National

'Will It Change India By Breakfast Tomorrow?'

The leading world expert on Indian constitutional law was blissfully unaware that President K.R. Narayanan was quoting him profusely while making a case for not tinkering with the statute.

Advertisement

'Will It Change India By Breakfast Tomorrow?'
info_icon
Granville Austin, leading world expert on Indian constitutional law, was blissfully unaware that President K.R. Narayanan was quoting him profusely while making a case for not tinkering with the statute. In New Delhi for the launch of his second book, he talked to Murali Krishnan-while stressing he wasn’t in the line of teaching Indians how to run their country: "I have gurus in India, I’m not India’s guru." Excerpts:

Is there a case for reviewing the Constitution?

Before anyone does that, it’s important to examine if set goals have been achieved. Has the Constitution failed the national interest? If it has, do you reach people through legislation or making conventions firmer? More importantly, will a review cause anxiety to the public who might be better off without any changes?

Advertisement

So you agree with the president’s position that it’s "we who have failed the Constitution"?

Again, it’s important to find out if the goals are to be pursued by legislation or otherwise. The catchword is caution. The president and the PM may not be very far apart, the former is perhaps using less expansive words. It’s worthwhile to look at the argument for greater implementation of the Constitution.

Do you support a fixed term for Parliament as suggested by the present government?

It’s not the best answer for stability. A system that is flexible allows you to vote it out. Look at the Emergency. If Indira Gandhi didn’t call elections, she could have extended Parliament and continued. Is that what we want? What if a faction-riven government is allowed to carry on? A parliamentary democracy gives people the choice to make and unmake governments.

Advertisement

So is there no need at all for statutory reforms?

Take the question of decentralisation which the government is arguing about. Does one need to amend the Constitution for this? The Sarkaria Committee report and the Inter-State council recommendations are there. The mechanisms are already available.

What you’re arguing for then is improving political behaviour rather than changing a document...

My question is: will the essentials of Indian politics change till breakfast tomorrow if the Constitution is amended now? If not, the case for amending is less strong.

Tags

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement