February 28: A review of the Indian Constitution was an unnecessary exercise, felt former judge Justice Hosbet Suresh. ``If at all the review has to be undertaken, the central government must initiate a public debate before effecting any changes,'' said the retired high court judge, who was chairing a seminar on the subject of constitutional review organised by the Documentation Research and Training Centre on Saturday. The discussion was arranged in response to the Commission appointed for review of the Constitution headed by Justice Venkatchaliah.According to Professior D N Sadanshiv, former member of the Law Commission, the commission appointed by the Bharatiya Janata Party-led NDA government has no legal authority. There are provisions onyl for amending the Constitution. ``But insteading of amending the document, the Vajpayee government has decided to transform the Constitution. They have not had the courtesy to ask for suggestions about legal and political implications of the decision,'' he added. Like Justice Suresh, Sadanshiv said there was a ``hidden fascist agenda'' in the exercise. ``The motives are not above board. They mean to saffronise the country. And the review is just the means to achieve this end,'' Sadanshiv added.Professor Luis D'Sliva also objected to Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's statement that the review will not touch the ``basic structure and core values of our constitution.'' He said the review itself spells ``something different from the earlier period''.Professor P M Kamath, however, endorsed the need for a review, especially in the context of the need for a presidential form of government. He said the presidential form has worked wonderfully in America, and none of the presidents have taken the help of the Constitution to rule undemocratically. ``It is wrong to conclude that presidents will take legal protection to dictate terms. The USA has shown that this system is very democratic and workable.''Professor Sudhakar Pai of Wilson College said the Constitution does need to be reviewed after 50 years of independence. ``Issues like centre-state relations, state autonomy, devolutions of power, local self-government and Article 356 need to be restudied by experts. There is a world of difference between the present times and the era when the Constitution was drafted.'' He said the Congress was ruling in the Centre and all states at that time. ``Naturally, the Centre-state relations were not strained. However, now with different political parties ruling in different states, the state governments' powers need to be reexamined. Otherwise, more and more states will speak the language of seperatism.''Ms Leni of the training centre informed that the organisation plans to open 30 centres in Mumbai to educate the masses about the dangers of the constitutional review.
