D.Y. Chandrachud, the Chief Justice of India (CJI), has emphasized the Constitution’s dynamic nature and stated that no generation may claim exclusive authority over its interpretation. In contrast to the American originalism philosophy, the CJI emphasized the Constitution’s significance in its capacity to adjust to shifting social, legal, and economic settings.
Key Points on Constitutional Flexibility and the CJI’s Views
Constitution as a Living Document
- CJI D.Y. Chandrachud stressed that the Constitution must be viewed as a “living document,” adapting to changes in societal norms.
- This adaptability helps courts address new and evolving challenges, ensuring the Constitution remains relevant.
Different Social Contexts
- Each generation faces unique social, legal, and economic contexts.
- New issues, such as the legalization of adultery, require fresh interpretations of the Constitution to meet contemporary societal needs.
Contrast with Originalism
- CJI referenced the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson case from the U.S., where abortion rights were denied based on originalism—sticking strictly to the Constitution’s original text.
- He contrasted this with India’s approach, which embraces evolving interpretations to protect citizens’ rights and avoid rigid limitations.
Inflexibility of Original Intent
- Rigidly adhering to the framers’ original intent risks making the Constitution inflexible and outdated.
- The CJI emphasized that the Constitution was meant to evolve with time, allowing future generations to address new challenges.
Nature of the Indian Constitution
- Hybrid Structure: Combines rigidity (to protect fundamental rights) and flexibility (to adapt to changes).
- Amendment Procedures:
- Special Majority of Parliament for major changes.
- State Ratification for provisions like Presidential election.
- Simple Majority for less critical amendments.
Living Document
- The Indian Constitution is a “living document,” capable of adapting to the changing needs of society.
- It evolves through judicial interpretations, legislative amendments, and societal shifts.
Judicial Interpretation
- Courts, especially the Supreme Court, play a key role in interpreting the Constitution in light of contemporary issues.
- Important judgments like Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala established the “basic structure” doctrine, allowing the Constitution to evolve while preserving its core values.
Amendability
- The Constitution can be amended under Article 368 to address new challenges and social realities.
- This balance between flexibility and rigidity allows for changes while protecting fundamental rights and the basic structure.
Adaptation to Social and Legal Contexts
- The Constitution’s provisions are interpreted in response to shifting social, legal, and economic contexts, ensuring relevance.
- For example, the decriminalization of Section 377 and the right to privacy are instances of evolving interpretations.
Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights
- The dynamic nature is also reflected in the interplay between Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) and Fundamental Rights.
- While Fundamental Rights are rigidly protected, DPSPs guide social welfare policies, offering flexibility to governments.
Ensuring Democratic Functioning
- The adaptability of the Constitution ensures that democratic governance remains responsive to contemporary issues like technological advancements and economic reforms.
- Laws related to data protection, environmental regulation, and human rights illustrate this adaptability.
The dynamic nature of the Indian Constitution ensures its relevance in addressing new challenges while safeguarding democratic principles and fundamental rights, enabling the nation to grow in harmony with evolving societal norms.
Balancing rigidity and flexibility is key to maintaining a Constitution that addresses contemporary challenges while preserving fundamental values. Constitutional flexibility is vital for justice, equality, and democracy in a changing society.
