CONSTITUTIONAL MORALITY
Key Aspects
|
- This perspective on constitutional morality underscores that commitment to the Constitution must be unconditional and not contingent on whether it aligns with the values or beliefs of any specific group.
- In essence, it necessitates accepting outcomes that may significantly differ from what certain citizens might have anticipated. The strength of this framework lies in its ability to balance conflicting priorities—it upholds respect for constitutional structures while simultaneously allowing for their critique. It mandates adherence to established procedures while permitting their reassessment and reform.
- More importantly, it does not demand blind loyalty to the Constitution but rather views it as a mechanism for managing societal differences through agreed-upon principles. This stands in contrast to Jürgen Habermas’ concept of constitutional patriotism, which promotes political allegiance based on the norms and values of the Constitution.
- While constitutional morality highlights the role of moderate cultural nationalism in fostering inclusivity, constitutional patriotism often advocates a singular-identity democracy grounded in constitutional ideals.
- The process-driven nature of constitutional morality is particularly relevant in contemporary discourse. It illustrates how constitutional commitment can be upheld without veering into rigidity or dogmatism.
- By striking a balance between reverence and reform, continuity and change, it promotes a more evolved constitutionalism.
- It is also essential to recognize that the framers of the Constitution envisioned its adoption as an expression of commitment to constitutional principles and governance
- On November 4, 1948, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar referenced the concept of constitutional morality during his speech in the Constituent Assembly while discussing The Draft Constitution. He advocated for integrating the administrative framework within the Constitution and cited the classicist Grote in his remarks.
- Ambedkar, however, was more acquainted with an older interpretation of the term, rooted in its 19th-century origins.
- This interpretation defines constitutional morality as the set of norms and procedures that guide decision-making in situations where the Constitution is either silent or grants discretionary authority.
- In contrast, the contemporary understanding of constitutional morality often relates to the core values embedded within a constitution. From this viewpoint, adhering to constitutional morality entails upholding the broader ethical principles inherent in constitutional provisions.
- For example, the principle of non-discrimination is frequently regarded as a fundamental aspect of modern constitutional morality
Although the term constitutional morality is not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution, its essence is deeply embedded in various provisions:
-
Preamble – It sets out the foundational values of Indian democracy, including justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity.
-
Fundamental Rights – These provisions protect individuals from the arbitrary exercise of state power. Notably, the Supreme Court ensures their enforcement through Article 32.
-
Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) – These principles guide the state in achieving the vision outlined by the Constitution’s framers, drawing inspiration from Gandhian, socialist, and liberal ideologies.
-
Fundamental Duties – Citizens are not only entitled to rights but also bear responsibilities toward the nation.
-
System of Checks and Balances – This includes mechanisms such as judicial review over legislative and executive actions, as well as legislative oversight of the executive, ensuring accountability.
-
In the 2015 Krishnamoorthy case, the Supreme Court highlighted the significance of constitutional morality as a cornerstone of good governance.
-
In Union of India vs. Government of the NCT of Delhi, the Court ruled that senior officials must uphold constitutional morality and adhere to the constitutional principles to prevent the arbitrary exercise of power.
-
In the Government of NCT of Delhi case (2018), the Court compared constitutional morality to a "second basic structure doctrine," underscoring its role in restraining arbitrary authority.
-
Likewise, in Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court declared that Section 377 violated the rights of the LGBTQI community, as it was inconsistent with the fundamental principles of individual dignity and equality protected under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
-
In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors., the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Aadhaar with specific limitations, emphasizing the judiciary’s role in preventing executive overreach.
-
In the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy case (2018), the Court reaffirmed its responsibility to safeguard constitutional morality by striking down any law or executive action that contradicts constitutional principles
Ignoring constitutional morality can have serious consequences for democratic functioning. Several critical questions have emerged in this regard:
-
To what extent can individuals be encouraged to uphold the ethical principles enshrined in the Constitution and fulfill their obligations responsibly?
-
Are ruling authorities, as alleged by opposition parties, misusing law enforcement or investigative agencies to exert political pressure?
-
How does the concentration of power impact the concept of constitutional morality in a parliamentary democracy?
-
In cases such as the entry of menstruating women into the Sabarimala temple, what approach should be adopted to ensure a non-discriminatory and balanced resolution?
|
For Prelims: Basic Structure of Constitution, Preamble, Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties
For Mains: GS II - Indian Polity & Governance
|
