It is among the momentous coincidences of history that the drafting of the Indian Constitution overlapped with the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The UDHR was drafted between January 1947 and December 1948. The Indian Constitution was drafted between December 1946 and November 1949. The result of this positive convergence contributed to strengthening the human rights provisions of both the UDHR and the Indian Constitution.There is literature available on the influence of the UDHR on the content of the Indian Constitution. Part III, that deals with Fundamental Rights, and Part IV, on the Directive Principles of State Policy are quite similar to the UDHR. Illustration: Pariplab ChakrabortyIn Keshvananda Bharti v. State of Kerala, the Supreme Court stated that the ‘The Universal Declaration of Human Rights may not be a legally enforceable instrument, but it illustrates how India understood the nature of human rights at the time the Constitution was enacted’.Regarding India’s influence on the content of the UDHR, however, the literature available is scant. The influence was significant and some of it emanated directly from the debates that were ongoing in the Constituent Assembly that drafted the Indian Constitution.An example of this congruence and cross-fertilisation is the role played by Hansa Mehta, who represented India, and made a major contribution, during the drafting of the UDHR. Mehta was also a member of the Constituent Assembly and travelled back and forth between her role in the constituent assembly and as part of the drafting team of the UDHR. As an example, when the drafters of the UDHR were discussing the article on freedom of movement, the text was limited to freedom of movement from one country to another. When Mehta joined these discussions, after having participated in the discussions and resolution of the article on freedom of movement in the Constituent Assembly, she informed the UN Committee that the Indian Constitution also included freedom of movement within a country. Mehta insisted on this freedom being included in the UDHR article despite objections from the Soviet Union and other countries who did not want their minority groups to have the freedom to move within the country. Her persistence led to Article 13 (1) of the UDHR stating that ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State’.India’s contribution to the UDHR is immense and can be traced to the debates in the Constituent Assembly and in the wisdom emanating from our freedom struggle. On the following issues, India made a major contribution: Women’s rights (India insisted on the word ‘men’ be replaced with ‘human beings’); Non-discrimination (India added the words ‘colour’ and ‘political opinion’ as criteria for non-discrimination); Freedom of movement (India added the article calling for freedom of movement within a country); The right to health (India suggested that health is much more than ‘the right to medical care’ and proposed the term ‘right to health: India also proposed, ironically in collaboration with the representative of Great Britain, that Motherhood and Childhood are entitled to special care and protection); The right to work (India added the principle of ‘just and favourable conditions of work’); Rights and Duties (India insisted on the UDHR recognising the crucial role of duties done to rights attained) and Secularism (India’s delegates made it clear that the UDHR applied to everyone in the world and that there were millions of people who did not believe in God. The UDHR, consequently states that ‘All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed by nature with reason and conscience, and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood’.These contributions were made by several Indian representatives to the drafting committees for the UDHR. These representatives – Hansa Mehta; Begum Hamid Ali; Lakshmi Menon; Mohammad Habib; M.R. Masani – had all been involved in or influenced by India’s freedom struggle, including the messages from Mahatma Gandhi, and brought with them to the UDHR deliberations the conception of human rights as being emancipatory. Our representatives were also well versed in the content of the emerging Constitution and often referenced it during their contributions to the debates that led to the UDHR. An example of this contribution is the intervention of Mohammad Habib during the debate of the UDHR drafters on the issue of freedom of religion. The Saudi Arabia representative suggested the deletion of the draft UDHR provision that everyone has the freedom to change his religion or belief. Habib in his intervention quoted from the Indian Constitution that, in Article 19, had guaranteed ‘the right to freedom of religion, which included the right to be convert or be converted’. The final text in Article 18 of the UDHR states that ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief either alone or in community with others…’The Indian Constitution continues to influence provisions in international human rights instruments that emerged following the adoption in 1948 of the UDHR. The UDHR continues to feature in the judgements from the Indian Supreme Court. In expanding the scope of freedoms recognised in the Constitution, the SC repeatedly buttresses its arguments with relevant articles from the UDHR. India’s Supreme Court has expanded the scope of fundamental rights, thus giving judicial backing to the rights that are in the directive principles section of the Constitution. For example, the apex court has recognised the right to education as a fundamental right, including the right to free and compulsory education. This amendment mirrors the text in Article 26 of the UDHR ‘Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Education shall be compulsory.’ These amendments have brought the IC closer to the provisions of fundamental rights already envisaged in the UDHR.The embryonic link between the UDHR and the Indian Constitution is important to recognise. This confluence of thoughts and ideas confirms India’s openness, just prior to and following independence, to absorb the universal human rights emanating from the drafting of the UDHR. The openness of the drafters of the UDHR, coming from countries across the world, to incorporate the wisdom emanating from the provisions in national constitutions, those adopted and those in the process of being drafted (e.g. India) confirms the global ‘content’ that breathes through the numerous articles that comprise the UDHR. The overwhelming evidence of the global influences that contributed to the universality of the UDHR is publicly available at the UN library in Geneva, in the form of Travaux Preparatoires (summary records) of the drafting process of the UDHR. These facts are also a convincing repudiation of those who claim that international human rights instruments are ‘Western’. The UDHR belongs to all residents of the earth and continues to guide us in India – as does our own Constitution. Miloon Kothari, based in New Delhi, is an independent expert on human rights and social policy and former Special Rapporteur on adequate housing with the UN Human Rights Council.