The Tension Between Human Rights and National Security in India: A Critical Review

Abstract

India, as the world’s largest democracy, enshrines robust fundamental rights in its Constitution, yet frequently curtails them in the name of national security. This paper offers a critical review of the persistent  tension  between  human  rights  and security imperatives  in  the  Indian  context.  It examines  how  legislative  frameworks— particularly the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA)  coupled  with  the  National  Register  of Citizens  (NRC)—have  been  used  to  justify prolonged detentions, extrajudicial actions, and systemic  discrimination,  especially  against marginalized  communities  in  Kashmir,  the Northeast, and among religious minorities. While the state invokes sovereignty and internal threats to legitimize these measures, this review argues that  such  laws  often  function  less  as  tools  of counter-terrorism  and  more  as  instruments  of political  control  and  social  exclusion.  The judiciary’s  inconsistent  stance—progressive  in theory but deferential in practice—further enables executive overreach. International human rights bodies have repeatedly flagged India’s declining civic freedoms, yet the government rejects external scrutiny under the banner of sovereignty. Drawing on  legal  judgments,  policy  documents,  and scholarly  critiques,  this  paper  contends  that sustainable security cannot be achieved through the suspension of rights but must be rooted in constitutional  morality,  accountability,  and inclusion. In an era of rising authoritarianism and shrinking democratic space, reconciling security with human dignity remains India’s most urgent democratic challenge.