The 18th Lok Sabha elections in 20024, has thrown many surprises. One out standing feature of these Lok Sabha elections, are that they effectively express people’s views and aspirations.
An analysis of the wide gap between what the various political parties, proposals and manifestos, to what in reality happened , indicates how the politicians think the country should be governed is different from what the people want, how their country and lives should be governed.
This aspirational chasm is caused due to the repeated failure of political parties, to direct their policies, actions and out looks, in tune with the Constitution of India. The Constitution of India is a dynamic document, which the political parties need to adopt according to the changing needs and realities rather than attempting to change it to suit their temporary and often narrow aims.
This ever-widening gap is the cause for unrest tension and violence in the country. Understanding, propagating and following true constitutional values and objectives, will definitely make the lives of the people better and politicians and political parties more acceptable to the people.
Where do these gaps lie?
These values as expressed in the preamble, apart from sovereignty, socialism, secularism, democracy, are justice, liberty, equality, fraternity, human dignity and the unity and integrity of the Nation.
These values have to be upheld in every aspect of the political life of the Country. Perhaps it’s not too late to provide some intensive training to our politicians as to how they could respect and follow these values in their day to day dealings with the people of this Nation, rather than indulge in impromptu, use of abusive language and ridicule, in dealing with the people, their aspirations and problems in different situations, be it natural calamity, violence or expression of discontents.
Because, the present political set up is devoid of these constitutional values, in them, there is always friction between the people and the ruling elite.
Secondly and most importantly the wide variation in objectives laid down in the Constitution and the objectives of the ruling elite is indeed a matter of grave concern.
The Constitutional objectives are spelt out in the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part -IV of the Constitution, from Article 36 to 50. They are regarding social justice, economic welfare, foreign policy, and legal and administrative matters. These Directive Principles are aimed at promoting social welfare, while Fundamental Rights are for protecting individuals from State encroachment. Fundamental Rights are limitations on State action, while Directive Principles are positive instructions for the Government to work towards a just socio-economic order
Dr Ambedkar stated on 19 November 1948 at the constituent assembly that the Directive Principles of State Policy, shall be the basis of future governance of the Country. He stated, “It is the intention of this Assembly that in future both the legislature and the executive should not merely pay lip service to these principles enacted in this part, but that they should be made the basis of all executive and legislative action that may be taken hereafter in the matter of the governance of the country.” Truly the greatest of concern for the members of the Constituent assembly was THE PEOPLE and THE PEOPLE alone.
However due to then prevailing economic situation of the country from 1947 to 1959, and soon thereafter, they were made unenforceable as per Article 37. But India is now the fifth largest economy with a size of about USD 3.7 trillion, therefore lack of financial resources to implement the objectives of the Constitution cannot be an excuse,after 70 years of the Indian republic .
What does the directive principles mandate?
It is to promote the welfare of THE PEOPLE (Article 38) by securing a just social order with justice, social, economic and political. This calls for not just enactment of laws but the whole orientation of governance towards welfare of THE PEOPLE. This idea and theme of welfare of the people is sadly, absent in all government discourses and actions. The purpose of orienting towards welfare of THE PEOPLE is to minimise the inequalities in income, and eliminate inequalities in status,
The second priority as per Article 39 is that people have right to an adequate means of livelihood. It’s not about providing employment alone, but the government policies are to be geared towards securing livelihood for everyone. It is expected to be achieved by creating and distributing ownership and control of the material resources of the community so as to best subserve the common good. If this is so important, how could government direct its actions and activities aimed at enrichment of few individuals, besides even selling government assets to few individuals? These are all actions counter to the objectives of the Constitution. The same Article further clarifies that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment.
There are many more directives like Equal pay for equal work in all employment, even providing living wages at all employment etc and even empowering panchayats to be a self-sustaining, independent local self-government systems, promotion of cottage industries in rural areas of India, all seems to be only in mere papers but actual implementation of these directives are in an eternal limbo.
A government elected by THE PEOPLE should presumably for the people by directing all its objectives towards THE PEOPLE, rather than boast about what will happen in next ten years, twenty years etc. People have elected a government to deal with their todays problem. Therefore government failure to address the immediate and urgent needs of the people is a failure of governance.
A failure to even consider them is utter Constitutional failure of governance. Good governance, should be capable and willing to attend to the needs of the people, whoever, whatever, where ever they are, anywhere in the Nation.
(The writer is a Professor of Law & an Education Consultant)
