Of late, one hears a lot about how the focus is shifting from a strict emphasis on citizen's rights to a middle path approach looking at both rights as also the responsibilities of citizens. And very rightly so. I mean, it is ridiculous for a populace to keep harping on what is due to them, and never ponder over what they are due to do. JFK perhaps put it in the most succinct manner possible: "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
The rights of a people, those granted by their government as also those inherent to them by virtue of their being citizens of a nation, are inalienable and irrevocable. Any assault on them, any attempt to reduce them, or to reduce their efficacy in the face of tyranny, would be tantamount to assaulting the very foundations of society.
And yet they are not infinite, because even they are not infallible. And that is where the duties and responsibilities of the citizenry play an important role. The citizenry is obligated to ensure that it uses the rights it enjoys in a responsible manner, befitting a civilized society. Just because these rights are near sacrosanct doesn't imply that these rights can be used to justify any deed sine prejudicio. The people are bound by their affiliation to a State to maintain due respect for its laws, so long as they are just and fair. The right to liberty is not a license for anarchism.
The decision of the
It remains to be seen how successful the scheme will ultimately turn out to be, given that we generally have a problem with implementation. But, I feel that this is a step in the right direction, a direction that we should have taken a long time back, but nonetheless, better late than never.
