Malcolm Rivera
India's constitution is the largest in the world, and some argue that it needs to be rewritten. The constitution gives the government enormous powers to intervene in the economy, to enact laws that discriminate among citizens based on attributes such as religion and caste, restricts freedom of speech, and limits the right to property. The constitution's colonial origins give the government near-omnipotent powers that are not consistent with a free society. The US Constitution, in contrast, is short, guarantees freedom of speech, protects property rights, prohibits discrimination among citizens, and limits the power of the government.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Size | The Indian Constitution is the largest in the world. |
| Nature of the government | The Indian Constitution gives the government enormous powers to intervene in the economy and to enact laws that discriminate among citizens based on attributes such as religion and caste. |
| Freedom of speech | The Indian Constitution restricts freedom of speech. |
| Property rights | The Indian Constitution limits the right to property. |
| Relationship between the people and the government | The Indian Constitution places the government as the master and the people as its servants. |
| Economic policy | The Indian Constitution's economic policy is a proximate cause for the need for a new constitution. |
| Amendment process | The Indian Constitution provides a tedious process for amending the Constitution. |
| Judicial criticism | The Indian judiciary has been criticised for its refusal to live up to the expectation of being a counter-majoritarian institution. |
| Executive takeover | There is a danger of the constitutionalism project failing in India due to a Parliament reeling under near-complete executive takeover. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- India's constitution is the largest in the world, making it unreadable and unread
- The constitution gives the government too much power to intervene in the economy
- The constitution restricts freedom of speech and limits property rights
- The constitution allows for discrimination among citizens based on religion and caste
- The constitution's colonial origins give the government near-omnipotent powers
India's constitution is the largest in the world, making it unreadable and unread
India's constitution is the largest in the world, making it unreadable and, in large part, unread. The sheer volume of this document points to a "'low trust' society, where the government and the people have an adversarial relationship. This lack of trust can be traced back to the colonial rule of the British, who imposed a government on an unwilling population, exerting oppressive control. As a result, the Indian Constitution grants the government vast powers, including the ability to intervene in the economy, enact discriminatory laws, restrict freedom of speech, and limit property rights. In short, it enables political and economic exploitation.
The Indian Constitution's length is a significant issue, as it is meant to be a foundational document that outlines the rules and constraints within which political decisions are made. A lengthy and complex constitution is inaccessible to the average citizen, making it difficult for them to understand their rights and hold the government accountable. This is in stark contrast to the US Constitution, which is concise and guarantees essential freedoms, including freedom of speech and protection of property rights.
The Indian Constitution's colonial origins are evident in the significant powers it grants the government, reflecting a paternalistic approach where citizens are treated as irresponsible or immature. This is further exacerbated by the government's abuse of the ordinance system, where they enact laws without the approval of both Houses of Parliament, and the president's power to dismiss state governments for political reasons.
The constitution-making process in India began with the first sitting of the Constituent Assembly on December 9, 1946. In just under three years, the Assembly completed its task of framing the constitution, which included 11 sessions and 167 days of work. The Fundamental Rights chapter, influenced by B.R. Ambedkar's work, includes 45 Articles covering rights to equality, freedom, religion, and constitutional remedies.
Despite the existence of a process to amend the Indian Constitution, the country has struggled with the promise of deliberative democracy. Since 2014, the government has proposed seven bills to amend the constitution, but only two were referred to Parliament Committees for detailed examination. This trend indicates a potential danger to the constitutionalism project in India, with a powerful government that may be able to amend the constitution unilaterally.
Understanding India's Constitution: A Book Guide
You may want to see also
The constitution gives the government too much power to intervene in the economy
India's constitution is the largest in the world, and critics argue that it gives the government too much power to intervene in the economy. The country's economic policies have been cited as a reason for its lack of progress, and the constitution, which shapes the nature of the government, is seen as a contributing factor.
The Indian Constitution has been criticised for granting the government excessive authority to interfere in the economy, enact laws that discriminate against citizens based on factors like religion and caste, restrict freedom of speech, and limit property rights. This has led to accusations of deliberate political and economic exploitation. The constitution's colonial origins are also blamed for empowering the government with near-omnipotent authority, which is deemed incompatible with a free society. The government's ability to issue ordinances when "immediate action" is required has been exploited to pass laws that would otherwise fail to pass both Houses of Parliament, further concentrating power in the executive branch.
In contrast, the US Constitution limits government power, protects freedom of speech and property rights, and prohibits discrimination among citizens. The differing constitutions reflect the contrasting relationships between the people and their governments: the US Constitution places the people as the principal and the government as their agent, while the Indian Constitution positions the government as the master and the people as its servants, a legacy of colonial rule.
The Indian Constitution's Fundamental Rights chapter includes rights to equality, freedom, religion, and constitutional remedies. However, the constitution's complexity has made it unreadable and largely unread, contributing to a lack of trust in society. The government's frequent attempts to amend the constitution without sufficient deliberation have further undermined the promise of democratic ideals in India.
In conclusion, the Indian Constitution's grant of extensive powers to the government to intervene in the economy and other aspects of civic life has led to concerns of exploitation and corruption. The constitution's colonial origins and complex nature have contributed to a lack of trust and a paternalistic government that treats citizens as irresponsible. These factors, combined with a lack of effective checks and balances, have prompted calls for a new constitution that better aligns with democratic values and enables India's economic potential.
Finance Commission of India: Constitution and UPSC Implications
You may want to see also
The constitution restricts freedom of speech and limits property rights
The Indian Constitution, which came into force in the 1950s, has been criticised for restricting freedom of speech and limiting property rights.
The Constitution provides "the right to freedom of speech and expression" under Article 19(1)(a). However, this right is subject to restrictions under sub-clause (2), which allows for limitations on freedom of speech and expression for reasons of "sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, preserving decency, preserving morality, in relation to contempt, court, defamation, or incitement to an offence". The vague phrase "decency or morality" in Article 19(2) has long enabled the state to engage in widespread moral policing of the mass media, the film industry, and the entertainment industry. Religious groups often object to liberal ideas and deem all progressive values as indecent.
The Constitution also does not mention the word "press", and the freedom of the press has been constrained by laws such as the Official Secrets Act and the Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (PoTA). Under PoTA, a person could be detained for up to six months for being in contact with a terrorist or terrorist group. For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major constraint on press freedom. The Constitution also enables the legislature to impose certain restrictions on freedom of speech and expression through Clause (2) of Article 19.
In addition to restrictions on freedom of speech, the Constitution also limits property rights. Initially, the right to property was given fundamental status under Articles 31 and 19(1)(f), which protected individuals against the government or state's arbitrary action to seize private property for public or private use. However, over time, the right to property has been weakened, and it is no longer considered a part of the Basic Structure Doctrine of the Constitution. The focus has shifted from individual property rights to social and economic goals, giving the state more power over property matters.
The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 inserted a new article, 300A, titled "Right to Property". This article provides that no person shall be deprived of their property without the authority of law, which must be validly enacted and just, fair, and reasonable. While this article provides some protection for property rights, it represents a shift towards a more state-controlled approach, prioritising social and economic development over individual property rights.
The Founding Fathers: Architects of India's Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The constitution allows for discrimination among citizens based on religion and caste
India's constitution is the largest in the world, and it has been argued that it has hindered India's economic progress. The constitution gives the government the power to intervene in the economy and to enact laws that discriminate among citizens based on attributes such as religion and caste. It also restricts freedom of speech and limits property rights.
The Indian Constitution places the government as the principal and the people as its servants, which is a legacy of colonial rule. The British government was imposed by force on the population, and the laws and regulations were designed to exert oppressive control over the people. This created an adversarial relationship between the government and the people, which has persisted post-independence. The Indian Constitution, therefore, gives the government significant powers that are not consistent with a free society.
The Indian Constitution, in Article 15, prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. This article states that no citizen shall be subject to any disability, liability, restriction, or condition on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth with regard to access to public spaces, such as shops, restaurants, and hotels, or the use of public resources, such as roads and wells. The article also specifies that the state shall not discriminate against any citizen on the same grounds.
Despite these constitutional provisions, caste-based differences and discrimination persist in India. The caste system is associated with Hinduism but has also been observed among Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, and Sikhs in the Indian subcontinent. The Indian government has recognised historically discriminated-against communities, such as the untouchables, under the designation of Scheduled Castes, and has implemented affirmative action policies to uplift these groups. However, critics argue that the reservation system has led to protests, with some Forward Castes complaining of reverse discrimination.
Indian Constitution: A Force for Good?
You may want to see also
The constitution's colonial origins give the government near-omnipotent powers
India's constitution is the largest in the world, with a vast set of rules that point to a "low trust" society. The constitution gives the government enormous powers to intervene in the economy, to enact laws that discriminate among citizens based on attributes such as religion and caste, restricts freedom of speech, and limits the right to property. The constitution's colonial origins have resulted in a paternalistic government that treats citizens as irresponsible, immature children.
The British government, which was imposed by force on an unwilling population, established the adversarial relationship between the government and the people that persists in India today. The laws, rules, and regulations implemented by the British were designed to exert comprehensive, oppressive control over the people. This dynamic created a fundamental lack of trust between the oppressor and the oppressed, which has continued even after independence.
The Indian Constitution places the government as the master and the people as its servants, a dynamic that is characteristic of a colonial government. The constitution gives the government near-omnipotent powers, including the ability to dismiss state governments and assume direct authority if a situation arises where the state government cannot be conducted according to the constitution. This power, known as the president's rule, has been abused, with state governments being dismissed on flimsy grounds for political reasons.
The executive branch, led by the prime minister, holds significant power in India's parliamentary system of government. While the president's role is mostly ceremonial, the prime minister exercises executive power, with the president being obligated to act on the prime minister's wishes. This system, with a powerful executive and a nominal advisor, mirrors the British system and is a direct result of colonial influences on India before and during the writing of its constitution.
In recent years, there have been concerns about the Indian government's attempts to amend the constitution without sufficient deliberation. The constitution provides a tedious process for amendments, requiring a special majority in parliament and sometimes ratification by legislative assemblies of at least half of the states. However, the current government has proposed several bills to amend the constitution, with some bypassing the referral to parliament committees. This has raised alarms about the potential failure of the constitutionalism project in India.
The Lost Indian Constitution: Where Lies the Original?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
India has not rewritten its constitution. However, since 2014, the government has proposed several bills to amend it.
The Indian Constitution is the largest in the world, with enormous powers given to the government to intervene in the economy, enact discriminatory laws, restrict freedom of speech, and limit property rights.
The US Constitution is short, guarantees freedom of speech, protects property rights, prohibits discrimination among citizens, and limits the power of the government. In contrast, the Indian Constitution places the government as the master and the people as its servants.
The constitution-making process was organised around the deliberations of the Constituent Assembly, which first sat on December 9, 1946. In just under three years, the Assembly framed India's Constitution, which included a Fundamental Rights chapter with 45 Articles.
Some concerns include the government's excessive power to amend the Constitution, the judiciary's "refusal" to act as a counter-majoritarian institution, and the potential failure of the constitutionalism project in India.
