ANS.
STRUCTURE
1. Explain the context in brief
2. Then define both national security and human rights and then relate to three different situation of their relationship with examples
3. Go for a synthesis type take away
4. Conclusion with a philosophy or quote
THE CONTEXT (INTRODUCTION)
The ethical principles for state were set by Kautilya-Yogakshema, Palana and Rakhshana also known as Rajddharma, in which moral realism becomes the guiding principle for the security and welfare of the state.
The present world scenario has posed one of the most important moral dilemmas as the challenges of national security have increased by manifold on the one hand and on the other, societal consciousness have made human rights as absolute type Kantian categorical imperative.
BODY
National security is the state capacity of a sovereign nation to protect its citizens, territory, economy, and institutions from external threats, internal subversion, and systemic crises.
Sardar Patel: “Every citizen must place the nation above self.”
Human rights are the fundamental moral and legal entitlements inherent to all human beings, regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. They represent the basic standards necessary for people to live with dignity, equality, freedom, and security.
The state tries to balance between them by adhering to both legal and moral principles. The primary standards used globally are the Siracusa Principles (1984) and the judicial Test of Proportionality by International Commission of Jurists:
1. The Legality Test (Prescribed by Law)
2. The Genuine Aim Test (Legitimate Threat)
3. The Proportionality Framework
4. The Non-Derogable Baseline
5. Due Process and Independent Oversight
There can be three types of scenarios
| Balance between both | National security over human rights | Human rights over national security |
|---|---|---|
| • Reasonable restriction and test of reasonableness • CJP protest case 2026- The SC ordered all FIRs withdrawn except one to conduct investigation against those who have criminal antecedents • PUCL case 1997-Phone Tapping Case: The SC allowed state surveillance for national security, but mandated strict procedural guidelines • Doctrine of Mean of Aristotle. | • ADM Jabalpur 1976 • Puttaswamy case 2017-three conditionality • Legality of NSA/UAPA • Mohammad Salimullah v. Union of India (2021): The SC permitted the government to proceed with deportations of over 150 Rohingya Muslims under the Foreigners Act. • Hobbes’ social contract and Machiavelli’s ends justify means | The Sonali Khatun / Sweety Bibi Case 2026- The SC intervened to secure the repatriation of the family members back to India. Pegasus Case 2021: The SC held that the State cannot get a "free pass every time the spectre of national security is raised." Anuradha Bhasin case 2020: The SC held that indefinite internet bans are unconstitutional and national security must strictly adhere to the Doctrine of Proportionality. • Kantian categorical imperative |
CONCLUSION
Although there can be scenario when national security becomes imperative like in case of Rohingya Muslims, but the ultimate guiding principle should be Doctrine of Proportionality or Doctrine of Mean of Aristotle. “The moral arc of the world is long but it bends towards justice”-Martin Luther King Jr.
Spread the Word