Those who take oath of office in its name are undermining its principles

AT the age of 75, the Constitution of India is the talk of the town. In parliamentary debates, as an issue in elections, in the speeches of political leaders across parties, it is a central point of debate. It is a tribute to the founding members who drafted the Constitution that not only has it stood the test of time, but upholding its core values has become an essential patriotic duty.

This is not to say that the people of India have benefitted equally from the Constitution. The implementation of the rights embodied in it has been flawed and uneven. This is partly rooted in the irrational and arbitrary division of the Constitution into justiciable and non-justiciable sections, with the major clauses related to social and economic justice relegated to the non-justiciable sections in the Directive Principles. Thus, India with a Constitution regarded as a model in the guarantee of equal rights for all citizens still has, within the constitutional framework, grown to be one of the most unequal societies. The apprehensions of several members of the Constituent Assembly, expressed in the words of K T Shah, a self-declared socialist, that such a division would be like “a cheque payable by the bank concerned at its own convenience” have turned out to be true. Defence of the Constitution must include the implementation of the spirit of the Directive Principles related to economic equality and justice.

When on November 26, 1949, the President of the Constituent Assembly, Rajendra Prasad, moved the motion “that the constitution as settled by the constituent assembly be passed”, the records of that day note the “prolonged cheers” when it was adopted unanimously. Outside the assembly, it was the RSS that opposed the Constitution on grounds that it was not in tune with “Bharatiya” traditions based on religious texts such as the Manusmriti. It argued that nationality and citizenship rights are linked to the religious identity of the majority, those who subscribed to Hindu beliefs and unless “others” subordinated themselves to this majority, they had no right to be treated as equal citizens. India, through the adoption of the Constitution, rejected these divisive theories. It was Pakistan that agreed with the RSS theory of religion-based nationality and shaped its constitution and forms of governance accordingly.

The problem is that 75 years later, the RSS maintains those beliefs and its agenda of establishing a Hindutva rashtra. The bigger problem is that those who rule India are increasingly more dependent on the RSS’s organisational network even to win elections. The facade of maintaining an identity distinct from the RSS is history. The last 10 years of the BJP government reflect its commitment to the RSS agenda. It is reflected in blatant anti-minority policies and framing of Islamophobic laws; in the vicious attacks on the opposition and against any dissent through the use of draconian laws; in pushing highly centralised forms of government against the constitutional rights of states; in imposing a distorted view of history and cultures, promoting manuvadi Hindutva and whitewashing the caste system; in subverting the mandate of autonomous institutions through appointments based mostly on degrees of ideological loyalty and so on. India is faced with an unprecedented situation where those who have been elected to power and assumed office in the name of the Constitution are following policies that incrementally weaken its basic structure resting on the pillars of secularism, democracy, social justice and federalism.

It would be entirely mistaken to view this as the result of the megalomania in the personality of a particular leader. An individual may well be the most effective representative of anti-constitutional politics, but it is a politics that goes beyond the individual and has deeper roots in social and class elites.

It is here that the experience of an earlier assault on the Constitution in the form of the Emergency is useful. At that time, the elimination of civil liberties and basic democratic rights was supported by powerful capitalist lobbies that believed it was essential to tame the working classes who, following the historic railway strike, were mobilising for their demands across the country. Industrialist J R D Tata put it plainly in an interview with The New York Times. “Things have gone too far… you can’t imagine what we have gone through here – strikes, boycotts, demonstrations… The parliamentary system is not suited to our needs…” Indira Gandhi’s assault on the Constitution was not just to serve her own interests or those of her party, but had a wider aim of satisfying the demands of India’s capitalist classes.

In the present time, what is striking is the declared loyalty of the ruling classes to the current regime. It is not unusual for the rich and powerful to shift loyalties in quid pro quo arrangements as governments come and go. But the obeisance to the Nagpur headquarters by prominent industrialists is a new feature reminiscent of the big business houses who bowed before the Nazi regime. Corporate India and the present regime go hand in hand. There are, of course, the most favoured individuals of the regime, but it is the class interests of corporates being served and saved by the Modi government. The attacks on the rights of workers through the enactment of the four labour codes, the repression of kisans, and the undeclared war against adivasis through the forcible takeover of their land to serve the interests of big mining companies or other private-sector projects are a function of this.

The twin cannons of BJP rule targeting the Constitution are majoritarianism and corporate interests, both linked to one another. On the 75th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution, resistance and defence must take into account both these aspects.

Courtesy: Indian Express