The doctrines of horizontal and vertical application of rights delineate the scope and enforcement of fundamental rights within a legal system. In India, these doctrines determine whether individuals can invoke constitutional rights solely against the state (vertical application) or also against other private individuals and entities (horizontal application).

MEANING, DEFINITION & EXPLANATION

• Vertical Application of Rights: This traditional approach allows individuals to enforce fundamental rights against the state or its instrumentalities. The Indian Constitution primarily envisages this model, where citizens seek protection from state actions that infringe upon their rights. For instance, Article 12 defines “the State,” encompassing government bodies against which fundamental rights can be claimed.

• Horizontal Application of Rights: This concept extends the enforcement of fundamental rights to disputes between private individuals or entities. It posits that certain rights should be upheld not only in the public sphere but also in private interactions. In the Indian context, while the Constitution predominantly supports vertical application, certain provisions imply horizontal applicability.

LEGAL PROVISIONS INDICATING HORIZONTAL APPLICATION

• Article 15(2): Prohibits discrimination by the state and private individuals concerning access to shops, public restaurants, hotels, and places of public entertainment. This article explicitly extends fundamental rights into the private domain, preventing discriminatory practices by private entities.

• Article 17: Abolishes “untouchability” and forbids its practice in any form. This provision applies horizontally, ensuring that private individuals do not engage in discriminatory practices based on untouchability.

• Articles 23 and 24: Prohibit human trafficking, forced labor, and child labor, respectively. These articles are enforceable against both the state and private individuals, highlighting their horizontal applicability.

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATIONS AND CASE LAWS

• Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011:

  • Facts: A social worker was brutally gang-raped in a village in Rajasthan. The absence of legal recourse for workplace sexual harassment led to the filing of this petition.
  • Issue: Whether the absence of legislation on sexual harassment violates fundamental rights, and if the court can frame guidelines to address this issue.
  • Held: The Supreme Court acknowledged the violation of Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 due to sexual harassment at the workplace. It issued the Vishaka Guidelines, mandating employers to prevent and address sexual harassment, thus applying constitutional principles horizontally.

• PUDR v. Union of India, (1982) 3 SCC 235:

  • Facts: A public interest litigation was filed highlighting the exploitation of construction workers engaged in the Asian Games projects in Delhi, alleging non-payment of minimum wages.
  • Issue: Whether non-payment of minimum wages amounts to forced labor under Article 23.
  • Held: The Supreme Court ruled that payment below the minimum wage constitutes forced labor, violating Article 23. This decision emphasized that private contractors must adhere to constitutional mandates, showcasing horizontal application.

COMPARISON WITH OTHER COUNTRIES

• United States: The U.S. Constitution primarily follows the state action doctrine, limiting the application of constitutional rights to state actions. However, through judicial interpretations, certain rights have been extended to apply in private disputes, especially concerning civil rights and anti-discrimination laws.

• South Africa: The South African Constitution explicitly provides for both vertical and horizontal application of rights. Section 8(2) states that provisions of the Bill of Rights bind natural and juristic persons if applicable, considering the nature of the right and duty imposed.

ESSENTIALS / ELEMENTS / PRE-REQUISITES FOR HORIZONTAL APPLICATION

1. Constitutional Provision: The Constitution must explicitly or implicitly allow for rights to be enforced against private individuals.

2. Judicial Interpretation: Courts play a pivotal role in interpreting the extent to which rights apply horizontally, as seen in cases like Vishaka.

3. Legislative Framework: Laws enacted by the legislature can facilitate the horizontal application of rights, such as anti-discrimination statutes.

DOCTRINES / THEORIES RELATED TO HORIZONTAL APPLICATION

• State Action Doctrine: Predominantly used in the U.S., this doctrine limits the enforcement of constitutional rights to actions by the state, not private individuals.

• Public Function Theory: If a private entity performs functions traditionally reserved for the state, constitutional rights may apply to its actions.

• Entanglement Theory: When the state is significantly involved with a private entity, constitutional obligations may extend to that entity.

FUTURE IMPLICATIONS

The evolving interpretation of horizontal application in India suggests a broader enforcement of fundamental rights, ensuring protection against violations by private entities. This shift necessitates increased awareness among private individuals and organizations regarding their obligations under constitutional mandates.

CRITICISM / APPRECIATION

• Criticism: Opponents argue that extending fundamental rights horizontally may lead to judicial overreach, disrupting the balance between individual freedoms and state authority.

• Appreciation: Proponents contend that in an era where private entities wield significant power, horizontal application is essential to safeguard individual rights comprehensively.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the doctrines of horizontal and vertical application of rights is crucial for comprehending the enforcement of fundamental rights in India. While the Constitution primarily envisages vertical application, judicial interpretations have progressively recognized horizontal applicability in specific contexts, ensuring a more comprehensive protection of individual rights.