Secularism – Implicit from day one, explicit in 1976
Why in the News?
A recent article by constitutional law expert Faizan Mustafa, published in The Hindu, revisits the constitutional foundation and philosophical origins of Indian secularism, amid increasing debates on the relevance and authenticity of the word “secular” added during the Emergency in 1976. The piece argues that secularism was always implicit in India’s constitutional ethos, and that the current critique is either misplaced or politically motivated.

Background
- Indian secularism does not follow the Western model of strict separation of religion and state (as in France or the USA).
- Instead, it reflects a principled distance model, rooted in Emperor Ashoka’s Dhamma, the freedom movement, and Nehruvian philosophy.
- The 42nd Constitutional Amendment (1976) inserted the word “secular” into the Preamble, but the Supreme Court had already recognised it as part of the basic structure in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973).
References from:
- Motilal Nehru Committee Report (1928)
- Karachi Resolution of Congress (1931)
- Hindu Mahasabha Draft Constitution (1944)
- Constituent Assembly Debates (1949), all reaffirm the secular idea.
Features of Indian Secularism (As Per Article)
Autonomy of Religions:
- Secularism protects all religions from state interference.
- Contrary to claims by some Hindutva supporters, secularism ensures the autonomy of Hinduism as much as any other religion.
Ashokan Legacy:
- Ashoka’s Rock Edicts (7 and 12) promoted tolerance, co-existence, and non-glorification of one’s religion.
- His Dhamma was a set of moral governance principles, not religious dogma.
Constitutional Continuity:
- Even without the word “secular” in 1950, the Indian Constitution:
- Guaranteed freedom of religion (Articles 25–28)
- Prohibited religious discrimination (Article 15)
- Upheld religious neutrality of the state (Article 14)
Secularism as Modernity:
- Emerged as a product of reason triumphing over religious dogma in the 18th century.
- Provides a framework for pluralistic coexistence in a deeply diverse society like India.
Comparative Models:
- The UK, Ireland, Greece, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka offer different models of religion-state relationships, from state religions to religious neutrality with guarantees of minority rights.
Challenges Highlighted
Misunderstanding of Secularism:
- Rising perception among Hindutva groups that secularism favours minorities or is anti-Hindu.
- Demands for a Hindu Rashtra disregard India’s constitutional and civilizational commitment to pluralism.
State Overriding Religious Authority:
- Examples like the 2024 consecration of the Ram temple, where Shankaracharyas’ views were ignored by the state, show the state’s supremacy over religious authorities, contradicting theocratic ideals.
Hate Speech and Intolerance:
- Violates the spirit of Ashoka’s edicts and the freedom struggle’s ideals.
- The politicisation of religion erodes the principle of equal respect.
Silences in the Constitution:
- Critics point to the absence of the word “secular” pre-1976, ignoring that many core ideas (like federalism, the rule of law) are also unwritten but accepted as basic structure.
False Narratives:
The idea that secularism was “artificially inserted” in 1976 ignores decades of constitutional and freedom movement advocacy for religious neutrality.
Way Forward
Reaffirm Constitutional Morality:
- Uphold secularism not just as a legal principle but as a governance ethic rooted in India’s civilizational ethos.
Educate on Historical Legacy:
- Disseminate accurate knowledge on the role of secularism in India’s freedom struggle, Ashoka’s Dhamma, and the framing of the Constitution.
Consider Jurisdiction Model :
- If discomfort persists with the current model, explore hybrid models like:
The UK’s Anglican Church with legal equality for all
Greece’s dominant religion, but with equality clauses
Sri Lanka’s foremost status for Buddhists with religious freedom
Promote Interfaith Respect:
- Develop a culture of mutual respect and co-existence through civic education, interfaith dialogue, and hate speech control.
Avoid Theocratic Temptations:
- India must resist becoming a religious state like Pakistan or Iran.
Instead, continue as a modern, pluralistic, secular democracy respecting all faiths equally.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Why is this topic in the news?
A recent article by constitutional expert Faizan Mustafa in The Hindu reignited the debate on whether secularism was part of India’s constitutional vision from the beginning, or only introduced through the 42nd Amendment in 1976. He argues that secularism was always implicitly embedded in the Constitution, and the amendment only made it explicit.
Was secularism part of the Constitution before 1976?
Yes. Although the word “secular” was added to the Preamble in 1976, secular values were already present through core constitutional provisions:
- Article 25–28: Freedom of religion
- Article 14: Equality before the law
- Article 15: Non-discrimination on religious grounds
- Kesavananda Bharati case (1973): Secularism recognised as part of the Basic Structure Doctrine
What is unique about Indian secularism?
Unlike Western models that call for a strict separation of religion and state (e.g., France or USA), Indian secularism promotes:
- Principled distance from all religions, not complete separation
- Equal respect and protection for all religions
- Limited state intervention to ensure equality and reform
- Influenced by Ashoka’s Dhamma, the freedom movement, and Nehruvian ideals
What historical sources support the secular vision?
Several foundational documents and debates support India’s commitment to secularism:
- Motilal Nehru Committee Report (1928)
- Congress Karachi Resolution (1931)
- Hindu Mahasabha Draft Constitution (1944)
- Constituent Assembly Debates (1949)
These sources affirm the vision of religious neutrality and equal rights embedded in India’s democratic fabric.
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION
Question: Was secularism a core constitutional value from the very beginning, or merely a later insertion during the Emergency? Critically examine historical and constitutional developments.







