THE CONTEXT: Recently, during the inaugural session of the new Parliament, controversy erupted after Members were gifted copies of the Indian Constitution, where the Preamble appeared to have omitted the terms ‘Socialist’ and ‘Secular’. This was followed by civil society debate on whether either of these terms defined the true spirit of the Constitution.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS:

• Preamble enforcing the republican character: The enactment of the Constitution is seen as the culmination of a decades-long process of dialogue among contending political actors, with focus on character of the envisaged republic. The preamble explicitly enforce this legitimising ends of the republic in terms of securing justice (social, economic and political), liberty (of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship), and equality (of status and of opportunity) to all Indian citizens.
• Spirit of the term ‘we the People’: The emphasis on the revolutionary potential of the Constitution is rooted in the spirit of “We the People.” The reduction of sovereignty of the “political community” to mere state sovereignty, reduces the constitutional promises. The Constitution can only remain a living force in our democracy as long as the phrase, ‘we the people’, can somehow approximate to a citizens which effectively discharges its agency as vigilant participants.
• Tendency to marginalize non-elite counter-sphere: There is distinction between the elite public sphere and the non-elite counter-sphere in civil society. There is an inertia of the elite public sphere in addressing constitutional challenges. It highlights the potential danger of marginalizing non-elite counter-sphere movements as emotional or sectional. There is potential loss of liberatory potential if the counter-sphere is not given equal standing in civil society.
• Popular sovereignty: The meaning or character of our popular sovereignty is often treated as a convenient myth or as a purely abstract assumption in our civil society discussions. In this respect, the constitutional scholar Sarbani Sen argued in her book, The Constitution of India: Popular Sovereignty and Democratic Transformations, the revolutionary potential of the Constitution inheres in this very spirit of popular sovereignty.

DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE

Ambedkar’s framing of the Preamble and his emphasis on morality as a governing principle:

• R. Ambedkar had framed the Preamble for a “way of life, which recognizes liberty, equality, and fraternity as the principles of life and which cannot be divorced from each other.
• Liberty cannot be divorced from equality; equality cannot be divorced from liberty. Nor can liberty and equality be divorced from fraternity.
• Without equality, liberty would produce the supremacy of the few over the many. Equality without liberty would kill individual initiative”.
• Equally, he refused to harbour naive presumptions about the self-perpetuating character of these constitutional principles.

Gandhi’s concept of ‘Swaraj’ as a creative process of self-realization and the importance of dialogue and empathy:

• It is enlightening to juxtapose Ambedkar’s plea for a transcendent civil morality with Gandhi’s conception of swaraj or ‘self-rule’. In the monograph, Unconditional Equality: Gandhi’s Religion of Resistance (2016), historian Ajay Skaria explains that ‘Swaraj’ for Gandhi did not confine itself to a mechanistic self-rule, but a creative process of self-realisation through which one might reach out towards a more secure and substantive plane of freedom and equality.
• The means to achieve Swaraj was thus ‘satyagraha’ which is defined as “truth force” and “love force”. For Gandhi, sovereign power is not exemplified only in the state. Rather, every self is deeply divided, and sovereignty is universal which is always exercised by the self.

THE WAY FORWARD:

• Engage in dialogue: There is a need to move beyond chauvinistic pride and engage in honest, introspective dialogue. It can be done by promoting empathetic engagement and dialogue to foster mutual understanding. This is not the shallow but the commonplace mode of dialogue but a form of debate focused on achieving a framework of objectively correct knowledge.
• Understand the position of alternative views: The particular form of dialogue stressed by Gandhi, Ambedkar and modern theorists of deliberative democracy seeks to understand the position of the ‘other’. It is through this empathetic engagement with the concerns and the world views of ‘others’ that we can build a stable foundation of mutual self-understanding, thus opening up possibilities for genuine solidarity.
• Inclusive and plural civil society: There is a need to advocate for an inclusive and plural civil society that recognizes the equal standing of all communities. It is like having a civil society that functions as the handmaiden of an authoritarian state.
• Encourage active participation: There is a need to encourage active participation in civil society, especially from non-elite counter-sphere movements. But the alternative is a civil society with little self-knowledge beyond chauvinistic pride, and little agency beyond being the handmaiden of an increasingly authoritarian state.

THE CONCLUSION:

It becomes clear that a progressive civil society in India can only be a plural civil society, if it is structured on the free and equal participation of every community. In this respect, emphasizing the need to understand popular sovereignty as a dynamic force rather than a static concept is the need of the hour.

UPSC PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTION

Q. Can Civil Society and Non-Governmental Organisations present an alternative model of public service delivery to benefit the common citizen? Discuss the challenges of this alternative model. (2022)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION

Q. Highlight the significance of inclusive dialogue, empathy, and a pluralist civil society for the true realization of constitutional principles.

Source: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/the-path-towards-a-pluralist-civil-society/article67811543.ece

THE CONTEXT: A fundamental purpose of democracy is to establish processes to negotiate differences among a diverse population that coexist. India’s leadership has put it above other countries in the international scenario but facing certain challenges. In this context, with the upcoming elections near the corner, India needs to set an example for the world to reset and bring back good faith in its politics.

ISSUES:

• Behaviour of ruling regime: The ruling regime has recently behaved impatiently in the Parliament even for democratic formalities. It has wielded state power in wholly undemocratic ways to neutralise the Opposition and clampdown on dissent.
• Stand of opposition: There is a section of the Opposition, especially civil society, which has pursued a strategy of embarrassing the government. It is not just that there is ideological opposition to the government but it is very clear that this section refuses to acknowledge the very legitimacy of the government.
• Erosion of faith: Decline of good faith in politics has resulted in a mindless rivalry where only the most partisan can prosper as opposed to those motivated by the public interest. This status quo, if left unaddressed, would be tragic for country.
• Issue of anti-defection law: There is another concern of anti-defection law which subverts representative democracy by constraining legislators to party leadership’s order. There has not been enough discussion on the effects of the anti-defection law on inner party democracy and issue-based mobilisation across parties.
• Lack of intra party transparency: It is a common knowledge that power in all political parties has concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. While political parties are notionally democratic, in-house elections lack transparency.

THE WAY FORWARD:

• Acknowledge the behaviour on both sides: There are a range of behaviours by the government but also those opposed to the government which need to be acknowledged from the both sides. There is no need for more explanation on the government’s misuse of state power, which includes defections, imprisonment, and intimidation.
• Role of individuals: Individuals of all ideological inclinations, who value civility and moderation in the politics, can play a crucial role. Many of these individuals wield influence within politically relevant institutions, either officially or through their networks. This group can play a pivotal role in restoring basic democratic principles in our public life by exerting influence.
• Reform with party system: Though partisanship is an important driver of multi-party democracy but constant demands for a blind, aggressive allegiance will only make partisanship and cynicism worse. Instead, party members must use their influence to restrain their own party’s excesses and reorient focus towards substantive issues.
• Address anti defection: There is a need to develop consensus of individuals across party lines on getting rid of the anti-defection law to limit potential instability in political parties. Also, dispersal of power to party’s elected representatives can create avenues for internal negotiations as well as horizontal issue-based mobilisation.
• Media’s role needs scrutiny: The mass media plays a pivotal role in opinion-making and instead of informing the electorate, the media often contributes to polarisation. It is in the interest of every citizen to promote responsible journalism and rebuild trust in the media. Individuals with influence over their party or media institutions can help create an environment to support a more public-interest media.

THE CONCLUSION:

India, like many other liberal democracies, is at a similar crossroads of ideological diversities. Therefore, concerned citizens across the ideological divide needs to come together to restore trust in our political institutions and preserve our democratic framework.

UPSC PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS

Q. Parliament’s power to amend the constitution is limited power and it cannot be enlarged into absolute power”. In light of this statement, explain whether parliament under article 368 of the constitution can destroy the basic structure of the constitution by expanding its amending power? (2019)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTIONS

Q. Faith in India’s political institutions seems at its lowest with the erosion of its credibility. Critically examine the statement and suggest ways to restore trust in politics.

SOURCE: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/bringing-back-faith-in-indias-politics/article67710670.ece

THE CONTEXT: The progressive and anti-communal civil space which is considered as last bulwark for India’s democracy is being targeted by the state. Civil society from NGOs to grassroots activist groups to social movements to unions is being undermined which is leading to erosion of democratic institutions.

MORE ON THE NEWS:

• There is an attempt to limit the civic space of several organisations relying on domestic and foreign donations. These organisations include, Amnesty International, Centre for Equity Studies, Citizens for Justice and Peace and Act Now for Harmony and Democracy (ANHAD), among significant others.
• The organisations were viewed as being either neutral, moderate, or strong regarding their views on minority rights, Dalit rights, Adivasi (tribal) rights and equity promotion.
• Recent findings suggest that the highest number of attacks were against organisations actively fighting against communalism. These would include organisations such as Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), Amnesty India, Oxfam, Centre for Equity Studies and Lawyers Collective.
• Moderately attacked institutions are those whose activities have been severely curbed because of multiple attacks by the state. They include the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) and a significant non-governmental organisation (NGO) with American funding working in the non-communal space.
• Moderately attacked institutions also include fiercely anti-communal NGOs such as ANHAD. Some of the organisations in this area are even neutral on the anti-communal issue. An analysis of the moderate section suggests that the civic space has shrunk to such an extent that the Indian state is not even leaving a non-communal organisation such as the CPR alone. One of the allegations against the CPR appears to be that it had some connections with Adivasi rights movements that impacted the mining interests of the tycoon Gautam Adani.
• Institutions that have been impacted by relatively low levels of attacks are generally not active in the anti-communal area, even though they may be pursuing significant human rights causes. The organisations such as Navsarjan, which is a leader in Dalit rights, and Save The Children’s work on child rights are less under attack compared to the others.
• It is also found that the disciplining instruments deployed by the state can impact organisations. Greenpeace, for example, has transitioned from one that faced high intensity attack to one that now faces a low level of attack by our definition.

ISSUES:

• Misuse of laws: The state is using the range of instruments to limit the civic spaces such as misusing of laws from the use of draconian anti-terror Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) to FCRA and other laws to keep activists behind bars.

1. UAPA: The draconian anti-terror Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) has been criticized for being misused by authorities to target human rights defenders, activists, and dissenters. Critics argue that the act has been used to stifle free speech and to quell any form of peaceful protests.

2. FCRA: The Indian government’s crackdown on foreign funding for civil society organisations using the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) continues to remain a cause for concern. The FCRA, which regulates the acceptance and utilisation of foreign funds by Indian NGOs, has been amended several times in recent years. These amendments have made it more difficult for NGOs to receive foreign funding and have given the government greater powers to monitor and regulate NGOs. One of the main reasons cited by the government for tightening the FCRA is to prevent ‘foreign influence’ over civil society organisations. However, critics argue that the government’s real intention is to suppress dissent and limit the activities of NGOs working on issues such as human rights, the environment and social justice.

3. Prior Reference Category List: Apart from the FCRA provisions, foreign donors are also intimidated by a Prior Reference Category List. It consists around 80 internationally reputed donors who are monitored and intimidated for pursuing any human rights related causes.

4. PMLA: The amendments, in 2019, to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, brought through the Finance Act enabled the Department of Revenue to work with a broader definition of proceeds of crime. This has resulted in the attacks on NGOs and Opposition politicians by the Enforcement Directorate.

5. Income tax act provisions: Domestic funding of non- and anti-communal NGOs is also under siege. Sections 12A and 80G of the Income-Tax Act provide tax exemptions for NGOs and donors, respectively. The 2020 amendments now make renewals of 12A and 80G certificates mandatory every five years. And donor data including their PAN card numbers must be made available to the Ministry of Finance. These provisions enable the state to intimidate domestic donors who wish to fight communalism and crony capitalism. The state uses income-tax surveys as a way of collecting data that can be used to further escalate and institute more cases either by the CBI or the Tax Department.

• Curbing dissent: The Indian government has also used other tactics to repress civic freedoms, including the use of sedition laws and the criminalisation of peaceful protests. Sedition laws have been used to arrest activists critical of the government and peaceful protests have been met with violence and repression by the police. Civil society organisations and activists critical of the government have been silenced, and the space for dissent has been severely curtailed.
• Threatens press freedom: The amendments in the above-mentioned laws were announced without adequate and meaningful consultation with journalists, press bodies and civil society It severely threatens press freedom and empowers the government to be the sole arbiter of truth on the internet.
• Undermines Human rights: Furthermore, the use of sedition laws and the criminalisation of peaceful protests are clear violations of human rights. The right to freedom of expression and assembly is enshrined in international human rights law, and the Indian government’s actions to repress these rights are a clear violation of its obligations under international law.

THE WAY FORWARD:

• Repeal laws: To improve the situation in India, the government must repeal laws that restrict the ability of civil society organisations to operate freely. For example, Government must stop the use of sedition laws to target activists critical of the government and ensure that peaceful protests are allowed to take place without fear of repression.
• Protect rights: Civic freedoms, including the freedom of expression, association, and assembly, are essential for a vibrant and functioning democracy. There is a need to recognise and protect these freedoms by social and political forces who repose their faith in the Constitution.
• Ensuring democratic principles: The Indian government’s actions to repress civic freedoms are problematic and unacceptable in a democratic society. There is a need to take adequate steps to ensure democratic principles. Mobilizing anti-communal and progressive civic space to safeguard democracy.
• Engaging with stakeholders: The Indian government must engage with civil society organisations and activists to address their concerns and work towards building a more inclusive and democratic society. The government must also work towards promoting a culture of respect for human rights and the rule of law in the country.
• Opposition stand: The Opposition should take stringent steps apart from fighting like a single party. It will also need to mobilise the anti-communal and progressive civic space in its favour to save democracy. For example, Recently, “Eddelu Karnataka” (Wake-up Karnataka) or similar social movements in Telangana, had mobilised the anti-communal civic space and secular and progressive social and political forces came together in both these States.

THE CONCLUSION:

A free civic space regulated under constitutionally guaranteed principles is the essence of democracy. There is a need to take adequate steps to preserve this unusually diverse and vibrant civil society.

UPSC PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTION

Q. Though the Human Rights Commissions have contributed immensely to the protection of human rights in India, yet they have failed to assert themselves against the mighty and powerful. Analysing their structural and practical limitations, suggest remedial measures. (2021)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION

Q. Constitutional freedoms are under siege as India’s diverse and vibrant civil space continues to be targeted by the state. Critically Examine.

SOURCE: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/civil-society-under-siege-in-india/article67706998.ece#:~:text=India%20is%20lucky%20to%20have,their%20faith%20in%20the%20Constitution.