India’s federal structure and democratic ideals face renewed debate in 2025. Recent calls to remove the words ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ from the Constitution’s preamble have revived discussions on the nation’s founding vision. These terms, added during the Emergency period, symbolise key ideological pillars. Their potential removal raises questions about India’s federal character and democratic fabric. This has brought attention back to the original constitutional debates on federalism and power-sharing.
Historical Context of Federalism in India
During the freedom struggle, many leaders advocated for a federal union with equal powers for states. K T Shah and others pushed for explicit constitutional recognition of India as a federal union. They sought to prevent centralisation and authoritarianism by ensuring states were equal constituents. However, these proposals were repeatedly rejected by the Constituent Assembly, including by B R Ambedkar, who viewed the Constitution mainly as a state mechanism rather than a social blueprint.
Debates on Secularism and Socialism
The terms ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ were added to the preamble in the 42nd Amendment during the Emergency (1975–77). These words reflected the state’s ideological stance under Indira Gandhi’s rule. Today, some argue that ‘secular’ is at odds with rising religious majoritarianism and that ‘socialist’ no longer fits an economy marked by growing inequality. Yet, critics warn that removing these words could symbolise a shift towards a Hindu-centric, centralised authoritarian state.
Constitutional Design and the Union-State Relationship
India’s Constitution calls the country a Union of States, not a federation. This wording was intentional to allow strong central control. Critics like Mahboob Ali Baig argued for the word federation to prevent power concentration and authoritarianism. The lack of clear federal terminology has allowed the central government to dominate state powers, often weakening provincial autonomy and local governance.
Post-Colonial Political Dynamics
Partition’s religious divisions overshadowed earlier federal visions. The Congress party’s dominance led to centralised authority, sidelining alternative ideas of power-sharing. Early socialist-federalist leaders like K T Shah lost political ground. The centralisation trend has continued, despite regional identities and demands for greater autonomy growing in states like Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, and Bengal.
Contemporary Relevance of Federalism
As India prepares for a new census and parliamentary delimitation, federalism’s importance resurfaces. Southern states fear losing political influence to the Hindi heartland. Regional pride and identity politics are resurging, challenging the centralised model. A genuine federal union with balanced power distribution is seen as essential for democratic stability and national unity.
Significance of Revisiting Constitutional Visions
Re-examining the founding debates helps understand the gap between constitutional ideals and political reality. The early anti-colonial vision combined democracy with federalism and socialism to prevent authoritarianism. Recognising and restoring these ideals could strengthen democracy and address regional alienation. Adding ‘federal’ to the preamble is proposed as a symbolic and substantive step towards this goal.
Questions for UPSC:
- Point out the challenges faced by federal systems in maintaining unity and diversity with suitable examples from India and other federal countries.
- Critically analyse the impact of the 42nd Amendment on India’s democratic institutions and federal structure.
- Estimate the role of regional identity politics in shaping contemporary Indian federalism and its implications for national integration.
- What are the principles of secularism in the Constitution of India? How do they interact with the rise of religious majoritarianism in recent decades?
