When Constitutions Converse: Key Takeaways from the 75-Year Commemoration Conference

Written by Pavitveer Singh, this piece reimagines the International Conference on “Seventy-Five Years of the Constitution of India” as a dialogue between the Constitutions of India, the USA, Nepal and Sri Lanka. It captures key insights, landmark judgments and comparative reflections in an imaginative, conversational format.

Scene: An ethereal, grand hall, bathed in a soft, reflective glow, where the very spirits of Constitutions have gathered for an exclusive dialogue. The Constitution of India stands centrally, exuding a quiet confidence, serving as the host. The Constitutions of the United States of America, Nepal and Sri Lanka are seated around, their forms shimmering with history and legal wisdom.

India: Welcome, esteemed colleagues. It is a profound honour to host you as I reflect upon seventy-five years of my existence, a journey that was recently commemorated and critically examined at the International Conference on “Seventy-Five Years of the Constitution of India: A Comparison with Major Constitutions of the World”. This significant event organised by the Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab, in collaboration with the Indian Law Institute and the All-India Law Teachers Congress, provided a platform to explore how I continue to shape and safeguard India's ‘democratic ethos’.

USA: Seventy-five years is a remarkable period for any foundational document. My own parchment, though older, constantly faces new challenges and interpretations. What were the most striking insights offered at this conference regarding your unique character and evolution, India?

India: Many insights emerged, particularly concerning my inherent nature. D.P. Verma, a distinguished member of India’s Law Commission, clearly articulated my role: I am supreme for the country, meticulously defining the powers and responsibilities of all governmental institutions and outlining the fundamental principles of governance. A particularly distinctive feature highlighted by Mr. Verma is my delicate balance between rigidity and flexibility. This allows me to adapt to changing times while maintaining my core structure. Justice Rajesh Bindal, a sitting Judge of my Supreme Court, further elaborated on this, noting my inherent flexibility, yet my ability to still uphold a basic structure that cannot be altered, ensuring continuity and stability.

Sri Lanka: That balance, India, is truly a mark of foresight. It brings to mind Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s profound prophecy. As Justice Peter Mohan Maithree Peiris, a former Chief Justice of my Supreme Court, eloquently recalled at the conference, Ambedkar asserted that India’s constitutional success depends more on the leaders who implement it than on its institutional design alone. This notion resonates deeply with my own experiences as a constitutional framework; a document, however meticulously drafted, requires dedicated and principled stewardship from those called to work it.

India: Indeed, the human element is undeniably paramount. However, my institutional design does possess some truly distinctive features, as Mr. Verma pointed out. My unique provision of a three-tier government system, for instance, is not found in any other country. Beyond the Centre and states, I explicitly recognise and empower rural local governments, the panchayats and gram sabhas. Through specific provisions such as Articles 38, 39(A), 40 and Schedule XI, I have actively worked to empower the lowest strata of my people. It is through these very provisions that many state governments have been able to significantly improve the quality of life for their rural populations.

Nepal: That comprehensive approach to decentralised governance is genuinely commendable, India. As Justice Balakrishna Dhakal, a Judge from my Supreme Court, expressed his appreciation at the conference, I too deeply value various provisions of your Constitution. He specifically lauded your Preamble, which encapsulates your aspirations, your Fundamental Rights, which guarantee essential liberties and your Directive Principles of State Policy, which guide your governance. My Supreme Court has frequently drawn upon the wisdom of your landmark judgments, finding them to be a valuable resource for our own jurisprudence. We also greatly appreciate the strength and resilience of your democratic system.

India: Your kind words are much appreciated, Nepal. My judiciary has indeed been a vigilant guardian and interpreter of my principles. Justice Sheel Nagu, the honourable Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, beautifully characterised me as a moral compass and a living promise to future generations. His address at the conference highlighted how my Supreme Court and High Courts have issued leading judgments that have continually defined and expanded my ambit and scope.

USA: The interpretation and expansion of fundamental rights are cornerstones of any enduring constitution. How have your courts navigated these vital liberties and the evolving societal landscape?

India: My courts have consistently striven to broaden the understanding and accessibility of rights. Justice Rajesh Bindal focused his discussion at the conference on the ever-increasing scope of the right to legal aid and legal services. He referenced the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and the crucial roles played by the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), State Legal Services Authorities (SALSA) and District Legal Services Authorities (DLSA) in making justice accessible to all. Furthermore, Justice Pankaj Mithal provided a fascinating historical development of my provisions, even drawing comparisons with ancient Indian culture and civilisation. He cited early, yet pivotal, Supreme Court decisions such as A.K. Gopalan vs. State of Madras (1950), which definitively established the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest as a fundamental right. Later, Khadhak Singh v. State of UP (1963) affirmed the nascent right to privacy.

Sri Lanka: Such judicial foresight and activism in defining and expanding rights are truly commendable. It speaks volumes about a living document that can adapt and respond to the evolving needs of its people, rather than remaining a static text.

India: Precisely. Justice Dipankar Datta, another esteemed Judge of my Supreme Court, also extensively discussed various provisions at the conference, including Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties and Directive Principles of State Policy. He meticulously referred to other landmark Supreme Court decisions, such as Keshvanand Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), which is foundational to my basic structure doctrine, ensuring that my essential features remain inviolable. He also cited Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), which notably established the right to travel abroad as an integral part of personal liberty. These cases vividly illustrate how my judiciary has consistently expanded the understanding and protection of individual freedoms. Justice Datta also explored the intricate Centre-State relationship and the crucial role of the Election Commission of India, among other governmental organs. He specifically applauded me for continuing to guide the country and thoughtfully quoted B.R. Ambedkar once more: “however good a Constitution may be and it is sure to turn out good because those who are called to work it, happen to be a good lot”.

Nepal: These examples profoundly underscore the dynamic nature of constitutional interpretation and the significant impact of judicial precedent, a principle we wholeheartedly embrace. The direct influence of your Supreme Court's decisions on my own judicial landscape is a testament to the depth and progressive nature of your jurisprudence.

India: Indeed. The conference itself served as a powerful testament to the necessity of ongoing dialogue and critical reflection. One student attendee, in a poignant remark, articulated a truth that resonates deeply with my seventy-five-year journey: “constitutional values are not self-sustaining. They require vigilance, courage and conversation”. This sentiment perfectly aligns with the observation by Vijay Shankar Dubey, former Chief Secretary of Bihar and Jharkhand, who noted that while governments may come and go, I will always remain the steadfast beacon for all three arms of governance—the legislature, judiciary and executive. He further highlighted how I stood the test of time and remained resilient even during national emergencies imposed in 1962, 1965, 1971 due to external situations like wars and then in 1975 for entirely different reasons.

USA: Your proven resilience through such a varied array of national crises is a truly powerful demonstration of your foundational strength and the deep trust placed in your framework. My own text, while revered, has also navigated centuries of tests and evolved through various interpretations.

India: The conference fostered an extensive intellectual exchange, delving into many comparative aspects through numerous academic papers. These papers covered a broad spectrum of themes, ranging from “Unshackling Indian Law: Constitutional Pathways to Decolonial Jurisprudence” to “The Answer Which Preceded Question: Rational Cost of a Privacy-less World”. Critical analyses of specific legislation, such as the Maharashtra Special Public Security Act, 2024, through the lens of freedom of expression, were also presented. These discussions underscore the continuous, vigorous effort required to uphold my principles and adapt them to an ever-evolving society.

Sri Lanka: It sounds like a profoundly enriching intellectual environment. It truly captures the very essence of what we, as Constitutions, fundamentally represent.

India: Absolutely. This gathering, much like the seminal conference itself, marks not an end, but a crucial milestone in an ongoing journey of introspection and evolution. The power of sustained dialogue, dedicated scholarship and a shared purpose is what keeps my values vibrant and alive, inspiring continuous vigilance, courage and informed conversation from my people and their leaders. It is through such reflections and comparative analyses that we all learn, adapt and ultimately thrive.

USA: A very profound and well-articulated point, India. The continuous commitment to these living values is what allows any constitution to not merely exist, but to endure and serve its people effectively through the ages.

India: Thank you, my esteemed friends, for joining me in this vital reflection. The ideas kindled at this comprehensive conference and certainly in illuminating conversations such as ours, will, I am confident, resonate far beyond these halls, continuing to shape the discourse on justice, governance and constitutional scholarship for many years to come.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Pavitveer Singh