Dignity Without Autonomy

In Prajwala v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that victims of trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation have a right to rehabilitation under Article 23 read with the right to dignity under Article 21. While the judgment has been celebrated for its three-dimensional dignity framework, it is a missed opportunity to articulate a constitutional basis for protecting the rights of sex workers. The Court's dignity framework – calibrated against objectification in trafficking – is insufficient alone to address persons who assert agency over their work. I argue that reading it alongside decisional autonomy fills the gap.

0