The beginning of the 21th century brings a marked modification in evaluating the growing status and relevance of socio-economic rights. In this part, we try to see how different nations approach to the realization of these rights, and more particularly, we will examine how the judiciaries have been engaging in the implementation game.
As regards the utility of fundamental or directives principles, the Bangladesh constitution went a step forward from the precedent of the Irish, Indian and even Pakistan constitution. Compared to that of others, the provisions of our constitution crate an enhanced and productive scope of judicial intervention in the implementation or realization process of these principles. Though the fundamental principles were categorically said by the constitution to be judicially unenforceable, interestingly the constitution itself casts an obligation even upon the judicial organ to interpret the constitution and other laws of the country in light of these directives. Moreover, by declaring these principles to be “the basis of all the action of the state and citizens”, the constitution virtually envisions the authority of “judicial evaluation” to secure the gradual or progressive realization of these principles in almost every sphere of the state life.
However, it has been the irony that in determining the status and utility of the fundamental principles, we have largely blurred the distinction between judicial enforceability and judicial evaluation. This missing point of constitutional discourse seems to import a serious ramification in shaping the judicial attitude towards fundamental principles in the early decades of our constitutional adjudication.
