Summary: T. R. Radhakrishnan examines whether elected representatives are observing the constitutional principles underlying India’s democracy. Beginning with the Preamble’s commitments to justice, liberty, equality and fraternity, the article recalls Dr. B. R. Ambedkar’s insistence on constitutional methods for achieving social and economic objectives. It reproduces his criticism of unconstitutional methods where constitutional avenues remain available and expresses concern that political competition, personal advantage and attempts to gain power may undermine national unity and democratic functioning. The author questions political parties’ emphasis on Fundamental Rights without corresponding attention to Fundamental Duties under Article 51-A of Part IV-A. He urges representatives and citizens to recognise their responsibilities towards the Constitution and the nation. The article also reproduces Ambedkar’s anxiety about whether Indians would place country above competing political creeds and his warning that reversing that priority could jeopardise independence. Turning to political speech, the author discusses sedition, Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Supreme Court’s decision in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962), referring to the distinction between criticism of government and speech connected with violence or public disorder. He advocates elections and constitutional legal remedies for political change and electoral grievances. The concluding appeal calls for good governance, national cooperation and protection of sovereignty, invokes Swami Vivekananda’s call to sustained effort, and urges citizens to exercise their vote diligently.
- Is the Indian Constitution Being Abused and Misused by Elected Representatives in Parliament and State Legislatures?
- Constitutional Ideals and Democratic Methods
- Ambedkar’s Warning Against Unconstitutional Methods
- Political Accountability and Fundamental Duties
- Placing the Country Above Political Creeds
- Political Speech, Sedition and Constitutional Remedies
- Good Governance and Citizens’ Electoral Responsibility
Is the Indian Constitution Being Abused and Misused by Elected Representatives in Parliament and State Legislatures?
Constitutional Ideals and Democratic Methods
The preamble of Indian Constitution states, “WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:
“JUSTICE, social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.”
Ambedkar’s Warning Against Unconstitutional Methods
In his speech at the close of the Constituent Assembly, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar said:
“If we wish to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact, what must we do? Their first thing in my judgment we must do is to hold fast to constitutional methods of achieving our social and economic objectives. It means that we must abandon the bloody methods of revolution. It means that we must abandon the method of civil disobedience, non-cooperation and satyagraha. When there was no way left for constitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives, there was a great deal of justification for unconstitutional methods. But where constitutional methods are open, there can be no justification for these unconstitutional methods. These methods are nothing, but the Grammar of Anarchy and the sooner they are abandoned, the better for us”.
Before Independence there was no way left for constitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives. But when India, that is Bharat became a sovereign democratic republic under a written constitution, unconstitutional methods became redundant to achieve social justice and economic objectives and still if followed, only anarchy and chaos and lawlessness will prevail threatening the sovereignty and integrity of the nation. Dr. Ambedkar also was apprehensive and forethought about the future and if he were alive today, he would have been very sad to see what sort of political eco system that the present day democratically elected representatives are indulged in today.
Political Accountability and Fundamental Duties
When we look at the functioning of democracy, we as law abiding citizens are apprehensive and frightened about the future outcome of our democracy as Ambedkar narrated it above. The pertinent question being raised is whether our democracy is being abused and misused by the elected representatives through unconstitutional methods to usurp power by perpetuation of anarchy to gain power for the party to which they belong and personal benefits at the cost national integrity and sovereignty. The raging fear is whether history will be repeated and subjugated Bharat again.
Every politician including independents, belonging to every political party clamour for their fundamental rights of justice, liberty and fraternity enshrined in the Constitution. But they conveniently forget the fact that every right is derived out of a duty first to be performed as enshrined in Article 51-A of PART IV -A under FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES.
Have we seen any of the parties who scream and shout to uphold their fundamental rights and constitutional rights particularly under their right to free speech and right to protest ever bother to raise slogans or to agitate for the strict implementation Article 51-A under Fundamental Duties? No and not at all.
In this connection all political parties who consider Dr. Ambedkar as the architect of our constitution whom each and every party extol the wisdom and exhortations of Ambedkar without even understanding the inherent virtues of our constitution and its preservation and by abandoning the principles enshrined under Article 51-A of the constitution, merely give lip service to Ambedkar and eulogises him for their selfish advantage. Do they remember what Dr. Ambedkar said in his closing remarks in the Constitution Assembly? It was his apprehension about the future of our Constitution which he expressed, considering the practical realities of the divided Bharat. This message is directed towards the legislatures and parliamentarians and also for the voting citizens.
Placing the Country Above Political Creeds
Dr. Ambedkar said, “Will history repeat itself? It is this thought which fills me with anxiety. This anxiety is deepened by the realization of the fact that in addition to our old enemies in the form of castes and creeds we are going to have many political parties with diverse and opposing political creeds. Will Indians place the country above their creed or will they place creed above country? I do not know. But this must be certain that if the parties place creed above country, our independence will be put in jeopardy a second time and probably be lost for ever. This eventuality we must all resolutely guard against. We must be determined to defend our independence with the last drop of our blood.”
Political Speech, Sedition and Constitutional Remedies
If an unbiased and non-prejudicial view is taken about the statement of some of the politicians and legal luminaries indirectly inciting people to take unconstitutional methods to achieve their objectives of regime change which can be construed as “sedition” or treason”, nothing can be done against such kind of deemed anti national statements and acts because of the interpretation of those two words, “Sedition” and Treason”. In India, the legal definitions of sedition (previously under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code and now updated under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita as “endangering sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India”) and treason are narrow and highly contested. The Supreme Court of India has consistently ruled that speech constitutes an offense only if it directly incites violence or public disorder. In this connection landmark Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962) judgment, The Supreme Court established that strong words, disapprobation of government actions, or vigorous comments on state measures—no matter how strongly worded—do not amount to sedition unless they act as a direct incitement to violence or intend to create public disorder. The political eco system prevailing now should understand that “Regime” change can only be brought through democratically conducted election. If anybody has any grievance regarding the process of election, they can resort to legitimate constitutionally adopted legal means. Under the current prevailing situation, in spite of matters pertaining to the election are under the purview of the court, the agitation is still continuing despite the matter being sub-judice.
Good Governance and Citizens’ Electoral Responsibility
Will the apprehension expressed by Dr. Ambedkar be proved to be correct? Can the citizens hope that the politicians abandon their destructive activities, understand their duties and responsibilities, to introduce good governance placing national interest casting away their nefarious and vested interests and work united and in unison to protect the interest and sovereignty of the nation?
OUR DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY AS TRUE AND HONEST CITIZENS OF INDIA THAT IS BHARAT, IS TO FIGHT AGAINST THE NEFARIOUS AND DESTRUTIVE ACTIVITIES TO PROTECT NATIONAL INTEREST AND SOVEREIGNTY OF THE NATION. LET US FOLLOW THE CLARION CALL OF SWAMI VIVEKANANDA “ARISE, AWAKE AND STOP NOT TILL THE GOAL IS REACHED”. Hence, the duty and responsibility of the citizens is to cast their vote diligently. But will they?
T. R. Radhakrishnan
