7. Difference between Directive Principles of State Policy and Fundamental Rights
According to B.N. Rau, legal advisors to the constituent assembly, FR’s and DPSP’s are integrated in scheme. They were presented as a single scheme in constituent assembly. Even in Motilal Nehru report they formed one unit. It is for avoiding constitutional crisis – inability to enforce DPSP’s because of lack of resources, that they have been separated. The following table highlights the important differences between the two:
Basis | Fundamental Rights | Directive Principles |
Philosophy | FR’s are based on philosophy of liberalism granting protection to individual and his rights | Different DPSP’s reflect different ideologies for example – that of welfare state, Fabian Socialism, Gandhism, Environmentalism, Internationalism etc. |
Nature | FR’s are prohibitions on the state in general and in certain cases on private individuals also. | DPSP’s are positive obligations on the state. Union, state governments as well as other authorities are expected to consider the |
DPSP’s as fundamental guidelines to be observed in policy making. | ||
Enforceability | FR’s are enforceable in court of law. Right to constitutional remedies itself is a fundamental right. Judiciary is empowered to declare any law null and void if it abridges any of the fundamental rights. | As per Article 37, DPSP’s are not enforceable in a court of law. Constitutional remedies, thereby are not available. |
Outcome | FR’s establish political democracy and gives civil rights. | DPSP’s seek to establish socio- economic democracy in the country |
Focus | FR’s are individual centric | DPSP’s are group centric |
