In Conversation With Advocate J Sai Deepak On His Upcoming Book “India That Is Bharat: Coloniality, Civilisation, Constitution"
Mr. Sai Deepak is an engineer turned litigator. He graduated from Anna University, Chennai, with a Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering, following which he completed his LLB in 2009, from IIT Kharagpur.
Mr. Sai Deepak established his independent practice as an arguing counsel in the year 2016, after working with Saikrishna & Associates as “Associate Partner”.
In his upcoming work, India that is Bharat: Coloniality, Civilisation, Constitution, he argues that in order to liberate Bharat’s distinctive indigeneity, Decoloniality is a Civilizational Imperative.
The book also touches upon the origins of Secularism, Tolerance, Humanism and Christian Political theology.
In one of his articles for the Open Magazine, “The Eternity of the Deity”, Mr. Sai Deepak critiqued the manner in which the Supreme Court employed Roman and English Jurisprudence for determining legal personage of a Hindu Deity in the Ram Janmbhoomi Dispute. He expressed the need to decolonise the Indian Education system, particularly the conceptual foundations of legal education that refuses to overthrow the colonial yoke, even while discussing indigenous ideas.
Excerpts of the Conversation:
Sanya Talwar: So jumping straight to your much awaited book, which reached no. 1 in the overall category of books within 7 hours of the pre-order link going live at Amazon… would you like to give an insight to the readers into what was it that led to the idea behind this book? Was it one singular incident, a thought or an assimilation of various experiences?
JSD: In my own headspace this book is a logical consequence of the decision I made to switch to Law from Engineering. At some point this book was waiting to happen, it was only a question of when I have enough material and enough lived experience to actually comment on it and most importantly, given to the different subjects that I have thrust upon in this particular book, it was also about equipping myself with the necessary qualification, training and knowledge.
This book goes beyond law, in fact if at all there is a misconception that this book is meant for lawyers and law students, it certainly isn’t.
Law as a subject, cannot be looked at in isolation, which is why I have tried to give a fair blend of History, Political Science and the Law.
In fact I started writing it last year because the lockdown gave me a fair bit of time to actually think about what is it that I actually want to do in the realm of Constitutional Law, having participated in quite a few matters of Civilizational and Constitutional Importance.
When you are in the heat of working in a matter, you get lost in the nuts and bolts of it, you don’t get to see the big picture of that matter, you don’t understand the deeper issues sometimes, so I thought this was a fantastic opportunity for me to step back and understand what is the common issue that each of these Civilizational matters face before the Supreme Court.
Sanya Talwar: The title of the book is also very intriguing. It starts with “India: That is Bharat”, What made you choose this title for your first book? With this choice, what are the thoughts you wanted to engender in your reader’s mind? Also, I would like to add, whether you think Bharat and India is really the same, what are the differences, dissimilarities, are there any at all?
JSD: (Referring to his stand on CAA and dilution of Article 370) During the course, or the aftermath of the enactment of CAA, on Twitter I used the word “Bharat” to refer to India and I have said this before, an Indian Engg. Student who is pursuing his masters from America felt that the use of “Bharat” was limited and against the premise of “Secularism” which is a Constitutional Promise according to him, so I simply lifted the words from Article 1 and reproduced it in response to his Tweet, and I said there you go… If You are a Constitutional Patriot, well the constitution says, “India that is Bharat”…
Opinions which are simply formed on the basis of hearsay, on the basis of news media, on the basis of secondary propositions, don’t translate it to first-hand information about the Constitution itself or its history remotely and I dare say, it is not even sufficient to know the history of the Constituent Assembly Debates, one needs to go much much beyond that. This is what I have tried to do with the book.
The idea was to reinforce the centrality of “Bharat” in the identity of this land and its popular discourse because there is a very specific reason that this country was given this name, I have given the material in the book as to what is the Constitutional reason for this, what is the material Constituent Assembly relied on to actually name this country as Bharat in the Objective Resolution and particularly on four dates… These are the aspects I have touched upon.
In my view there is clearly, a difference between the Idea of India and the Idea of Bharat as we live today because the Idea of India subscribes to a certain Anglicized version of this country, whereas the Idea of Bharat is perhaps more rooted and I thought its time that both parties started speaking with each other and understood what the reality is and what are the roots of this particular country… The entire exercise was to start with the Title itself and somehow bring Bharat back to the fore…
Sanya Talwar: When you have to trace a certain civilization from the Columbus’ Expedition of 1492 to Government of India Act, 1919, there would be probably a lot that you would have unearthed and probably a lot that you’d have read. What is it that you dug into, what kind of work did it really require? What sources you pack up this work with?
JSD: As someone who also practices, Intellectual Property Law, I think I must give credit to a lot of people from whom I have benefitted… I am fortunate to be surrounded by a bunch of people who are smarter than me when it comes to a few subjects, who are better informed, better read, and I have had the benefit of picking their brains, had the benefit of looking at the literature they introduced me to, because you see I am not trained in humanities, I am fundamentally a mechanical Engg. who chose Law so at the best I can say is that I have a 3 year exposure in terms of training…
(Refers to his conversation with Dr. Indumathi Vishwanathan, specialized in the area of Decoloniality and Decolonial Scholarship)
… Once I went through the scholarship, I immediately understood its utility in quite a few issues that Bharat faces, as a consequence of it being a post-colonial society, the identity issues, split personality fundamentally and the inability as to in which language we are suppose to think in..
(Refers to his conversation with Dr. Meenakshi Jain, Sandeep Balakrishna, Historians)
According to me the first book is the toughest part, hopefully, and I am done with it… So as you said, this covers the timeline from 1492 to 1919-1920, the second book will cover 1920-1951… 1951 because that’s the year first amendment to the Constitution was introduced where two things happened, apart from the Land Reforms that Sri Jawaharlal Nehru introduced which was then kept in a separate schedule where he wanted to protect it from Judicial Intervention, you also had greater restrictions imposed on Free Speech under Article 19 and the then Law Minister who did that in support of was Dr. Ambedkar… most people don’t wish to talk about this but I have also addressed this to some extent, then 1952-77 and beyond will be the subject matter of the third book…So I call this the Bharat Triology and hopefully it should be released right before the Independence Day.
Sanya Talwar: When you actually started formulating the book, was it decided that there’s going to be three books, did you have anything in mind? Or was it just like you began writing and you realised that my premise will be better justified with 3 books?
JSD: This is meant to be one book, just one book and I am grateful to my researcher Ms. Shaktiki Sharma, who has done a brilliant job, who has been my go to researcher for several years now… the material that she and I put together…almost finishing about 60% of this book, I realised that there’s no way I can do justice to all of it…and I was happy because there was more, more to be written… so this book alone was meant to cover a period uptil 1950, but so much had happened till 1919 which is rarely discussed, the international developments which led to the formation of the GOI Act, the fact that the Indian Constitution 1950 is a product of a global movement which is rarely discussed… so these are the aspects I thought require a lot more focus…
Sanya Talwar: While you were writing “India: that is Bharat”, did you have any target audience for the book in mind or is it something which will find a place in the book collections of people across all generations? Do you think it will do any good to have that perspective which you wish to put out, towards the students, into the student life?
JSD: So since September 2016, I think I have delivered about 230 lectures across the Country, primarily dedicated to the student audience, and if you look at any of these lectures, there is not a single lecture limited to Law, I always bring in History because,
Law without a Historical Perspective is Kora Kagaz, it’s like you are reading a physical equation in some textbook of Physics, but you are simply understanding the mathematical portion of it without understanding the physical significance of it. So an equation, if it is Law, physical significance of the equation is the Historical Context in which you are reading it…
One thing that I have done is to impress upon the young demographic, to understand History better.
One Thing I would certainly like to inform to your audience and listeners, I have quoted primary material as it is, so that they read the language of what was said in debates and other places so that they don’t think that I am reading too much into it Or I am deliberately infusing the literature with my biases.
Sanya Talwar: Your work also reflects upon origins of “Secularism”, “Tolerance” and “Humanism”. In light of this, can you reflect upon the significance of the 42nd Amendment and the position of Bharat before/after it?
JSD: I have tried to bust a lot of common perceptions on origin of these words, I have dealt extensively with political and religious history which gave birth to these words, I have dealt with impact of these words and these concepts on those societies which do not share religious origin of these words, I have also dealt on how these words have been universalized and secularized over a point of time to the extent that we have completely forgotten its history and its origins. As for what the origins are, what the masala is, I will wait for you to read the book!
On 42nd Amendment (hinting it to be a part of the third sequel):
We have engrafted several provisions particularly which have an impact on our identity and our consciousness, without any thought, without any attention being paid to its future implications, without any impact assessment of it to native rights, faith systems, knowledge systems… Infact I have extensively touched upon the connection between nature, knowledge and faith which is essential to Bhartiya Indic Knowledge Systems.
Briefly explains the terms Colonization, Coloniality & Decoloniality
Sanya Talwar: In an article titled, “A Dharmic Document: What is Constitutional Morality?” authored by you for the Open Magazine, you write that Dharma remains the grundnorm of Modern Bharat. I would also like, if you could shed some light whether Coloniality exists in any way, in the legal sector, and if you think it is persisted and whether it should change, if it has affected our legal sector in a negative sense?
JSD: South Africa is a perfect example to answer most of your questions. One of the things they did and they have been doing over the years, is to Africanise legal Education, as oppose to Westernizing it, and South Africa has passed several legislations, including Constitutional provisions so to speak which has the impact of protecting their indigenous culture, from any further foreign influence, to a significant extent and if you bring up the concept of Transformative Constitutionalism or Constitutional morality, in the context of South Africa, it actually means going closer to your roots whereas if you apply the same to Bharat, it means moving away from your roots. That is the distinction.
South Africa has done a better job, and several African countries including Kenya, have done a better job of moving closer to their roots and bringing their administrative structures and legal structures, consistent with their National Origins, consistent with their Civilizational Origins, consistent with their Cultural Origins, whereas Bharat is going exactly in the Opposite direction and therefore this proves that Coloniality exists, and it does not exist only in one particular arm of the State, it exists across the board and I dare say, including the Legal System.
On Dharma and Constitutional Morality:
That is one of the propositions that I certainly put forth…I am not sure if that is the conclusive position because I am trying to explore that when I write the second book because that’s where I ask myself, when morality as a word was used in the Constitution across several provisions such as public morality and its been used as a fetter over Fundamental Rights, what is the source of Morality according to the framers of the Constitution, are they using Civilizational sources, are they using general universalist theories or moral theories, what is the basis… if left to me I would basically say
Every country draws its notions of public morality from its culture. Europe specifically says that when it refers to public morality it is referring to European Civilizational Ethos. They say so in judgments very openly. They don’t even run away from this. So when they say European Civilizational Ethos they will speak of reformation, of enlightenment, they will speak of everything which is a Christian milestone in Europe’s History. But when we speak of Morality in the context of Bharat, Is reference To Dharma there or not, is the Central Question.
Therefore the Question would be What is the reservoir or repository from which you draw all these values… this is the question I hope to address in the second book… (goes on to explain the gist of the Article referred to in the question)
Sanya Talwar: In one of your articles titled, “The Coloniality of Modernity”, you write that native systems have been otherized, more clearly set up as an alternative to the modern mainstream. In that context how far do you think has Bharat, as a civilizational entity, compromised on its indigenous values? Has it been systemic, came in with “standards of development” we were expected to meet? Also, putting it out from a Gender perspective…when we see these gender gap reports, we are not very well placed there, so I am sure we are doing something wrong, can you point out what it is that we are doing wrong? (Reference also made to other Soft Sanctions in Trade and IP by the West)
JSD: On the question of Gender… and I assume this question comes because of my stand primarily in Sabariamala case… Our issues related to Gender Rights are significantly informed by the developments in the west and we impose those very filters to the Indian society. If you hear misogyny somewhere, straightaway say that even Bharat is misogynistic … the problem is that patriarchy, misogyny, every aspect that deals with the question of Gender Rights or Feminism we assume are universally applicable across the board.. that is not the case at all… in fact students of International Law will tell you what is seen in the International Law is primarily the product of the west, therefore what is seen as universal standards of Human Rights, what is seen as universal standards of Gender Rights, Modernity… All of these are experiences of specific regions and specific countries which has been passed of as Human History and World History.
So my response firstly would be, Let us accept the basic proposition that if there is a problem, should the problem be addressed in a manner which is consistent with your civilizational ethos or do you again wish to be a mental slave and again simply import a solution from outside..
Second, I am not saying that close your mind to all the ideas that come from rest of the world but at the very least your first point of reference, must be your culture. First ask a question on the basis of your own culture. That is what every society does.
If there is a problem which your culture is not in a position to address or it lacks the capacity to generate a solution, that is when you start looking outside but if the instinctive response is that let us see what the United Kingdom did on it or what the US did, then you are mentally thinking like the west, your originality has been surrendered at the feet of the west…
It is not my position that we must defend everything that belongs to the past or we must justify everything that belongs to the past merely because it comes from our own culture, A forward movement is necessary for every society, however, that forward movement must be on a very clear understanding of History where you have understood your History more than parroting the History given to you by the Coloniser..
Retaining that Right also to be Open to New Ideas is a way possible.
(Refers to the concept of Standard Of Civilization)
Sanya Talwar: When you are advocating for pride and belongingness to Indic Civilisation, you have a certain idea of Bharat, Is there any specific characteristic that you think should apply to your idea?
JSD: There is a decent chance that my position is taken against Religious Minorities, there is a decent chance that people mistake my position as an exclusionary position… (Explains his position with an instance) … Merely to be able to accommodate certain identities which have become part of our history, as a consequence of our history, I don’t need to abandon my roots, I don’t need to give up my identity.
My idea of Bharat would be Don’t Forget Your Past, Deal With Your Present and as far as future is concerned, Learn the lessons of the Past and take it forward because A Civilization or a Society that has zero respect or understanding for its past, lives in an incomplete present and certainly does not have a clear future, its future is indeterminate because
A person who doesn’t know where he comes from certainly doesn’t know where he is going.
Youtube Link for the Live Session:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOjM6ICMccE
Twitter Link:
https://twitter.com/LawBeatInd/status/1414924344074018819
Pre Order Link to the Book:
https://www.amazon.in/dp/9354352499/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_glt_fabc_BHQ1EZPQRF9RF5SJG8RM