PROTECTING FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BRITISH AND INDIAN APPROACHES

This study explores the protection of fundamental rights in Britain and India, analyzing how constitutional frameworks influence judicial accountability and rights enforcement between 2020 and 2024. The importance of this research stems from ongoing challenges in both countries, where legal protections often fail to translate into real-world freedoms, especially for marginalized groups. By comparing the written constitutional structure of India and the unwritten framework of Britain, the study seeks to understand the role of judicial review, legislative interventions, and institutional accountability. A comparative doctrinal methodology was employed, using secondary data such as judicial statistics, legal records, and institutional reports from both nations. The major findings show a significant decline in the success rates of judicial reviews in both countries, from 31% to 18% in the UK and 41% to 24% in India. Statistical analysis, including Pearson correlation and multiple regression models, reveals that institutional accountability (r = 0.83) positively impacts rights enforcement, while legislative interference (r = -0.77) hinders it. The study concludes that effective rights protection requires robust judicial independence and institutional capacity, alongside supportive legislative reforms. The implications suggest that reforms must target both the legal framework and the operational efficiency of rights institutions to ensure comprehensive rights enforcement. Recommendations include enhancing judicial capacity, reducing procedural delays, and ensuring political support for judicial autonomy.