FRATERNITY SIDE NOTES

Apart from the preamble, like secularism and federalism, fraternity is not expressly stated in any
article. However it is reflected in various provisions of Chapter III of the Indian Constitution.
● INDIAN CONSTITUTION
The role of fraternity had been prescribed as ensuring dignity of individuals. The provisions of
chapter III are geared towards preserving and promoting the dignity of Individuals mainly,
Art. 19- Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc
Art. 20- Protection in respect of conviction for offences
Art. 21- Protection of life and personal liberty
Art. 21A- Right to education
Art. 22- Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases
Art. 23- Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour
Art. 24- Prohibition of employment of children in factories, etc
Art. 25-30- Right to Freedom of Religion, and,
Art 32- Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part
● In the judgement of Justice K S Puttaswamy (Retd.), And Anr. V. Union Of India,
(2017) 10 Scc 1 human dignity has been talked about.
[Para 85]
“But most important of all is the cardinal value of fraternity which assures the dignity of the
individual. The dignity of the individual encompasses the right of the individual to develop to the
full extent of his potential.”
[Para 95]
“Fraternity is to be promoted to assure the dignity of the individual. The individual lies at the
core of constitutional focus and the ideals of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity animate the
vision of securing a dignified existence to the individual.”
[Para 96]
“Dignity as a constitutional value finds expression in the Preamble. The constitutional vision
seeks the realisation of justice (social, economic and political); liberty (of thought, expression,
belief, faith and worship); equality (as a guarantee against arbitrary treatment of individuals)
and fraternity (which assures a life of dignity to every individual). These constitutional precepts
exist in unity to facilitate a humane and compassionate society. The individual is the focal point
of the Constitution because it is in the realisation of individual rights that the collective well
being of the community is determined. Human dignity is an integral part of the Constitution.
Reflections of dignity are found in the guarantee against arbitrariness (Article 14), the lamps of
freedom (Article 19) and in the right to life and personal liberty (Article 21).”
[Para 101]
“Human dignity was construed in M Nagaraj v Union of India168 by a Constitution Bench of
this Court to be intrinsic to and inseparable from human existence. Dignity, the Court held, is not
something which is conferred and which can be taken away, because it is inalienable:
“The rights, liberties and freedoms of the individual are not only to be protected against the
State, they should be facilitated by it... It is the duty of the State not only to protect the human
dignity but to facilitate it by taking positive steps in that direction. No exact definition of human
dignity exists. It refers to the intrinsic value of every human being, which is to be respected. It
cannot be taken away. It cannot give. It simply is. Every human being has dignity by virtue of his
existence…(169) India is constituted into a sovereign, democratic republic to secure to all its
citizens, fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity of the nation. The
sovereign, democratic republic exists to promote fraternity and the dignity of the individual
citizen and to secure to the citizens certain rights. This is because the objectives of the State can
be realized only in and through the individuals. Therefore, rights conferred on citizens and
non-citizens are not merely individual or personal rights. They have a large social and political
content, because the objectives of the Constitution cannot be otherwise realized.(170)””
[Para 103]
“In Dr Mehmood Nayyar Azam v State of Chhattisgarh173, this Court noted that when dignity is
lost, life goes into oblivion. The same emphasis on dignity finds expression in the decision in
NALSA.”
[Para 107]
“To live is to live with dignity. The draftsmen of the Constitution defined their vision of the
society in which constitutional values would be attained by emphasising, among other freedoms,
liberty and dignity. So fundamental is dignity that it permeates the core of the rights guaranteed
to the individual by Part III. Dignity is the core which unites the fundamental rights because the
fundamental rights seek to achieve for each individual the dignity of existence. Privacy with its
attendant values assures dignity to the individual and it is only when life can be enjoyed with
dignity can liberty be of true substance. Privacy ensures the fulfilment of dignity and is a core
value which the protection of life and liberty is intended to achieve.”

● ANGEL PUYOL
Angel Puyol discusses dignity in his book, Political Fraternity- Democracy beyond Freedom &
Democracy discusses dignity,
“The modern ideas of dignity and equality can also provoke in us a feeling of benevolence or
love towards humanity, but they do not rely on those affections. Kant expressed this extremely
clearly without mincing his words: That which refers to universal human inclinations and needs
has a market price; that which, even without presupposing any need, is in accord with a certain
taste, i.e., a satisfaction in the mere purposeless play of the powers of our mind, an affective
price; but that which constitutes the condition under which alone something can be an end in
itself does not have merely a relative worth, i.e., a price, but rather an inner worth, i.e., dignity.
(Kant, 2002 [1785], p. 53) Fraternity is related to dignity, whereas fraternisation belongs to the
world of affection.” (p. 113)

Angel puyol has also liked redistributive justice to fraternity

“This distributive conception of equity was to be taken up by Marx in the nineteenth century with
his proclamation: ‘From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!’ (Marx,
1978 [1875], p. 531). In the twentieth century, John Rawls, inspired by this tradition, again
associated fraternity with distributive justice and the principle according to which it is not fair to
appropriate a greater part of the wealth if the least advantaged do not benefit from it (Rawls,
1971, pp. 105–106).” (p. 37)

“Unlike Rawls, Cohen believes that the principles of justice should not be applied solely to the
basic structure of society; they should also govern indi- viduals. To put it a different way, the
principles of justice, in addition to legiti- mising a redistributive fiscal policy, should be
translated into norms of behaviour for individuals; they should be capable of informing people
what the just behaviour is in their relationships as citizens in the public sphere. Cohen thinks
that the principles of justice should act as a motivation for people to behave justly, and not only
in order to create and preside over just institutions.” (p. 134)

● FRATERNITY AND JUSTICE

This is reflected in the Article 51, Directive Principle Of State Policy such as,
A- to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the
National Anthem
E- to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India
transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce practices
derogatory to the dignity of women
F- to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture
G- to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife,
and to have compassion for living creatures
H- to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform
These have been linked to distributive justice. Some courts have categorised these under the
Rawls Principle of justice.

● Art 39 (b) talks about that the “ownership and control of the material resources of the
community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good” which has values of
Fraternity which in turn has been borrowed from the Irish Constitution. The biblical
meaning of the term “fraternity” can be focused around two poles: from Adam (cf. Gen
1–2), “He made from one the whole human race” (Acts 17:26), united in the community
by the bonds of blood, up to Christ, “the firstborn among many brothers” (Rom 8:29).
The fraternity of all people in the Lord comes from the relationship of the Son with the
Father, indicating a way of building human relationships with God and with each other.8
The natural fraternity, based on kinship, is completed by the spiritual fraternity of all
those who believe in Christ. (p 704 of Fraternity in the Teaching of Pope Francis)

● AMAYA’S ARTICLE
Since then, fraternity has had some constitutional recognition, appearing in the preamble of the
1848 French Constitution and in article 51 of the Indian Constitution, as well as in such
international law texts as article 1 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. (Page 2,
Footnote 3)

● DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE AND FRATERNITY

1. Janhit Abhyan v. Union of India, 2019
Bela M trivedi (pdf page 170)
16. “Economic empowerment to the weaker sections of the society is the fundamental
requirement for ensuring equality of status and to promote fraternity assuring dignity as
visualised by the framers of our Constitution.”
S ravindra bhat (pdf page 392)
180. In the light of the above discussion, it is held that the principles of non-discrimination,
non-exclusion and equality of opportunity to all is manifested in the Constitution through the
equality code, which is part of its basic structure. Their link with fraternity, which the Preamble
assures is intrinsic to “dignity of the individual and unity and integrity of the nation”, is
inseparable. The framers of our constitution recognised that there can be no justice without
equality of status, and that bereft of fraternity, evenequality would be an illusion as existing
divisions and “narrow domestic walls'' would fragment society. (97)
Paragraph 181-188, The principles of non-discrimination and fraternity in the
constitutional ethos (page 392)
Fraternity is deeply embedded in India's ethos and culture, central to the Equality Code. It
recognizes that all individuals share the same human experiences and limitations, despite
differences in ethnicity, religion, caste, gender, origin, or economic status. Fraternity calls for
collective cooperation and commitment, essential for creating inclusive institutions and
achieving societal progress.
India's Constitution fosters unity amidst its multidimensional diversity, promoting Justice,
Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. Fraternity implies brotherhood, emphasizing concern for others
and respect for diversity. Justice, Liberty, and Equality cannot be assured without a sense of
fraternity at all societal levels. Fraternity is the key integrator and unifier, crucial for national
unity and harmony.
 2. Air India Statutory Corporation vs United Labour Union & Ors on 6 November,
1996 (Page 23, 27, 29, 35, 36, 37) ( K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA, S.B.
MAJMUDAR)
Article 39(b) of the Indian Constitution is essential for distributing material resources to promote
distributive justice and restructure the economic order for the common good. The Supreme
Court, in Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing Co. v. Bharat Cooking Coal Ltd. & Anr., affirmed that
economic justice is a fundamental principle of Directive Principles.
Justice in the Preamble balances distributive and commutative justice, aiming to promote
community well-being and individual excellence, ensuring equality and fairness. Social equality
fosters fraternity and mutual respect, which are essential for a true democracy where every
citizen has equal rights and opportunities. To achieve comprehensive freedom, resources and
employment opportunities must be provided to ensure socio-economic justice for all, especially
the disadvantaged.

Agnes Heller, in "Beyond Justice," emphasizes the importance of distributive justice within a
broader socio-political context. Historical thinkers like Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, Locke, and
Hume highlighted the moral duty to alleviate poverty and balance property rights with social
utility. Justice K.K. Mathew stressed that balancing Directive Principles with Fundamental
Rights is crucial for distributive justice, underscoring justice's role in maintaining social order
and fairness.
3. Welfare Assocn. A.R.P., Maharashtra & ... vs Ranjit P. Gohil & Ors on 18 February,
2003 (Refer to Page 12, 14.)
Article 37 of the Indian Constitution states that while the Directive Principles of State Policy are
not enforceable by any court, they are fundamental in governing the country and must guide
law-making. Article 38 directs the State to promote the welfare of the people by securing a social
order where justice—social, economic, and political—prevails, ensuring equal treatment and
equitable distribution of resources.

Distributive justice, a concept endorsed by the Constitution, involves eliminating economic

inequalities and addressing injustices arising from transactions between unequals. The law
should serve as an instrument of distributive justice to ensure fair wealth distribution based on
the principle: "From each according to his capacity, to each according to his needs." This
encompasses various measures, such as differential taxation, debt relief, property redistribution,
and regulation of unfair transactions, to achieve a just allocation of material resources.
4. Gurbax Singh S/O Chanda Singh vs Financial Commissioner And Anr on 21
September, 1990 (Page 9-10)
In this case, the court aimed to balance justice and equity between the parties involved. Recalling
the principles of justice from Justinian’s Institutes, the court noted that justice is the constant
desire to give everyone their due, and jurisprudence is the knowledge of the just and unjust. Max
Rumelin and Gustav Radbruch highlighted the interplay between justice and equity, emphasizing
that distributive justice involves treating people according to their needs and merits.
Aristotle’s concept of commutative and distributive justice was discussed, with commutative
justice requiring two equals and distributive justice requiring three or more individuals, where
one authority grants equality of rights and capacities. Radbruch asserted that distributive justice
is the foundation of justice, guiding the law towards ensuring necessary conditions for human
life and perfection.
In this case, the Rehabilitation authorities decided the competing land claims. Given the scarcity
and increased value of the land, the court ordered the land to be divided equally between the
appellant and the second respondent. The Financial Commissioner was directed to execute this
division within three months, aiming for an equitable resolution and peace between the parties.
The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs, and a copy of the judgment was to be sent to
the Financial Commissioner.
5. Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Limited And Another v. Brojo Nath,
1986, (Paragraph 2, 358-360; Pdf page 7-8, 54)
The doctrine of distributive justice emphasizes achieving fairness and justice in wealth
distribution through regulatory measures, not just taxation. In Lingappa Pochanna Appelvar v.
State of Maharashtra & Anr., the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Maharashtra
Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974, highlighting the concept of distributive
justice in modern jurisprudence. Distributive justice involves rectifying economic inequalities
and injustices resulting from transactions between unequal parties. It advocates for a fair division
of wealth based on the principle of "From each according to his capacity, to each according to his
needs." This concept extends beyond taxation to include measures like debt relief, property
distribution, and regulatory control of contractual transactions to ensure fairness and equity in
wealth distribution among society members.

POLITICAL FRATERNITY: DEMOCRACY BEYOND FREEDOM AND EQUALITY (Angel

Puyol)

A DIVISION OF TYPES OF FRATERNITY

● Religious Fraternity or Christian Fraternity

● Fiscal Fraternity or Fiscal Justice
● Distributive Fraternity

A. ReligiousorChristianFraternity

​ ● In Christianity, fraternity is primarily viewed as a moral virtue practised among

believers, emphasising relationships within the Christian community and extending to
interactions with non-believers. Unlike in other contexts where fraternity may have direct
political implications, in Christianity, it is rooted in spiritual and moral principles rather
than being tied directly to political institutions or secular virtues. As mentioned in, “the
Christian
conception deals with the relationships that should exist between members of the
Christian community and also with the non- believers...Christianity conceives fraternity
as a moral virtue of believers – a virtue that the faithful should practise between each
other in their common relationship with God...but it is not seen as a secular virtue of
polit- ical institutions or independently of divine transcendence...” (Puyol González,
2019, p. 13)
​ ● “The first characteristic of Christian fraternity that needs to be emphasised here is the
absence of exclusion: its universality. That all human beings are brothers and sisters
means that there is a common link between all humanity.” (ibid)
​ ● “Christian fraternity unites Christians and non- believers in poverty and need, but this
does not mean that fraternity is completely universal. ‘The Christian is the brother of his
fellow Christian, but not of the non- Christian. His commitment to love is independent of
 this, however, and is directed toward anyone in need whom he can help’ (Ratzinger,
1993, p. 40).”
​ ● “Christian fraternity creates a real bond, whereas universal fraternity, extended to
include all human beings through the simple fact of sharing a common nature,8 ‘remains
an empty ideal’” (Ratzinger, 1993, p. 28)
​ ● “However, Christian fraternity does not translate into rights, either moral or legal. The
Christian duty to help those less fortunate than oneself brings with it a moral obligation
that is translated into Christian caritas, but there is no institutional and political
expression of such a need for charity – no political obligation that responds to certain
types of rights and moves beyond the principle of subsidi- arity, as we see in what
follows.” (Puyol González, 2019, p. 15)
​ ● “Christianity spiritualises fraternity because it spiritualises human subject- ivity and
interpersonal relationships. That is why fraternity is constructed in the realm of moral
conscience, but not in that of political institutions” (Puyol González, 2019, p. 16)
​ ● “In summary, the Christian conception of fraternity that we encounter in theological
and Vatican texts is strongly linked to paternalism, the principle of subsidiarity, social
integration and charity. The brothers with whom this fraternity is concerned are the
believers, because only they ‘were one with him in their assent to the will of the Father’
(Ratzinger, 1993, p. 40)” (Puyol González, 2019, p. 20)
SUMMARY-
The passage discusses the Christian conception of fraternity and its implications for
political history. It contrasts this conception with Classical Greek and Enlightenment
ideas, highlighting the universality and inclusivity of Christian fraternity. However, it also
notes that Christian fraternity primarily applies to believers, although extending to
non-believers in need. Ratzinger argues that Christian fraternity primarily applies to
believers, with a later extension to all those in need, emphasising moral duty rather than
universal political principles.
B. FiscalFraternityorFiscalJustice

● Fraternity in the French Revolution changed the meaning of fraternity from being just a moral
concept (christian fraternity) to now a political concept, “Fraternity acquired at least two political
functions during the revolutionary period. On the one hand, it was used as a guarantee of social
stability in the face of the pro- found changes that were taking place in the social and political
structure.” (Puyol González, 2019, p. 33)

​ ● “Under the Ancien Régime, the social and legal system clearly separated the
privileged from the common people. The latter, which included ‘peasants, servants, those
in domestic service, salaried workers who are under a superintendent, poor artisans,
official apprentices, women, and all those who, in order to live, have to depend on others,
asking them for permission’ (Domènech, 2004, pp. 84–85) saw in fraternity the best bond
to unite them- selves, and they discovered in the patria ‘an imaginary and privileged
place of freedom and equality’ (Borgetto, 1997, p. 23). Nation and patria figure as
original sources of fraternity. The nation reminds one of Mother Nature, who feeds all her
children equally, whereas the patria represents the protecting Father, who offers his
offspring safety of all types (personal, legal, social and eco- nomic): safety, which the
common people completely lacked under the Ancien Régime.” (Puyol González, 2019, p.
34)
​ ● “Fraternity as emancipation means being free from domination of all types, as I have
already said, but it also means being free from the fear and misery that result from living
under permanent submission or dependence on the will of another. Fraternity is
incompatible with social organisation and institutional design that allow that some live
entirely at the mercy of others due to the fear that the latter instil in the former or the
misery to which they subject them (Bertomeu, 2018).” (Puyol González, 2019, p. 36)
​ ● “Fraternity complements equality in the area of rights and it is translated into a
communal idea of distributive justice that maintains that all citizens should con- tribute to
the good of the society according to their abilities and they should receive from society in
accordance with their needs. The community should be considered as an ‘extended
family’.” (Puyol González, 2019, p. 37)
​ ● “In the twentieth century, John Rawls, inspired by this tradition, again associated
fraternity with distributive justice and the principle according to which it is not fair to
appropriate a greater part of the wealth if the least advantaged do not benefit from it
(Rawls, 1971, pp. 105–106).”(ibid)
​ ● “It was not a case of doing away with economic inequality, or of abolishing private
property, or of creating absolute equality, but rather of guaranteeing that the poor could
 subsist with dignity...In this way, the idea of fiscal fraternity (or fiscal justice) ‘according
to his abilities’ did not divide the revolutionary parliamentarians...It did not question the

legitimacy of private property, allowed for its public confiscation in case of need, as the Jacobins
understood it, that is, in the case of widespread misery and hunger.” (Puyol González, 2019, p.
38-39)

SUMMARY-

During the French Revolution, fraternity took on significant political roles. Firstly, it served as a
means of maintaining social stability amidst the radical changes occurring in society and politics.
Fraternity united revolutionaries against aristocrats and other opponents, reinforcing the idea of a
common nation as the framework for equality and freedom.

Secondly, fraternity represented an aspiration for social emancipation and justice, particularly for
the marginalised and oppressed under the Ancien Régime. Fraternity evolved from a moral
principle to a political demand for equitable distribution of resources and opportunities for the
common good.

The Jacobin interpretation of fraternity emphasised its role in achieving political freedom and
equality for all citizens. Fraternity was seen as a means of emancipation from various forms of
domination and oppression, leading to demands for social justice and redistribution of wealth.
Fraternity complemented the principle of equality by promoting distributive justice, where
citizens contributed according to their abilities and received according to their needs. Progressive
taxation and social policies aimed to ensure the subsistence and dignity of all members of
society, while respecting the right to private property and economic freedom.

● Fiscal Fraternity, the federalism cases laws, has centre state judgements, taking into
account the cooperation of states to ensure that the resources between states.