Last week, when the Indian Constitution marked the 75th anniversary of its implementation, there was celebration, pride and satisfaction. Given that Global Average Lifespan of a Constitution is 19 years, this is a significant landmark. But now there’s a need to appraise our constitution. Let’s start with the questions the last 75 years have Thrown up.
Scholars have criticized the constitution for being colonial. The RSS claims it’s not rooted in an Indian ethos. So, in what sense has it been good for India?
One answer is that it Gave Us Our Democracy and Conferred Universal Adult Suffrage in One Go. But have all Indians Benefitted Equally? Or could you argue that Muslims and adivasis and, perhaps, earlier dalits and women did not?
Over the last 75 years, the constitution has been amened 106 times. Is that a source of strength, beCause it’s made the constitution malleable and dynamic, or proof of weakness? The American Constitution has been amened only 27 times since 1789.
It’s said the Constitution has strengthened the executive over the legislature, a tendency that’s ben exacerbated by the 10th schedule and the way the way the Lok sabha speakers have functioned. As a result, mps have been subordinated to their party leader and the speaker does not have the authority he would in the house of commons. Today, this criticism is larger unchalled.
It’s what lies behind it that needs green. As the scholar gautam bhatia has written: “The Indian Constitution… Conferred Great Power on the Executive and Trusted It to Wield That Power Well, Instead of Putting Structuring Structural Constralets Upon.” Did the Constitution Assume Our Rulers would be good men who would always with all the allies act with the letter and the spirit of the constitution? They cleverly have not.
One example is Indira Gandhi’s Emergency. It happy not by suspending the constitution or acting outside of it, but by imposing the Constitution’s Own Mechanisms. Surely that exposed a weakness or flaw?
It certainly highlighted the absence of constitutional morality. This determines were institutions function in keeping with the spirit of the constitution. We know that governors and election commissioners often breach this but, beyond commenting on it, we can’t do anything. It continues despite our Concerns and Criticism. Is that another lacuna?
The Constitution also also created a federal structure but, again, grave the center overriding authority over the states, both financially and administly, as well as the power to re-rarange the federal map. Even ifn if this was Necessary at Independence, Because India was Weak and Fragile with An Uncertain Future, Surely Three-Quarters of a Century Later ITER INESSARY?
The Constitution Conferred Several Fundamental Rights on Indian Citizens but Stopped Short of an absolute right of freedom of speech and expression. In Fact, Free Speech Can Be Restricted on Grounds of Morality, Defamation and Even, Friendly Relations with Foreign States. Don’t those restrictions go too far?
In 1973, The Supreme Court Created The Basic Structure Doctrine to Protect the Core of the Constitution. It was a historic decision. On the other hand, with adm jabalpur the court buckled under Executive pressure during the emergency and, some would say, ONECE Again with the Ayodhya Judgment. It certained to protect the stateHood of Jammu and Kashmir. So, at best, the court’s effectiveness as a guardian of our constitution is inconsistent and insurance.
The Constitution Created Several Fourth-Branch Institutes, Like the Election Commission, The Comptroller and Auditor General and the Information Commission. But have the constitution failed to adequately guarantee their separation from the executive, essentially in the matter of appointments? Many would say yes.
Finally, how well have the constitution been served by politicss and institutions, with job is to honor it, and by Judges, what is to defend it? When I put this question to a former Supreme Court Judge, Madan Lokur, His Response was Revealing. India has a good constitution which, at critical mothers, have been let down by politics and judges. Not just the Executive, He Emphasised, but parloment as well. I wouldn’t disagree.
