Definition of secularism according to Indian constitution

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by anoop_mig25, Apr 16, 2014.

  1. anoop_mig25

    anoop_mig25 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,195
    Likes Received:
    2,223
    @A chauhan and and others lawyers on DFI

    I want to ask how has word "Secularism" defined in Indian constitution.Is the word has been defined or not .If not then why not ????

    Other has any countries constitution defines word "Secularism" .. for eg USA/UK/France/german/chinese/japanese
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  2.  
  3. anoop_mig25

    anoop_mig25 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,195
    Likes Received:
    2,223
    What i did something wrong or what.

    I am just asking is secularism defined under indian constitution as well as other country consititution because i had some where read that is has not been defined under Indian constitution and attempt was made in past to define but it was scuttled.

    I am not asking some to prove their secularism
     
  4. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,573
    Not at all sir. just shouting out loud my thoughts on secularism. i was suggesting a definition thats all. :p
     
  5. jalsa

    jalsa Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    Messages:
    724
    Likes Received:
    442
    Location:
    Indus Land
    If one needs the definition of Secularism today its very simple. " if you are a Hindu or Modi supporter then you are Communal, otherwise you are Secular" .
     
    archie and sesha_maruthi27 like this.
  6. sesha_maruthi27

    sesha_maruthi27 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,884
    Likes Received:
    1,568
    Location:
    Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh(INDIA)
    As simple as nothing, Secularism according to the constitution must be LOVE YOUR MOTHERLAND AND BE A TRUE PATRIOT, then you are secular.

    If you hate your MOTHERLAND and are against the law of the land and you betray your motherland and show your loyalty to other country, then you are not secular...

    This is NaMo ji says and follows....

    INDIA FIRST....
     
  7. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Secularism has not been defined in the Constitution explicitly

    Its understanding is ameliorative, and is to be applied/understood by interpreting other associated principles.

    For eg. in France as per their interpretation of Secularism Burkha is a form of subjugation of woman and is to be banned.

    Indian Govt allows for Muslims to have upto 4 wives in India, because we have given the various religious groups greater segmental autonomy, and greater individual choice in their conduct of their personal affairs.

    ==

    Logic:

    India has never been a united country for a good part of its history
    India is a very diverse country
    There is a need to have greater power sharing and autonomy for various groups.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  8. RajeevKr

    RajeevKr Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    252
    Likes Received:
    54
    Location:
    India
    "Secular" word made to preamble of constitution of India along with 42nd amendment of constitution, I don't think it is defined separately. As per my understanding, I think Indian state accepts religious laws as guiding principle/ binding on nation state(not sure about correct operative word), probably that's why Sharia laws are accepted. Maybe other religious groups gave up their religious laws to accept the supremacy of constitutional laws except for Muslims who wanted to continue with their personal laws defined in their religion.
    I don't think since one group has given up its right to religious personal laws, the other group should follow suit by compulsion is not fair in my opinion. Maybe, with changing time, they will accept it.
     
  9. Abhijat

    Abhijat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    469
    Likes Received:
    350
    Location:
    Nothingness
    Secularism as such is not defined in Indian Constitution , but it is based on philosophy of "principled and equal distance " . We have to understand first why secularism as a philosophy is required in democracy.?

    For it to understand we have to understand why democracy is required ? Democracy is a means for citizens to achieve the best capability that they can achieve , so it requires laws and policies to be citizen-centric . But as we live in society ,so too much individual centrism could hamper the integrity of community as one will form a individual centric universe around oneself. So democracy can also bee seen as means through which negotiation between "I & WE" takes place i.e maintain the coherence between society and individual , while giving sufficient space for individual to grow his/her potential.

    Now we have to Compare today's democratic polity with yesterday's autocratic rules to see why such change was needed in first place . Previously the State was based on religion . So religion was a tool for streamlining the society and imparting certain values and restrain for individual to it's freedom as the member of community . So we can say that religion defined the power structure within the society , by not only defining what belief one must have but also the occupation one can take , law , administration etc. , where power was tilted in favor of religious leaders as such . It also means the scope for a person to utilize it's capacity was limited by religious lines.

    For creation of society where each member can grow his potential to it's maximum , we needed to destroy this power structure as it was not based on consensus by all , but on imposing certain rules as one deemed fit.

    So secularism can be seen as a tool for destroying this power structure and creating a society which is equal.

    Further, for understanding the scope of secularism we have to see the power structure, which are of three types:

    1: When one religion dominates over the other i.e inter-religious conflict
    2: When one group within religious community dominates other group within community i.e intra-religious
    3: When State as a political power uses its financial and administrative power to promote dominance of one religion.

    So we have to define three principals for secularism :

    1: Separation of State from religion , so that a group can't use state's power to promote one religion
    2: Giving freedom of religion to individual to practice as one's religion as one deemed fit and not restrained by some religious leader direction . So intra-religion freedom
    3: Also intervene in practice which can cause conflict between religious group or within the religious community which violates individuals fundamental rights . So preventing , both , inter and intra religious conflict . Best example for intra is abolition of Untouchability .

    By above we can clearly see how Indian Secularism follows model of "Principled and Equal distance " , "principle " being that to prevent any kind of religious domination and "equal " being recognition of all type of religion as equal.

    To give the above Indian model in perspective , we can compare Indian model with other countries :

    American Model :: It clearly separate the state from church and state cannot interfere in the practice on one's religious practice . So if their is a conflict between two group on religion lines , state cannot intervene as such . We can see the helplessness of Obama when he couldn't do anything to prevent a Jewish Priest from burning Quran , which had repercussion for US in other part of world

    French Model :: Here state is a suppressor of religion . That is state utilizes it's power to make society "secular" , best example can be order to ban turban or burkha in school . But it creates conflict between state and citizens and in long run can lead to instability.

    British Model :: Here state uses it's power to promote one religion i.e catholic Christianity. Other religion are suppressed. Recently British P.M declared his country as Christian state. We see conflict between native British citizen and immigrant Muslim population.

    The final conclusion of mine is that , as due to rapid globalization immigrants will increase in every country . They will bring their culture and religion with them , as it's form part of their identity. The best method to form a coherent society can be not "tolerance" as propagated by intellectuals today , but of mutual respect and acceptance . The Indian Secularism principal provide such possibility and democracy the platform for such consensus . We have to believe in democracy and participate in it because "Democracy is what we make of it ".
     
    happy, Singh and parijataka like this.
  10. Abhijat

    Abhijat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    469
    Likes Received:
    350
    Location:
    Nothingness
    Yes India is a diverse country and power sharing between different group is required . But by accepting a group based on religious lines , and assuming that , all group members have same kind of interest , gives a singular identity to the group and any alternative view by member of group is rejected. Also to extend it further , any member outside the group is not accepted as assumed to have different view , thus giving the group exclusive identity .

    As religion is a exclusive and partisan social difference , so accepting the power sharing on these lines will prove fatal as there will be no multiplicity of identity , but a singular identity , so views between two different groups can not be exchanged thus no coherence can be possible between them . Also projecting an exclusive identity will create conflict , as demand of one group may be in line of interest on other group , so a need for complementary identity to national identity will not be possible.

    That's why whenever our constitutional makers talked of giving more autonomy to group , it was based on culture , language etc. , because they have multiple identity personnel i.e person can speak same language and belongs to different religion etc. So we can see secularism was never about providing a religious autonomy as such but a tool for creating a platform for different groups to come together and shedding away a singular identity based on religion.
     
    happy and Singh like this.
  11. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    @Abhijat

    Excellent post.

    American Model militantly favours free speech too, whether it impacted their understanding of secularism or vice versa, I don't know.

    British Model doesn't promote Catholicism. Protestant are anti-Catholic.

    ==

    The biggest problem with Secularism is that it itself is a poorly defined family of concepts. And its interpretation or application also depends on the worldview of the particular state.

    For eg. Indian world-view is not anti-religion, French world-view is anti-religion.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    happy likes this.
  12. A chauhan

    A chauhan "अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l" Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,928
    Likes Received:
    4,563
    Location:
    Raipur
    The constitution has no definition of the term "secular" so it should be interpreted that "there will be no state-religion" read it together with article 25, you'll know what you want to. However the term "secular" has unnecessarily been added in it, there was no need to make this amendment.
     
  13. Pratap

    Pratap Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    508
    Location:
    India
    Is it possible to drop this term? I am asking as I do not know much on constitution.
     
  14. Abhijat

    Abhijat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    469
    Likes Received:
    350
    Location:
    Nothingness
    Not possible , as it is part of "basic structure" of constitution. In "Kesavananda Bharti vs State of Kerala " case ,SC gave the concept of Basic Structure , to limit to the extent to which parliament can amend the constitution. It was based on concept of limited power to a organ of state, which are legislature , executive and judiciary. So that no one organ can take all control of State and enjoy unlimited power.
     
  15. rock127

    rock127 Maulana Rockullah Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    8,938
    Likes Received:
    10,290
    Location:
    India
    That's why Congis has defined their own version of "Secular" which means Muslims.

    Because of Congis Muslims are poor and the weakest part of Indian society but STILL Muslims give vote to Congis.:dude:

    Azam Traitor Khan did Muzzafarnagar riots but STILL Muslims give vote to him.
     
  16. A chauhan

    A chauhan "अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l" Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,928
    Likes Received:
    4,563
    Location:
    Raipur
    Keshvanand Bharti case was decided by a bench of 13 judges by 7/13 judges (almost a 50-50 decision) , SC can reverse its judgments and has a history of doing so. Hence anything can be amended in our constitution only the procedure is tough.
     
  17. anoop_mig25

    anoop_mig25 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,195
    Likes Received:
    2,223
    Shouldn`t a word like secularism should have been by defined By Indra Gandhi and then included in preamble

    Second why has our original constitution drafters included word "secularism" in preamble .

    Or word secularism was some kind of hidden/presence always in constitution.

    Second other countries have explicitly defined word constitution

    or there to its hide/seek game
     
  18. rock127

    rock127 Maulana Rockullah Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    8,938
    Likes Received:
    10,290
    Location:
    India
    Yeah we are getting sick n tired of Congis and their supporters using and abusing SECULARISM.

    They first do riots and then claim they are SECULAR.

    Sanjhay Jhalla,Surjewala etc has used SECULARISM about 1,000,000,000 times till now in all statements/debates.

    Every second word they use is this SECULARISM. :dude:
     
  19. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    @Abhijat

    Power sharing agreements, and autonomy in personal affairs etc were essential to solicit support of the various groups.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  20. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Secularism is a cacophonous concept.
     
  21. Abhijat

    Abhijat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    469
    Likes Received:
    350
    Location:
    Nothingness
    Yes totally agree with you regarding the power sharing , as it is basic theme for democracy . But will disagree on what basis this power sharing agreement is to be based on i.e not religion as a basis , which is disharmonus to concept of democracy , which puts power in hand of person directly and not on some representative of such religion. We totally fail to understand in today's public discourse the difference between communalism and bringing represenative of a religious community in political sphere. For ex. UCC code today is treated by intellectuals as something which is against muslim community and projected as hindutvata agenda.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015

Share This Page