Q.15. Discuss India as a secular state and compare with the secular principles of the US constitution. [UPSC 2024 GS P-2]

India as a Secular State:

India is a secular state as outlined in its Constitution, meaning that it maintains neutrality toward all religions and does not favor any religion over another. Secularism in India is rooted in the country’s pluralistic and diverse cultural history, where multiple religious communities have coexisted for centuries. The Indian model of secularism is unique because it does not advocate for a complete separation of religion from the state, but rather aims for equal respect and treatment of all religions.

Key Features of Secularism in India:

1. Constitutional Framework:
   • The word “secular” was added to the Preamble of the Indian Constitution by the 42nd Amendment (1976), making it clear that India is a sovereign, socialist, secular, and democratic republic.
   • Article 25 to 28 of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of religion to individuals and groups, subject to public order, morality, and health. These provisions protect religious practices while allowing the state to intervene in secular activities associated with religious institutions (like financial regulation of temples or religious charities).
2. Equal Treatment of All Religions:
   • India follows a policy of equal respect for all religions. The state does not declare any official religion and strives to maintain a neutral position in religious affairs. This is embodied in the principle of “Sarva Dharma Samabhava” (equal respect for all religions).
3. Freedom of Religion:
   • Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of conscience and the free profession, practice, and propagation of religion. However, this right is subject to restrictions related to public order, morality, and health.
   • Article 26 allows religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs in matters of religion.
4. State’s Role in Religion:
   • The Indian state can intervene in religious matters for the sake of public welfare. For example, it has legislated on issues like abolishing untouchability (Article 17) and ensuring equal rights for women through reforms in personal laws, including Hindu, Muslim, and Christian marriage and divorce laws.
5. No Complete Separation of Religion and State:
   • Unlike some Western notions of secularism, India’s secularism allows for some involvement of the state in religious matters. For instance, the state may provide funding to religious institutions for purposes like education or social welfare, but it cannot promote any one religion over others.
6. Minority Rights:
   • India’s Constitution provides special protections for religious minorities. Articles 29 and 30 ensure that minorities can establish and administer their own educational institutions and protect their culture and language.

Secularism in the United States:

In contrast, the United States follows a stricter form of secularism, with a clear separation of church and state. This is rooted in the history of the American Revolution and the desire to protect individual freedom from state imposition of religion, which was prevalent in Europe at the time.

Key Features of Secularism in the United States:

1. Constitutional Framework:
   • The First Amendment to the US Constitution lays the foundation for secularism. It contains two key clauses regarding religion:
     • The Establishment Clause: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” This clause ensures that the government cannot establish an official religion or favor one religion over another.
     • The Free Exercise Clause: “…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This protects individuals’ rights to practice any religion or no religion at all.
2. Complete Separation of Church and State:
   • The US follows the principle of strict separation of church and state. This means that religious institutions are kept separate from government institutions, and the state does not interfere in religious matters unless it infringes on other constitutional rights.
   • This separation is often symbolized by Thomas Jefferson’s “wall of separation” between church and state. For example, public schools cannot endorse religious teachings or practices.
3. No Involvement in Religious Institutions:
   • Unlike India, where the state may intervene in the management of religious institutions for social reform, the US government does not involve itself in the internal matters of religious organizations unless their actions violate civil or criminal law.
   • Religious institutions in the US enjoy considerable autonomy, including tax-exempt status, as long as they do not engage in partisan politics.
4. Freedom of Religion:
   • Like India, the US Constitution guarantees freedom of religion through the Free Exercise Clause. People are free to follow any religion or none at all, and the state cannot restrict religious practices unless they conflict with public order or constitutional rights (e.g., cases involving polygamy or child endangerment in the name of religion).
5. Judicial Interpretation:
   • Over time, the US Supreme Court has played a major role in interpreting the limits of state and religious interaction. For example, in the case of Engel v. Vitale (1962), the Court ruled that prayer in public schools was unconstitutional, reinforcing the strict separation of religion from state affairs.
6. Pluralism, but Strict Neutrality:
   • While the US is a religiously pluralistic society, the government maintains strict neutrality regarding religious issues. The state cannot fund religious schools or institutions directly, although private donations to religious organizations are tax-deductible.

Comparison of Indian and US Secularism:

1. Nature of Separation:
   • India: India follows a model of “principled distance” or neutrality. The state does not promote any one religion but can engage with religions for social reform or welfare purposes. It does not strictly separate religion from public life, and religious practices often intersect with social and political matters.
   • US: The US follows a more rigid separation of church and state. The state does not interfere in religious matters and cannot endorse or promote any religion.
2. Role of Religion in Public Life:
   • India: Religion has a visible presence in Indian public life. Public holidays are often based on religious festivals, and religious symbols are common in public spaces. While the state is neutral, religion remains an integral part of the cultural fabric.
   • US: Religion plays a private role rather than a public one. While individuals may be deeply religious, religious practices or symbols are generally kept out of government institutions. Public life is expected to be secular.
3. Judicial Involvement:
   • India: The Indian judiciary has actively interpreted Article 25-28, allowing the state to reform religious practices that violate constitutional principles, such as gender equality or caste discrimination.
   • US: The US judiciary strictly enforces the separation of church and state, ensuring that the government does not endorse or support religious activities in public institutions. The courts have limited the role of religion in public education, government offices, and legislation.
4. Government Support:
   • India: The government may provide financial assistance to religious institutions for social purposes, such as running schools or hospitals, as long as it is available to all religions.
   • US: Direct government support to religious institutions is generally prohibited, except in cases where the aid is provided for secular purposes and benefits all citizens, not just religious groups.

Conclusion:

India and the United States both uphold secularism but approach it differently. India’s secularism emphasizes equal respect for all religions while allowing the state to intervene in religious matters for social reform and welfare. In contrast, US secularism enforces a stricter separation of church and state, ensuring that religion and government functions remain distinct. Both models are suited to the unique historical, social, and cultural contexts of their respective countries, but they reflect fundamentally different relationships between religion and state.