Gandhi-logo
  1. Home
  2. Articles
  3. Relevance of Gandhi
  4. Gandhi and the Indian Constitution: Realising the Idea of a Village-based Polity

Gandhi and the Indian Constitution: Realising the Idea of a Village-based Polity

- By G. Geethika*

Abstract

As India celebrates seven decades of its commitment to constitutionalism, we revere the invaluable contributions of the Constituent Assembly in drafting a state of the art document. As we all understand, the Constitution of India is an amalgam of relevant ideas from constitutions across the world. Mahatma Gandhi played a crucial role in the setting up of the Constituent Assembly and was also a significant influence on the Constitution makers. Yet, upon an enquiry into the constitution, one cannot be but intrigued by how callously and superfluously his thoughts have been reflected in the Indian Constitution. This paper proposes to critically inquire into the nature and scope of how Gandhian principles, specifically the idea of village-based state-building, have been addressed by the Constituent Assembly, the Indian Constitution, and independent India.

Introduction

On 26 November 2020, India celebrated Constitution Day1, concluding the 70th anniversary of adopting the Indian Constitution. Our constitution has been revered the world over for many reasons. Scholars have extensively studied the significance of the efforts put in by the stalwarts of the Indian independence movement in drafting the constitution and how far it has stood the test of time in fostering democracy in the nation for seven decades. The contribution of each member of the Constituent Assembly2 is invaluable, commemorated, and cherished by the country. The constitution is the lengthiest3 and was drafted by adopting relevant ideas from constitutions of many other countries. Yet, it has been reprised by many scholars, then and now, that our constitution severely fails to reflect the vision and mission postulated by the Mahatma

This paper is structured into three parts. Firstly, we will attempt to understand Mahatma Gandhi's notions about a constitution for independent India and his vision of a village-centric grass-root democracy. Then, the paper shall explore how far the constitution makers have sought inspiration from him while drafting the constitution. Finally, the paper proposes to critically enquire into the nature and scope of the assimilation of Gandhian principles in the Indian Constitution and the extent of incorporating Gandhian perspectives in State building in the past 70 years of independent India. The inquiry is centered on the predominant and most celebrated political facet of the Gandhian perspective of State building, the Panchayati Raj system. In 2018 we completed 25 years of nationwide adoption of decentralized governance through the monumental 73% and 74th constitutional amendments and the Panchayati Raj Act, which came into force on 24 April 1993.4 Primarily, the paper argues that the Constitution of India is predominantly short of his grand vision and aims to understand the reasons for the void.

II. Gandhi's Vision of a Constitution for India

Gandhi had a vision and perception about every aspect of humanity, which he unhesitantly shared with the world through his innumerable writings5 and speeches. He was keen on initiating discourses with other leaders and laymen to communicate his ideas and amend himself. In this process, Gandhi also deliberated on the socio-political and economic approaches to be adopted by an independent India. He knew that India would need a constitution, which he perceived as a monumental document written in tune with the core principles of the Indian freedom struggle and the ethos and values nurtured by our rich socio-political traditions and culture.

Gandhi's role in shaping the constitution for India has to be understood in different phases. As early as 1909, Gandhi penned in ‘Hind Swaraj’ his views on the future constitution of India.6 In it, he vehemently expressed his reservations about parliaments. Yet another, more prominent expression of Gandhi's perception of the structure and composition of a constitution was evidenced in the constitution he helped draft for the people of Aundh in 1923.7

In that constitution, Gandhi envisioned a decentralized government, for he had often shared his disregard for centralized power, which he thought was expensive, inefficient, ruthless, and power-hungry.8 The decentralized government envisaged by Gandhi had village panchayats, taluks formed by the panchayat presidents, and a legislative assembly constituted by the members sent by the taluks. This bottom-up approach ensured the chances of a village panchayat member becoming the prime minister of Aundh.9 The other condition Gandhi insisted on practicing in Aundh was that only literate citizens might vote. Before the first election, he strictly instructed the ruler to make arrangements to help people become literate. He also insisted the prince should live and work in Aundh for ten years as a poor citizen of Aundh. Gandhi also ensured to include fundamental rights.10

Yet, until the 1930s, he continued to express serious reservations against the constitution and a parliamentary system in India. His observations about the constitution proposed by Motilal Nehru in the 1928 Nehru Report reflected the same. But, under the influence of Jawaharlal Nehru, Gandhi gradually began to take an interest in constitutional matters.12 Gandhi represented India in the Second Round Table Conference and contributed his ideas for the future constitution of India.12 He was also actively involved in the sessions held by Indian National Congress (Congress) to discuss constitutional reforms. On all these occasions, Gandhi voiced the idea of ‘swaraj’, a stateless society, for he perceived the centralized, monolithic state as a ‘soulless machine’ that would abrogate citizens’ rights. He disdained the corrupting nature of political power and the power politics of political parties. Swaraj was meant to empower the people and the state towards achieving his principles of reconstruction.

Again in Young India (10 September 1931), Gandhi shared some thoughts in this regard, specifically, his desire to ensure clauses pertaining to the prohibition of untouchability, gender equality, non-violence, elimination of caste-based discrimination, etc. He wrote, “I shall strive for a constitution, which will release India from all thralldom and patronage.”13

In 1934, M.N. Roy demanded the setting up of a Constituent Assembly, which Congress soon advanced; Gandhi was skeptical. But, in 1939, he seconded Jawaharlal Nehru in including the demand for a Constituent Assembly in Congress resolutions, as he felt it was ‘the only way’ to “solve the communal problems and other distempers, besides being a vehicle for mass political and other education.14 Later, in 1946, when the Cabinet Mission Plan put forth a Constituent Assembly and was rejected by the Indian political fraternity for its controversial provincial arrangements, Gandhi spoke in favour of ratifying the Congress Working Committee resolution to join the Constituent Assembly. He understood that its composition had many defects and said, “The Constituent Assembly is going to be no bed of roses for you but only a bed of thorns”, But, he continued to add that ...a satyagrahi cannot wait or delay action till perfect conditions are forthcoming” and urged the Congress Party to consider Constituent Assembly as the “substitute of Satyagraha”, for he called it “constructive Satyagraha.”15

Another documented compendium of Gandhi’s ideas on the constitution is found in the book authored by Shriman Narayan Agarwal in 1946, ‘Gandhian Constitution for Free India’. Mahatma Gandhi wrote the foreword of the book, and it contained his reflections on a participatory form of governance, with village panchayatas the primary political unit, aimed at socio-cultural harmony and welfare as the goals of the polity.16

Agarwal (1946: 13) pronounces the Gandhian perception of the Indian Constitution as “a swadeshi constitution for swaraj”. He identified and elaborated on the three dimensions of decentralization as proposed by Gandhi on various occasions. While the political aspect of decentralization of governance, prompted from the grass-root level, emphasized the promotion of “harmony of interests and spontaneity of political life”, economic decentralization envisaged a production system that was simultaneous with consumption and distribution. The basic philosophy of decentralization was converged on “simple living and high thinking.”17

Shriman Narayan Agarwal consolidated Gandhi's constitutional plan and enlisted the following features in the ‘Swaraj constitution’, in consultation with Gandhi:

  • 13 fundamental rights and three duties
  • Panchayati Raj institutions
  • Provincial governments (3-year term; composed of presidents of taluk panchayats)
  • The disintegration of princely states
  • A unicameral central government (3-year term; composed of presidents of provincial panchayats)
  • Replace the colonial legal system with panchayat-level courts and such
  • Rejected communal electorates and emphasized the relevance of literate voters
  • Desired a foreign policy based on peace and world federation
  • Special attention to the protection of minorities
  • Economic decentralization, more spending on education and health, and a ceiling on wealth
  • Free and compulsory basic education till 14 years of age, curriculum promoting awareness about health and hygiene, agriculture, social service, etc.18

One can also find that Gandhi wrote about the system of governance in his autobiography and ‘India of My Dreams’. The book “India of My Dreams’, published in 1947, with a foreword by Dr. Rajendra Prasad, is a compilation by R.K. Prabhu of excerpts from Young India and other writings as well as speeches of Gandhi about the course of action envisaged for an India of his dreams, distinct from the conceptions of governance practiced by the West. Chapter 25 of the book quotes Gandhi from Harijan, July 1946, as saying “Independence must begin at the bottom. Thus, every village will be a Republic having full powers.”19

In brief, Gandhi's criticisms of Western civilization anchored on industrialism and modernity made him conceive a notion of an independent India which was determined to eliminate the vices of poverty and violence through spiritual seeking and practical actions. It involved decentralization, rural uplift, cooperative farming, village industries, new education, women empowerment, etc. All this and more constitutes the Constructive Programme proposed by Mahatma Gandhi.

Now, let us explore how far the Constituent Assembly had imbibed the Gandhian thought while drafting the Indian Constitution.

III. Gandhi and the Drafting of the Constitution of India-Stage I

The Indian Constitution adopted features from constitutions worldwide to be enacted as one of the consummate legal texts for nation-building. Along with many provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, the constitution borrowed prominent features like parliamentary government, the post of Prime Minister, powerful Lower House, single citizenship, the rule of law, legislative procedure, fundamental rights, judicial review, independence of the judiciary, preamble, amendment procedures, federal features, ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity, concurrent list, fundamental duties, etc.20

As the father of the nation, it is presumably appropriate that the most significant document of independent India should strive to uphold the dreams of the Mahatma. This, we find, was not a natural and easy occurrence for many reasons. First of all, in spite of writing profusely in various forums about his notions about an independent India, Gandhi had not jotted down or scripted a single text containing his views on provisions to be included in the constitution. It is a rather unbelievable truth that Gandhi was not a member of the Constituent Assembly. Gandhi chose to keep away from the provincial elections, and while the Constituent Assembly met to draft the constitution, he was soon traveling to different parts of the country to pacify the communal riots. One could argue that this rather coincidental aloofness and the debatable inclination of the members of the Constituent Assembly towards the British and American Constitutions led to moderate neglect of Gandhi and his ideas during the early stage of drafting the constitution.

Despite prudent observations by many constitutionalists that it is illogical to import constitutions, one can find that the constitution of India has borrowed heavily from those of prominent liberal, parliamentary democracies, especially British. Since the 1916 Congress-League Scheme and the ‘Outline Scheme of Swaraj’ (1922) by Deshbandhu C.R. Das and Dr. Bhagavandas, the inclination toward the western pattern of governance was claiming centre-stage in Indian discussions.21 Nanda writes that the Commonwealth of India Bill (1925) by Annie Besant, the Nehru Report (1928) by Motilal Nehru, and the Sapru Committee Report (1945) emphasized the centralized democratic parliamentary system of government with a convenient amalgamation of federal features.22

In the famous speech (Objectives Resolution) delivered by Jawaharlal Nehru in the Constituent Assembly on 13 December 1946, proposing its aims and principles, he urged the assembly to remember Gandhi at every step of drafting the constitution. He said, “There is another person who is absent here and who must be in the minds of many of us today- the great leader of our people, the father of our nation- who has been the architect of this Assembly...He is not here because, in pursuit of his ideals, he is ceaselessly working in a far corner of India.23 During the discussion on the resolution, a member of the Constituent Assembly, M.R. Masani referred to Gandhi to elucidate his notion of a democratic state. He quoted Gandhi's words, as spoken to Louis Fischer, “The centre of power now is in New Delhi, or in Calcutta or Bombay, in the big cities. I would have it distributed among the seven hundred thousand villages of India...There will then be voluntary co-operation between these seven hundred thousand units.24 In the discussion that pursued, nearly all the speakers unanimously expressed gratitude to Mahatma Gandhi for his contributions.

But, while drafting the constitution, the Gandhian model of decentralization was perceived as impractical, utopian, and sidelined. Moreover, Nehru and many young leaders of the time vouched rapid industrialization and mechanization as the key strategy for the country. In 1947, Gandhi criticized the absence of even the term village panchayats in the draft constitution. He said, “It is certainly an omission calling for immediate attention if our independence is to reflect the peoples’ voice. The greater the power of the panchayats, the better for the people.” He also said, “What good will be the Constitution be if the village does not find its due place in it?25 But he added that the existing settings were not sufficient to realize this dream. He urged the Constructive Workers to pursue the mission to ‘resuscitate the village’ and establish a ‘non-violent social order’. Gandhi may have reconciled himself to believe that the western model of centralized parliamentary system was unavoidable and was ready to keep aside his dreams of “parliamentary swaraj based on village republics.” Yet, he continued to pursue the desire to practice the constructive programme to empower and reform the villages.26

Interestingly, many of the members soon realized the vacuum and insisted on incorporating Gandhian thoughts into the structure of the constitution. The latter stage of the drafting of the constitution found a slight leaning in the deliberations in terms of adopting Gandhian thoughts into the ambit of the constitution.

IV. Gandhi and the Drafting of the Constitution of India-Stage II

B.R. Nanda observes that the general skepticism about the practicality of Gandhi's ideas was reflected in the initial discourses of the Constituent Assembly. The stalwarts engaged in the drafting of the constitution “took little notice of Gandhi’s views.”27 None of Gandhi’s cherished dreams of a village-centric decentralized India, striving on cooperative farming and village industries, found a place in the early stage of the drafting of the constitution. The framers of the constitution, including B.R. Ambedkar, Jawaharlal Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel, were diligently seeking ways to get the country together, rid of poverty and other pertinent information issues of the time, and resorted to the conventional package of ‘centralised government and rapid industrialization’. The developed countries, which inflicted the world with the worst catastrophes, were modelled upon to achieve progress.28

The Constituent Assembly debates of November 1948, incidentally after Mahatma Gandhi's assassination, steered the attention towards the absence of Gandhian perceptions in the draft constitution. One cannot ignore the vehement arguments by some of the members. While moving a motion, Damodar Swarup Seth pointed out “The constitution of a free country should be based on local self- government” and “our Indian Republic should have been a union of small autonomous republics.” He also said, “Mahatma Gandhi emphasized the fact that too much centralisation of power makes that power totalitarian.” Some of the other members supported that his motion should be permitted. Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena, on two occasions, said he was, “pained to hear from Dr. Ambedkar that he rather despised the system in which villages had a paramount voice” and remarked that the portion should be “amended properly.”29 H.V. Kamath curtly said, “[I]f we do not cultivate sympathy and love and affection for our villages and rural folk I do not see how we can uplift our country. Mahatma Gandhi taught us in almost the last mantra that he gave in the last days of his life to strive for panchayat raj. If Dr. Ambedkar cannot see his way to accept this, I do not see what remedy or panacea he has got for uplifting our villages.”30

Arun Chandra Guha emphatically pointed out the grave absence of “Gandhian social and political outlook”. He also shared his apprehensions about how silent B.R. Ambedkar has been in this regard. Guha elaborated on the relevance of “pyramidal structure based on the village panchayats” and expressed his displeasure about Ambedkar’s view that the villages have been the ruination of India. He felt it convenient to have a strong centre and a strong panchayat-based mechanism of administration.31 T. Prakasam also mentioned the inappropriateness of the constitution being distanced from the “wish and desires of those who had fought the battle of freedom for thirty years...under the leadership of the departed Mahatma Gandhi”. He commented, “The Drafting Committee had not the mind of Gandhiji, had not the mind of those who think that India’s teeming millions should be reflected through this camera.” He talked about the relevance of Gandhi's constructive programme and drew attention to the fallacies of the capitalist monetary system. Further, he urged Ambedkar to replace it with the Gandhian model of an economy based on self-sustained villages.32 Prof. N.G. Ranga was concerned about choosing a strong centre instead of decentralization and that “freed from the shackles of ignorance and superstition, the panchayat of the Gandhian village will certainly be the backbone of the structure of this country’s Constitution.” Mahavir Tyagi expressed his disappointment that he saw “nothing Gandhian in this Constitution” and projected the concepts of prohibition, cottage industries, etc.33

Statesmen like K. Hanumanthaiya expressed displeasure in overtly embracing the centralized state system while ignoring the Gandhian idea of provincial governance. He said, “...we wanted the music of veena or sitar, but here we have the music of English band” during the Constituent Assembly debates of 17 November, 1948.34 People like him were adept with Gandhi's views on how the constitution should be drafted. V.I. Muniswamy Pillai, while praising the “efforts and the services rendered by the Drafting Committee,” also believed that “we will be unjust to our people and to our country” if Mahatma Gandhi was not duly represented in the constitution.35 I. Krishaswami Bharathi was the last member to raise the matter and elaborated on the idea of village swaraj and concluded by reminding that, “for Gandhi, India could live only if the villages live.”36 Other members, Syamanandan Sahaya, B.P. Jhunjhunwala and O.V. Alagesan, also expressed dissatisfaction with the draft constitution for not sufficiently delivering Gandhian idea of the village during the third reading in 1949.37

It cannot be claimed that the observations made during the constitutional debates of 1948 bore fruit, for one could still sense a coldness in reverting to the Gandhian vision of decentralized democratic structure through directly elected village panchayats. One could assume that the dire economic and social inequalities prevalent in the Indian society of the time prevented the statesmen from doubting the appropriateness of adopting the decentralized village-centric political economy. Gandhi was hopeful of casteless villages which flourished through the democratic environment created by the panchayati raj system. Friedman recollects Nehru’s response to Gandhi’s economic views as, “utterly wrong.....and impossible of achievement.”38 Ambedkar was also reluctant to absorb the Gandhian notion of the village and openly expressed a preference for the individual as the primary unit instead of the village.39 Ambedkar was skeptical of the future of decentralization and participatory grassroots democracy in Indian villages, given the villages’ historically embedded caste contradictions and power equations and the implications on the weaker sections. A paradigm shift had been made in favour of the individual rather than the village, probably reliant on liberal and Marxian notions.

Eventually, towards the waning of the Constitutional Debates, Ambedkar agreed to accept the resolution proposed by K. Santhanam, and subsequently seconded by many honourable members of the Constituent Assembly to add Article 31-A, envisaging the state to “take steps to organize village panchayats.”40 Further, the interventions succeeded in accommodating Gandhian ideas in the Preamble, Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles of State Policy, etc. The following sections aim at searching how far effectively we have adopted the Gandhian ideas of state-building into the ambit of the Constitution of India.

V. Gandhian Principles in the Constitution of India

The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) is unique for many reasons. The fifteen articles included in Part IV (Art.36-51) of the constitution along with four amendments, direct the states to adopt and execute social, economic, and political programmes for a ‘modern, welfare state’. These non-justiciable principles were drafted in line with the ‘Instrument of Instructions’ given in the Government of India Act, 1935. Interestingly, the DPSP has assimilated some of the Gandhian ideas he envisaged for the country’s holistic development. While Art.39 aims to secure the equal right to livelihood and resources and discourages the concentration of wealth, Art.43 and 43B promote cottage industries and cooperative societies, respectively. Art.46 intends to uphold the educational and economic interests of weaker sections. Art.47 encourages the state to make policies to prohibit the consumption of intoxicants, and Art. 48 prohibits the slaughter of cows and other milch cattle etc. And, Art. 51 enlists the promotion of international peace and honourable relations between nations.41 The most prominent inclusion is Art.40, which envisages the implementation of village panchayats following the Constituent Assembly Debates of 22 November, 1948.

The Fundamental Rights also reflect the influence of Gandhi. Articles have been incorporated to prevent discrimination (Art. 15), abolish untouchability (Art.17), promote secularism (Art. 25), and protect the interests of minorities (Art. 29-30).42 The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002, to promote education through Art.21A provisioning the state to provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years is another welcome step.43 Similarly, the adoption of universal adult suffrage and the accommodation of regional languages are in line with Gandhian views of devolution of power to the masses and respecting the multicultural nature of the country. Though Gandhi openly criticised the Drafting Committee for omitting fundamental duties, its addition under Article 51A, occurred through the 42™ Constitutional Amendment in 1976.44

In the past seven decades, central and state governments have implemented various projects, schemes, regulations, and acts to achieve the dreams of the father of the nation. In spite of these efforts, a close comparison of the principles and provisions envisaged by Gandhi and those incorporated in the actual constitution and those implemented by the governments would reveal a deliberate gap. The reasons are beyond the scope of this paper. This paper focuses on how intensely Art.40 has been appropriated to pursue Mahatma Gandhi's vision of an India of self-sufficient villages.

VI. Gandhi’s Village Panchayats and Article 40: Gauging the gaps

As has already been said, Gandhi dreamt of an independent India, Swaraj, from within, built on the prospects of village autonomy. This idea of decentralization envisioned a self-sustained and equitable village republic pillared on the values of satyagraha and ahimsa, progressing through sufficient cultivation, khadi and cottage industries, inclusive education, clean water, waste management and sanitation, cooperative finance management, and simple living. He also proposed village governance ingrained in grassroots political and economic democracy.45 He said, “My purpose is to present an outline of village government. Here there is perfect democracy based upon individual freedom. The individual is the architect of his own government. The law of non-violence rules him and his government.”46 His desire for the country to be an enlightened anarchy “endowed with apolitical and self-sustaining villages.”47 In a subsequent Harijan (1946), Gandhi is said to have commented that “I may be taunted with the retort that this is all Utopian and, therefore, not worth a single thought.” Gandhi knew that such a village could be realized if someone can “take up a village, treat it as his world and sole work, and he will find good results.”48

The most prominent Gandhian principle which found a place in the Indian Constitution is the directive to implement decentralisation through village panchayats (Art.40). At this point, it will be worthwhile to delve into the meaning of decenralisation as understood by Mahatma Gandhi, his compatriots, and independent India. M.S. John writes that while liberalism envisaged decentralization as a tool to foster accountability and stability in democracy, adopting the perspectives of Tocqueville and J.S. Mill, the contemporary perception is more reliant on the ideas of devolution and delegation. Further, John argues that “the potential for privatisation and the transfer of service provision to the shoulders of the local bodies” make decentralization attractive for neoliberal agencies. What deserves attention is that these perceptions of decentralisation are quite distanced from the philosophical anarchism and normative perspective held by Gandhi.”49

Gandhi dreamt of an India empowered through decentralization (Grama Swaraj) and grassroots democracy, where the power will trickle upwards. It was intended to promote rural empowerment as an alternative to industry-based modernism and centralized system of government. It also embodied non-violence and communal harmony. This system of decentralization anchored on village panchayats was not only accountable to the people but also devoid of political factions. Even though the post-independent India earnestly picturised panchayati raj as a Gandhian idea, his idea appears to have got smothered by the corpulent quasi-federal parliamentary form of government based on the party system. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar opposed the village-centric system because of his serious reservations about its impact on the depressed castes. Following him, independent India argued for the inclusion of a strong District Panchayat and a multi-tier hierarchical system as a measure to facilitate requisite intervention by the centre. The intention was to eliminate the possibilities of hegemonisation by high caste landlords and ensure compliance with national development goals.50 In the early decades, a few states, namely Rajasthan (1959) and Andhra Pradesh (1959), introduced the system following the launch of the Community Development Programme in 1952 and the recommendations of the Balwant Rai Mehta Committee in 1957.51 Iyer comments that Nehru tried to embrace the possibility of institutionalising panchayati raj as an instrument of development. The second five year plan associated this system of decentralization as a mechanism necessary for rural progress and upliftment of the weaker sections.52

But, in no time, the institution staggered and exhibited signs of state patronage and misappropriation by power brokers. The Asoka Mehta Committee (1978), while observing the flaws of corruption and politicization, recommended concrete refinement of the panchayati raj institutions (PRIs). The foremost recommendation was to empower the local bodies by transferring more powers. Also, the Committee suggested a two-tier system comprising a Zilla Parishad and a Mandal Panchayat constituted by grouping villages. In this model, the Gram Sabha would play a crucial role in enriching the grass-root democracy. The Committee further expected systematic changes in administration and resource management.53 The GVK Rao Committee (1985) also recommended the district as the basic unit of planning and emphasized the relevance of regular elections. The L. M. Singhvi Committee (1986) realised the system could be strengthened only by providing it constitutional status. Subsequently, the nationwide implementation of the three-tier system was initiated by adopting the Panchayati Raj Act of 1994 following the 73“ and 74" amendments of the constitution passed by the Parliament in 1992. The Act aims to achieve social justice and good governance through local self-governments enjoined by co-responsibility instead of hierarchy.54

Articles 243 to 243-O of Part IX of the constitution list the duties and composition of the panchayats. The powers and functions of the panchayats were enumerated in the eleventh Schedule. As established by the Act, the relevant features of the panchayats include Grama Sabha, three tiers of administration, reservation for women, and SCs and STs. The duration of the panchayats was specified as five years unless dissolved on specific grounds in accordance with the state legislations. The states could legislate provisions to disqualify the members. The finance commission appointed by the state every five years would review the distribution of taxes, allocation of funds, and grant-in aids.55

In 2018, the Panchayati Raj system completed 25 years, and it is a bag of successes and stutters. Around 3,100,804 representatives were elected across the country to administer the development of about 260,512 Panchayati Raj institutions and urban local bodies (2,53,268 Grama Panchayats, 6,614 Block Panchayats, and 630 District Panchayats), according to 2017-18 GOI statistics.56 Since seats are reserved for women (1,375,914) and SC/ST candidates, the empowerment it facilitates is immeasurable.57 The Panchayats are expected to enhance economic development and social justice by facilitating the smooth execution of central and state government schemes, including the 29 subjects listed in Schedule XI. So far, various rural development schemes worth crores of rupees have been implemented through the Grama Panchayats. In the past five years, about 180,263 crores were allocated as a basic grant and 20,029 crores as a performance grant to rural local bodies. The annual Grama Sabha meetings and the Grama Panchayat Development Plans have also contributed immensely to customizing development in favour of the local community. On an average, two lakh plans are submitted across the country per year.58

In spite of the magnitude of the financial, structural, and administrative dimensions the Panchayati Raj system has acquired in the last 25 years, there are many pitfalls that delineate it from Mahatma Gandhi's vision and objectives towards achieving grass-root level political empowerment. One of the system’s drawbacks is that the state governments have legislated variedly on the devolution of the powers of the panchayats (Art. 243). The present system continues to follow the conventional top to bottom approach, which is a total departure from the ideas of Gandhi. Consequently, as against the vision of Gandhi, the local self-governments are refrained in many ways from generating and utilizing revenue autonomously. The state governments are still unwilling to fully transfer powers to the local bodies in the true spirit of the Act of 1992.59 Pradhan and Joseph (2013) observed that “this scenario had practically resulted in decentralization of corruption and not the true decentralization of power.”60

Also, direct democracy had become a farce in many village panchayats. The overbearing control wielded by the political parties and illiteracy continues to be an issue stalling the efficient participation of the people. The incongruities in elaborating the role of the state government and bureaucracy limit the viability immensely, leaving the panchayats contingent on the political will of the states. One could be relieved that reservation in representation for women and SC/ST has helped augment political participation as well as address their issues.

In his villages, the devolution of financial powers to the panchayats has also not been implemented in the manner suggested by Mahatma Gandhi. The State Finance Commissions, constituted as per the Act, concedes the panchayats to collect a share of the state taxes on land revenue, entertainment tax, additional stamp duty, and other such taxes that are less buoyant while excluding the sales tax and other more buoyant taxes. This severely impairs the mobilization of revenue at the local level, and this, along with the dependence on the state government, is in contradiction to the resource autonomy Gandhi preferred for the panchayats.61

Similarly, with respect to the devolution of functions, while some states have transferred many schemes and related departments to the PRls, other states have been implementing the decentralization through the state bureaucracy, denying the true spirit of the system. The undue role of the bureaucracy, as well as the deficit of means to monitor transparency and accountability, severely hampers the efficiency of the decentralisation process.62

The most crucial denial of Gandhian ideals in this respect has been with regard to the status of Grama Sabhas. One finds that the Grama Sabhas meetings were “minimal and mere formality.” The quantity and quality of participation were compromised. Grama Sabhas were expected to contribute enormously to amass the will of the villagers and streamline progress through the opinions generated, but the state laws were such that these Grama Sabhas were inherently weakened by being assigned “ritualistic functions” which could be “ignored by the Grama Panchayat.”63 Two states, Madhya Pradesh and Kerala stand out for making the recommendations of the Grama Sabha mandatory on the Grama Panchayat.

To overcome the faults, a few initiatives have been launched. The Ministry of Panchayati Raj was formed in 2004. On the 25 anniversary of the Panchayati Raj system, the government of India launched the five-year Rashtriya Gram Swaraj Abhiyan to equip the institutions for achieving Sustainable Development Goals. Another step has been strengthening the People’s Plan Campaign called ‘Sabki Yojana Sabka Vikas’.64 Some states have also put to practice noteworthy models, such as the ‘People’s Planning’ campaign and the concept of ‘neighbourhood groups’ implemented by the State of Kerala in 1996. Organized under six phases, the people’s campaign facilitates the local bodies to formulate and execute devolution of up to 40% of the state’s plan outlay for projects.

VII. Conclusion

Gandhism is an amalgamation of myriad theoretical concepts and their empirical ramifications. One can find Gandhi often handling contrasting ideas with ease and balance. He yearned for justice, freedom, and equality while reminding people about their duties, selfless work, and non-possession. The responsibilities of the state were perceived upon the tenets of realism, liberalism, socialism, economic justice, etc., to envision a deconstruction of state-centric power structures. The predominant disdain towards positivism and modernity for disfiguring pluralism and decentralization is felt throughout his writings. He firmly held on to tradition, morality, and ethics.

When we delve deep into Gandhian thought, we can understand that he was concerned with uplifting the vulnerable sections and protecting the environment to foster international peace in the larger interest. The Constitution makers have, after many deliberations, strived to encourage and direct the states to conceive steps to eradicate poverty, illiteracy, and discrimination, while fostering economic and social uplift, based on his ideas of Sarvodaya and Constructive Programme. Yet, we have significantly failed to comprehend his ideas.

Gandhi envisioned a ‘trickle up’ strategy for the comprehensive and holistic development of the country, incorporating sustainability and equality. The lawmakers and the executive must forgo political differences and undergo attitudinal changes to fathom this Gandhian dream. Many procedural and legislative modifications are necessary to enhance the effectiveness of the programmes manifesting the Gandhian principles. While people continue to be optimistic about the strengths of the PRIs, vested interests of those in the rungs of power and reluctance in true devolution of power by the state, have largely impaired the initiative in delivering the vision of Gandhi in its true spirit. Suppose the intention is a self-reliant village republic based panchayati raj system. In that case, there is a dire need to dissociate the system from partisan politics as well as take more rigourous actions to make villages generate resources locally.

As decades passed by, India, and the world in general, realized the relevance of Gandhian thought. We have been at fault for not having given due significance to his aspirations about independent India. It is reflected in his minimal presence in the Indian Constitution. Nanda points out how Jawaharlal Nehru, M.N. Roy, and Jayprakash Narayan had later expressed their failings for not understanding Gandhi while comprehending the concepts of progress, secularism, scientific growth, etc.65

Over the years, we have tried to do justice to him through constitutional amendments, jurisprudence, and development schemes. Now, it is time that we pay attention to executing the provisions of the constitution with utmost emphasis on attaining Gandhi’s values or Talisman, for he is the father of the nation, and the country is obliged to enliven his dreams of ‘swaraj’ and ‘sarvodaya’ to the fullest.

Notes and References:

  1. The Constitution of India came into effect on January 26, 1950, but it was adopted on November 26, 1949, as stated in the Preamble. On November 19, 2015, the government of India formally notified November 26 as Constitution Day or ‘Samvidhan Divas’. The day is also observed as National Law Day.
  2. The Constituent Assembly of India was established to write the Constitution of India. It functioned from 6 December 1946 to 24 January 1950. Initially, there were 389 members, of which 93 were from princely states and upon the adoption of the Indian Independence Act 1947 announcing two separate nations of India and Pakistan, the number was reduced to 299 in June 1947.
  3. Indian Constitution is the lengthiest constitution among sovereign nations, with 395 articles in 22 parts and 8 schedules. The total word count is about 145,000.
  4. The Panchayati Raj system was implemented through the Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1992. The states of Nagaland, Meghalaya, and Mizoram, as well as Scheduled areas of a few other states, have been exempted from the operation of the Act allowing traditional Gram Sabhas. Please refer to the Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996, for more details.
  5. No other leader in the world would have published as many journals and newspapers as Mahatma Gandhi. The prominent journals by Gandhi are Indian Opinion, Navajivan, Young India, Harijan, Harijan Bandhu, Harijan Sevak. Most of Gandhi's thoughts have also been published as key texts and books. For more details, refer to Journals by Gandhiji
  6. Shriman Narayan Agarwal, Gandhian Constitution for Free India (Allahabad: Kitabstan, 1946), p.12
  7. The small princely state of Aundh was formed after the collapse of the Maratha Kingdom in 1818. It was located in the areas bordering Maharashtra and Karnataka. It acquired a unique place in Indian history through the ‘Aundh experiment’, which began in 1988 when Raja Bhawanrao Pant Pratinidhi, the ruler, relinquished his throne and handed over the governance to the people. Gandhi was approached seeking help to constitute a new government of the people. Refer Narendra Chapalgaonker, Mahatma Gandhi and the Indian Constitution (London: Routledge, 2016), pp.70-73
  8. Sidin Vadukut, “What Might a Gandhian Constitution Have Looked Like?”, Mint, January 27, 2018.
  9. P. Iswara Bhat, “Impact of Gandhian Thoughts on the Institutional Jurisprudence: A Postmodernist Perspective,” Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 61, no. 2 (2019): 182-212.
  10. Narendra Chapalgaonker, 2016, op.cit; Sidin Vadukut, 2018, op.cit.
  11. Salil Misra, “Gandhi & Nehru: Poles Apart but They Transformed Each Other and the Freedom Struggle”, National Herald, November 13, 2019, accessed on 18 March 2021
  12. MK. Gandhi, “Speech at the Round Table Conference | The Voice of Truth | The Selected Works of Mahatma Gandhi,” mkgandhi.org, November30) 1931 https://www.mkgandhi.org/voiceoftruth/roundtableconference.htm. accessed on 3 May 2021
  13. MK. Gandhi, India of My Dreams, compiled by R.K. Prabhu (Ahmedabad: Navajivan Trust, 1947), p.14
  14. MK. Gandhi, “The Only Way,” Harijan, 1939.
  15. MK. Gandhi, “Gandhi Speech at AICC-CabinetMissionPlan/Behind the Scenes” (sites.google.com, July 7, 1946), https://sites.google.com/site/cabinetmissionplan/Behind-the-scenes-Gandhi. accessed on 18 March 2021
  16. Agarwal, 1946, op.cit.
  17. ibid, pp.38-49
  18. ibid, pp.77-128; Bhat, 2019, op.cit.
  19. Prabhu, 1947, op.cit. p.95
  20. India Today, “Constitution Day: Borrowed Features in the Indian Constitution from Other Countries,” India Today, November 26, 2019, https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story /constitution-day-borrowed-features-in-the-indian-constitution-1622632-2019-11-26. accessed on 17 May 2021
  21. Agarwal, 1946, op.cit. pp.12-14
  22. B.R. Nanda, “Gandhi in Sharper Focus"”, accessed on 3 May 2021
  23. Jawaharlal Nehru, “Objectives Resolution: Constituent Assembly,” Parliament of India: Lok Sabha, December 13, 1946
  24. Constituent Assembly, “Constituent Assembly Debates Vol. I 17 December 1946,” December 17, 1946
  25. MK. Gandhi, “Harijan,” December 21, 1947.
  26. Thomas Pantham, “Gandhi and the Constitution: Parliamentary Swaraj and Village Swaraj,” in Politics and Ethics of the Indian Constitution, ed. Rajeev Bhargava (New Delhi: Oxford India, 2008), pp.59-78
  27. Nanda, 2011, op. cit.
  28. Pantham, 2008, op.cit. p.63
  29. The reference was to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s speech moving the draft Constitution, wherein he said, “What is a village but a sink of localism, a den of ignorance, narrow-mindedness and communalism? I am glad that the Draft Constitution had discarded the village and adopted the individual as its unit.” Refer Constituent Assembly Debates, Volume VII, 4 November, 1948, p.38. http://164.100.47.194/Loksabha /Debates /cadebadvsearch.aspx accessed on 8 April 2021
  30. Constituent Assembly, “Motion Re. Draft Constitution I: Constituent Assembly Debates 5 November,” November 5, 1948, p.221.
  31. Constituent Assembly, “Motion Re. Draft Constitution II: Constituent Assembly Debates,” November 6, 1948.
  32. ibid.
  33. Constituent Assembly, “Motion Re. Draft Constitution III: Constituent Assembly Debates” November 8, 1948.
  34. Bhat, 2019, op.cit.
  35. Constituent Assembly, November 8, 1948, op.cit.
  36. Paramjit S. Judge, “Ambedkar, Gandhians and the Indian Village,” Economic and Political Weekly LVI, no. 12 (March 20, 2021): 59-65.
  37. ibid, p 62.
  38. Joseph S. Friedman, “Mahatma Gandhi's Vision for the Future of India: The Role of Enlightened Anarchy” Penn History Review 16, no. 1 (2008): 55-65, p. 57.
  39. Ram Chandra Pradhan and Siby K. Joseph, “Panchayati Raj and Gandhi's Vision of Village Governance,” Dialogue Quarterly 15, no. 2 (December 2013): 56-69, pp.62-63
  40. Constituent Assembly, “Motion Re. Draft Constitution I: Constituent Assembly Debates” November 22, 1948.
  41. GOI, Constitution of India (New Delhi: Government of India, 1949). accessed on 14 May 2021
  42. ibid.
  43. GOI, “The Constitution (Eighty-Sixth Amendment) Act, 2002”, December 12, 2002, accessed on 11 March 2021.
  44. GOI, “The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976,” 1976.
  45. Pradhan and Joseph, 2013, op.cit. pp.60-61
  46. MK. Gandhi, “My Idea of Village Swaraj,” Harijan, July 26, 1942.
  47. Friedman, 2008, op.cit. p.60
  48. Gandhi, 26 July 1942, op.cit.
  49. MS. John, “Gandhi and the Contemporary Discourse on Decentralisation,” in T.M. Joseph Eds. Local Governance in India: Ideas, Challenges & Strategies (New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company, 2007), 20-31. P.22
  50. ibid, pp 24-27
  51. P. Ananth, “Panchayati Raj in India,” Journal of Education and Social Policy 1, no. 1 (June 2014).
  52. VR. Krishna lyer, “Panchayati Perestroika?,” Economic and Political Weekly 24, no. 37 (September 16, 1989): 2051-54, p.2051
  53. Ashok Mehta, “GOI Report of the Committee on Panchayati Raj Institutions” (New Delhi, 1978).
  54. GOI, “The Constitution (Seventy-Third Amendment) Act, 1992)”, 1992, accessed on 10 May 2021.
  55. ibid.
  56. Ministry of Panchayati Raj (MoPR), “Basic Statistics of Panchayati Raj Institutions” (Government of India, 2019), accessed on 14 May 2021
  57. Shruti Rajagopalan, “Evaluating the Panchayati Raj Institutions at 25”, Mint, April 30, 2018, accessed on 14 May 2021.
  58. MoPR, 2019, op.cit.
  59. Ananth, 2014, op.cit.
  60. Pradhan and Joseph, 2013, op.cit. p.65
  61. Planning Commission of India (NITI AAYOG since 2015), “Decentralisation of Panchayati Raj Institutions,” in Mid Term Appraisal (1997-2002) (Government of India, 2002).
  62. Planning Commission of India (NITI AAYOG since 2015), “Macro Issues-Governance,” in Mid Term Appraisal (2007-2012) (Government of India, 2012)
  63. Planning Commission of India (NITI AAYOG since 2015), “Decentralisation of Panchayati Raj Institutions.”
  64. MoPR, 2019, op.cit.
  65. BR. Nanda, Mahatma Gandhi: A Biography (New Delhi: OUP India, 1996).

Courtesy: Gandhi Marg, Volume 43 Number 4, January-March 2022.

* G. Geethika is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Union Christian College, Aluva, Ernakulam District, Kerala. Email: geethikag@uccollege.edu.in.