Fundamental Duties

Introduction:

The Fundamental Duties are an important part of Indian Constitution. The duties prescribed, embody some of the highest ideals preached by our great saints, philosophers, social reformers and political leaders. No Duties of the Citizen were incorporated in the original constitution of India at the time of its commencement in 1950.

Their inclusion came later as a response to evolving socio-political needs and philosophical influences, reflecting a balance between rights and responsibilities in a democratic society.

Evolution and Origin of Fundamental Duties

The concept of Fundamental Duties emerged during the Emergency (1975-77), when the need for civic obligations gained prominence.

1. 1. Post-Independence Context:
      • The Constitution, as originally framed, emphasized Fundamental Rights (Part III) to protect individual liberties against state overreach, inspired by Western liberal democratic ideals like the U.S. Bill of Rights. However, it did not explicitly enumerate duties, assuming civic responsibility would be implicit in citizenship.
   2. Swaran Singh Committee (1976):
      • During the Emergency (1975-1977), the need to emphasize citizens’ obligations to the state gained prominence. The Swaran Singh Committee, set up by the Indira Gandhi government, recommended the incorporation of Fundamental Duties to counterbalance Fundamental Rights and foster national unity and discipline.
      • The committee drew inspiration from the Soviet Constitution (USSR), which emphasized duties alongside rights, reflecting a socialist influence amid India’s growing alignment with socialist principles.

1. 3. 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976:
      • Based on the committee’s recommendations, Fundamental Duties were introduced under Article 51A in Part IV-A of the Constitution through the 42nd Amendment. Initially, ten duties were listed, reflecting a blend of moral, civic, and nationalistic obligations.
      • This amendment was enacted during the Emergency, raising debates about its timing and intent, though it was retained post-Emergency, signalling broad political acceptance.
   4. 11th Duty Added (2002):
      • The 86th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2002, added a new duty under Article 51A(k), making it a fundamental duty of parents or guardians to provide opportunities for education to children aged 6-14 years.
      • This was linked to the Right to Education under Article 21A, reinforcing the interplay between rights and duties.
   5. Philosophical and Cultural Roots:
      • Beyond legal and political origins, Fundamental Duties draw from Indian traditions like Dharma (duty) in ancient texts (e.g., Bhagavad Gita), which emphasize responsibilities toward society, family, and the nation.
      • Gandhian ideals of selfless service and collective welfare also subtly influenced their inclusion.

Nature of Fundamental Duties

The Fundamental Duties under Article 51A are a unique feature of the Indian Constitution. Their nature can be analysed as follows:

1. 1. Non-Justiciable Character:
      • Unlike Fundamental Rights, which are enforceable through courts, Fundamental Duties are non-justiciable, meaning citizens cannot be legally penalized for failing to perform them. They serve as moral and ethical guidelines rather than binding obligations.
      • However, they can guide judicial interpretation (e.g., in public interest litigation) and inform state policy, as seen in cases like M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (1987), where environmental protection duties were emphasized.
   2. Directed Toward Citizens: Unlike the Directive Principles of State Policy, which guide the state, Fundamental Duties under Article 51A target citizens directly. These duties urge individuals enjoying Fundamental Rights to honour the Constitution’s ethos, foster unity, and cultivate a sense of fraternity among all.
   3. Scope and Coverage:
      • The 11 duties encompass a wide range of obligations:
        • Civic Duties: E.g., to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions (Article 51A(a)).
        • Moral Duties: E.g., to cherish noble ideals of the freedom struggle (Article 51A(b)) and uphold scientific temper (Article 51A(h)).
        • Nationalistic Duties: E.g., to defend the country and promote unity (Article 51A(c) and (f)).
        • Social Duties: E.g., to protect the environment (Article 51A(g)) and ensure education for children (Article 51A(k)).
      • They address both individual behaviour and collective responsibility, reflecting a holistic vision of citizenship.
   4. Inspirational and Educational Role:
      • The duties are hortatory in nature, intended to inspire citizens and instill a sense of discipline and patriotism. They align with the Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV), which also guide governance without being enforceable.
      • They serve an educational purpose, reminding citizens that rights come with corresponding responsibilities, a concept rooted in Rousseau’s social contract theory adapted to the Indian context.
   5. Dynamic and Reflective of Indian Ethos:
      • The duties reflect India’s socio-cultural diversity and historical struggles (e.g., references to the freedom struggle and composite culture). Their addition over time (e.g., education duty in 2002) shows adaptability to contemporary needs like environmental conservation and child welfare.
   6. Applicable Only to Citizens: In contrast to some Fundamental Rights, which extend to foreigners (e.g., equality before law under Article 14), Fundamental Duties exclusively apply to Indian citizens, highlighting their unique role in defining citizenship responsibilities.

List of Fundamental Duties

1. To abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National Anthem.
2. To cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom.
3. To uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.
4. To defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so.
5. To promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities and to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women.
6. To value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture.
7. To protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures.
8. To develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform.
9. To safeguard public property and to abjure violence.
10. To strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity, so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement.
11. Subsequently, another duty was added by the 86th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2002: for a parent or guardian to provide opportunities for education of the child or ward between the age of six and fourteen (It was added when under Article 21A Right to education was made a FR).

Enforcement of Fundamental Duties

The Constitution does not provide mechanisms for directly enforcing Fundamental Duties or punishing their violation. Nevertheless, their influence is felt indirectly:

• Judicial Role: Courts may uphold a law’s validity under Articles 14 or 19 if it aligns with a Fundamental Duty, deeming it “reasonable.”
  • For example, in cases like M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court linked Article 51A(g) (environmental protection) with Articles 21, 47, and 48A, adopting principles like sustainable development, the precautionary principle, and the polluter pays principle as part of Indian law.
• Deterrent Function: These duties act as a moral caution against anti-social acts, such as defacing public property or disrespecting national symbols, encouraging responsible behaviour.
• Interconnectedness with Parts III and IV: Fundamental Duties (Part IV-A), Fundamental Rights (Part III), and Directive Principles (Part IV) share a symbiotic relationship. Courts interpret these provisions holistically, ensuring that rights, governance principles, and duties reinforce each other. Thus, individual duties contribute to the state’s collective responsibility.

Legal Provisions Supporting Fundamental Duties

The absence of direct enforcement does not stem from a lack of concern but rather from gaps in implementation strategies. Several laws indirectly uphold these duties:

• National Honour: The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, and the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950, safeguard the dignity of national symbols like the Flag and Anthem. The Flag Code of India further guides their proper use.
• Social Harmony: Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) penalizes acts promoting enmity between groups based on religion, race, or language, while Section 153B addresses actions harming national integration.
• Religious Respect: Sections 295-298 of the IPC tackle offenses against religion, and the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955, punishes caste-based discrimination.
• Electoral Integrity: Under the Representation of People Act, 1951, Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) classify appeals to religion or communal hatred as corrupt practices, potentially disqualifying offenders from legislative roles (Section 8A).
• Unlawful Activities: The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, allows declaring communal organizations unlawful.

Judicial Insights on Fundamental Duties

The judiciary has significantly shaped the understanding and application of Fundamental Duties, despite their non-justiciable status.

1. C. Mehta vs. Union of India (1987 and subsequent cases):

• Context: A series of public interest litigations (PILs) on environmental degradation (e.g., Ganga pollution, industrial emissions).
• Insight: The Supreme Court linked Article 51A(g) (duty to protect the environment) with Fundamental Rights (Article 21 – right to life) and Directive Principles (Articles 47, 48A).
• Ruling: Introduced the principles of sustainable development, precautionary principle, and polluter pays principle as part of Indian law, asserting that citizens’ duty to safeguard the environment complements the state’s obligations.

2. P. Unnikrishnan vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993):

• Context: A case on the right to education.
• Insight: The Court indirectly supported the idea that Fundamental Duties (later formalized under Article 51A(k) in 2002) and rights are interconnected, emphasizing education as a societal obligation.
  • This Laid groundwork for the 86th Amendment (2002), which added the duty of parents to educate children aged 6-14, aligning with Article 21A (right to education).

3. AIFF vs. State of Goa (1997):

• Context: A case involving public property destruction.
• Insight: The Court referred to Article 51A(j) (duty to strive toward excellence) and Article 51A(g) (protect public property), using Fundamental Duties as a moral framework to condemn anti-social acts.

4. Rangnath Mishra vs. Union of India (2003):

• Context: A petition following the Justice Verma Committee report, seeking enforcement of Fundamental Duties.
• Insight: The Supreme Court directed the central government to consider enacting laws to enforce Fundamental Duties, as recommended by the Verma Committee, acknowledging their importance in fostering civic responsibility.

5. In Re Ramlila Maidan Incident vs. Home Secretary (2012)

• Criticized excessive state action while urging citizens to respect public property (Article 51A(g)) and lawful orders.

6. Shyam Narayan Chouksey vs. Union of India (2018):

• Context: A PIL on mandatory playing of the National Anthem in cinemas.
• Insight: The Court connected Article 51A(a) (duty to respect the Constitution and national symbols) with patriotic obligations, initially mandating the Anthem’s playing, though later making it optional.

Judicial Philosophy:

• The Supreme Court has consistently held that Fundamental Duties, though non-justiciable, serve as a conscience of the Constitution. In cases testing the reasonableness of laws under Articles 14 and 19, courts may uphold legislation if it aligns with a Fundamental Duty (e.g., Bijoe Emmanuel vs. State of Kerala, 1986, balanced rights and duties regarding the National Anthem).
• The judiciary views Parts III (Fundamental Rights), IV (Directive Principles), and IV-A (Fundamental Duties) as a trinity, urging a harmonious interpretation to ensure rights are exercised responsibly.

Recent Developments:

• M.C. Mehta Cases (Ongoing Legacy): Building on earlier rulings (e.g., 1987, 1998, 2000), the Supreme Court in 2023 revisited environmental duties in a PIL concerning Delhi’s air pollution. It reiterated Article 51A(g), urging citizens and the state to act cohesively, reinforcing sustainable development principles.
• Madhya Pradesh Illegal Mining Case (2024): The Court penalized mining firms for ecological damage, citing citizens’ duties alongside state obligations, echoing the Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum (1996) precedent on the polluter pays principle.
• Voting as a Duty: In a 2023 election-related petition, the Court referenced Shri Ranganath Mishra (2003), hinting at voting as an implicit civic duty under Article 51A, though not enforceable.

Criticism of Fundamental Duties:

• Non-Justiciable Nature: Unlike Fundamental Rights (Part III), which are enforceable via courts, Fundamental Duties lack legal binding force. There is no direct mechanism to penalize violations, rendering them mere moral exhortations.

• • E.g. Acts like disrespecting the National Flag (Article 51A(a)) or damaging public property (Article 51A(i)) are widespread, yet citizens face no constitutional repercussions unless covered by separate laws (e.g., Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971).

• Vague and Ambiguous Framing: Many duties, such as “cherishing noble ideals of the freedom struggle” (Article 51A(b)) or “promoting scientific temper” (Article 51A(h)), are abstract and subjective, lacking clear definitions or actionable steps.
  • This vagueness dilutes their practical utility, leaving citizens and authorities uncertain about compliance. For instance, what constitutes “excellence” under Article 51A(j) varies widely across contexts.
• Timing and Political Context of Introduction: Introduced during the Emergency (1975-77) via the 42nd Amendment, Fundamental Duties carry a historical stigma of authoritarian Critics argue they were a tool to shift focus from state accountability to citizen obligations amid rights suppression.
  • This origin fuels scepticism about their legitimacy, with some viewing them as a political ploy rather than a genuine constitutional enhancement.
• Limited Scope and Inclusivity: Fundamental Duties apply only to citizens, excluding foreigners, unlike certain Fundamental Rights (e.g., Article 14). Moreover, they omit critical contemporary duties, such as digital responsibility or gender equality promotion.
• Lack of Awareness and Implementation: Despite judicial nudges (e.g., Shri Ranganath Mishra, 2003) and policy efforts (e.g., Constitution Day campaigns), public awareness of Fundamental Duties remains low. Recommendations from the Justice Verma Committee (1998) for educational integration are largely unimplemented.
  • Without robust awareness or enforcement mechanisms, duties like protecting the environment (Article 51A(g)) see limited compliance, evident in persistent pollution and vandalism.
• Imbalance with Fundamental Rights: The Constitution prioritizes enforceable rights over duties, creating a lopsided framework. Citizens often invoke rights (e.g., Article 19) without corresponding accountability to duties, weakening the intended equilibrium.
  • g. Protests damaging public property highlight the disconnect—rights are exercised, but duties ignored. Judicial balancing (Rural Litigation, 1985) is sporadic, not systemic.
• Comparison with Global Practices: Unlike nations like Singapore, where civic duties (e.g., cleanliness) are legally enforceable with fines, India’s approach relies on persuasion, reducing effectiveness.
  • The Soviet-inspired model (emphasizing duties) was adopted without its coercive backbone.
• Overemphasis in Rhetoric, Underperformance in Action: Recent government campaigns (e.g., #DutyFirst, 2024) and speeches (e.g., PM’s Constitution Day address, 2024) glorify Fundamental Duties, yet tangible outcomes lag. Critics see this as symbolic posturing rather than substantive reform.

Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties:

• Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties are inter-related and one can’t exist without the other.
• “Fundamental rights can be defined as privileges granted to each individual of the country to enjoy and the Fundamental Duties are the moral responsibilities which one needs to carry out in order to respect the rights of another individual and perform social obligations,” says Advocate Manuj Chadha.