(Read the
following article not as an article rather as a question)
This session
started with a discussion on the ‘Commitment to India’s Constitution’ on the
125th birth anniversary of B R Ambedkar. I kept changing the channel
to the Lok Sabha to watch the live discussion in the parliament. Yes, Lok Sabha
is actually a television channel!! I was eager to know what the Constitution
means to the leaders of our democracy.
It was a day
full of attacks and counter-attacks. It was a day full of quotes by our freedom
fighters. It was, once again, a day of BJP vs Congress. But above all, it was a
day of discussion on the Commitment to India’s Constitution made in 1950. Are we
in consonance to the Constitution made in 1950? Why the changes made in the
Constitution after 1950 were wrong?
Members of
Parliament were busy in discussing what Constitution meant to us. It has been
more than six decades. Should not we start thinking what Constitution means to
us in contemporary era? I agree values like equality, liberty, fraternity are
seminal. But do they mean same to us now?
Does
Equality mean only reservation? The only solution I listen to giving equality
is reservation. Give reservation to women in legislatures. Give reservation to
backward castes in education. Give reservation in promotion. Give reservation
in food distribution. Give reservation in jobs. What about the rudimentary idea
of providing QUALITY education sans political-social interference to all free
of cost? I think it is the solution to all the problems in our society.
Constitution
makers gave reservation to end inequality. But now even a debate on relevance
of reservation can invoke jibes thrown at you. When will the clause of
continuance of reservation end?
We have been
sticking to the past. I am not demanding to change the principles of
Constitution like Democracy and Federalism. But can we change the way how it
works? Do we need a strong centre? Why not adopt a strict federal model? Let
Centre control only major subjects like defence and communication. Let’s state decide
their course and bring out true competitive federalism. India is proud of
Diversity with Unity. And it is high time to respect that diversity by giving States
more powers.
We have the
lengthiest constitution and added to that sub-ordinate and delegated
legislation makes numerous laws contradictory. Should we not cut short the
Constitution to basic values?
Fundamental
Rights are the quintessential part of a Constitution. And due to various
judicial verdicts the Fundamental Rights are being read in the most liberal
manner. Instead of expanding the vastness of Right to life, should we not
specify the rights? An extra page will not make it heavier. And when will
rights of nature be included in the Fundamental rights?
Directive
Principles of State Policy asks for various prohibitions. Should not we decide
if we want to drink alcohol or eat beef? Is India a socialist economy or
capitalist economy or a mixed economy? I don’t see India as a socialist country
where rich is telling poor how to develop. Classes sitting at the higher echelons
of the society are enforcing their plans of growth and equality on the poor.
Their attitude-I’m rich and I’ll tell you how to become rich. Directive
Principles include provision of just and humane conditions of work and
maternity relief. Should not it be a Fundamental Right rather than a policy direction?
Directive Principles are full of such contradiction.
We even have
a law not to joke about our constitutional authorities!! Actually a law saying
you not to laugh!!
A simple
analytical mind can find hundreds of contradictions in Constitution. If you ask
judiciary meaning of any article, they will hide behind the technicalities and
legal jargon which none of us can comprehend.
SHOULD A
CONSTITUTION INSPIRED BY CONSTITUTIONS OF THE PAST GOVERN OUR FUTURE?
No comments:
Post a Comment