A Civil Servant’s Adieu

Contrary to Rau’s ideas, the framers of the Indian constitution, however, were deeply influenced by the political history that preceded the meeting of the Constituent Assembly. As a result, the framers privileged not only Fundamental Rights but also the postcolonial State and the latter’s right to intervene for the cause of social justice. Interestingly, the idea that mainly underscored this act of privileging was not so much to come together to create a state by submitting individual wills (as theorized by social contract theorists, for instance) but rather there was a deep mistrust between the different political interests that were at work in the Constituent Assembly. Thus, by the time of the drafting of the Indian constitution, political history played a dominant role, with norms giving way to a history of politics.

Conundrum on the Eve of Decolonization

This chapter examines the political history of the tumultuous years leading up to several political discussions on the eve of India’s decolonization. Conventionally appreciated only for its politics, this chapter underscores the influence that this political history had on ideas of constitutionalism. Fundamentally, the chapter points out that the Constituent Assembly (the body that eventually framed independent India’s constitution) emerged out of this political conflict and hence any claim of a presumed sovereignty of the Constituent Assembly must be tempered in the light of this history.

Introduction

This chapter introduces both Rau and the problem of studying the history of the Indian constitution and identifies the ways in which this book departs from existing historiographies. Specifically, the book departs from narratives that explain the making of the Indian constitution either as a product of colonial benevolence or a victorious appropriation of mainstream Indian nationalism and instead highlights the tension between the projects of colonialism, nationalism, and constitutionalism.

Conclusion

This chapter summarizes the main arguments of the book and argues that we can only forget the political history that went into the making of the Indian constitution at our own peril. It points out that political history matters, and the political history of the Indian constitution, perhaps matters even more. By recovering the work of the largely forgotten bureaucrat Sir B.N. Rau and locating his constitutional thought and contributions at variance and indeed in tension with the process of constitution making, the book strives to underscore the importance of studying political histories when thinking about the history of the Indian constitution.

Provincial Autonomy and Its (Anti)Colonial Limits, 1935–8*

This chapter revisits a pivotal moment in Indian constitutional history, namely, the implementation of the Government of India Act, 1935. In particular, it highlights a hitherto unknown aspect of this history by closely examining the role that Rau played in the implementation of this colonial legislation. Appointed as an Officer on Special Duty, Rau, for the first time acquired national and international prominence by creatively interpreting the idea of a constitution that he argued underlined the 1935 Act. However, both the colonial government and the Indian nationalist forces resisted Rau’s interpretation, thereby evidencing the manifestation of a tension-prone relationship between colonialism, nationalism, and constitutionalism.

Moment of Utopia

In 1946, Rau was appointed as the Constitutional Advisor to the newly formed Constituent Assembly. In this capacity, Rau collated and solicited constitutional ideas from members of the Constituent Assembly and put forward his own as well. In these drafts, one gets a clear sense of Rau’s constitutional thoughts, which was a direct response to the political conflicts that unfolded outside the Constituent Assembly. Rau saw the constitution only as a means to an end, which was ‘development’. In pursuit of this goal, Rau wished for a largely powerful head of the state with wide discretionary powers and a legislature and executive that would be committed to ideas of development. While protecting minority interests were paramount, perhaps, most controversially, Rau privileged the Directive Principles—ideas that needed to guide the lawmakers—rather than the granting of Fundamental Rights.

Rau’s Constitutional Solutions to the Political Conundrum

In 1945, Viceroy Wavell requested Rau to return to the Reforms Office and help the process of transitioning power from Britain to India. Aware and working with the knowledge of the political problems between the Congress, which wanted a united India, and the Muslim League, which wanted a divided subcontinent by establishing Pakistan, Rau put forward several constitutional solutions. In drafting these constitutional ideas, Rau drew heavily from his experience of working with the Government of India Act, 1935, which, as in a decade before, brought his ideas into conflict with both the British colonial government as well as the main Indian political parties—the Congress and the League.