The Preamble of the Constitution of India begins with the words, “We, the People of India.” These words clearly proclaim that it is the people who have adopted, enacted, and given themselves the Constitution. It declares that ultimate sovereignty lies with the people themselves.
Interestingly, the phrase “We the people of India” has been borrowed from the Constitution of the United States of America.
The Idea Behind “We, The People”:
“The first task of this Assembly is to free India through a new Constitution, to feed the starving people, to clothe the naked masses, and to give every Indian the fullest opportunity to develop according to his capacity.” — Jawaharlal Nehru
Dr. Jawaharlal Nehru, speaking in the Constituent Assembly, elaborated on the significance of these words, stating, “The word ‘People’ indicates that the Constitution was not created by the States, nor by the people of individual States, but by the people of India in their entirety. Hence, it would not be within the power of any State, or group of States, to abolish the Constitution or secede from the Union created by it.”
The Famous Kamath vs Assembly Debate:
The debate regarding whether to include “God” in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution highlights key discussions around secularism, pluralism, and the role of religion in governance. On 17 October 1949, as the Constituent Assembly debated the Preamble, the conversation took a significant turn.
- H.V. Kamath’s Proposal:
- Opposition to Kamath’s Proposal:
- Outcome:
Kamath suggested beginning the Preamble with the phrase “In the name of God,” referencing constitutions such as the Irish Constitution of 1937, which include religious allusions. His proposal aimed to incorporate a divine element into the nation’s foundational document, seeking divine validation for the authority of the state, thereby pointing towards the divine origin of the state.
However, several members, including Pillai, opposed Kamath’s suggestion. They argued that it would infringe upon the fundamental right to freedom of belief. Pillai noted that such an inclusion could alienate those who do not believe in God or follow different religious faiths, thereby compromising the Constitution’s secular nature. He highlighted that while the Constitution offers flexibility in the Oath, allowing for both believers and non-believers, the Preamble should remain neutral to reflect the diversity of beliefs among all citizens.
Some leaders, such as Saxena, argued that including God in the Preamble would align India with other nations that have adopted such references, seeing it as a reflection of India’s cultural heritage and moral values. They believed that religious references would add an ethical dimension to the Constitution.
Ultimately, Kamath’s amendment was defeated by a vote of 68 to 41. The decision to exclude “God” from the Preamble was a deliberate one, affirming the secular nature of the Indian Constitution. This decision reflects the framers’ commitment to a legal framework that respects the religious and non-religious beliefs of all citizens, emphasising that the state should not impose any particular religious view. It underscores India’s commitment to inclusivity, social justice, and non-marginalisation.
By choosing to omit “God” from the Preamble, the Constituent Assembly reinforced the principle that the Constitution’s authority is derived from “We, the People,” highlighting the secular foundation of the Indian state. This decision also aimed to promote social justice and prevent marginalisation.
The opening words of the Preamble demonstrate that the people of India are the source of authority, and the Constitution is the outcome of their collective will. It signifies that citizens have the power to elect their representatives and the right to hold them accountable.
B.R. Ambedkar’s Thoughts on the Preamble:
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, a key architect of the Constitution, expressed his thoughts on the Preamble, stating:
“It was, indeed, a way of life, which recognises liberty, equality, and fraternity as the core principles of life, and which cannot be separated from one another: Liberty cannot be separated from equality; equality cannot be separated from liberty. Nor can liberty and equality be separated from fraternity. Without equality, liberty would lead to the supremacy of a few over the many. Equality without liberty would stifle individual initiative. Without fraternity, liberty and equality would lose their essence.”
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Preamble serves as a guiding light for governance, providing a moral compass for policymakers and lawmakers. It reminds them of the ultimate goals of justice, equality, liberty, and fraternity, which they must strive to uphold in all their decisions. At the same time, the Preamble inspires citizens by reminding them of their rights, duties, and responsibilities towards the nation. It instils a sense of patriotism, civic duty, and a commitment to the ideals of justice, equality, and fraternity.
At EuroSchool, through debates on topics such as “My Idea of Democracy” and celebrations of diversity through MUN (Model United Nations), the principles enshrined in the Preamble are put into practice and appreciated.
