Legislating on economic-social rights amidst de-democratisation: lessons from a lapsed Indian bill on the right to health

Pandey, Shruti (2024) Legislating on economic-social rights amidst de-democratisation: lessons from a lapsed Indian bill on the right to health. The Theory and Practice of Legislation. ISSN 2050-8840 (In Press)

[thumbnail of Legislating on economic-social rights amidst de-democratisation  lessons from a lapsed Indian bill on the right to health.pdf (Shruti Pandey - author copy).pdf] Text
Legislating on economic-social rights amidst de-democratisation lessons from a lapsed Indian bill on the right to health.pdf (Shruti Pandey - author copy).pdf - Published Version
Restricted to Repository staff only

Download (2MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Due to their special nature, the economic-social rights (ESRs) – compared to civil-political rights (CPRs) – entail distinct legislative methodology. This is still a nascent area of knowledge globally. ESRs are increasingly pivotal in the trending populist governments. Also, there is growing practical clarity on the paradigm of indivisibility and interdependence of ESRs and CPRs. However, unlike CPRs, the ESRs continue to be seen as resource-contingent, and therefore not amenable to legislative regulation but to ‘progressive realization’ through policies. This article foremost contests that, and instead asserts that ESRs too are legalisable and even justiciable, though differently from CPRs. It illustrates this from a lapsed national health bill of the Indian government, drafted and steered by the author. The matrix comprising the right to health and an Indian legislative initiative is used: the right to health as a particularly complex ESR; and India as a representative democracy with rising influence of privatisation and a declining legislature. Secondly, this experience demonstrates that ESRs need alternative concepts, techniques and practices of legislating. The unfolding nature of ESRs and their deep political-economic entrenchment require nimble and intricate negotiations among competing stakeholders. This makes the ESR laws evolving non-linear processes more than finished end-products. Also, process heaviness makes their legislation necessarily complicated and slow. Thirdly, the case study shows, legislating on ESRs invokes a qualitatively different understanding of democracy. Since ESRs essentially involve multiple interest groups and the larger regulatory framework comprising both the legislature and the executive, they implicate innate democratic values. In the contemporary de-democratisation context, their long-drawn legislative process – even a disingenuous one, initiated only for legitimacy – could counter-intuitively bolster deliberative democracy. For all three reasons, the process itself – besides the enacted law, the product – deserves recognition as an underexamined critical success-indicator of legislative methodology, especially for ESRs.

Item Type: Article
Keywords: Economic-social rights | ESR | Right to Health | Justiciability | Legislative technique | Framework law | Legislative effectiveness | Legislative efficacy | Legislative process | Health Bill
Subjects: Social Sciences and humanities > Economics, Econometrics and Finance > Economics
Social Sciences and humanities > Social Sciences > Social Sciences (General)
Social Sciences and humanities > Social Sciences > Law and Legal Studies
JGU School/Centre: Jindal Global Law School
Depositing User: Subhajit Bhattacharjee
Date Deposited: 15 May 2024 16:19
Last Modified: 03 Jun 2024 06:22
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2024.2351764
URI: https://pure.jgu.edu.in/id/eprint/7767

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item
View Item