Reader Debate: We must change, before changing the constitution

On the 63rd Republic Day, we asked whether our constitution had failed us, or whether we’d failed in living upto the spirit of the constitution. Our readers had much to say on our our views published in the article titled ‘Republic Day thought: Has our constitution failed? Or have we? ’. Two of our readers had some strong smart comments, which we have decided to publish as a separate post. As is our policy, we have edited out a few sentences that were directed at the author. Gaurav Jain: The republics failure is the the people’s failure, its their fault for being taken in by less than scrupulous leadership, for not voting the snake down. For not caring to wake up and go down to poll, for selling the country for a handful of rice or a color television or worse, for empty promises. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on you.. what if you are fooled for fifty years? [caption id=“attachment_195804” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Has our constitution failed? Or have we? Reuters”] [/caption] This is what the late, great George Carlin said and i believe its the definitive take on the subject: “Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don’t fall out of the sky. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It’s what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you’re going to get selfish, ignorant leaders” IAF101: The Indian constitution is a failed document - this is a truth that we cannot deny. Even though some of the greatest Indians of their time put their heads together to draft the document there is just so much they left out, so many things they missed and so many things they tried to achieve that its just one big mess. The Constitution is written with some archaic Victorian moral code and apart from being a document of law, it tries to inculcate some moral guidelines as well. Vague and arbitrary language litter the document like breadcrumbs in a bakery! Words like “good conduct”, “offensive statements”, “immoral character” and “contaminating minds” etc are so subjective that no serious document of law can consider the Constitution to be a document drafted by professionals. We have strange laws and a hodgepodge of Colonial laws mixed in with modern laws, making it ridiculous to say the least. Some laws even contradict themselves or weaker other laws making them meaningless. Even something so simple and basic as “due process” that is present even in the Magna Carta is absent in the Indian constitution - that is why we have police forces conducting forced narco-tests and brain exams on suspects to determine “testimony” that would self-incriminate the suspects. On one hand the Constitution talks eloquently and grandly about the “freedom of thought and expression” and then makes a laundry list of exceptions and rules and strictures by which expression and speech are bounded by. Half our so-called policy makers and people in charge are elected “indirectly” like the Raja Sabha members, the President, Vice-President.  What sort of document can claim to accept that free expression of ideas and beliefs are the corner stone of democracy while simultaneously making them contingent on the “moods” and “feelings” of every random stranger or group in the nation ? There is not even any guarantee in place in the constitution such that even a government which has absolute majority would not be able to suddenly cancel the rights of citizens through a bill passed in parliament at their pleasure! Finally, the Indian constitution when it was originally drafted failed to take into account the nature of Indian society, its fragmentation, its cultural prejudices and the possibility of a tyranny of the majority or the risks of populism or the limits of government oversight to prevent a nanny-state or big-brother welfare state. If one were to compare the thought that went behind the framing of the US constitution ( an extremely elegant, precise and brilliant document that was far ahead of its time) to the committee of catastrophe behind the Indian constitution, it is clear how far our Constitution really needs to go to drag us from the nation we are to the nation we hope to be. Those who have the right ideas can never be in the right place to make a difference because of a system that is crippled with the tyranny of the mobs and the extortion of populism and politics. Today, the average citizen is uneducated, unarmed and literally at the mercy of the state for his  livelihood. The government controls everything - water, power, roads, sewage, construction, transportation, the price of vegetables, the price of oil, every single thing is controlled inexorably by the government that is all pervasive and completely unapologetic! There is no concept of individualism, of self-determination of self-discovery or self-improvement based on the natural aspirations of people - the very things that brought about and ultimately led to the Independence of this nation. Given the brilliant examples and the rich history of various free nations to study and learn from, the mistakes of various nations and various democracies and the compromises made to both empower and enrich life, liberty and fraternity, the Indian Constitution has been a dismal failure. In an attempt to create a patchwork of laws, there has no foresight or even insight into the kind of system that they were going to build, there was no foresight into the culture of this nation or how it might develop in time or the aspirations of future generations. For this I blame the drafters of the constitution and especially the chairman B.R Ambedkar. He was a great man and a great symbol of power to Dailts but he did a terrible job as chairman of the drafting committee IMO.