Fundamental rights

Having a right and being able to enforce it are different things. Everything turns on the available remedy and the deadline.

Illustration: Fundamental rights

Appear on this page

Get our daily news watch

Why this page is on AffectionPlus

They come into play at two moments in a family's life. In proceedings first: a divorce, an inheritance, a custody decision are argued on this ground too — fair trial, equality between spouses, respect for private and family life, the best interests of the child. It is the argument you reach for when the national rule produces a plainly unjust result.

In campaigning second: these are the rights invoked to change a law. Opening marriage to same-sex couples, paternity leave, shared custody, family benefits, recognising or banning polygamous marriage — every time a rule of family life has shifted somewhere, someone leaned on a fundamental right first. Anyone who wants a law to change starts here.

Who can strike down a law?

This is the first question, and the answer divides the world in two. In some countries a constitutional court can invalidate a statute that conflicts with protected rights. In others the court can only declare the incompatibility, leaving the statute in force until the legislature acts. A third pattern exists: domestic legislation is shielded from review, but a ratified international treaty allows its application to be challenged indirectly. Knowing which pattern applies determines the whole strategy.

Who do rights bind?

Fundamental rights are aimed first at the state. Against an employer, a landlord or a trader they often apply only indirectly, through private law or through anti-discrimination legislation. A few systems go further and make their catalogue of rights enforceable between private parties; others have given that job to a specialised commission. In practice, for a dispute with a private actor, it is almost always the discrimination route that works.

Non-judicial remedies, consistently underused

In a bright office, a woman explains her situation to a mediator sitting beside her at a round table
Ombudsmen and human rights commissions are free and accessible without a lawyer.

Ombudsmen, national human rights institutions and regulators are free, accessible without a lawyer and often effective. Some have real powers — to investigate, to order, sometimes to award compensation — while others only make recommendations, which nonetheless carry weight with the body concerned. Approaching them generally does not stop court deadlines running, so both routes have to be handled in parallel.

Regional and international remedies

Almost all of them require domestic remedies to be exhausted and impose a short deadline running from the final domestic decision. A few regional mechanisms are the exception and accept direct individual applications without exhaustion, which makes them the most accessible route where they exist. Individual access sometimes depends on an optional declaration that a state can withdraw: check that before doing anything else.

Deadlines are the leading cause of failure

Rights claims are confined within short time limits — often weeks or a few months from notification of a decision — and they are almost never extended. Record the date you received each decision as soon as it arrives and check the applicable deadline immediately, before you even decide whether to act.

The law country by country

The legal framework, the procedure, the time limits and the costs differ from one country to another. Each country below has a detailed page: governing texts, key facts, the actual procedure, costs, where to go and the traps to avoid.

Select a country to open its detailed page.

European framework

European Union

The Charter has had the same legal value as the Treaties since 2009, but it binds member states only when they implement Union law.

Europe

Ireland

Unusually strong: the courts can and do strike down statutes as unconstitutional, and unenumerated rights have been recognised.

United Kingdom

Courts can declare a statute incompatible with rights — but they cannot strike it down. Parliament has the last word.

Western Africa

Ghana

Article 33 gives a direct High Court remedy, and CHRAJ investigates free of charge with quasi-judicial powers.

Nigeria

A dedicated fast-track procedure — the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Rules — plus direct access to the ECOWAS Court.

Eastern Africa

Ethiopia

Chapter Three of the 1995 Constitution (Arts. 13 to 44) guarantees human and democratic rights, ratified treaties are part of the law of the land (Art. 9(4)), constitutional disputes are decided by the House of the Federation (Art. 83), and the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission takes complaints free of charge, toll-free on 7307.

Kenya

Article 22 opens the courts to anyone, with no filing fee and no need to show personal injury.

Rwanda

Rwanda's Constitution of 2003, revised in 2015, guarantees the right to life (art. 12), physical and mental integrity and the ban on torture (art. 14), equality and non-discrimination (arts 15 and 16) and privacy (art. 23); the judiciary is guardian of these rights (art. 43), the independent National Commission for Human Rights receives complaints (toll-free 3430), and the death penalty was abolished by Organic Law N° 31/2007.

Tanzania

Tanzania's Bill of Rights and Zanzibar's own constitutional rights can be enforced by petition to the High Court (Art. 30(3); Zanzibar Art. 24(2)), the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance takes oral or written complaints, and the mandatory death sentence for murder (Penal Code s. 197) stands although no execution is known since 1994.

Uganda

The Uganda Human Rights Commission can itself award compensation — a power few national institutions have.

Zambia

Part III of the Constitution, enforced by the High Court under Article 28, with a Human Rights Commission alongside.

Southern Africa

South Africa

South Africa’s Constitution provides enforceable rights and several routes to redress. Each route has its own powers and limits.

Southern Asia

India

Article 32 lets you go straight to the Supreme Court — a right that Ambedkar called the heart and soul of the Constitution.

Pakistan

The Federal Constitutional Court hears questions of public importance concerning fundamental rights, on an application filed by a person (Article 175E(3)).

Eastern Asia

Hong Kong

The Basic Law and the Bill of Rights Ordinance apply the ICCPR locally, within a framework reshaped by national security legislation.

South-eastern Asia

Indonesia

Indonesia's 1945 Constitution guarantees human rights in Chapter XA (Arts. 28A to 28J), with a list of rights that cannot be limited (Art. 28I(1)); the Constitutional Court reviews statutes against it (Art. 24C), Komnas HAM receives complaints under Law No. 39 of 1999 (Art. 90), and the Criminal Code keeps the death penalty only as an alternative sentence, with a ten-year probation period (Arts. 98 to 101).

Malaysia

Part II of the Federal Constitution, with SUHAKAM as the national human rights commission.

Philippines

Two constitutional remedies found almost nowhere else: the writ of amparo and the writ of habeas data.

Singapore

Part IV of the Constitution sets out fundamental liberties, subject to broad legislative restriction.

Northern America

Canada

The Charter can strike down laws — but section 33 lets a legislature override several of its guarantees for five years at a time.

United States

Courts can strike down any law — but the Constitution binds the government, not private parties.

Caribbean

Jamaica

The 2011 Charter replaced the old chapter on rights and binds private parties in some respects.

Trinidad and Tobago

A constitutional motion gives direct access to the High Court — but the country left the American Convention in 1998.

Oceania

Australia

The only major common law democracy with no national bill of rights; protection comes from statutes, three sub-national charters, and implied constitutional freedoms.

New Zealand

The Bill of Rights cannot override legislation, but since 2022 courts can formally declare a statute inconsistent and the government must respond.

This topic is also covered for French-speaking countries · German-speaking countries.

Sources

  1. Human Rights Act 1998, section 4: Declaration of incompatibility — UK Government (GOV.UK), 1998
  2. Convention européenne des droits de l'homme — European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), accessed 2026 (in French)
  3. Charte canadienne des droits et libertés (Loi constitutionnelle de 1982) — laws-lois.justice.gc.ca, 1982 (in French)
  4. Version consolidée du traité sur l'Union européenne — eur-lex.europa.eu, 2012 (in French)
  5. Rwanda 2003 (rev. 2015) — constituteproject.org, 2015
  6. Burundi 2018 Constitution — constituteproject.org, 2018

Official or institutional documents this page relies on, consulted on 12 October 2026. Links open in a new tab.

Content updated in . The instruments cited can change: if in doubt, confirm with the official source given.

Text written with the help of AI, under the editorial responsibility of CAPIT; human reviews are occasional (method and sources: About). This content does not replace medical or legal advice. Spotted an error? Write to us.

Locate this page in the site map