BJP and Constitutional Integrity: The Case Against the 42nd Amendment

Historical debates about the Indian Constitution often revolve around not only the preservation of its core principles but also the potential for manipulation and misinterpretation. One particularly controversial amendment, the 42nd Amendment, has been the subject of heated discourse. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has not only stayed true to its no-constitutional change stance, except for the implemented Uniform Civil Code (UCC), but it has also raised concerns about the implications of the 42nd Amendment. This article delves into the reasons behind BJP's stance and the significance of maintaining the integrity of the Constitution.

BJP's Stance on Constitutional Amendments

The Bharatiya Janata Party is known for its conservative and constitutional stance, firmly committing to the maintenance of the Constitution as it was originally framed. This dedication is evident in their refusal to introduce changes unless it pertains to implementing the Uniform Civil Code (UCC). UCC, a law aimed at codifying all personal laws in India, has been a topic of ongoing debate; the BJP has acknowledged its constitutional legitimacy.

However, the 42nd Amendment stands as a prime example of the potential for misuse of constitutional changes, particularly during times when the government wields extraordinary powers. This amendment, introduced by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi during the Emergency in 1971, introduced the words 'Socialist' and 'Secular' into the Constitution's Preamble.

The 42nd Amendment and Its Impact

The 42nd Amendment was a significant and controversial addition to the Constitution. Indira Gandhi, capitalizing on the Emergency, appended these terms, marking a departure from the original Constitution, which only mentioned 'We, the people of India, have solemnly resolved to constitute India a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic Republic'. The inclusion of 'Socialist' and 'Secular' was seen as a political maneuver rather than a constitutional necessity.

The move by Indira Gandhi was not only seen as heavy-handed but also illegal. It was performed in the shadows of the Emergency, without the explicit consent of the people. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of the Indian Constitution, himself would have vehemently disagreed with the amendment.

Consequences of the 42nd Amendment

The 42nd Amendment has had profound implications, not just in altering the nature of the Constitution but also in shaping the political landscape of India. The addition of 'Socialist' and 'Secular' into the Preamble added labels that are often misleading and are frequently invoked for political gains. These labels have become rallying cries for appeasement policies and have provided a veneer of respectability to practices that may not necessarily align with the true spirit of these terms.

The nature versus character dichotomy remains pertinent. While the Constitution can reflect the character of a nation through its principles, the Preamble often inscribes these values as characteristics, leading to a skewed interpretation. For instance, a person known for criminal acts, like Ajmal Kasab, is not defined primarily by their nature but by their character. The same principle extends to India, where its secular nature and socialist ideals have become less about its true nature and more about the policies and practices that label it as such.

The 42nd Amendment also paved the way for political maneuvering, where parties like the Congress could use the Preamble to justify appeasement policies. The forced label has caused confusion and division, as true secularism and socialism are often compromised in the name of political expedience.

The Broader Context and BJP's Perspective

The broader context of political integrity and the need for constitutional reform has been starkly highlighted by the 42nd Amendment. The BJP believes that the Constitution should remain a reflection of the people's will and not a tool for short-term political gains. The amendments made during the Emergency period have only served to create further distrust in the democratic process and have perpetuated a cycle of political manipulation.

The BJP's stance on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a recent example of this commitment. The UCC is not just about codifying personal laws but is also about ensuring equality and justice for all citizens, regardless of their religion or community. This move is seen as a natural evolution of the Constitution, aligning it more closely with the principles of justice and equality.

Conclusion

The 42nd Amendment remains a pivotal point in the history of the Indian Constitution. Its introduction has raised important questions about the balance between preservation of constitutional principles and the need for political flexibility. The Bharatiya Janata Party's unwavering support for the Constitution's integrity, except for the UCC, reflects a deep commitment to democratic values and the preservation of constitutional democracy.

By maintaining the original character and nature of the Constitution, the BJP aims to uphold the foundational principles that define India as a nation, ensuring that the Constitution remains a living document that resonates with the aspirations of all its citizens.