In this article, we will discuss Criticism of Indian Constitution: A Borrowed Constitution. So, let’s get started.
Criticism of the Constitution
The Constitution of India, as framed and adopted by the Constitution Assembly of India, has been criticized on the following grounds:
A Borrowed Constitution
The critics opined that the Indian Constitution contains nothing new and original. They described it as a’borrowed Constitution’ or a bag of borrowings’ or a ‘hotch-potch Constitution’ or a ‘patchwork’ of several documents of the world Constitutions. However, this criticism is unfair and illogical. This is because, the framers of the Constitution made necessary modifications in the features borrowed from other Constitutions for their suitability to the Indian conditions, at the same time avoiding their faults.
While answering the above criticism in the Constituent Assembly, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, said: “One likes to ask whether there can be anything new in a Constitution formed at this hour in the history of the world. More than hundred years have rolled over when the first written Constitution was drafted. It has been followed by many countries reducing their Constitutions to writing. What the scope of a Constitution should be has long been settled. Similarly, what are the fundamentals of a Constitution are recognized all over the world. Given these facts, all Constitutions in their main provisions must look similar. The only new things, if there can be any, in a Constitution framed so late in the day are the variations made to remove the faults and to accommodate it to the needs of the country. The charges of producing a blind copy of the Constitutions of other countries is based, I am sure, on an inadequate study of the Constitution”.