Some people believe that a constitution
merely consists of laws and that laws are one
thing, values and morality, quite another.
Therefore, we can have only a legalistic, not a
political philosophy approach to the
Constitution. Itis true that all laws do not have
a moral content, but many laws are closely
connected to our deeply held values.
For example, a law might prohibit
discrimination of persons on grounds of
language or religion. Such a law is connected
to the idea of equality. Such a law exists
because we value equality. Therefore, there is
a connection between laws and moral values.
One should look upon the constitution as a
document that is based on a certain moral
vision, and adopt a political philosophy
approach to the constitution. What do we
mean by a political philosophy approach to
the constitution? We have three things in
mind.
• First, we need to understand the
conceptual structure of the
constitution. What does this mean? It
means that we must ask questions like
what are the possible meanings of
terms used in the constitution such as
‘rights’, ‘citizenship’, ‘minority’ or
‘democracy’?
• Furthermore, we must attempt to
work out a coherent vision of society
and polity conditional upon an
interpretation of the key concepts of
the constitution. We must have a
better grasp of the set of ideals
embedded in the constitution.
• Our final point is that the Indian
Constitution must be read in
conjunction with the Constituent
Assembly Debates in order to refine
and raise to a highertheoretical plane,
the justification of values embedded
in the Constitution. A philosophical
treatment of a value is incomplete if a
detailed justification for it is not
provided. When the framers of the
Constitution chose to guide Indian
society and polity by a set of values,
there must have been a corresponding
set of reasons. Many of them, though,
may not have been fully explained.
A political philosophy approach to the
constitution is needed not only to find out the
moral content expressed in it and to evaluate
its claims but possibly to use it to arbitrate
between varying interpretations of the many
core values in our polity. It is obvious that
many of its ideals are challenged, discussed,
debated and contested in different political
arenas, in the legislatures. in party forums, in
the press, in schools and universities. These
ideals are variously interpreted and
sometimes wilfully manipulated to suit
partisan short term interests. We must,
therefore, examine whether or not a serious
disjunction exists between the constitutional
ideal and its expression in other arenas.
Sometimes, the same ideal is interpreted
differently by different institutions. We need
to compare these differing interpretations.
Since the expression of the ideal in the
constitution has considerable authority it must
be used to arbitrate in conflict of interpretation
over values or ideals. Our Constitution can
perform this job of arbitration.