Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

Introduction

“All human rights for all’ and ‘the world is one family” are the two notions that have relied
on the broadened definition of human rights, ensuring human dignity for every individual of
the human race in the global village.

The question of fundamental human rights has been relevant ever since the rudimentary
structure of human society came to be established. Such rights can be said to comprise the
basic needs of human beings, which include the right to food, the right to breathe clean and
unpolluted air, the right to shelter, the right to clothing, and the right to a decent environment,
all of which are essential for human beings to live and survive, as against natural rights,
which all living beings enjoy from birth and which no human agency can give or take away.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) declares, from the outset, that its goal
is to establish worldwide human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
is a building block in the modern history of human rights since it draws from ancient to
contemporary philosophies in response to the horrific events of World War II.

What are human rights

The term “human right” does not have a specific scientific definition. These are moral claims
that are inalienable and inherent in all human beings solely because of their existence. These
claims are expressed and formalised in what we now refer to as human rights, and have been
translated into constitutional/legal rights established through the law-making processes of
states/societies, both nationally and internationally.

Human rights are often defined as “inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is
essentially entitled just by virtue of being human.” Thus, human rights are understood as
universal (meaning they apply everywhere) and egalitarian (meaning they are the same for
everyone). Human rights is a generic term that includes and is the traditional civil and
political rights and newly developed modern economic, social and cultural rights.
Developments in England

Some of the significant developments witnessed in England with regard to human rights.
These developments include:

1. The Magna Carta Principles (1215)

2. The Petition of Right (1628)

3. The English Bill of Rights (1689)

Classification of human rights

Civil and political rights (human rights of 1st generation)

Civil rights or liberties are rights that protect one’s right to life and liberty. They are essential
for a person to enjoy a dignified life. These rights include the right to life, liberty, the right to
privacy, home, and correspondence, the right to possess property, the right to be free of
torture and cruel or degrading treatment, the freedom of thought, conscience, religion, and the
right to move. Political rights are those that allow people to participate in the formation or
administration of a government. Examples: the right to vote, the right to be elected in
legitimate periodic elections, and the right to participate directly or through chosen
representatives in the administration of public affairs.

Economic, social, and cultural rights (human rights of 2nd generation)

Civil and political rights are linked with western capitalist countries (eg. the United
Kingdom, the United States of America, and France). On the other hand, human rights,
according to socialist states, are those founded on the harmony of individual and collective
interests of a socialist society. The Russian Revolution of 1917 and the Paris Peace
Conference of 1919 gave birth to economic and social rights. With the emergence of
socialism in the twentieth century, these rights gained respect.

These second-generation rights are positive in the sense that they compel states to adopt
proper actions to safeguard them. For example, rights include the right to adequate food,
clothing, housing, and an adequate quality of life. It also includes the right to work, the right
to social security, the right to good physical and mental health, and the right to education.
Without these rights, human life will be jeopardised.

These rights have been recognised in the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and
Cultural Rights.

Relationship between two generations of human rights:

Even though the two sets of rights are recognized by the UN in two different Covenants, they
have a strong relationship. It has been correctly recognised that both kinds of rights are
equally vital and that without civil and political rights, economic, social, and cultural rights
cannot be fully realised, and vice versa.

About the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

As previously said the concept of inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms is not new;
nonetheless, the social and political setting of the mid-twentieth century was unique and left
an eternal impact on the development of human rights. At a time when society was
undergoing significant changes, the concept of human rights was also compelled to shift as
well. Following the end of World War II, the Holocaust inevitably shed light on human rights
issues, bringing those concerns to the forefront in the postwar era.

The scars left by World War II on the human fraternity made it necessary for every nation to
realise the need for an international instrument that would serve as an attempt or effort
towards ensuring peace and the protection of human rights. Therefore, a declaration that was
essential and that would serve as a guiding light in the direction of the protection of human
rights and the establishment of peace across the globe was drafted by the Commission on
Human Rights. This declaration was drafted in complement to and support of the UN Charter,
which mentioned the promotion of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted by the United Nations General
Assembly, is an international declaration that establishes all human beings’ rights and
freedoms. It was adopted by the General Assembly on December 10, 1948, at the Palais de
Chaillot in Paris, France, after being drafted by a UN committee directed by Eleanor
Roosevelt. The UDHR is a foundational text in the history of human and civil rights,
consisting of 30 articles in it. Although the declaration is not legally enforceable, the rights
are inscribed in the constitutions and national legislation of many countries.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, along with the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights with its two Optional Protocols, the International Covenant on Economic,
Social, and Cultural Rights along with its Optional Protocol, forms the International Bill of
Human Rights.

The UDHR, as mentioned above, comprises a preamble and 30 Articles that include both
civil and political, as well as economic, social, and cultural rights. Though there is no clear
classification of articles into the two categories in The UDHR, they can be broadly classified
depending upon the rights that each article guarantees. Articles 2 to 21 and Article 28 can be
classified as civil and political rights, and Articles 22 to 27 can be categorised as economic,
social, and cultural rights. The first article of the declaration is the conveyance of a message
to every individual to uphold the spirit of brotherhood, and the last two articles of the
declaration, i.e., Articles 29 and 30, are more like an obligation than a right; they impose the
duty or obligation upon every individual and state to not exercise any of the rights enshrined
in the Declaration in a way that would violate others’ rights and freedoms.

World Human Rights Day is observed every year on December 10th, the anniversary of the
adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Articles of UDHR.

The basic structure of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was influenced by the
Code Napoléon, a series of regulations written centuries ago by Napoléon Bonaparte.

Though its final shape took form in the second draft prepared by French jurist René Cassin,
who also contributed to the first draft prepared by Canadian legal expert John Peters
Humphrey.

The Declaration consists of the following:

The preamble of the Declaration outlines the social and historical factors that led to the
formation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 1: Free and equal

All humans are born free and equal, and they should all be treated equally.

Article 2: Freedom from discrimination

Everyone is entitled to claim their rights, regardless of their sexual orientation,

socioeconomic status, religion, ethnicity, or language.

 Civil and Political Rights: Articles 3 to 21

Article 3: Right to life

Everyone has the right to life, as well as the right to live in a free and secure environment.

Article 4: Freedom from slavery

No one has the right to treat anyone as a slave, and you have no right to enslave anyone.

Article 5: Freedom from torture

No one human being has the right to subject any human being to torture.

Article 6: Right to recognition before the law

Each and every individual should be legally protected by law.

Article 7: Right to equality before the law

The law is the same for everyone and it should be applied in the same way to everyone
without any discrimination.
Article 8: Access to justice

When the rights of individuals are violated, they have every right to seek legal aid.

Article 9: Freedom from arbitrary detention

No individual has the authority to arbitrarily arrest or detain any individual, or deport them
from their nation.

Article 10: Right to a fair trial

Trials should be open to the public and conducted fairly by an impartial and independent
tribunal.

Article 11: Presumption of innocence

Until an individual is to be proven guilty in a court of law, they are presumed innocent, and
hence they have the right to a defence.

Article 12: Right to privacy

Each and every human being has the right to be protected if someone attempts to damage
their reputation, access their house without permission, or interfere with their
correspondence.

Article 13: Freedom of movement

Everyone has the right to leave or relocate inside their own country and to return

Article 14: Right to asylum

Everyone has the right to seek refuge in another country if you are being persecuted in your
homeland.
Article 15: Right to nationality

Each and every human being has the right to be a citizen of a country and to have its
nationality.

Article 16: Right to marriage and to found a family

Men and women have the right to marry (only when they attain their legal age to marry)
without any regard to race, country, or religion. The government and the legal system of that
country should safeguard families.

Article 17: Right to own property

All human beings have the legal right to own property. No one has the authority to
unlawfully take them from any individual.

Article 18: Freedom of religion or belief

Everyone has the freedom to freely express, change, and practise their religion alone or with
others.

Article 19: Freedom of Expression

Everyone has the right to think and freely express ideas or whatever they decide.

Article 20: Freedom of assembly

Every individual has the right to hold peaceful meetings and to participate in them.

Article 21: Right to take part in public affairs

Everyone has the right to participate in the political activities of their country and has equal
access to public service.
  Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: Articles 22 to 27
Article 22: Right to social security

Every individual should be able to develop freely and take advantage of all the benefits that
their country has to offer.

Article 23: Right to work

Everyone has the right to work in just and fair conditions, with the freedom to select their
work and pay that allows them to sustain themselves and their families. For equal work,
everyone should be paid equally.

Article 24: Right to leisure and rest

Workdays should not be excessively long, and everyone has the right to rest and take paid
leave regularly.

Article 25: Right to an adequate standard of living

Everyone has the right to have everything you require so that you and your family do not go
hungry, are not homeless, and do not fall ill.

Article 26: Right to education

Regardless of race, religion, or place of origin, every human being has the right to attend
school, continue their studies as far as they choose, and learn.

Article 27: Right to take part in the cultural, artistic, and scientific life

Each and every individual has the right to share the cultural, artistic, and scientific benefits of
your community.

Article 28: Right to a free and fair world

To ensure that our rights are protected, there must be a court that can protect them.

Article 29: Duty to your community

We humans have responsibilities to the community that allows us to completely develop our
personality. Human rights should be protected by law. It should enable everyone to
appreciate and be respected by others.

Article 30: Rights are inalienable

No one, neither institution nor individual, should act in any way to undermine the rights
guaranteed by the UDHR.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Human Rights in India

India, as a democratic and welfare nation, has always given utmost importance to human
rights and has always been committed to the protection of human rights, which is also
reflected in the Indian Constitution.

The UDHR had a great influence on the Indian Constitution since the drafting of the
document was completed a year later to the adoption of the international instrument. India,
being a signatory to the proclamation, ensured that the principles enshrined in the UDHR are
also reflected in the Constitution of India. The words “Secular, Justice, Equality” in the
preamble, the very beginning text of the Constitution, reflect the spirit of India as a nation to
promote and protect human rights. The simple terms in the preamble are supported by Part
III and Part IV of the Constitution, which discuss the fundamental rights and the directive
principles of state policy.

Comparison of the Indian Constitution and the UDHR

The below table shows the comparison between rights provided in the Indian Constitution
and the UDHR.

Right Indian Constitution Universal

Declaration of
 Human Right

Right to equality Article 14 Article 7

Prohibition of discrimination Article 15, 16(2) Article 2, 7

Equality of opportunity Article 16(1) Article 21

Freedom of speech and expression Article 19(1)(a) Article 19

Right to form peaceful assembly Article 19(1)(b) Article 20(1)

Right to form association or union Article 19(1)(c) Article 23(4)

Freedom of movement and residence within the Article 19(1)(d)

Article 13
state and (e)

Freedom to practise profession, business or

Article 19(1)(g) Article 23(1)
occupation of choice

Right against retrospective application of penal

Article 20(1) Article 11(2)
laws

Right to life and personal liberty Article 21 Article 3

Right to education Article 21A and 45 Article 26

Right against arbitrary detention Article 22(1) Article 9

Article 22(1) and

Right to be heard Article 10
39A

Prohibition of trafficking and forced labour Article 23 Article 4

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

 Right to enjoyment of cultural life Article 29(1) Article 22 and 27

Remedy for enforcement of rights Article 32 Article 8

Right to adequate means of livelihood and standard Article

Article 25(1)
of living and health 39(a) and 43

Right to equal pay for equal work Article 39(d) Article 23(2)

Right to healthy childhood and special care and

Article 39(f) Article 25(2)
assistance

Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala & Anr. (1973)

Brief facts:

 In the present case, the petitioner was the chief of a religious institution (Mutt) in
the state of Kerala. The Mutt’s land was acquired by the state under the Kerala
Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1969. The petitioner challenged this Act in the
Supreme Court, contending that the Legislation is violative of Article 26 which
provides for freedom to manage religious institutions.

 The Parliament in the meanwhile passed 24th, 25th and 29th Constitutional
Amendment Acts, which added the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Acts,
1969 and 1971 to the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution and also curtailed the
right to property as a fundamental right.

 The petitioner challenged the constitutional validity of these acts and the power of
parliament to amend fundamental rights.

Issues:

 Whether or not the parliament can amend the fundamental rights.

  Whether or not the impugned Constitutional Amendment Acts are valid.

Judgement:

Though the present case is a landmark one that dealt with various issues, the relevant portion
of the judgement with regard to human rights is the issue of the power of parliament to
amend fundamental rights. The Court in this case held that the parliament has the power to
amend any provision of the Constitution, but the amendment should not be violative of the
basic structure of the Constitution which includes the fundamental features of the constitution
such as equality, justice, or any of the principles mentioned in the preamble of the
constitution. The basic structure also includes Part III of the Constitution which includes the
fundamental rights. The Court also held that though the UDHR is not legally binding, the
way the fundamental rights are drafted by the constituent assembly shows how India
understood the nature of human rights. The Court further held that the declaration describes
some rights as inalienable.

ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976)

Brief facts:

 The president of India declared a national emergency through a presidential order

under Article 352 of the Constitution citing threat to security of India due to
internal disturbances.

 The presidential order led to the suspension of fundamental rights guaranteed

under Part III of the Constitution. Simultaneously, the court proceedings with
regard to the application of Article 14, 21 and 22 of the Constitution were also
subject to suspension.

 The declaration of emergency was followed by arbitrary detention of various

politicians and others.

 As a result of the presidential order, the lower courts suspended the proceedings
dealing with the application of rights under Articles 14, 21, and 22 of the
Constitution. But the decision of a few courts was not in favour of the government,
and the government appealed such decisions before the Supreme Court.
Issues:

Whether or not the fundamental rights can be suspended during an emergency.

Judgement:

Hon’ble Justice Khanna, the dissenting judge in this case, while interpreting the presidential
order under Article 359(1), held that the interpretation of the presidential order, since it
affects the fundamental rights or human rights, should be in conformity with the international
customary law. Justice Khanna stressed upon Article 8 and 9 of the UDHR which provide for
the enforcement of fundamental rights and protection from arbitrary detention. He observed
that the Court should interpret the presidential order under Article 359(1) in a manner which
would bring it conflict with Article 8 and 9 of the UDHR. He therefore held that the
presidential order should not be construed to permit arbitrary detention or suspension of any
remedy for the enforcement of fundamental rights.

Kishore Chand v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1991)

Brief facts:

 In the present case, the appellant, along with two other accused, was charged with
offences under Section 302 and 201 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 for murder and concealing the dead body of the victim.

 The Sessions Court convicted all three accused for the alleged crime and sentenced
them to life imprisonment for offence under Section 302 and a rigorous
imprisonment of 2 years for offence under Section 201 of the Penal Code.

 The High Court, on appeal, acquitted accused 2 and 3 for offence under Section
302 and confirmed the conviction and sentence of the accused.

 Therefore, the appellant filed an appeal before the Supreme Court.

Issues:

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Judgement:

The Supreme Court, while acquitting the appellant, held that the police failed to establish the
guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and that there was fabrication of evidence by
the investigating officer. The Court also held that the investigating officer also violated the
fundamental right to personal liberty of the accused by framing them for offences punishable
with capital punishment. The Court further observed that, though investigating heinous
crimes is a difficult task since such crimes are committed with great secrecy, it is necessary to
consider the precious fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed by Article 3 of
the UDHR and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The Court also invoked the right to
defend guaranteed under Article 10 of the universal declaration and held that assigning an
experienced defence counsel to the accused is an important aspect of a fair trial and the
inbuilt right to life and liberty as guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the
Constitution.

Chairman, Railway Board & Ors. v. Mrs. Chandrima Das & Ors. (2000)

Brief facts:

 In the present case, a few railway employees committed rape of a woman, who
was a Bangladeshi national, at the ‘Rail Yatri Niwas’, Howrah railway station.

 Mrs. Chandrima Das, an advocate, filed a petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution before the Calcutta High Court claiming compensation for the victim.
The High Court awarded a compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs to the victim, which was
to be paid by the railway board since the offence was committed by the railway
employees on the station premises.

 The railway board filed an appeal before the Supreme Court contending that it
would not be liable to pay the compensation since the victim was a foreigner and
not an Indian national. The board also contended that the offence was an
individual act of persons, and hence it would not be liable to pay compensation for
the acts of concerned individuals. The board had further contended that
compensation could not be awarded since the petitioner was not the victim herself.
Issues:

Whether the railway board is liable to pay the compensation.

Judgement:

The Court dismissed the appeal and held the railway board and the central government
vicariously liable. The Court, while upholding the compensation awarded to the victim,
discussed the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court held that
fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution are in consonance with the rights set
out in the UDHR. Therefore the meaning of the term ‘life’ under Article 3 of the Constitution
has to have the same meaning under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court held that the
meaning of the term life under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be narrowed down.
Though the fundamental rights are available to the citizens of the nation, a few of them are
available to any person, be it a citizen or a foreigner.

Thalappalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors. (2013)

Brief facts:

 In the present case, a person named Sunil Kumar filed an RTI application seeking
information about some members of a co-operative society.

 The Kerala State government issued a circular stating that all the co-operative
societies registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 fall within
the definition of ‘Public Authority’ under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005 as a
result of it being obligatory to provide the information sought by any citizen under
the RTI Act.

 The co-operative society filed a writ petition before the Kerala High Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the circular. The Court upheld the
circular.

 After a series of appeals that involved overturning and upholding decision of the
Kerala High Court, the present appeal is filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Issues:
Whether the Co-operative societies fall within the definition of ‘Public Authority’ under
Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Judgement:

The Court in this case answered the issue negatively, holding that the co-operative societies
do not fall under the definition of public authority. The Court held that the furnishing
personal information of an individual that has no public interest would be a violation of the
individual’s right to privacy, which has been recognised as a basic human right under Article
12 of the UDHR and also as an implied right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The
Court in this case also observed that the right to information is also a fundamental right under
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, though it is not explicitly mentioned. It further noted that
Article 19 of the universal declaration also recognises right to information as a fundamental
human right.

K.S. Puttaswamy & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. (2017)

Brief facts:

 The government launched AADHAR, which was made mandatory for availing
certain schemes.

 An individual was required to provide biometric data while signing up for

AADHAR.

 The petitioner, who is Retd. Justice, challenged the Aadhar scheme before the
Supreme Court, contending that it violates the right to privacy of an individual .

Issues:

Whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right and a constitutionally protected value.

Judgement:

The Supreme Court in this case held that the right to privacy is an essential part of the right to
life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court observed that the
right to privacy is recognised as an international human right by Article 12 of the UDHR to
which India is also a signatory. The Court therefore observed that recognition of privacy as a
fundamental constitutional value is part of India’s commitment to global human rights,
as Article 51 of the Constitution requires the state to respect international law and treaty
obligations. The Court further held that the importance of the right to privacy cannot be
diluted.

Conclusion

In a world where human rights enforcement is still a challenge in both developed and
developing countries, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) serves as a
lighthouse for the international community on the standards that should be set for the
protection and promotion of human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
marked the beginning of a new era of hope for respect for all people’s inherent equality and
dignity. It paved the way for the drafting of international human rights treaties and the
formation of several human rights organisations. It gave greater legitimacy to the subject of
human rights around the world, putting it firmly on the agendas of both national governments
and the international community.

Despite these great achievements, the last seventy-three years have also shown that, in the
absence of political will and resources, complete respect for human rights remains a pledge
on paper. Even in recent scenarios, the fight against crime and terrorism has also put a strain
on fundamental rights.

So governments today must show the same degree of vision, courage, and commitment that
led the United Nations to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights seventy-three
years ago.