Supreme Court expands Article 19 ambit

Supreme Court expands Article 19 ambit

News: By ruling that a citizen can seek enforcement of the fundamental rights to freedom of speech not just against the state, the Supreme Court has, effectively, extended the ground for seeking these rights against other citizens.
• “A fundamental right under Article 19/21 can be enforced even against persons other than the State or its instrumentalities,” said the 4-1 majority ruling by the Constitution Bench.

What can be the possible impact of recent judgement?
• This interpretation could bring an obligation on the state to ensure private entities also abide by Constitutional norms. These questions could hypothetically range from seeking enforcement of privacy rights against a private doctor to seeking the right to free speech against a private social media entity.
• While delivering this judgment, the Court relied on the 2017 verdict in Puttaswamy where a 9 judge bench unanimously upheld privacy as a fundamental right. One of the key arguments by the government was that privacy is right enforceable against other citizens and therefore, cannot be elevated to the status of a fundamental right against the state.
• The court also referred to several foreign jurisdictions such as the US where there is a shift from a purely vertical approach to a horizontal approach. 

What is the vertical and horizontal approach of rights?
• No jurisdiction in the world appears to be adopting, at least as on date, a purely vertical approach or a wholly horizontal approach. 
• A vertical approach provides weightage to individual autonomy, choice and privacy. 
• While the horizontal approach seeks to imbibe Constitutional values in all individuals. 
• A vertical application of rights would mean it can be enforced only against the state while a horizontal approach would mean it is enforceable against other citizens. 
• For example, a horizontal application of the right to life would enable a citizen to bring a case against a private entity for causing pollution, which would be a violation of the right to a clean environment.