The Constitution of India was adopted on November 26, 1949 and the date of January 26, 1950 set for its entry into force. On November 25, while delivering his last speech to the Constituent Assembly, B.R. Ambedkar asked:
“On the 26th of January 1950, India would be a democratic country in the sense that India from that day would have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people … What would happen to her democratic constitution? Will she be able to maintain it or will she lose it again?”
On November 30, 1949, four days after the constitution was adopted and enacted, the RSS mouthpiece Organiser wrote scathingly that there was nothing ‘Bharatiya’ in it.
While incorporating many aspects of the “British, American, Canadian, Swiss and sundry other constitutions”, said the RSS about the framers, adding that they did not find any worth in the “laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti”, which “excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity”.
Nourished by the RSS’s values, BJP leaders like Ananta Hegde, Lallu Singh, Arun Govil and Jyoti Mirdh have said that once Prime Minister Modi assumes office on getting 400-plus seats in the Lok Sabha, their government will move to amend the constitution.
This is the reason why, 75 years after Ambedkar first expressed his anxieties about the constitution’s future, people at large have also started getting worried.
This anxiety is writ large and persists especially among Dalits, STs and OBCs despite Modi’s assurance that the constitution will never be changed and Amit Shah – no lover of secularism – publicly declaring that even the word “secular” in the preamble will not be removed.
Dalits, STs and OBCs are apprehensive that the reservation system that has enabled them to get government jobs will be scrapped or diluted by the Modi regime.
Their mistrust of Modi and Shah on this issue has been deepened due to measures taken by the regime to hand public sector enterprises to select corporates since there is no reservation in the private sector.
While Modi’s economic policies have the effect of reducing the number of reserved jobs available for SCs, STs and OBCs, the PM has sought to scapegoat minorities – and especially Muslims – in his election speeches.
In rally after rally, he has repeated the lie that the Congress plans to hand over the country’s resources and even people’s possessions to Muslims.
Dalits, STs, OBCs and minorities constitute a significant majority of the population and their anxieties about the future of the constitution might harm the BJP’s electoral prospects.
Apart from the fear of changes to the constitution gravely affecting the people, the country is witnessing its high constitutional functionaries wilfully flouting the constitution.
Modi himself did so by conflating Ram with rashtra (state) and dev (God) with desh (country) while speaking on the occasion of the consecration of the Ram temple in Ayodhya on January 22 this year.
Also read: India’s OBCs Can’t Understand Why Narendra Modi, an OBC PM, Is Against a Caste Census
In doing so, he contravened the constitutional provisions mandating neutrality of the state to religion.
Governors and other functionaries take an oath “to preserve, protect and defend the constitution”. However, in several opposition-ruled states, governors have acted contrary to that oath.
Punjab governor Banwarilal Purohit did not convene the budget session of the state assembly in spite of the cabinet’s recommendation to do so, and it was only after the Supreme Court said it was ready to adjudicate his decision that he convened the session.
Rajasthan’s governor did the same and former chief minister Ashok Gehlot had to sit on a dharna to secure the governor’s nod.
In November 2023, Purohit did not give his assent to the Bills passed by the state assembly in a session that he said lacked constitutional validity as it was convened by the speaker when the assembly had been adjourned sine die. The Supreme Court remarked that Purohit was “playing with fire” and asked him to take a decision on those Bills.
Tamil Nadu governor R.N. Ravi violated the constitution by not appointing MLA K. Ponmudi as a minister on the chief minister’s instructions even after the apex court had stayed Ponmudi’s conviction in a disproportionate assets case. He was finally appointed a minister on the orders of the Supreme Court, which took a serious view of Ravi’s action.
In 2000, the then-President K.R. Narayanan saved the constitution when Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s regime wanted to review it. As a result, Vajpayee was forced to set up a commission with a mandate to only review the working of the constitution rather than the constitution itself.
Twenty-four years after Narayanan saved the constitution, ordinary voters appear to be standing in guard to save it again – by voting out those who have endangered it.
S.N. Sahu served as officer on special duty to former President K.R. Narayanan.
This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire & Galileo Ideas – and has been republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here.
