Time to Reconsider? The Debate Over the Word 'Secular' in India's Preamble

S.S. Sarkaryawah and Dattatreya Hosabale have recently called for a national debate on the Emergency-era inclusion of the words "secular" and "socialist" in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution.

- SIDDHARTHA DAVE

This statement has rekindled a decades-old constitutional and ideological debate that cuts to the core of India's national identity.

At the heart of this renewed scrutiny lies the term 'secular,' added to the Preamble through the contentious 42nd Amendment during the Emergency imposed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi between 1975 and 1977. Notably, these words were absent in the original Preamble drafted under the stewardship of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and were never part of the vision articulated by the founding fathers during the Constituent Assembly debates.

The issue is not merely academic or semantic. The inclusion or deletion of this term influences how India is perceived, governed, and interpreted—as a civilizational state rooted in Dharma or a modern republic patterned after Western liberal democracies.

At a time when there is renewed interest in reclaiming the original spirit of the Constitution and aligning governance with India's indigenous ethos, this debate invites serious consideration. Has the term 'secular' fulfilled its intended purpose, or has it outlived its relevance—perhaps even distorted the spirit of the Constitution by becoming a tool for political convenience and selective application?

The Constituent Assembly Debates: A Term Repeatedly Rejected

The drafting of the Constitution of India was a thorough and deliberative process. The Constituent Assembly spent nearly three years debating every aspect of India's future constitutional structure. During these debates, the idea of incorporating the term 'secular' into the constitutional text was proposed on at least three distinct occasions. Each time, it was decisively rejected.