On November 26, which is now celebrated as Constitution Day, Prime Minister Narendra Modi wrote a letter to his fellow citizens.
In the letter, Modi exhorted citizens to place duties as listed out in the Constitution foremost in their minds. "To carry out our duties, it becomes imperative to put in our full capability and dedication in every task. Every action of ours should strengthen the Constitution and further national goals and interests."
The Prime Minister said that it was the power of the Constitution that enabled a humble and economically disadvantaged person like him to serve as the head of government continuously for over 24 years. Modi's reaffirmation of his faith in the Constitution comes at a time when opposition parties led by the Congress Party have campaigned in elections saying that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government intended to amend the set of national canons that came into force in 1950.
The BJP, however, might want to think about amending its own constitution, as its basic philosophy - Integral Humanism - conflicts with the country's Constitution. And it is not about the differences over the Preamble.
'Socialism' And 'Secularism'
The issue heated up in the summer when Dattatreya Hosabale, sarkaryavah or general secretary of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the ideological mentor to the BJP, called for a debate to remove the terms 'socialist' and 'secular' from the Preamble. Following a furore, in a written reply in the Rajya Sabha in July, union law minister Arjun Ram Meghwal clarified that the government had "no current plans" to remove 'socialist' or 'secular' from the Preamble. Both terms were inserted by way of the 42nd amendment in 1976 when the Emergency was in force. While the Sangh Parivar rejects socialism as a political ideology for India, it believes that the idea of secularism enshrined in the Constitution is based on western thought and has also been perverted into minority appeasement by Congress and its friends.
RSS and BJP leaders often lean on BR Ambedkar, the chief architect of the Constitution, to refute the need for having 'socialism' and 'secularism' in the Preamble. During the Constituent Assembly debates, Ambedkar said that it was not required to use the two words explicitly. He reasoned that both were already enshrined in the Constitution; secularism was woven into the fundamental rights and socialism in the directive principles.
Morality And Legality
Addressing a lawyers' gathering in 2017, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat had spoken about his debate with former President Pranab Mukherjee on Constitutional morality. Mukherjee had said that morality is legality, to which Bhagwat counter-questioned whether the vice versa was also true. He said the Indian legal system needed to be freed of foreign influences. The RSS believes that the Hindu 'dharma' is by its nature secular. It also believes that India is a Hindu Nation.
The Representation of People's Act, which governs elections in the country, forces the BJP to embrace socialism and secularism in the party constitution. Among the commitments it lists in its constitution are a "Gandhian approach to socio-economic issues leading to the establishment of an egalitarian society free from exploitation". It also swears by 'positive secularism', which is 'Sarva Dharma Samabhav', or equal respect for all religions. It should be recalled that the RSS was unhappy when the BJP was formed in 1980 because its guiding philosophy was Gandhian Socialism. It was replaced in its constitution five years later with Deendayal Upadhyaya's Integral Humanism in Article III: basic philosophy.
An Ideological Dilemma
The change created an ideological contradiction that the party has to confront if it accepts Upadhyaya's charter. The party constitution says that it is committed to nationalism. Upadhyaya, in his second lecture laying out the contours of his treatise, analyses western ideals of nationalism, democracy and socialism. He says by itself, nationalism is in conflict with world peace. He also says that socialism militates against democracy. Yet, he does not reject it. In fact, he accepts all three in a customised form to suit the 'Bharatiya culture', underlining socialism's importance in the Indian context of wide socio-economic inequalities. Upadhyaya rooted for free education, healthcare, and a job for every able bodied citizen.
Upadhyaya's other objection was to the federal structure. He favoured a unitary structure and argued that from the point of view of growth, the Indian Constitution needs amendment. "We made our Constitution federal, whereby what we have adopted in practice, we have rejected in principle," he says.
Several states, especially those from the South, are already up in arms saying federalism is in retreat and the Centre is usurping states' powers. Several opposition-ruled states, including Kerala, West Bengal, and Tamil Nadu accuse governors to be agents of the Centre, who intervene in state institutional functioning. Similarly, when farm laws were repealed for new central legislation, it was seen as an overreach by the Centre into a subject in the State List. The tendency to run major welfare and development projects through centrally sponsored schemes in which states also bear significant financial burden is another contentious issue in Centre-state relations.
Considering that growth, or 'vikas', is a daily mantra for the BJP, status quo would mean that the party is only paying lip service to Integral Humanism. "It is after all our responsibility to fulfil the dreams envisioned by the framers of our Constitution," the PM said in his letter. Perhaps it is time for the BJP to drop Integral Humanism. After all, Upadhyaya was not among the framers of the Indian Constitution.
(Dinesh Narayanan is a Delhi-based journalist and author of 'The RSS And The Making Of The Deep Nation'.)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
