Recently, the Indian Supreme Court overturned an externment order against a journalist, stating that flimsy grounds cannot be used to curb a person’s fundamental right to reside and move about anywhere in India. The Court emphasized that this drastic measure should only be invoked in exceptional cases to maintain law and order or prevent disruptions in public tranquility and peace.
The Constitution of India and Freedom of Movement
According to Article 19(1)(d), the Indian Constitution grants every citizen the right to move freely throughout the country. However, it should be noted that this right is safeguarded only from state interference, and not from actions by private individuals. The privilege excludes foreigners, legal entities like corporations, and extends solely to the citizens and shareholders of a company.
The freedom of movement preserves two dimensions: internal (movement within the country) and external (the right to exit and re-enter the country). Article 19 only safeguards the first dimension, whereas Article 21 (Right to life and personal liberty) deals with the second.
Restrictions on Freedom of Movement
Any restrictions on these freedoms can only be imposed on two grounds mentioned in Article 19(5). These grounds are the interests of the general public and protection of any scheduled tribe’s interests. For instance, the freedom of movement for prostitutes can be curtailed under the veil of public health or morality. Similarly, entry into tribal areas is restricted to protect their unique culture, language, customs, and towards shielding their traditional vocation and properties from exploitation.
Freedom of Residence and Settlement
Article 19(1)(e) of the Constitution grants every Indian citizen the right “to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India”. This clause aims to eliminate internal barriers within India. Like the right to move, this right is also subject to reasonable restrictions mentioned in clause (5) of Article 19. The right to reside and move freely throughout the country are often interrelated.
Article 19: Freedom of Speech and Expression
Apart from the right to move and reside, Article 19 also encompasses freedom of speech and expression, enabling every citizen to express their views, beliefs, and convictions freely through various mediums. It guarantees six rights, including the right to assemble peaceably, form associations or unions, practice any profession or carry on any occupation, trade or business.
Whilst these freedoms are largely unrestricted, Article 19(2) allows for curtailment under several circumstances such as security, sovereignty and integrity of the country, friendly relations with foreign countries, public order, decency or morality, hate speech, defamation, and contempt of court.
Key Supreme Court Judgments on Article 19
The Supreme Court’s stance on Article 19 has evolved over a series of landmark cases. Among other decisions, the court has ruled that there is no absolute right to protest, and the freedom to do so can be subjected to authority’s orders regarding time and place.
The court has further held that while historical truths must be presented candidly, they should not promote hatred or enmity between different groups. Although the court has refrained from declaring the right to internet access as a fundamental right, it recognizes the internet as an integral medium for expression under Article 19(1).
The judgments in the past have reiterated the importance of freedom of press, right to information, and even the freedom of speech beyond national boundaries. The Supreme Court has also recognized the right to silence as part of the right to speech and expression.