Introduction
India’s Constitution, adopted in 1950, reflects the nation’s commitment to democracy, justice, liberty, and equality. It contemplates a political regime where power is bound by notions of constitutional morality, the moral center that must animate all constitutional functionaries. Yet, in 1975, that moral foundation was shaken to its core.
The Emergency between June 25, 1975, and March 21, 1977, was an unprecedented attack on democratic principles and the liberties of the individual. Constitutional norms were distorted in the name of national security and political stability, institutions were brought under control, and civil freedoms were brutally crushed.
This article revisits the Emergency not just as a political episode but as a trial of constitutional morality. It examines how the Constitution’s ethical principles were abandoned in favor of expediency, centralization, and authoritarianism, leading to what many have called the death of liberty in India’s democracy.
Understanding Constitutional Morality
Before assessing how the Emergency subverted it, one must understand constitutional morality. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the chief architect of the Indian Constitution, emphasized that constitutional morality means adherence to the spirit, not just the text, of the Constitution. It includes respect for individual rights, institutional integrity, the rule of law, checks and balances, and ethical conduct by those wielding power.
Constitutional morality serves as the invisible scaffolding of a democracy. When leaders act contrary to it, even within the letter of the law, the very legitimacy of constitutional governance is endangered. The Emergency offers a case study of how constitutional legality was weaponized to commit moral illegality.
The Political Prelude: Crisis and Consolidation
By the mid-1970s, India faced severe economic challenges, high inflation, rising unemployment, and food shortages, leading to widespread public dissatisfaction. Politically, the ruling Congress government led by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was under increasing pressure from mass protests led by opposition figures like Jayaprakash Narayan, advocating a “Total Revolution.”
The turning point came on June 12, 1975, when the Allahabad High Court found Indira Gandhi guilty of electoral malpractices and declared her election to the Lok Sabha void. Facing possible removal from office, Gandhi advised the President to declare an emergency under Article 352, citing “internal disturbance”, a charge faulted for its ambiguity and abuse.
Thus began one of the most controversial episodes in Indian political history, a constitutional emergency declared to protect personal power rather than national interest.
The Suspension of Civil Liberties: A Constitutional Betrayal
The Emergency resulted in an unprecedented curtailment of constitutional fundamental rights. Articles 14 (equality), 19 (freedom), 21 (life and liberty), and 22 (protection from arbitrary arrest) were effectively suspended.
- Arbitrary Detentions and Mass Arrests
Using the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA) and Preventive Detention laws, thousands of political opponents, journalists, activists, and students were arrested without trial. Due process was ignored; judicial oversight was bypassed.
- ADM Jabalpur Case (1976): The Judiciary Falters
In the infamous case of ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla, the Supreme Court held by a 4:1 majority that even the right to life could be suspended during an Emergency, and no court could entertain a habeas corpus petition. Only Justice H.R. Khanna dissented, stating that the Constitution does not authorize the State to extinguish life and liberty without legal recourse.
This judgment remains one of the most significant failures of Indian constitutionalism, where the judiciary, the people’s last hope, surrendered its independence.
- Censorship and Control of Media
Pre-censorship was imposed on the press. Newspapers were denied the right to publish anything critical of the government. Several editors and journalists were jailed, and dissenting voices were stifled. The Indian Express ran a blank editorial as a symbol of protest.
In a democracy where a free press is integral to liberty, this directly attacked the constitutional right to freedom of expression.
The 42nd Constitutional Amendment: Authoritarian Legalism
Passed during the Emergency in 1976, the 42nd Amendment is often called the “Mini-Constitution” for its sweeping changes to the constitutional framework.
Key changes included:
- Curtailing judicial review by making constitutional amendments non-justiciable.
- Declaring that any law implementing the Directive Principles of State Policy could not be challenged for violating Fundamental Rights.
- Centralizing power by weakening the federal structure.
- Extending the life of Parliament from five to six years.
This Amendment fundamentally altered the balance of power between the judiciary, legislature, and executive, violating the fundamental structure doctrine laid down in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). It turned the Constitution into a tool of executive authoritarianism rather than a charter of people’s rights. People’s Rights, People’s Sovereignty and Political Machinery: Agents of Coercion
During the Emergency, the administrative and police machinery was repurposed as an instrument of state coercion. Under the direct influence of Sanjay Gandhi, who held no constitutional office, several draconian programs were launched:
- Forced Sterilizations
In a coercive population policy, millions were sterilized without informed consent. The poor and marginalized were disproportionately targeted, and the principle of dignity and autonomy over one’s own body was violated.
- Slum Demolitions
Mass slum clearance drives in Delhi uprooted thousands of people. These were conducted without rehabilitation, showing contempt for the right to livelihood and shelter.
The bureaucracy, bound by the Constitution to act reasonably and within legal bounds, became a pawn in pursuing arbitrary and inhumane objectives.
Civil Society Under Siege
The Emergency paralyzed not only institutions but also civil society:
- Student movements were criminalized.
- NGOs were surveilled.
- Trade unions were weakened.
- Citizens were gripped by fear of informers, arbitrary detentions, and loss of livelihood.
A democracy depends on a vibrant civil society that can check the State. During the Emergency, society was silenced, leaving the State unchallenged in its pursuit of unaccountable power.
Restoration of Democracy: A Public Reckoning
In January 1977, Indira Gandhi suddenly lifted the Emergency and called for general elections. To her surprise, the people responded with an overwhelming vote for change. The Janata Party coalition won a majority, and the Congress was routed; Indira Gandhi lost her seat.
This was not merely a political transition; it was a moral resurrection. The Indian people rejected authoritarianism and reaffirmed their faith in constitutional democracy.
- The 44th Amendment (1978)
To undo the damage, the new government passed the 44th Constitutional Amendment, which:
- It made it harder to declare an emergency (replacing “internal disturbance” with “armed rebellion”).
- Ensured that Articles 20 and 21 could never be suspended.
- Reinstated judicial review over constitutional amendments.
It was a legislative acknowledgment that the Constitution had been violated, and safeguards were needed to prevent recurrence.
Lessons for Today: Is Liberty Still at Risk?
Though no formal emergency has been declared since 1977, constitutional morality remains under strain in contemporary India:
- Laws like UAPA and NSA are frequently used to detain dissenters.
- Internet shutdowns, surveillance, and pressures on the media echo past tactics of control.
- Attempts to weaken institutions, like undermining the Election Commission or eroding judicial independence, raise red flags.
- Increasing majoritarianism and executive dominance over institutions show that constitutional ethics are still vulnerable.
The Emergency shows that liberty can be lost not only through formal proclamations but also through slow erosion. When citizens are desensitized, institutions are complicit, and constitutional values are reduced to slogans.
Conclusion: Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty
The Emergency of 1975 was not only a political crisis but a moral one. It revealed the ease with which constitutional instruments are manipulated when the wielders of power shed their ethical bearings in governance. Liberty’s death in the years that followed was no accident; it was designed by legal means without any moral restraint.
Yet, the story also holds hope. The restoration of democracy by the people’s vote shows that constitutional morality, though vulnerable, is never entirely extinguished. It can be revived only through vigilance, dissent, institutional integrity, and public conscience.
Dr. Ambedkar once warned, “Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on Indian soil, which is essentially undemocratic.” The Emergency proved him right. But the people’s resistance, the lone voice of dissent of Justice Khanna, and the ultimate reversion through law and activism established something else as well:
Even when liberty dies, it can be reborn, but only if we remember the past and defend constitutional morality with unwavering resolve.
