A lecture was organized on 29th January 2024 by Dr Ambedkar, Chair at the Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Museum and Memorial, on ‘Constitutional Morality and Affirmative Action: Deconstructing Perceptions and Realities’ by the Guest speaker Dr Ramratan V Dhumal (Assistant Professor, Ajeenkya D Y Patil University, Pune), Dr Ajay Choudhary, Chair Professor, Dr Ambedkar Chair, presided over the session.

The other guests were Prof. Jyoti Chandiramani Dean, Faculty of HSS and Madam Sanjeevani Majumdar. The programme started with reading the Preamble, after which Sanjeevani Majumdar talked about Dr Ambedkar in the Constitutional Assembly and his idea of constitutional morality.

Prof. Jyoti Chandiramani shared her views on the overall and inclusive development that needs to happen with the aim of SDGs. Dr. Ajay Choudhary talked from the identity perspective, by which we are Indians First and Last. To end, he invited Dr Ramratan V Dhumal for his lecture.

Dr Dhumal introduced the topic, its standfirst, and his methodology to analyse it. He used a deconstructive methodology to understand history, which followed the originalist perspective without creating any complexities. Further, he contextualises his talk in the present times.

He brings out the prophecies made during the Constitutional Assembly Debates, which presumed that the Constitution would not survive even a year; however, the Indian Republic is 75 years old now. He referred to an article by Chicago Law School, “The Lifespan of Written Constitution”, in relevance to the Constitution of India, highlighting the building of its foundations.

He talked about the speech of Dr Ambedkar on 4th November 1948 while presenting the first draft of the Constitution, where he mentioned the ‘Form of Government’ and ‘Form of Constitution’ and highlighted the importance of having an accountable government as far more critical than having a stable government.

The Constitution envisions an accountable government. Also, he talked of three essential sections of the Preamble: the source clause, the objective clause and the implementation clause, which begins and ends with the people of India.

Dr Dhumal talked about Constitutional Morality and how it was addressed during the time of Constitutional Assembly Debates and in the post-1950 times through some landmark cases. He also referred to the works of George Grote and why Dr Ambedkar felt it necessary to invoke Grote during the Constitutional Assembly Debates.

An important point that was put forward was that the Constitution needs to be revered by all organs of the government, including citizens. In addition, Grote’s point of a free and peaceful government.

uding citizens. In addition, Grote’s point of a free and peaceful government. He brought out the importance of constitutional morality, such that even if a small opinionated minority does not hold power to gain power, it holds enough power to make the Constitution impracticable, and the form of administration has a close connection with the form of the Constitution. However, Grote does not talk about how the Perversion of the Constitution is possible without changing the form of administration.

This marks the importance of constitutional morality because it is not a natural sentiment but needs to be cultivated. Dr Dhumal brings out the writing of Dr Ambedkar, ‘States and Minorities’ from 1945-46, whereby he says there needs to be proper entitlements we should give to all the communities in the Constitution. Thus, he shifted to the use of constitutional morality in the post-1956 time.

He shows the references of the ideas in cases like Keshvanand Bharti Case 1973, S.P Gupta versus the Union of India or the first Judges Transfer Case 1981, Navtaj Singh Johar versus Union of India 2018 on de-criminalisation of homosexuality, Manoj Narula versus Govt of India 2014 on the de-criminalisation of politics in India, Joseph Shine versus Union of India, 2018, which was about adultery, Young Lawyers’ Association versus state of Kerala or the Sabarimala Case.

The speaker quoted Justice AP Shah from Delhi, High Court’s judgment, para 86 of de-criminalisation of homosexuality – the constitutional morality must outweigh the argument of public morality even if it is the majority belief. From a different judgment, he quotes the importance of constitutional morality for the government, where the court equated constitutional morality with good governance.

Subsequently, he questioned relying solely on constitutional morality and not backing them with statutes and Law as constitutional morality is not a coherent principle, and this leaves the scope for discretions by which uniformity in the implementation cannot be maintained. Subsequently, he connected it with affirmative actions, which are evolving along with the evolution of the Constitution.

He highlighted that the moment more people are brought within the scope of affirmative action, more people associate themselves with the Constitution, and they protect the ethos of the Constitution. No political system can outrightly reject the existence of the Constitution if citizens stand to defend their Constitution. Thus, this enhances the legitimacy of the Constitution.

His lecture was followed up by some questions, after which a vote of thanks was given, and the programme ended with a picture of the speaker and other guests with the students.