Abstract

In the midst of massive policy efforts to stem the global COVID-19 pandemic rage countries are battling to minimize the effect on the daily lives of the people they serve. Since employees were sick and reduced their work hours or were fired or were laid off, sick-leave programs that are paid as well as short-time work programs and unemployment benefits, have been introduced, and several nations have taken measures to make these schemes more accessible or generous. These initiatives have helped maintain the incomes of many and have reduced the loss of jobs in the beginning. However, they aren't reaching everyone whose lives are affected. Even in countries with the most advanced social protection, certain family members and workers are left out: those who work in unorthodox jobs, such as self-employed, temporary and informal workers, as well as those working very limited hours, are not usually covered under insurance-based unemployment and sickness benefits schemes. Some, who were working but could not find work before the crisis, are now facing prolonged financial hardship. This is especially true in countries with massive informal industries and poor social protection systems. Increasing numbers of people lose work and are unable to access income assistance. All over the world, numerous countries have enacted strict restrictions on confinement to "flatten the COVID-19-curve" and to alleviate the immense pressure that is put on hospitals and ultimately, decrease the death rate of the deadly pandemic. The result of these measures is major supply shocks since workers are being forced to go home, and companies are shut down temporarily. In the meantime, demand for many products and services has dropped because households and businesses cannot either financially or physically sustain their spending. In this incredibly difficult situation when countries are struggling to minimise the effects of the economic hardships on citizens, typical choices between incentives and support, as well as between fiscal sustainability and generosity are being temporarily put aside. In the event of a decline in incentives to work are not the primary concern since workers are being asked to remain at home. Concerns about the sustainability of fiscal policy have been put to rest as policymakers move swiftly in their efforts to avoid the escalating economic and social crisis. This paper will give you a deep understanding of the right to livelihood affected during the covid-19 pandemic by focusing on the comparison between the right to livelihood and the right to life enshrined in Indian laws.

Keywords