What can France learn from the Indian Constitution's approach to secularism?

CD Reference

https://www.civilsdaily.com/secularism/

Approach:

It’s a direct question.It wants you to compare 2 models of secularisms – French and Indian and asks you to what

• In recent times, France has been the target of various terror attacks and subsequently, France has banned various religious insignias and dresses. While France follows the rigid principle of secularism whereas Indian secularism is equal respect to all religions.


• In the intro, define secularism and state that there can be many models. France has a strict separation while that of India is ‘principled distance’.


• Then in the 1st part of the main body, discuss the basic differences between Indian and French secularism.


• In the 2nd part, mention the challenges and issues with the French version of secularism.


• Highlighting the recent events of terrorism and subsequent banning on many religious activities in France.


• Mention what can France learn from India in terms of secularism and maintaining harmony in a multi-religious and multicultural society. Highlight how accommodating our Constitution is.


• Discuss, though briefly, some of the issues with Indian secularism as well before ending the answer in an optimistic tone.

Answer

Secularism refers to the separation of Religion from Politics. It’s a western construct that finds its origin in the Treaty of Westphalia. There are many models of secularism.

France follows thewall of separation model– it calls for a water-tight separation between the religion and state. The state actively tries to confine people’s religion to their private spheresIt takes a tough stand to prohibit any visible religious symbols in public space. Eg.banning burkinis, hijab, etc.

Problems with French Secularism

• Due to the lack of support from the state in western secularism minorities get marginalized.


• For instance, recent Hijab and Burkini ban in France has created anxiety among minorities.


• If religious women forbids a woman from becoming a priest, then the state cannot do anything. Like this, if a particular religion forbids the entry of some of its members in the sanctum of its temple, then the state has no option but to let the matter rest exactly where it is.


• So in France, religion is a private matter, not a matter of state policy or law. This model interprets freedom and equality in an individualistic manner. Liberty is the liberty of individual. Equality is the equality between individuals. There is little scope for community based rights or minority rights.


• On the other hand, the drawbacks of this model can be seen as, such states focus on intra-religious domination by strict separation of state from church to realise among other things individual freedoms, issues of inter-religious (and therefore minority rights) equality are often neglected.


• This model leaves no scope for the idea of the state supported religious reforms.

Indian Constitution’s Approach

The Indian Constitution gives many rights to create a more inclusive society where any religion can thrive.

Freedom of Conscience –Every person is guaranteed the freedom of conscience and to freedom to profess, practice and propagate his own religion

Freedom to manage Religious Affairs –There is not only the freedom of the individual to profess, practise and propagate his religion, there is also the right guaranteed to every religious group or denomination.

Cultural and Educational Rights – The Minorities can preserve their culture and education.

While in France, laws are made in isolation from religious principles, in India, the law seeks to accommodate the multiple religious principles that followers of different religions adhere to.

Indian Secularism has made room for and is compatible with the idea of state-supported religious reform. Eg.Indian constitution bans untouchability under Article 17. Abolition of child marriage and lifting the taboo on inter-caste marriage sanctioned by Hinduism.

The Indian Secularism can be best described as that of ‘Principled Distance’. The doctrine of Principled Distance allows states to interfere in matters of religion to stop discrimination and ensure that all religions are treated equally.

It should go without saying that no state’s approach to religion is perfect, and India faces its own significant problems with diversity and integration. But in many ways, its approach is more forward-looking than France and hence France can adopt many of the best practices.