Decoding Indian Constitution’s anatomy remains a big challenge

In medicine, anatomy is the study of the physical parts and structure of living things, such as the human body, animals, or plants. Physiology is the study of how their bodies and parts work. Similarly, the anatomy of a document refers to its static, physical components and layout. Just as human anatomy looks at bones and organs, document anatomy looks; and its physiology refers to its dynamic processes and how it works to achieve a goal. It explains how individual components interact to deliver meaning.

It can hardly be disputed that the miraculous machine called the human body is among the most amazing creations of nature. Its primary organ systems constantly collaborate to maintain life and balance. What is more, the systems do not work in isolation but form a complex dynamic network. There is, for instance, a remarkable partnership between the nervous system, the muscular system, the cardiovascular system and respiratory system during exercise, with the integumentary system producing sweat to cool the body later.

Strangely the same is true of the Constitution of India, in terms of the staggering degree of networking between its various parts and articles, and the synergistic and mutually reinforcing the way its structure and framework were created.

The anatomy of the supreme law of the land has many unique features.

To begin with, with its 25 parts, 12 Schedules, and approximately 448 Articles, it is the lengthiest written constitution of any sovereign country in the world.

Its genetic material was drawn from several global sources; and its structural traits were inherited from multiple legal traditions. The Constituent Assembly of India adopted the parliamentary blueprint from the UK, the concept of fundamental rights from the US, and the idea of the Directive Principles from Ireland.

The document’s structural anatomy is informed by the principle of Separation of Powers and checks and `balances, borrowed from the early political philosophy of the United States Constitution, which drew heavily from Enlightenment thinkers such as Aristotle, Locke and Montesquieu, is split into three distinct vital organs or institutional structures. One is the Legislature, comprising Parliament and the State Assemblies, the legislative skeleton that crafts laws. Then there is the Executive, comprising the President, the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers and the administration, the physical machinery that executes laws. Judiciary, consisting of the Supreme Court and the High Courts of the States, an independent, integrated backbone that guards legal limits, is the third wing of the apparatus of the State.

The Core Framework or the ‘Basic Structure’, is the structural ‘DNA’ that cannot be mutated or altered, as ruled by the Supreme Court, in the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case, a verdict that has served to preserve the features of secularism, democracy, and judicial review.

The physiology of the Constitution, on the other hand, dictates how these anatomical organs interact, maintain internal balance (homeostasis), and react to external socio-political environments.

In a truly fascinating manner, the various systems of the document perform their respective functions with a view to preserving its integrity. The provision pertaining to amending the Constitution, for example, comparable to the process of evolution of the metabolism of the human body, serves to regenerate and update the text managing, in the process, to maintain a significant balance between the needs for rigidity as well as flexibility. The provisions that deal with the allocation of powers, as between the Union and the States, are comparable to the circulatory system of human physiology and the essential federal structure of the polity with its unitary character also in place. There are, then, the provisions relating to judicial review and interpretation comparable to the nervous system of the human body under which the Supreme Court acts as the brain. Similarly, the provisions of the articles dealing with the fundamental rights and the provision for writs correspond to the immune systems of the human physiology, while the directive principles can be described as the counterpart endocrine system of the human body which releases long – term ‘hormones’ that guide the economic and social growth of the country in order gradually to transform it into a comprehensive welfare state.

The ultimate strength of the Indian Constitution, thus, lies in its functional homeostasis. While its anatomy establishes checks and balances, no single organ can dominate or paralyze the system, its evolutionary physiology ensures that it does not become a historical relic, but remains a dynamic tool equipped effectively to respond robustly to ongoing socio-economic change

In other words, any attempt to analyse the anatomy and physiology of the Constitution of India” is a challenge that calls for the ability to treat the document as an organic, living instrument.

As US President Woodrow Wilson once remarked, a constitution must be “Darwinian in structure and in practice” rather than static.

It is interesting to note the different connotations which the word constitution stands for. It can stand for the basic laws or rules of a country or organisation. It can also, in a different context, refer to the way the parts of something are put together or its structure. Yet another sense it conveys, on occasion, is when it is used to describe the state of well-being of a person in terms of overall physical make-up, general state of health and natural strength or resilience against illness. The word can also describe a person’s mental outlook, emotional stability, or general mood.

All features are so strikingly relevant to the context of this discussion; be it about a document or a human being!

(The writer was formerly

Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh)

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr MOHAN KANDA

Dr MOHAN KANDA[email protected]