This article has been written by Manu Sharma, 9th semester of law from Amity University Raipur.
Abstract
Chapter 4 of the Indian constitution, based on the Irish constitution, aims to create a welfare state where the government is responsible for economic and social welfare. It imposes duties on the government through laws, rules, principals, guidelines, and recommendations. The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) are pilotage for the government to implement new laws for social welfare, but they cannot be justified. The non-justiciability of DPSP has been a source of legal debate in India’s legal system.
The Indian constitution, drafted by the constituent assembly, implements the Directive Principles (DPSP) to ensure the welfare of the people and the state. While some argue that DPSP is unfeasible, others believe it is necessary for monitoring the government and unifying India. Article 44 of the constitution mentions the Uniform Civil Code, which calls for equal provisions of civil law for all people regardless of caste, faith, religion, or belief. Critics argue that DPSP should not be implemented separately, as many laws within it are already part of other provisions. DPSP also imposes moral standards on the citizens, which should not be confused with law. Despite its importance, DPSP is not legally enforceable, but it serves as a guide for the government in creating laws and policies to ensure the welfare of the people and the state. It also serves as a scale for government selection and ensures proper implementation of the principal. DPSP is not rigid and can be interpreted in a wider sense, but it should align with the social welfare of the people, helping to achieve the four pillars of the constitution: fraternity, liberty, equality, and justice.
Fundamental rights and directive principals of state policy (DPSP) are complementary and enforceable, with DPSP directing governments to achieve certain results through power. However, DPSPs limit this power, and in cases of violation, strict steps should be taken. Remedies are only available when there is a law already available, and violations can be covered under fundamental rights in some areas. The distinction between DPSPs and fundamental rights is that a law against DPSPs cannot be declared void by the courts. The importance of balancing these factors in judicial proceedings is crucial.
The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) are crucial for India’s democratic governance and economic democracy. They ensure that the constitution avoids the extremes of a proletariat dictatorship and a capitalist oligarchy, which can lead to a dictatorship. The Directive Principles of State Policy have been instrumental in achieving political democracy and economic democracy in India.
However, critics argue that these principles may not be sufficient in the twenty-first century, as they may not be relevant in the future. The DPSP also contain positive duties of the state towards its citizens, which are revolutionary in nature but yet to be realized constitutionally. The State Principles Directive ensures that India’s Constitution avoids the two extremes of a proletariat dictatorship that kills personal freedom and a capitalist oligarchy that jeopardizes economic security for the majority.
The current administration has made significant efforts to implement these principles, such as establishing panchayats, nationalizing industries, and strengthening the cottage sector. However, there is still much work to be done, including addressing political, economic, and social inequality, raising the people’s standard of living, and implementing socialism.
One problem is that the implementation of these principles presents several obstacles, such as the need for a more comprehensive approach to governance and the need for a more balanced approach to economic development. Additionally, the implementation of these principles may not be feasible in all regions, making it difficult to assess their effectiveness in different contexts.
Key word: fundamental rights, governance, enforceability etc
Introduction
In Indian constitution chapter 4 covers the idea of the directive principal of state policy, the idea has been taken from Irish constitution. The main aim of directive principal of state policy is creating a state where government take responsibility of an economic and social welfare of the people or in simple term we can say that it gives a glimpse of how a welfare state should look like. The purpose of chapter 4 is enhancement of social status and economic democracy of a state, but its purpose does not include strengthening of political democratic system. These chapter impose duty on government by giving important laws, rules, principals, guidelines and recommendations to regulate the country. According to principals of B.R. Ambedkar these principles form a “new element” of the constitution. The DPSP are pilotage for the government so that proper implementation of the new laws which are for social welfare of the people can be done. However, DPSP cannot be justified, hence no one can force the State to consider or implement anything mentioned in it.
Part 4 covers Article 36 to 51 of the Indian constitution, which covers the directive principal of state policy. The Directive Principles of State Policy have been in vogue after the date of India’s independence. The violation of Fundamental Rights (FR) by them was a starting origin of legal debate. The non-justiciability of DPSP has always been a source of controversy in India’s legal system. DPSP are non-justiciable constitutional provisions which means they cannot be enforced in court.
Importance, scope and enforceability of part 4 of the constitution
The Indian constitution is drafted by the constituent assembly, but it does implement the DPSP. But non enforcement of DPSP does not means that this principal is futile. Some reasons Favor its implementation, and some go against the implementation of the DPSP. Those who Favor the enforceability of the principles claim that the implementation of the DPSP will monitor the government and unify India. For example, Article 44 of the Indian Constitution mentions the Uniform Civil Code, which calls for equal provisions of civil law for all people in the country regardless of caste, faith, religion or belief.
The people who do not support enforceability of DPSP think that the concept of DPSP must not be implemented separately, because many laws which are part of DPSP are already part of other provisions. One of the examples can be article 40 of the constitution which deal with Panchayati raj, it was adopted through a constitutional amendment, and it is extremely clear that there are now many Panchayats in the country. Another criticism against the DPSP is that it imposes morals and ideals on the country’s residents. It should not be confused with law, as it is important to understand that law and ethics combine different concepts.
If we apply the opposite, the development and expansion of state will generally be hindered. It articulates the safety of women in the country, protection of the environment, rural development and growth, distribution of power, uniform civil code, etc., which are considered important in the formation of the law of ‘welfare state’. Though not impartial, they give guidelines to the government on how to work in the country. Directive Principles are not legally enforceable, but they are supported by the vox populi (voice of the people), which are the right sanctions under each law. It provides the philosophical basis for the welfare system. These principles make the state responsible for securing it through welfare legislation.
Moral standards are more significant due to their inherent character. Although it serves as the state’s moral code, this does not lessen the significance of moral principles, as their absence can impede societal advancement. Given that the people of a state create and run its government, it is critical that nation has a legal system. This is a crucial matter. The government uses the Directive Principles as a guide for creating laws and policies to ensure the welfare of the people and the state.
They provide as a sort of anchor for the nation’s governance, as in a democracy, governments change frequently following elections, and each new administration enacts new laws and policies. Such regulations are crucial because they guarantee that all governments base their legislative decisions on the DPSP principles. It is possible to view Directive Principles as beneficial state regulations that support democratic social and economic features. Political rights and other liberties are provided by the fundamental freedoms, to which DPSP is a supplement. Since one guarantee social, economic, and other political rights, the other is essential to the other.
DPSP works as scale for the government through which individual can check that they should be selected or rejected. If they do not fulfil all the requirement given under DPSP they must be rejected and they ensure people proper implementation of the principal than they must be selected. DPSP reflects the nation. It shows the thought of the originator of the constitution, which also shows how one can interpret constitution and what are the aim of the provisions of the constitution, which helps in better law making.
DPSP in not rigid and can be changed or interpreted in wider sense as per the situation. But it should be in accordance with the social welfare of the people, which helps in proper implementation of democratic India. Many thinkers says that DPSP are supplementary to the fundamental rights given in part 3 of the constitution. But as per my opinion in is complimentary which helps to achieve four pillar of the constitution that is fraternity, liberty, equality and justice.
Co-relation between fundamental rights and directive principal of state policy
As we know that fundamental rights are enforceable by high court and supreme court. On the other hand, DPSP are non-enforceable, so it is the point of difference among both principals. But for proper implementation of DPSP fundamental rights play vital role because of which we can say that both parts are complementary to each other. DPSP direct governments to achieve some results through power and fundamental rights put some limitation to that power. In violation of fundamental rights strict steps should be taken, but when DPSP get violated then remedies are only available when there is some law already available to that, violation of DPSP can be covered under fundamental rights in some areas and punishment can be imposed. The difference between both concept is that “A law against the DPSPs cannot be declared as void by the courts, but this is not the case with Fundamental Rights”.[1]
Bothe supplementary as well as complementary aspect of fundamental rights can be spotted. As there are many changes were made and different opinion can be seen as per different judicial proceeding. In case of State of Madras v. Champakan[2] fundamental rights were given more priority over DPSP by saying that infringement of fundamental rights is illegal whereas infringement of DPSPs is not. But a different opinion was given in case of Keshavnanda Bharti v. State of Kerala[3] Article 31C was extended to include protection of any law passed in the application of the DPSP from being deemed unconstitutional because it violated Articles 14 and 19. A similar position was adopted in 42nd amendment too which shows that DPSPs are given preference over fundamental rights. But in Minerva Mills v. Union of India[4], the extension of Article 31C was rejected, and it was determined that these factors needed to be carefully matched and balanced.
Role of DPSP in governance
In today’s era DPSP is very important part of over constitution, and this chapter plays vary vital role in proper governance. Neither fundamental rights can replace DPSP nor DPSP can replace fundamental rights, they both have different importance and they both are important organ of the constitution. The aim of the Indian constitution is to achieve democracy in the country, which cant be done without DPSPs. The foundation of democratic democracy needs to be appropriately established. Simultaneously, the strongest factor advancing political democracy is the presence of economic democracy. If economic democracy isn’t present, political democracy will quickly turn into a dictatorship.
If political democracy is guaranteed by the Indian Fundamental Rights, then economic democracy will be upheld by the Directive Principles. Consequently, the Directive Principles of State Policy emerged as the principal safeguards of India’s authentic democracy. Given this, it would be imprudent to write these principles off as a mere political manifesto with no legal force behind them, or to label them as nebulous, confusing, and useless, or to write them off as nothing more than moral precepts. The criticism in question is no longer valid or significant, as evidenced by several examples during the last fifty years. If K.T. Had Shah still been alive the Constituent Assembly would have had to reconsider his belief that these ideals were “like a check payable on a bank, payable only when the resources of the bank permit it.”
Whether many of the policy concepts derived from Western European or English experience in the 19th century are deserving of being included in the current Constitution and deemed appropriate for Indians in the mid-20th century is another perceived major critique of the Directive concepts.
It is hard to say if they will be sufficient in the twenty-first century, when the Constitution is supposed to stay in effect. May `be by then, they won’t be relevant anymore. Who is to determine the precise nature of the nuclear or hydrogen age’s possibilities? It has the power to completely change India’s economic system and turn it into a country of plenty where all of humanity’s material needs are met right away. It has the power to completely change India’s economic system and turn it into a country of plenty where all of humanity’s material needs are met on time and in full. The guiding concepts seem both antiquated and regressive in this context. Nonetheless, India had to meet the same criteria in the 20th century as Western Europe did in the 19th in many areas of economic endeavour.
Furthermore, not all of what is said about “foreign borrowing” is correct. Numerous clauses in this chapter, as previously said, demonstrate the uniqueness of the Constitution and serve as a testament to the brilliance of the Indian people. The Directive Principles may be appropriately changed or eliminated if they become out of date. Modifying these clauses is an easy process. However, had these changes been made, India would have benefited immensely from the Directive Principles, economic democracy would have become firmly ingrained in Indian culture, and the goal would have been achieved in the current way that these principles represent. Additionally, these ideas would have been ingrained in Indian society. Thus, it is evident that these concepts have excellent educational.
They will instil in the minds and thoughts of future generations of young Indians the essential ideals of a stable political order and a prosperous economic system. The focus of a constitution is the current one. If the present is built on stable foundations, the future will look after itself. Consequently, in respect to certain elements of a constitutional instrument it is not required to consider the distant future.[5] The DPSP are important because they contain the positive duties of the State towards its citizens. One cannot say that these responsibilities are trivial or that even if they are fulfilled, the social structure of India will remain essentially intact. Indeed, they are revolutionary in nature and yet they are yet to be realised constitutionally. Herein lies the real significance of enshrining these ideas in the Constitution.
The State Principles Directive ensures that India’s Constitution avoids the two extremes of a proletariat dictatorship that kills personal freedom and a capitalist oligarchy that jeopardises economic security for the majority. These guidelines are so national goals and consciences and whoever winning the election cannot ignore them. “The provisions of Part IV of the Constitution cannot be lightly ignored by any Ministry responsible to the public,” says Alladi Krishnaswamy Ayyar.[6] State legislatures and the Union Parliament both refer to it for guidance. They are used by courts to support their rulings. For a long time, government institutions have followed these regulations as norms. We are urged to evaluate the accomplishments of the current administration in carrying out these initiatives objectively. In our country, panchayats are being founded even in the most isolated communities.
They are returned to their previous splendour. Some industries have been nationalised and companies have been founded. The state is doing so in the name of avoiding concentration of wealth, as shown by the greater taxes on higher incomes, the recovery of deliberately hidden taxes and audacious attempts to drag Dalmia’s into the law.[7] Building a poor home in the nation’s capital would eliminate a significant barrier to a sufficient standard of living and enhance the reputation of Indian democracy. More people are employed because of the expansion of public businesses, industries, and state-owned businesses. Two important statutes that assist workers who are elderly, disabled, or in unjust poverty are the Employees State Insurance Act and the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
The cottage sector is being strengthened. Minimum wage laws have been introduced to improve the working conditions of workers. Attempts are being made to provide primary education to children below 14 years of age. Scholarships for the Scheduled Castes, subsidies in school tuition, and age and price restrictions for job seekers through the Public Service Commission are all effective means of helping the poorer Hindu classes. The organisation of agriculture is based on scientific concepts. Attempts are being made to improve the breed of cows. Some countries have made the concept of breeding of cows and calves illegal.
Article 49 directives are implemented by the Ancient Monuments Acts. The judiciaries of several states, including Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana, Punjab, Kerala, Madras, Mysore, and Maharashtra, are independent of the executive branch. Our Prime Minister’s attempts to further global peace and security goals cannot be underestimated. The “Panch Sheel” is a significant initial step. It was acknowledged that Pt. Nehru was a cultural messenger from the East to the spiritual West to the material world. He was praised to the hilt by Muslims in the Arab East and even by pseudo-democrats in the United States and Britain. Much work still needs to be done. Political, economic, and social inequality still exists. There is still needed to raise the people’s standard of living. Unemployment is still a concern. Socialism still must be put into practice. Nevertheless, given everything, it is reasonable to draw the conclusion that the administration is making significant and honourable efforts to accomplish these objectives.
However, the implementation of these Principles presents several obstacles. One problem is that states are not able to implement the Directives with the budgetary resources. Each Directive entails a substantial financial expense that the country cannot pay. Another difficulty is that the country has so many problems that the directives are not on the priority list.[8] The public either paid little attention to these directives or did not speak out firmly against them. But a significant challenge arises when a command that affects a religious group directly or indirectly is implemented in a certain way. Religious leaders raised a racket when the Supreme Court presented a direction on a unified civil code.
Conclusion
Not only were these provisions included by our constitutional drafters for the purpose of inclusion, but they were also incorporated for the benefit of the nation’s government. This section was developed to accomplish the nation’s ultimate aims and fundamental objectives. It would also be incorrect, considering the prior information, to state that DPSPs are not used. Part IV standards must be complied with by the state in all policies and regulations. They are just as relevant and significant as any other part of the Constitution, although not having any legal force behind them. The mere fact that DPSP is unenforceable in court does not diminish its significance. These additional guidelines are included to help the nation’s government function more efficiently. It is included to achieve a nation’s primary objectives and goal, which is to promote the welfare of its citizens. Since the above indicated data serves several crucial purposes, we are unable to claim that DPSPs are unnecessary or not applicable. It functions as a kind of framework for the government, which should only make accommodations for it when creating new laws to protect the interests of the populace. The provisions outlined in Part IV of the Constitution must be adhered to by all state legislation and regulations. Even if they are non-justiciable, they are still implemented in some essential acts and hold the same importance as the fundamental rights mentioned in Part III of the Indian Constitution.
[1] Narender Kumar, Constitutional Law of India, 480 (8th ed., 2014).
[2] (1951) SCR 523 (531)
[3] AIR 1973 SC 1461
[4] AIR 1980 SC 1789
[5] WHITE, SIR FREDERICK, India: A Federation? Being a Survey of the Principal Federal Constitutions of the World, with Special Reference to the Relations of the Central to the Governments in India
[6] AIYER, ALLADI KRISHNASWAMI and AIYANGA, N.R., (1928) Government of India Act, 1935 with a AIYER, SIVASWAMY, Indian Constitutional Problems ARCHIBOLD, W.A.J., Outline of Indian Constitutional History (1926)
[7] MARKANDAN, K.C., (1966) Directive Principles in the Indian Constitution
[8] BASU, DURGA DAS, Cases on the constitution of India (2 Vols)
