove that
the declaration has drawn more attention to the issue of human rights. Furthermore, many
improvements can be made to the further realization of the document as it continues to evolve
over time. The UDHR carries invaluable legal and moral weight. It has and will continue to
provide insight into the well-being of all of humankind.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 H.O. Aggarwal, International Law and Human Rights 790 (Central Law Publications,
Allahabad, 20th edn.)
 Jatinder Kumar Das, Human Rights law and Practice 50 (PHI Learning Private
limited, New Delhi, 2016)
 Olivier De Schutter, International Human Rights Law: Cases, Materials, Commentary
16 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014).

WEBLIOGRAPHY

 Duan, Fengyu, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Modern History
of Human Rights, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3066882 or
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3066882)
 History of the Document available at: https://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-
declaration/history-document/index.html.
 Mary Ann Glendon, “The Rule of Law in the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights” 2 (Nw. J. Int'l Hum. Rts., 2004). Available at
http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njihr/vol2/iss1/5
 Morsink, Johannes, “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins,
Drafting, and Intent” (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999).
 Natsu Taylor Saito, “Beyond Civil Rights: Considering" Third Generation" International
Human Rights Law in the United States,” 387-412 (The University of Miami Inter-American
Law Review, 1996).
 Syamantak Sen, “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights- Foundation, Scope
and Impllications” available at: https://lexisnexisindia.wordpress.com/2018/06/21/the-
universal-declaration-of-human-rights-foundation-scope-implications/
 United Nations, Commission on Human Rights, Summary of Meetings, UN Doc.
E/HR. 9, (1946).
 United Nations, Report of the Commission on Human Rights to the Second Session of
the Economic and Social Council, UN Doc. E/38, (1946).
 Universal Declaration of Human Rights Available at:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/universal-declaration-of-human-rights/