खालील उतारा काळजीपूर्वक वाचा आणि त्यावर आधारित विचारलेल्या प्रश्नांची (प्र. ३१ ते ३५) योग्य उत्तरे द्या:
संविधानाच्या भाग III अंतर्गत मूलभूत अधिकारांचे स्वरूप नीटपणे स्थित आहेत. मूलभूत अधिकार नकारात्मक म्हणून विहित केलेले आहेत, जेणेकरून "राज्यघटनेने अशा मर्यादा निर्धारित केल्याशिवाय कोणत्याही व्यक्तीला असा अधिकार नाकारता येणार नाही". उपरोक्त सूत्रीकरणाला फक्त संविधानाचे कलम 21A अपवाद आहे, जो एक सकारात्मक अधिकार आहे. 14 वर्षापर्यंतच्या सर्व मुलांना शिक्षणाचा अधिकार प्रदान केला जाईल याची खात्री करण्यासाठी संबंधित सरकारने सक्रिय प्रयत्न करणे आवश्यक आहे. राज्यघटनेच्या 86 व्या दुरुस्ती अन्वये सदर बाब बहाल करण्यात आली.
अभिव्यक्ती स्वातंत्र्याच्या सकारात्मक विधानाचे वेगवेगळे परिणाम होतील जे आपल्या संविधानाने स्वीकारलेले नाहीत. भिन्न सामाजिक आणि आर्थिक पार्श्वभूमी असलेले आणि विकासाच्या भिन्न स्तरावर अस्तित्वात असलेल्या, निहित मानवी हक्कांनी भिन्न भूमिका आणि हेतू स्वीकारले आहेत. भारतीय राज्यघटनेच्या रचनाकारांना अशा सक्रिय कर्तव्याच्या सामाजिक आर्थिक खर्चासह भारताच्या परिस्थितीची जाणीव होती आणि त्यांनी मूलभूत अधिकारांचा वापर नकारात्मक पद्धतीने प्रतिबंधित करण्याचा सुज्ञ निर्णय घेतला. या महत्त्वपूर्ण सूत्राचा न्यायालयाने आदर करणे आवश्यक आहे, ज्याने अशा नकारात्मक वापरामागील घटनात्मक नैतिकतेचे समर्थन व्हायला हवे.
कायदा आणि तंत्रज्ञान क्वचितच तेल आणि पाण्यासारखे मिसळतात. कायद्याचा विकास, तंत्रज्ञानाच्या तुल्यबळ गतीने होत नाही, अशी टीका सातत्याने होत असते. या संदर्भात आपण हे लक्षात घेतले पाहिजे की कायद्याने तंत्रज्ञानाच्या विकासाला आत्मसात केले पाहिजे आणि त्यानुसार समाजाच्या गरजा पूर्ण करण्यासाठी त्याचे नियम तयार केले पाहिजेत. कायद्याच्या कक्षेत तंत्रज्ञानाची मान्यता न मिळणे, ही एक दुर्दैवी स्थिती आहे.
आजच्या काळात, इंटरनेटचे महत्त्व कमी लेखले जाऊ शकत नाही, कारण सकाळ-रात्र, आपण सायबर स्पेसमध्ये गुंतलेले असतो आणि आपले सर्वात मूलभूत क्रियाकलाप इंटरनेटच्या वापराद्वारे पूर्ण केले जातात. इंटरनेटला आता समकालीन महत्त्व प्राप्त झाले आहे आणि माहिती प्रसारणाचे हे एक प्रमुख माध्यम ठरले आहे. त्यामुळे इंटरनेटच्या माध्यमातून भाषण आणि अभिव्यक्ती स्वातंत्र्य, हे कलम 19(1)(a) चा अविभाज्य भाग आहे आणि त्यानुसार, त्यावर कोणतेही निर्बंध हे घटनेच्या कलम 19(2) अनुसार असले पाहिजेत.
भारतीय संविधानाच्या भाग III मध्ये अभिप्रेत असलेल्या मानवी अधिकारांना वेगळा अर्थ प्राप्त होतो, कारण.
EN
Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions (Q. 31 to 35):
The nature of Fundamental Rights under Part III of the Constitution is well settled. The Fundamental Rights are to be understood in a negative context, as in "no person could be denied such right until the Constitution itself prescribes such limitations". The only exception to the aforesaid formulation is Article 21A of the Constitution, which is a positive right that requires an active effort by the concerned Government to ensure that the Right to Education is provided to all children up to the age of 14 years as given by the 86th Constitution Amendment.
The positive prescription of freedom of expression will result in different consequences which our own Constitution has not entered into. Having different social and economic backgrounds and existing on a different scale of development, the application of Human Rights enshrined therein have taken a different role and purpose. The framers of the Indian Constitution were aware of the situation of India, including the socio-economic costs of such proactive duty and hence took an informed decision to restrict the application of Fundamental Rights in a negative manner. This crucial stipulation needs to be respected by the Courts, which have to uphold the Constitutional morality behind the limitation of such negative prescriptions.
Law and Technology seldom mix like oil and water. There is a consistent criticism that the development of technology is not met by equivalent movement in the Law. In this context, we need to note that the Law should imbibe the technological development and accordingly mould its rules so as to cater to the needs of society. Non-recognition of technology within the sphere of Law is only a disservice to the inevitable.
In this light, the importance of internet cannot be underestimated, as from morning to night we are encapsulated within the cyberspace and our most basic activities are enabled by the use of internet. Further, the internet has gained contemporary relevance and is one of the major means of information convergence. Therefore, the freedom of speech expressed through the medium of internet is an integral part of Article 19(1)(a) and accordingly, any restriction on the same must be in accordance with Article 19(2) of the Constitution. Human Rights as enshrined in the Part III of the Constitution of India got different meaning due to:
The positive prescription of freedom of expression will result in different consequences which our own Constitution has not entered into. Having different social and economic backgrounds and existing on a different scale of development, the application of Human Rights enshrined therein have taken a different role and purpose. The framers of the Indian Constitution were aware of the situation of India, including the socio-economic costs of such proactive duty and hence took an informed decision to restrict the application of Fundamental Rights in a negative manner. This crucial stipulation needs to be respected by the Courts, which have to uphold the Constitutional morality behind the limitation of such negative prescriptions.
Law and Technology seldom mix like oil and water. There is a consistent criticism that the development of technology is not met by equivalent movement in the Law. In this context, we need to note that the Law should imbibe the technological development and accordingly mould its rules so as to cater to the needs of society. Non-recognition of technology within the sphere of Law is only a disservice to the inevitable.
In this light, the importance of internet cannot be underestimated, as from morning to night we are encapsulated within the cyberspace and our most basic activities are enabled by the use of internet. Further, the internet has gained contemporary relevance and is one of the major means of information convergence. Therefore, the freedom of speech expressed through the medium of internet is an integral part of Article 19(1)(a) and accordingly, any restriction on the same must be in accordance with Article 19(2) of the Constitution. Human Rights as enshrined in the Part III of the Constitution of India got different meaning due to: