Liberty in India and France: A Comparative Analysis

Table of contents

What is Liberty?

Liberty, as defined by John Stuart Mill, is “the absence of coercion, allowing individuals to act according to their own will, provided they do not harm others.” This foundational principle of modern democracies varies in interpretation and application across nations.
India’s concept of liberty is shaped by its colonial past, cultural diversity, and constitutional ideals, while France’s model is deeply rooted in revolutionary ideals, secular republicanism, and a centralized state.

Liberty in the Indian Context

Historical Perspective

India’s understanding of liberty evolved through its anti-colonial struggle, emphasizing both individual freedom and collective emancipation. Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, and B.R. Ambedkar envisioned liberty not just as political freedom but also as social and economic justice.
The colonial experience instilled a desire for self-rule while highlighting internal social inequalities such as caste and gender discrimination.

Constitutional Framework

The Indian Constitution enshrines liberty as a fundamental right under Part III:

Articles 19-22 guarantee freedoms of speech, expression, assembly, and personal liberty, subject to reasonable restrictions for public order and security.
Articles 15 and 17 extend liberty beyond individual rights, ensuring protection against social discrimination and abolishing untouchability.
Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) expand the concept to include socio-economic rights like education and livelihood.

Socio-Cultural Dimensions

Religious Freedom and State Intervention: Article 25 guarantees religious liberty, but state regulations on practices (E.g., cow slaughter bans, personal law reforms) reflect a balance between individual rights and social harmony.
Caste and Social Justice: For marginalised communities, liberty means emancipation from caste discrimination. Ambedkar emphasised that without social & economic equality, liberty remains meaningless.
Pluralism and Constraints: Linguistic and regional diversity shape liberty, but economic disparities and social norms often limit its practical realization, making it an evolving, negotiated space.

Political and Practical Challenges

Vulnerability of Fundamental Rights: The Emergency (1975-77) demonstrated how civil liberties can be suspended under extraordinary circumstances, raising concerns about executive overreach.
Legal Constraints on Dissent: Laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and sedition provisions in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) impose broad restrictions on speech and assembly, often invoking national security as justification.
Institutional and Social Barriers: Bureaucratic red tape, judicial delays, and socio-economic inequalities—especially along caste and gender lines—limit the practical exercise of liberty for marginalised communities.

Liberty in the French Context

Historical Background

French Revolution (1789-1799): Idea of liberty in France is deeply rooted in the Revolutionary ideals of liberté, égalité, fraternité, which dismantled monarchical absolutism, feudalism, & clerical dominance.
Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789): Defined liberty as an inalienable right, inspired by Enlightenment principles advocating individual autonomy and rational governance.

Unlike India, where liberty evolved through anti-colonial struggles, France’s liberty was internally driven, focusing on breaking free from traditional authority & establishing a universal, citizen-driven republic.

Constitutional and Legal Framework

Fifth Republic (1958): France’s current constitutional framework continues to be influenced by the 1789 Declaration, which remains embedded in the Constitution’s preamble.
Guaranteed Rights:

Unrestricted freedoms of expression, association, & conscience with fewer limitations compared to India.
The state ensures freedom from religious influence rather than accommodating religious diversity, as seen in laws banning religious symbols in public spaces.

Centralised Authority: The French state asserts strong control to protect its secular and unitary character, distinguishing its approach from India’s federal and pluralistic model of governance.

Socio-Cultural Dimensions

Homogeneous National Identity: Unlike India, where liberty is shaped by caste, religious, and linguistic diversity, France emphasizes universalism, ensuring equal rights for all citizens.
Freedom from Religious & State Control: French liberty is focused on shielding individuals from religious, rather than addressing internal social hierarchies like caste discrimination in India.
Cultural Expression and Individual Autonomy: Strong protections exist for artistic expression, press freedom, and intellectual dissent, though always balanced with a collective commitment to the Republic.

Political and Practical Challenges

Strong State Apparatus vs. Civil Liberties: France follows a centralised governance model rooted in Jacobin traditions, contrasting with India’s federal structure.
Protests as a Mode of Liberty: Demonstrations like the gilets jaunes (yellow vest) protests reflect civic expression but often face strict state crackdowns.
Liberty and Multiculturalism: Rigid secularism and universalist ideals clash with growing multiculturalism, leading to debates on immigration, integration, and religious expression.

Comparative Analysis: Liberty in India and France

Philosophical Foundations

India’s liberty is pragmatic & collectivist, balancing individual rights, social justice & historical inequities.
France’s liberty is universalist & individualistic, rooted in Enlightenment ideals & revolutionary transformation.
India seeks liberty through accommodation and reform, while France pursues it through rupture and uniformity.

Role of the State

India’s state intervenes to balance individual freedoms with social harmony, often imposing broad restrictions on liberty.
France’s state enforces a uniform republican identity, limiting religious expression to protect secularism.
India’s approach is flexible and evolving, whereas France’s model is rigid and centralised.

Secularism and Religion

India follows pluralistic secularism, allowing personal laws & religious accommodations within legal frameworks.
France’s laïcité mandates strict separation, banning overt religious symbols in public institutions.
India protects group identities, while France prioritises individual equality.

India faces communal tensions, economic inequality, and state overreach, affecting liberty unevenly.
France grapples with immigration, terrorism, and populism, testing its commitment to universalism.
India’s federalism allows regional variations in liberty, while France’s centralised governance enforces uniformity.

Conclusion

India balances liberty with diversity and social justice, while France enforces a universalist, secular model. Both face challenges, India with legal restrictions and social inequality, and France with rigid secularism and integration issues. The future of liberty in both nations depends on adapting to evolving societal needs while upholding fundamental freedoms.

Reference: UPSC CSE Mains PYQs

PMF IAS Pathfinder for Mains – Question 124

Q. Critically examine the concept of liberty in the Indian context. How does it differ from the model of liberty adopted in France? (15 Marks) (250 Words)

Approach

Introduction: Define liberty, state the purpose, and preview the comparison of liberty in the two countries as prevalent.
Body: Explain the liberty model in India and give its critical evaluation, give a brief on Liberty in France, and then do a comparative analysis between the two.
Conclusion: Summarise the arguments and reflect with a sentence on differences between the two.