Comment

The Constitution of India is widely considered to be an enlightened and illuminating document on the subject of the rights and responsibility of the people of a democratic republic.

In Article 15, The Constitution says:
“(1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

(2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to —
(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment…”

This right and assurance from the state gets lost in everyday living. And whenever matters of religion come up —especially noticeable since the Hindutva brand of politics started moving towards centre-stage some 20-odd years ago — the Constitution of
India starts taking a back seat. Yet, for all that our Hindutva friends go on about historic wrongs committed on Hindus by Christians and Muslims, it is important to understand that India as it stands today needs the Constitution to continue its existence. The Constitution refers to India as a nation. India as a historical entity is another matter. But for all of us who live in India, the Constitution is — not just has to be but is — our defining document.

Once you have accepted the Constitution, perceived historical wrongs become a matter of rhetoric and sadly, hate-mongering. Incidentally, the Constitution does mention that provision can be made for communities and castes which have been historically wronged — and this includes women and might explain reservations.

The issue then is not of being a “pseudo-secularist” or of being a “bleeding hearts liberal” or of being a “hater of Hindus”. The first is ridiculous, the second is ironic and the third is idiotic. It is a question of upholding the Constitution. This means that discriminating against people on the basis of caste, religion and gender is against the highest law of the land. If you do not agree with the Constitution, does that make you a traitor? You are free to have your views, but if you cross the legal line, then you should have to pay the price. This includes those who applaud the burning of churches, the killing of Muslims, the lynching of Dalits and the oppression of women — regardless of the faith, community, gender and caste of the perpetrator. It even includes people like Raj Thackeray when he wants some kind of Indians to stay out of Maharashtra.

It is hardly surprising that most of the money for anti-Constitutional actions comes from those living outside the nation. That ought to give our various sectarian friends something to think about: The Constitution does not apply to them and they do not understand its importance. But we should.

Those who do not appear to understand the Constitution, alas, appear to be large in number and are often made up of the so-called educated middle class. Perhaps we do not learn enough about it in school any more. Civics — which is what it was called in my day — was generally seen as rather a boring subject but that’s more because of the way it was taught. (A recent interaction with young people on the subject of politics showed a high level of ignorance, especially among those in big cities.) — if you don’t develop this last point, it looks like it has just been tagged along and can be done away with.

Yet, whether we know about it or not, the Constitution applies to all of us.

Here’s another thought: Democracy, which we have taken on for ourselves, is not an easy concept to live with. Yet, is any other form of governance acceptable? This is Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers of the US Constitution: “Bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.”
One rule to bind us all?
b_ranjona@dnaindia.net