I am glad to be in this historic city of Hyderabad to-day among legal luminaries and social scientists and activists hailing from different countries of the far-flung Asian region.  I must, at the outset, congratulate the International Jurist Organization, Asia, for convening this Asia Law Conference on Social Development. Asia had been, in the past, the fountainhead of religious, philosophical and ethical ideas that enriched human civilization.  It had also made major contributions to the legal systems of the world and to the social development of mankind.  I, therefore, believe that this region has an important role to perform at the Social Summit that is taking place at Copenhagen in March this year under the auspices of the United Nations.

The United Nations Organization was born in the midst of the Second World War, a war which Winston Churchill called "the unnecessary war".  And, it grew up in the murky environment of "the cold war" which one might, with the advantage of hindsight, call "the unnecessary cold war."  From the very beginning it was pre-occupied, inevitably, with problems of political and military conflicts in the world, problems of peace-keeping and peace-making.  The founders of the U.N. had not envisaged for the organization a central role in the area of social and economic development.  They had, however, intimations of the importance of social and economic rights in maintaining peace and promoting freedom in the world. 

That was evident from the role assigned to the Social and Economic Council of the U.N. and to the Special Agencies like the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Health Organization, the UNESCO, the UNICEF, and the U.N.D.P.  In fact the credit for some of the constructive achievements of the U.N. goes to the work of these specialized agencies.  Besides, several of the international declarations and conventions adopted by the United Nations relate to social and economic issues like racial discrimination, employment, hunger and malnutrition, rights of woman and the child, and to a whole range of social, economic and cultural rights of the individual and the society.  The United Nations has already held or is scheduled to hold a series of world conferences on social and economic issues like the World Summit on Children, the Conference on Environment and Development, the World Conference on Human Rights, the International Conference on Population and Development, the World Summit on Social Development and the World Conference on Women.

Thus focus of the concern of the United Nations has shifted, particularly after the end of the cold war, to the social and economic needs and rights of the people.  In the present era of liberalisation it is almost a platitude to say that the dominant issues for mankind are social and economic and that the conflicts of the future in the world would centre round more and more economic than political and military issues.  For the developing countries of the world these issues have always been of primary interest.  Even in the midst of the prolonged struggle for freedom in the colonial era leaders of the struggle like Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru interpreted national independence and world peace in terms of social and economic freedom for the common man crushed by poverty and exploitation.  Nehru had declared:  "The existence of under-developed and poverty-stricken nations or peoples is itself an abiding danger  to the maintenance of peace. 

It has been increasingly recognized that the welfare and the peace of the world require the extermination of poverty and disease and ignorance from every country as to build up a liberated humanity".  For the common man the meaning of the end of the world war and now the cold war is that it has provided opportunities for liberating him not only from political tyranny but from social and economic servitude.  Arnold Toynbee once observed:  "The twentieth century will be chiefly remembered in future centuries not as an age of political conflicts or technical inventions, but as an age in which human society dared to think of the welfare of the whole race as a practical objective."

The Asia Law Conference at Hyderabad to-day and the coming Social Summit at Copenhagen are manifestations of the new daring to think globally and in an integrated manner on the welfare of the whole race.  It is surprising that sometimes apprehensions and even alarm are being expressed when there are calls for the social and economic rights of man.  That may be a hangover from cold war thinking or a consequence of the North-South divide.  But let us not forget that modern capitalism has survived, as Prof. Galbraith has pointed out, "not as capitalism;  it has survived because of the extra-ordinary modifications that were made such as those of the welfare state of Kenynes".  That is a truth of modern history even though in many countries parts of the welfare State are being dismantled to-day. 

But even in those countries the State is playing a greater role in such areas as human development, environment etc.  Let us also not forget that every great movement in history, be it the American Revolution with its slogan of "no taxation without representation", the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, the Chinese Revolution or the anti-colonial revolutions in the third-world, were all, at bottom, demands not only for liberty, but equality and fraternity, what we to-day call in less romantic language ecosocul rights and social integration.  Some of the revolutions failed in the long run because they degenerated into tyranny and because they could not fulfil the expectations of the people for the betterment of their condition and for social and economic justice.  I believe that the Social Summit at Copenhagen is the culmination, in the modern context, of the results of those historical experiences of mankind and also the outcome of the inexorable facts of modern life and the aroused consciousness of people everywhere.

The core issues at Copenhagen have been identified as (1) alleviating and reducing poverty;  (2) expanding productive employment; and (3) enhancing social integration.  These are in essence issues that are of predominant interest to people in the developing countries reflecting the giant agony of one billion people living below the poverty line and many millions suffering from malnutrition, disease and ignorance.  But these are not issues confined exclusively to people in the developing world.  We know that even in Europe and America there are people suffering from poverty and unemployment.  As the "Washington Post" pointed out in one of its editorials, "Poverty and wealth in the United States are increasing together".  It has been estimated that about 13% of the population of U.S.A. amounting to 33 million people live below the poverty line.  One out of five American children, and two out of five black American children, live in poverty.  In the third world and in our own country, the figures of poverty and deprivation are more staggering.  The spectacular advances in technology and its reckless and uncontrolled applications are posing profound social, cultural and moral problems for the modern technological civilization. 

Even in an economic sense it is increasing the problem of unemployment in both developed and developing countries with all the social and moral consequences.  Inspite of these overwhelming facts of modern life there is resistance to the idea of social and economic rights as fundamental rights on the ground they detract from the pristine concept of liberal freedoms and individual human rights.  This is also reflected in what cannot but be called neo-colonial theories like that of "the clash of civilizations" and "the end of history".  Freedom-rights are being put in opposition to ecosocul rights.  It is surprising that in the Draft Declaration for the Copenhagen Summit prepared by the Preparatory Conference held in New York the term "social rights" does not figure, with the phrase "good governance" more or less replacing it.  No one, particularly from an established democracy like that of India, would object to "good governance" or to the liberal freedoms and human rights which are at the foundation of our democracy.  The concept of the uniqueness of the individual personality and the universal vision of a human family had throughout ages past motivated Indian thought and philosophy. 

Mahatma Gandhi had glorified what he called "soul-force" which he pitted against the might of a great Empire.  He held that "man is superior to the system he propounds" and one as individual was infinitely better than the system he has evolved as a corporation.  Jawaharlal Nehru once said: "We talk of the good society.  Is this something apart from and transcending the good of the individual? If the individual is ignored and sacrificed for what is considered the good of society, is that the right objective to have ? "  he added:  "real social progress will come only when opportunity is given to the individual to develop....."  The Preamble to the Indian Constitution states this balanced view in almost poetic language when it talked of "Justice, social, economic and political;  liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;  equality of status and opportunity, and fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and the integrity of the Nation. " 

For us economic and social rights are not less important than the fundamental freedom-rights.  The major issue of our time is to harmonize social rights with fundamental rights, and not to detach one set of rights from the other.  Unless such an integration is attempted and a central place is given to social rights at the Summit Conference on Social Development it would be like enacting Hamlet at Copenhagen without the Prince of Denmark.  A heavy responsibilty, therefore, rests on the shoulders of delegates from the Asian region to ensure that social and economic rights are not edged out of the centre-stage of the Summit at Copenhagen.

I am aware that the background paper of the Hyderabad Conference presented by the International Jurist Organization, Asia Chapter, before the Prepcom at New York advocated that all nations should give the highest priority to the concept of social progress and development.  The Bangkok Declaration of 1993 also advocated the right to development.  While recognizing that "human rights are universal in nature", it argued that "they must be considered in the context of a dynamic and evolving process of inter-national norm-setting, bearing in mind the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious background." 

What the Bangkok Declaration put forward was not "the doctrine of different rights" which the colonial rulers of the 18th and 19th centuries upheld to the effect that what is legally and morally wrong in Europe was not so in Asia and Africa.  This doctrine had until very recently continued in the apartheid system in South Africa.  While I say this I do not for one moment ignore the social and economic inequalities and discriminations that existed in Asian societies, especially in my own country, some of which still continue to exist.  It is the pursuit of freedom-rights and human rights in our societies that has led us to the progressive elimination of such social and economic inequalities and discriminations.  For the consolidation of freedom-rights in modern societies it is necessary to give recognition, in theory and practice, to the importance of ecosocul rights.

In the Indian Constitution the interplay between the Fundamental Rights of the Citizen and the Directive Principles of the Constitution has provided a certain harmony between these two sets of rights which, in our opinion, are not contradictory but complementary.  Through the policies of the State and judicial interpretation and judicial activism the dichotomy between the two is being gradually overcome.  In this context I should like to refer to a recent judgment of the Supreme Court of India delivered in the first week of this month by the Chief Justice A.M. Ahmadi and Justice K. Ramaswamy who are with us here to-day. 

That judgment held the right to health and medical care of workers as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution which dealing with Protection of Life and Personal liberty says "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law."  The judgment of the Supreme Court interprets this constitutional provision as guaranteeing to workers right to health as a fundamental right because the health of the worker is an integral facet of his right to life.  The Indian Constitution and the Indian judiciary have taken similar positions with regard to the rights of weaker sections like women, children, and the Scheduled Castes and Tribes.  Indeed the acid tests of social development are the empowerment of women, the protection of the child and the upliftment of the oppressed and deprived sections of society. 

The movement of democracy and law in the world is towards bringing social and economic rights closer to the fundamental freedom-rights of the individual.  This is taking place both in the realm of law and in the field of practice.  I do not wish to enumerate here the basic social and economic policies the Government of India have been pursuing for the alleviation of poverty, economic disparities, and for the upliftment of the weaker sections of our society.  It is a major programatic thrust which does not abridge but on the other hand put substance into the liberal rights and freedoms of the individual.

I find that enhancing social integration is one of the themes of the Social Summit.  It is a paradox of the modern world that while technology is bringing  humanity closer together and the process of globalisation is sweeping the social and economic life of nations, social integration is impeded by fissiparous forces nationally as well as internationally.  The world as well as nations are pluralist in their composition.  The power of technology, economics and politics cannot extinguish this pluralist variety.  Indeed it is essential to accept pluralism as an inextinguishable fact of life. 

The art of civilization is to live together in harmony while maintaining the personality of the individual or the group or the nation.  Asia is a continent with experience in this art of living together inspite of the conflicts that marred its history.  We have to recapture that old art of civilization.  With regard to my own country may I say that we have had always a pluralist society with all the religions of the world, different languages and racial groups meeting and mingling on our soil.  We have fought among each other quite often.  But we never had the phenomenon of prolonged religious and ideological wars in our history.  No hundred years of the Crusades, no Thirty Years War, no ideological Cold War.  By and large different religions and ideologies co-existed in this sub-continent with occasional conflicts, no doubt.  The broad experience of our long history is one of tolerance of different ideas and ways of living. 

Since independence we have been consciously trying to go beyond tolerance and co-existence towards social and emotional integration of the people of this vast and complex country.   In this we are convinced of the need for the fundamental freedoms of the citizen and the liberal freedom-rights.  But we are also convinced of the need for social and economic rights.  I do hope that here at the Hyderabad Conference and later at Copenhagen, these two sets of rights would be accepted as inter-related principles and objectives.

Thank you