What would be the main problem if there were no constitutional remedy for Fundamental Rights?

Correct answer: Rights might become weak and remain only on paper in practice

Correct answer: A. Constitutional remedies provide an enforcement mechanism. Without that mechanism, a person whose Fundamental Right is violated may have no direct constitutional route to ask a court for protection or correction. The right could still be written in the Constitution, but its practical value would be reduced because an unlawful act might go unchallenged. Option B is wrong because a right does not become stronger merely by losing its remedy. Option C is wrong because the absence of judicial enforcement could allow arbitrary state action to continue, not reduce it. Option D is wrong because removing a route to legal protection would normally make justice harder to obtain. This does not mean every case automatically succeeds in court; it means that a constitutional avenue for enforcement is essential. Memory cue: right plus remedy equals enforceable protection; right without remedy risks becoming only a promise.