Double standards

Sir, - There are 16 Directive Principles of State Policy contained in Part IV of the Constitution. They are recommendatory and not enforceable in courts. On the contrary freedom of religion emanates from fundamental rights which are enforceable. Hence fundamental rights get precedence over the Directive Principles.

Some of the Directive Principles are mentioned below: Free compulsory education up to the age of 14 (Art. 45); free legal aid to the poor (Art. 30(a)); provision of unemployment allowance to unemployed (Art. 41); enforcement of prohibition laws (Art. 47); protection of historical monuments (Art. 49).

Among them are directives that ask the states to ensure equal pay for equal work for men and women, to raise standards of living, to improve public health, to provide free treatment to poor patients, etc. All these educationally, economically and socially important directive principles have remained unimplemented.

On the contrary Art. 47 was violated when instead of enforcing prohibition laws the state has itself started liquor business. Art. 49 directs to protect historical monuments. The vociferous protagonists of Art. 44 and Uniform Civil Code had demolished on Dec. 6, 1992 the 500 years old historic Babri Masjid violating the directives of Parliament, National Integration Council, special bench of the Allahabad High Court, Supreme Court and Art. 49 of the Constitution. Why are the protagonists of Uniform Civil Code and Art. 44 silent on the non-implementation of the above mentioned important Directive Principles and on flagrant violation of Art. 47 and Art. 49 which ask the state to enforce prohibition laws and to protect historical monuments? Why these double standards?

G. Hasnain Kaif,

Bhandara (Maharashtra)

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Security lapse
Next     : Underlying message