Date: 28/11/2022

Relevance: GS-2: Indian Constitution—historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure.

Key Phrases: Constitution Day, Drafting committee of Constitution, Draft committee meetings, Amendments to the Draft Constitution, Ambedkar’s views on the constitutional provisions.

Context:

• Recently, the Constitution Day (Samvidhan Diwas) was celebrated which has been observed since 2015 to commemorate the day the constitution of India was adopted for the first time.

Background:

• The Constituent Assembly took two years, 11 months and 17 days to draft the Constitution for Independent India.
• During this period, it held 11 sessions covering 165 days, and its members submitted around 7,600 amendments to the draft Constitution.
• India’s Constitution adoption was a mammoth exercise and during this many questions were raised about the Constitution.
• The chief architect of constitution Dr BR Ambedkar was criticized for many reasons and his response to the critics is essential to understand India’s forefathers’ vision for the nation.
• 4 important issues are discussed based on Dr Ambedkarar’s views-
  • Borrowed from other documents
  • Protection of minorities’ rights.
  • Not representing the “ancient Hindu model of a State”.
  • Fundamental rights.

Borrowed from other documents

• The constitution of India was framed in 1947 and the world's first constitution was adopted in the 1780s, the US adopted it in1789.
• The scope of a Constitution should have long been settled and all Constitutions in their main provisions must look similar.
• The only new things which could be in a Constitution framed so late are the variations made to remove the faults and to accommodate it to the needs of the country.
• There have been provisions from constitutions of other countries but charges of producing blind copy are based on inadequate study of the Constitution.
  • The Drafting Committee has performed its duty and it is not slavish imitation as it is represented.

On “ancient Hindu model of a State”

• No part of the Draft Constitution represents the ancient polity of India.
  • The new Constitution should have been drafted on the ancient Hindu model of a State and that instead of incorporating Western theories the new Constitution should have been raised and built upon village Panchayats and District Panchayats.
  • Some members did not want any Central or Provincial Governments and wanted India to contain so many village Governments.
• Village models are self-sufficient but are not strong enough to conduct their other affairs.
  • They will become a weakness to the state and administrative challenges will be huge.
• Mere self-survival has no value and these village republics have been the ruination of India.
• Those who condemn Provincialism and communalism should understand that a village is nothing but a sink of localism, a den of ignorance, narrow-mindedness and communalism.

Safeguards for minorities

• Dr Ambedkar said that while introducing safeguards for minorities, the Committee merely followed the “decisions of the Constituent Assembly”.
• In this country both the minorities and the majorities have followed a wrong path.
  • It is wrong for the majority to deny the existence of minorities.
  • It is equally wrong for the minorities to perpetuate themselves.
  • Therefore a solution must be found which will serve a double purpose.
• Dr Ambedkar stressed that minorities are an explosive force which, if it erupts, can blow up the whole fabric of the State.
  • He illustrated through the example of Ireland that even the majority leaders offered safeguards to the Protestant minority but declined as they did not want to be ruled by the majority.
  • He also said that the minorities in India have agreed to place their existence in the hands of the majority.
  • They have loyally accepted the rule of the majority which is basically a communal majority and not a political majority.
• Therefore it was for the majority to realize its duty not to discriminate against minorities.

On fundamental rights

• Dr Ambedkar said that fundamental rights could not mean absolute rights.
  • He defended the charges of Article 13 being riddled with many exceptions and fundamental rights not being absolute rights using the distinction between fundamental and non-fundamental rights.
• According to Dr Ambedkar non-fundamental rights are created by agreement between parties while fundamental rights are the gift of the law.
  • Because fundamental rights are the gift of the State it does not follow that the State cannot qualify them.
• He said that fundamental rights in America were also not absolute as they were limited by Supreme Court judgments, whereas in India, the limitations had been included in the Draft

Constitution itself.

• It has been done so that the state can impose limitations upon the fundamental rights when time comes and does not have to rely on the Supreme Court to come to the rescue of Parliament.

Conclusion

• According to Forward Press, Ambedkar’s historical method remains resilient and alluring in our times because his reflections highlighted the important political difference between imagination and fantasy, conjecture and possibility and a credible story and academic pedantry.
• Today India is facing many socio-economic challenges such as casteism, communalism, separatism, gender inequality, etc.
  • We need to find Ambedkar's spirit within us, so that we can pull ourselves from these challenges.

Source: Indian Express

Mains Question:

Q. Dr Ambedkar’s principles are relevant today more than ever when India is facing many socio-economic challenges such as casteism, communalism, and separatism, critically analyze. (250 words).