While the broad ideas depicted in these Fundamental Duties are unquestionable, it is important to highlight that they are not legally enforceable. This appears to be the rationale for their inclusion in the DPSP chapter. Directive Principles are basic but not enforceable because they are in the character of instructions directed to citizens. The Swaran Singh Committee proposed legal punishments for citizens' responsibilities in its report. It had proposed that Parliament enact legislation that would allow for the implementation of penalties for non-compliance or unwillingness to perform the tasks. It was also recommended that no law imposing such a penalty or punishment be challenged in any court on the basis of repugnancy to the Constitution.

On closer inspection, it was discovered that several of the responsibilities would be difficult to enforce. Might tasks like "upholding the great goals of the freedom struggle" or "developing a scientific temper and humanism and spirit of inquiry and reform" or "striving for excellence" be enforced by legislation, and what punishments can be imposed if these duties aren't met? The real reason for including a set of responsibilities in the Constitution appears to be to project a set of norms that would, over time, help change established attitudes, generate new ones, and create a psychological climate conducive to the development of alert, informed, and dedicated citizenship.

It has also been argued that if a list of responsibilities was to be incorporated into the Constitution, it should also contain various additional requirements such as the responsibility to work, the duty to be disciplined, the duty to vote, and so on. Furthermore, it is noted that enumerating citizens' responsibilities without mentioning the responsibilities of political and administrative authorities is insufficient. Otherwise, citizens will have only obligations and no rights, while rulers will have only rights and no obligations. Fundamental Duties, critics argue, will remain only moral precepts with no more practical relevance than a code of behaviour if suitable legal'sanctions' are not enacted. It should be underlined that certain of the responsibilities, such as the rejection of habits that are damaging to women's dignity, require excessive action. Evidently, legal consequences can be devised; in fact, some legal measures already exist for behaviours that are in violation of such obligations.

It is vital for everyone to be aware of their responsibilities in order for them to be properly enforced. This should be accomplished through systematic and intensive public education, such as through advertising or by including it in school syllabi and curriculum.