‘Right-sizing’ federalism: Tamil Nadu panel headed by Justice Kurian Joseph calls for changes in language policy, Governor post

“Federalism was never a borrowed theory or an ideological indulgence. It was a necessity,” the preface to the report states. Yet, it adds, centralisation now persists “as habit — an inherited reflex rather than a consciously renewed constitutional choice”.

The 387-page volume sets out eleven foundational arguments for decentralisation, including what it calls the “Liberty Argument”, the “Democracy Argument”, and the “Innovation Argument”, alongside critiques of what it terms the “Uniformity Fallacy” and the “Control Fallacy”. Together, the panel says, they form a “coherent and principled framework for rebalancing India’s federal order”.

Among its most consequential recommendations are changes to the Constitution’s amendment procedure. The committee proposes that virtually all constitutional amendments require ratification by not less than two-thirds of states representing two-thirds of India’s population. It also suggests codifying the Constitution’s “Basic Features” explicitly within Article 368 to prevent future dilution.

The report argues that Parliament’s power to alter state boundaries under Article 3 should be curbed, requiring state consent and, in some cases, referendums. It proposes a new Article 3A to bar the creation of new Union Territories and mandate periodic referendums for existing ones.

Language policy occupies a central place in the report’s critique. “India must abandon the ‘One Nation, One Language’ illusion,” it states. The committee recommends amending Article 343 to constitutionally entrench English as the permanent official language of the Union, deleting references to Hindi in Article 345, and omitting Article 347 altogether. It also calls for replacing the Special Officer for Linguistic Minorities with a National Language Commission.

The office of the Governor, the panel says, has “increasingly departed from its intended role”. It recommends amending Article 155 to bind the President to appoint one of three names approved by the State Legislative Assembly, fixing a single non-renewable five-year term under Article 156, and codifying binding limits on gubernatorial discretion through a new “Instrument of Instructions”.

On fiscal federalism, the committee contends that the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime has strained cooperative federalism. It proposes recalibrating voting structures within the GST Council and clarifying that the council’s recommendations are advisory, in line with the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Mohit Minerals.

The report also urges extending the freeze on inter-state seat allocation in Lok Sabha until 2126 or until states’ fertility rates converge, separating Union and state election administration, moving education back to the State List, and restoring state control over medical education.

Indian federalism, the committee concludes, must be “right-sized” rather than weakened. “A federation that trusts its states… does not weaken sovereignty; it deepens democracy,” the preface says.

Whether these recommendations will translate into national consensus remains to be seen. But in tabling the report, Tamil Nadu has signalled that the debate over the future shape of India’s Union is no longer a matter for academic seminars alone, but for legislative reckoning.