Abstract
Human rights are generally rights inherent to all human beings, whatever the nationality, place of residence, sex, ethnic origin, colour, religion, language or any other status. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible and more importantly equally entitled to all without discrimination. Universal human rights,including rights of civil servants, are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of Treaties, Customary International Law, etc. Every Government is thus obligated to secure, promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of all its citizenry. However, the ground picture both in Kenya and India is rather different as every civil servant is a silent victim of one or the other sort of human rights violation. This paper establishes various international Conventions, constitutional and legal provisions in existence both in Kenya and India that are intended to curb violation of human rights of civil servants.
Key Words: Kenya, India, Human Rights, Civil Servant.
Ā
Introduction:
Every human being, who lives in a human society, incidentally has some universally accepted human rights which are protected by the rule of law[1] and which are otherwise inherited from birth till death and nobody, including the law enforcement authorities has a right to breach these rights[2]. These rights are generally expressed and guaranteed by law in the form of treaties, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law[3].Both Kenya and India are signatories to three key United Nations backed Covenants that promote human rights of civil servants and other individuals i.e., the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 [hereinafter referred to as UDHR]; the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966 [hereinafter referred to as ICESCR]; and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966[4] [hereinafter referred to as ICCPR][5]. Apart from these Conventions, there are various constitutional and legal provisions both in Kenya and India that promote and protect human rights of individual in general and human rights of civil servants in particular. All these shall be expansively analysed in this paper.
Ā
ācivil servantā and āhuman rightsā: meaning and concept
Civil service, the backbone of the Kenyan as well as the Indian Government machineries which carries great respect and responsibility, constitutes all the Departments which run the entire State administration. āCivil servantā generally refers to a body of Governmentemployees entrusted with the administration of the country, and mandated to carry out the policy of the Government of the day[6]. The term includes members of a civil service of the National/Centre and Counties/States,or all those who hold civil posts[7] under the National/Centre or County/State Government[8]. However, the term does not include a member of a defence service[9] or even a civilian employee in defence service who is paid salary out of the estimates of the Ministry of Defence[10], or employees of the statutory corporations or Government companies registered under the Companies Act[11] even though they are regarded as instrumentalities of the State and thus āauthoritiesā for the purpose of Art.12[12].
The term āhuman rightsā on the other hand, has not been expressly defined in any United Nations Convention nor under the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 [hereinafter referred to as COK] or the Constitution of India, 1950 [hereinafter referred to as COI]. Human rights or fundamental or universal rights are generally inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because he/she is a human being[13]. In other words, they are rights interdependent, indivisible[14], inalienable and inherent to all human beings, whatever the nationality, sex, colour, religion,etc.[15]These rights therefore, may exist as natural rights or as legal rights in local, regional, national and international law[16]. Moreover, human rights are rights of āparamount importanceā and their violation āa grave affront to justiceā[17].Thus, public bodies must at all timerespect rights of all persons including the civil servants whether working at a high post or at the least post in the Government. The Government is therefore mandated to ensure that there are proper laws, rules and regulations in place for mutual respect of human rights.[18]
Human rights embodies two key features i.e.,they have right holders[19] and/or they focus on freedom, protection, status, or benefit for the rightholders.[20]Politicians are now keen to expanding the horizon of human rights. But they must be cautioned on expanding the list since that may lead toāhuman rights inflationā.[21]
Ā
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
The UDHR is a milestone declaration and/or a āmagna cartaā[22] in the history of human rights adopted on 10th December 1948 out of the experience of the Second World War.[23] It consists of thirty Articles which have served as the foundation for a growing number of national laws, international laws and treaties, as well as regional, national, and sub-national institutions protecting and promoting human rights of all persons including the civil servants.The Declaration asserts that every person has a right to life liberty and security of person[24]. This, of course, is the most fundamental right in the Declaration, since no other rights can be exercised if one does not exist. Besides, the Declaration refers to human rights as āequal and inalienableā and declares that human beings have āinherent dignityā.[25]
The UDHR further incorporates other rights namely:right to participate in Government and in free elections[26];right to adequate living standard[27];freedom from slavery[28]arbitrary arrest, torture and degrading treatment[29]; right to equality[30] and recognition as a person before the law[31];freedom from discrimination[32];right to free movement in and out of the country[33];right to fair public hearing including right to be considered innocent until proven guilty[34];freedom of opinion and information[35];freedom of privacy, family, home and correspondence[36];right to marriage and family[37];right to own property[38];freedom of belief and religion[39];right of peaceful assembly and association[40]; right to social security
civil servantsā human rights: constitutional and legal perspective
Both the COK and COI guarantee human rights in the Chapter on Bill/Fundamental Rights[43]. Besides, the Directive Principles of State Policy [hereinafter referred to as DPSP] under the COI supply the necessary guidelines for the effective implementation of fundamental rights[44]. Moreover, ratifiedInternational Conventions,Treaties and Declarations are also recognized under both the COK and COI[45]. There are a number of constitutional provisions that support, promote and protect human rights of civil servants both under the COK and the COI. They are:Ā
Right to life and freedom:
The most fundamental right on the basis of which other rights accrue is the right to life.[46]Chapter IV of the COK and Part III of the COI guarantees the right to life of all persons including civil servants by prohibiting arbitrary deprivation of life or personal liberty.Deprivation of life can therefore be justified either be the Constitution or any written law.[47]Art.21of the COI has been liberally interpreted so as to mean something more than mere survival and mere existence or animal existence[48]. It therefore includes all those aspects of life which go to make a manās life meaningful, complete and worth living[49]. Under the canopy of the Article, so many rights have thus found shelter, growth and nourishment[50]i.e., right to shelter[51], right to livelihood[52], right to receive timely medical treatment[53], right to privacy[54], right to good health, right to speedy trial and humanitarian treatment while imprisoned to all persons, etc.[55]All this rights are part and parcel of the human rights of civil servants.
This apart, civil servants both in Kenya and India are entitled to certain rights to freedom under Chapter IV of the COK and Part III of the COI i.e., freedom of speech and expression[56]; right to assemble peaceably and without arms[57]; freedom to form associations or unions[58]; freedom of movement and residence[59]; right to acquire, hold and dispose of property[60]; right to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business[61], freedom of religion[62], etc. These rights are however, not absolute.The Constitutions of Kenya and India confer power upon the State[63] to impose by law reasonable restrictions as may be necessary in the larger interest of the community.[64] The grounds for imposing these restrictions vary according to the freedom sought to be restricted, and they include restrictions relating to decency or morality, security of State, defamation, public order, incitement to an offence, hate speech, propaganda for war, maintenance of sovereignty and integrity of the nation, contempt of Court, etc.[65]restrictions however must be reasonable and not unreasonable. Unreasonable here implies that there is no proper balance between the rights of the individual and those of the society.[66]
While examining the reasonableness of a statutory provision whether it violates the fundamental rights of civil servants, the Court has to necessarily consider one or more of the following points:
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā the restrictions must not be arbitrary or of an excessive nature;
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā the DPSP;
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā the prevailing social values and social needs intended to be satisfied by the restrictions; etc[67];
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā the Court should be alive to the felt need of the society and complex issues facing the people which the legislature intends to solve through effective legislation.[68]
The freedoms guaranteed by Arts.33, 36, 37, 39 and 40 of the COK and Art.19 of the COI are further sought to be protected by Arts.25, 49 to 51 and Arts.20 to 22 of the Constitutions of Kenya and India respectively. Both Constitutions provide not only protection against arbitrary and excessive punishment to any person who commits an offence while in or out of the civil service[69] but they also provide specific rights to persons arrested and detained while in the civil service, in particular the rights to be informed of the grounds of arrest, consult a lawyer of one’s own choice, be produced before a magistrate within twenty four hours of the arrest, and the freedom not to be detained beyond that period without an order of the magistrate.[70]
Ā
Right to Equality and the Right against Exploitation:
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.[71] Every person therefore, is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in the Constitution, without discrimination[72] of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, marital status, dress, etc[73].The right to equality is therefore an essentialhuman right that the COK as well as the COI guarantees to all individuals including the civil servants for it affords protection not only against discriminatory laws passed by the legislatures but also prevents arbitrary discretion being vested in the executive[74].
Chapter IV of the COK and Part III of the COI guarantees equality before law as well as equal protection of the law to all persons[75]. This includes equal subjection of all persons irrespective of the social status to the authority of law, as well as equal treatment of persons in similar circumstances.[76] Thus, the Court is mandated to strike down any arbitrary executive or administrative action which involves the negation of equality.[77] Besides, the equality clause guarantees the right of hearing to the person adversely affected by an administrative order.[78]
The equality clause further emphasizes on the rule that āthe like should be treated alike and not that unlike should be treated alikeā.Ā InĀ Randhir Singh v. Union of India,[79] the SCI has emphatically held that although the principle ofĀ ‘equal pay for equal work’ is not expressly declared by the Constitution to be a fundamentalĀ right, it is certainly a constitutional goal under Articles 14, 16 and 39 (c) of the COI.Ā This right can, therefore, be enforced in cases of unequal scales of pay based on irrationalĀ classification. This decision has been followed in a number of cases by the SCI thus helping to instill equality in all matters related to civil service.[80]
All citizens also have a right to be treated equally in matters of public employment.[81]Recruitment and promotion of civil servants must thereforebe conducted in manner that is consistent with the provisions of the Constitution. The State is therefore, prevented from discriminating against anyone in matters of employment.[82]Both the Constitutions of Kenya and India however, creates exceptions for the implementation of measures of affirmative action for the benefit of any backward class of citizens, persons with disabilities, youth, minorities and marginalized group of persons in order to ensure adequate representation in public service.[83]This clause therefore, does not bar reasonable classification or differentiation of employees for reasonable tests for selection to the civil service[84] as the classification will not amount to discrimination if it is intended to redress imbalances.[85]
It can also be drawn that there is a nexus between the right to equality and human dignity. Human dignity is generally an inherent right to which all human beings including civil servants, regardless of their capabilities or disabilities are entitled to without discrimination.[86] It is therefore, a duty on every individual to respect the right of another.[87]
This apart, civil servants especially lower cadre employees are often silently exploited by their seniors despite the existence of certain provisions in the COK and COI. Part II, Chapter IV of the COK and Part III of the COI for e.g., contains certain provisions to prevent exploitation of the weaker sections of the society by individuals or the State.[88] Human trafficking, forced labor or any act of compelling a person to work without wages where he/she is legally entitled not to work or to receive remuneration is prohibited.[89]The prohibition against forced labour is however, made subject to one exception under the COI.[90]The State can impose compulsory service without pay for public purposes and in imposing such services, the State cannot make any discrimination.[91] The State may however, exempt women from compulsory service for that will be discrimination on the ground of sex and that is not been forbidden by the Article[92].
Ā
other constitutional and legal provisions:
Apart from the above fundamental rights, there are also some other rights under the COK and the COI that support, promote and protect human rights of civil servants. These are:
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Cultural and educational rights:For instance,any sections of the civil servants having a distinct language, script, culture of their own, have a right to conserve and develop the same[93].
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Right to Constitutional Remedies:Chapter IV of the COK and Part III of the COI incorporates provisions for the enforcement of fundamental rights[94].Superior Courts are generally designated Courts with power to issue writs, namely; habeas corpus,mandamus, prohibition, certiorari and quo-warranto for the protection and enforcement of fundamental rights under the COK as well as the COI.[95]
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Directive Principles of State Policy:One of the important features which is not clearly incorporated in COK but emphatically finds its place in the COI is the DPSP.[96] Although the DPSP are asserted to be fundamental in the governance of the country, they are not legally enforceable.[97] Instead, they are more or less an elaboration of principles, ideals and guidelines for creating a social order characterized by social, economic, and political justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity as enunciated in the COI’s preamble. The DPSP aims to ensure that the State providesfree legal aid to guarantee equal opportunities for securing justice to allirrespective of economic or other disabilities.[98] The DPSP also obliges the State to provide the right to work, education and to public assistance in cases of sickness and disablement, within the limits of economic capacity[99] as well as to provide for living wage, just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief, etc[100]. All these principles generally promote and protect the human rights of civil servants.
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Human Rights Commission: Another aspect that is incorporated in Part 5, Chapter IV of the COK but does not expressly find place in the COI is the provisions relating to the establishment of the Human Rights Commission[101].The Commission in India is rather established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993[102] which is in pari material with the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights Act, 2011. In either case, the Commissions are autonomous bodies charged with protection and promotion of all human rights for all individuals and groups including civil servants.
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā The Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940: This Act provides protection against injurious drugs as a result of onward march of science and complexities of living processes. New and emerging diseases, combined with the rapid spread of pathogens resistant to antibiotics and of disease carrying insects resistant to insecticides, are daunting challenges to human health.
Ā·Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisement) Act, 1954: The object of this Act is generally to control the advertisement of drugs in certain cases, to prohibit the advertisement for certain purposes of remedies alleged to possess magic qualities[103].
Ā
CONCLUSION:
A study undertaken in this paper establishes key international, constitutional and legal provisions including judicial pronouncements relating to civil servantsā human rights both in Kenya and India.It is a fact that there exist many challenges on the civil servantsā human rights horizon today namely, poverty, food security, terrorism, arbitrary transfers, stringent restrictions on forming unions, etc.Ā To confront these effectively, revision of the existing legal provisions, free and frank exchange of views, coordination at various levels i.e., national, regional and international levels, convergence in resources and technical cooperation, partnership with Non-Governmental Organisations and civil society groups is essential for better protection and promotion of human rights both in Kenya and India.
Submitted by:
Ratemo Tom Junior,
Department of Post Graduate Studies in Law,
Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University,
Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India.
[2]Human Rights,available at: http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights (Last visited on September 25, 2013).
[3]See, āUnited Nations Human Rightsā, available at:
http://www.uganda.ohchr.org/EN/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx.htm (Last visited on September 18, 2013).
[4] There are also other International Conventions that promote and protect human rights of individuals and groups i.e., the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of DiscriminationĀ Against Ā Women, 1979; the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006; the Convention Against Torture, 1984; the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 1965,etc.
[5] Art.2 of the new Constitution of Kenya, 2010 allows any Treaty or Convention ratified by Kenya to form part of the law of Kenya under the Constitution.
[6]āCivil Serviceā, available at: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/civil-service.html(Last visited on September 26, 2013).
[7] See, Jain M. P., Indian Constitutional Law, infra note 49 at 1564.
[8] For e.g., members of the police force [see, Jagannath Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1961 SC 1245]; officers and members of a High Court [see, Pradyat Kumar v. Chief Justice, Calcutta High Court, AIR 1956 SC 285; Akhil Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1960 All 193] are also considered as civil servants.
[9]InderSain v. Union of India, AIR 1969 Del 220.
[10]Lekh Raj v. Union of India, AIR 1971 SC 2111.
[11]Bool Chand v. Kurukshetra University, AIR 1968 SC 292; Rajasthan SRTC v. Gurudas Singh, (2004) 13 SCC 418.Also see, M.P. Jain, The Legal Status of Public Corporations and their Employees, 18 JILI 1-34 (1976); Jain and Jain, Principles of Administrative Law, Ch XXV (1986).
[12] Art.12, infra note 44
[13]SepĆŗlveda Magdalena, Van Banning Theo, GudmundsdĆ³ttirGudrĆŗn, Chamoun Christine & Van Genugten Willem J.M., Human rights reference handbook 3, 3rdedn., (Costa Rica: University of Peace, 2004).
[14]Human rights are indivisible meaning that one cannot pick and choose which rights he wants to honoursee, What are Human Rights?, available at: http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/human-rights/ (Last visited on March 28, 2013).
[15]See, āUnited Nations Human Rightsā, available at:
http://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx (Last visited on September 28, 2013).
[16]Nickel James, āHuman Rightsā, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fall 2010 Edition, 2010.
[17]See, Cranston, M., āHuman Rights, Real and Supposed,ā in D. D. Raphael (ed.), Political Theory and the Rights of Man, (London: Macmillan, 1967); Griffin, J., āFirst Steps in an Account of Human Rightsā European Journal of Philosophy, 9: 306ā327 (2001).
[18]Emphasis mine.
[19]Broadly, the right holders of human rights are all people living today.
[20]See, Brandt, R. B., āThe Concept of a Moral Right,ā Journal of Philosophy, 80: 29ā45, (1983).
[21]Cranston, M., What Are Human Rights?,(London: Bodley Head, 1973); Orend, B., Human Rights: Concept and Context, (Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press, 2002).
[22]Quote by Anna Eleanor Roosevelt, American first lady (1933ā45), the wife of Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd President of the United States, while chairing the United Nations Commission on Human Rights that was responsible for the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
[23]See, āUnited Nations Human Rightsā, available at: http://www.ohchr.org/en/udhr/pages/introduction.aspx (Last visited on September 25, 2013).
[24]Art.3, infra.
[25]Supra note 1.
[26]Art.21, ibid.
[27]Art.25, ibid.
[28]Art.4, ibid.
[29]Arts.5 and 9, ibid.
[30]Art.7, ibid.
[31]Art.6, ibid.
[32]Art.2, ibid.
[33]Art.13, ibid.
[34]Arts.10 and 11, ibid.
[35]Art.19, ibid.
[36]Art.12, ibid.
[37]Art.16, ibid.
[38]Art.17, ibid.
[39]Art.18, ibid.
[40]Art.20, ibid.
[41]Art.22, ibid.
[42]Art.30, ibid.
[43]See, Chapter 4, supra note 5 and Part III, infra.
[44]See, Part IV, the Constitution of India, 1950.
[45]See, Art.2, supra note 5 and Arts.51 and 253, ibid.
[46] The Constitution of Kenya: Contemporary Reading, infra note 85 at 66. See also, Nmehielle O., The African Human Rights System: Its Laws, Practice and Institutions 85, (2001).
[47] The use of the words āexcept to the extent authorised by this Constitution or other written lawā under Art.26, supra note 5 and the words āexcept according to procedure established by lawā under Art.21, supra note 44 justify this preposition/statement.
[48]Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597.See also, Basu, Durga Das, Shorter Constitution of India259, 13thedn.,(Nagpur: Wadhwa& Company, 2003).
[49] Jain M. P., Indian Constitutional Law 1225, 6thedn.,(Gurgaon: LexisNexis ButterworthsWadhwa Nagpur, 2010).
[50]Bakshi P. M., The Constitution of India 55, 8thedn.,(New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2007).
[51]Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan, AIR 1997 SC 152.
[52]See, Narendra Kumar v. State of Haryana, (1994) 4 SCC 460. See also, OligaTellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180; D. K. Yadav v. Y. M. A. Industries, (1993) 3 SCC 259; Dr. Hariral L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, AIR 1996 SC 1708.
[53]See, Paschim Bengal KhetMazdoor Society v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1996 SC 2426; PramanandKatara v. Union of India, AIR 1989 SC 2039.
[54]Govind v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1975 SC 1378.
[55]See, for e.g.,Govindaraju Alias Govinda v. State By Sriramapuram Police Station and another, (2012) 4 SCC 722; P. Vijayan v. State of Kerala, (2010) 2 SCC 398; Vakil Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar, (2009) 3 SCC 355; JapaniSahoo v. Chandra Sekhar Mohanty, (2007) 7 SCC 394.
[56] Art.33, supra note 5 and Art.19(1)(a), supra note 44.
[57] Art.37, infra note 90 and Art.19(1)(b), supra note 44.
[58] Art.36, supra note 5 and Art.19(1)(c), supra note 44.
[59] Art.39, infra note 90 and Art.19(1)(d), supra note 44.
[60] Art.40, supra note 5 and Art.300A, infra.
[61]Art.19(1)(g), supra note 44.
[62] Art.32, supra note 5 and Arts.25 to 28, ibid.
[63] The State, in this context, includes the Government and the legislatures as well as all local or other authorities under the control of the Government i.e., Municipalities, Local Boards, etc. See, Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohan, A. 1967 SC 1856.
[64] Art.24, supra note 5 and Art.19(2) to (6), supra note 61.
[65]Basu Das Durga, Introduction to the Constitution of India 101, 19thedn.,(New Delhi: Wadhwa and Company Law Publishers, 2004). See, Gopalan v. State of Madras, (1950) SCR 88 (253-54); Qureshi v. State of Bihar, (1959) SCR 629; The Constitution of Kenya: Contemporary Reading, supra note 46 at 80.
[66]State of Maharashtra v. Himmatbhai A., 1970 SC 1157.
[67]M. R. F. Ltd. v. Inspector, Kerala Government, (1998) 8 SCC 227.
[68]PapnasamLabour Union v. Madura Coats Ltd., AIR 1995 SC 2200.
[69] Art.25, infra note 90 and Art.20, supra note 61.
[70] Art.49, supra note 5 and Art.22, supra note 61.
[71] Art.1, supra note 1.
[72] The word ādiscriminationā here means any distinction, exclusion or preference that has an effect of nullifying or impairing equal enjoyment of rights, see, Communication 241/2001, Purohit and Moore v. Gambia, Sixteenth Annual Activity Report of the African Commission on Human and Peoplesā Right (Annex VII) Para 61.
[73] Art.27, supra note 5 and Arts.14 to 16, supra note 44.
[74] Laski Harold Joseph, Liberty in the Modern State 25, (New York: Harpers and Brothers, 1930).
[75] Art.27, infra note 90 and Art.14, supra note 61.
[76]Arts.27(8), 54 to 56, supra note 5 and Art.15 and 16, supra note 61 however, permits the State to classify persons for legitimate purposes.
[77]See, A. L. Karla v. P and E Corporation of India Ltd., AIR 1984 SC 1361, 1367. See also, Pandey , J.N., Constitutional Law of India 69, Allahabad: Central Law Agency, 2003; DwarkadasMarfatia and Sons v. Board of Trustees, Bombay Port, AIR 1989 SC 1642; LIC v. Escourts, AIR 1986 SC 1370; LIC of India v. Consumer Education and research Center, AIR 1995 SC 1811; M. S. Bhutt Education Trust v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2000 Guj 160.
[78]Delhi Transport Corporation v. DTC Mazdoor Union, AIR 1999 SC 564.
[79]AIR 1982 SC 879.
[80] For e.g.,DhirendraChamoli v. State of U.P., AIR 1986 SC 172; Daily Rated Casual Labour v. Union of India, (1988) 1 SCC 122,Mewa Ram v. A.I.I. Medical Science, AIR 1984 SC 1361, etc.
[81]See, Arts.27, 32, 55 and 56, infra note 90 and Art.16, supra note 44.
[82] Art.27, supra note 5 and Art.16, supra note 61.
[83]Arts.27(8), 54 to 56, supra note 5 and Art.16, supra note 44.
[84]All India Station Masters and Assistant Station Mastersā Association, Delhi v. General Manager, Central Railway, AIR 1960 SC 384; Jagannath Prasad Sharma v. State of uttarpradesh, AIR 1961 SC 1245; Indian Rly, SAS Staff Association v. Union of India, AIR 1998 SC 805.
[85] Lumumba P. L. O., Mbondenyi M. K., &Odero S. O., The Constitution of Kenya: Contemporary Reading 68, (Nairobi: Law Africa Publishing Ltd., 2011).
[86]See, Art.28, infra note 90 and Art.21 and 39(f), supra note 61.
[87] Communication 241/2001, Purohit and Moore v. Gambia, Sixteenth Annual Activity Report of the African Commission on Human and Peoplesā Right (Annex VII) Para 57.
[88] Art.30, supra note 5 and Arts.23 and 24, supra note 44.
[89]Ibid. See also, Suraj v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1960 MP 303.
[90]Art.23(2), supra note 5.
[91]Pylee, M.V., India’s constitution 56,(New Delhi: S. Chand and Company, 1999).
[92]See, āFundamental Rights in Indiaā,available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Rights_in_India.
[93] Arts.43 and 44, supra note 90 and Arts.29 and 30, supra note 44.
[94] Arts.22 and 23, supra note 90 and Arts.32 and 226, supra note 61.
[95] Art.23, supra note 90 and Arts.32 and 226, supra note 44. See also, RomeshThappar v. the State of Madras, 1950 AIR 124, 1950 SCR 594; Daryao v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1961 SC 1457, 1461.
[96] Part IV, supra note 44.
[97]Art.37, ibid.
[98] Art.39A, supra note 44.
[99]Art.41, ibid.
[100]Art.42, ibid.
[101] Art.59, supra note 90.
[102]See, Chapter II and V, the Protection of Human Rights Act, (1993).
[103]See, the Preamble, the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisement) Act, 1954.