The relevance of the Constitution in times of turmoil: JNU vs State

The recent JNU vs State debate over nationalism and freedom of expression was the one that caught the nation’s attention. It was during this time, that I was facing this conundrum within trying to grapple with opposing views on the issue. Shashi Tharoor, MP in his speech at the Azad Square, JNU campus stated and I paraphrase that the underlying issue for this juxtaposition is the concept/idea of the nation and Indian Nationalism. It is therefore very clear that these events speak about the complexity of the the concepts of Indian nationalism and freedom of expression which were seen to be loggerheads and deciphering the same shall be critical to our understanding of these concepts.

Pic Credits: NDTV, India

The emergence of the exclusionary dominant Hindu narrative of nationalism with the BJP, the political wing of the RSS coming into power further sidelining the marginalized was an added blow. This majoritarian construct of Cultural nationalism considers the nation state to be of Hindus and making allowances for other minorities to exist. It glorifies the spiritual and religious golden age and any treats difference as alien. 

The BJP government after coming to power  has time and again continue to curtail the freedom of expression of dissenting voices or these alien sections. Whether it is the institutions censoring by the censor board to deem fit what falls and does not fit into Indian culture, the ban on artistic freedom like that of the AIB roast or any book that seem to threaten the religious sentiments whether it may be true or not or that my the Information & Broadcasting ministry to ensure a reality US TV show reduced to just beep sounds instead of any words severely compromising on the overall experience of the show. Such moral policing is demeaning and in fact unconstitutional but they state continues to do so with its belief of safeguarding the so called Indian Culture under the cultural nationalism ideology.

My understanding of Indian Nationalism comes from my personal experiences of growing up in metropolis like Mumbai whose people celebrated all festivals like Diwali and Eid together sidelining the religious connotation associated with it, where in people of multiple ethnicities, religions, caste lived together in harmony. Indian Nationalism was epitomised by this idea of ‘Unity in diversity’. India has had a long history of this diversity and peaceful coexistence and there are numerous examples of this. Tharoor puts it eloquently “The only singular thing about India is that you can speak of its in plural.

This idea of Territorial nationalism gives precedence to the languages promoting the idea of united ness in its language diversity. This concept evolved over time after our independence. The constitution in an effort to strengthen the national identity ensured more powers to the centre over the state for exactly the same reason. This concept of territorial nationalism helped us peacefully coexist and accepting differences but never made leeway to end the disparity and discrimination that existed in India. It was this discriminated, disempowered set whose contiguous exploitation made them wary of the idea of Indian nationalism.   

So when the JNU meeting condemning the hanging of Afzal Guru happened, it was essentially the clash of the notions and ideals of nationalism. I don’t exactly ascribe to which one is true but it is crucial to understand all stake holder point of view based on these underlying ideals to have a better understanding of the topic. 

Article 19(a) in the Constitution of Indian, 1949 states that All citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression. This was later amended to "Nothing in sub clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence". This was done after the Romesh Thappar vs State of Madras case curbing freedom of the press which was though to propagate Marxist ideas that were threatening the nationhood. Around the same time were other cases that made way for this amendment by Nehru. This was hugely debated and still continues to be. It essentially introduced ambiguity and let for the state and its machinery to deduce what reasonable restriction meant. The state in the JNU case choose to go way beyond reason and chose to protect cultural nationalism over nationalism that is prescribed in the preamble by the Constitution.

The Preamble of our Constitution states

WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:

JUSTICE, social, economic and political;

LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;

EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all^[5]

FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;

This notion of Nationalism based on these principles is what Kanhaiya Kumar and JNU profs. speak of . They call this the idea of Progressive Nationalism which imagines  to bring together the puraskrit (privileged) and the bahishkrit (excluded) to eliminate the existing asymmetries. This ideas asks for us to go beyond the territorial and cultural goals towards a more inclusive idea of nation. In fact, after his release, Kanhiaya's speech focussed on freedom form the caste, class, religion, economic exploitation which clearly resonates the Preamble of India's Constitution 

It is this idea of progressive nationalism that will help understand the plight of the Kashmir population and take necessary steps to reduce military control whilst ensuring security at our borders.  It is this idea that shall help see minorities in India  and help them see India in a new light with conscious efforts from state to address their concerns. These same ideals shall aid curbing the growing regional, class, caste, religious and cultural divide and the growing appropriation as prescribe by the dominant populations. It shall ensure going beyond the tokenism rhetoric of cultural nationalism and narrow mindset of territorial national to a true nationalist and all inclusive definition of nationalism 

 

Our Constitution has guided us so far in 65 years of this Republic. It sees the light through the future and yet continues to guide us in such difficult times when things go wrong . The consciousness of the Indian public, the existence of discourse as was bought by the JNU vs state battle and the  faith in democracy and its sovereign, social, democratic republic  ideals as given by the Constitution shall ensure peace and prosperity to prevail in India.