In a discussion on the experience of the working of our Constitution, three speakers took three different positions:
a. Harbans: The Indian Constitution has succeeded in giving us a framework of democratic government.
b.Neha: The Constitution made solemn promises of ensuring liberty, equality and fraternity. Since this has not happened, the Constitution has failed.
c. Nazima: The Constitution has not failed us. We have failed the Constitution.
Do you agree with any of these positions? If yes, why? If not, what is your own position?
Any answer supported with argument or explanation would solve the purpose. It is strongly recommended that you prepare the solution on your own. However, one sample solution has been provided for your reference:
a. The position of Harbans is correct. The constitution has succeeded in creating a framework of democratic government within which people exercise their choice while electing the government. Elections are conducted regularly at all levels of government and institutional arrangements have been largely successful in preventing the subversion of Constitution.
b. The position of Neha is not correct. While it is true that the country is yet to entirely achieve the stated goals of liberty, equality and fraternity, it must be also remembered that these goals are not a static but dynamic process since society is always evolving. The inability to achieve these goals cannot be attributed to the constitution but rather to the individual shortcomings and weaknesses of the people who are in position of power and the nature of politics in recent years.
c. The position of Nazima is correct. The Constitution has adequate principles for proper governance of the country. The people who are responsible for executing and implementing the principles of the constitution have failed to do so because of their self-interest and dishonesty. The tendency to subvert democratic processes in pursuit of power has led to the state of affairs where elections are rigged, money and muscle power becomes important and political parties are run as family institutions without inner-party democracy. All this is responsible for the rampant rise in corruption as people who gain positions of power through money want to recover their expenditure.