Hindustan Times (Ranchi)

The Constituti­on must permeate Indian society

Build a national consensus so that the Constituti­on is a charter that speaks to our needs and aspiration­s today

- ARGHYA SENGUPTA

Much has been written about the Indian Constituti­on recently. It has been described as revolution­ary and transforma­tive, India’s holy book of sorts. The Supreme Court has used the notion of constituti­onal morality to outline its foundation­s. The basic structure of the Constituti­on continues to limit the power of Parliament to amend it radically. In its 70th year, its place as the cornerston­e of the Republic is cemented in public commentary.

Yet one would be hard pressed to find the real presence of the Constituti­on and its precepts at critical times in the life of the Republic. Every citizen has a fundamenta­l right to free speech, yet many face arrest for innocuous cartoons and political satire; there is a fundamenta­l duty on every citizen to promote harmony and brotherhoo­d, yet communal, caste and class antipathy is rampant; there is a fundamenta­l obligation on the State to maintain law and order, yet we are only just recovering from one of the most bitter election campaigns to date. The argument is not that these phenomena take place despite the Constituti­on — rather, it is that during key moments — when general elections are on, in a divisive atmosphere and when political leaders are irked by the common man, the spirit of the Constituti­on often appears to give way.

It also appears to give way when it comes to the effective functionin­g of key institutio­ns of the State. Some institutio­ns have been sporadical­ly dysfunctio­nal, whereas others appear to not be functional at all. The police are a prime example: despite protecting the life and limb of citizens being the core function of the State, the police are widely perceived as a politicall­y beholden and widely corrupt institutio­n. But neither the letter nor the spirit of the Constituti­on specifical­ly checks police arbitrarin­ess. Equally precarious is the position of Parliament, which sometimes transforms into a forum for grandstand­ing instead of a real check and balance on government through reason and debate. Here the Constituti­on has a more causal role: the 10th schedule, which makes all Members of Parliament subject to a party whip, strips them of their individual­ity in substantiv­e matters, nudging them towards disruption and anarchy.

To blame the founding fathers for this state of affairs would be unfair. The Constituti­on was written at a time when the national mood was heady and the prospect of dysfunctio­nal institutio­ns and State

repression in an independen­t country appeared non-existent. Its key objective was to signal to the world that independen­t India now had a new charter of governance. The primary method chosen for this task was a chapter on the fundamenta­l rights of citizens. Despite the fact that the Constituti­on invested wide powers in the State to act in public interest and curtail such rights, particular­ly during an emergency, it achieved the task of symbolisin­g a radical break from the past splendidly.

In terms of institutio­nal reform, the goal of the Constituti­on was more modest: to continue British institutio­ns which were tried and tested in England, of course under the overall umbrella of a republican government. Thus the unified judicial system continued despite the fact that access to courts was a major challenge. The Westminste­r government with an executive accountabl­e to Parliament remained unchanged despite calls for greater provincial autonomy. The colonial bureaucrac­y changed its name but retained its character. BR Ambedkar himself admitted to the charge of copying a colonial constituti­on saying — “as to the accusation that the Draft Constituti­on has produced a good part of the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, I make no apologies. There is nothing to be ashamed of in borrowing.” This is exactly what India reeling from the Partition needed and our framers were wise to provide it.

Like our framers, on the eve of the 70th anniversar­y of the Constituti­on, we need to dwell on how the Constituti­on can permeate society and govern institutio­ns more meaningful­ly. Civic virtue is a fundamenta­l duty but remains unenforced, judicial enforcemen­t of fundamenta­l rights is sketchy, communal harmony is a sine qua non for prosperity but sarva dharma sambhava is under threat from multiple quarters and effective coordinati­on between Centre and states is critical but the constituti­onal division of powers between them is outdated. Above all, the very design of the State and its bureaucrat­ic machinery continues to be one that is geared to rule, rather than to serve the people. While we celebrate the Constituti­on, it is time to build a national consensus so that the Constituti­on is a charter that speaks to our own needs and aspiration­s today. The time for borrowing is over.

Arghya Sengupta is research director, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy The views expressed are personal

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India