“The identity of a ‘nation-state’ is premised on the possibility of annulling the cultural rights of a community in order to constitute itself as a political entity” (Savyasaachi, 1998:45)

“A Constitution is a political document , which gives legal content to a set of pre-existing rights, secured politically through people’s struggles. Rights have always been acquired, never granted.” (Kannabiran, 2004:45)

The paper was part of the Key Note Address delivered by the Author in the International Seminar “Indian State and Indigenous/Tribal Peoples: Revisiting Philosophical Foundations of Constitutional Guarantees”, organized by Bodoland University & Center for Social Justice and Governance, Tata Institute of Social Sciences at Kokrajhar on 28-29th March 2014. The seminar was supported by the Tribal Intellectual Collective India.

Full Paper Available with Managing Editor

REFERENCES

• Anupama Roy(2005), Gendered Citizenship- Historical and Conceptual Explorations, New Delhi: Orient Longman
• Government of India (2004), Report of the Expert Group on Prevention of Alienation of Tribal Land and its Restoration, New Delhi: Ministry of Rural Development
• Government of India (2006) Report on Development Challenges in Extremist Affected Areas, New Delhi: Planning Commission of India
• K.G. Kannabiran, The Wages of Impunity: Power, Justice and Human Rights, Hyderabad: Orient Longman
• Partha Chatterjee (1993) The Nation and its Fragments : Colonial and Post Colonial Histories, Princeton: Princeton University Press
• Perry Anderson (2012) The Indian Ideology, New Delhi: Three Essays Collective
• Savyasaachi (1998) Tribal Forest- Dwellers and Self-Rule: The Constituent Assembly Debates on the Fifth and Sixth Schedules , New Delhi: Indian Social Institute.

See Savyasaachi, especially views of Brajeshwar Prasad (88, 122, 127), Babu Ramnaryan Singh (90), Kuladhar Chaliha (119) and B. Das (199) are especially revealing of this sentiment

See for example the decisions of the Supreme Court of India in the Narmada Bachao Andolan case and the Balco case wherein the court stated that it would not interfere with the New Economic policy adopted by the state

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of preventive detention laws immediately after the framing of the Constitution in A.K. Gopalan vs State of Madras (1950 SCR 88). It upheld the constitutional validity of the colonial law of sedition in Kedar Nath vs State of Bihar (AIR 1962 SC 955). The Armed Forces Special Powers Act was upheld in the decision given in Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights vs Union of India (1998) 2 SCC 109). Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act was upheld in Kartar Singh vs State of Punjab (1994 (2) SCR 375) and the constitutional validity of Prevention of Terrorism Act was upheld in People’s Union for Civil Liberties vs Union of India (2004 (9) SCC 580)