Consider the following statements : 1. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides that everyone shall have the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. 2. Although India agrees in principle with the ethos of ICCPR, it has not yet ratified it fully. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- (a)1 only
- (b)2 only
- (c)Both 1 and 2
- (d)Neither 1 nor 2
Correct — A, 1 only. Statement 1 reproduces Article 16 of the ICCPR almost word for word — 'Everyone shall have the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law' — so it is correct. Statement 2 is not: India is a full party to the Covenant. The UN Treaty Collection's status table records India's action as accession on 10 April 1979, and accession has exactly the same legal effect as ratification for a state that did not sign the treaty when it was open for signature. India is therefore bound by the Covenant, and the claim that it has not ratified it fully is wrong.
- (b)2 only — Statement 1 is a near-verbatim reproduction of Article 16 of the Covenant, so it cannot be the false one.
- (c)Both 1 and 2 — It accepts statement 2, but India acceded to the ICCPR on 10 April 1979 and is a full party; the Covenant binds it.
- (d)Neither 1 nor 2 — Statement 1 is correct, so rejecting both is wrong.
The ICCPR is one of the two treaties that turned the Universal Declaration of Human Rights into binding law. It was adopted by the UN General Assembly at New York on 16 December 1966 alongside the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and it entered into force on 23 March 1976. Together with the Universal Declaration the two Covenants are known as the International Bill of Human Rights. The ICCPR covers the classic civil and political guarantees — life, liberty, fair trial, freedom of expression, assembly and association, equality before the law, and in Article 16 recognition as a person before the law. Compliance is monitored by the Human Rights Committee through state reports.
The trap in statement 2 is that it sounds like the familiar and true observation that India has held back from parts of the human-rights machinery. There is a real fact behind that feeling, but it is not the one stated: India acceded to the Covenant itself in 1979, and what it did alongside was to enter declarations, including one on Article 1 on the right of self-determination — a declaration to which France, among others, formally objected in the treaty record. Holding a reservation or a declaration is not the same as not having ratified, and the statement fails on that distinction. This position has not changed since the 2024 exam; India remains a party, and the UN Treaty Collection currently lists 175 parties to the Covenant.
- The ICCPR was adopted at New York on 16 December 1966 and entered into force on 23 March 1976.
- Article 16 of the Covenant reads: 'Everyone shall have the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.'
- The UN Treaty Collection records India's accession to the ICCPR on 10 April 1979; the Covenant currently has 175 parties.
- India's accession carried declarations, including one relating to Article 1 on self-determination, which some states parties objected to in the treaty record.
- Treating accession as something less than ratification; for a state that did not sign during the signature period, accession produces the same binding effect.
- Confusing a reservation or declaration on particular articles with a failure to become a party.
- Mixing the ICCPR up with the ICESCR — civil and political rights in one, economic, social and cultural rights in the other.
Asked as a two-statement item pairing a treaty text with India's status; the treaty-status half is the one that decides it.
Consider the following: 1. Right to education. 2. Right to equal access to public service. 3. Right to food. Which of the above is/are Human Right/Human Rights under “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”?
- (a) 1 only
- (b) 1 and 2 only
- (c) 3 only
- (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer(d) 1, 2 and 3 — education, equal access to public service and an adequate standard of living including food all appear in the Universal Declaration.
Tests the content of the Declaration that the ICCPR was written to make binding, in the same statement-checking format.
Other than the Fundamental Rights, which of the following parts of the Constitution of India reflect/reflects the principles and provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)? 1. Preamble 2. Directive Principles of State Policy 3. Fundamental Duties Select the correct answer using the code given below:
- (a) 1 and 2 only
- (b) 2 only
- (c) 1 and 3 only
- (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer(d) 1, 2 and 3 — the Preamble, the Directive Principles and the Fundamental Duties all echo provisions of the 1948 Declaration.
Connects the international human-rights instruments to their reflections in the Indian Constitution, which is the usual reason this material is examined.
- practice — not a real PYQ
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, together with which other instrument, form the International Bill of Human Rights?
- (a)The Geneva Conventions
- (b)The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- (c)The Charter of the United Nations
- (d)The Convention on the Rights of the Child
Answer(b) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights — the 1948 Declaration plus the two 1966 Covenants make up the International Bill of Human Rights.
- practice — not a real PYQ
In treaty law, when a State becomes a party to a treaty it did not sign while the treaty was open for signature, the act is called
- (a)ratification
- (b)accession
- (c)reservation
- (d)succession
Answer(b) accession — it has the same legal effect as ratification and is how India became a party to the ICCPR in 1979.