Indianness of Constitution of India

The Constitution of India was framed by the Constituent Assembly that was absolutely Indian. An overwhelming majority of members of the body that enacted the most important document for governance of Bharat and observe Rule of Law comprised freedom fighters who had given their best to making India free. Their credentials were above reproach. Our Founding Fathers of the Constitution enjoyed the love, respect and admiration of people of India. People loved the members of the Constituent Assembly and got love in return in abundance.

FEATURES OF INDIANNESS

Language, culture, dress, education, Sanskars and above all the Mindset go to make the Indianness or otherwise of our Constitution. The vast majority of constitution makers came from villages of India. They were soaked in the soil, water and air of India. Regretfully they were not allowed to have their say in matters constitutional.

Leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel, Dr Rajendra Prasad, Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar and many legal luminaries of the Aiyyar and Iyengar Tambram intellectual clans dominated the   proceedings of the Constituent Assembly from A to Z. The semi-literate Ram and Ghanshyam, men of peasant stock who were in an overwhelming majority in the Assembly, followed no English, what to say of legal lingua franca in a foreign tongue. Their presence in the Hall was the only contribution that they could make. Thus the Constitution of India in its final shape did not have an imprint of the People of India, the rural India, the India of the Vedic culture or the Ganga-Jamuni composite culture, notwithstanding the fact that it was enacted, adopted by the People of India and promulgated by the People of India just two months after enactment and signing by one and all concerned with it.

The Constitution was a finished product in a book form on 26 November 1949. It was adopted on 26 January 1950 and then the same day the Republic of India came into being. Dr Rajendra Prasad who was President of the Constituent Assemby, was dy eected as the first President of the Republic of India.

One regrets to note that despite all factors being favourable to India and Indians, the Constitution of India lacked an Indian soul that was needed to make it effective at the ground roots level. Our Vedic heritage was touched with a barge poll but there was no deep penetration in Spiritualism. Borrowing from the West where a camour for separating the Christian Church from the State was heeded to and the State was a votary of Secularism At a later stage Secularism was incorporated in our Indian Constitution too but here it was interpreted by successive Congress governments as an Article for protection of the Muslim minority reducing them to the status of a vote-bank.

The Constitution of India failed the litmus test of being Indian in character. It was everything but a document for the People, by the People and of the People of India that is Bharat. The vast majority of peope lives in villages and yet the villages are as neglected today as they were under the foreign rule. The focus was on the cities and urban areas and that caused a migration from the rural areas to the urban areas creating a myriad problems.

 What a pity that the members of that august body, the Constituent Assembly failed to give just one Indian name to the motherland. It is called India that is Bharat in our Constitution and other legal documents. India remained but Bharat receded into anonymity.

The founding fathers of the Constitution of India were in favour of adopting just one national anthem – Vande Mataram. What a shame the present national anthem jana gana mana came from behind riding the shoulders of Jawaharlal Nehru and usurped the throne. The whole country regrets that dacoity till this day. Nehru did so just to please a section of the Muslim minority, ignoring the numerically superior Hindus of Bharat, jettisoning VANDE MATARAM and superimposing a Tagore written song that the vast majority of Indians believes  was written as an eulogy for King George V when he visited the British India in 1911. We have to live with that disgrace forever, thanks to Nehru’s monumental folly.

Dr Rajendra Prasad, President of the Constituent Assembly and a down to earth scholar and legal luminary sensed the mood of the House and the Indian Nation and said that Vande Mataram will be the National Song of India and shall have the same stats as the trumped up national anthem. That solemn promise remained on paper only and the inspiring anthem of the struggle for independence days gradually faded into oblivion.

As a commentator on Akashvani and Doordarshan, now on the ZEE NEWS on the Independence Day ceremony at the Red Fort and the Republic Day Parade on the Raj path, I always miss the good old VANDE MATARAM that I had sung along with other students on many a march against the British imperialism on road to freedom. The British Police beat up boys of senior classes, threatened juniors like me with sending a letter of complaint to parents but we marched on relentlessly. When the seniors fell to the lathi blows, we juniors held the Tricolour and rented the sky with our patriotic chants and slogans- Vande Mataram, Vande Mataram. Even the British sergeants looked at us in awe, used abusive language but stopped short of beating boys of junior classes. Freedom came sans the song of freedom.

It was the devilish design and a shameful act of those who appeased the anti-national elements by banishing the national song from the State ceremonies just to retain political power in their hands. Who cares for the country? Who cares for the Constitution? Who cares for the people? Not the ruling elite of political bigwigs and some families who became Pretenders to the Throne.

FEATURES OF OUR CONSTITUTION

The Constitution of India is a written document and is relied solely on its text by the judiciary. Although the Hindi text is the authentic text of the Constitution of India, it is the English text that rules the roost and is relied upon by judges and advocates in many a legal battle fought in courts of law. Unlike the British constitution which is by and large convention and tradition based and is in a written form to a minor degree only, the Indian constitution gives a little leeway to judicial interpretation where written word is clear in its intent. Indeed the Supreme Court and the High Courts have the constitutional mandate for a Judicial Review and their interpretation is not only the Last Word in the matter but also lays down law of the land.

The Judiciary ensures that the country is governed by the provisions of law and that the Rule of Law is respected and obeyed always. The Indian   jurisprudence, that relies on the Anglo-Saxon and Roman jurisprudence, lays down:

HOWEVER HIGH YOU MAY EVER BE,

THE LAW IS ABOVE YOU.

The Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles are a part of the Constitution of India. It has 395 Articles and Nine Schedules. With the result, the Indian Constitution is a bulky book, difficult to carry and harder to understand in letter and spirit. It falls on the strong shoulders of the Indian Judiciary to interpret the Constitution of India for the benefit of the People of India.

The Artices, Schedues, Clauses and Sub-clauses are so complicated that even judicial brains are perplexed and confused many a time, what to say of Sepoy Bhup Singh of the Indian Army who rarely knocks at the door of a Temple of Justice, even if he is wronged and feels aggrieved. It is well nigh impossible for a common man to get Justice since it is so expensive that he cannot afford it in this life.

Nevertheless the Constitution of India is the sole authentic document the legal fraternity relies upon. The leaders of the opposition parties who are incarcerated by the party in power every now and then have no option but to knock at the door of the High Court of the State where the cause of action occurred or at the Supreme Court if a number of States are involved. More often than not the underdog gets grievances redressed and is released from prison forthwith unless detained in some other case of infringement of law of the land.

As a student of the University of Allahabad it was my privilege to watch the proceedings of a case of Habeas Corpus under article 226 of the Constitution of India when the Socialist leader of eminence, Dr Ram Manohar Lohia was detained by the government of Uttar Pradesh for no rhyme or reason. Under orders of the High Court of Allahabad, Dr Lohia was brought from the central prison and in parts he was permitted to argue his own case in addition to what his counsel had said. Dr Lohia had read out the views of eminent thinkers and philosophers from all over the world like Hobbes, Thoreau, Rousseau and Chanakya to plead that he had exercised his  right of freedom of thought, expression, unrestricted movement without endangering the life, limb, property or any other constitutional right of another Indian citizen. The government could not produce any reliable evidence to support its case of detention of the leader and the logical deduction was that the govt had exceeded its powers and put restriction on the constitutional rights of Dr Lohia. Their Lordships allowed the petition and set Dr Lohia free. Indeed it was a landmark judgement reiterating the constitutional rights of a citizen and the judiciary was applauded as a protector of the Constitution of India.

VEDIC VISION

TRUTH, EQUALITY, LIBERTY, FRATERNITY, NON-VIOLENCE LEADING TO AN EGALITARIAN SOCIETY ARE SOME OF THE PILLARS OF VEDIC VALUES OF LIFE ON WHICH THE VEDIC SAMAJ EXISTED AND RESTED.

I am glad to note that the present Constitution of India promulgated on 26 January 1950 has incorporated quite a few them. Some of them got diluted over a period of time when values of life were thrown overboard and self-seekers put self before the society. The apple cart of Vedic vision was over-turned and the same degeneration set in post independence as had set in post-Mahabharat period of history.The words in Sanskrit in the Devnagari script written under the State symbol are: satyamev jayate, it means that the TRUTH alone shall prevail. The Vedic philosophers like Shankaracharya, Manu Maharaj and Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati have laid an emphasis on the TRUTH as the foundation of an ideal human life. In the TEN Principles of the Arya Samaj, there is an emphasis on the Truth among five of them.

Some commentators are of the opinion that the State symbol should have carried the correct quote: Satyamev Jayate nanritam – THAT IS THE Truth alone shall prevail but NOT the UNTRUTH. Unfortunately, only the three lions form the State emblem and the Sanskrit words from the Mundak Upanishad got deleted over a period of time. But a revival of the quotation is in the offing.

It would be appropriate to mention that the four lions are taken from the Sarnath Buddhist edict pillar erected by Emperor Asoka but only three are seen in print. It was a penchant with Nehru to go for symbols of other religions like the present one but keep the principles of the Vedic Dharm at bay. Little did he realise that weakening the hold of the Hindus on State authority will weaken the majority community and that in turn will weaken India that is Bharat. Now the writing is on the wall for everyone to see.

CONSTITUTION A SOULLESS ENTITY

The constitution is quite an idealistic one as it promises Heaven but does not deliver even mundane minor goods. There have been numerous amendments as the Congress government was, generally speaking, bent upon to undo whatever the judiciary did to uphold the rights of the wronged citizens. In Indira Gandhi’s time of prime ministership, her government had even superseded three judges of the Supreme Court just because they exercised their right to deliver unbiased judgements and did not toe the line of the government like a subservient magistracy. The whole world had criticised this unholy act of the government of India and thereafter the govt did not repeat its folly.

Now the Judiciary is so assertive that they do not let the Executive (read government) come anywhere near the selection process of judges of the High Courts and the Supreme Court. There is a Collegium of the Chief Justice of India, two senior most judges of the Supreme Court and Chief Justice of the High Court concerned where a judge is to be appointed. When the Collegium of Judges recommends names, the govt just issues the appointment  letter. The Executive is quite cut up on this assertive move of the Judiciary but as per the Constitution is powerless to act in the matter. The Judiciary is running the Executive show in many a matter because the govt is gripped with a paralysis of making policy decisions.

On making a critical assessment of the effectiveness of the Constitution, legal brains find that it is quite a hotch- potch. There is no fragrance of THE SOIL OF INDIA in the Constitution of India. To start with, the Constituent Assembly relied heavily on provisions of the Government of India Act 1935 that the then British govt had promulgated for a gradual transfer of power to the Indians. With the result certain constitutional posts were saddled with powers that should have devolved on the elected Executives. The State Governor even now recommends dismissal or continuation of an elected govt, including the Chief Minister, of a State.

Our Constitution had borrowed systems from other countries too although the circumstances, the people and the ground realities did not match. The Vedic values of life listed earlier were listed as the Guide but were thrown overboard when it came to working out the nitty-gritty of actual working of the system of governance. Undue importance was given to the rights of minorities and that fuelled anti-national activity among some elements who were inspired by their co-religionists from across the western borders. Thus the mixed provisions of constitution left the Indian intelligentsia a confused lot and the Founding Fathers got a bad name unnecessarily. The way to hell was paved with good intentions.

Here is a brief review of what we borrowed from where. The Parliamentary system of governance, the separation of powers between the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary with checks and balances to keep each other within bounds was a brilliant idea borrowed verbatim from the United Kingdom. The UK has a long tradition of People exercising Power since 1215 when King John was forced by the Barons to sign on the dotted line of Magna Carta. Thereafter, the parliamentary democracy evolved with maturity over many centuries. The British Parliament is likely to enact in 2011 The Right To Recall of the MPs if they have a serious brush with law. The voters wil exercise this right for the first time in UK. Anna Hazare, the Indian social activist is pressing for the same Right to Recall for the Indian voters too.

 India had the inheritance of Vedic Ganarajya system and the sagacity to implement it but the then political leadership of Nehru’s ilk were so British oriented in their thinking that they abhorred their forefather’s legacy. The nation paid dearly for this fallacious thinking. Nehru took pride in being branded as the last Englishman to rule India on behalf of the British Crown.

The principles of the Fundamental Rights and the over-riding factor of Judicial Review to keep the autocratic Executive in check were borrowed lock stock and barrel from the Constitution of the United States of America.

The Directive Principles of the Constitution were borrowed from the Irish Republic but rarely implemented. The Directive Principle of Common Civil Code for all Indian citizens irrespective of their religion or faith was put in the cold storage lest the Congress party lost Muslim votes as they were   opposed to the very idea of a Common Civil Code. Fortunately the then British government had implemented the Common Criminal Procedure and criminal Law otherwise the spineless Congress govt would have conceded to the Muslims their right of governance under the Sharia Law.

Under the influence of the Communists, the Congress government had amended the Constitution to add the Fundamental Duties on the pattern of the Constitution  of Russian Federation.

The Supreme Court of India has come to the rescue of the hapless Indian citizen and Ruled once and for all that no amendment can be brought by the govt that may alter the basic character of the Constitution. Their lordships of the large Constitution Bench also said that in case it was deemed necessary by the government to alter the basic character of the Constitution, a new Constituent Assembly should be elected and mandated to alter the basic character.

By Brigadier Chitranjan Sawant,VSM  

UPVAN  609,  Sector 29,   Noida – 201303,  INDIA. 

Email :  upvanom@yahoo.com or sawantg.chitranjan@gmail.com