Chapter 1 – Constitution: Why and How? | Class 11 Political Science Notes | Political Science Solution

A Constitution is a fundamental set of principles and rules that governs a country. It acts as the supreme law of the land, providing a framework for the relationship between the government and its people, and among the people themselves. It outlines how a society will function and what its core values are. Think of it as the rulebook that everyone in the country agrees to follow.

The need of a Constitution

Every society, no matter how small or large, needs some basic rules to operate smoothly. A constitution serves several important functions for a society:

A constitution is not merely a legal document; it is a dynamic framework that plays multiple essential roles within a society. It helps answer the critical question of how a community—especially one with deep social, cultural, and religious diversity—can coexist and thrive together.

1.1 Coordination and Assurance: Establishing Fundamental Rules
 The foremost role of a constitution is to lay down a basic set of rules that enable coordination and provide a sense of security among members of society. Consider a large community where people differ in religion, occupation, beliefs, and lifestyles. Conflicts are bound to occur—be it over property ownership, access to education, or the allocation of public funds between security services and recreational facilities. For such a community to function harmoniously, shared rules are necessary.

Yet, simply having rules is insufficient. These rules must be publicly accessible, widely understood, and, most importantly, enforceable. If individuals are not assured that others will also abide by them, they themselves have little incentive to comply. Legal enforceability ensures that violations are met with sanctions, building confidence that agreements will be respected. This enforcement mechanism provides the minimum level of coordination needed to avoid insecurity, where people are uncertain about what to expect from others or what rights they hold over resources.

This illustrates a key principle: the authority of a constitution lies not only in the clarity of its rules but also in its ability to ensure compliance by attaching consequences to breaches, thereby converting social agreements into binding norms.

1.2 Specification of Decision-Making Powers: Who Gets to Decide?

The second key function of a constitution is to determine who holds the authority to make decisions within a society. Even when members of a community agree that rules are necessary, a deeper issue remains: whose choices and principles will ultimately prevail? A constitution resolves this question by clearly distributing power. The method of allocation varies depending on the system. In a monarchy, decision-making power lies with the monarch; in the former Soviet Union, it rested with a single political party. In democracies, however, power ultimately residies with the people.

Yet, even in democratic systems, the process is not straightforward. The constitution must outline how people exercise this power—whether directly, as in the ancient Greek practice of collective voting, or indirectly, through elected representatives. The Indian Constitution, for instance, explicitly establishes Parliament as the supreme legislative body and even details how it is to be constituted. In this way, the constitution becomes the ultimate source of legal authority, the very document that brings the government into existence and legitimizes its lawmaking power. The government’s legitimacy is thus derived entirely from the authority vested in it by the constitution.

1.3 Restricting Government Power: Safeguarding Against Tyranny

A constitution does more than empower the government—it also restrains it. Its third function is to set boundaries that prevent the state from exercising unchecked or unjust authority over its citizens. These limitations are so fundamental that governments are forbidden from violating them under normal circumstances. Typically, such safeguards are provided through the recognition of fundamental rights. These rights shield individuals from unfair treatment, such as arbitrary imprisonment, and guarantee core freedoms like speech, conscience, and association.

At the same time, constitutions often specify exceptional situations, such as a national emergency, when some of these rights may be temporarily suspended. The overall aim is to ensure that the state cannot devolve into tyranny by enacting laws that, for example, prohibit certain religious practices or unjustly seize property. This protective function creates what is often called “negative liberty”—freedom from government intrusion or abuse. It stands apart from the next constitutional role, which emphasizes empowering the state to actively advance justice in society.

1.4 Enabling Social Aspirations: Building a Just Society

Moving beyond older constitutional traditions, many twentieth-century constitutions—most notably India’s—established not only limits on power but also positive obligations for governments. This fourth function highlights the constitution’s role in articulating the aspirations of a society and enabling the state to pursue them. In contexts marked by deep inequality, such as India’s long history of caste oppression, the constitution does not merely prevent injustice; it also equips the state to promote equality and dignity.

The Indian Constitution authorizes welfare policies and social reforms to secure a life of self-respect for all citizens, with some measures enforceable in courts. This marks a philosophical departure from a purely “minimal state” model to a more active welfare-oriented state. The Preamble, Fundamental Rights, and Directive Principles of State Policy embody this vision. Comparable developments can be seen elsewhere: South Africa’s post-apartheid constitution empowered the state to dismantle racial inequality, while Indonesia’s constitution mandates the creation of a national education system and the protection of vulnerable children.

1.5 Defining the Collective Identity: Nationhood and Moral Values

Finally, a constitution represents the collective identity of a people, setting the moral and political foundation for citizenship. It defines the shared principles through which individuals can pursue their goals while coexisting as part of a larger community. While people may already belong to different cultural, religious, or ethnic identities, the constitution creates a common political identity by establishing authoritative norms and core values.

Different nations have adopted distinct approaches to this. Germany’s earlier constitutional tradition tied national belonging to ethnic identity, while India deliberately avoided this approach. The Indian Constitution unites its diverse communities not on the basis of ethnicity or religion but through shared democratic values and principles. Such identity formation can often become contentious—as demonstrated by the struggle to draft a new Iraqi constitution after Saddam Hussein’s fall, where Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds clashed over influence. In contrast, India’s constitution serves as a cultural and political framework that defines citizenship through commitment to democratic ideals rather than narrow ethnic or religious criteria.

Part II: The Authority and Effectiveness of a Constitution

 A constitution is generally understood as a written document that outlines the framework of the state, defining how it is organized and the principles it must uphold. In most countries, this takes the form of a single, compact text consisting of various articles specifying the structure of government and its guiding norms. However, not all nations follow this model. For example, the United Kingdom does not have one codified constitution; instead, its constitutional framework is derived from a combination of statutes, judicial decisions, and conventions. Thus, a constitution can be described as a document—or a set of documents—that performs the essential functions of structuring the state and guiding its conduct.

 The true measure of a constitution lies not in its words alone but in its practical effectiveness. Many constitutions across the world remain symbolic texts, existing only on paper without shaping political reality. For a constitution to be effective, it must influence the functioning of government institutions and impact the daily lives of citizens. Its effectiveness depends on multiple factors,

2.1 Mode of Promulgation: The Process of its Creation

The first determinant of a constitution’s legitimacy is the manner in which it was brought into existence. Constitutions that emerge from broad-based national struggles and are drafted by leaders with widespread public credibility—such as those of India, South Africa, and the United States—tend to enjoy lasting authority. By contrast, documents imposed by unpopular political or military rulers often remain ineffective because they fail to inspire public loyalty.

India’s Constitution, though never approved through a nationwide referendum, carried immense legitimacy because it was framed by leaders who commanded respect across the population. Over time, citizens embraced it as their own by adhering to its principles. This demonstrates a clear sequence: the credibility of the framers produced consensus, and that consensus fostered public allegiance. Nepal provides a contrasting case. Since 1948, the country had five constitutions imposed by its monarchy, none of which carried popular legitimacy. The lack of acceptance led to political unrest, the monarchy’s eventual abolition in 2008, and finally the adoption of a new constitution in 2015. This experience highlights that constitutional authority is not simply legal in nature—it must be earned through political trust and public ownership.

2.2 Substantive Provisions: The Actual Content

The second factor influencing effectiveness is the content of the constitution. For it to succeed, it must provide reasons for all groups in society to respect and follow it. A constitution that entrenches the dominance of one section of society, suppresses minorities, or institutionalizes inequality will not inspire loyalty. Communities that feel excluded or treated unjustly have little incentive to abide by such a framework.

Although no constitution can fully guarantee justice, its durability is closely tied to how well it secures liberty and equality for all citizens. Stability arises not merely from the existence of written law but from a widespread perception that the rules are fair. A constitution that is seen as a credible path toward justice stands a far better chance of surviving in the long run.

2.3 Balanced Institutional Structure: Checks and Balances

The third element is institutional design, which must be arranged in such a way that no single authority can monopolize power or undermine the document itself. This principle—commonly known as “checks and balances”—is crucial to preventing authoritarian control.

The Indian Constitution demonstrates this approach by distributing power horizontally across the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary, while also establishing autonomous institutions such as the Election Commission. This distribution ensures that if one institution exceeds its authority, others have the capacity to restrain it. Such a system acts as a safeguard, making the constitution a defensive mechanism against authoritarianism by dispersing power and ensuring mutual accountability.

2.4 The Constitution as a Living Framework: Balancing Stability and Change

Another essential feature of constitutional design is finding the right equilibrium between rigidity and flexibility. A constitution must remain firm in protecting its fundamental values while also being adaptable enough to respond to evolving social realities. If it is too rigid, it risks collapse under the strain of change; if too flexible, it loses its identity, predictability, and authority.

The Indian Constitution is often described as a “living document” precisely because it achieves this balance. It allows amendments when necessary but also imposes limits to safeguard its core principles. This adaptability has helped it remain relevant and respected over time. In contrast, Iraq’s newer constitution has been portrayed as fragile—symbolized in a political cartoon as a “castle of cards”—reflecting its instability and lack of broad-based legitimacy. Thus, the endurance of a constitution is not only about its origins but also about its ability to evolve with society, retaining its foundational essence while adjusting to contemporary challenges.

Part III: The Making of the Indian Constitution

The making of the Indian Constitution was not a hurried exercise but a thoughtful, inclusive, and carefully structured process that reflected the collective wisdom of the freedom movement.

3.1 The Constituent Assembly: Formation and Composition

The Constitution was formally drafted by the Constituent Assembly, which had originally been elected for undivided India and held its first meeting on December 9, 1946. After Partition, the reconstituted Assembly met again on August 14, 1947, with members chosen indirectly through the Provincial Legislative Assemblies established under the Government of India Act, 1935.

The framework for the Assembly was shaped by the Cabinet Mission Plan of the British government. Representation was allocated based on population, at a ratio of one seat per million people. Consequently, 292 members came from provinces directly under British rule, while at least 93 seats were reserved for the Princely States. Within the provinces, seats were apportioned among Muslims, Sikhs, and the General category in proportion to their population, and representatives were elected through proportional representation by the single transferable vote system.

After Partition, the total membership dropped to 299. The Constitution was adopted on November 26, 1949, signed by 284 members on January 24, 1950, and came into effect on January 26, 1950.

Although the Assembly was not elected through direct universal suffrage, it still represented a serious attempt to create a broadly inclusive body. It included members of different faiths, 28 representatives from Scheduled Castes, and within the Congress Party itself, a diversity of views and voices were accommodated. At a time of intense communal conflict during Partition, the choice of indirect representation was considered a more practical and stabilizing approach than a direct popular vote. This emphasis on inclusivity and representation helped ensure that the Constitution was accepted as a genuine national charter.

3.2 The Principle of Deliberation: The Power of Public Reason

The Assembly’s authority rested not only on its representative character but also on the deliberative procedures it followed. Members engaged in what political theorists call public reason—deliberating in terms of the national interest rather than narrow sectional gains.

Debates within the Assembly reflected real differences of principle, such as how to balance power between the Centre and the States or the scope of authority given to the judiciary. The only major issue passed with near unanimity and minimal discussion was the principle of universal adult suffrage—granting every citizen the right to vote regardless of caste, religion, gender, education, or income. This decision illustrated the Assembly’s deep democratic commitment.

The discussions were rigorous and thoughtful. Every clause was debated, scrutinized, and refined. These extensive proceedings transformed the Assembly into a kind of philosophical forum, where the fundamental principles of the Indian state were examined with intellectual depth and seriousness.

This commitment to reason and principle is evident in the words of its leaders:

“We must make our political democracy a social democracy as well. Political democracy cannot last unless there lies at the base of it social democracy. What does social democracy mean? It means a way of life, which recognises liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life. These principles of liberty, equality and fraternity are not to be treated as separate items in a trinity. They form a union of trinity in the sense that to divorce one from the other is to defeat the very purpose of democracy. Liberty cannot be divorced from equality, equality cannot be divorced from liberty. Nor can liberty and equality be divorced from fraternity. Without equality, liberty would produce the supremacy of the few over the many. Equality without liberty would kill individual initiative. Without fraternity, liberty and equality could not become a natural course of things…”.¹

— Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, November 25, 1949

The use of the committee system further highlighted the inclusive and collaborative spirit of the Constituent Assembly. Eight major committees were established, each often chaired by prominent leaders with contrasting viewpoints—among them Jawaharlal Nehru, Rajendra Prasad, and B.R. Ambedkar, who had long been a vocal critic of the Congress Party. Despite these ideological and political differences, the members made conscious efforts to reach consensus-based decisions that would avoid harming any particular community or group.

Over a span of two years and eleven months, the Assembly convened for 166 sittings, all of which were open to both the press and the public, ensuring transparency and accountability in its functioning.

 Dr. Rajendra Prasad paid a heartfelt tribute to the Drafting Committee and its Chairman:

“… I have realised as nobody else could have, with what zeal and devotion the members of the Drafting Committee and especially its Chairman, Dr. Ambedkar in spite of his indifferent health, have worked. We could never make a decision which was or could be ever so right as when we put him on the Drafting Committee and made him its Chairman. He has not only justified his selection but has added lustre to the work which he has done…”.¹

— Dr. Rajendra Prasad, November 26, 1949

3.3 Inheritance of the Nationalist Movement: The Background Consensus

The Constituent Assembly did not draft the Constitution in isolation; rather, it translated into institutions and laws the principles that had been developed during the freedom struggle. For decades before Independence, the nationalist movement had engaged in deep discussions on the nature of government, its guiding values, and the social and economic inequalities it would need to address. The Constitution became the final expression of these long-standing debates.

These ideas were most clearly articulated in the Objectives Resolution, introduced by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1946. Based on this resolution, our Constitution gave institutional expression to these fundamental commitments: equality, liberty, democracy, sovereignty and a cosmopolitan identity.  This resolution laid down the foundational ideals and aspirations that would shape the Constitution’s framework.

Core Features of the Objectives Resolution

• India would be established as an independent and sovereign republic.
• The Union would consist of former British Indian provinces, Princely States, and any territories choosing to join.
• The constituent units of the Union would function as autonomous entities, retaining all powers except those explicitly vested in the Union government.
• All authority and sovereignty of independent India, and of its Constitution, would derive directly from the people.
• Citizens would be assured social, economic, and political justice, along with equality of status and opportunity, equality before the law, and basic freedoms of speech, expression, belief, faith, worship, occupation, association, and action.
• Adequate protections would be guaranteed for minorities, backward and tribal communities, and disadvantaged classes.
• The territorial integrity of the Republic, along with sovereign rights over land, sea, and air, would be preserved in accordance with justice and international law.
• India would contribute actively and willingly to world peace and the welfare of humanity.

Thus, the Constitution was not conceived as a mere technical manual of governance. It represented a moral and political pledge to realize the promises of the national movement and to translate them into enduring institutions and rights for the people.

Part IV: Key Institutional Arrangements and Global Influences

In creating a balanced and effective governmental framework, the Constitution’s framers were not limited to their own experiences. They demonstrated a wide learning by drawing from constitutional traditions around the world.

4.1 Adopting a Balanced System

The Constituent Assembly invested significant effort in designing a structure of government that struck the right balance between institutions, ensuring democracy while prioritizing the welfare of the people. This effort resulted in two fundamental institutional decisions: adopting the parliamentary system of government and establishing a federal framework. These arrangements divided power horizontally between the legislature and executive, and vertically between the Union and the states.

4.2 Borrowing from Global Traditions: Not a “Slavish Imitation”

The framers of the Constitution were open to drawing insights from the experiments and experiences of other nations, reflecting both intellectual openness and pragmatism. As Dr. B.R. Ambedkar noted:

“One likes to ask whether there can be anything new in a Constitution framed at this hour in the history of the world… The only new things, if there can be any, in a Constitution framed so late in the day are the variations made to remove the faults and to accommodate it to the needs of the country.” ¹

— Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, November 4, 1948

This approach was far from a blind imitation of foreign models. Every borrowed element was carefully scrutinized and adopted only if it suited India’s specific challenges and aspirations. Thus, the originality of the Indian Constitution rests not in rejecting outside influences, but in the framers’ ability to critically evaluate, adapt, and blend global ideas into a document that was distinctively Indian in character.

The following table provides a clear overview of the key provisions adapted from different constitutional traditions:

Provisions Adapted from Constitutions of Different Countries