Article 45 refers to a provision stated in the Constitution of India which explains the responsibility of the Indian government in providing free and compulsory education for children up to the age of 14 years. The article states that “The State shall endeavour to provide, within a period of ten years from the commencement of this Constitution, for free and compulsory education for all children until they complete the age of fourteen years.”
The Article is a very crucial provision in the Indian Constitution as it signifies the commitment of the Indian government to ensure that every child receives basic education regardless of their economic background. The provision was inserted into the Constitution through the 86th Amendment Act in 2002, which made education a fundamental right for children between the ages of six and fourteen.
The incorporation of this Article has been a significant step in the development of the country as it has improved access to education for children from rural and economically backward areas. The aim of this provision is to achieve universal elementary education in the country, which is the foundation for the overall growth and development of any nation.
Moreover, as per the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, the government has made considerable efforts to implement Article 45 by ensuring that children from weaker sections and disadvantaged communities receive education without any discrimination or inequality. This Act envisions providing basic infrastructure, trained teachers, and free textbooks to help children learn and grow in a conducive environment.
Though there has been significant progress in achieving the objectives of Article 45, there are still many challenges in realizing the vision of universal elementary education in India. The government must ensure that the education system is accessible, affordable, and of high-quality for every child, especially those from backward communities.
Article 45 is an essential provision in the Indian Constitution and emphasizes the government’s commitment to provide free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of 14 years. It is a progressive step towards achieving universal elementary education in the country, and the government must ensure that it is implemented effectively and efficiently for the betterment of the entire society.
What does Article 45 of the Constitution mean?
Article 45 of the Constitution is a provision that lays down certain directives for the State to promote the welfare of the people by providing opportunities for their participation in various activities of the State. Essentially, this Article mandates that the State take necessary steps to ensure that citizens have a say in the governance of their country and that they have access to various developmental opportunities.
The Article states that the State shall endeavour to provide free and compulsory education for all children until they reach the age of fourteen years. This provision aims to ensure that every child in the country has access to education, which is fundamental to their overall development.
The Article also directs the State to provide adequate facilities for the promotion of the cultural, educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the society, such as the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This provision recognizes that certain communities face social and economic challenges and require special attention and support from the State.
Another important aspect of Article 45 is that it obliges the State to take steps to reduce child labour and improve the working conditions of children. The provision acknowledges that child labour is a pervasive problem in the country and seeks to prevent the exploitation of vulnerable children.
Overall, Article 45 of the Constitution is a crucial directive that aims to promote the social and economic well-being of the citizens. It emphasises the importance of education, social inclusion and child welfare, and requires the State to take appropriate measures to address these issues. The provision underscores the idea that the government has a duty to work towards the betterment of the people and create a more equitable and just society for all.
When was Article 45 inserted?
Article 45 was inserted in the Constitution of India in the year 1976. It was introduced as a part of the 42nd Amendment Act, which was passed by the Parliament of India in 1976 during the Emergency period. The amendment act brought significant changes to the Indian Constitution and inserted several new articles in it.
Article 45 of the Indian Constitution states that the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children between the ages of six and fourteen years. This article was inserted to promote the spread of education among the masses and to remove illiteracy from the country.
The idea of free and compulsory education was not new in the Indian Constitution, as it was previously included in the Directive Principles of State Policy as well. However, the insertion of Article 45 made it a fundamental right for children to receive education and mandated the state to provide the same.
The insertion of Article 45 was a significant step towards transforming the Indian Education System. It provided a foundation for the Right to Education (RTE) Act, which was passed in 2009 and made the provision for free and compulsory education a fundamental right for children between the ages of six and fourteen years.
Article 45 was inserted in the Constitution of India in 1976 and mandated the State to provide free and compulsory education to all children between the ages of six and fourteen years. It was a significant step towards promoting education among the masses and has since paved the way for the Right to Education Act.
Which of the following amendment has changed the subject matter of Article 45 in the Constitution of India?
The amendment that has changed the subject matter of Article 45 in the Constitution of India is the 86th Amendment. This amendment was passed by the Indian parliament in 2002 and it inserted a new clause in Article 21A of the Constitution of India. Article 21A deals with the right to education and the new clause inserted by the 86th amendment makes education a fundamental right for children in the age group of 6 to 14 years.
Before the 86th amendment, Article 45 of the Constitution of India stated that “the state shall endeavour to provide free and compulsory education for all children until they complete the age of 14 years”. This provision was not enforceable by law and was merely a directive principle of state policy.
However, with the 86th amendment, the right to education was made a fundamental right, which means that it became enforceable by law.
The 86th amendment also added a new article to the Constitution of India, Article 21A, which states that the state shall provide free and compulsory education to all children in the age group of 6 to 14 years. The amendment also made it mandatory for the government to provide necessary resources, infrastructure, and facilities to ensure that every child receives quality education.
The aim of the 86th amendment was to ensure that every child in India has access to quality education, irrespective of their socio-economic background. The amendment also recognizes the role of education in the overall development of the country and the need for universal education to achieve this goal.
The 86th amendment to the Constitution of India changed the subject matter of Article 45 by making education a fundamental right for children in the age group of 6 to 14 years. This amendment is a significant step towards universal education in India and has played a vital role in increasing access to quality education for millions of children in the country.
What is the difference between Article 45 and Article 21?
Both Article 45 and Article 21 are articles from the Indian Constitution that deal with the fundamental rights of citizens. However, there are some key differences between the two that set them apart.
Firstly, Article 21 deals with the right to life and personal liberty. It states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. In other words, the state cannot take away someone’s life or personal liberty without following a fair and just legal process.
This article is considered to be one of the most important and basic human rights, as it protects individuals from being arbitrarily detained, tortured, or killed by the state.
On the other hand, Article 45 deals with the obligation of the state to provide free and compulsory education for children between the ages of 6 and 14 years. It states that the state shall endeavor to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years.
The article recognizes the importance of education for individual development as well as for the welfare of society as a whole. The government’s responsibility to ensure access to education is essential for promoting social and economic development.
Another key difference between the two articles is that Article 21 is a fundamental right that cannot be suspended even in times of emergency, whereas Article 45 is a directive principle of state policy that is not enforceable by the courts. This means that the government is not legally bound to provide free and compulsory education, but it has a moral obligation to work towards fulfilling this goal.
While both Article 21 and Article 45 deal with fundamental rights that are essential for individual and societal development, the former outlines the right to life and personal liberty, and the latter emphasizes the state’s obligation to provide free and compulsory education for all children. Additionally, Article 21 is a fundamental right that cannot be suspended, while Article 45 is a directive principle of state policy that is not enforceable.
Does federal law supersede state Constitution?
In the United States, federal law is considered to be the supreme law of the land. This means that in cases where there is a conflict between state law and federal law, federal law will take precedence over state law. However, it is important to note that the relationship between federal law and state law is complex, and there are several factors that come into play when determining whether federal law supersedes state law.
One important factor to consider is the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which states that federal law “shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” This clause makes it clear that federal law takes precedence over state law in cases where there is a conflict.
Another factor to consider is the concept of preemption, which is when federal law explicitly preempts state law in a particular area. For example, the Controlled Substances Act is a federal law that regulates the manufacture, possession, and distribution of certain drugs. Because this law explicitly preempts state law in the same area, states are not allowed to pass their own laws regarding controlled substances that conflict with the federal law.
However, there are also situations where federal and state law may both apply without conflict. In these cases, the laws are said to be “complementary,” meaning that the two sets of laws work together to achieve a common goal. For example, federal law may provide a minimum standard for worker safety, while states may pass their own laws that provide additional protections for workers.
Federal law generally supersedes state law in cases where there is a conflict, thanks to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. However, there are also situations where federal and state law may both apply without conflict, and in these cases, the laws are said to be complementary. Regardless of whether federal law supersedes state law or not, it is important for individuals and organizations to be aware of both sets of laws and to ensure compliance with both sets of requirements.
What does right to bear arms mean Constitution?
The right to bear arms is a pre-existing, fundamental right protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. This amendment explicitly states that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This means that citizens have the right to possess firearms for personal protection, hunting, and other lawful activities.
The right to bear arms was not simply an afterthought to the framers of the Constitution. It is rooted in a deep-seated belief in personal liberty and self-defense that dates back to the earliest civilizations. The Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights as a means of safeguarding this fundamental right from infringement by a potentially oppressive government.
Over the years, the interpretation of the Second Amendment has been the subject of much debate and controversy. Some interpret it to allow for unlimited access to firearms, while others believe that reasonable restrictions can and should be placed on the right to bear arms in order to promote public safety.
Regardless of one’s stance on gun control policies, it is important to recognize the central role that the right to bear arms plays in American history and culture. It is a deeply ingrained part of American society, and any efforts to restrict or eliminate this fundamental right must be carefully weighed against the potential consequences for individual liberties and public safety.
What does the Constitution of the United States say you may not be deprived of life liberty or property property without?
The Constitution of the United States outlines the fundamental rights and freedoms of every American citizen, and one of the most significant provisions in this regard is what is referred to as the Due Process Clause. Specifically, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
This fundamental protection guarantees that the government may not take away these essential rights and interests without following proper legal procedures.
In essence, the Due Process Clause serves as a crucial safeguard against arbitrary government actions that could deprive individuals of their fundamental rights without proper justification. It establishes a standard of fairness and equal protection under the law, ensuring that no individual can be unfairly targeted or subjected to unjustified punishment or deprivation.
The Due Process Clause applies to all levels of government, from federal to state and local, and can encompass a wide range of actions or decisions that could affect an individual’s rights or interests. This includes everything from criminal proceedings and civil litigation to regulatory actions by government agencies.
Overall, the due process protections contained in the Constitution are essential safeguards of liberty and property rights for every American citizen. By specifying that no person shall be deprived of these interests without due process of law, the Constitution ensures that legal fairness and equal treatment under the law are upheld and that individual rights are protected from arbitrary government actions.
What does the Constitution say about the right to keep and bear arms?
The Constitution of the United States is a foundational document that outlines the framework for how the country and its government are supposed to operate. Within it are various sections, known as amendments, that establish certain rights and protections for citizens. One of the most contentious of these amendments is the Second Amendment, which deals with the right to keep and bear arms.
To begin, the text of the Second Amendment reads as follows: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The wording of the amendment has been debated and interpreted many times over the years, with different groups and individuals taking different views on what it means.
One interpretation of the Second Amendment is that it grants an individual right to own and carry firearms. This interpretation is often referred to as the individual rights theory, and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in several cases. In 2008, for example, the Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own a firearm for personal use, such as for self-defense in the home.
The Court also confirmed that the amendment applies to the states as well as the federal government.
Others argue that the Second Amendment only grants the right to bear arms within the context of a well-regulated militia, as the text of the amendment suggests. This interpretation is often referred to as the collective rights theory, and it has been rejected by the Supreme Court. In Heller, the Court held that the phrase “well regulated Militia” does not limit the right to bear arms to those serving in a militia, but rather acknowledges that a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state.
Despite the ongoing debate over the meaning of the Second Amendment, one thing is clear: the right to keep and bear arms is deeply ingrained in American culture and history. From the pioneering days of the Wild West to the modern era of gun ownership and advocacy, firearms have played a significant role in the American experience.
At the same time, gun violence and the regulation of firearms continue to be pressing issues for policymakers and citizens alike. the interpretation of the Second Amendment will continue to inform and shape these debates for years to come.
What does Article 45 TFEU reference?
Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) references the freedom of movement of workers within the European Union (EU). This means that EU citizens have the right to work in any member state without discrimination on the basis of nationality.
Article 45 TFEU is a crucial element of the EU’s single market, which seeks to eliminate obstacles to the free movement of goods, services, capital, and people among EU countries. This article acknowledges the fact that the EU is made up of diverse countries with different economic strengths and weaknesses, and in order to ensure a level playing field, it is essential that workers are able to move freely across borders to seek employment where it is available.
The article establishes the right of EU citizens to choose their place of work, to move freely within member states for this purpose, and to reside there for this reason. It also prohibits discriminatory practices on the grounds of nationality when it comes to employment, remuneration, and other working conditions.
Article 45 TFEU has been particularly important in promoting the integration of the EU and has helped to create a more mobile and flexible labour market. It has also been instrumental in facilitating the mobility of workers in the EU, including the free movement of professionals such as doctors, nurses, and engineers.
This is important as it ensures that workers can find employment where their skills are most in demand and can also help to address skills shortages in individual member states.
Overall, Article 45 TFEU is a key aspect of EU law, promoting the free movement of workers, supporting economic growth, and strengthening the social dimension of the EU. It plays a vital role in guaranteeing the free movement of workers, preventing discrimination and promoting the EU’s single market.
Does Article 45 of TFEU have direct effect?
Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) establishes the principle of free movement of workers within the EU. It provides that “freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Union” and that “such freedom of movement shall entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration, and other conditions of work and employment.”
The question of whether Article 45 of TFEU has direct effect is a complex one. In general, direct effect refers to the ability of EU law to be invoked in national courts by individuals or entities, without the need for further implementation by Member States. This means that individuals can use EU law as a legal basis to challenge the actions of Member States, companies, or other entities.
In the case of Article 45 of TFEU, there are arguments both for and against its direct effect.
One argument in favor of direct effect is that Article 45 is a clear and specific provision of EU law that is intended to create individual rights. The provision sets out a specific principle of EU law that is intended to protect the rights of workers to move freely within the EU and to be treated equally regardless of their nationality.
As such, it can be argued that Article 45 should be directly effective, as individuals should be able to rely on it in national courts to protect their rights.
Another argument in favor of direct effect is that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has recognized the direct effect of other provisions of EU law that are similar to Article 45. For example, the ECJ has held that Article 39 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (which was replaced by Article 45 of TFEU) has direct effect.
This suggests that there is a precedent for recognizing the direct effect of Article 45.
However, there are also arguments against the direct effect of Article 45 of TFEU. One argument is that the provision is too vague and lacks sufficient clarity to be directly effective. This argument suggests that the provision is too broad and general to provide individuals with clear and specific rights that can be invoked in national courts.
Another argument against direct effect is that Article 45 is a horizontal provision, meaning that it regulates the relationship between individuals rather than between individuals and the state. In general, horizontal provisions are less likely to be directly effective than provisions that regulate the relationship between individuals and the state.
The question of whether Article 45 of TFEU has direct effect is a matter for the courts to decide. While there are arguments both for and against direct effect, the ECJ has not yet ruled on this question. Therefore, whether or not individuals can rely on Article 45 in national courts is likely to depend on the interpretation of national courts and the specific circumstances of each case.
What is the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union reference?
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU) is an essential reference document that outlines the fundamental rights enjoyed by every citizen of the EU. It was officially proclaimed in December 2000 by the European Parliament, and it became legally binding with the Treaty of Lisbon in 2007.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU comprises 54 articles, which are categorized into six main chapters: Dignity, Freedoms, Equality, Solidarity, Citizen Rights, and Justice. Each chapter covers a specific area of human rights, such as the right to life, freedom of expression, the right to education, the right to work and social protection, and the right to access to justice.
The Charter is an integral part of the EU constitutional framework, and it strengthens the protection of fundamental rights in the EU. It applies to all EU institutions and to member states when they implement EU law. As such, the Charter provides a common set of values that guide the EU’s policies and decisions, ensuring that they respect the fundamental rights of citizens.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU is a fundamental reference document for various stakeholders, including policymakers, legal professionals, civil society organizations, and individual citizens. Policymakers refer to it when drafting legislation, regulations and policies, to ensure they are in line with the EU’s values and principles.
Legal professionals use it as a reference point when interpreting EU law, while civil society organizations utilize it to hold institutions accountable and push for change. Individual citizens also turn to the Charter for guidance on their rights, especially when they feel they are being violated.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU is an essential reference document that plays a significant role in protecting the rights of all EU citizens. It ensures that the values and principles of the EU are respected by all member states and EU institutions, creating a more just and fair society for everyone.
How do you cite the European Convention on Human Rights?
The European Convention on Human Rights is an important international treaty protecting fundamental human rights in Europe. When citing the European Convention on Human Rights, there are several key elements that need to be included to ensure accuracy and clarity.
Firstly, it is important to identify the title of the treaty – the European Convention on Human Rights. This should be followed by the complete citation of the treaty, which includes the year of adoption, the name of the signing parties, and the number of the treaty article.
For example, a complete citation of the European Convention on Human Rights might look like this:
European Convention on Human Rights, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, 4 November 1950, CM(2007)119 (English and French versions), ETS No. 005.
This citation includes the date of adoption of the treaty (4 November 1950), the fact that it has been amended by Protocols No. 11 and 14, the reference to any language versions of the treaty (English and French in this case), and the official reference number for the treaty (ETS No. 005).
When citing a specific article of the European Convention on Human Rights, it is important to include the article number and any relevant paragraphs or subparagraphs. For example, a citation of Article 2 might look like this:
Article 2, European Convention on Human Rights, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, 4 November 1950, CM(2007)119 (English and French versions), ETS No. 005, para. 1.
This citation includes the same basic elements as the previous example, but also includes a reference to paragraph 1 of Article 2.
Overall, when citing the European Convention on Human Rights, it is important to be as precise and detailed as possible to ensure accuracy and clarity. By including all relevant information about the title of the treaty, the specific article being cited, and any amendments or translations, a complete citation can be created that is easy to understand and follow.
What article is free movement of persons?
The free movement of persons is one of the fundamental pillars of the European Union (EU), and is enshrined in Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). This article establishes the principle that EU citizens have the right to move freely within the territory of the EU, as well as the right to take up residence and work in any member state.
The free movement of persons is a crucial aspect of the EU’s single market, as it allows workers to move more easily between member states, and helps to create a more equitable and efficient labor market. It also enables individuals to pursue educational opportunities, access healthcare services, and establish businesses in other EU countries.
Under the free movement regime, EU citizens are not required to obtain visas or work permits to enter or work in other member states. However, member states may require individuals to register with their national authorities and comply with certain administrative procedures.
Additionally, the free movement of EU citizens is subject to certain limitations in order to protect public order, public health, and national security. Member states may also impose temporary restrictions on the free movement of persons in certain circumstances, such as in response to a public health crisis or to manage migration flows.
Overall, the free movement of persons is a foundational principle of the EU, and is essential to the functioning of the single market and the promotion of a more integrated and cohesive Europe.
When can Charter rights be violated?
Charter rights, which refer to the rights and freedoms guaranteed to Canadians by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, are considered to be some of the most important constitutional rights in Canada. These rights are designed to protect Canadians’ basic freedoms and ensure that they are treated fairly and equally under the law.
However, there are times when Charter rights can be violated by the government, law enforcement agencies, or private individuals.
One of the primary ways that Charter rights can be violated is through legislation or government action that violates the Charter. This can occur when laws or policies are passed that infringe upon the rights guaranteed by the Charter. For example, the Charter guarantees that every individual has the right to life, liberty, and security of the person.
If a government passes a law that strips an individual of these rights, such as by authorizing indefinite detention without trial, then it is clear that the Charter rights of that individual are being violated.
Charter rights can also be violated by law enforcement agencies when they use excessive force, engage in unlawful searches and seizures or engage in racial profiling. For example, the Charter guarantees the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. If a police officer conducts a search without a warrant, without reasonable suspicion or without the consent of the individual, it constitutes a violation of that person’s Charter rights.
Similarly, if an officer uses excessive force during an arrest, they can be said to have violated the individual’s Charter rights.
Private individuals and organizations can also violate Charter rights. This can occur when private entities engage in discrimination on the basis of age, sex, race, sexual orientation, or other prohibited grounds under the Charter. For example, if an employer discriminates against an employee on the basis of their gender identity or sexual orientation, they are violating the employee’s Charter rights.
Charter rights are an essential part of Canadian law and are designed to protect individual freedoms and ensure that everyone is treated fairly and equally. However, there are times when these rights can be violated, either through government action, law enforcement procedures, or private practices.
It is important to be aware of these potential violations and to work together to ensure that the Charter rights of all Canadians are protected.