Home » Posts tagged "India"

GST – Goods and Service Tax Forum all Over India

GST – Goods and Service Tax Forum all Over India











Goods and Service Tax

Mumbai, India (PRWEB) January 04, 2012

Jif Communications Pvt. LTD is conducting a one day forum on Goods and Service Taxes on 13th January, 2012 in Mumbai and 23rd of January, 2012 in Ahmadabad.

What is Good and Service Tax (GST)?

The Constitution of India introduced Bill in Lok-sabha on March 22, 2011, to introduce the Goods and Services Tax, to give concurrent taxing powers to both the Union and States of India. GST would replace a number of indirect taxes levied by the Centre and State governments, and is intended to remove cascading of taxes and provide a common national market for goods and services.

GST would replace a number of indirect taxes levied by the Centre and State governments, and is intended to remove cascading of taxes and provide a common national market for goods and services. As the stage is set to roll out of Goods and Services Tax (GST), Jif Communications Pvt LTD is organizing a 1-day Programme to enlighten the participants on the structure, operations, and nuances of the GST model of taxation.

Jif Communications Pvt Ltd has already conducted several one day forums on Goods and Service Tax. “After the opening, of one day forum on 22nd August 2011 in Mumbai, we received tremendous response and were requested to conduct GST forum in other cities of India. Due to public demand we are conducting forums in other parts of India on the following dates and cities.” said Mr. Jamshed Pathan, at Jif Communications Pvt Ltd.


13th     January 2012 – Mumbai.
23rd     January 2012- Ahmedabad.
Next : Cochin, Bhubaneswar, Chandigarh, and other parts of India.

Sectors which can benefit by attending this one day forum:

1) Oil & gas Petro chemicals Refineries

2) Auto mobile & Auto Component Industries

3) Cement / metallurgy Industries

4) FMCG / Pharmaceuticals / Chemicals

5) Shipping Infrastructure / Aviation engineering

6) Heavy Engineering / Textile Garments

7) Sugar / Agriculture / Fertilizers

8) Power and Energy

Who is going to conduct this Forum?

Prof. V S Datey is B Tech (Hons), FCS, FICWA. Prof. Datey worked for 27 years in the corporate field at senior levels in indirect taxation, finance and secretarial fields in leading listed companies, till 1993. He started his career as author and indirect taxes consultant in 1993. Presently, he is concentrating on writing books on various topics – particularly relating to indirect taxes, economic laws and corporate laws.

All his books are published by Taxmann, New Delhi. His first book on Indirect Taxes was published in 1994, on Economic Laws in 1997, on Corporate Laws in 1998 and on Service Tax in 2004. Subsequently, yearly editions of these books are being published, for professionals and students. His books have been prescribed for professional examinations like CA, CS and ICWA and are also widely referred by professionals and departmental officers. Prof. Datey is Chairman, Nasik Ojhar Chapter of Cost Accountants. He is also Chairman of Nasik Chapter of WIRC of ICSI, Nasik.

About Jif Communications Pvt LTD.

Jif CPL is a multi-disciplinary management consultancy which brings the world leading experts in organisational leadership, management, technology, legal, taxation and business development collectively. The invited faculty being the most well-known and respected credible experts in the industry, with a knowledge base that is wide and spans from policy, practical solutions, exchange of technological knowhow, through to delivery.

Jif Communication Pvt Ltd also offers In House training for corporate companies. For more details visit http://www.jifcpl.com

###









Attachments






















Vocus©Copyright 1997-

, Vocus PRW Holdings, LLC.
Vocus, PRWeb, and Publicity Wire are trademarks or registered trademarks of Vocus, Inc. or Vocus PRW Holdings, LLC.







Related The Constitution Press Releases

Test of Valid Classification under Constitution of India

Art 14 Declares “the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

Thus Art 14 used the two expression “equality before the Law” and “equal protection of the law”

As such this right  was considered generally a negative right of an individual not to be discriminate in access to public offices or places or in public matter generally. It did not take account of existing inequalities arising even from the public policies with that kind of undertaking of the right to equality.

This first expression equality before the law, is a somewhat negative concept which is said to be have taken from English common law, is a declaration of equality of all person within the territory of India, implying there by the absence of any special privilege in favor of any individual. Ever person whatever be his rank or position is subject to the jurisdiction of the ordinary court. Prof. Dicey, explain the concept of equality as it operated in England said ” with us every official from the PM down to a constable or collector of taxes is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.

The second expression the equal protection of the law which is rather a corollary of the first and is to be taken from US, it is a more positive concept implying equality or treatment in equal circumstances.

These two expression under this article to make the concept of equal treatment a binding principle of State action .  The word Law in the former expression is used in a generic sense a philosophical sense, whereas the word Laws in the latter expression denotes specific laws. It has not explained this statement any further, but it means that equality for all is the law or standard norm of the land.

Equal protection of the laws is now being read as a positive obligation on the State to ensure equal protection of the Laws  by bringing in necessary social and economic  changes so that every one may enjoy equal protection of the laws and nobody is denied such protections.

Underlying Principle

As no human being are equal in all respect the same treatment to them in every respect would result in unequal treatment. For example the same treatment to a child as to an adult or to a physically challenge or healthy person, will result in unequal treatment.

Therefore the underlying principle of equality is: not the uniformity of treatment to all in all respect, but rather equal must be treated equally  while unequal must be treated differently.

But this does not mean the unequal treatment for all, while the later Article of this part ( Part III) especially Art 15 and 16,  equality not only prohibited unequal treatment but it also demands equal treatment. Therefore state must not only treat people unequally but it must also take positive steps to remove existing inequalities, especially those inequalities which treat human being less then human being.

Test of Valid Classification

This article forbids the legislature classification, but it does not forbid reasonable classification of person, objects and transactions by the legislature for the purpose of achieving specific ends. And differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Act.

There must be an nexus between the basis of classification and the object of the Act which makes the classification.

In Kedar Nath Bajoria V/s State of WB

It said

The equal protection of the Laws guaranteed by the Article 14 of the Constitution does not mean that all the Laws must be general in character and universal in application and that the  State is no longer  to have the power of distinguishing and classifying persons or things for the purpose of legislation.

In E.P Yoyappa v/s State of TN

Propounded a new approach to Article 14 in the following words:

Equality is a dynamic concept with many aspects and dimensions and it is cannot be cribbed, cabined and confined within traditional and doctrinaire limits. For a positive point of view equality is antithetic to arbitrariness.

In Maneka Gandhi v/s Union of India

Article 14 strikes at arbitrariness in state action and ensure fairness and equality of treatment, the principle of reasonableness, which logically as well as philosophically is an essential element of equality or non arbitrariness pervades Article 14 like a brooding omnipresence.

 

 

Hi, my name is Naveen Kumar Shelar. I reside in New Delhi, India currently employed full time as a Facility & Administration Professional .

I started out as a Executive Administration late in 2005 evolved into a Facility & Administration with time and now I’m into New office development and Planning . I am mostly involved in new office infrastructure planning, procurement development, execution, and operations, not only this but I love to policies and procedure drafting for office operations.

When I’m not working I am mostly into sports like Cricket or Chess. I’m also into movies and music big time. I love spending time at home on holidays with my mom, dad, wife Anu, daughter Shrishty, Siya  and my pet Ronny, chutki (Labrador) who is simply on his moves all the time to keep you busy at home 🙂

My father and my mother has been a great source of inspiration for my life.

Specialties: New office set up and it’s whole life cycle, in technology driven organizations. Competitive analysis, process compliance & improvements, policy and procedure drafting, legal Agreement drafting.

Article from articlesbase.com

Comment on Art 12 of Constitution of India

Comment on Art 12 of Constitution of India.

The constitution of India has defined the word STATE for the purpose of Part –III and Part IV.

In  STATE OF WEST BANGAL V/S SUBODH GOPAL BOSE, the SC observed that the object of Part III is to provide protection to the rights and freedoms guaranteed under this part by the invasion of State.

Part III and Part IV  carry a theme of Human Rights, Dignity of Individual and also of the unity and dignity of the nation.

These parts respectively as a Negative Obligation of the State and not to Interfere with the Liberty of the Individual, and Positive Obligation of the State to take steps for the welfare of the Individual.

Sate under Art 12 of the constitution has Four Components:

1. The Government and Parliament of India

Government means any department or institution of department; Parliament shall consist of the President, the House of People and Council of State.

The Government and Legislature of each State.

State Legislatures of each State consist of the Governor, Legislative Council, and Legislative Assembly or any of them.

All Local Authorities  and;

It means, Municipal boards Panchayats, Body of Port Commissioner, and other legally entitled to or entrusted by the government.

Other Authorities within the territory of India or under the control of Government of India.

The first two categories included the legislative and executive wings of the Union and State in all their possible varieties. They are quite specific and self explanatory.

Judicial Scrutiny

The letter two categories, particularly the last are not so specific and require some explanation. To give a wider dimension to FR the Judiciary has interpreted “State” in different context at different time.

Principle of Ejusdem Generis:

In University of Madras v/s Santa Bai ,the Madras High Court evolved the principle of ejusdem generis i.e. of the like nature. It means that those authorities are covered under the expression ‘other authorities which perform governmental or sovereign functions.

In Ujjam Bai v/s Union of India the Supreme Court rejected the principle of ejusdem generis .It observed that there is no common genus between the authorities mentioned in Article 12. And by giving the reference of Art 19 (1) (g), and Art 298 which contemplated engagement of state in the performance of commercial activity, and Art 46 promotion of education or economic interest.

In Rajasthan State Electricity Board v/s Mohan Lals it was held that to be State, it is not necessary that the authority must be performing governmental or sovereign functions .It should-
( i ) Be created by the Constitution of India;
(ii ) Have power to make laws;

In R.D.Shetty  v/s International Airport Authority, the Court laid down five tests to be an other authority-
( i ) Entire share capital is owned or managed by State.
( ii ) Enjoys monopoly status.
( iii ) Department of Government is transferred to Corporation.
( iv ) Functional character governmental in essence.
( v ) Deep and pervasive State control.

( f ) Object of Authority
In Ajay Hasia v/s Khalid Mujib the Court observed that the test to know whether a juristic person is State is not how it has been brought but why it has been brought.

( g ) Clearance of five tests
In Union of India v/s R.C.Jain , to be a local authority, an authority must fulfill the following tests-
( i ) Separate legal existence.
( ii ) Function in a defined area.
( iii ) Has power to raise funds.
( iv ) Enjoys autonomy.
( v ) Entrusted by a statute with functions which are usually entrusted to municipalities.

 

In Prem Garg v/s Excise Commissioner H.P. the Supreme Court held that when rule making power of judiciary is concerned, it is State.
Other jurists say that since judiciary has not been specifically mentioned in Article 12, it is not State, therefore if the Judge or magistrates are not note State while there are functioning  as a Judiciary. But if they are also functioning as Administrator then they will be treated as State within the meaning of Art 12.  The Chief Justice of High court shall have functions in dual role :

Chief Justice of High Court
Chief Administrative of High Court.

If any citizen aggrieved by the act of the Chief Justice , while he was function as chief administrator of the high court then that chief justice has no remedy and he shall be treated as a State under the Art 12.

Conclusion
The word ‘State’ under Article 12 has been interpreted by the courts as per the changing times .It has gained wider meaning which ensures that Part-III can be applied to a larger extent. We hope that it would continue to extent its width in coming times.

 

Hi, my name is Naveen Kumar Shelar. I reside in New Delhi, India currently employed full time as a Facility & Administration Professional .

I started out as a Executive Administration late in 2005 evolved into a Facility & Administration with time and now I’m into New office development and Planning . I am mostly involved in new office infrastructure planning, procurement development, execution, and operations, not only this but I love to policies and procedure drafting for office operations.

When I’m not working I am mostly into sports like Cricket or Chess. I’m also into movies and music big time. I love spending time at home on holidays with my mom, dad, wife Anu, daughter Shrishty, Siya  and my pet Ronny, chutki (Labrador) who is simply on his moves all the time to keep you busy at home 🙂

My father and my mother has been a great source of inspiration for my life.

Specialties: New office set up and it’s whole life cycle, in technology driven organizations. Competitive analysis, process compliance & improvements, policy and procedure drafting, legal Agreement drafting.

Article from articlesbase.com

The material above was produced by C-SPAN, with permission granted for non-commercial use with no modifications to the material. The original version can be found here www.c-spanvideo.org
Video Rating: 0 / 5

The United Nations, India and the Gulf War (1990-2001)

Note: This article was written in 2001

Historical Background
Throughout history, the Gulf region has been rife with all kinds of coups, disputes, crises and wars. The overthrow of Mossadeq (1951), the Suez Crisis (1956), the Six Days War (1967), the Iran-Iraq War (1980-88) were some of the crises that marred the region since the Second World War.

The Gulf crisis of 1990 was the result of many long-standing disputes between Iraq and Kuwait, besides other causes such as the emergence of Iraq as a great military power after the Iran-Iraq War, Saddam’s ambitions in the absence of democratic ideals in the Arab world and the intra Arab-Gulf relations.

When Iraq became independent in 1932, it began to assert territorial claims against Kuwait. Iraq claimed that Kuwait has been under the Ottoman Empire as a district of Basra, and that since Iraq is the successor of the empire, Kuwait naturally becomes a part of Iraq. Before 1990, Iraq had attempted to incorporate Kuwait into Iraq on at least two occasions. The first occurred in the late 1930s when King Ghazi of Iraq made demands to unify Kuwait with Iraq. But that demand soon died down when King Ghazi mysteriously died in an accident on 4 April, 1939.

The second occasion occurred in 1961 when Britain and Kuwait formally terminated their relationship under the treaty of January 1899.[1] Iraq, under General Abdul Karim Qasim again made an attempt to incorporate Kuwait into Iraq. On 2 July, 1961, the United Nations Security Council met to discuss the problem. Under paragraph 2, Article 35 of the United Nations, both Iraq and Kuwait submitted their complaint to the UN. The UN Security Council, however, could neither diffuse the crisis nor pass any resolution due to the use of its veto by the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union went along with the Iraqi view and stated that, “The Security Council’s most immediate task in this situation is to condemn the actions of the colonial power and to take measures which lead to the immediate withdrawal of United Kingdom troops from Kuwait.”[2] In the absence of any proper agreements in the UN, the Arab League stepped in and came up with an alternative solution to the problem. It accepted Kuwait’s independence and vowed to defend Kuwait against any external threats or aggression. Iraq, however never really accepted Kuwait’s independence.

With the passage of time, the dispute simmered down. The outbreak of the Iran-Iraq War almost completely overshadowed the Kuwait-Iraq issue and the matter was laid to an uneasy rest during the war. Although several meetings were held between Kuwait and Iraq, the matter could not be settled and it continued until 2 August, 1990 when the dispute took a completely new turn.

In the months preceding the invasion, Saddam made several threatening charges against Kuwait among which are the extraction of Iraqi crude oil by Kuwait in the Rumailah oilfield and Kuwait’s illegal possession of Warba, Bubiyan and Failaka Islands. Saddam accused Kuwait of ‘overproduction’ of oil, which Iraq regarded as “… a kind of war against Iraq.” This overproduction, Saddam claimed, depressed oil prices and raised the revenue of Kuwait which did nothing to help Iraq. He warns Kuwait that its overproduction was “a poison dagger in Iraq’s back,” and that it was “an evil against Iraq… an American plot to deplete Iraq’s oil revenues…” Saddam also threatened to use force “… to put things right… cutting a few throats is better than cutting the means of living.”[3]

The Crisis
Things finally came to a head after the failed Jeddah meeting of 31 July and 1 August, 1990 between Iraq and Kuwait, when, on 2 August, 1990, 100,000 Iraqi troops and 300 tanks rolled into Kuwait with little resistance. Iraq announced soon after that it would withdraw when the situation stabilises and when the “Free Provisional Government of Kuwait” asks them to withdraw.[4] This announcement proved to be a complete sham because on 28 August 1990, Kuwait was formally annexed to Iraq and declared as the 19th Iraqi province. By 4 November, it was announced that Kuwait “no longer exists and that the world should forget about Kuwait’s independence.”

After several resolutions were passed by the UN Security Council condemning the action and imposing sanctions on Iraq, Resolution 678 was finally passed on 29 November 1990 that authorises the coalition forces to “restore international peace and security in the area” by the use of “all necessary means.” The Council, in what it termed a “pause of goodwill” gave Iraq until 15 January 1991 to end its occupation of Kuwait.

In the intervening period, many diplomatic efforts for a peaceful resolution to the crisis were undertaken. The Nonaligned Movement (NAM), the League of Arab States, the European Community, France and four permanent members of the Security Council (Colombia, Cuba, Malaysia and Yemen) forwarded their peace plans, but due to lack of international support, no viable solutions could be found. The 9 January 1991 talks between the US Secretary of State, James Baker and Iraq’s Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz did not make any headway either. A last minute effort by the UN Secretary General was also “unfortunately unsuccessful.” As the Secretary General’s efforts yielded no results and as the deadline came to an end, he remarked, “No one, and no nation can, except with a heavy heart – resort to the other ‘necessary means’ implied by the resolution 678 (1990), knowing in advance that tragic and unpredictable consequences can follow.”

What followed next was the transformation of “Operation Desert Shield” to “Operation Desert Storm.” From 17 January, for the next six weeks, Iraqi military facilities and other installations were bombed. This had serious effect on Iraqi military strength, for, when the ground offensive began at 4am local time on 24 February 1991; the US-led coalition forces met little resistance and easily succeeded in liberating Kuwait on 27 February 1991.

The United Nations and the Gulf Crisis
Soon after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the Security Council met in an emergency meeting to discuss the matter. The Council, at its 2932 meeting on 2 August 199o adopted Resolution 660. The resolution stated that the Security Council was “alarmed by the invasion of Kuwait… by the military forces of Iraq,” and it “condemns the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait” and demanded that “Iraq withdraw immediately and unconditionally.” This resolution was adopted with 14 votes with one abstention (Yemen). The League of Arab States (LAS), Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), Nonaligned Movement (NAM), Nordic States, Western European Union (WEU), NATO, OPEC, World Bank and ICAO have, in their own terms also condemned the invasion.

As Iraq failed to comply with the Security Council Resolution 660, the UN Security Council, on 6 August adopted Resolution 661 which imposes mandatory arms and economic sanctions on Iraq. Iraq, however, calls it “iniquitous and unjust,” “precipitous,” and aimed at starving the Iraqi people.[5] This resolution was adopted with Cuba and Yemen abstaining.

Iraq continued to stand defiant and on 7 August 1990 declared its “comprehensive, eternal and inseparable merger” with Kuwait. With no sign of Iraqi withdrawal or compliance with resolutions 660 and 661, Resolution 662 was adopted on 9 August 1990 which declared the annexation of Kuwait “null and void.” Two other resolutions were adopted by the end of the first month of the crisis. On 18 August the Security Council adopted Resolution 664 which demanded the release of foreign nationals held in Iraq. Resolution 665, adopted on 25 August, calls upon member states to cooperate with the exiled Kuwaiti Government and to stop and search all ships travelling to or leaving Iraq.

Resolution 666, adopted on 13 September 1990 addressed the humanitarian situation in Iraq. It directed the Sanctions Committee to pay particular attention to “children under 15 years of age, expectant mothers, maternity cases, the sick and the elderly” in the determination of food supplies among the civilian population.

The closure of all diplomatic missions in Kuwait by Iraq prompted the Security Council to adopt Resolution 667 on 16 September which expressed the Council’s outrage and its demands for “the immediate release of those foreign nationals as well as all nationals,” and “protect the safety and well-being of diplomatic and consular personnel and premises in Kuwait.”

Resolution 669 of 24 September 1990, “entrusts the (Sanctions) Committee… with the task of examining requests for assistance under the provisions of Article 50” of the UN Charter.[6] The very next day, on 25 September, Resolution 670 confirmed that the sanction against Iraq “applies to all means of transport including aircraft.” It called upon member states to impose an air embargo on Iraq and Kuwait.

On 29 October 1990, the Council, in its Resolution 674 demands that Iraq “desist from taking any third state nationals hostage” and to stop its mistreatment and oppression of either Kuwaitis or foreign nationals. On 28 November 1990, yet another resolution was adopted by the Council. Resolution 677 condemns the Iraqi attempt to alter the demographic composition of the Kuwait population and the destruction of population records.

Iraq’s refusal to comply with any of the Council’s resolutions finally led to the passing of Resolution 678 on 29 November 1990 which authorises the use of “all necessary means” to uphold and implement the resolutions. This resolution was adopted with 12 in favour, 2 against (Cuba and Yemen) and 1 abstention (China). Although the words “the use of force” were not used, it was clearly implied, as the United States maintained. The US said after the voting, “Today’s resolution is very clear. The words authorise the use of force.”[7] The Council gave “Iraq one final opportunity as a pause of goodwill” till 15 January 1991 to comply with the resolutions. This resolution was the first resolution since 27 June 1950 when the Security Council adopted a resolution that authorises the use of force in Korea.

What followed was a flurry of diplomatic activities undertaken by different countries and regional organisations. The UN Secretary General Perez de Cuellar’s last-ditch efforts to persuade Iraq to withdraw failed. Then, the dateline of 15 January 1991 expired. On 16 January, nothing happened; like the lull before a storm. Then all hell broke loose on 17 January with allied forces pounding Iraqi positions. The start of air campaigns was reported by the US to the Security Council on the same day.[8] Saddam Hussein announced on Iraq radio that the “Mother of all Battles” had started. On 22 January 1991, the UN Secretary General appealed to Iraq to comply with the Council resolutions. Later on, he urged Iraq to put “this tragic situation on the road to a peaceful solution.”[9] Several private meetings of the Security Council were held during February and March. But these meetings could not yield any fruitful results.

On the morning of 24 February 1991, ground offensive started and soon, on 27 February, Kuwait was liberated. On 27 February, Iraq announced that it agreed to comply with the UN Security Council Resolution 660 of 1990 and all other resolutions.[10] Iraq also informed the Security Council of the withdrawal of all Iraqi forces from Kuwait, while adding that “American and other pro-aggressor forces” are continuing their attack on the withdrawing Iraqi forces.[11] The coalition operations were stopped at midnight 27-28 February 1991. By 4 March 1991, the Kuwaiti Government resumed its functions in Kuwait City.

Looking back at Resolution 678, we can find some inconsistencies and discrepancies in its provisions. The wordings of the resolution – “use (of) all necessary means” was too vague in the first place, and this led to a number of interpretations. The US interpreted it as the authorisation of the use of force. It can be said that it was a US victory when the resolution was passed. In a speech before the resolution was put to vote, the US representative to the Security Council said, “If Iraq does not reverse its course peacefully, then other necessary measures, including the use of force, should be authorised.”[12] It can also be seen that the resolution was not in conformity with Chapter 7 of the UN Charter though the resolution stated that it acts “under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.” For instance, Article 42 (under Chapter VII) states that forces may be used only when the economic sanctions are inadequate. Article 46 states that “Plans for the application of armed force shall be made by the Security Council with the assistance of the Military Staff Committee.” These provisions were not followed at all under resolution 678. It did not give enough time for the sanctions to take effect. This was also the Indian view.[13] The resolution also did not mention any Military Staff Committee. Moreover, with the abstention of China from the resolution, it failed to have the required concurrence of the five permanent members.

On 27 February 1991, it was President Bush who ordered the ceasefire and who proclaimed ‘victory’. The Secretary General, on 28 February said, “We hope it is the beginning of the end of this terrible tragedy.”

On 2 March 1991, resolution 686 was adopted by a vote of 11 in favour, 1 against (Cuba) and 3 abstentions (China, India and Yemen). While reaffirming that all the resolutions adopted before continue to have “full force and effect”, it laid down several preconditions for the ceasefire which Iraq was obliged to immediately implement. It also recognised that during the implementation of resolution 686, the right to use “all necessary measures” under resolution 678 will “remain valid.”

Resolution 687 was adopted on 3 April 1991 which finally and formally declared a ceasefire. This resolution was adopted by 12 votes to one (Cuba) with two abstentions (Yemen and Ecuador). Some of the main provisions of the resolution included guarantee of boundary and allocation of islands between Iraq and Kuwait, deployment of a United Nations observer unit to monitor the demilitarised zone, destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision, of all chemical and biological weapons and all ballistic missiles, UN inspection of Iraq’s biological, chemical and missile capabilities, return of all Kuwaiti property seized by Iraq, payment of compensation by Iraq, continuation of sanctions, repatriation of all Kuwaiti and third-country nationals, renouncement of the practice of terrorism and declaration of ceasefire.

Iraq called this resolution “unjust” and “iniquitous” and was “an unprecedented assault” on Iraq.[14] But Iraq, having no other choice, had to accept the resolution on 6 April 1991.[15] This resolution was also criticised in the following words: “It was not a negotiated agreement but a unilaterally formulated one, imposed on Iraq. The peace was dictated. The Council exceeded its powers because its Charter nowhere empowers the UN to impose a settlement on parties to a dispute.”[16] With the Iraqi acceptance of the resolution, the ceasefire formally came into effect.

Post-War Situation and the UN
Soon after the ceasefire, the UN took steps to actively participate in reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts in Iraq and Kuwait. Several UN missions and teams went to Iraq and Kuwait to assess the humanitarian situation there. Their reports highlighted hunger, thirst, disease, desolation, destruction and death. According to one report, 170,000 children under five would die in 1991 because of the war and economic sanctions. It was remarked, “The situation was absurd. While UN and other agencies were struggling with totally inadequate resources to meet the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people, another UN body, the Security Council was insisting that Iraq be denied the opportunity to sell its own oil in order to buy food, medicines and other supplies.”[17]

A direct effect of the ceasefire resolution, particularly the continuation of sanctions was that “There now began a massive onslaught on the Iraqi civilian population – denied the means to rebuild a totally shattered social and industrial infrastructure, denied uncontaminated drinking water, denied medical facilities, and denied food in adequate quantities. The US policy represented one of the most comprehensive campaigns of biological warfare – denying relief to a diseased and starving people – in modern times.”[18]

Some more resolutions were adopted later that year – 688 (5 April); 692 (20 May); 697, 699 and 700 (17 June); 706 and 707 (15 August); 712 (19 September); 713 (25 September); 715 (11 October) – dealing with the post-war situation and reparation in Iraq.

In retrospect, it can be said that the Gulf War was not an UN war at all. The UN was marginalised on all occasions. It was the US that ran the whole operation. The US, it seemed, was clearly intent on using force right from the beginning. Even before the invasion of 2 August 1990, the US having knowledge of the threat did not warn the UN and made no efforts to stop it. It never directly negotiated with Iraq after the ‘storm’ nor was the UN asked to act as mediator.[19]

When the war finally came, the UN Secretary General remarked that “… the war in the Gulf is not UN war, and the World Body has no control over it… we are informed through the Security Council about military operation but after they have taken place.”[20] He also said, “We cannot consider it as an UN war in the sense that there is no UN flag. They are not in blue UN helmets. There is no UN control over military operations.”

Several peace plans came forward from different quarters, even from Iraq. However, none of them could succeed in bringing the war to an end, for; they are rejected by the US. The UN could do nothing. “The Americans had used the Security Council when it suited them, calling it into session again and again when Iraq invaded Kuwait and accepting resolutions critical of Iraq in order to ratify its own condemnation of Iraq. But once the war began, the Americans with enthusiastic British support, did all they could to stop the Security Council playing any part, and when they failed to hold the line, made sure its proceedings were in secret. Perez de Cuellar, who should have been a man at the centre of events, was never consulted and never informed of what was going on.”[21]

India and the Gulf Crisis
Historically, there have always been good relations between India and Iraq. Therefore when Iraq invaded Kuwait on 2 August 1990, India was in a big dilemma. Neither did India want to offend Saddam Hussein nor did it want to go against the UN. India decided to toe the middle line for sometime by making a statement that, “India was opposed to the use of force in any form of relations between states.”

The major policy objective of India under Prime Minister VP Singh was the repatriation of the 170,000-180,000 Indians stranded in Kuwait. From August, Air India started massive airlifting operations and by October, almost 160,000 Indians were returned home. The VP Singh government later denounced the Iraqi invasion and demanded the immediate withdrawal of Iraqi force from Kuwait. However, India did not take any further steps to resolve the crisis. After resolution 661 was adopted, India’s import of crude oil from Iraq stopped. This greatly affected India’s earnings and India had to as the UN for assistance.[22]

On November 1990, there was a change of government in India. VP Singh was replaced by Chandrasekhar of Janata (S). The Chandrasekhar government too remained a passive spectator to the Gulf Crisis. There were no active diplomatic efforts on the part of India to diffuse the crisis. However, there were some shifts in the Indian stand now. There was a general impression that India was toeing the US line. India now blamed Saddam Hussein and Iraq for the crisis.

Just before the air campaign, the Foreign Minister VC Shukla and the Deputy Foreign Minister Digvijay Singh visited several countries to bring about some solution to the problem, but to no avail. When the war finally came, India maintained a conspicuous silence. The Indian peace proposal fell on deaf ears. The late Rajiv Gandhi also put forward his peae-package while criticising the government for reducing India to a “hapless spectator.” His main focus was on the replacement of the US-led coalition by a UN force and the withdrawal of Iraqi forces.[23]

Adding to the confusion was the discourse that US planes were being refuelled at Bombay since 9 January 1991. It caused a great political turmoil in India, when major political parties started to point their fingers at each other. The Congress, the Janata Dal and the left parties severely criticised the government for being an ‘ally’ of the US. The BJP on the other hand, backed the government arguing that India must support the UN and extend all help to the coalition forces.[24]

Some analysis pointed out that the government’s decision to permit the refuelling was because of the improved relations between the US and India. Besides, the economic situation in India had forced it to ask an IMF loan of 1.8 billion dollars. Then, three days after the loan was sanctioned, the refuelling started. No one believed that this was a coincidence.[25]

Though the government resisted and dogged the salvo of criticisms for some time, the Congress’s threat to withdraw support led the government to stop the refuelling facility provided to the Americans.

The Nonaligned Movement also came in for a lot of criticisms for its actions (or more appropriately, inactions). Iraq and Kuwait are both members of the NAM. The first high-level meeting of NAM to discuss the Gulf Crisis was held on 11 September 1990. This meeting was attended by the Indian Foreign Minister IK Gujral. It was announced that NAM would set up a ‘catalyst group’ to bring the crisis to an end.

The Belgrade meeting of NAM on 11 February 1991 produced no desired results. But it was decided that they should send a team to both the sides. The team to visit Baghdad on 23 February was to be composed of the Foreign Ministers of India, Cuba, Iran and Yugoslavia. The beginning of the ground war however blew the plan into oblivion. NAM could no longer play any role as the focus was on the UN and the US.

India’s role through the war fared no better. When the Iraqi invasion took place, India was not a member of the Security Council; therefore it did not take part in any of the meetings of the UN Security Council and its resolutions. India however expressed its support to the UN. India’s dilemma began only after 1 January 1991 when it became a member of the Security Council. India abstained, along with China and Yemen in the first voting of the first resolution after 678 on 2 March 1991.

India voted for the ceasefire resolution (687) after certain clauses were changed with its insistence. India had reservations with some provisions relating to the boundary between Iraq and Kuwait and also with the provisions relating to the destruction of Iraqi nuclear weapons because India had apprehensions that they would have further implications on the Kashmir issue and India’s own nuclear programme.[26]

Throughout the war, India was criticised for not playing any decisive role, and seems to be only interested in the repatriation of the stranded Indians in Kuwait and in the continuation of its oil supplies. Besides, India did not take any decisive steps as a regional leader and as an important member of NAM to diffuse the crisis. The provision of refuelling facilities and its subsequent withdrawal also showed India’s indecisiveness and reluctance to play any pro-active role in international politics. It also seems that India’s role “… ended up in solving neither Iraq nor Kuwait and certainly not our own country.”[27]

However, to arrive at a balanced assessment of India’s role in the crisis, certain factors must be understood. In the first place, the government in India was a minority government. The Janata (S) had only 68 members out of 473 in the Lok Sabha. The Congress support with 193 members was vital to its survival. Thus, it was unable to act decisively. The subsequent shift in India’s foreign policy towards the US-led coalition should also be seen in the light of the economic situation in India. This shift may also have been caused by certain elements within the government that are pro-US. Moreover, India, through NAM could not act because of the attitudes of the coalition force under the US as well as that of Saddam Hussein.

Post-War Developments (up to 2001): a chronology
1992: The UN Security Council resolutions 706 and 712 (1991) had allowed Iraq to sell petroleum worth up to 1,600 million dollars over a six months period, the revenue from which was to be controlled by the UN. Iraq in 1992 rejected the terms of the resolutions and withdrew from all negotiations on this issue. Resolution 778 was adopted on 2 October 1992 to put pressure on Iraq to accept resolutions 706 and 712. Iraqi request to lift sanctions was rejected.

1993: In 1993, UN weapons inspectors arrived in Iraq. Another team abruptly left Iraq after Iraq refused the setting up of surveillance equipments at its missile testing locations. For the rest of the year, talks between the UN and Iraq remained inconclusive.

1994: In March 1994, another Iraqi request to lift sanctions was again rejected. With this, a division within the Council emerged. Russia, France and China are in favour of lifting the sanctions. On October, in an apparent move to draw attention to its plight, Iraq moved its forces towards Kuwait. Iraq announced later that it would withdraw. Prompted by this, the Council on 10 October passed resolution 949 that warns Iraq to desist from using its forces against its neighbours or the UN. By December, it was announced by the head of UNSCOM that he believed Iraq no longer have any nuclear or ballistic weapons.

1995: In 1995, another resolution (986) was adopted that was aimed at the partial resumption of exports of Iraqi oil. In the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the UN held at New York during 22-24 October 1995, the Iraqi Vice President Tariq Aziz said, “unipolarism” led to “hasty application of… sanctions and the use of armed force.” This has “deprived… people of their basic human rights…” and led to “the death of thousands of children, women and the elderly due to lack of food and medication.”[28]

1996: In early January 1996, Iraq indicated its willingness to enter into a dialogue on a ‘oil-for-food’ agreement with the UN. After several rounds of talks, it was finally agreed that up to 4000 million dollars worth of Iraqi oil would be sold a year to purchase food and medicine. On 27 March, the Council adopted resolution 1051 that established a system to monitor all exports to Iraq that could be used for the production of weapons of mass destruction. This was apparently prompted by the announcement made by the head of UNSCOM Rolf Ekeus that Iraq was in possession of missiles and biological weapons.

1997: After the deliberate violation of the air exclusion zone by Iraq in April and the subsequent remark of the US president that Saddam is the biggest threat and the refusal of Iraq to allow arms inspectors to work, the Council passed yet another resolution (1115) on 21 June 1997, warning Iraq that more sanctions may come. In October, the Revolutionary Command Council criticised the high proportion of Americans in UNSCOM. Resolution 1137 was adopted that warned Iraq to stop expelling US personnel. In December, Iraq suspended oil exports.

1998: Oil exports from Iraq resumed in January. Security Council resolution 1153 adopted on 20 February doubled the six-monthly income permitted to the Iraqi government to 5200 million dollars. Resolution 1175 of June continued the distribution plan of humanitarian supplies. Iraq was also permitted to improve its oil productions. Just when it seems that things will get better, the ‘discovery’ of VX spoilt it all. In December, the US and UK launched attacks on Iraq. This elicited widespread demonstrations across the Middle East.

1999: In January, after the French proposal of replacement of UNSCOM was opposed by the US, Iraq voted in parliament renouncing all previous commitments made to the Security Council. In March, reports came that the CIA has been using UNSCOM as a cover for operations in Iraq. New demands were made for the replacement of UNSCOM by a new system of monitoring. In December, the Council adopted Resolution 1284 that replaced UNSCOM by the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) which was charged with monitoring Iraq.

2000: In January, the IAEA inspectors went into Iraq. The sanctions imposed on Iraq had a deep impact on the civilian population. In February, the ICRC reported that infant mortality had trebled since 1990, and water supplies had deteriorated. Air strikes still continued.[29]

2001: In mid-January, the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz, to mark the 10th anniversary of the Gulf War stated, “Kuwait deserved invasion” and warned that Baghdad would fight back if the US continued its anti-Iraq policy under the new US President George W. Bush.[30] On 16 February, about two dozen US and British warplanes bombed five “military targets” in and around Baghdad in the biggest strike against Iraq since 1998. In response, Iraq announced that “… their aggression will achieve nothing but failure.”[31] This strike came under criticisms from China, Russia, France, India, Egypt, Syria, Canada and Turkey who felt that the US and Britain had overstepped their line. They agreed that strikes must be sanctioned by the Security Council.
Prime Minister AB Vajpayee slams the US for its air raid and said that India was in favour of lifting sanctions, and that the no-fly zones “do not come within the framework of the UN Security Council resolutions.”[32]

Again on 22 February, US warplanes strike Iraqi’s air-defence targets in northern Iraq. These strikes were followed by large demonstrations with the demonstrators calling for jihad.

Conclusion
As the current process of sanctions, strikes, inspection, verification and the likes continue, it is very likely that Iraq could use it in his own favour. Using the “sympathy strategy”, Iraq can get oil deals from France, Russia and China. Moreover, with more frequent attacks on Iraq, more Gulf War allies are now siding with Iraq, Egypt and Syria had already signed trade agreements with Iraq. Even within the Security Council, the crack has become more vocal in their criticism of the embargo imposed on Iraq. The Iraqi people do not have much of a choice except to rally behind Saddam Hussein.[33]

However, the US and UK are still very firm in their commitment to contain Saddam Hussein who had been labelled by them as the most dangerous man in the world. On the other hand, Iraq is determined to stay defiant. Iraq now asserts that UN arms inspectors will never be allowed back into the country.[34] Meanwhile, the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan exhorted the Security Council to find a common ground on Iraq.

It is now very important that both the sides change their attitude before talking about peace. To assure any lasting peace, it is imperative to strike at the roots of instability. For this, the Persian Gulf countries need to be well integrated, embark on confidence building measures, create regional alliance and common security and build up non-offensive defence.[35]

Even after ten years, the crisis in the Gulf is still to be solved. One is left to wonder when it will be. For the moment, however, the end of the crisis is nowhere in sight.

June 2001

END NOTES

[1] Agreement between the British government and the Sheikh of Kuwait regarding the non-reception of foreign representatives and non-cession of territory to foreign powers or subjects, 23 January 1899 in Lauterpacht et al (eds) The Kuwait Crisis: Basic Documents (1991)

[2] Security Council Official Records (SCOR), sixteenth year, 958th meeting, 5 July 1961, paras 55, 65

[3] Iraq TV, 8pm (IST), 17 July 1990. Quoted in Gazi Ibdewi Abdulghafour, The Tragedy: Iraq’s Invasion of Kuwait. Genesis, Consequences and Conflict Resolution (New Delhi: Lancers Books, 1993) p. 67

[4] S/PV, 2932, 2 August 1990

[5] UN Document S/20503, 13 August 1990

[6]  Article 50 of the UN Charter states, “If preventive or enforcement measures against any State are taken by the Security Council, any other state, whether a member of the United Nations or not, which finds itself confronted with special economic problems arising from the carrying out of these measures shall have the right to consult the Security Council with regard to solution of the problems.”

[7] S/PV, 2963, 29 November 1990

[8]  UN Document S/22090, 17 January 1991

[9]  UN Document S/22172, 30 January 1991

[10]  UN Document S/22275 and S/22276, 27 February 1991

[11]  UN Document S/22274, 27 February 1991 and S/22288, 28 February 1991

[12] UN Document S/PV 2963, 29 November 1990

[13] JK Baral and JN Mahanty, “India and the Gulf Crisis: The Response of a Minority Government,” Pacific Affairs, Vol. 65, No. 3, Fall 1992, pp. 368-84.

[14] UN Document S/22496, 6 April 1991

[15] UN Document S/22480, 11 April 1991

[16] Gazi Ibdewi Abdulghafour, The Tragedy, p. 139

[17] Geoff Simons, The Scourging of Iraq: Sanctions, Law and National Justice,( Basingstoke; Macmillan, 2nd Edition, 1998) p. 52

[18] Geoff Simons, Iraq-Primus Inter Pariahs: A Crisis Chronology, 1997-1998 (Basingstoke; Macmillan, 1999) p. 54

[19] Pierre Salinger, “The United States, The nited Nations and the Gulf War,” Middle East Journal, Vol. 49, No. 4, Autumn 1995, pp. 593-613

[20] UN Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar in an interview to PTI-TV, 5 February 1991

[21] John Bulloch and Harvey Morris, Saddam’s War: The Origins of the Kuwait Conflict and the International Response (London; Faber and Faber, 1991) p. 200

[22] UN Document  S/21711, 5 September 1990

[23] The Times of India (New Delhi), 21 January 1991.

[24] JK Banal and JN Mohanty, “India and the Gulf Crisis,” p. 374-75

[25] Ibid. p. 377

[26] Ibid. p. 383

[27] Deccan Herald, 19 April 1991

[28] Address by Taha M. Marouf, Iraq Vice President in UN at 50: Statements by World Leaders, New York, 22-24 October 1995 (NY;UN, 1996)

[29] Middle East and North Africa 2001 (London, Europa Publications 2000, 47th Edition 2001, 2000) pp. 578-599

[30] Hindustan Times, (New Delhi) 16 January 2001

[31] Hindustan Times (New Delhi), 17 February 2001

[32] Times of India (New Delhi), 18 February 2001

[33] Times of India (New Delhi) 21 February 2001.

[34] Hindustan Times (New Delhi), 28 February 2001

[35] Farah Naaz, “Security in the Persian Gulf,” Strategic Analysis, Vol. XXIV, No. 12, March 2001, pp. 2257-2271

The author has a Ph. D. in International Politics from the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

His areas of interest are Southeast Asia, Southern Africa and Latin America and writes mainly on the politics of regional integration in these areas. He also writes on issues pertaining to South Asia, particularly on India’s Northeast.

Article from articlesbase.com

How freedom movement is related to social and religious reform movement in pre independence India: An Analysis

“freedom movement and social reforms in India”

Introduction

After the completion of five decades of our existence as a democratic, sovereign republic, it is but appropriate that we look back at the track that we have traversed, take note of our successes and failures in different spheres of our national life, consolidate the gains and correct the mistakes, and march ahead towards a better future. Hence this discussion on systemic reforms and its relationship with freedom movements have been discussed here.

The term Indian independence movement incorporates various national and regional campaigns, agitations and efforts of both Non violent and Militant philosophy. The term encompasses a wide spectrum of political organizations, philosophies, and movements whose aim was to free India from the clutches of Britishers and also to bring mass nationalisation and awakening among Indians.

The various socio-reforms and religious movements which took place in India during the British rule were the expression of the rising of national consciousness and spread of the liberal ideas of the west among the Indian people. These movements increasingly tended to have a national scope and programme of reconstruction in the social and religious spheres. There are certain inter relationships which exist between the way in which freedom movements started and social and religious reforms and how leaders faces problems in bringing the people together which were divided on the line of religion, language, caste, class and culture so that the notion of liability can be imbibed in them. There were many factors responsible for bringing the masses together for freedom movements and one of the ways was bringing social, economic and political reforms.

The enthusiasm of social reform waned considerably with the progress of political struggle, and it was deliberately disassociated itself from the political movement. But the spread of natural course of evolution and education increased the tempo of demand for social reforms and widened its horizons. The demand came from both individuals and organisations. For example the effort of Indian National Social Conference were ably supplemented by others associations and social reformists. The role played by freedom fighters, social and religious reformist as well as organisations and associations are equally important.

The British conquests and the consequent dissemination of colonial culture and ideology had led to an inevitable introspection about the strength and weakness of indigenous culture and institutions. The response was indeed, varied but the need to reform social and religious life was commonly shared convictions. The spirit of reform embraces the whole of India and this was possible only because of rising Nationalism. The main thread which runs through the entire socio religious reforms was the presence of the feeling of unity and mass integration of the people. Two important intellectual criteria which informed the reform movements were rationalism and religious universalism. Social relevance was judged by a rationalist critique. This century witnessed therefore two renaissances in Indian history:

Indian struggle for freedom Socio religious awakening of the masses

Therefore, my project basically deal with the interrelationship of freedom movements and social reforms and how struggle for freedom helped to attained the very needed objective of social reforms with the help of freedom fighters, social reformers as well as associations and organisations.

1.1 Research methodology:

The methodology adopted in making this project is descriptive, analytical and explanatory using quantitative as well as qualitative methods. The researcher has used historical, analytical and descriptive method of writing. Thus both primary data i.e., data collected directly from the subjects and secondary data is used. The study was undertaken in a planned manner to make the systematic investigation of the history of India.

1.2 Objective of the Project:

The objective of the project is to undertake the study of Indian struggle for Independence and social reforms movements prevalent in Indian society at that level of time. My project basically deals with the interrelationship of freedom movements with the socio-religious reforms of Indian society and how it played the most important role in mass nationalisation and integration of the society.

1.3 Hypotheses:

The hypotheses formulated in this project are:

How freedom movement is related to social reforms in Indian society? Did it lead to the awakening of mass nationalisation?

1.4 Mode of Citation:

The researcher has followed a uniform mode of citation throughout this project.

1.5 Literature Survey/Sources:

The researcher has collected the primary data in the form of information collected from different sources like

Literature in the form of books and articles, Mainly taken the help of history literature Internet

1.6 Scope and Limitation

My project basically deals with the relationship between freedom movements and social reforms in India. Though its scope is very large as I have to deal with all aspects of India’s fight for freedom and how this freedom movement was basically related to social reforms. How freedom fighters, social reformers and organisation played important role in mass nationalisation, still I tried to narrow down its scope only to the main events that transformed the entire course of Indian History or one can say that it had brought Indian Renaissance.

Chapter: 2

Interrelationship between Freedom Movements and Social Reforms

The Indian National Movement was undoubtedly one of the biggest mass movements modern society has ever seen. It was a movement which galvanised millions of people of all classes and ideologies into political action and brought to its knees a mighty colonial empire. Various aspects of the Indian National Movement, especially Gandhian political strategy, are particularly relevant to these movements in societies that broadly function within the confines of the rule of law, and are characterized by a democratic and basically liberation polity. The result of freedom movement is basically such where state power was not seized in a single historical moment of revolution, but through prolonged popular struggle on a moral, political and ideological level; where counts of hegemony were built up over the years through progressive stages; where the phases of struggle alternated with “passive” phases.[1]

The Indian freedom of Independence is perhaps one of the best examples of the creation of an extremely wide movement with a common aim in which diverse political and ideological currents could co-exist and work and simultaneously continue to contend for overall ideological and political hegemony over it. What are the outstanding features of a freedom struggle? A major aspect is the values and modern ideals on which the movement itself was based and the broad socio-economic and political vision of its leadership.[2]

Now a question arises; how to interrelate between the Indian freedom of independence and social reforms movements. Before analyzing the full concept of these aspects, it is necessary to establish a relationship between the two. When the struggle for freedom movement started, the leaders faces the major problem of mass mobilization as peoples are divided on the basis of caste, religion, race, class, culture etc. All the peoples have to be integrated so that the feeling of nationality may be imbibed in them. The main framework of our national leaders is the mass appeal which motivated all section of society to become one not only against the exploitative British practises but also against economic, political and social degradations of Indians. The Indian leaders were facing difficulties in the liberalization on two fronts:

Liberalization on horizontal terms that is mass liberalization. Liberalization on vertical terms that is elite representation.

The liberalization of these forces was extremely necessary to ignite the sense of bringing social and economic reforms along with the much needed religious reforms. Social stratification, values, beliefs, political ideas and administration were the modes to respond to the process of encroachment from outside, i.e.

Colonialization Imperializm Modernization

Moreover, emotional integration was also necessary for bringing people together when they had to brought up within the umbrella of nationalism. Basically, nationalisation is a process or product of historical conjecture of social forces through which the linkage not only established and expounded but also qualitatively strengthened. Nationalization is not a product but outcome of maturing social process.

The role of famous freedom fighters such as Mahatma Gandhi, Gopal Krishna Gokale, Lala Lajpat, Rabindra Nath Tagore, Sarojini Naidu, Annie Beasant, and the part played by associations were also very important. Like we had Indian National Congress, Bombay Association, Indian National Association Servants of India Society etc. Through the process of socio-economic reforms, they want to bring freedom. Dissolution of prejudices among various classes was an essential instrument to generate the feeling responding to the problems of the nationalisation. These associations became significant forum for criticizing the policies of British government and also they demanded various changes in the political and social scenario. Through national movement a sort of feeling of awakening was there among masses. For example in 1905 Gopal Krishna Gokhale founded Indian National Association of Servants Society whose aim was to train national missionary to promote national interest. Gandhiji also gave new dimensions to INC and thus it became mass organisation and spread to all over India. There were many other organisations like Muslim League, Home Rule League, Hindu Mahasabha, All India Depressed Class Association, All India Depressed Class Federation, all these mass associations had played a key role in Indian freedom struggle.

Moreover, Gandhiji theory of “trusteeship” also gathered support from ideologies and philosophies. Legal environment was also created to facilitate the working of these associations and organisations. Then, mass movement and national awakening of people also played a major role in the freedom struggle like the famous movements of Non Cooperation, Swadeshi, Quit India movement. These movements were the projections of organisational strength of masses and later on it also helped in bringing social reforms in country by eminent leaders and freedom fighters.

Therefore, in the process of freedom movement, freedom fighters could not directly mobilize or influence the people, so they thought of bringing social reforms so that the fight for Independence could have mass appeal.

Further, the Nationalist strategy alternated between phases of massive mass struggle which broke existing laws and phases of intense political agitational work within the framework. The strategy accepted that mass movements by thier very nature had ups and downs, troughs and peaks, for it was not possible for the vast mass of people to engage continuously in a long drawn out extra legal battle that involved considerable sacrifice. Therefore, it becomes necessary to adopt constructive work for mass movements like promotion of khadi, national education, Hindu Muslim unity, the boycott of foreign clothes and liquor, the social upliftment of Harijans formed an important part of nationalist strategy especially during its constitutional phases.

The Indian National Movement for the struggle of freedom and its relation to mass awakening was a popular multi class movement. It was not a movement led or controlled by bourgeoisie nor did they exercise influence over it. Moreover, its multi class, popular and open ended character meant that it was open to the alternative hegemony of socialist ideas. In time, freedom for struggle developed into one of the greatest mass movements in world history. It derived its strength, especially before 1918, from militancy and self sacrificing spirit of the masses. For example Satyagraha as a form of struggle was based on the active participation of the people and on the sympathy and support of the non participating millions. Millions of man and women were mobilized in myriad ways; they sustained the movement by their grit and determination. Starting out as a movement of nationalist intelligentsia, the national movement succeeded on mobilizing the youth, women and urban pretty bourgeoisie, the urban and rural poor, urban and rural artisans, peasants, workers, capitalists and a large number of smaller landlords.[3]

Chapter: 3

The rise of Indian Independence Movement

The term Indian independence movement incorporates various national and regional campaigns, agitations and efforts of both Nonviolent and Militant philosophy. The term encompasses a wide spectrum of political organizations, philosophies, and movements which had the common aim of ending the British Colonial Authority as well as other colonial administrations in South Asia. The initial resistance to the movement can be traced back to the very beginnings of Colonial Expansion in Karnataka by the Portuguese in the 16th century and by the British East India Company in Bengal, in the middle and late 1700s. The first organised militant movement was in Bengal, but it later took political stage in the form of a mainstream movement in the then newly formed Indian National Congress, with prominent moderate leaders seeking only their basic rights to appear for civil services examinations and more rights, economic in nature, for the people of the soil.

They used moderate methods of prayer, petition and protest (3p’s). The beginning of the early 1900s saw a more radical approach towards political independence proposed by leaders such as the Lal Bal Pal and Sri Aurobindo. Militant nationalism also emerged in the first decades, culminating in the failed Indo-German Pact and Ghadar Conspiracy during the World War I.

The end of the freedom struggle saw the Congress adopt the policies of nonviolence led by Mohandas Gandhi. Other leaders, such as Subhash Chandra Bose (called Netaji), later came to adopt a military approach to the movement. Yet there were others like Swami Sahajanand Saraswati who along with political freedom wanted economic freedom of peasants and toiling masses of the country. The World War II period saw the peak of the movements like INA movement led by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose from East Asia and Quit India movement.

The independence movement also served as a major catalyst for similar movements in other parts of the world, leading to the eventual disintegration and dismantling of the British Empire and its replacement with the Commonwealth of Nations. Gandhi’s philosophy of nonviolent resistance inspired the American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968) led by Martin Luther King, Jr., the quest for democracy in Myanmar led by Aung San Suu Kyi and the African National Congress’s struggle against apartheid in South Africa led by Nelson Mandela. However not all these leaders adhered to Gandhi’s strict principle of nonviolence and non resistance.[4]

3.1 Background for the rise of Indian  Independence Movement

European traders came to Indian shores with the arrival of the Portuguese explorer Vasco da Gama in 1498 at the port of Calicut in search of the lucrative spice trade. After the 1757 Battle of Plassey, during which the British army under Robert Clive defeated the Nawab of Bengal, the British East India Company established itself. This is widely seen as the beginning of the British Raj in India. The Company gained administrative rights over Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa in 1765 after the Battle of Buxar. They then annexed Punjab in 1849 after the death of Maharaja Ranjit Singh in 1839 and the First Anglo-Sikh War (1845–46) and then the Second Anglo-Sikh War (1848–49).

The British parliament enacted a series of laws to handle the administration of the newly-conquered provinces, including the Regulating Act of 1773, the India Act of 1784, and the Charter Act of 1813; all enhanced the British government’s rule. In 1835 English was made the medium of instruction. Western-educated Hindu elites sought to rid Hinduism of controversial social practices, including the varna (caste) system, child marriage, and sati. Literary and debating societies initiated in Bombay and Madras became forums for open political discourse. The educational attainment and skilful use of the press by these early reformers created the growing possibility for effecting broad reforms within colonial India, all without compromising larger Indian social values and religious practices.

Even while these modernising trends influenced Indian society, Indians increasingly despised British rule. As the British increasingly dominated the continent, they grew increasingly abusive of local customs by, for example, staging parties in mosques, dancing to the music of regimental bands on the terrace of the Taj Mahal, using whips to force their way through crowded bazaars (as recounted by General Henry Blake), and mistreating sepoys. In the years after the annexation of Punjab in 1849, several mutinies among sepoys broke out; these were put down by force

3.2 The Indian Rebellion of 1857

The Indian Rebellion of 1857 was a period of uprising in the northern and central India against British rule in 1857–58. The rebellion was the result of decades of ethnic and cultural differences between Indian soldiers and their British officers. The specific reason that triggered the rebellion was the rumoured use of cow and pig fat in 557 calibre Pattern 1853 Enfield (P/53) rifle cartridges. Soldiers had to break the cartridges with their teeth before loading them into their rifles. So if there was cow and pig fat, it would be offensive to Hindu and Muslim soldiers, respectively. In February 1857, sepoys (Indian soldiers in the British army) refused to use their new cartridges. The British claimed to have replaced the cartridges with new ones and tried to make sepoys make their own grease from beeswax and vegetable oils, but the rumour persisted.

In March 1857, Mangal Pandey, a soldier of the 34th Native Infantry in Barrackpore, attacked his British sergeant and wounded an adjutant. General Hearsay, who said Pandey was in some kind of “religious frenzy,” ordered a jemadar to arrest him but the jemadar refused. Mangal Pandey was hanged on 7 April along with the jemadar. The whole regiment was dismissed as a collective punishment. On 10 May, when the 11th and 20th Cavalry assembled, they broke rank and turned on their commanding officers. They then liberated the 3rd Regiment, and on 11 May the sepoys reached Delhi and were joined by other Indians. The Red Fort, the residence of the last Mughal emperor Bahadur, was attacked and captured by the sepoys. They demanded that he reclaim his throne. He was reluctant at first, but eventually agreed to the demands and became the leader of the rebellion.

Soon, the revolt spread throughout northern India. Revolts broke out in places like Meerut, Jhansi, Kanpur, Lucknow etc. The British were slow to respond, but eventually responded with brute force. British moved regiments from the Crimean War and diverted European regiments headed for China to India. The British fought the main army of the rebels near Delhi in Badl-ke-Serai and drove them back to Delhi before laying siege on the city. The siege of Delhi lasted roughly from 1 July to 31 August. After a week of street fighting, the British retook the city.

Despite the sepoys limitations and weaknesses, their effort to emancipate the country from foreign rule was patriotic act and a progressive step. Even in failure it served a grand purpose: a source of inspiration for the national liberation movement which later achieved what the revolt could not. Freedom fighters got the understanding that for involving masses for nationalization they need thier motivation and support and this could be done only by inculcating a sense of nationality through reforms.[5]

3.3 Its Aftermath

The war of 1857 was a major turning point in the history of modern India. The British abolished the British East India Company and replaced it with direct rule under the British crown. A Viceroy was appointed to represent the Crown. In proclaiming the new direct-rule policy to “the Princes, Chiefs, and Peoples of India,” Queen Victoria promised equal treatment under British law, but Indian mistrust of British rule had become a legacy of the 1857 rebellion.

The British embarked on a program in India of reform and political restructuring, trying to integrate Indian higher castes and rulers into the government. They stopped land grabs, decreed religious tolerance and admitted Indians into the civil service, albeit mainly as subordinates. They also increased the number of British soldiers in relation to native ones and allowed only British soldiers to handle artillery. Bahadur Shah was exiled to Rangoon, Burma where he died in 1862, finally bringing the Mughal dynasty to an end. In 1877, Queen Victoria took the title of Empress of India.

3.4 Rise of Organised Movements

The decades following the Sepoy Rebellion were a period of growing political awareness, manifestation of Indian public opinion and emergence of Indian leadership at national and provincial levels. Dadabhai Naoroji formed East India Association in 1867,and Surendranath Banerjee founded Indian National Association in 1876. Inspired by a suggestion made by A.O. Hume, a retired British civil servant, seventy-three Indian delegates met in Mumbai in 1885 and founded the Indian National Congress. They were mostly members of the upwardly mobile and successful western-educated provincial elites, engaged in professions such as law, teaching, and journalism. At its inception, the Congress had no well-defined ideology and commanded few of the resources essential to a political organization. It functioned more as a debating society that met annually to express its loyalty to the British Raj and passed numerous resolutions on less controversial issues such as civil rights or opportunities in government, especially the civil service. These resolutions were submitted to the Viceroy’s government and occasionally to the British Parliament, but the Congress’s early gains were meagre. Despite its claim to represent all India, the Congress voiced the interests of urban elites; the number of participants from other economic backgrounds remained negligible.

The influences of socio-religious groups such as Arya Samaj (started by Swami Dayanand Saraswati) and Brahmo Samaj (founded, amongst others, by Raja Ram Mohan Roy) became evident in pioneering reform of Indian society. The inculcation of religious reform and social pride was fundamental to the rise of a public movement for complete nationhood. The work of men like Swami Vivekananda, Ramakrishna Paramhansa, Sri Aurobindo, Subramanya Bharathy, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Rabindranath Tagore and Dadabhai Naoroji spread the passion for rejuvenation and freedom.

By 1900, although the Congress had emerged as an all-India political organization, its achievement was undermined by its singular failure to attract Muslims, who felt that their representation in government service was inadequate. Attacks by Hindu reformers against religious conversion, cow slaughter, and the preservation of Urdu in Arabic script deepened their concerns of minority status and denial of rights if the Congress alone were to represent the people of India. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan launched a movement for Muslim regeneration that culminated in the founding in 1875 of the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College at Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh (renamed Aligarh Muslim University in 1920). Its objective was to educate wealthy students by emphasizing the compatibility of Islam with modern western knowledge. The diversity among India’s Muslims, however, made it impossible to bring about uniform cultural and intellectual regeneration.

3.5 Rise of Indian nationalism

The first spurts of nationalistic sentiment that rose amongst Congress members were when the desire to be represented in the bodies of government, to have a say, a vote in the lawmaking and issues of administration of India. Congressmen saw themselves as loyalists, but wanted an active role in governing their own country, albeit as part of the Empire. This trend was personified by Dadabhai Naoroji, who went as far as contesting, successfully, an election to the British House of Commons, becoming its first Indian member.

Bal Gangadhar Tilak was the first Indian nationalist to embrace Swaraj as the destiny of the nation. Tilak deeply opposed the British education system that ignored and defamed India’s culture, history and values. He resented the denial of freedom of expression for nationalists, and the lack of any voice or role for ordinary Indians in the affairs of their nation. For these reasons, he considered Swaraj as the natural and only solution. His popular sentence “Swaraj is my birthright, and I shall have it” became the source of inspiration for Indians.

In 1907, the Congress was split into two. Tilak advocated what was deemed as extremism. He wanted a direct assault by the people upon the British Raj, and the abandonment of all things of British. He was backed by rising public leaders like Bipin Chandra Pal and Lala Lajpat Rai, who held the same point of view. Under them, India’s three great states – Maharashtra, Bengal and Punjab shaped the demand of the people and India’s nationalism. Gokhale criticized Tilak for encouraging acts of violence and disorder. But the Congress of 1906 did not have public membership, and thus Tilak and his supporters were forced to leave the party.[6]

But with Tilak’s arrest, all hopes for an Indian offensive were stalled. The Congress lost credit with the people, A Muslim deputation met with the Viceroy, Minto (1905–10), seeking concessions from the impending constitutional reforms, including special considerations in government service and electorates. The British recognised some of Muslim League’s petitions by increasing the number of elective offices reserved for Muslims in the Government of India Act, 1909. The Muslim League insisted on its separateness from the Hindu-dominated Congress, as the voice of a “nation within a nation.” A closer look at the mass nationalisation and the reforms process reveals it to have been considerably less novel and far reaching.[7]

Chapter: 4

4.1 Types of Social Reforms

Before discussing the causes of reforms and how independence struggle and reforms went hand to hand, let us briefly analyze what are the types of social reforms were there which the social reformist had used for bringing social change in society. Reform movements are organized to carry out reforms in some specific areas. The reformers endeavour to change elements of the system for better. For example: Civil Rights Movement, Women’s Liberation Movement, Arya Samaj Movement, Brahmo Samaj movement.

4.4.1Revolutionary Movements:

The revolutionary movements deny that the system will even work. These movements are deeply dissatisfied with the social order and work for radical change. They advocate replacing the entire existing structure. Their objective is the reorganization of society in accordance with their own ideological blueprint. Revolutionary movements generally become violent as they progress. Example: the freedom movement of 1857.

4.4.2 Reactionary or Revivalist Movement:

Some movements are known as reactionary or regressive movements. These aims to reverse the social change .They highlight the importance and greatness of traditional values, ideologies and institutional arrangements. They strongly criticize the fast moving changes of the present.

4.4.3 Resistance Movement:

These movements are formed to resist a change that is already taking place in society. These can be directed against social and cultural changes which are already happening in the country.

4.4.4. Utopian Movement:

These are attempts to take the society or a section of it towards a state of perfection. These are loosely structured collectivities that envision a radically changed and blissful state, either on a large scale at some time in the future or on a smaller scale in the present. The Utopian ideal and the means of it are often vague, but many utopian movements have quite specific programmes for social change.

4.4.5 Peasant movement:
Peasant movement is defined by Kathleen Gough as an attempt of a group to effect change in the face of resistance and the peasant are people who are engaged in an agricultural or related production with primitive means who surrender part of their or its equivalent to landlords or to agents of change. The history of peasant movements can be traced to colonial period when repressive economic policies, the new land revenue system, the colonial administrative and judicial system and the ruin of handicrafts leading to the overcrowding of land transformed the agrarian structure and impoverished the peasantry.
When the peasants could take it no longer they resisted against the oppression and exploitation through uprisings. Peasant Movements occupy an important place in the history of social unrest in India though the aims and objectives of these movements differ in nature and degree from region to region. It is in this sense that these movements also aimed at the unification of the peasants of a region, development of leadership, ideology and a peasant elite.

Some of the important peasant uprising:

1770- Sanyasi rebellion
1831- Wahabi uprising
1855- Santhal uprising
1859- Indigo revolt
1890-1900- Punjab Kisan struggle
1917-18- Champaran satyagraha
1921- Moplah rebellion
1928- Bardoli satyagarya
1946- Telangana movement
1957- Naxalbai movement

4.4.6 Women’s Movement:

The women’s movement in India is a rich and vibrant movement which has taken different forms in different parts of the country. Fifty years ago when India became independent, it was widely acknowledged that the battle for freedom had been fought as much by women as by men.

The first to join the freedom struggle was Sarojini Naidu, who went on to become the first woman President of the Indian National Congress in 1925. Her presence was a signal for hundreds of other women to join, and eventually the salt protest was made successful by the many women who not only made salt, but also sat openly in marketplaces selling, and indeed, buying it. The trajectory of this movement is usually traced from the social reform movements of the 19th century when campaigns for the betterment of the conditions of women’s lives were taken up, initially by men.

By the end of the century women had begun to organize themselves and gradually they took up a number of causes such as education, the conditions of women’s work and so on. It was in the early part of the 20th century that women’s organizations were set up, and many of the women who were active in these later became involved in the freedom movement. .

4.4.7 Backward Caste Movement:

The Backward castes have been deprived of many social, economic, political and religious privileges. These people provided manual labour and the untouchables occupied the lowest position among the caste hierarchy. They were subjected to extreme form of exploitation. The colonial power accentuated the disparities in the distribution of economic power. The atrocities united the lower castes against the upper castes.

Some of the important backward caste movement which came up was Satyashodak Samaj and Nadar Movement which consolidated the masses along the castelines. E.V Ramaswamy started Self-Respect movement against the Brahmins in South India. The SNDP movement in Kerala was more of a reformist movement.[8]

Chapter: 5

Causes of the Social and Religious reforms movements: Its all embracing Scope

The 19th century India witnessed a strong wave of reformative activities in religion and society. There were attempts made by the educated young Indians to end the evils and abuses in religion and society. Western ideas of reason, equality, liberty and humanity inspired them. They tried to remove defects in thier culture. They wanted to revive the glory of Indian culture. Hence, we call the socio-religious movement of the 19th century India as the “Indian Renaissance” movement.

Causes for the social religious reforms movement:

1. Political Unity:

India was politically united because of the expansion and consolidation of British rule. It led to the understanding of many common problems of the Indians. The nature of British rule provoked many young Indians to find out the causes of thier misery and degradation.

2. Reaction against propaganda of Christian missionaries:

The Christian missionaries made all possible attempts to spread Christianity particularly among the poor and the oppressed. Educational Institutions, hospitals, charity services and official support were also made use for this purpose. Therefore, both the Hindus and Muslims made attempt to safe thier religion.

3. Contribution of foreign scholars:

Many foreign scholars like Max Muller and William Jones rediscovered India’s past. They studied the scholarly work of Indians of past. They brought to light rich cultural heritage which was even superior to western culture. They translated many literary and superior works. These works received worldwide recognition. It made the educated Indians develop faith in thier culture. They wanted to establish the superiority of Indian culture against the western culture.

4. Indian press:

The European introduced the printing press in India. It made possible the appearance of many newspapers and magazines. Books were also published in different Indian languages. Mostly thier subject matter was Indian. It certainly helped to open eyes of the educated Indians with regard to natural heritage and glory. They therefore, started to work for Indian glory and culture.

5. Western Education:

The spread of western education led to the spread of western concept of democracy, liberty, equality and nationalism. The Indians who went abroad came in direct contact with the working of these concepts. After they returned they were too pained to see the lack of awareness among the Indians about such concepts. They did the spade work for the spread of such ideas.[9]

5.5.1 Debate of Medievalism versus Liberalism

There are many aspects of socio-religious reforms were there which are needed to be discussed here.

Medievalism basically, on the whole instigated the man to take the pessimistic view of life and concentrate his attention on the other world. Liberalism intensified man’s appetite to live up pointing out the unlimited scope to make up pleasure bringing material things in this world by means of modern machinery and science.

The old religion was based on the low level of economic and cultural development of old society. It had to be remodelled to meet the needs of the society. It had to be revised in the spirit of nationalism, democracy, an optimistic and positive attitude to life, and even rationalist philosophy.

On the whole, national progress became the main objective of these reconstructed religions. When religion itself was not repudiated or reformed, nationalism became identified with religion (e.g. the religion of nationalism as propounded by B.C. Pal, Aurobindo Ghosh and others.) thus, the religious revival movement like the religious reform movement, was inspired with the national ideal.[10]

5.5.2. Growth of rationalism and materialism

Rationalist and materialist philosophical ideas slowly began to spread in India after 1930.This was due to numerous reasons such as wider spread of Indian intelligentsia in the political, sociological and philosophical literature of the west after the war of 1914-18.

The pioneers and leaders of nationalism were the educated class and bourgeoisie. They based themselves on the new capitalist society which, historically the higher type, increasingly replaced the medieval social system in India. They accepted its economic foundations. They desired the free development of society. Liberalism was the philosophy of rising capitalism. It was a body of principles which guaranteed its growth. And just as capitalism was higher social system than the pre-capitalist one, liberalism with its principles of national unification, individual liberty, democracy, equal rights of man, democratic institutions and rationalism, was higher a philosophy than pre capitalist philosophies which were mostly based on religious obscurantism and defended ranks and privileges based on birth.

Logically, the Indian intelligentsia, the pioneers of Indian nationalism, should have adopted the liberal philosophy in toto. However, since liberalism originated in the west and since the Indian people were ruled by the western power, they rather remobilized the masses.[11]

5.5.3 Religious reform movements, thier reactionary role and progressive significance

In its initial stages, when Indian nationalism was immature, just sprouting, it found expression in such liberal religio-reform movement as Brahmo Samaj. The religious form of the national movement was conditioned by its very immaturity. As such these movements played a progressive role in mass awakening against the freedom struggle, in spite of thier limited rationality.

It is true that nationalist movement headed by Gandhi had a programme for nationalist democratic transformation of India and not the establishment of any Hindu raj. It is true that that Indian National congress was a national organisation, a mustering centre for all conscious nationalist forces, but Gandhi declared conception that politics should be spiritualised, be in line with religio-ethnic principle, alienated those who wanted the freedom movement to be secular. Further, it introduced a mystical element in political calculations, often distorting the strategy of movement.[12]

Chapter: 6

Social and religious reforms movements and the expression of National Democratic

Awakening

The various socio reform and religious reform movements which took place in India during british rule were the expression of the rising national consciousness and spread of the liberal ideas of the west among the Indian people. These movements increasingly tended to have the national scope and programme for reconstruction in the social and religious spheres.

In the social spheres there were movements of caste reform and caste abolition, equal rights for women, a campaign against child marriage, and a ban on widow remarriage, a crusade against social and legal inequalities.

In the religious spheres, there sprang up movement which combated religious superstitions and attacked idolatry, polytheism and hereditary priesthood.

These movements, in varying degrees, emphasized and fought for the principles of individual liberty and social equality and stood for nationalism. So, in a sense, these movements provide a backbone for the mass awakening as far as freedom struggle were concerned.

The reformers argued that such reforms are necessary to built up a sound national unity to achieve political freedom and social, economical and cultural advance of the Indian people. The national democratic awakening found expression in all fields of national life. In politics, it gave birth to the movement of administrative reform, self government, Home rule, Dominion Status and finally Independence. In a social and religious sphere, Indian Nationalism proclaimed the principles of individual liberty, equality and self determination. It attacked the undemocratic principle of birth and exclusive privileges based on birth, on which such institutions as castes were reared. Indian Nationalism was thus democratic in essence and, as such, struggled against both medievalism and foreign rule. The socio-reform and religious-reform movements were the expression of the national awakening in India and aimed at a revision of the medieval social structure and religious outlook on a more or less democratic basis, i.e. on the principle of individual liberty and human equality.[13

“I regret to say,” write Raja Ram Mohan Roy in 1828, “that the present system of religion adhered to by the Hindus are not well calculated to promote thier political interests. The distinction of caste introducing innumerable divisions and sub divisions among them have entirely deprives them of patriotic feeling, and the multitude of religious rites and ceremonies and the laws of purification has totally disqualified from undertaking any difficult enterprise. It is, I think necessary that some change should take place in their religion at least for the sake of thier political advantage and social comfort.”[14]

Written at the time when Indians has just begun to experience the intellectual and cultural turmoil that characterized social life in the nineteenth century India this represented the immediate Indian response.

The spirit of reform embraced almost the whole of India beginning with the efforts of Raja Ram Mohan Roy in Bengal leading to the formation of Brahmo Samaj in 1828. Apart from the Brahmo Samaj, which has branches in several parts of country, the Paramhansa Mandali and the Prarthna Samaj in Maharashtra and the Arya Samaj in Punjab and North India were some of the prominent movements among Hindus. There were several other regional and caste movements like the Kayastha Sabha in Uttar Pradesh and the Sarin Sabha in Punjab. The backward class also started the work of reformation with the Satya Sodhak Samaj in Maharashtra and the Shri Narayana Dharma Paripalana Sabha in Kerala. The Ahmadiya, the Aligarh Movement, the Singh Sabha and the Rehnumayai Mazdeyasan Sabha represented the spirit of reform among Muslims, the Sikhs and Parsees respectively. Despite being regional in scope and content and confined to a particular religion, thier general prospective were remarkably similar; they were regional and religious manifestations of a common consciousness.

Although religious reformation was a major concern of these movements, none of them is exclusively religious in character. Strongly humanist in inspiration, the idea of other worldliness and salvation were not a part of thier agenda; instead thier attention was focussed on worldly existence.

Given the interconnection between religious beliefs and social practises, religious reformation was a necessary pre-requisite for social reform. Religion was the dominant ideology of the times and it was not possible to undertake any social action without coming to grips with it.

Indian society in 19th century was caught in a vicious web created by religious superstitions and social obscurantism. Social conditions was equally depressing, the most distressing was the position of women. The birth of a girl was unwelcome, her marriage a burden and her widowhood as inauspicious. Attempts to kill girl infants at birth were not unusual. Those who escaped initial brutality were subjected to the marriage at tender age.[15]

Another debilitating factor was caste. It sought to maintain a system of segregation, hierarchically ordained on the basis of ritual status. The rules and regulations of caste hampered social mobility, fostered social division and sapped individual initiative. Above all was the humiliation of untouchability which militated against human dignity.

There were innumerable human practises marked by constraint, credulity, status, authority, bigotry and blind fatalism. Rejecting them as features of decadent society, the reform movement sought to create a social climate for modernization. Since practises based on faith cannot be challenge without bringing faith itself into question. Hence, Raja Ram Mohan Roy demonstrated that sati had no religious sanction, Vidyasagar did not take up his pen in defence of widow remarriage without being convinced about scriptural support and Dayanand based his anti casteism on Vedic society.

Two important intellectual criteria which informed the reform movements were rationalism and religious universalism social relevance was judged by a rationalist critique. It is difficult to match the uncompromising rationalism of the early Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Akshay Kumar Dutt. This prospective not only enabled them to adopt a rational approach to tradition but also to evaluate the contemporary socio-religious practises from the stand point of social utility and to replace faith with rationality. In the Brahmo Samaj, it led to the repudiation of infallibility of Vedas, and in Aligarh Movement, to the reconciliation of teaching of Islam with the needs of the Modern age. Holding that religious tenet is not immutable, Syed Ahmad Khan emphasised the role of religion in the progress of the society: if religion did not keep pace with the meet and demands of the time, it would be fossilized as in the case of Islam in India.

The prospective on reform were not always influenced by religious considerations. A rational and secular outlook was very much evident in posing an alternative to prevalent social practises. In advocating widow marriage and opposing polygamy and child marriage Akshay Kumar was not concerned about religious sanctions or whether they existed in the past. His arguments were mainly based on effect on society.

Although the ambit of reform were particularistic, thier religious prospective was universalistic. Raja Ram Mohan Roy considered different religions as National embodiment of universal theism. The Brahmo Samaj was initially conceived by him as a universalistic church. He was defender of basic and universal principles of all religions- the monotheism of the Vedas and the Unitarianism of Christianity, and at the same time attacked polytheism of Hinduism and trinitarianism of Christianity. Syed Ahmad Khan echoed the same idea: all Prophets have the same din (faith) and every country and Nation had different Prophets. These prospective found clearer articulations in Keshub Chandra Sen’s ideas. He said “our position is not that truths are to be found in all religions, but all established religions of the world are true.” He also gave expression to the social implications of all this universalistic ideas.

The 19th century witnessed a cultural –ideological struggle against the backward elements of traditional culture, on the one hand and the fast hegemonising colonial culture and ideology on the other. The initial reforming efforts represented the former. In the religious spheres they sought to remove idolatry, monotheism and priestly monopoly of religious knowledge and to simplify religious rituals. They were important not only for religious reasons but equally for their social implications.

The socially debilitating influence of the caste system which perpetuated social distinctions was universally recognised as an area which called for urgent reform. It was morally and ethically abhorrent; more importantly, it militated against patriotic feelings and negated the growth of democratic ideas. Raja Ram Mohan Roy initiated, in ideas but not in practise, the opposition which became loud and clear as the century progressed. Ranade, Dayanand and Vivekananda denounced the existing system of caste in no uncertain terms.

The campaign for the improvement of the condition and status of women was not purely humanitarian measure also. No reform could be really effective without changes in domestic conditions, the social space in which the initial socialization of the individual took place. A crucial role in this process is played by women. Therefore, there could be no reformed men and reformed homes without reformed women. Viewed from the standpoint of women, it was indeed a limited prospective. Nevertheless, it was recognised that no country could ever make a ‘significant progress in civilization whose females were sunk in ignorance’.

If the reform movement had totally rejected tradition, Indian society would have easily undergone a process of westernization. But the reformers were aiming at modernization rather than westernization. A blind initiation of western cultural norms was never an integral part of reform.

Faced with the challenge of intrusion of colonial culture and ideology, an attempt to reinvigorate traditional institutions and to realise the potential of traditional culture developed during the 19th century. This concern embraced the entire cultural existence, the way of life and all significance practises like language, religion, art and philosophy. Two features characterized this concern:

The creation of an alternate ideological system Regeneration of traditional institutions.

Therefore, the cultural ideological struggle, represented by the socio-religious movements, was an integral part of the evolving national consciousness. This was so because it was instrumental in bringing about the initial intellectual and cultural break which made a new vision of the future possible. Second, it was the part of the resistance against colonial cultural and ideological hegemony. Out of this dual struggle evolved the modern cultural situation: new men, new home and new society. [16]

So, basically, to concise one can say that these were the effects of movements and social reforms:

The reform movements brought about remarkable changes in the society and religion. Initially, the great changes affected a small group of people but afterwards spread among large masses. The reform movements strengthened the Hindu and Muslim religions and made effort to remove social evils among them. The educated Indians started to think reasonably. The caste system began to lose its hold in the society and there was a significant achievement in the field of emancipation of women, some legal measures were also adopted to improve thier status. The reform movements led to the mass awakening and strengthened the emotional, social and economical bond among Indians which provide as a great pillar to our fight for Independence.

A new inspiration was abroad and under its urge the medieval moulds, already weakened, began to break down. The individual realised the significance of the self as well as new responsibility towards society. The circumference of his society which had been limited to the family, the caste and the tribe now owe its allegiance to the Nation, and in this way socio-religious reforms helped in mass awakening.[17]

CHAPTER: 7

Contribution of the freedom fighters as well as social reformists in mass nationalisation

7.1 Mass appeal: Mahatma Gandhi

Struggle for Indian Independence (1916–1945)[18] In 1915, Gandhi returned from South Africa to live in India. He spoke at the conventions of the Indian National Congress, but was primarily introduced to Indian issues, politics and the Indian people by Gopal Krishna Gokhale, a respected leader of the Congress Party at the time. Champaran and Kheda Gandhi’s first major achievements came in 1918 with the Champaran agitation and Kheda Satyagraha, although in the latter it was indigo and other cash crops instead of the food crops necessary for their survival. Suppressed by the militias of the landlords (mostly British), they were given measly compensation, leaving them mired in extreme poverty. The villages were kept extremely dirty and unhygienic; and alcoholism, untouchability and purdah were rampant. Now in the throes of a devastating famine, the British levied a tax which they insisted on increasing. The situation was desperate. In Kheda in Gujarat, the problem was the same. Gandhi established an ashram there, organizing scores of his veteran supporters and fresh volunteers from the region. He organized a detailed study and survey of the villages, accounting for the atrocities and terrible episodes of suffering, including the general state of degenerate living. Building on the confidence of villagers, he began leading the clean-up of villages, building of schools and hospitals and encouraging the village leadership to undo and condemn many social evils, as accounted above.[19]

But his main impact came when he was arrested by police on the charge of creating unrest and was ordered to leave the province. Hundreds of thousands of people protested and rallied outside the jail, police stations and courts demanding his release, which the court reluctantly granted. Gandhi led organized protests and strikes against the landlords who, with the guidance of the British government, signed an agreement granting the poor farmers of the region more compensation and control over farming, and cancellation of revenue hikes and its collection until the famine ended. It was during this agitation, that Gandhi was addressed by the people as Bapu (Father) and Mahatma (Great Soul). In Kheda, Sardar Patel represented the farmers in negotiations with the British, who suspended revenue collection and released all the prisoners. As a result, Gandhi’s fame spread all over the nation. He is also now called as “Father of the nation” in India.

Non-cooperation movement

Gandhi employed non-cooperation, non-violence and peaceful resistance as his “weapons” in the struggle against British. In Punjab, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre of civilians by British troops (also known as the Amritsar Massacre) caused deep trauma to the nation, leading to increased public anger and acts of violence. Gandhi criticized both the actions of the British Raj and the retaliatory violence of Indians. He authored the resolution offering condolences to British civilian victims and condemning the riots which, after initial opposition in the party, was accepted following Gandhi’s emotional speech advocating his principle that all violence was evil and could not be justified. But it was after the massacre and subsequent violence that Gandhi’s mind focused upon obtaining complete self-government and control of all Indian government institutions, maturing soon into Swaraj or complete individual, spiritual, political independence.[20]

In December 1921, Gandhi was invested with executive authority on behalf of the Indian National Congress. Under his leadership, the Congress was reorganized with a new constitution, with the goal of Swaraj. A hierarchy of committees was set up to improve discipline, transforming the party from an elite organization to one of mass national appeal. Gandhi expanded his non-violence platform to include the swadeshi policy — the boycott of foreign-made goods, especially British goods. Linked to this was his advocacy that khadi (homespun cloth) be worn by all Indians instead of British-made textiles. Gandhi exhorted Indian men and women, rich or poor, to spend time each day spinning khadi in support of the independence movement.[21] This was a strategy to inculcate discipline and dedication to weed out the unwilling and ambitious, and to include women in the movement at a time when many thought that such activities were not respectable activities for women. In addition to boycotting British products, Gandhi urged the people to boycott British educational institutions and law courts, to resign from government employment, and to forsake British titles and honours.

“Non-cooperation” enjoyed widespread appeal and success, increasing excitement and participation from all strata of Indian society. Yet, just as the movement reached its apex, it ended abruptly as a result of a violent clash in the town of Chauri Chaura, Uttar Pradesh, in February 1922. Fearing that the movement was about to take a turn towards violence, and convinced that this would be the undoing of all his work, Gandhi called off the campaign of mass civil disobedience.[22] Gandhi was arrested on 10 March 1922, tried for sedition, and sentenced to six years imprisonment. He began his sentence on 18 March 1922. He was released in February 1924 for an appendicitis operation, having served only 2 years.

Without Gandhi’s uniting personality, the Indian National Congress began to splinter during his years in prison, splitting into two factions, one led by Chitta Ranjan Das and Motilal Nehru favouring party participation in the legislatures, and the other led by Chakravarti Rajagopalachari and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, opposing this move. Furthermore, cooperation among Hindus and Muslims, which had been strong at the height of the non-violence campaign, was breaking down. Gandhi attempted to bridge these differences through many means, including a three-week fast in the autumn of 1924, but with limited success.

Swaraj and the Salt Satyagraha (Salt March)

Gandhi at Dandi, 5 April 1930, at the end of the Salt March.

Gandhi stayed out of active politics and as such limelight for most of the 1920s, preferring to resolve the wedge between the Swaraj Party and the Indian National Congress, and expanding initiatives against untouchability, alcoholism, ignorance and poverty. He returned to the fore in 1928. The year before, the British government had appointed a new constitutional reform commission under Sir John Simon, which did not include any Indian as its member. The result was a boycott of the commission by Indian political parties. Gandhi pushed through a resolution at the Calcutta Congress in December 1928 calling on the British government to grant India dominion status or face a new campaign of non-cooperation with complete independence for the country as its goal. Gandhi had not only moderated the views of younger men like Subhas Chandra Bose and Jawaharlal Nehru, who sought a demand for immediate independence, but also reduced his own call to a one year wait, instead of two. The British did not respond. Gandhi then launched a new satyagraha against the tax on salt in March 1930, highlighted by the famous Salt March to Dandi from 12 March to 6 April, marching 400 kilometres (248 miles) from Ahmedabad to Dandi, Gujarat to make salt himself. Thousands of Indians joined him on this march to the sea. This campaign was one of his most successful at upsetting British hold on India; Britain responded by imprisoning over 60,000 people. The government, represented by Lord Edward Irwin, decided to negotiate with Gandhi. The Gandhi–Irwin Pact was signed in March 1931. The British Government agreed to set all political prisoners free in return for the suspension of the civil disobedience movement.

In 1932, through the campaigning of the Dalit leader B. R. Ambedkar, the government granted untouchables separate electorates under the new constitution. In protest, Gandhi embarked on a six-day fast in September 1932, successfully forcing the government to adopt a more equitable arrangement via negotiations mediated by the Dalit cricketer turned political leader Palwankar Baloo. This was the start of a new campaign by Gandhi to improve the lives of the untouchables, whom he named Harijans, the children of God. On 8 May 1933 Gandhi began a 21-day fast of self-purification to help the Harijan movement.[23] This new campaign was not universally embraced within the Dalit community.

World War II and Quit India Movement

In 1939 Nazi Germany invaded Poland. Initially, Gandhi had favoured offering “non-violent moral support” to the British effort, but other Congressional leaders were offended by the unilateral inclusion of India into the war, without consultation of the people’s representatives. All Congressmen elected to resign from office en masse. After lengthy deliberations, Gandhi declared that India could not be party to a war ostensibly being fought for democratic freedom, while that freedom was denied to India itself. As the war progressed, Gandhi intensified his demand for independence, drafting a resolution calling for the British to Quit India. This was Gandhi’s and the Congress Party’s most definitive revolt aimed at securing the British exit from Indian shores.[24]

Quit India became the most forceful movement in the history of the struggle, with mass arrests and violence on an unprecedented scale.[25] Thousands of freedom fighters were killed or injured by police gunfire, and hundreds of thousands were arrested. Gandhi and his supporters made it clear they would not support the war effort unless India was granted immediate independence. He even clarified that this time the movement would not be stopped if individual acts of violence were committed, saying that the “ordered anarchy” around him was “worse than real anarchy.” He called on all Congressmen and Indians to maintain discipline via ahimsa, and Karo Ya Maro (“Do or Die”) in the cause of ultimate freedom.

7.2 Gopal Krishna Gokhale

(May 9, 1866 – February 19, 1915)

He was one of the founding social and political leaders during the Indian Independence Movement against the British Empire in India. Gokhale was a senior leader of the Indian National Congress and founder of the Servants of I

Article from articlesbase.com

Basic Structure of Constitution of India a comment

Amendments in constitution at time become necessary to adapt to the changing needs of national development and strength, to overcome the difficulties which may encounter  in future in working of the constitution and to realize any popular demand for changing the political system e.g State reorganization, provisions of ST SCs, lowering of age for voting etc.

However the amendment of constitution often been used to achieve political purposes or to override judicial verdicts.

For providing the compatibility of Constitution with the changing society needs , constitution maker provide the  Art 368- Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and procedure therefor

for the purpose of amendment the provisions of constitution fall under 3 categories.

(a)  Amendment by Simple Majority.

(b)  Amendment by special Majority.

(c)   Amendment by special majority and rectification by states.

Sankari parsad V/s Union of India AIR 1951 SC 455

This is the case which in route the theory of Basic Structure, in this case SC held that

The power to amend the Constitution including the fundamental rights is contained in the Art 368,
And that the world Law in Art 13 includes only an ordinary law and does not include constitutional amendment which is made in exercise of constituent power.

In Sajjan Singh v/s State of Punjab, SC held that the world amendment of constitution means amendment of all the provisions of constitution.

Golak Nath V/s State of Punjab AIR 1971 SC 1643

SC held that Parliament cannot amend the FR,
Rejection of argument- Amendment of Constitution was a Sovereign Power and that did not permit any implied limitation.

Keshavanand Bharti’s V/s State of kerela AIR 1973  SC 1461

This is the case which emerge the theory of Basic Structure first time.

The Golak Nath Case  was overruled in this case, and SC held that Art 368 ever before 24th Amendment contained the power as well as procedure of amendment.
The Parliament has a wide powers of amending the constitution but these powers has not the unlimited nature, and does not include the power to destroy or abrogate the “Basic feature of constitution under article 368.

Basic Structure Theory-

Ac to Sikri , CJ, the basic structure was build on the basic foundation i.e. the freedom and dignity of the individual, the feature of BS T are:

a. Supremacy of Constitution.
b. Republican and Democratic form of Government and sovereign of the country.
c. Secular and federal character of Constitution and
d. Separation of power between Legislature, executive and Judiciary.

Ac to Shelat and Grover, J.J also included :

a. Fundamental Right
b. Directive Principle.

 

Indira Gandhi V/s Raj Narain AIR 1975 SC 2299

In this case 39th Amendment 1975 was passed by parliament for validating with retrospective effect the election of PM Indira Gandhi which was declared invalid by Allahabad High Court on the ground of having committed corrupt practice. Anew article 329 A has been added  that provided that the election of a person who hold the office of PM can be challenged only before such a body or forum as may be established by Parliament by law and not in court.

The SC in this case enhance the list of Basic Structure which was emergence in Keshavanand Bharti’s Case :

a. Sovereign democratic republic status
b. Equality of status and opportunity of an individual
c. Secularism and freedom of conscience and religion
d. ‘government of laws and not of men’ i.e. the rule of law

 

Minerva Mills V/s  Union of India AIR 1980 SC  1789

Struck down clauses (4) and (5) of the article 368 inserted by 42nd Amendment, on the ground that these clauses destroyed the essential feature of the basic structure of the constitution. It was ruled by court that a limited amending power itself is a basic feature of the Constitution

L. Chandra Kumar case

“That the power of judicial review over legislative action vested in the High Courts under Article 226 and in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution is an integral and essential feature of the Constitution, constituting part of its basic structure“.

Conclusion
Now we can say, there is no hard and fast rule for basic feature of the Constitution. Different judge keep different views regarding to theory of basis structure. No law can be enacted or amended in a manner that violates the spirit of the preamble.

 

Hi, my name is Naveen Kumar Shelar. I reside in New Delhi, India currently employed full time as a Facility & Administration Professional .

I started out as a Executive Administration late in 2005 evolved into a Facility & Administration with time and now I’m into New office development and Planning . I am mostly involved in new office infrastructure planning, procurement development, execution, and operations, not only this but I love to policies and procedure drafting for office operations.

When I’m not working I am mostly into sports like Cricket or Chess. I’m also into movies and music big time. I love spending time at home on holidays with my mom, dad, wife Anu, daughter Shrishty, Siya  and my pet Ronny, chutki (Labrador) who is simply on his moves all the time to keep you busy at home 🙂

My father and my mother has been a great source of inspiration for my life.

Specialties: New office set up and it’s whole life cycle, in technology driven organizations. Competitive analysis, process compliance & improvements, policy and procedure drafting, legal Agreement drafting.

Article from articlesbase.com

Dual Citizenship in India ? Know everything you want to know about it!

The Government of India has not given permission for Dual Citizenship yet! That means an Indian resident can not hold the citizenship of the native country and a foreign country at the same time. In addition, the Indian Nationality Law allows OCI (Overseas Citizenship of India). But it should not be referred to as Dual Citizenship.

If you get an OCI, you should not control yourself as being as a regular Indian Citizen. Further, you are not allowed to vote and/or can not hold your claim as a participant of Lok Sabha/Rajya Sabha/Legislative Assembly/Council and are barred from holding employment in the Government sector.

PIO Card: PIO Card was launched in favor of People of Indian Origin.

People of Indian origin who are living abroad have the freedom to go for a visa free entry. At the same time, the PIO Card holders enjoy all the benefits that the NRIs have in store for them.

Benefits of PIO Card

PIO Card holders do not require a visa to visit India There is no need to register with the Foreigners Registration Officer if you have a limit stay of 180 days. You are required to register with the same if your stay exceeds 180 days. Enjoy the benefits that are extended to NRIs, barring the political rights of India.

POIs (People of Indian origin) of certain mentioned categories, which migrated from India and hold a citizenship of another country (not Pakistan and Bangladesh), are eligible for grant of OCI, provided that their home countries allow dual citizenship in accordance with their respective regulations.

An OCI registered citizen can apply for Indian citizenship provided he or she fulfills the below mentioned requirements:

The applicant should be registered as OCI for five years

Out of these five years, the applicant has been residing in India for one year before going for the application process.

Benefits of OCI

No need to register with the local police authority for required stay in India

Parity with Non-resident Indians (NRIs) economic, financial and educational fields, barring in acquisition of agricultural or plantation properties.

Ajay Sharma is an immigration expert who provides his valuable advice to people seeking immigration in countries like Canada, Denmark, USA, Australia and many others. With years of experience under his belt, he is the principal immigration consultant of ABHINAV.com, which is in business since 1994.

National Security Adviser Jones Visits India Before Obama’s November Trip

National Security Adviser Jones Visits India Before Obama’s November Trip
U.S. National Security Adviser General Jim Jones is traveling to India this week to prepare for a visit by President Barack Obama in November.

Read more on Bloomberg

Indian Constitution: the Supreme Law That Governs India

A constitution is the supreme law of a free country. It is the system by which a government of a country functions. Constitution of India was adopted in the in the constituent assembly on 26th November 1949. It is document that contains set of instructions and policies that a government in power of India must follow. Indian constitution came into force on 26th January 1950, the republic day of India, defining India as a republic union of states. Indian constitution also defines the fundamental rights, directive principles and fundamental duties of a citizen of India. Constitution of India declared India as a state to be sovereign, democratic republic but later in the amendment of constitution of 1976 the India was added to be a socialist and secular state.

The constitution of India is the longest written official book than any other of an independent country. Indian constitution is considered the best constitution that an independent country has in the world. It is a well drafted book that is a result of research of years. India is still a young independent country and hence the makes of India constitution have adopted several effective articles and laws from different constitutions of other countries. It has given a permeable that is just a complete crux about it. Preamble of India is again considered the best in the world. It contains 22 sections including 395 articles, 12 schedules and 83 amendments.

The committee that drafted the constitution of India was headed by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and other six members as Jahwahar Lal Nehru, C. Rajagopalachari, Rajendra Prasad, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Shyama Prasad Mukherjee. All these members were great politicians and major scholars of India. Indian constitution is written in the hand writing of Dr. Ambedkar.

Indian constitution is the best official draft one must read to know how a democratic and independent republic nation works. It will provide a deep insight of the laws and principles that Indian government follows to run the union of India.

Sonal Arya is offering advice for quite some time. Having completed her Ph.d in Archaeology from The Jawaharlal Nehru University. She provide useful advice through her articles that have been found very useful. To find Indian constitution,famous in india, cities in india, temples in india, personalities in india visit http://www.famousinindia.com/

Constitution of India – a Bold Experiment

                                       Indian Constitution – A Bold Experiment

      

 Our constitution is not a novel formation of the constituent assembly, the various parts of the constitution has been derived from the working constitutions of other nations. As we know the fundamental rights enshrined in Part 3 and our federal structure of governance with a strong centralizing tendency has been taken from the American Constitution. The fundamental duties from the Irish Constitution and the parliamentary system of democracy with an independent judiciary from the England. We have been fortunate enough that our founding fathers took the initiative to inculcate such essential freedoms and form of governance in the most sacred law of the land, without which perhaps we would have resorted to an autocratic form of government akin to the British rule in India. Our forefathers had given us the tools that were essential for building a nation that had been ravished by the scourge of multi-ethnic wars and colonialism for decades, but in my respectful submission the moot question which they possibly did not envisage was whether our diverse cultures coupled with the burden of illiteracy would be able to handle these tools effectively. Sixty years down the line we might say that our democracy is the largest in the world and has been a grand success, but if we look minutely we can find that it is working mechanically. When we look into the majority flooding our constituent assembly we can see power hungry ministers who hardly have any concern for the masses.

 

If we go back to history we can find a possible answer as to why we have such a gloomy situation in our country. The ideologies of democracy, federalism and fundamental rights have been taken from the Western world, where people have attained there rights through struggle. The French Revolution of 1789 resulted in the: La Déclaration des droits de l’Homme et du citoyen) which is one of the fundamental documents of the French Revolution, defining a set of individual rights and collective rights of all of the estates as one. Influenced by the doctrine of natural rights, these rights are universal: they are supposed to be valid in all times and places, pertaining to human nature itself. We can also draw inspiration from the American Declaration of Independence in 1776 which came after 8 long years of war and it declared that “…..We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their CREATOR, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness….” These monumental documents arose out of an unprecedented social and political struggle.

 

We did recognize these rights in our constitution but our illiterate masses remained oblivious to its true meaning as they were far away from these ideologies as they struggled for their basic necessities; which were further enhanced in the aftermath to the creation of two separate countries after independence when millions were left homeless and thousands were massacred. We still have people who are unaware of their own basic rights. Our founding fathers had borrowed these principles from the Western society and had imported and transplanted them on our backward, semi-feudal society. Consequently our constitution and our society do not correspond with each other the former being modern while the later being backward. The belief that by merely importing and transplanting a modern Constitution on a backward society will result in our society quickly becoming modern has proved to be a mistake. We have still today a lot of casteism and communalism in our society.

 

At the same time it cannot be said that the Indian constitution is merely a paper document, by setting up modern ideals the Constitution is pulling society forward the goals of creating a modern society. No doubt that it has not done so automatically merely by its promulgation but it has reduced the pain, agony and duration which Western societies had to go through during the period of their transition from feudal agricultural society to modern industrial society. This transitional period is a very painful period and its is only after going through this fire that a transformation can be brought about

 

India is presently passing through this fire. We need to first bring our society and its attitude at par with the modern world, free from all the bias and inequality; after all the constitution is for the people, of the people and by the people of this nation .Our constitution makers had indeed made a bold experiment when they created the constitution in the backdrop of the society which prevails in our country.  However the Constitution if implemented in its true spirit, will be a boon to us, it is up to us to give it teeth and make the dream of our founding fathers a reality.