Shri. Ram Madhav’s Our Constitution Our Pride is written in the backdrop of this year marking 75 years of the adoption of India’s Constitution. Shri. Ram Madhav starts the book with an introduction to the adoption of the Indian Constitution. He mentions how commemorating 75 years since the Constitution’s adoption, a grant inaugural programme including year-long celebration was held in the Central Hall of the Parliament on 26th November, 2024. Addressing the members of both the houses of the Parliament, President Draupadi Murmu described the Constitution as the “holiest book of the country”
The making of India’s Constitution has been an inspiring saga of which every Indian should be proud writes Shri Ram Madhav while explaining how it was one of the longest processes in the world. The Constituent Assembly of India convened its first session on 9th of December, 1946 and the final draft was adopted on 26th November, 1949. It held eleven sessions spread over a period of 165 working days. While the first draft submitted by the drafting committee comprised 243 articles and 13 schedules, the final draft approved by the Assembly in 1946 contained 395 articles, 22 parts and eight schedules. After 75 years, today, with 448 articles arranged into 25 parts and 12 schedules, the Indian Constitution is considered the longest written Constitution in the World as it contains over 1,46,385 words.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government declared November 26 as ‘Samvidhan Diwas’ in 2015. According to Shri. Madhav, four aspects of our Constitution should invoke Pride in us - one, the struggle that preceded its making, two, the making itself, three, the relevant content, and finally, the journey in the last seven decades. The book then delves into the following chapters while analysing the minutest details pertaining to Bharat’s Constitution:
The strength of this book lies in Shri. Ram Madhav explaining how in one sense, the Constitution of India was the outcome of nearly three year of deliberations by some of the greatest minds while in the true sense, it was the outcome of our long freedom struggle. To begin any discussion on Bharat’s Constitution from December 1946 when the Constituent Assembly was formed for the first time, the struggle to persuade the British to agree to India having its own Constitution began at least 25 years earlier. The First War of Independence in 1857 had shaken the foundations of the British East India Company which exercised control over India. The Government of India Act 1858 was promulgated, establishing direct control of the British Crown over India. No Indian was involved in that process at that time. Six decades later came the new version of Government of India Act 1919, which too denied any significant role for Indians at the central level as all powers remained in the hands of the Viceroy and his hand-picked executive council. There was not much opposition to the Act in 1858 because there was no organised opposition by the Indians to the British regime. But by 1919, the Congress emerged as a rallying point for all nationalists.
The nationalists raised a strong voice against the Act for the first time, demanding that, not the British Government, but the Indian legislature should exercise the authority to draft its own constitution. Mahatma Gandhi rejected the Act, saying that “the Montford Reforms were only a method of further draining India of her wealth and of prolonging her servitude”. Gandhiji was instrumental in preparing a Constitution for the princely state of Aundh in collaboration with Raja Bhawanrao Pant and Maurice Frydman, in 1939. In that Constitution, Gandhiji envisioned a decentralised government comprising village panchayats, talukas formed by the panchayat presidents and Legislative Assembly constituted by the members sent by the talukas. Gandhiji believed that such a bottom-up approach would ensure the chances of a village panchayat member becoming the prime minister of Aundh.
Congress leadership had an all-party conference in December 1927, to draft a constitution for India. It came out with a draft constitution in 1928 and it became popular as “the Nehru Report”. It contained 22 chapters and 88 articles that dealt with important subjects like fundamental rights, bicameral parliament, division of powers, judicial independence and Centre-state relations. It unequivocally declared that universal adult franchise will be the model for India with every citizen of 21 years of age securing voting rights. The Government of India Act of 1935, while allowing limited democracy, sought to enhance the powers of the Viceroy including the power to dissolve the Parliament and voting rights being granted to less than 15 per cent of the population. There was no provision for rights at all.
Despite these challenges, the Congress had succeeded in its struggle to force the British to agree to its demand. The Cabinet Mission, led by Sir Pethick-Lawrence, Sir Stafford Cripps and A.V. Alexander, arrived in India in March 1946 to work out modalities for the transfer of power. Under the Cabinet Mission Plan, Viceroy Wavell appointed a government led by Jawaharlal Nehru in September 1946 and also a Constituent Assembly was elected in December 1946 with 389 members to allow Indians to draft their own constitution. The Indian Independence Act, 1947, in February of that year, formally acceded that the British Parliament would have no power whatsoever over law-making in India once the country was granted independence. That included the period of close to 30 months after independence, during which time the country remained a dominion.
The Constituent Assembly met for the first time on 9th December, 1946. It formally commenced the task of framing the constitution for the India four days later. The Assembly establishing various committees to prepare points for the constitution. Although seven members were appointed to the drafting committee, one resigned and one left for America. Out of remaining five, one passed away, one remained busy with the work of the royal court, and two others did not live in Delhi and were often unwell. No vacancies were filled, as a result, despite his ill health, Ambedkar had to shoulder much of the burden of drafting the Constitution and incorporating thousands of amendments moved by the members by burning the midnight oil writes Shri Ram Madhav. Ambedkar had to work for 18 hours a day on many occasions so that the discussion over the Draft Constitution in the Constituent Assembly was thorough and elaborate. While moving the objectives Resolution in December 1946, Nehru had passionately appealed that it was more than just a resolution. He called it a “declaration”, a “firm resolve”, a “pledge” and an “undertaking”, and finally, a “dedication”.
Shri. Ram Madhav opines how fortunately, the makers of Indian Constitution were idealist. They surveyed Constitution of various countries, not to copy their content, but to understand where the lacunae lay including considering the following principles:
Makers of the Constitution were aware that the future generations would need the acts and articles to be contemporaneous and hence allowed for it to be amended appropriately through an appropriate process. They appreciated the fact that for a large and diverse country like Bharat, a re-examination of various facets of the Constitution from time to time is important. Except for the Canadian constitution, all constitutions in the world allowed amendments. The Indian Constitution too has already been amended 106 times. Quoting the great American statesman, Thomas Jefferson, Ambedkar himself argued that no generation has the right to impose its will on future generations. There were things that leaders like Ambedkar had vigorously argued for incorporation in the Constitution were achieved during the journey of the independent nation. Similarly, there were things that others wanted or didn't want to be incorporated, yet they found a place in the Constitution. Some such things were either amended or being debated.
(a) Hindu Code BillAmbedkar was very keen on introducing a Hindu Code Bill in the Constitution. A determination to restructure Hinduism based on equality prompted Ambedkar to embark on framing a Hindu Code Bill. The Hindu Code Bill sought to codify the diverse systems and property practices relating to Hindu men and women. Ambedkar's proposals faced stiff resistance in the Constituent Assembly from members of the Congress, Hindu Mahasabha and other Hindu religious leaders. Rajendra Prasad, Chairman of Constituent Assembly of India, argued that even his wife would never support the divorce clause and it was only the "overeducated women" who favoured the Bill. Later, as the Law Minister in the first government in 1950, he again set out to frame the Hindu Code Bill. Before drafting the Bill, he appointed many Sanskrit scholars to translate important texts and shlokas.
Then Prime Minister Nehru was initially enthusiastic and told Ambedkar, "I will die or swim with the Hindu Code Bill". But soon a strong resistance surfaced from within the Congress as well as sections of the Opposition wrote to Ambedkar in August 1951 that "you should take things easy as there is opposition inside and outside to the Hindu Code Bill.” Ambedkar's Hindu Code Bill was thus shelved explains Shri. Ram Madhav which asked for nothing more than repairing parts of the Hindu system. In the end, Ambedkar resigned from the Cabinet in protest. But, starting in 1952, the same contents were adopted as four different Bills championed by Nehru himself being the Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Succession Act, Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, and Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. Hence the Hindu Code Bill did became a reality in 1958 writes Shri Ram Madhav.
(b) Fundamental DutiesGandhiji too found time in a moving train on May 25, 1947. "I learnt from my illiterate that all rights to be preserved and preserved come from duty well done”. Thus, the very right to live accrues to us only when we do the duty of citizenship of the world. From this one fundamental statement, perhaps easy enough to define the duties of man and woman and correlate every right to some corresponding duty to be first performed observes Shri Ram Madhav. Despite Gandhi's insistence, the Indian Constitution didn't enumerate the duties of citizens at the time of its adoption. Subsequently the 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution, amongst other things, incorporated the concept of fundamental duties under Article 51-A.
(c) Decentralisation and Panchayati Raj System'Gram swaraj' - village self-rule was an article of faith for Gandhiji. The idea of gram swaraj was that of a complete republic, independent of its neighbour for its own vital wants and yet interdependent for many others in which dependence is a necessity. In the Constituent Assembly, a detailed discussion took place over the Gandhian view of decentralisation and devolving major powers to the village panchayats. Many members insisted that a strong Centre and an empowered village panchayat system should be the way forward for India. But Ambedkar took an uncharacteristically strident line.
Although the village panchayats have been the long surviving political institutions in India, their contribution to the affairs and destiny of the country was very little, he opined. Further according to Ambedkar, these village republics had been the ruination of India and Nehru too was not an admirer of village self- governance. India was to adopt Gandhi’s rural empowerment programme much later under the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution of India. This Amendment, popularly known as the Panchayati Raj Amendment was promulgated in 1992 and came into effect from 1993, a full 46 years after Independence. Though this amendment, a three-tier elected local government structure was created, at village, block and district levels.
(d) Centralised planningGandhi was always for decentralised planning. The planning commission, set up for this purpose, was finally to be disbanded by Shri Narendra Modi’s government in 2014, not before its disastrous consequences were suffered by the country.
(e) Abrogation of Article 370The story of Article 370 was another example of how an inconclusive chapter of our Constituent Assembly reached its logical conclusion during our constitutional journey of seven decades. While the Draft Constitution was being made, Sheikh Abdullah approached the architect of the Constitution, Ambedkar, with a request to draft a special law for Kashmir. Ambedkar flatly refused as this according to him would create lots of problems. Nehru's decision was strange since Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was handling the accession of over 535 princely states, including the difficult ones like Hyderabad and Junagadh. Nehru singled out Kashmir and handed it over to Gopalaswami Ayyangar. In other words, Nehru retained it with himself leading to Patel naturally being miffed.
Shri Ram Madhav explains how discussion on draft article, originally called 306A (which become Article 370 in the final draft) was brought before the Constituent Assembly in a hurried manner in October 1949, just a month before the final approval of the draft Constitution. It was to be a temporary provision. There were in fact several occasions during Nehru’s tenure when the demand for its repeal had arisen in parliament which several such occasions enunciated by Shri Ram Madhav. In fact even Bakshi Gulam Mohammad, the then Prime Minister of Jammu & Kashmir had once urged Nehru to repeal the Article. The anomaly thus created at the time of the making of our Constitution was corrected through a recourse provided by that very Constitution in August 2019 by the Modi government by way of abrogating Article 370 opines Shri Ram Madhav.
(f) Uniform Civil CodeDuring his Independence Day address in August 2023, Prime Minister Narendra Modi referred to the unfinished agenda of the Indian Constitution, calling for the promulgation of a uniform civil code in the country. Modi's pitch for a secular civil code for all Indians is perfectly in line with the arguments made by Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly. On November 23, 1948, when Article 35 of the Draft Constitution, that called for a Uniform Civil Code, came up for discussion before the Assembly, Ambedkar took the firm stand that it shouldn't get mired in communal discourse. Ambedkar’s argument on the constituent Assembly was that Uniform Civil Code should be seen in the same light as a secular law applied to all and should have been implemented after the formation of the first government in 1952. M.C. Chagla, who rose to become the Education Minister in Jawaharlal Nehru's government, insisted that "Article 44 is a mandatory provision binding the government, and it is incumbent upon it to give effect to this provision". However, Nehru couldn't muster the courage when the best opportunity came during the reform in the Hindu law in 1954.
Shri. Ram Madhav very aptly also highlights important judicial precedents rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, India’s highest Court such as Sarla Mudgal vs Union of India (1995), wherein it was held that "when more than 80 per cent of the citizens have already been brought under the codified personal law, there is no justification whatsoever to keep in abeyance, anymore, the introduction of Uniform Civil Code for all citizens". In another case namely John Vallamattom vs Union of India (2003), the Apex Court had again said that "it is a matter of regret that Article 44 of the Constitution has not been given effect to". This remains one unfinished agenda of Ambedkar and Constituent Assembly explains Shri Ram Madhav.
Part XVIII of the Constitution is called “The emergency Power” covering Articles 352-360 of the Constitution. Article 356 remains one of the most misused provisions of the constitution in the last seven decades until the government’s wing clipped by allowing judicial review of such powers observes Shri. Ram Madhav. One such instance highlighted by Shri. Madhav was regarding when the first major abuse of Article 356 happened in 1959. During that time, the President of India was none other than Rajendra Prasad, who was also the Chairman of the Constituent Assembly when the discussion about the potential misuse of the article took place.
Shri. Ram Madhav further relies on the case of S.R. Bommai vs Union of India rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in 1993 while making this observation wherein the Supreme Court had mandated that any future use of Article 356 shall be subject to judicial review, thus seeking to prevent its further misuse. So far, the article, that Ambedkar had called as a "dead letter", was invoked 125 times, out of which Indira Gandhi as Prime Minister alone invoked it 50 times. The Sarkaria Commission, constituted during the Janata Government had stated in its report that Article 356 was invoked 75 times between 1951 and 1987, out of which at least 50 instances can be called as its misuse.
(b) EmergencyThe "dead letter" provisions became alive once again when Indira Gandhi, as Prime Minister, decided to impose Emergency in 1975 using Article 352 of the Indian Constitution. At the midnight of June 25, 1975, the Emergency order was proclaimed, pushing the country into an unprecedented crisis for the next 21 months. During the period, fundamental rights and civil liberties of the people were suspended and media freedoms were gagged. Using her dictatorial powers and the absence of the Opposition in the Parliament, Indira attempted to vandalise the Constitution through several amendments thereby attempting to curtail the powers of the judiciary explains Shri. Madhav.
National Emergency was imposed earlier during the wars with China in 1962 and Pakistan in 1971. According to the Constitution, President of India has the power to impose Emergency only upon the written recommendation of the Union Cabinet. However, in 1975, President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed had signed on the declaration of Emergency proposed by Indira Gandhi even though there was no Union Cabinet approval for it. The Cabinet met the next day and hurriedly ratified it. A massive underground movement, led by organisations like the RSS, had led to the people of the country realising the danger to India's democracy and the Constitution, and finally overthrowing Indira's dictatorial regime when elections were conducted to the Indian Parliament in March 1977.
(c) Shah Bano CaseThe Shah Bano case was a landmark legal battle that resulted in a significant victory to Muslim women. A five-judge bench composed of then Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, and then Justices Rangnath Misra, D.A. Desai, O. Chinnappa Reddy, and E.S. Venkataramiah heard the matter and delievered a unanimous judgement providing maintenance. The Rajiv Gandhi Government had brought an act by name Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986, which effectively nullified the rights granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to the Muslim women. This regressive act had reduced maintenance period to only 3 months, which is called the Iddat period in Islam. Instead of protecting the rights of the divorced Muslim women, this act helped only to protect the Muslim men from their responsibility towards women whom they marry and summarily divorce use the most regressive Triple Talaq practice. These were some of the instances when the Constitution faced its darkest phases and yet survived due to the diligence of its holders, the people of India writes Shri. Ram Madhav.
In February 2000, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government constituted a commission led by the eminent jurist M.N. Venkatachaliah. However, the "Basic Structure" argument came in the of implementing the commission's recommendations at that time. In the famous Kesavananda Bharati judgment rendered in 1973, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had ruled that the basic features of the Constitution could not be altered through amendments. This opinion was reiterated time and again by different benches subsequently.
Shri. Ram Madhav concludes his book by asserting that ultimately the Constitution is only a statement of intent. For democracy to succeed, Gandhi and Ambedkar believed that parliamentary majorities needed to be restrained through constitutional ethics and public morality. It is all about respecting constitutional morality, conventions and public institutions by the leaders of the republics The Americans have a written constitution however the British don't and yet both have developed healthy conventions that safeguard their democracies mentions Shri. Ram Madhav. There is a beautiful convention in the US of the outgoing President leaving behind a handwritten letter for the incoming one which the new incumbent of the White House would get to see on the first day in the Oval office observed Shri Madhav.
Upon concluding, Shri Ram Madhav has enlightened the book’s readers have annexing the following vital documents that give an insight into the journey of the Constitution namely (a) Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru's Address on December 14, 1946 to the Constituent Assembly while Moving the Objectives Resolution; (b) Dr. Ambedkar's speech on November 25, 1949 in the constituent assembly on adoption of the constitution; (c) President Rajendra Prasad's Address on November 26, 1949 on the conclusion of drafting of the Constitution; (d) Prime Minister Narendra Modi's address in Lok Sabha at special discussion on 75th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution; (e) President Draupadi Murmu's Address on November 26, 2024 commemorating 75th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution and (f) Some Comments by Members of the Constituent Assembly.
In my opinion, this book thus indeed gives a very a historical account of the Constitution’s journey right from its pre-adoption stage and the struggle involved in its making. As India enters the 75th year of its Republic, this history, this present and these warnings are very much relevant and important opines Shri Madhav. Ambedkar had warned that "constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It needs to be cultivated.”