Phantom menace

To the uninitiated it must have come as something of a surprise that a country which responds to every calamity, earth-shattering or minus...

To the uninitiated it must have come as something of a surprise that a country which responds to every calamity, earth-shattering or minuscule, by appointing a commission of inquiry should witness such a brouhaha over the constitution of yet another panel. And this surprise must have been laced with a dash of mystification. Plainly stated, in our symbolism-driven times the fiftieth anniversary of the Constitution should logically occasion an inquiry into the working of the one book this nation has looked to for daily guidance.

Half a century is a long time in the life of a nation whose transition to independence is but three years older; glancing back to assess the shortcomings and the strengths of its manifesto would be the obvious thing to do, right? But this is 21st century India, where every undertaking cultural or developmental, social or economic is sought to be imbued with a deeply political colour, to be scrutinised for the faintest, and often the most fanciful, of signs of a hidden agenda. If it has been so with a film set in the 1930s, so it is with the Constitution review panel today.

And so it is too that now that the review panel is a reality, its composition has become the subject for political scuffles. This newspaper had earlier called for a healthy debate on the Constitution and its review, for an assessment of its suitability for our times as well as the human failings that may have been attributed to it. Sadly, this has not happened.

In its stead there have charges and counter-charges based on personalities and shadowy motivations. How unfortunate. It is incumbent upon the Opposition that, while seizing its responsibility to caution the government as it deems fit, it offers considered opinion and constructive criticism.

Instead of shooting at phantoms, instead of lamenting what could be, it should participate wholesomely in this activity. For, the entire exercise could colour India8217;s understanding of its constitutional history, and could finally reflect in historical amendments that would shape the country8217;s future. It is equally incumbent on the government to accept that in the final analysis, a review of the Constitution is an inherently political enterprise.

Accordingly, it needs to be a trifle more forthcoming on the terms of reference, however hazy they may be at this exploratory stage, it envisions for Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah and his team.

It would be instructive if, for instance, political parties offered their views on what exactly is the basic structure of the Constitution that they consider sacrosanct. The Supreme Court judgment in the Kesavananda Bharati case certainly never detailed it. Hence, those promising to preserve and those tremulous about its sanctity need to trace its contours.

Story continues below this ad

In the process, they could help articulate their roadmap for India8217;s future. On another note, federalism and political stability have been mentioned as the goals before the panel. The people of India would surely welcome an investigation into the socio-economic revolution envisaged in the Directive Principles of State Policy. And in the end any review of the Constitution would remain an incomplete exercise if it does not address the plethora of archaic laws that hold back progress towards the ideals that animated our founding fathers.