National News

It’s time to discuss restoring the original Preamble in light of Modi’s reforms and Ambedkar’s principles

Remembering Modi's Constitution yatra from 12 years ago is crucial at the publication of a new book titled "Ambedkar and Modi."

Gujarat experienced an extraordinary public march in January 2010. Perhaps for the first time in India, a parade riding an elephant carrying a massive facsimile of the Constitution was seen in a city. A beaming Narendra Modi, who was the chief minister of Gujarat at the time, led the parade with a statue of BR Ambedkar.

When I was at the book launch for Ambedkar and Modi: Reformer’s Ideas Performer’s Implementation, this picture from 2010 kept coming to mind. K.G. Balakrishnan, the former chief justice of the Supreme Court, was present for the book launch of former president Ramnath Kovind in New Delhi. Speaking at the publication, Kovind recalled how the event, which was to be one of many similar yatras over the years, was how then-CM Modi showed his belief in and dedication to Ambedkar’s ideas and the Constitution. The Indian Constitution and constitutional knowledge have always been at the centre of Modi’s relationship with Ambedkar. It wouldn’t be overstating things to say that Ambedkar’s role as the creator of the Indian Constitution only received the most attention during Modi’s time as prime minister.

During his first term as prime minister, Modi oversaw the publication of an official gazette announcement designating November 26 as Constitution Day. A concentrated campaign on civic responsibilities as outlined in the Constitution was launched in response to this. creating a website portal with the Preamble in 23 languages and a quiz about the Constitution, transforming it into a significant digital campaign.

Narendra Modi’s eight years as prime minister have been marked by a constant focus on Ambedkar and the Constitution. This dedication contrasts sharply with the way Ambedkar’s original Constitution has been altered since Independence.

Too many changes
The Indian Constitution as drafted by Dr. BR Ambedkar was altered and modified significantly on more than 50 occasions between the terms of Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi, and Rajiv Gandhi as prime minister. In actuality, the 77 Constitutional amendments made by all Congress governments—more than all previous prime ministers combined—have been made during their reigns.

The more than 100 Constitutional modifications and the undemocratic way the Indira Gandhi administration changed the Preamble during the Emergency by inserting the terms “socialist” and “secularism” are a rejection of everything Ambedkar stood for and held dear.

The Constituent Assembly really discussed the demand to include references to socialism in the Preamble on November 15, 1948, and Ambedkar vehemently opposed it. Ambedkar said that such an insertion would be a rejection of democracy and equate to denying the people’s right to periodically select which economic system is best for the nation.

Return to the initial state?
What motivates Modi to appreciate Ambedkar is his progressive thinking that goes beyond constitutionalism. It is Ambedkar’s beliefs that serve as the foundation for all of Modi’s programmes, from Make in India to his support for urbanisation and industrialization to his steadfast belief that education is a great leveller for all people.

Men and women from lowly backgrounds have risen to the highest political positions in India thanks to the Constitution’s fundamental role in promoting political emancipation as envisioned by Ambedkar. Thus, Ambedkar and Modi is a vital addition to the public conversation that sits at the nexus between Ambedkar’s principles and Modi’s changes.

Perhaps this public discussion could also address the issue of returning the Preamble to its original form, eliminating the additions made during the Emergency era, and educating future generations about the great advice Ambedkar shared with the Constituent Assembly on November 15, 1948.

The people themselves must decide what the state’s policies should be and how the society should be structured in terms of its social and economic facets, depending on the period and circumstances. It cannot be stated in the Constitution itself since doing so would completely undermine democracy. In my opinion, you are removing the people’s freedom to choose what should be the social structure in which they choose to live if you specify in the Constitution that the social organisation of the State shall have a specific form. Therefore, I fail to understand why the Constitution should force the people to live in a certain way rather than letting them make that choice for themselves.

Your Opinion Counts !

Tags
Show More

Related Articles

Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker