PEARLS AND PITFALLS OF THE DOCTRINE OF CONSTITUTIONAL MORALITY

Constitutional Morality

Abstract

A society is intangible, and we want new levels of intellectuals to evolve society in every dimension, be it science, technology, or social sciences. As per the demand of society, the Law cannot remain motionless. It needs to modification with time. Morality is a standard of what is right and what is wrong, and it can also be a communicative conduct specific to a person or society. The concept of morality is not uniform and differs from person to person, place to place, and civilization to civilization. The concept of morality is not defined at anyplace in the Constitution. Therefore, for “constitutional morality,” we can say that it is an undefined behavioural conduct relating to constitutional facets. In the modern sense, constitutional morality means to abide by the substantial moral entailment that the Constitution carries. Indian courts have formulated that inherent to the Indian Constitution lies a morality called “Constitutional Morality.” Constitutional morality acts as an interpretive device to help courts to ascertain the meaning of the Constitution’s text in contested cases. Constitutional morality is vital for constitutional laws to be effective. Without constitutional morality, the operation of a constitution tends to become arbitrary, inconsistent, and whimsical. Scholars and legal experts are divided in their opinion on constitutional morality. One set of these experts believes that constitutional morality is necessary to implement and interpret constitutional provisions effectively. In contrast, others believe it is a tool for the arbitrary use of power by the judiciary. In this context, the paper attempts to understand the doctrine of Constitutional Morality, its background, approach of the Indian courts in application of this doctrine, and the pearl and pitfall of it.