Conceptual underpinnings of DPSPs

 There was a time when the nature of the state used to be veering round the concept of lasseiz-faire. This was a time of extreme kind of liberalism that stressed upon absolute individual liberty without the indulgence of the State in the economic activities. It was believed that the State is an evil as it interferes with the rights and liberties of an individual. It was thus proclaimed that the state should confine itself only to its basic functions right from the maintenance of law and order to the defence of the country against any external aggression and should have no role in the economic activities of the people.

However, very soon it came to be realized especially by modern liberals that such a restrictive nature of the state had not only become an outdated idea, but even out of time keeping in view the vast concerns that the underdogs and marginalisedsegments of the society had thrown around because of their neglect under such a minimal state. The idea thus generated was to have of an interventionist state that could not only distribute the resources of the society in an equitable manner, but also come to the aid of those who are needy and deprived. It is only then the real democracy could be achieved. This concept of an interventionist state hinged on the fact that an unregulated capitalism merely produces new forms of injustice in the society by promoting what may be called as ‘might is right’. State intervention was justified as enlarging liberty by safeguarding the individuals from the social evils such as poverty and inequality that can even kill their survival. Indeed, the increasing focus on such a state was the arrival of social democracy that could only make the political democracy meaningful. Any state wedded to the ideals of social and economic democracy is a welfare state.

The Constitution of India was drafted at a time when the concept of a welfare state was the dominant norm. Such a state above all, seeks to promote the prosperity and well being of its people by striving to bridge in the de-facto inequalities that exist in the society either in social and economic terms so that at the end of the day, a kind of socialistic pattern of society could be established. We may also call it a state promoting democratic socialism in the country in a manner that the welfare of the poor, disadvantaged and marginalised strata of the society remains its top priority.

Carried away by the vision of such a state that the Constitution makers wanted India to be, they inserted special provisions in the Constitution in part-IV, what we today know them as Directive Principles of State Policy. While inserting these provisions, the makers were aware of the fact that in a poor country like India, merely having a political democracy would be useless unless, social and economic democracy is established in this country. This justifies the inclusion of directive principles of state policy in the Constitution, for these principles seek to strengthen and promote the concept of a welfare state in India by laying down some socio-economic goals which the various governments in India shall have to achieve through their affirmative action notwithstanding their being very fundamental in the governance of the country… 

The enumeration of the Directive Principles of state Policy is a unique feature of the Indian Constitution. They epitomize the aims and ideals of the Constitution. The Directive Principles of State Policy provide one of the most novel and striking features of modern constitutional governments. This novel feature of the Constitution has been borrowed from the constitution of Ireland. The Directive Principles aim to establish a welfare State as opposed to a regulatory state. The Directive principles are a unique blend of socialism, Gandhism, Western Liberalism and the ideals of Indian freedom movement. They are in the nature of general directions or instructions to the State. They embody the aims and ideals, which the State must bear in mind while formulating policies and making laws. They constitute in fact a very comprehensive, social, economic and administrative program for a modern democratic State.

Classification of directive principles

The Directive Principles of State Policy can be classified under four principles groups. The first group deals with general principles of social policy, the second with the principles of administrative policy, the third with socioeconomic rights and the last group contains a statement of the international policy of the IndianRepublic. The main Directive Principles of State Policy are as follows:

1.      To secure and protect a social order which stands for the welfare of the people. (Art. 38)

2.      In particular, the State shall direct its policy towards securing; (i) adequate means of livelihood to all citizens; (ii) a proper distribution of the material resources of the community for the common good; (iii) mention of concentration of wealth to common detriment; (iv) equal pay for equal work for both men and women; (v) protection of the strength and health of workers and avoiding circumstances which citizens to enter vocation unsuited to their age or strength; (vi) the protection of children and youth against exploitation of moral and material abandonment (Art. 39)

3.      To organize village Panchayats as units of self-government (Art. 40).

4.      To secure the right to work, education and public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness, etc. (Art. 41).

5.      To secure just and human conditions of work and maternity relief (Art. 42).

6.      To secure work, a living wage, a decent standard of life, leisure and social and cultural opportunities for people, and in particular to promote cottage industries (Art. 43)

7.      To secure a uniform civil code applicable to the entire country (Art. 44).

8.      To provide, within then years from the commencement of the Constitution, free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of fourteen (Art. 45).

9.      To promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, especially the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Art. 46)

10.    To secure the improvement of public health and the prohibition of intoxicating drinks and drugs (Art.47)

11.    To organize agriculture and animal husbandry on scientific lines and preserve and improve the breeds and prohibit the slaughter of cows, calves and other mulch and draught cattle (Art.48)

12.    To protect all monuments of historic interest and national importance (Art.49).

13.    To bring about the separation of the judiciary from the executive (Art. 50).

14.    To endeavor to secure; (a) the promotion of international peace and security; (b) the maintenance of just and honorable relations between nations; and (c) the settlement of international disputes by arbitration (Art. 51)

Directives added after the commencement of the constitution

Added By the 44th Amendment Act 1978

The State shall, in particular, strive to minimize the inequalities in income and endeavor to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals but also amongst groups of peoples residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations. (Art.38 (2)),

Added By 42nd Amendment Act In 1976

The children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment (Art. 39(f)).

To provide equal justice by ensuring the legal system promotes justice and provide free legal aid by suitable legislation (Art 39-A)

Participation of workers in management of industries (Art.43-A).

Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wilds life (Art.48-A).

Gandhian Principles

The philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi centres on empowerment of people through decentralization of political power to villages and economic power to the village industries. It is embodied in the traditional Indian institutions of participatory governance called Panchayatraj and Nagarapalika bodies. The economic democracy that Gandhian ideals speak of is based on cottage and villages industries as they are labour-intensive; help in dispersal of power geographically and also in terms of economic benefits; and prevent concentration of wealth. Further, Gandhiji advocated banning of cow slaughter and banning consumption of intoxicating substances.

The above elements of Gandhian ideology are found in the DPSPs in the following Articles of the Constitution

• Art. 40( Panchayatraj)
• Art. 43 (Village and cottage industries)
• Art. 47 (prohibition)
• Art. 48 (banning of cow slaughter)

DPSPs non justiciable

The reason for making the DPSPs non justiciable are the following:

• ‘Economic resources may not permit. For example, right to work.
• ‘Social and political development may not be adequate. For example, uniform civil code.
• ‘Administrative and economic constraints For example, free and compulsory education for children in 10 years after the commencement of the Constitution (Art.45).

DPSPs outside Part IV

In addition to the Directives that are found in Part IV of the Indian constitution, there are certain other directives in other Directives in other Parts of the Constitution addressed to the state and non-justiciable like the rest. They are the following -

• ‘Art.335 says that in reserving jobs for the Scheduled Caste and Tribes inGovernment, due attention should be paid to efficiency in administration:

• ‘Art 351 enjoins the state to promote the use of Hindi so that it may he developed as a medium of communication.
• ‘Art.350A enjoins the state and the local authorities to impart primary education to the linguistic minorities in their mother tongue.

Why India needs a uniform civil code?

Although, the necessity of a uniform civil code has had been discussed and debated in this country many times in the past, yet this debate seems to be not dying down as one after the other issues crop up involving the rights of the women vis-a vis the outdated customary laws operating in this country based purely on conflicting ideologies. In a multi religious country like India, uniformity in purely secular matters such as marriage, inheritance or adoption, transcending all religious affiliations is thus called for if we are to knit a unified and integrated India.

Imbued by the same aspiration, the Constitution makers thus inserted a special provision in the Constitution under Article 44 vide Directive principles of State Policy enjoining the state towards establishing a Uniform Civil Code for the citizens of this country so that a uniform system of laws could be established in this country in purely secular matters like matrimony and inheritance; after all human rights make no distinction between one religion and the other. A majority in the Constituent Assembly amidst opposition from some of the Muslim members thus justified the provision for a uniform civil code in the Constitution on some of the following considerations:

• That India had already achieved a uniformity of law over a vast area such as IPC and CPC etc;
• That though there was diversity in personal laws in the country, there was nothing sacrosanct about them;
• That the matters like matrimony and inheritance etc are purely secular activities and thus should be separated from religion;
• That a uniform law in these matters applicable to all would promote national unity and
• That no legislature would forcibly amend any personal law if people were opposed to it…

When many a progressive and enlightened sections among Muslims and Christians are in favour of amendments in all those hackneyed personal laws which have remained very discriminatory especially to their women, why not the governments act to initiate a debate and build a consensus on this issue despite repeated reminders from the Apex Court?

Unfortunately, even after 65 years of the commencement of the Constitution, no serious attempt has so far been made in this regard thereby, reducing one of the solemn mandates of the Constitution virtually a dead letter. The only tangible step taken in this direction has been the codification and secularization of Hindu Law. On the same lines, it is high time that Muslim and Christian personal Laws should also be codified.

The nay-Sayers or sceptics of UCC might believe that it would amount to an interference to their freedom of conscience or free profession or practice of religion by being imposed with a uniform code, they should however note that any secular activity say, matrimony or inheritance or any other secular activity associated with a religious practice has already been exempted by the Constitution itself from the guarantee of this religious freedom. In this sense, it could plausibly be argued that personal laws purely pertain to secular activities and hence fall within the regulatory power of the state just like other activities such as morality, economic interests or health of the society etc…

On the above mentioned propositions, it is thus vital nay need of the hour that law be divorced from religion. Because with the enactment of a UCC, not only the secularism be strengthened in this country, but much of the present day vices of separatism and divisiveness prevalent in the Indian society showing their ugly face now and then, will also disappear. Having such tendencies being contained, India will certainly emerge as a much more cohesive and integrated nation.

Let any fear may be allayed from the minds of concerned religious communities that a UCC does not imply the imposition of Hindu code on them; it will instead be a move towards the integration of all personal laws so that disparate loyalties to such laws could be removed which are based nothing more than on conflicting ideologies striking at the very root of national integration which our Constitution emphasizes in unequivocal terms. After all who would get in sync with such malpractices in a civilized society like ours where a Hindu Husband, married under Hindu law, embraces Islam to solemnize his second marriage so as to escape the consequences of bigamy? Many more questions of the similar kind need to be answered before we have a Uniform Civil Code in this country. It is high time that the government should wake up from its slumber so that the human rights of all those poor and destitute women could be protected who are left in lurch by the vagaries of undemocratic personal laws. The Supreme Court was forthright in observing in one of the celebrated cases:

“… that the law relating to marriage, judicial separation, divorce or inheritance is far, far from uniform in this country. Surely, the time has now come for a complete reform of the law of marriage and make a uniform law applicable to all people irrespective of religion or caste… We suggest that the time has come for the legislature to intervene in these matters to provide for a uniform code of marriage and divorce….”

Difference between the directive principles and the fundamental right

The difference between the two is significant. Whereas the Fundamental Rights provide the foundation of political democracy in India, the Directives spell out the character of social and economic democracy in India. Generally speaking the Fundamental Rights lay down the negative obligation of the State i.e. they are prohibitive in character and are in the nature of injunction requiring the state not to do certain things. The Directive Principles on the country are affirmative directions dealing with the positive obligations of the State towards the citizens.

The vital difference, however, between the two is Fundamental Rights are justiciable while the Directive Principles are non-justiciable. Fundamental Rights can be enforced by the Courts but Directive Principles are not enforceable by any court as laid down specifically in Art. 37. These principles are directive and not mandatory. They confer no legal rights and create no legal remedies.

If the Government does not take any positive action in promoting the objects set forth in the Directive Principles action can be brought against it in a court of law that is inconsistent with the provision of any of the Fundamental Rights.

Relationship between the fundamental rights and the DPSPs

As the constitutional provisions reveal the Fundamental Rights enumerated under Part III, are enforceable in a court of law, whereas the Directive Principles under Part IV are non-justiciable. But, Art.37 declares that nevertheless the Directive Principles are fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply the Directive Principles in making laws. But the question is if laws made by the State giving effect to Directive Principles violate the Fundamental Rights. Can they be valid? This question was raised before the Supreme Court as early as in 1951. The Supreme Court consistently held that on the whole there is no inherent conflict between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles. They together constitute an integrated scheme, and the therefore, as far as possible they should be interpreted harmoniously. However, if this is not possible the Fundamental Rights will prevail over the Directive Principles. In other words the Supreme Court held that the Directive Principles cannot override the Fundamental Rights and such a law is void. On this ground the Supreme Court for example held the Bank Nationalization Law and the Privy Purses Abolition Law as unconstitutional.

In 1971 the Parliament passed the 25th Amendment Act, It introduced a new Article 31-C which states that if the State enacts any law giving effect the two Directive Principles namely equitable distribution of wealth. (Art 39(b)) and prevention of concentration of wealth in fewer hands (Art39 (b)) and in that process if the Law violates the Fundamental Rights enumerated in Art. 14,19 and 31, it cannot be held void for infringing the three fundamental Rights. Art.31-C further states that such a law giving effect to Art 39(b) and (c) cannot be questioned in the court of law. The 25 Amendment Act came to be challenged before the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). The Court making a change from its earlier decisions upheld the first part of Art. 31-C which states that a law giving effect to Art. 39(b) and (c) can override Arts.14, 19 and 31. But the second part of the Articles, which barred the judicial scrutiny of laws passed to give effect to Directives, contained in Art.39 (b) and (c) was declared unconstitutional by the Court.

The 42nd Amendment Act 1976 has again amended Art. 31-C and widened its scope and gave precedence for all the Directive Principles over Art.14, 19, and 31. Art.31-C as amended by the 42nd Amendment Act 1976 empowered the State to make laws giving effect of all the Directive Principles and in doing so the law can override Arts. 14, 19 and 31. But the Supreme Court in the Minerva Mills case 1980, struck down the changes introduced by the 42nd Amendment Act in Art.31-C as unconstitutional, and the present position is that only Art. 39 (b) and (c) can be given precedence over Arts 14 and 19 and not all the Directive Principles. (Art.31 dealing with right to property is no longer relevant in this respect as it has been removed by the 44th Amendment Act 1978 from the Fundamental Rights and has been made a constitutional right under Art.300-A).

Importance of the directive principles

The directive Principles have been criticized chiefly for their lack or Legal sanction. Jurists have described them as “mere window-dressing”,” nothing but pious superfluities”, amounting to no more than manifest of aims and aspirations”, “mere moral precepts lacking teeth”, etc. But it is pertinent to note as Dr. B.R. Ambedkar observed in the Constituent Assembly and later by Chief Justice Kania that these Principles represent not the temporary will of a majority of the Constituent Assembly but the deliberate wisdom of the country expressed through the Constituent Assembly. No Ministry responsible to the people can ignore these Principles, as it is answerable to the electorate in the next election. The Directive Principles Act as a signpost to all succeeding governments and to the people. It is the duty of the Government to take the country towards that signpost. The Directive Principles provide the yardstick for assessing the success or failure of these governments.

Implementation of the directive principles

The Governments of the Union and the States have taken significant steps to implement the Directive Principles. Since India basically is an agrarian country, the greatest progress in carrying out the Directives has taken place in implementing Art. 39(b) which states that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community shall be so distributed as best to sub serve the common good. Under this Article, the Zamindari, Jagirdariand ryotwari systems have been abolished and the actual tillers of the soil have been made owners of the Land. This reform, popularly called land reform has been carried almost completely throughout India. In order to prevent concentration of land holding in fewer hands (Art.39(c)), a majority of State Governments have enacted laws fixing a limit to land holdings. Under Art.40, almost all the States have organize village Panchayats elected by adult population of the respective villages which are endowed with power of civil administration. For the promotion of cottage industries (Art.43) various boards such as All India Khadi and Village Industries Board, Silk Board, Handloom Board, Small Scale Industries Board, National Bank for Agricultural and Rural Development, Agriculture Co-operative Societies etc. have been established Compulsory and Free education (Art.45) is provided in most of the States up to the school level. Laws providing for minimum wages and equal pay for equal work for both men and women have enacted. Community Development Program has been launched throughout India for raising the standards of living of the rural population (Art.47). The judiciary has been separated from executive (Art. 50). The Parliament passed the Criminal Procedure Code 1973, which has placed the function of judiciary in the hands of judicial magistrates who are members of the judiciary and are under the complete control of the High Court. Free legal aid to economically backward classes of people has been provided (Art.39-A). In order to provide easy access to the needy and poor sections of the society to bank fund, the Union Government nationalized fourteen major banks in 1969 and six more banks in 1980. To abolish inequality among citizens, the privileges of I.C.S. Officers and the Privy purses of former princes have been abolished.

Though much of the Directive Principles have been implemented still there are some, which have not been implemented so far. The important among them are, right to work (Art.41), to minimize the inequalities in income (Art.38), to secure a Uniform civil code for all citizens (Art.44), and to improve standard of living (Art.47). Some of the Directives like providing employment, social security and free and compulsory education for children below the age of fourteen have not been achieved. India is far from being a full-fledged welfare State. There is along way to go. Given the poverty and backwardness of the country at the time of independence and the democratic polity the country has chosen, dramatic and fast progress cannot be achieved in a short time. In a democratic country following a multi party system, the economic and social structures cannot be changed in a revolutionary in character. The country has set the establishment of a socialistic pattern of society as its goal. There is visible progress towards that goal though may not be gain-say to state that considerable progress has been made in the implementation of the Directive Principle

Key terms

Directive Principles: The Directive Principles of State Policy are not justiciable in Indian Constitution. Directive Principles of State Policy are contained in Part IV of the Constitution and declares the aim and objectives to be taken by the State in the Governance of the country. This part compels the states to implement this policy.

Uniform Civil code: A common code that applies to all people of India irrespective of their religious denominations especially for matrimonial matters. Article 44 of the Constitution specifically provides for the same and obligates every State to secure a uniform civil code.

Political Democracy: Freedom in respect of all political matters as is secured by the provision of fundamental rights in our Constitution.

Social and Economic democracy: An ideal that is being sought to be achieved by the directive principles of state policy that will ensure not only a social parity among the Indians, but income parity as well.

Privy purses:  The concentration of wealth in the hands of the former Princes or rulers.