High Court of Manipur, Phone: 9077331556, Email:srabindra10@gmail.com
Abstract
This article argues that the people are the true sovereigns of the Republic and that the government and its institutions are only trustees of delegated power, not masters. It examines how constitutional breakdown occurs when this relationship is forgotten, how misuse of state power can grow silently in the absence of public vigilance, and why intellectuals and citizens must act as the living conscience of the Republic. Drawing on constitutional provisions, jurisprudence, and the present crisis of governance, it urges a collective awakening to protect democracy and uphold justice.
I. Introduction: The Forgotten Sovereign
The Preamble of the Constitution opens with the resounding declaration: “We, the People of India…” - affirming that sovereignty vests in the people. This is not symbolic language; it is the legal and moral foundation of our Republic. Sovereignty is delegated, never surrendered. The government - legislative, executive, and judicial - exercises authority not as masters but as trustees of the people’s will.
However, when citizens forget this foundational truth, the balance of power shifts dangerously. Governments begin to act as if their mandate is absolute, and the people - the true masters - become passive recipients of state power. This erosion of civic awareness paves the way for constitutional breakdown.
II. Sovereignty in Constitutional Design
The Indian Constitution distributes power carefully to prevent concentration and abuse. Article 326 guarantees universal adult suffrage, enabling citizens to constitute the legislature. Articles 12 to 32 provide Fundamental Rights that limit state power and protect individual liberty. Article 13 subjects all laws to the Constitution, ensuring that no authority can override the people’s charter.
In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225, the Supreme Court held that Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution is limited by its “basic structure.” Chief Justice Sikri identified the sovereignty of the people, the rule of law, and judicial review as part of that basic structure. Similarly, in Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975 Supp SCC 1), the Court struck down a constitutional amendment that sought to immunize the Prime Minister’s election from judicial review, reaffirming that the democratic process cannot be subverted even by constitutional text.
These decisions make it clear: sovereignty is not at the mercy of transient political majorities. It is a permanent feature of the Republic.
III. The Present Crisis: Constitutional Breakdown by Silence
Today, India witnesses not merely institutional dysfunction but what can be termed a slow-motion constitutional breakdown. During prolonged crises — whether in Manipur’s failure of law and order, the selective suspension of fundamental rights, or the inaction of authorities in protecting life and property - citizens are left unprotected despite the constitutional promise under Article 21.
Institutional silence in the face of mass violations is as dangerous as overt tyranny. Judicial inaction, delayed legislative responses, and executive overreach together erode public faith. When this occurs, the Republic risks transforming into a nominal democracy where sovereignty is only on paper.
IV. The Role of Intellectuals and Citizens
Constitutionalism cannot survive on legal texts alone. It requires constitutional morality, as Dr. B. R. Ambedkar warned in the Constituent Assembly: “However good a Constitution may be, if those who are implementing it are not good, it will prove to be bad.”
Intellectuals, jurists, and conscious citizens have a duty to remind both the state and the public that power is held in trust. Civic education must move beyond textbooks to cultivate awareness of Article 19 rights — freedom of speech, assembly, and association — so that citizens can hold power accountable without fear.
Peaceful public participation is not an act of rebellion but an affirmation of sovereignty. The Supreme Court in Ramlila Maidan Incident, In re (2012) 5 SCC 1 observed that the right to peaceful protest is a fundamental right, integral to democratic governance. To suppress dissent is to undermine the very legitimacy of state power.
In moments of constitutional breakdown, the silence of intellectuals can be as dangerous as the failure of state institutions. The ancient maxim “qui tacet consentirevidetur” (silence is taken as consent) warns that passivity in the face of injustice risks legitimizing tyranny. When the organs of the State falter in discharging their duties under Part III and Part IV of the Constitution, it becomes imperative for the intellectual community - scholars, jurists, writers, teachers, journalists - to act as the moral sentinels of the Republic.
Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, not as a privilege but as a constitutional instrument to correct governmental error. It casts a corresponding duty on those who can think, write, and speak with authority to use their freedom for the preservation of constitutional order. Article 51A of the Constitution enumerates the fundamental duties of citizens, including the duty to “abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions.” Intellectuals bear a higher share of this burden, for they are the cultivators of what Dr. B.R. Ambedkar described as “constitutional morality” - a sentiment that “is not a natural sentiment, it has to be cultivated.”
Legal maxims strengthen this responsibility. “Fiat justitia ruatcaelum” - let justice be done though the heavens fall — is a reminder that the pursuit of justice must not be compromised by fear or expediency. Similarly, “salus populi suprema lex” (the welfare of the people is the supreme law) imposes a moral imperative to act when the State fails to protect its citizens, and “lex injusta non est lex” (an unjust law is no law at all) becomes a call to question actions or laws that violate Articles 14, 19, and 21 - the “golden triangle” of the Constitution.
Socratic duty, as expressed in Plato’s Apology, sees the philosopher as the “gadfly of the state,” awakening citizens from moral lethargy. Hannah Arendt’s warning about the “banality of evil” highlights the danger of normalizing injustice through silence. If intellectuals remain mute in such moments, they become complicit in the erosion of constitutionalism.
Thus, the role of intellectuals is not optional but essential: to speak truth to power, to keep public reason alive, and to act as the conscience-keepers of the Republic. In doing so, they discharge not merely a moral obligation but a constitutional duty, ensuring that the spirit of liberty, equality, and justice - enshrined in the Preamble - survives even when formal institutions appear to collapse.
V. Preventing Misuse of Power
Unchecked power does not emerge suddenly; it grows in small increments, exploiting public apathy. Timely intervention — whether through judicial review, media scrutiny, or civic mobilization - prevents this growth from becoming unmanageable.
The doctrine of public trust, articulated in M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997) 1 SCC 388, holds that the state is a trustee of resources for the people. This doctrine must be extended to all forms of public power. Every decision by the government must be measured against the test: Does it advance the people’s sovereignty or diminish it?
VI. Towards a Democratic Renewal
The Republic needs a renewal of civic consciousness. Schools, universities, and media must foster constitutional literacy. Courts must remain vigilant, exercising judicial review not as a matter of discretion but as a constitutional duty. Legislators and executives must be reminded that their legitimacy depends on fidelity to the Constitution, not mere electoral victory.
Public participation — through lawful protest, informed debate, and responsible voting - is the strongest safeguard against authoritarian drift. As the Supreme Court noted in People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2003) 4 SCC 399, the right to know is essential for democracy to function. The people must demand transparency as an act of reclaiming their sovereign role.
Conclusion and Call to Action
The survival of the Republic depends not only on its institutions but on the vigilance of its people. Sovereignty, once forgotten, is difficult to reclaim. Citizens must remember that they are not subjects but masters, and that government is only their trustee.
In times of constitutional breakdown, silence is complicity. The call of our era is clear: awaken civic courage, revive constitutional morality, and guard the Republic with the same zeal with which it was created.
This is not only a message for lawyers or judges but for students, teachers, journalists, civil society, and every citizen. Discuss these issues, teach them, write about them, protest lawfully, and engage constructively with governance. Democracy survives only when the people stand up for it — and the time to stand up is now.
