President-PM standoff — Govt begins damage control

"This Government has no intention whatsoever to tinker with the basic features of the Constitution … the President is absolutely right that no review can recommend tinkering with the basic features of the Constitution," Union Law Minister Ram Jethmalani told reporters here.

"There is no conflict of any kind between the President and the Prime Minister on this issue," he said.

Jethmalani said an unseemly controversy was being raised by the media and added, "If the President was opposed to any amendment to the Constitution per se, he would have been highly critical of what has been done to the Constitution almost 80 times (through amendments) in a span of 50 years."

Virtually outlining the terms of reference of the panel, the Minister said, "The empowerment of women, power to sack a state government using Article 356, Centre-state financial relations, removal of just grievances of scheduled castes and tribes are the areas which require constitutional amendment".

Defending appointment of such a committee, he said, "What is wrong in introspection? The committee will find out whether the constitutional objectives have been achieved and if not, who is to be blamed for it."

Taking a dig at the Congress, Jethmalani said that it was the Congress government in 1973 which opposed the "basic feature doctrine" propounded by the Supreme Court in the Keshavanand Bharati case.

He said that the then attorney general had "forced the court to listen for two days (to) its opposition to the basic feature doctrine" and added, "These are the same people who carried out the maximum number of amendments to the Constitution and now they are saying that there cannot be even an introspection on whether or not constitutional goals have been achieved."

Jethamalani said, "Those who constitute the present government have fully and unreservedly accepted the validity of the Keshavanand doctrine."

Asked how many members would be there in the constitutional review committee, he said, "I personally feel there should not be more than a dozen experts. They should hear as many people as possible and give their report."

Making light the Opposition’s fear on the committee, he said, "We in the Government do not have two-thirds majority in either House of Parliament to effect any change in the Constitution.

"At best, the report of the committee would be placed before Parliament. To carry out any change as per the recommendation of the committee, we have to depend on the support of other political parties as well as the main opposition."

Jethmalani said there was no hidden agenda of the Government in appointing a review committee.

Elaborating on areas that need "immediate change in the Constitution", he said women empowerment was a priority area.

"I have no doubt that the Women’s Reservation Bill will be carried in both Houses of Parliament. It will definitely see the light of the day," he said.

Another area for introspection was the mode of appointment and removal of judges and relation between the Centre and states, particularly on revenue sharing. He said he favoured that states should have more power over their natural resources.

The Minister said the Constitution under Article 334 had thought that SCs and STs would achieve equality in society within 10 years, but each government had carried out amendments to extend reservation for them after every ten years.

The Constitution "is a basic document which requires reverence from every person. Those people who did not bat an eyelid when it was amended 80 times are the ones most against appointment of a committee for review," he added.