Constitutionalism

Awareness Survey in New Delhi

People's Awareness of the Indian Constitution and the Review Process
- A CHRI Survey Report

Introduction

After 11 months of work, NCRWC has released some consultation papers for public debate. Another batch of 13 papers is due for release next month. Questionnaires have been designed for ascertaining people's opinions on various issues under the areas identified for review. People are expected to debate these issues and forward their opinions to NCRWC within a month before it compiles its final recommendations for change. The consultation papers, their summaries and questionnaires have been put on NCRWC's website (http://ncrwc.nic.in). However regional language translations of these documents are not available.

The Basic Questions

Now that the stage has been set for debate, it becomes necessary to ask whether the people are willing to participate in the review process. Even if they are willing, are they generally aware of the mandate of NCRWC and the areas covered by the review in order to be able to react to the issues in an informed manner? Has NCRWC been successful in conveying to the people its oft-repeated clarification that it is not going to review the Constitution per se? How many even amongst the educated sections of society know that it will review only the working of the Constitution without tampering with its basic features? Has the political controversy surrounding the genesis of NCRWC received more publicity than its designated job? How many people know that they can send their opinions and suggestions to NCRWC? Does the ordinary citizen know where NCRWC is situated in order to send comments and answers to the questionnaires? Last but most important-what mechanism has been devised to ascertain the views of the unlettered millions who cannot read but have volumes to speak about the working of the Constitution and their suffering due to poor governance? Does NCRWC want to contact these people who constitute more than 40% of the population?

Objectives of the Survey

CHRI, which has strongly advocated the idea of a participatory and consultative constitution making and review process throughout the Commonwealth, has been urging NCRWC to become much more proactive about involving the people in its work. While this idea has had a sympathetic hearing, the NCRWC has not translated it into a real attempt to involve the public in the ongoing review of the working of the Constitution.

In view of the absence of any major publicity exercise for educating people, CHRI conducted a survey in New Delhi to assess the level of people's awareness about the review. During September-October 2000, CHRI sought to find out:

a) whether literate people living in the capital city know about the existence of NCRWC and were aware of its work;

b) whether they knew they could send their views and suggestions to NCRWC and

c) whether they wanted to be consulted about how they want to be governed despite election fatigue and disillusionment with the functioning of the government at various levels.

The survey was used as an opportunity to inform the respondents themselves about the ongoing Constitution review exercise. It was an opportunity to disseminate information about NCRWC among those who knew nothing about it. We hoped that they would feel motivated to send their views to NCRWC about life under the Constitution during the last five decades.

The Sample

The survey was conducted in southern Delhi which houses the more affluent segments of the city's population. CHRI concentrated on this portion of the city with the following assumption:

With their high media access and information networks, if people living in southern Delhi did not know about NCRWC and its functioning, then the rest of Delhi and inferentially people living elsewhere in the country must know even less.

However, within this broad band of relatively affluent folk we sought to add diversity. We contacted a broad cross section of society by targeting people of either sex, who had received varying levels of formal education and belonged to various age groups. Prepared questionnaires were administered at public places such as bus stops, market places, cinema halls, temples, Gurudwaras, mosques, churches, schools (targeting parents) and students in colleges and universities. Delhi being a cosmopolitan city with a high degree of mobility, some of our respondents actually resided elsewhere but were visiting these parts for diverse of reasons.

A total of 1,026 respondents - 566 men (55.17%) and 460 women (44.83%) responded to the questionnaires administered orally by surveyors (Fig. 1).

A majority (90.74%) of the respondents belonged to the 18-50 years age group (Fig. 2).

People who were literate but below the graduate level comprised the largest category of respondents at 44.74% (graduates = 30.51%; post-graduates = 18.32% and illiterates = 6.43%- Fig. 3).

The Questionnaire

The questionnaire - made up of just ten close-ended questions - was very simple. These had to do with the review process, such as awareness about the location of NCRWC and the possibility of making submissions to it. Some of the questions were designed to ascertain the extent of people's faith in NCRWC as well as the concept of consultative and participatory democracy. The questionnaire was composed in Hindi and English so that the survey would not remain limited to just one segment of the population. (sample questionnaire is attached).

The Findings

Awareness about the Constitution

As expected, a majority of the illiterate respondents (62.12%) were not even aware that India has a Constitution. Comparatively, literate respondents fared better with awareness levels ranging from 75% to 100%- the lower level scored by respondents below graduate level. (Fig. 4). Unlettered women (65.62%) fared worse than their male counterparts (58.52%) in terms of their lack of awareness (Fig. 5).

Awareness about NCRWC

1. Predictably, high levels of education corresponded to higher levels of awareness of the existence of NCRWC. More than 82% of the postgraduates and 65.63% of college and university students were aware of NCRWC's existence (Figs. 6 & 7 respectively). Conversely, 89.39% of the illiterate respondents were ignorant about the existence of NCRWC (Fig. 6). Moreover, awareness about NCRWC existed primarily due to the political controversy surrounding its genesis, rather than the efforts of NCRWC to make itself known. Hence, the poor levels of awareness about the location and the mandate of NCRWC, as will be seen below.
   

2. Almost two thirds of the respondents were unaware of the location of the office of NCRWC. Only 36.84% of the respondents correctly identified New Delhi as its headquarters. A few respondents chose Chennai and Mumbai from the alternatives given in the questionnaire (Fig. 8).

Awareness about NCRWC's mandate

More than 60% of the respondents (overall) were ignorant of NCRWC's mandate. Only 39.77% correctly identified the job of NCRWC, namely to examine the working of the Constitution and recommend changes if necessary (Fig. 9). An overwhelming 93.92% of the unlettered respondents were unaware of the nature of NCRWC's work (Fig. 10). 12.77% of the respondents believed that NCRWC would amend the Constitution and 2.24% believed that it would write a new Constitution for the country. Curiously, some of the respondents believed that NCRWC performed two or more of these tasks! (Fig. 9).

Awareness about making submissions to NCRWC

Only 30.12% of the respondents (overall) were aware that they could present their views before NCRWC (Fig. 11). The modest sized advertisements of NCRWC, in popular national dailies, inviting submissions from the public, obviously escaped the notice of many a reader. Less than half of the postgraduate respondents (45.75%) were aware that they could send their opinions to NCRWC (Fig. 12). Moreover, 77.19% (overall) of the respondents did not know how to make submissions to NCRWC (Fig. 13). Even among postgraduate respondents who knew that they could make submissions to NCRWC, almost 40% did not know how to go about it (Fig. 14).

Willingness to make submissions to NCRWC

Yet, more than three-fourths (77%) of the respondents (overall) wanted to tell NCRWC how they would like India to be governed. This level of enthusiasm evenly spread through all categories of literate respondents. At 59.09%, the unlettered respondents were least interested about giving their views to NCRWC (Fig. 15). Illiterate men showed lesser interest than their women counterparts did to give their views to NCRWC (Fig. 16). At 84%, postgraduate women seemed most enthusiastic of all respondents about giving their views to NCRWC (Fig. 17).

Will NCRWC listen to us?

An overwhelming majority of the respondents were skeptical that their views would be taken seriously by NCRWC. Less than one-third (29.43%) of the respondents were confident that NCRWC would take their views into consideration while formulating its report (Fig. 18). Even amongst literate respondents, only 40% postgraduates believed that NCRWC would listen to their views (Fig. 19). The figures drop further with lower education levels with an astounding 82.36% of the illiterate men expressing skepticism that their views would receive a sympathetic hearing at NCRWC (Fig. 20).

Participatory Democracy through Consultation

Despite high levels of skepticism, the respondents were enthusiastic about participating in the review of the working of the Constitution. This is the first time in the country's history that people have been asked to give their views about such an important matter. The only mass-based mechanism, available with the people for expressing their views on issues and policies has been the 'vote'. More than 80% of the respondents said they would like to be consulted again in future about how they should be governed (Fig. 21). Lowest levels of interest (62.12%) in the consultative process were recorded for illiterate respondents (Fig. 22).

It is remarkable that the response from women in all literate categories was more positive than that of men. Literate women in general showed a marginally higher degree of awareness about the review process than men.

Effectiveness (or lack of it) of NCRWC's media strategy

NCRWC has published its advertisements from time to time in the English language based national dailies. Regional language translations of its terms of reference, schedule of work, areas identified for review and other vital details are not available. It has set up a website on the Internet for disseminating information about its work, and its consultation papers and questionnaires among the public.

• Only 1.85% of the respondents said that they came to know about NCRWC through the Internet (Fig. 23).
  

• 69.36% of the respondents (overall) had come to know about the existence of NCRWC through newspapers.
  

• Similarly 44.94% of the respondents (overall) came to know about NCRWC through television.
  

• Only seventeen out of 1,026 respondents said they had learnt about the existence of NCRWC through radio. None belonged to the illiterate group (Fig. 24).
  

• Only 7.91% of the respondents said they had acquired knowledge by word of mouth (Fig. 24). Most of these respondents were students who had learnt about NCRWC in classroom discussions.

Conclusion

Our survey demonstrates that a majority of illiterate people does not know that India has a Constitution. In fact, levels of ignorance may be much higher amongst the unlettered people living in other parts of the country. Though our survey did not delve into this aspect, it is surmised that only a few might possess comprehensive knowledge of the contents of the Constitution even amongst literate people. Awareness about the existence and mandate of NCRWC is lacking amongst a majority of illiterates and those who have some education below graduate level. A majority of the respondents are not aware of the nature of NCRWC's work. Even amongst those who know about the review, people learnt about it because of the political controversy and not through the NCRWC's publicity exercises.

Despite the controversial origins of NCRWC, an overwhelming majority of the respondents whom we contacted felt motivated to participate in the review process if they knew how to go about it. However, they are skeptical of getting a sympathetic hearing from NCRWC. This lack of faith must be attributed to the inability of NCRWC to move out of the elite circles within which it has been operating so far. It has not targeted common men and women - who do not have access to national dailies or the Internet - and yet happen to be the most reliable witnesses and more often the victims of the evils of poor governance. A sense of alienation from the review process has already set in amongst the unlettered people whom we contacted as they were least interested in giving their views to NCRWC. It would not be surprising at all if one finds a complete lack of interest even amongst educated sections of society living outside the metros.

The ordinary citizen does not doubt the integrity of the individual members of NCRWC. Instead, NCRWC's timorous attitude in reaching out to the common folk has done the most damage to its image. Leaving aside regional news networks, within the national media there has been very little objective news reporting on the issues raised by NCRWC's consultation papers. Media attention has focused more on the political aspects of the review process.

NCRWC must harness the power of radio and television, which constitute cost-effective and practical means of propagating knowledge about its mandate and work amongst the masses of people. Demystified and shorter versions of the consultation papers must be made available in the regional languages through local newspapers and education programmes on radio and TV. The period allotted for debate must be increased to one year.

Most importantly, NCRWC should from time to time clear misconceptions from people's minds about the ideas contained in its consultation papers, through the media.