To review or not

Whether or not people agree with President K R Narayanan's views on the Constitution, everyone must appreciate the fact that he has stripp...

Whether or not people agree with President K R Narayanan8217;s views on the Constitution, everyone must appreciate the fact that he has stripped away layers of obfuscation and placed squarely before the country the substantive issues involved in the exercise the BJP has embarked upon of altering the Constitution. No longer will the euphemism of reviewing the Constitution hold. According to the President8217;s reading of 8220;talk of revising or even writing a new Constitution8221;, the purpose is to replace the present parliamentary system of government with a presidential system. This is not at all how the Vajpayee government presented its exercise. It has been extraordinarily coy about revealing its intentions. It is less than honest to say a review is necessary simply because half a century has passed by since the Constitution was ad-opted.

Alternatively, to say a review commission is being set up because the NDA manifesto promised one is circular reasoning that begs the question. Now the President puts the onus onthe Vajpayee government to spell out clearly why it wants to set up a commission to review the Constitution. Particularly when the Prime Minister says the review will not include the basic structure of the Constitution, which alone is unalterable.

The President should be thanked for setting out straightforwardly his reasons for opposing the changes being contemplated in the Constitution and for drawing attention to key aspects of it that have tended to be overlooked in the political hurly-burly of recent years. When governments fall like nine-pins, the search for stability becomes paramount. But it is worth remembering that the political system itself has been durable and one factor responsible for this is the facility of changing governments.

When change is possible people tend to be more tolerant of political arrangements they do not approve of. A presidential system is seen as going against the intent of the framers of the Constitution. In their considered judgment a system of collectiveresponsibility was preferable to a presidential form which has an inbuilt tendency towards authoritarianism. And it is important before the Constitution is turned inside out to consider, as the President says, whether we have failed the Constitution.

There is no better demonstration of the checks and balances in the system than the President8217;s forthright intervention. With the government playing its cards close to its chest, public debate has not been possible so far. Now a healthy one should ensue.

The BJP wants to leave its mark on the country. That is very plain. Whether it is security policy or education or the constitutional framework, the party constantly tries to break the old mould and reorder things. The way it goes about doing it is unacceptable. In each case the methods are clandestine and there is no attempt to conduct a public debate or consult political allies. There is considerable suspicion about the motives and agenda of the BJP with regard to the Constitution. The Vajpayee governmentshould tread very carefully here. There is no case to alter a scheme which has stood the country in good stead for 50 years and given it the most viable democratic system in Asia.