Opinion Why India’s Constitution has survived the test of the time, even as those of its neighbours failed
The Constitution has been neither rigid nor flexible. It is a blend of both and paved the way for political leaders to alter the rule book according to the current needs of society, without changing the basic framework
The Indian Constitution emerged from rigorous deliberations within the Constituent Assembly, whose compositional diversity reflected the nation’s diversity. (File) 
By Thirunavukarasu S and and Saumya Gupta
Almost a decade after the Arab Spring reshaped the political landscape of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), South Asia now appears to be undergoing its own wave of mass mobilisations. It is witnessing unprecedented turmoil: Myanmar’s military junta, bolstered by fresh conscripts and advanced weaponry, has regained control in key regions despite sustained resistance. Meanwhile in Bangladesh, an interim government concluded a high-profile trial in Dhaka, sentencing former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to death. Nepal faces political uncertainty as a former Supreme Court justice leads a struggling administration after Gen Z-led protests toppled the previous regime. As the Taliban continues to strive for international legitimacy, it experiences a sharp resurgence in regressive politics. Sri Lanka remains focused on economic recovery, while in Pakistan, Field Marshal Asim Munir has managed to position the military above both the government and the judiciary.
Amid these regional upheavals, India’s historic commitment to democracy endures. Progress may be cautious and uneven. But, the Constitution remains the steadfast foundation of its democratic promise. For over 75 years, our Constitution has guided governance and shaped society’s spirit. It remains a living document deeply rooted in reason, imagination, and reflexivity, continuously evolving through the courage of the people.
The Indian Constitution emerged from rigorous deliberations within the Constituent Assembly, whose compositional diversity reflected the nation’s diversity. Unlike other South Asian countries, where dominant groups imposed their rule, India, with its commitment to proportional representation, embraced contentious debates. Constitutional scholar Ornit Shani highlights that this participatory spirit extended above and beyond the Assembly, as numerous groups, including the Communal Harmony Board, All India Gurkha League, Backward and Minor Hindu Intermediate Allied Caste League, Ved Prachar Mandal and Assam Tea Labourers’ Association, actively contributed through letters and memorandums, shaping this enduring document. Thus, the Indian Constitution incorporated the spirit and courage of reasoning of its people.
Pakistan has had three constitutions primarily because of conflicting power dynamics. Another setback for several South Asian constitutions is that they inherently lack a well-defined balance of power doctrine. Such lack of clarity often leads to an oversimplified idea of power, leading to military dominance or executive outreach. On the other hand, scholars like Douglas V Verney and Balveer Arora argue that despite centralising tendencies, India’s Constitution has adapted to evolving political contexts.
In our neighbouring countries, despite landmark rulings like Anwar Hossain Chowdhury in Bangladesh and Mahmood Khan Achakzai in Pakistan, reasserting constitutional supremacy, courts failed to act decisively. This, then, allowed for executive overreach, particularly by military forces, to weaken state institutions and imperil society. In contrast, India’s judiciary has been pivotal in safeguarding the Constitution by scrutinising amendments that threaten its core guarantees. Beginning with early rulings like Shankari Prasad and Sajjan Singh, and evolving through landmark cases such as Golaknath and Kesavananda Bharati, the Supreme Court established the Basic Structure Doctrine, an immutable constitutional shield against majoritarian excess.
However, the executive has often sought to override judicial authority, for example, during the Emergency. Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister, temporarily placed the government above judicial scrutiny by overriding norms in judicial appointments, bypassing seniority and sidelining dissenting judges while appointing the chief justice. This led to key rulings like the Second Judges Case that balanced executive influence with judicial independence through the collegium system, sparking ongoing debates on transparency versus autonomy. In Bangladesh, the Supreme Court invalidated several constitutional amendments, and in Pakistan, parliament curbed the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court; in contrast, India’s judiciary remains a contested but crucial guardian of constitutionalism.
The Indian Constitution has been neither rigid nor flexible. It is a blend of both and paved the way for political leaders to alter the rule book according to the current needs of society, without changing the basic framework. Over the years, the Constitution has adapted to growing and varying demands like introducing language policies, empowering local governance, expanding reservation, embracing environmental duties, and enhancing women’s political participation.
Despite many strengths, the Indian Constitution wrestles with several challenges, like the ongoing tussle between centralisation and federalism. Ambiguities, such as the Governor’s unchecked discretion over state bills, fuel these concerns.
Paulo Freire beautifully observes in Pedagogy of the Oppressed that “Liberating education consists in acts of cognition, not transferals of information.” Similarly, the Indian Constitution is not just a set of laws. It is a living document, born through reason. As we celebrate the 76th anniversary of our Constitution, the message is clear: The Constitution protects us, we have to protect it.
Thirunavukarasu S is a research fellow, at the Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, University of Madras and Saumya Gupta, a fellow at the Department of Anthropology, University of Amsterdam
Share
