THE ROLE OF HABEAS CORPUS IN HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION: AN INTERNATIONAL EVALUATION OF PREVENTIVE DETENTION LAWS AND APPLICATION OF HABEAS CORPUS

AUTHOR – SAM S SIRYON, BA. LL. B HONORS, APEEJAY STYA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LEGAL STUDIES

BEST CITATION – SAM S SIRYON, THE ROLE OF HABEAS CORPUS IN HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION: AN INTERNATIONAL EVALUATION OF PREVENTIVE DETENTION LAWS AND APPLICATION OF HABEAS CORPUS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (1) OF 2026, PG. 628-635, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

In this contemporary era where politics has proven to influence the enjoyment of human rights and personal liberty, as political decisions often defines the extent of individual freedoms, such includes freedom of speech, assembly, and movement. Politics, though have a positive impact in framing laws and regulations that safeguard rights, it also has significant adverse impact on human rights and persona liberty, primarily by concentration state power, eroding democratic institutions, and enabling discriminatory and repressive policies. It is however, no doubt that politics suppresses civil liberties where political actions often justified under the guise of national security can lead to suppression of dissent, censorship of the media and internet, and the prohibition of peaceful assembly and protest. The use of draconian preventive detention laws allows for the arbitrary arrest and prolonged detention of political and social justice activists, journalists and perceived opponents which creates a climate of fear thereby silencing criticism. Preventive detention is often politically influenced and could be used as a tool for suppressing political dissent and opposition, rather than being solely used for the stated purpose of maintaining public order and national security. This subjective nature of the power and the lack of robust judicial oversight makes it prone to abuse by the executive branch. In as much as these preventive detention laws often use vague and broad definitions of terms like ‘public order’ or ‘national security’ or ‘anti-social activities’, gives the detaining authorities significant discretion and allows authorities to act on political motives rather than objective evidence of an imminent threat. The framework of preventive detention concentrates significant powers in the hand of the executive including the district magistrates and police commissioners to issue detention orders based on their subjective satisfactions. This undermines the separation of powers and the rule of law in any given democracies, especially when the judiciary defers to the executives claims of national security.

Keywords Preventive detention laws, Writ of Habeas Corpus, Human Rights Enforcement