Introduction
The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) emerged from growing concerns about India’s governance system by the late 1990s. After fifty years of constitutional practice, India faced challenges such as coalition instability, criminalisation of politics, delays in justice and uneven development. Policymakers and some scholars believed that piecemeal amendments could not address these wide-ranging issues. A complete and structured review seemed necessary to examine whether institutions still matched India’s needs.
The Vajpayee-led NDA government, elected with a more stable majority in 1999, had long supported constitutional reforms. These included improving political stability, revisiting centre–state relations and strengthening electoral processes. Using this opportunity, the government decided to establish a national-level review mechanism. This proposal created political debate. Several opposition groups and civil society organisations feared that the review might weaken secular or federal principles. To reduce these concerns, the government repeatedly stated that the basic structure of the Constitution would not be touched.
How Was the NCRWC Formally Established?
The NCRWC did not arise from a constitutional amendment. The government created it through an executive resolution on 22 February 2000. The Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs issued the resolution. It explained the commission’s purpose, powers, composition and working method.
The resolution directed the commission to study fifty years of constitutional functioning and recommend how the Constitution could meet new governance and development challenges. It also emphasised that any suggestion must stay within the framework of parliamentary democracy. Most importantly, it required the commission to preserve the basic structure doctrine established by landmark Supreme Court judgments such as Kesavananda Bharati. This restriction made clear that core values like secularism, democracy, republicanism, judicial review and federalism would remain untouched.
Who Were the Members of the NCRWC?
The NCRWC consisted of eleven members, including the chairperson and the member-secretary. Former Chief Justice of India M. N. Venkatachaliah served as the chairperson. The commission included jurists, academics, administrators, social scientists and public figures. The government aimed to bring together experts with different backgrounds to examine constitutional issues thoroughly.
A senior officer of the rank of Secretary to the Government of India served as the commission’s full-time secretary. The commission also worked with research staff, consultants and specialists from various fields. It created working groups and advisory panels on issues like electoral reforms, centre–state relations, rights and duties and judicial reforms. This structure allowed the commission to prepare consultation papers, invite public opinions and hold detailed discussions.
What Were the Terms of Reference for the NCRWC?
The government gave the commission a broad mandate. It asked the members to review almost all aspects of constitutional functioning. The aim was to examine how the Constitution could support efficient governance, promote accountability and encourage socio-economic development.
The commission studied relations between the legislature, executive and judiciary. It examined whether these institutions worked harmoniously and effectively. It looked at how to strengthen fundamental rights and fundamental duties. It also explored possible improvements in political parties, the electoral system and the federal structure.
Although the scope was vast, the commission had one major restriction. It could not propose changes that would alter the basic structure of the Constitution. This limitation ensured continuity with the Constitution’s essential values. The government made clear that the exercise was a review, not a drafting of a new Constitution.
How Did the NCRWC Function During Its Term?
The commission began its work in 2000. It received one year to complete the review. However, the scale of issues and the volume of public submissions required more time. The government extended its term several times until 31 March 2002.
During this period, the commission published consultation papers to invite feedback from citizens, experts, institutions and political groups. It reviewed research studies and constitutional experiences from India and other democracies. It conducted internal discussions and worked with its advisory panels to refine its proposals.
The commission functioned independently but remained within the limits defined by the government. Its working style was transparent and consultative. This helped build credibility and encouraged diverse participation.
When Was the NCRWC Report Submitted?
The commission submitted its final report on 31 March 2002. The report was comprehensive. It appeared in two volumes and covered almost 2,000 pages. Volume I contained the commission’s recommendations. Volume II included consultation papers, background documents and details of deliberations.
The commission made more than 200 recommendations. These covered electoral reforms, parliamentary functioning, rights expansion, centre–state relations, judicial reforms and governance improvements. Only some of these suggestions influenced later legislative or constitutional changes. However, the report remains an important reference for discussions on constitutional reform in India.
The composition is another crucial detail. Justice M. N. Venkatachaliah served as its chairperson and the commission had eleven members in total. The formal establishment date, 22 February 2000, and the submission of its report in March 2002 are important factual points. The broad scope, wide consultation process and its more than 200 recommendations make the NCRWC a significant constitutional exercise.
How Did Politics Influence the NCRWC?
The decision to create the commission drew mixed political reactions. Supporters felt that the Constitution needed a holistic review after five decades of use. Critics argued that the government might use the review to introduce ideological changes. The BJP-led NDA government therefore highlighted repeatedly that the exercise would not disturb the core structure of the Constitution.
Despite the controversy, the commission worked in a professional and research-driven manner. It focused on practical governance issues rather than ideological changes. Its emphasis on stability, accountability and rights protection reflected concerns shared across political lines.
What Made the NCRWC Unique in India’s Constitutional History?
India had seen many committees and commissions on specific constitutional or administrative issues. However, the NCRWC was the first national-level body with a formal mandate to review the entire functioning of the Constitution. It worked with a wide consultative approach, used comparative constitutional studies and analysed fifty years of democratic experience.
It did not attempt to rewrite the Constitution. Instead, it aimed to strengthen existing institutions. It tried to balance change with continuity. Its work combined academic research, public participation and practical solutions.
Conclusion
The NCRWC’s lasting contribution lies in its comprehensive analysis of constitutional practice. Many of its suggestions remain part of ongoing debates about reforms, including electoral transparency, judicial accountability, federal relations and stronger anti-defection provisions. Even though only a limited number of recommendations translated into laws, the report continues to influence policy discussions and academic studies.
The commission highlighted the need for stronger institutions, clearer responsibilities and more transparent political processes. It reaffirmed the importance of fundamental rights and democratic values. Its work continues to serve as a guide for future reforms.
