Constitutional Jurisprudence in a Time of Transition: Legal Sessions begin at Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam Ki Oar 4.0

The fourth edition of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam Ki Oar (VK4.0), themed “Sankraman Kaal”, brought together leading voices from law, geopolitics, and public policy to reflect on India’s institutional frameworks at a moment of profound transition.

The event features a series of legal and geopolitical sessions from 17th-22nd January, 2026, each engaging with questions of power, legitimacy, and governance in a rapidly changing national and global order. While the geopolitical sessions are set to examine India’s evolving role on the world stage, the legal sessions turned inward towards the Constitution as the cornerstone of democratic stability.

Among these, Legal Session 1: Constitutional Jurisprudence offered a thoughtful exploration of the philosophical and structural foundations of the Indian Constitution.

The session was anchored by an eminent panel comprising Jamshed Cama, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India; Jayant Jaibhave, Member and Former Chairman of the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa; and Krishnan Venugopal, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India.

The discussion opened with a foundational question on the difference between written and unwritten constitutions, and whether codification necessarily leads to better governance. The panel reflected on how a written Constitution like India’s provides certainty, accessibility, and normative clarity in a diverse democracy, while also raising concerns about rigidity in times of social and political change.

Krishnan Venugopal observed that where a constitution is not codified, governance ultimately depends on the discretion of those in power, be it the legislature, a monarch, or even a dictator deciding matters on a case-to-case basis.

Drawing a comparative parallel, he remarked that despite the United States having a written Constitution, the manner in which executive power has at times been exercised without regard to legislative or judicial approval, resembles the functioning of an uncodified constitutional system, where institutional restraints become fragile.

A key theme of the session was Article 368 and the power of constitutional amendment.

The panel examined whether a codified Constitution can endure without an express amendment mechanism, and why such a provision is essential to constitutional longevity. At the same time, the discussion acknowledged the risks of excessive amendment, emphasising the role of judicial doctrines particularly the Basic Structure doctrine in preserving the Constitution’s core identity.

Emphasising the importance of judicially enforced limits, Jamshed Cama noted that after the evolution of the Basic Structure doctrine, “nobody can do whatever they want,” as every action of the government must be tested against constitutional barriers. He further underscored the judiciary’s role as a constitutional sentinel, observing that without courts restraining unconstitutional action, democracies risk sliding into authoritarianism.

The session also delved into the scheme of constitutional interpretation, addressing the enduring tension between the letter and spirit of the Constitution. The panel highlighted how Indian constitutional jurisprudence has evolved through purposive and principled interpretation, enabling the Constitution to respond to changing realities without abandoning its foundational values of liberty, equality, and justice.

Jayant Jaibhave highlighted that democratic failure often stems from citizens not understanding the Constitution they are governed by. He stressed that constitutional terms must be discussed and interpreted meaningfully by the public, noting that the Constitution begins with “We the People of India,” underscoring popular sovereignty as its moral foundation.

Concluding the discussion was an examination of the supremacy of the Constitution. The panel traced its unchallengeable authority to the legitimacy of the Constituent Assembly and the moral force of the constitutional vision.

While ordinary laws remain subject to political change, the Constitution endures as the supreme law, anchoring India’s democratic experiment amid constant transition.

At its core, Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam Ki Oar 4.0 attempts to bridge ancient Indian value systems with contemporary constitutional and legal frameworks. Drawing from ideas rooted in Indian Rajneeti, philosophy, jurisprudence, and civilisational ethics, the conclave explores whether India’s modern legal system is sufficiently equipped, both structurally and institutionally, to integrate indigenous constitutional thought while responding to present-day legal, political and governance challenges.