Congress’s Past With Ambedkar Haunts Its 'Save the Constitution' Narrative

The Indian National Congress continues to project itself as the guardian of India's constitutional values, rallying behind slogans like "Save the Constitution." This narrative helped the party secure 99 seats in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections-its best performance since 2014.

However, critics argue that this claim is inconsistent with the Congress's historical record-particularly its uneasy relationship with Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and a legacy of constitutional interventions that often weakened democratic institutions.

A Troubled Legacy: Ambedkar and the Congress

The ideological friction between the Congress and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar dates back nearly a century. The most glaring episode was in the 1930s, when Ambedkar's demand for separate electorates for Dalits was opposed by Mahatma Gandhi, who went on a fast unto death. Ambedkar, under pressure, signed the Poona Pact, settling for joint electorates with reserved seats-a compromise many Dalits saw as coerced.

Ironically, despite Ambedkar's pivotal role in shaping the Constitution, the Congress never nominated him to the Constituent Assembly. He had to find his way in through a seat from Bengal, facilitated by the Muslim League. Only after Partition did the Congress, realizing his importance, enable his election from Bombay.

Clashes Over Vision: Nehru vs. Ambedkar

As Law Minister and Chair of the Constitution Drafting Committee, Ambedkar faced significant pushback from within Nehru's cabinet. Nehru objected to the scale and permanence of reservations, citing concerns over mediocrity-arguments that resurface even today. The Hindu Code Bill, which Ambedkar passionately championed to reform Hindu personal laws, was stalled and watered down by Nehru's government, ultimately leading to Ambedkar's resignation in 1951.

In subsequent elections, Congress pitted candidates against Ambedkar and actively campaigned to defeat him. The party also propped up compliant Dalit leaders and organizations to counter Ambedkar's Scheduled Castes Federation, a move critics say diluted independent Dalit political assertion.

Constitutional Amendments and Centralised Control

Congress's own track record on constitutional integrity is also checkered. Nehru's First Amendment in 1951 curtailed freedom of speech-something Ambedkar openly criticized. But the most glaring abuse came during Indira Gandhi's Emergency (1975-77), when the 39th and 42nd Amendments were passed to insulate the PM from judicial scrutiny and alter the Constitution's basic structure.

During this time, Congress also weaponized Article 356, dismissing opposition-led state governments at will, thereby weakening India's federal framework. Institutions like the Election Commission remained under tight executive control, and reforms to curb defections and money power in politics were either delayed or diluted.

A History of Delay and Denial

Today, Congress leaders speak of caste census and "Jitni abaadi, utna haq" (rights in proportion to population). But historically, Congress governments were reluctant to go down that road. The Mandal Commission report, submitted in 1980, was shelved for nearly a decade under Indira and Rajiv Gandhi. It was only implemented by a non-Gandhi Congress PM-P.V. Narasimha Rao-in the 1990s.

Even recent moves, such as appointing Mallikarjun Kharge as the first Dalit Congress president in decades, are viewed by many as symbolic. Questions remain about the real extent of his authority within the party's top leadership.

BJP's Counter-Narrative

Meanwhile, the BJP has positioned itself as the true torchbearer of Ambedkar's legacy-naming monuments, promoting schemes like "Panchteerth," and elevating leaders like Droupadi Murmu and Ram Nath Kovind to the highest constitutional offices. Critics view this as strategic tokenism, but for many in the Dalit and tribal communities, it marks a tangible shift in representation.

The Congress's newfound commitment to protecting the Constitution sits uneasily alongside its historical decisions-from opposing Ambedkar and diluting his reforms to altering the Constitution during the Emergency and delaying social justice measures.

While no party can claim a flawless record, invoking Ambedkar's legacy carries weight only when matched with consistent action. As India navigates an era of renewed constitutional debates, the past remains a mirror-and for Congress, that reflection is complicated.