Guwahati: Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Tuesday claimed that Dr B R Ambedkar had opposed the insertion of the word ‘secular’ in the Constitution as India already had a long tradition of 5,000 years of secularism.
Addressing the 75th Constitution Day celebrations organised by the Assam government’s Parliamentary Affairs Department here, Sarma said, ”The Constituent Assembly had reflected the essence of Indian civilisation in our Constitution and laid the foundation for building a society based on those values.”
In India, despite the opportunity to draft a constitution based on religion, the framers succeeded in making it secular and this exceptional work was possible due to the strength of Indian civilisation, he said.
The petition was filed by former Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy and lawyers Ashwini Updhayay, Balram Singh and Karunesh Kumar Shukla who challenged the amendment.
“The writ petitions do not need further deliberation and adjudication. The amending power of Parliament over the Constitution extends to Preamble,” the CJI said.
Noting that the first petition in this case was filed in 2020, forty-four years after the Constitutional amendment, the court said the delay rendered the petitions questionable.
“This stems from the fact that these terms have achieved widespread acceptance, with their meanings understood by ‘We, the people of India’ without any semblance of doubt. The additions to the Preamble have not restricted or impeded legislations or policies pursued by elected governments, provided such actions did not infringe upon fundamental and constitutional rights or the basic structure of the Constitution,” the bench said.
The top court clarified that parliament has the power to amend the Constitution and this power is not curtailed by the date of its adoption.
“The date of the adoption of the Constitution would not curtail the government’s power under Article 368 and moreover this is not under challenge,” it said.
Swamy in his petition argued that the insertion of the words “secular” and “socialist” conflicted with the original Preamble adopted in 1949. He further claimed that the Constitutional amendment brought in by the Indira Gandhi government violated the basic structure doctrine established in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), which prohibits Parliament from altering the Constitution’s essential features.
