National Commission to Review the Working of Constitution (NCRWC)

Venkatachaliah Report

National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) was established on February 22, 2000, by a resolution of the Government of India. The commission is also known as the Justice Manepalli Narayana Rao Venkatachaliah Commission, for the purpose of suggesting possible constitutional amendments. M.N. Venkatachaliah, the former Chief Justice of India, presided over the 11-member Commission. The commission submitted its report in 2002.

National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) is an important topic for Prelims 2023 preparation and UPSC Mains 2023 as well.

National Commission For Review Of Working Of Constitution – Establishment

The National Commission to Review the Workings of the Constitution was established by Government Resolution on February 22, 2000, and is chaired by Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah.
According to the terms of reference, the Commission shall examine, in light of the past 50 years’ experience, how best the Constitution can respond to the changing needs of modern India’s efficient, smooth, and effective system of governance and socio-economic development within the framework of Parliamentary democracy, and to recommend changes.
If any, that is required in the Constitution’s provisions without interfering with its basic structure or features On March 31, 2002, the Commission delivered its findings to the government in two volumes.
The mission of the NCRWC is to recommend amendments to the “Indian Constitution.”
The Commission concluded that Article 263 of the Constitution had enormous potential that has not been properly used in resolving numerous difficulties involving more than one State.
The Commission observed that when the Union Government enters into a treaty touching an issue on the State List that is crucial to the interests of the states, no previous consultation is undertaken with them.

National Commission For Review Of Working Of Constitution – Term of Reference

The Terms of Reference ****stated that the commission will:

Examine, in light of the past 50 years of experience, how the Constitution can best respond to the changing needs of modern India’s efficient, smooth, and effective system of governance and socio-economic development within the framework of Parliamentary democracy.
Make recommendations for changes, if any, to the Constitution’s provisions without interfering with its basic structure or features.
The commission clarified that its job was to study the Constitution’s operation rather than modify it, and that its role was exclusively consultative and recommendatory.
The Parliament was given the option of accepting or rejecting any of the recommendations.

Composition

National Commission for Review of Working of Constitution – Composition

Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, the retired Chief Justice of India, presided over the 11-member commission.
The Commission’s other members were:
- B.P. Jeevan Reddy (Law Commission’s Chairman),
- R.S. Sarkaria (Retired Judge of the Supreme Court of India),
- K.Punnayya (Retired Judge of Andhra Pradesh High Court),
- Soli Sorabjee (Attorney-General of India),
- K. Parasaran (Former Attorney-General of India),
- Subhash C. Kashyap (Ex Secretary-General of Lok Sabha),
- C.R. Irani (Chief Editor & Managing Director of the Statesman),
- Abid Hussain (Former Ambassador of India to the USA),
- Sumitra Kulkarni (Ex Member of Parliament) and
- P. A. Sangma (Ex Speaker of Lok Sabha).

Report of the Commission

Submission

The Commission was given one year to finish its study and provide recommendations.
The Commission finally presented its findings on March 31, 2002, following three extensions.
Arun Jaitley, the Law and Justice Minister, received the report, which is two volumes long and contains 1979 pages.
Volume I contains the recommendations, while Volume II comprises thorough consultation papers, background papers, details of debates, and the report of the drafting and editorial committee.

Eleven areas identified in the report:

Strengthening parliamentary democracy’s institutions (working of the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary; their accountability; problems of the administrative, social and economic cost of political instability; exploring the possibilities of stability within the discipline of parliamentary democracy).
Electoral changes and political standards.
Under the Constitution, the rate of socioeconomic change and growth (guarantee of social and economic rights: how fair, how fast, and how equal?).
Promoting literacy, creating jobs, maintaining social security, and reducing poverty are all important goals.
Relations between the Union and the States.
Decentralization and devolution; Panchayati Raj Institutions’ empowerment and strengthening.
The expansion of fundamental rights.
Execution of Fundamental Responsibilities.
Implementation of Directive Principles and accomplishment of the Constitution’s Preamble Goals.
Fiscal and monetary policies are subject to legal regulation, and there is a public audit process in place.
In public life, there is an administrative structure and a set of standards.

Recommendation of the Commission

There were 249 recommendations in total from the commission. 58 of them call for constitutional amendments, 86 for legislative action, and the remaining 105 for executive action. Following is a list of the commission’s major recommendations:

Fundamental Rights:

Under Article 15 and 16, discrimination should be prohibited on the basis of “ethnic or social origin, political or other viewpoint, property, or birth”.
Article 19’s freedom of speech and expression should be expanded to expressly include “the freedom of the press and other media, etc.”
Article 21-A, the right to education, should be expanded.

In terms of preventive detention two adjustments should be made:

The maximum length should be six months; and
The advisory board should be composed of a chairman and two other members who should be serving judges of any high court.
Sikhism, Jainism, and Buddhism should be considered as independent religions from Hinduism, and the clauses combining them under Article 25 should be removed.
During the operation of a national emergency, the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights under Articles 17, 23, 24, 25, and 32, as well as those under Articles 20 and 21, will not be suspended.

On Comptroller and Auditor General of India (Lack of quality of report):

According to the National Commission to Review the Constitution’s Workings, “administrative departments frequently criticize the audit department’s operation.” They point out that audits frequently focus on minor concerns and a negative fault-finding approach rather than finding a solution to the administration’s problem.

On Directive Principles:

Part IV of the Constitution’s heading should be changed to ‘Directive Principles of State Policy and Action.’
A new Directive Principle on Population Control should be added to the list.
Every five years, an independent National Education Commission should be established.
To promote inter-religious harmony and social solidarity, an Inter-Faith Commission should be constituted.

On Fundamental Duties:

The ways and mechanisms by which Fundamental Duties could be publicized and made effective should be considered.
The Justice Verma Committee’s suggestions on the operationalization of Fundamental Duties should be adopted as soon as possible.
Article 51-A should add the following new essential responsibilities:
The responsibility to vote in elections, participate actively in the democratic process of governance and pay taxes.
To promote a sense of family values and responsible parenting in matters of children’s education, physical, and moral well-being.

On State funding of election:

The National Commission to Review the Constitution’s Workings did not support state funding of elections but agreed with the 1999 law commission report that an appropriate framework for regulating political parties would need to be put in place before state funding could be considered.

On Anti-Defection Law:

All individuals who defect (individually or in groups) from the party or alliance of parties on whose ticket they were elected must renounce their parliamentary or assembly seats and run in new elections.
The defectors should be forbidden from holding any public office, including ministerial positions, or any other remunerative political position, for at least the remainder of the current legislature’s term or until the next elections, whichever comes first.
A vote cast by a defector to overthrow a government should be considered void.
The Election Commission, rather than the Speaker or Chairman of the House concerned, should have the authority to determine on questions of defection disqualification.

On Center-State Relations:

The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution made recommendations, many of which were similar to those made by the Sarkaria Commission. The following few of the novel recommendations:

According to Article 307, a legislative organization named the Inter-State Trade and Commerce Commission should be constituted.
A committee consisting of the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Speaker of the Lok Sabha, and the Chief Minister of the state in question shall nominate the Governor.
The Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule should cover disaster and emergency management.
In the event of a political breakdown in a state, the state should be given an opportunity to explain its position and correct the situation before invoking Article 356, to the extent possible.
The 1990 Inter-State Council directive should explicitly outline the topics that should be discussed during the discussions.

Conclusion

Consecutive administrations have declined to embrace the ideas. To get the most out of these guidelines, they should be executed with a good framework. The National Commission to Review the Workings of the Constitution (NCRWC) was established by a decision of the Government of India in 2000, with a one-year deadline to make its recommendations.