Editing Civil liberties (section)

===India===
{{Main article|Fundamental rights in India}}
<!-- Image with inadequate rationale removed: [[File:Nehru signing Indian Constitution.jpg|thumb|250px|[[Jawaharlal Nehru]] signing the [[Constitution of India]] on 24 January 1950]] -->
<!-- FAIR USE of Image:Nehru signing Indian Constitution.jpg: see image description page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Nehru signing Indian Constitution.jpg for rationale -->

The Fundamental Rights{{snd}}embodied in Part III of the constitution{{snd}}guarantee liberties such that all Indians can lead their lives in peace as citizens of India. The six fundamental rights are right to equality, right to freedom, right against exploitation, right to freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights and the right to constitutional remedies.<ref name=constpartIII>[[s:Constitution of India/Part III|Constitution of India-Part III Fundamental Rights]].</ref>
[[File:Dyfikolkata (54).jpg|thumb|left|Huge rallies like this one in [[Kolkata]] are commonplace in [[India]].]]
These include individual rights common to most [[liberal democracy|liberal democracies]], incorporated in the fundamental law of the land and are enforceable in a court of law. Violations of these rights result in punishments as prescribed in the [[Indian Penal Code]], subject to the discretion of the [[judiciary]]. These rights are neither absolute nor immune from constitutional amendments. They have been aimed at overturning the inequalities of pre-independence social practices. Specifically, they resulted in the abolishment of untouchability and prohibited [[discrimination]] on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. They forbid [[human trafficking]] and [[Forced labour|unfree labour]]. They protect the cultural and educational rights of ethnic and religious [[minorities]] by allowing them to preserve their languages and administer their own educational institutions.

All people, irrespective of race, religion, caste or sex, have the right to approach the [[High courts of India|High Courts]] or the [[Supreme Court of India|Supreme Court]] for the enforcement of their fundamental rights. It is not necessary that the aggrieved party has to be the one to do so. In the public interest, anyone can initiate litigation in the court on their behalf. This is known as "[[Public interest law|public interest litigation]]".<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.worldlii.org/int/cases/ICHRL/1995/69.html
| title = ''Bodhisattwa Gautam vs. Subhra Chakraborty''; 1995 ICHRL 69
| publisher = [World Legal Information Institute]
| access-date = 2006-05-25
}} This was the case where [[public interest litigation]] was introduced (date of ruling 15 December 1995).</ref> High Court and Supreme Court judges can also act on their own on the basis of media reports.

The Fundamental Rights emphasize equality by guaranteeing all citizens access to and use of public institutions and protections, irrespective of their background. The rights to life and personal liberty apply to persons of any nationality, while others, such as the freedom of speech and expression apply only to the [[Indian nationality law|citizens of India]] (including [[Indian diaspora|non-resident Indian]] citizens).<ref>Tayal, B.B. & Jacob, A. (2005), ''Indian History, World Developments and Civics'', p. A-25</ref> The right to equality in matters of public employment cannot be conferred to [[Indian nationality law#Overseas citizenship|overseas citizens of India]].<ref name="OCI">{{cite web
| url = http://rajyasabha.nic.in/legislative/amendbills/XXXIX_2003.pdf
| title = ''Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2003''
| pages = 5
| publisher = [[Rajya Sabha]]
| access-date = 2006-05-25
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20060425230738/http://rajyasabha.nic.in/legislative/amendbills/XXXIX_2003.pdf <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archive-date = 2006-04-25}}</ref>

Fundamental Rights primarily protect individuals from any arbitrary State actions, but some rights are enforceable against private individuals too.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.worldlii.org/int/cases/ICHRL/1995/69.html
| title = ''Bodhisattwa Gautam vs. Subhra Chakraborty''; 1995 ICHRL 69
| publisher = [World Legal Information Institute]
| access-date = 2006-05-25
}} This was the case where Fundamental Rights were enforced against private individuals (date of ruling 15 December 1995).</ref> For instance, the constitution abolishes untouchability and prohibits ''[[Forced labour|begar]]''. These provisions act as a check both on State actions and the actions of private individuals. Fundamental Rights are not absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions as necessary for the protection of national interest. In the [[Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala|''Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala'' case]], the Supreme Court ruled that all provisions of the constitution, including Fundamental Rights can be amended.<ref>[[Basic structure#Kesavananda|''Kesavananda Bharati vs. the State of Kerala''; AIR 1973 S.C. 1461, (1973) 4 SCC 225]] – In what became famously known as the "Fundamental Rights case", the [[Supreme Court of India|Supreme Court]] decided that the basic structure of the constitution was unamendable.</ref> However, the Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the constitution like secularism, democracy, federalism, and separation of powers. Often called the "Basic structure doctrine", this decision is widely regarded as an important part of Indian history. In the 1978 ''[[Maneka Gandhi]] v. Union of India'' case, the Supreme Court extended the doctrine's importance as superior to any parliamentary legislation. According to the verdict, no act of parliament can be considered a law if it violates the basic structure of the constitution. This landmark guarantee of Fundamental Rights was regarded as a unique example of judicial independence in preserving the sanctity of Fundamental Rights.
The Fundamental Rights can only be altered by a constitutional amendment, hence their inclusion is a check not only on the executive branch but also on the Parliament and state legislatures.<ref>Tayal, B.B. & Jacob, A. (2005), ''Indian History, World Developments and Civics'', p. A-24</ref> The imposition of a [[States of emergency in India|state of emergency]] may lead to a temporary suspension of the rights conferred by Article 19 (including freedoms of speech, assembly and movement, etc.) to preserve national security and public order. The [[President (government title)|President]] can, by order, suspend the constitutional written remedies as well.