Musings On The Constitution-IV Narasimhan Vijayaraghavan
Narasimhan Vijayaraghavan
We may also need to know that Sanskrit as the national language was mooted by Dr. Ambedkar and seconded by many members, including T T Krishnamachari, Nazirudin Ahmed, Mrs. G. Durgabai, Mrs. Dakshayani Velayudhan, Dr. B V Keskar. And who opposed it, while going for the Hindi language? The BJP leaders led by Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi embraced Dr. Ambedkar’s support for Sanskrit as national language. Alas, it was their own Syama Prasad Mookerjee, founder of the erstwhile Jan Sangh, ‘who strongly opposed Sanskrit language as hardly one percent of Indians could read and write sanskrit’ while going for Hindi. Much, later, much much later, it was noted that clarion call for Sanskrit from Dr. B R Ambedkar was ‘more a strategic call to deflect attention and soften strident opposition from the southerners”.
Back to basics. Justice David Souter and Sandara Day O’Conor (first female Judge in 1981 in 192 years), if the US Supreme Court, both now retired bemoaned that “Americans’ civic knowledge is abysmal. A survey conducted by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania and released on Constitution Day 2017 found that only 26 percent of Americans could name all three branches of government and that 37 percent could not name any of the rights guaranteed under the First Amendment. “The Justices strongly urged ´ We can and should do better in producing educated citizens, by teaching both the origins and historical development of the Constitution. “If the state of affairs in the US, the oldest democracy were such, what to say of our own. Justice V R Krishna Iyer once said, “My experience was that our well informed laymen citizens knew more of our Constitution than the so called lawmen practising in the justice market”.
Why should we at all care for our Constitution or know about it? In an age of kings and emperors, tsars and sultans, the Constitution began with the words, “We the People.” In an age of princes, dukes, nobles, and aristocrats of every sort, the Constitution prohibited “titles of nobility.” And in an age of religious conflict and persecution, the Constitution provided that there would be “no religious test” for holding office, and the Fundamental Rights affirmed our right to freely enjoy them.
First and foremost, it is the Constitution that binds us all together as We The People. Second, improving civic literacy will elevate and enrich our public discussion. The Constitution, after all, is a set of rules by which we all agree to play. Knowing the rules — and knowing how the framers’ ideas and institutions based on those roles have developed over time — is the key to sustaining civic engagement, civil debate, and health of the republic. The best antidote to cacophonous ideological food fights on cable television (as Prof. Michael Sandel alludes to it), “fake news” on social media, and violent protests in the streets, is a thoroughgoing knowledge of the Constitution and a deeper appreciation for the Bharatiya experiment. In 1835, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, one of the most important constitutional scholars in American history, asserted his desire to “fix in the minds of American youth a more devout enthusiasm for the constitution of their country, a more sincere love of its principles, and a more firm determination to adhere to its actual provisions against the clamours of faction.” As John Marshall, the fourth Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, rightly said, “The Constitution is colour blind, and it neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.”
The yearlong nationwide activities on Constitution Day were launched to mark the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Indian Constitution by the Constituent Assembly, beginning November 26, 2019, by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The day 26th November is celebrated every year as Constitution Day (also known as ‘Samvidhan Divas’). These activities aim to reiterate and reorient the citizens towards the values and principles expressed in the Indian Constitution and encouraging all Indians to play their rightful role in strengthening the Indian Democracy. The aim was to publicize the glorious and rich composite culture and diversity of our nation. Further, it aims to create awareness of Fundamental Duties as enshrined in the Indian Constitution. As citizens of our great nation, we believe firmly in Gandhian thought that ‘The true source of rights is duty. If we all discharge our duties, rights will not be far to seek’ and as said by Sardar Patel, ‘Every Indian should forget that he is a Rajput, a Sikh, or a Jat. He must remember that he is an Indian and he has every right in his country but with certain duties’.
An idea for a Constituent Assembly was proposed in early 1934 by Manabendra Nath Roy, a pioneer of the Communist movement in India and an advocate of radical democracy. It became an official demand of the Indian National Congress in 1935, C. Rajagopalachari voiced the demand for a Constituent Assembly on 15 November 1939 based on adult franchise, and was accepted by the British in August 1940. The sequence of events could be encapsulated as –t he demand was carried forward by Mahatma Gandhi for a Constituent Assembly, composed of the freely chosen representatives of the people of India, and was affirmed, from time to time, by various public bodies and political leaders, but it was not till May, 1934, that the Swaraj Party, which was then formed at Ranchi, formulated a scheme in which the following resolution was included:- “This Conference claims for India the right of self-determination, and the only method of applying that principle is to convene a Constituent Assembly, representative of all sections of the Indian people, to frame an acceptable constitution.”
M.N. Roy Gandhi with Rajaji
Prof. Robert Kraynak, a political scientist, can be quoted to check the ‘why’ to read our Constitutional history. Yes, as a tool of constitutional interpretation, in Judiciary, it presents a telling study. But on the societal and political plane, it has its own fundamental curiosity. “Many people today are rediscovering the American Founding Fathers. The interest can be seen among both scholars and ordinary citizens. The general public is also very interested in rediscovering the Founders and in bringing their ideas to contemporary political debates. One explanation is that the founding period seems like a Heroic Age in which great statesmen were performing great deeds for the greater glory of our country and debating great issues at the highest level of political discourse .This fascination with greatness and heroes will never die, despite the efforts of revisionist historians to demythologize the Founders and cut them down to size. Americans simply love to compare later politicians to the Founders—and to bemoan the lack of greatness in the present crop of leaders who “don’t measure up.” Such comparisons are especially popular when politics turns petty, nasty, and personal—although this behaviour is nothing new, since the Founders too could be petty, nasty, and personally ambitious.”
Before we tuck into the importance and justification to read and rely on constitutional history and debates in the Constituent Assembly, as a legal tool, in judicial decision making, let us check out the prime..
(Author is practising advocate in the Madras High Court)
