Procedure Established by Law: A Comparative Study of Article 21 Under Indian Jurisprudence Vis-a-Vis Japanese Constitution

The legal impulse and social struggles have agreed to rest on the point of inviolable nature of Right to Life as prescribed under the American, Japanese and Indian Constitution. However, the polity of all the three nations are very different because of use of the terms adopted by the drafting committee selected for each of the three nations. The judicial dynamics in U.S. had led to transformation from Due Process of law (hereinafter referred to as ‘The Clause’) as a means of revoking right to life, to Procedure Established by Law (hereinafter referred to as ‘The Phrase’) in the Japanese Constitution, from which the notion for Article 21 has been adopted by the framers of Indian Constitution. However, due to evolution of individualistic approach of rights and liabilities, the line of distinction has been blurred between the Phrase and the Clause, leaning more in favor of the latter in all the three nations. The liberal approach for rights has also led to an intermingling of standards of restrictions under Article 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. This reflects a muddled polity based on liberal and realist school of Jurisprudence.