Constitution, Social Justice and Human Rights Questions and Answers

Answer: C

The National Human Rights Commission was constituted in 1993.

It was set up on 12 October 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Ordinance, which was replaced by the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. Justice Ranganath Misra, a former Chief Justice of India, was its first chairperson. It is a statutory body, not a constitutional one.

1991, 1992 and 1994 are near misses. The Act came into force with retrospective effect from the date of the ordinance, so the Commission dates from 1993.

Answer: C

The answer is the welfare state.

In India the duty to protect the rights of the individual rests on the State. The Constitution makes the State responsible for securing fundamental rights and for working towards the welfare goals of the Directive Principles, and it acts through the courts, the human rights commissions and the administration.

Social workers, political parties and the family can promote and defend rights, but none of them carries the legal responsibility or the authority to enforce them. That responsibility belongs to the state.

Answer: B

Social justice denotes the fair and equitable distribution of resources, opportunities and privileges in society.

Social justice means that every person has an equal claim to the basic resources and opportunities of society, with special measures for those who are disadvantaged. In India it underlies the Preamble, the Directive Principles and policies such as reservation.

Distribution by individual capacity or by economic status would preserve existing inequalities rather than correct them. Financial aid to the wealthy is the opposite of social justice.

Answer: D

The Minister in-charge of the Ministry of Defense is not a member.

Under Section 4 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the chairperson and members of the NHRC are appointed by the President on the recommendation of a committee of the Prime Minister (chairperson), the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Minister of Home Affairs, the Leaders of the Opposition in both Houses and the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

The Prime Minister, the Speaker and the Home Minister are all on that committee. The Defence Minister is not.

Answer: D

The Right to Freedom does not include freedom to marry.

Article 19(1) guarantees the freedoms of speech and expression, to assemble peaceably and without arms, to form associations or unions, to move freely throughout India, to reside and settle anywhere in India, and to practise any profession or carry on any occupation, trade or business.

Freedom of speech, of expression and of assembly without arms are all in that list. The right to marry a person of one's choice has been recognised by the Supreme Court as part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, not as one of the Article 19 freedoms.

Answer: A

Both statements are correct, so the answer is (a) and (b) are correct.

(a) Fundamental rights differ from ordinary legal rights in how they are enforced. Article 32 lets a person whose fundamental right is violated move the Supreme Court directly, and Article 226 the High Courts; the right to approach the Supreme Court is itself a fundamental right.

(b) An ordinary legal right has no such remedy. If it is violated, the person must go through the ordinary courts first and cannot go straight to the Supreme Court. Since both statements hold, the options keeping only one, or rejecting both, are wrong.

Answer: C

The correct matching is i-(a), ii-(b), iii-(c), iv-(d).

• Right to Equality: Articles 14 to 18.
• Right to Freedom: Articles 19 to 22.
• Right against Exploitation: Articles 23 and 24.
• Right to Freedom of Religion: Articles 25 to 28.

The articles follow the order of the rights in Part III, so the pairs run in sequence. The codes that swap equality with freedom, or exploitation with religion, break that order.

Answer: A

Both are duties of the State, so the answer is Both (a) and (b) are correct.

The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, made under the Act, require that a copy of the First Information Report be given to the informant free of cost (a), and that immediate relief in cash or in kind be provided to victims of atrocity or their dependents (b). Section 21 of the Act places on the State the duty of taking measures for its effective implementation, including such relief.

Since both are statutory duties, the options rejecting one or both are wrong.

Answer: B

Lok Adalats were set up under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, as forums where disputes are settled by compromise, outside the formal procedure of courts, and they reduce the pending cases in courts so that justice is quicker and cheaper. The key takes the chief purpose, to decrease the case load of courts for speedy justice. A summary trial is a short court procedure and is not what a Lok Adalat conducts, and the people themselves do not decide the dispute, as a panel of persons helps the parties to reach a settlement. The decisions of a Lok Adalat are final and binding as a civil court decree and there is no appeal, though the parties are free to go to court if they do not accept the compromise. The answer is decreasing the case load of courts for speedy justice.

Answer: A

Denotified tribes are the communities which were branded as 'criminal tribes' under the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871, and which were freed of that label when the Act was repealed in 1952, so they are the ex-criminal tribes. They are not the untouchables, who are the scheduled castes, nor simply wandering communities or artisans, although many of them are nomadic. Today these communities are listed as denotified, nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes, and they remain among the most marginalised groups, with many of them still facing police suspicion. The answer is ex-criminal tribes.