Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy are two distinct concepts enshrined in the Indian Constitution. Some key differences between the two are:
- Justiciability: Fundamental Rights are justiciable, which means that they can be enforced by the courts of law. On the other hand, Directive Principles of State Policy are non-justiciable, which means that they cannot be enforced by the courts of law.
- Nature: Fundamental Rights are individual-centric and protect the rights of individuals against the State. Directive Principles of State Policy, on the other hand, are State-centric and guide the State in making policies and laws that promote the welfare of the society as a whole.
- Enforceability: Fundamental Rights are negative in nature, which means that they prohibit the State from doing certain things such as discrimination, arbitrary arrest or detention, etc. Directive Principles of State Policy are positive in nature, which means that they mandate the State to do certain things such as ensuring free and compulsory education for all children up to the age of 14 years.
- Origin: Fundamental Rights are based on the principles of natural justice and human rights. Directive Principles of State Policy, on the other hand, are based on the socio-economic and political needs of the society.
- Limitations: Fundamental Rights are subject to certain limitations such as public order, morality, and national security. Directive Principles of State Policy are subject to limitations such as financial constraints and other practical considerations.
In summary, while both Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy are essential components of the Indian Constitution, they serve different purposes and have different characteristics. While Fundamental Rights protect the rights of individuals against the State, Directive Principles of State Policy guide the State in promoting the welfare of the society as a whole.
