Hannah Arendt argued that only those revolutions succeeded that limited the task to the political and did not extend to the social. Her example was the success of the English (1688) and the American (1766) Revolutions and the failure of the French (1789) and the Russian (1917) Revolutions. Her analysis of the American was questionable as it left out slavery, a major social issue and the Civil War subsequently resolved it.

The situation of the postcolonial societies is totally different. The forced distortions of the whole of the public sphere make it essential that the post-independent construction would have to be both political and social. This was manifested by a longprotracted movement for social reforms subordinating the political in India, until the last quarter of the nineteenth century. The reform movements crystallized in a form of cultural nationalism led by Dayananda and Vivekananda.

Meanwhile after India came under the direct rule of the British after the Sepoy Mutiny also referred to as the First War of Independence, limited opportunities in education and governmental employment enabled the emergence of a small but powerful middle class that spearheaded national causes first with the establishment of the Indian Association in 1876 and then the Indian National Congress in 1885.

Before the advent of Gandhi, the Congress appeal and programme remained limited with a strict stipulation that no divisive issues would be discussed. This narrowly focused Congress underwent a total transformation by becoming a mass and cadrebased party under Gandhi. In a rudimentary sense an Indian nation had arrived with an assertion of its rich heritage, its present predicament and a future ideal achievable within a foreseeable future.

Gandhi provided a democratic constitution for the Congress, disregarded the British map with a linguistic map and broadened the base of the Congress reflecting the needs and aspirations of the ordinary person. Subsequently, he elaborated the social aspect by providing a blueprint for constructive programmes. The Congress moved from dominion status towards complete independence with twin objectives of realizing social welfare and freedom.

At the end of the Second World War, when the Constituent Assembly was entrusted with the task of making a constitution for free India, its members knew the cardinal importance of a new Constitution to steer the new nation from a repressive and oppressive political apparatus and also to tackle endemic poverty, illiteracy and backwardness at the same time. In view of these, self-government seemed a questionable endeavour.

Fortunately, the limited experience of governing the provinces under the Government of India Act of 1935 provided the essential confidence and that was the reason the bulk of the administrative guidelines in the Constitution was borrowed from it. But for providing a general framework the Constitution could not be ambiguous or vague; as Ambedkar had pointed out, India was not yet a nation but a nation in making. Along with it he also reminded that even when the US Constitution was formulated the US was also not a nation. A new nation would demand clarity and demarcation which would complement the political with the social revolution by consent. It was an unprecedented exercise, and the Constitution makers could not afford to leave any lacuna for future deviations and that was the reason for the length of the Constitution. They did not look for originality and that led to the Indian Constitution being a compilation deriving the best from all the available sources.

Granville Austin found three non-negotiable basic directions of the Constitution: (1) Unity and integrity of the nation, (2) an Open Society enshrined as fundamental rights and (3) Social Justice reflected in the Directive Principles to ensure rough equality and parity in social and economic affairs. It was a balancing act within a constitutional framework which could in the words of Ambedkar be “both unitary as well as federal according to the requirements of time and circumstances”.

The power and authority of the Constitution would be provided by people. The word justice was specifically used to implement the constitutional provisions in all areas of life, social, economic, and political. It explicitly guaranteed equality of opportunity and democratic freedom. But significantly, it also added adequate safeguards for minorities, depressed and the backward classes as well also for the underdeveloped and tribal areas. It offered a holistic view of development of a nation of major contradictions with equal constitutional citizenship for every single Indian as the guiding principle.

This centrality of the Constitution and the art of governance would be tested by the effectiveness of the rulers’ capacity to ameliorate the grievances of the people in the shortest period of time. Unlike in the West where constitutional democracy preceded social democracy, one that took decades to make it truly representational with one person one vote, India at one stroke ensured solidarity, equality, and republican spirit.

In the wake of partition, although there were voices like Selig Harrison who predicted the disintegration of India, this emphasis on unity was essential with a confidence that an open society with democratic institutions would nurture a diverse nation towards attaining common good. It also meant interlinking social justice with the other two basic provisions. The Indian Constitution envisaged a vibrant political society to be a check on the enormous powers of a statist enterprise where eternal vigilance would ensure liberty. The single citizenship had revolutionary implications as Austin remarked providing “laws and a mechanism for adjudication of disputes outside society’s repressive hierarchy”.

At one stroke it addressed the concerns of backwardness enshrining the rule of law, a spirit of toleration and a scientific and rational mode of ordering a diverse and plural social order. The spirit and promise of the Indian Constitution were so appealing that Ernest Barker praised the Preamble as the best possible declaration of a public cause.

If we analyse the working of the Indian Constitution for the last seven decades, it has stood the test of time. The constitutional divisiveness mainly between the executive and the constitutional court has been successfully resolved except for the inglorious period of the Emergency. Even in that dark period the opposition, some sections of the press like Gorewala’s Opinion and the indomitable courage of HR Khanna, a judge in the Supreme Court stood up. Mrs Gandhi’s blunder was that she tried to offset the balance and focused on the social without realizing that in advancing it, freedom, fundamental rights and federal balance were the essential ingredients.

The overwhelming rejection of the Emergency in the 1977 election indicated the strength of Indian democracy to provide for orderly change. In recent years, a vibrant regional press, electronic media and other forums of social interaction have spread democratic republican spirit among the people. The incorporation of the RTIs and the enthusiasm of the poor for upholding democracy through their high voting percentage is encouraging. However, by the Gini Coefficient scale we are greatly unequal in the field of education. Even in essential services like health care there is great inequity. We are yet to establish institutions of just meritocracy and just reward. A slow judicial process reflects the collapse of the criminal justice system. There is also a need for introspection about our poor human development indices when many other nations who started their journey along with us, in similar circumstances have done better than us. There is also an alarming divide between the North and South.

Constitutional democracy has consolidated itself in India. It is a self-sufficient Republic with achievements to be proud of but there are still important deficiencies. The task now is to bridge the gulf and create an India that would exhibit republican virtues visibly. 

(The writer is a retired Professor of Political Science, University of Delhi)