Constitution of Bharat: Article 18: Part 2

 

The Parliamentary Debates on Article 18 of the Indian Constitution, which deals with the abolition of titles, took place during the Constituent Assembly sessions. Here's a summary of those discussions:

Key Points of Discussion:

1. Draft Article 12 to Article 18:
   • The debate on what would become Article 18 occurred on November 29, 1948, when it was initially listed as Draft Article 12. This draft was later adopted as Article 18.
2. Abolition of Titles:
   • Objective: The central aim was to abolish all titles conferred by the State, except for military or academic distinctions, signaling a move towards a republic that values merit over birth or political allegiance.
   • Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's Argument: As the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, Ambedkar was a strong advocate for this article, arguing that titles were remnants of a feudal and colonial past, incompatible with a democratic society. He emphasized that titles could perpetuate social inequality.
3. Provisions of Article 18:
   
   
   • Clause (1): No title, not being a military or academic distinction, shall be conferred by the State. This was to ensure that no new titles would be created that could lead to social stratification.
   • Clause (2): No citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign State, aiming to prevent the influence of foreign honours on Indian citizens.
   • Clause (3): No person who is not a citizen of India but holds an office of profit or trust under the State shall accept any title from any foreign State without the President's consent. This was to control the acceptance of foreign titles by non-citizen officials.
   • Clause (4): No person holding any office of profit or trust under the State shall accept any present, emolument, or office from or under any foreign State without the President's consent, further restricting the acceptance of foreign accolades by officials.
4. Debates on Exceptions:
   • There was discussion on whether exceptions should be made for certain honors, particularly those from foreign countries. Some members, like Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, proposed amendments to allow for foreign titles if they were purely honorary and not associated with privileges or duties. However, these suggestions were generally opposed due to concerns over maintaining the integrity of Indian republican values.
5. Adoption and Consensus:
   • Article 18 was adopted with near-unanimous support, reflecting the assembly's commitment to egalitarianism and the eradication of colonial legacies. The consensus was that titles were not only unnecessary but also potentially harmful to democratic principles.
6. Cultural and Social Implications:
   • The debate reflected a broader desire to dismantle hierarchies based on birth or colonial loyalty and to promote a society based on merit and equality. The abolition of titles was seen as a step towards this transformation.

Impact and Legacy:

• Democratic Ethos: Article 18 established a clear stance against the creation or acceptance of titles, reinforcing India's democratic and republican identity.
• Legal Precedents: Over the years, the judiciary has upheld these principles, ensuring that any attempt to reintroduce or recognize titles in a manner that could undermine Article 18's intent is checked.
• Cultural Shift: It contributed significantly to the cultural shift away from feudal and colonial practices, promoting a more egalitarian society.

The debates on Article 18 were emblematic of the Constituent Assembly's vision for a new India, free from the social and political stratification of the past, focusing instead on equality and merit.