The Struggles of the Indian Constitution in the Face of Autocratic Legalism: Constitutionalism at Crossroads?

In this article, we seek to delineate the nature of India’s ongoing constitutional struggles against a grave crisis, considering the threat that such crisis poses to the functioning of the country’s constitutional democracy. Using the acceptable definitive models of such a crisis, we then try to examine the extent to which India’s constitutional struggle might have been necessary in order to confront such a crisis. The role played by the deliberate usage of the legal and prima facie constitutional routes to render the very spirit and safeguards of the constitutional system redundant, or the concept of autocratic legalism, as a singular symptom displayed by such a crisis, is focused upon in this context. We draw analogies from multiple jurisdictions with myriad political legacies, including the USA, Poland, Hungary, Turkey, Russia and the Latin American nations. Increasing the judicial burden to cripple the adjudicating machinery; appointment of judges exhibiting specific political inclination; emergence of a charismatic political leader commanding mass support — the potential impact of these factors on liberal constitutionalism is examined. The article delves into the Indian narrative, citing instances from the past such as the Nehruvian legacy of superseding the judiciary as watchdogs of constitutional values, emergency and relevant constitutional amendments, as well as from the present, such as abrogation of special status of Indian states like Jammu and Kashmir, introduction of national population register and modification of citizenship norms, passing contentious legislation via the Money Bill route to avoid close scrutiny and constitutional debates, reservation on economic grounds and introducing new tax structures impinging on the federal relationship. We assess the role played by the Indian judiciary in each of these instances, along with instances of judicial (pro)activism, and their impact on the overall stability of the judicial institution.