FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK
We, the People
T
he current anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA)
protests that are happening in India lead one to offer at
least two conceptions of “we, the people,” which is the
opening expression of the preamble to the Indian Constitu-
tion. Arguably, the expression with which the preamble begins
can be seen in terms of its abstractness in the sense that it
does not refer to an individual or to social groups. The expres-
sion that was echoed on 26 January 1950 was hypothetical
inasmuch as it assumed people’s endorsement to the Consti-
tution that was mediated through the spokesperson of each
social group.
“We, the people,” the premium expression of the Constitu-
tion connotes an abstract if not an imprecise sense. Generally
speaking, the word “we” in the expression seeks to identify
those who belonged to India on the eve of the promulgation of
the Constitution on 26 January 1950. The “we” further indicates
that the people who are constitutive of the above expression
and share a general identification, irrespective of their specific
leanings to religion, region, caste, and gender, do belong to
India. However, it is historically true that the wider process of
constitution-making did contain multiple expressions of differ-
ent voices. And yet, the leaders representing these specific
voices had to merge into a consensus on the original meaning
that is embedded in the preamble. The original meaning,
which extends to the fundamental principles of the Constitu-
tion, theoretically induced people into accepting the impor-
tance of being sovereign, socialist, secular, and democratic.
“We,” thus, was seen as a collective endorsement of these prin-
ciples. This is how the concept or the expression “we, the people’’
was produced through consensus.
The constitution-makers, while adopting this word in 1950
and making it a part of the preamble, did not seem to have con-
cretely specified the exact meaning of “we, the people.”
This perhaps was needed to be carved out from the general
identification of a more concrete identity such as citizens. It is
needless to mention that the word “citizen” in the preamble is
quite technical and has a precise location in the Constitution.
Economic & Political Weekly EPW JANUARY 25, 2020 vol lV no 4
It is defined in terms of the rights that the citizens tend to enjoy
within the limits of specific constitutional provisions. Thus,
citizenship is the result of the much broader and abstract
expression like “we, the people.” Which is why the word citizen
appears only after the expression “we, the people” in the pre-
amble. This profound expression represents the general con-
sensus on the adoption of egalitarian, and hence, foundational
principles of the Constitution. “We, the people” thus was the
adoption of the original meaning of the Constitution. In this
regard, it has to be kept in mind that such a meaning did not
come from the intention of the constitution-makers, but from
their sincere awareness about the lived experience of the
people. Lived experience was tragic in one sense, in that it
involved the exploitation of Dalits, subjugation of women and
distraught isolation of the Adivasis. At another level, lived
experience was also an energising experience as it presented
human diversity in the cultural field. The Constitution offered
the promise of egalitarianism to the underprivileged, and to
the privileged, security from social disorder.
The expression “we, the people’’ is once again finding its
echo in the current protests opposing the CAA, which are not
only an endorsement of the foundational principles of the
original meaning, but can be seen as an affirmation of the
original meaning. The protests are nothing but the restoration
of the original expression “we, the people.” The protests can
be seen as an articulation of republican authority to defend the
original meaning or the basic principles of the Constitution.
Such a commitment to the original normative meaning of
the Constitution has been further accentuated through the
symbolic celebration of the constitution-makers as well as the
Constitution. The expression “we, the people” seems to be
re-emerging once again in the public domain. The word “we”
in the current context does show moral determination to
stand by the Constitution. It seems to rule out any surrender
to a “super sovereign.”
9