THE CONTEXT: The Objectives Resolution, moved by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru on December 13, 1946, and unanimously adopted by the Constituent Assembly on January 22, 1947, laid the philosophical groundwork for the Preamble. Key points of the Resolution included:
-
- Proclaiming India as an Independent Sovereign Republic.
- Guaranteeing and securing justice, equality, and fundamental freedoms for all people of India.
- Providing adequate safeguards for minorities, backward areas, and depressed classes.
- Maintaining the integrity of the territory and sovereign rights.
- Attaining a rightful place in the world and contributing to world peace.
CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY DEBATES ON SOCIALISM AND SECULARISM:
-
- In October 1949, Constituent Assembly member Hasrat Mohani proposed amending the Preamble, to begin with, “We, The People of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Union of Indian Socialistic Republics to be called U.I.S.R. on the lines of U.S.S.R.” This proposal was rejected.
- Professor K.T. Shah moved an amendment to Article 1(1) in November 1948, suggesting that India be described as a “Secular, Federalist, Socialist Union of States.” This motion was also negatived.
- V. Kamath supported adding ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ to the Preamble rather than Article 1, stating, “I think that they should find a place, if at all only in the Preamble.”
- B.R. Ambedkar, the chief architect of the Constitution, opposed the inclusion of these terms. He argued that the socialist principles were already embodied in the Constitution, particularly in the Directive Principles of State Policy.
KEY CHANGES INTRODUCED BY THE AMENDMENT:
The 42nd Amendment, often referred to as a “mini constitution,” made sweeping changes to the Indian Constitution:
-
- Expanded Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution without judicial review.
- Curtailed the power of courts to issue stay orders or injunctions.
- Added new Directive Principles (Articles 39A, 43A, and 48A).
- Gave primacy to Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights.
- Added a new section on Fundamental Duties.
- Granted more power to the President in consultation with the Election Commission.
- Extended Parliament’s power to amend powers, privileges, and immunities.
INSERTION OF ‘SOCIALIST’ AND ‘SECULAR’ IN THE PREAMBLE:
The 42nd Amendment added the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ to the Preamble, changing the description of India from a “sovereign democratic republic” to a “sovereign, socialist, secular democratic republic.” This change was one of the amendment’s most significant and lasting impacts.
The Supreme Court, in its recent judgment on November 25, 2024, upheld the inclusion of these words, dismissing challenges to their insertion. The Court clarified:
-
- Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution extends to the Preamble.
- The date of adoption of the Preamble does not restrict Parliament’s amendment power.
- ‘Socialism’ in the Indian context primarily means a welfare state.
- ‘Secularism’ has been held to be part of the basic structure of the Constitution in the SR Bommai case.
RATIONALE BEHIND THE CHANGES:
The justification for the 42nd Amendment was multifaceted:
-
- Enhance central government power: The amendment aimed to strengthen the central government’s authority and shift towards a more unitary system.
- Implement Swaran Singh Committee recommendations: The committee, formed in 1976, suggested constitutional changes to bolster central government authority.
- Reduce judicial interference: The amendment sought to limit the judiciary’s role in reviewing and invalidating laws passed by Parliament.
- Address governance and development issues: It aimed to make the Constitution more flexible and responsive to contemporary needs.
- Emphasize social justice and economic development: New Directive Principles focused on these aspects.
SUPREME COURT’S STANCE ON THE AMENDED PREAMBLE:
Minerva Mills case (1980) and subsequent amendments: The Minerva Mills v. Union of India case (1980) was a landmark decision that significantly impacted the interpretation of the Constitution’s basic structure doctrine. Key points from this case include:
-
- The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution is limited and cannot be used to destroy its basic features.
- The court struck down clauses 4 and 5 of the 42nd Amendment Act, which had attempted to give Parliament unlimited power to amend the Constitution.
- Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud emphasized that Parliament cannot convert its limited amending power into an absolute one.
- The court held that the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles is essential to the Constitution.
The 43rd and 44th Amendments partially reversed some of the changes introduced by the 42nd Amendments, restoring certain judicial powers and the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles.
RECENT CHALLENGE TO THE PREAMBLE (2020):
In July 2020, a series of petitions were filed challenging the inclusion of the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in the Preamble:
-
- Balram Singh, a Supreme Court advocate, initiated the challenge.
- Former Law Minister Subramaniam Swamy and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay later filed similar petitions.
- The petitioners argued that the Constitution’s framers deliberately excluded ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ from its definitions and restricted the government’s economic policy-making.
- On November 25, 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed the petitions challenging the inclusion of ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in the Preamble.
INTERPRETATION OF ‘SECULAR’ IN INDIAN CONTEXT:
-
- India has developed its interpretation of secularism, where the state neither supports any religion nor penalizes the practice of any faith.
- Secularism represents one facet of the right to equality, woven into the basic fabric of the constitutional scheme.
- The ideals in the Preamble, such as fraternity, equality, and individual dignity, reflect India’s secular ethos.
INTERPRETATION OF ‘SOCIALIST’ IN INDIAN CONTEXT:
-
- It refers to the principle of economic and social justice, which ensures that no citizen is disadvantaged due to economic or social circumstances.
- Socialism in India does not restrict private entrepreneurship or the right to business and trade, which remains a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g).
- It represents the goal of economic and social upliftment without impeding private sector growth.
COURT’S REASONING FOR UPHOLDING THE AMENDMENT:
-
- The Preamble is integral to the Constitution and can evolve according to societal needs.
- Parliament’s power to amend extends to the Preamble, and the date of adoption does not restrict this power.
- The additions to the Preamble have not impeded legislation or policies pursued by elected governments.
- The court questioned the timing of the challenge, coming 44 years after the amendment, noting that the terms have achieved widespread acceptance.
- The justices found no legitimate cause or justification for challenging the constitutional amendment after such a long period.
EVOLUTION OF SECULARISM AND SOCIALISM IN INDIAN CONTEXT:
-
- Constitutional Framework for Secularism: Secularism is enshrined in Articles 15, 16, and 25, guaranteeing equal treatment of all religions. The state maintains impartiality while protecting citizens’ religious rights. Unlike Western secularism, Indian secularism allows state intervention to eliminate obnoxious religious practices.
- Contemporary Interpretation of Socialism: It emphasizes welfare state principles without restricting private sector growth. It aims to eliminate exploitation in all forms—social, political, and economic. It promotes equitable resource distribution while protecting entrepreneurial rights.
IMPACT ON CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION:
-
- Basic Structure Doctrine: Both socialism and secularism are now considered part of the Constitution’s basic structure. The Kesavananda Bharati case established their fundamental nature. The Minerva Mills case emphasized harmonizing Fundamental Rights with Directive Principles.
- Judicial Evolution: The Abhiram Singh Case (2017) clarified that secularism doesn’t require state aloofness from religion. The State of Karnataka vs. Sri Ranganatha Reddy case emphasized socialism’s focus on social good. The Maneka Gandhi case linked socialist principles to the right to live with dignity.
RELEVANCE TO CONTEMPORARY GOVERNANCE AND POLICY-MAKING:
-
- Economic Policy: It allows flexibility in economic policymaking without ideological constraints. It supports private sector growth while maintaining welfare objectives. It enables a mixed-economy approach for balanced development.
- Social Justice: Guides affirmative action policies and reservation systems. Influences wealth distribution and poverty alleviation programs. Shapes policies for marginalized and underprivileged sections.
- Religious Harmony: Provides a framework for managing religious diversity. Enables state intervention in religious matters for social reform. Supports uniform civil code initiatives while protecting religious freedoms.
THE CONCLUSION:
The 43rd and 44th Amendments restored crucial democratic safeguards. However, the Supreme Court’s Minerva Mills judgment struck down provisions giving Parliament unlimited amending power. Later amendments restored judicial review and federal balance.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTION:
Q. Discuss India as a secular state and compare it with the secular principles of the US Constitution. 2024
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q. Discuss the significance of the Minerva Mills case in maintaining the balance between parliamentary power and constitutional principles.
SOURCE:
https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-law/socialist-secular-preamble-sc-9692683/
Spread the Word