Constitution’s relevance lies in its flexibility: CJI
Delivering the MK Nambyar Memorial Lecture in New Delhi, the CJI highlighted that the Constitution’s ongoing relevance is the result of a continuous dialogue
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud on Thursday emphasised the enduring relevance of the Indian Constitution, attributing its longevity to its flexibility and sensitivity to the evolving needs of its people.
Delivering the MK Nambyar Memorial Lecture in New Delhi, the CJI highlighted that the Constitution’s ongoing relevance is the result of a continuous dialogue between generations of citizens, each of whom interprets and applies constitutional principles to address contemporary challenges.
“The story of the Constitution is a constant dialogue between generations of citizens. This dialogue reflects a dynamic process where each era interprets and applies constitutional principles to contemporary challenges and aspirations. It highlights how the Constitution evolves through judicial interpretations, legislative amendments, and societal changes, adapting to new contexts while preserving fundamental rights and values. This continuous dialogue ensures that the Constitution remains relevant and responsive, reflecting the collective vision and aspirations of the people across different epochs,” said the CJI.
He spoke about the role of constitutional visionaries such as MK Nambyar, who was a pioneering constitutional lawyer associated with landmark cases, leaving a mark on the interpretation of fundamental rights and the limits of parliamentary power.
The CJI praised Nambyar’s contributions to India’s constitutional jurisprudence, particularly his landmark arguments in cases such as IC Golaknath and Kesavananda Bharati.
The Golaknath judgment in 1967 held that Parliament cannot curtail the fundamental rights of citizens and that all amendments can be subject to judicial review. This case laid the basis for the “basic structure doctrine” formulated in the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973.
The 1973 ruling laid down that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution but cannot tinker with its basic structure – a check on the executive and the legislative powers of the government.
With senior advocates KK Venugopal (Nambyar’s son and a former attorney general) and CS Vaidynathan in attendance, the CJI highlighted that Nambyar’s arguments went beyond strict adherence to the framers’ original intent, advocating instead for a more dynamic interpretation. “The Constitution continues to be relevant because it is sensitive to the changing needs of its constituents,” the CJI said, explaining how Nambyar’s approach marked a departure from originalism and helped shape India’s legal landscape.
Justice Chandrachud stressed dialogue has kept the Constitution alive and responsive to the aspirations of a diverse nation. He cautioned against interpreting the Constitution with a rigid focus on the framers’ original intent. “A conservative reading of the framers’ intent belies their foresight,” he said. He added that the framers themselves did not intend to “lock the provisions of our Constitution in place for eternity.” The CJI said they rather envisioned the document as a framework that could evolve over time, acquiring greater insight and flexibility to meet the transformative needs of society.
The CJI emphasised the indispensable role of lawyers in this ongoing constitutional dialogue. While judges interpret the Constitution, lawyers craft the interpretative frameworks that guide these decisions. The CJI urged young lawyers to follow Nambyar’s example and use every opportunity before the court to enrich the Constitution, ensuring its continued relevance for future generations. He hoped future lawyers “will learn from his experience and view every opportunity before the Court as a platform to enrich the Constitution.”
Concluding his address, CJI Chandrachud said that constitutional interpretation must evolve with the times while preserving the core values that anchor India’s democratic framework. “A thriving democratic order must account for each of them, encourage more assertion, creative interpretation, and engagement with our constitutional culture.” He highlighted visionaries such as Nambyar showed that constitutional interpretation goes beyond text and original intent, blossoming in the lived realities of the people.