Constitution Day: How India’s founding document came to make history

India has the lengthiest constitution in the world, taking two years, 11 months and 18 days to be written by the nation’s modern founders.

At inception, many called it a “patchwork” of different constitutions and doubted its ability to keep India together as a democracy.

“Too long, too rigid, too prolix,” said Sir Ivory Jennings, a renowned constitutionalist of that time, about India’s founding document.

‘Organiser’, the weekly mouthpiece of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, warned against “this precipitate dose of democracy” and said Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru “would live to confess the failure of universal adult franchise in India”—a right granted in the constitution, writes scholar Ram Chandra Guha writes in his book ‘India After Gandhi: the History of the World’s Largest Democracy’.

“When Nehru goes, the government will become a military dictatorship–as in so many of the newly independent states, for the army seems to be the only highly organised centre of power,” said English philosopher Aldous Huxley.

The Constituent Assembly of India adopted the constitution on November 26, 1949, and the document came into effect on January 26, 1950. As India observes Constitution Day, or ‘Samvidhan Divas’, on November 26 here are key features of the document that make it unique.

Learning from others

The constitution took points from Ireland, Canada, Germany, Australia, Russia, Britain, the USA, and Japan, but claims of it being a “patchwork” are not necessarily true. Even though the ideas were borrowed, they were adapted to India’s needs. For example, the concept of Directive Principles of State Policy was borrowed from Ireland, but each ‘principle’ was shaped for India.

Federalism but with a unitary bias

Federalism is a key feature of the constitution, but it is different from America’s idea of the political concept. In the US, each state has its own separate constitution. India practices “cooperative federalism”, or what has often been described as “quasi-federalism”. The functions of the Indian states and the central government are clearly defined in one single constitution.

Equal parts rigid and flexible

India borrowed many features from Britain’s unwritten constitution, including the parliamentary form of government, but for the balance of powers, it is like’s USA’s document. The Indian constitution provides for three different types of amendments depending upon the nature of the amendment. The procedure for making a simple amendment is different from the complex process of a special amendment. Even amendments that might change the “basic structure of the constitution” are subject to judicial review.

The constitution establishes a system of checks and balances between the judiciary, the executive, and the legislature.

The rigidity of the Indian constitution ensures that basic principles of democracy are not dispensable on the whims of a leader or a party, whereas the flexibility allows it to evolve and stay relevant to the issues of changing times.

Universal adult franchise

Before the first general elections in 1952, almost 85 per cent of India’s voters were unlettered. Democracy in the West did not give the right to vote to all adults for a long time. The right to vote was initially given to men in proportion to their property and education. The USA declared its independence in 1776, but women were given the right to vote only in 1920. In Switzerland, women were given the right to vote in 1971.

When the constitution gave the right to vote for all adults irrespective of their class, caste, gender, creed, and religion, many had mocked India’s attempt at democracy as a “gamble”.

Independent judiciary

To maintain the system of checks and balances, along with ensuring parliament sovereignty, the makers of the constitution also provided for an independent judiciary. The constitution delivers this complete independence through administration and financial independence for the judiciary. As the judges of Supreme Courts and High courts are appointed through a collegium system, removing them requires a special majority in parliament.