3. Constitutional Morality | Ambedkar's Idea and How the Supreme Court Uses It

This is the 3rd post in Unit I — the earlier posts covered what a Constitution is and how constitutions evolved and are classified; this post covers an idea that explains how it should be followed in practice: constitutional morality.

The Problem This Topic Solves

A Constitution is only words on paper unless the people who run the State obey its spirit as well as its text. Rulers can follow the letter and still misuse power. Courts can read a law narrowly and still defeat the Constitution's aims. Constitutional morality names the habit of respecting the Constitution's values, so that power stays limited and rights stay protected.

Meaning and Origin

Constitutional morality (a commitment to the values and norms of the Constitution, over personal views, popular opinion or convenience) was brought into India's constitutional debate by Dr B.R. Ambedkar. In his speech on the draft Constitution in the Constituent Assembly on 4 November 1948, he quoted the historian George Grote, who described constitutional morality as "a paramount reverence for the forms of the constitution".

Ambedkar then warned: "Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it." He meant that a democratic Constitution survives only if officials and citizens learn to respect constitutional methods, even when they dislike the result.

What Constitutional Morality Requires

• Respect for constitutional values — liberty, equality, fraternity, dignity and the rule of law, as set out in the Preamble and the Fundamental Rights.
• Respect for constitutional institutions and procedures — the legislature, executive and judiciary stay within their own limits, and settle disputes by constitutional means.
• Limited government (constitutionalism) — power is exercised under law, not at the will of the ruler; this connects to the idea of constitutionalism explained in the first post of this unit.
• Protection of minorities from majority pressure — rights do not depend on popular approval.

Constitutional Morality in the Supreme Court

• Manoj Narula v. Union of India (2014). The Constitution Bench described constitutional morality as bowing down to constitutional norms, and held that constitutional morality and constitutional trust guide executive governance. They apply to the advice the Prime Minister gives under Article 75(1) when choosing ministers.
• Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018). The Court unanimously struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code in so far as it criminalised consensual same-sex relations between adults. It held that constitutional morality, with its values of liberty, equality, fraternity and dignity, prevails over majoritarian public morality.
• Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (Sabarimala case) (2018). By a 4:1 majority, the Court struck down the custom barring women aged 10 to 50 from entering the Sabarimala temple. The majority opinions stressed that constitutional values, such as equality and dignity, prevail over social custom.

Constitutional Morality and Public Morality

• Constitutional morality means respect for the Constitution's values and procedures, over personal or popular views.
• Source: Ambedkar's speech of 4 November 1948 in the Constituent Assembly, quoting George Grote: "a paramount reverence for the forms of the constitution".
• Ambedkar: "Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated."
• Cases: Manoj Narula (2014), Navtej Singh Johar (2018) and the Sabarimala case (2018).
• Constitutional morality prevails over majoritarian public morality (Navtej Johar).

• Constitutional morality is not a phrase found in the text of the Constitution; it is a principle developed from the Constitution's values.
• It links with constitutionalism: limited government, rights and the rule of law.
• Exam trap: do not confuse constitutional morality with public morality or religious morality; the two can conflict.

A Practical Example

A local community strongly disapproves of two adults who live together in a consensual relationship. Public morality may demand punishment. Under the approach in Navtej Johar, the State and the courts must instead ask whether the Constitution's values of liberty, equality and dignity protect the adults, and these values prevail over the community's disapproval.

Quick Revision Points

• Meaning: commitment to constitutional values and procedures over personal or popular views.
• Origin: Ambedkar, 4 November 1948 (Grote: "a paramount reverence for the forms of the constitution").
• Elements: respect for constitutional values, respect for institutions and procedures, limited government, protection of minorities.
• Cases: Manoj Narula (2014); Navtej Singh Johar (2018); Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (2018).
• Constitutional morality prevails over public morality when they conflict.