Large Obstacle For The Indian Constitution example essay topic

A constitution introduces the rules of politics and government in order to try and guarantee fair competition. It establishes the framework under which a country is governed by specifying the organisation of government, the limits to how much power the state holds, and introduces basic laws for the country. Essentially, a constitution attempts to strike a balance between the authority of the state and the freedom of it's citizens. India struggled to gain independence for a long period and the long rule of the British, over two centuries, undoubtedly had some impact on the Indian constitution. The Government of India Act of 1935 was particularly important in India's path to independence and was linked in certain ways to the constitution.

It was introduced by the British to form a framework of rule for the country to be governed, and gave a significant amount of responsible Government to Indians living in the provinces. One feature of the act that was adopted in the Constitution of 1950 was the use of a federal system of government. This was a representative system formed on the basis of periodic elections, and gave every adult citizen the opportunity to vote and indeed run for elective office. There were three levels of government introduced in the Constitution, the Union government in New Delhi, state government and local government. The Union, also known as the Center, had strong residuary powers and consisted of a president, Prime Minister and a cabinet. The state government is able to function freely in normal circumstances, but the Center has the power to control, and even overrule the direct administration under certain circumstances.

India's constitution had 395 articles and eight schedules making it one of the longest in the world. There were four main aims in the introduction of the political system that the constitution laid down: for India to be democratic, federal, secular and republican. The majority of the Constitutional Assembly were happy to continue with the system of parliamentary democracy that was familiar to them, although there was a call from some quarters for a decentralised Gandhian form of rule. Federal government was preferred as it was thought the best way to accommodate India's diversity in terms of class and religion. Secularism was approved due to the misgivings the Congress party felt on the two-nation theory, which caused the separation of India and Pakistan. Finally, a republican position was used to show freedom and complete independence from British rule and influence.

Despite the fact that the Constitution was a step away from the features of British rule, it wasn't a complete break from the past. One main characteristic feature of colonial rule that was preserved was the Indian Civil Service (ICS), renamed as the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) at the time of independence. This service is a far cry from many of the aims that the Constitution holds, as with fewer than 2000 officers, it was a small but very powerful elite which was seen as the "steel frame" which held the British colonial rule together. The ICS had a large proportion of authority and control in their districts, and they acted as both heads of administration and judicial institutions. They had the power to maintain law and order, as well as collecting revenue from taxes, fines and so forth. There were a number of supposed advantages to preserving this old colonial administration however.

Firstly, they were recruited from a highly educated elite through a difficult examination process and since the recruits were generalist, they were very adaptable. Corruption, a large problem in Third World politics, was never really an issue due to the officers's else of duty. Perhaps most importantly was the fact that the ICS was loyal to India as a whole rather than to regions or provinces, and therefore helped to create a type of centralised governance. Despite this link to the colonial past, the Indian leaders at independence quite self-consciously maintained features of the colonial legacy, seeing it as an obvious benefit.

A unique feature of the Constitution that displayed a desire to move away from strict British political practices, was that of a list of both Fundamental Rights of the People and Directive Principles. The founding members of India's independence were at best hesitant in their approach to Western and Soviet ideals. Many thought that the United States democracy was too pure and gave too much opportunity, whereas communism in the USSR lacked democracy and was generally unjust. However, both Western and Communist ideals were seen as attractive to Indian leaders, such as the equality of status and opportunity under communism, and the freedom of thought and speech of Western political thought. This attraction towards both democracy and socialism is evident in the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles. The Rights of the People were basically forms of protection for citizens against the encroachments of state authority, and gave a constitutional guarantee to the worth and dignity of Indian citizens that Western democracy strongly believes in.

However, the majority of people were very poor, illiterate and often exploited by landlords, merchants and so forth. A great worry was that the rights would be used to help the exploiters rather than those being victimized. Special measures were introduced through the Directive Principles to protect the lower classes and different castes, and gave opportunities such as reservations of places in government agencies for disadvantaged groups. This was very much a feature of Soviet socialism but helped to ensure that the fundamental rights were supporting the right people, i.e. the lower classes and disadvantaged.

The Constitution also abolished certain negative characteristics of Indian social practice, such as forced labour and untouchability. It must be mentioned however that under the constitution, the state reserves the right to suspend fundamental rights in times of emergency and there is no judicial power to contravene such a move. This is important as it is stating that the needs of the state can be greater than those of individuals and ignores due process of law. A large obstacle for the Indian Constitution was the fact that it's society was intensely divided into many different groupings, both religious and communal. The social structure was traditionally based on an ideology of hierarchy rather than equality, and this was the reason the British colonial rulers often gave when discussing the notion of a parliamentary democracy existing in India.

Indian nationalists always argued that Hindu-Muslim collectivism was a British invention, and that if allowed to work together, political order would be divided in terms of class and economics, with religion not playing a part. The constitution scrapped separate electorates, which were imposed under colonial rule, and replaced them with general electorates in which all people could vote, regardless of caste or religion. It was also evident that unless measures were put in place low castes would have very little participation in politics, as was shown when Congress tried to enrol disadvantaged groups before independence. Despite pressures to create separate electorates at independence, the Constitution established procedures to ensure the participation of low castes as equal citizens.

This was achieved in a similar fashion to the Directive Principles, with the reservation of seats in the legislatures, and entitling low castes to preferential policies and certain privileges. However, the issue of inter communal relations between religions and castes has continued post-independence and conflicts have occurred in states such as Bihar and Tamil Nadu, indicating that the problem is far from resolved. In conclusion, we can see that the major ideas of government in the Indian Constitution concern an incorporation of both democratic and socialist thought, with obvious Western and Soviet influences. The Fundamental Rights can be compared to the American Bill of Rights and even to the UN declaration of human rights, whereas the importance of the necessity of the state is more a socialist view.

There is also an obvious attempt to express freedom and independence from the British Crown, but nevertheless the Constitution did preserve elements of the Colonial legacy as well as introducing similar political practices. India was also keen to remain a member of the Commonwealth but without displaying any true loyalty to the crown. The relatively recent independence of India makes it difficult to judge how effective the Constitution has been, but it has undoubtedly served to protect the lower classes and maintain a central base of governance. However the diversity and sheer size of the country remains a large problem which is likely to continue to hinder the development of the country.

Bibliography

R. Thakur - The Government and Politics of India P. Brass - The Politics of India since Independence W.H. Jones - The Government and Politics of India.