Introduction
While a Constitution is the foundational legal document laying out the framework of the state, constitutionalism is the political philosophy asserting that governmental authority must be legally constrained to prevent arbitrary rule. It emphasizes limited government, institutional checks and balances, and the inviolability of fundamental liberties under the Rule of Law.
Constitution vs. Constitutionalism: Similarities and Differences
While often used interchangeably, the two concepts differ fundamentally in scope and purpose:
- Similarities: Both concepts aim to establish order, organize state institutions, and govern the relationship between citizens and the state based on legal rationality rather than arbitrary authority.
- Differences: A state can possess a formal written Constitution without practicing constitutionalism (as seen in authoritarian or totalitarian regimes). Constitutionalism embodies the substantive moral spirit of governance, ensuring equality before law (Article 14) and the protection of individual liberty (Article 21), ensuring that power is bounded rather than absolute.
Historical Influences and Evolution Since Independence
India's constitutionalism is a product of anti-colonial values and gradual institutional evolution:
- Historical Roots: The Indian freedom struggle instilled deep commitments to civil liberties and socio-economic justice, notably reflected in the 1931 Karachi Resolution. The Government of India Act, 1935, provided institutional mechanisms for separation of powers and federal organization.
- Post-Independence Trajectory: The early decades saw executive dominance under broad legislative majorities. Over time, the judiciary emerged as a key guarantor of constitutional limitations, notably establishing the Basic Structure Doctrine in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), which barred Parliament from using its amending power to alter the core framework of the Constitution.
Contemporary Challenges to Constitutionalism
Modern constitutional governance in India faces several institutional strains:
- Executive Overreach: Frequent reliance on ordinances (Article 123) bypasses legislative scrutiny, undermining parliamentary supremacy and the deliberative process.
- Institutional Erosion: Perceived pressures on independent regulatory and oversight bodies, such as the Election Commission of India and central investigative agencies, dilute institutional checks and balances.
- Influence of Money Power: Opacity in political finance undermines democratic accountability and the constitutional guarantee of a fair electoral playing field.
Measures to Strengthen Constitutional Governance
Revitalizing constitutionalism requires reinforcing both structural safeguards and democratic culture:
- Preserving Institutional Independence: Ensuring judicial autonomy and independent appointments, as reiterated when the Supreme Court invalidated the National Judicial Appointments Commission in SCAORA v. Union of India (2015).
- Enhancing Transparency: Upholding voters' fundamental right to information, as demonstrated by the striking down of the Electoral Bonds scheme in Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024).
- Reviving Legislative Scrutiny: Mandating the referral of major bills to Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees and empowering civil society for active constitutional vigilance.
Conclusion
Constitutionalism prevents the Constitution from degenerating into a mere paper document by infusing it with dynamic restraint and ethical governance. Sustaining this spirit demands an independent judiciary, active parliamentary oversight, and an informed, vigilant citizenry.