Sabarimala temple entry case and constitutional morality debates
Source:Indian Express ↗
Why It Matters
The Sabarimala issue is a landmark case study for understanding the tension between individual fundamental rights (women's equality) and collective religious rights (freedom of a denomination to manage its affairs). It tests the judiciary's 'Essential Religious Practices' doctrine and highlights the practical limitations and political sensitivities the executive faces when implementing transformative but unpopular judicial mandates.
Summary
The Kerala government has softened its stance regarding the entry of women of all ages into the Sabarimala temple. Departing from its previous position of strictly enforcing the 2018 Supreme Court judgment that lifted the ban on women aged 10-50, the state is now advocating for broader consultations with religious scholars and stakeholders before initiating any changes to age-old traditions. This policy shift underscores the complexities and sociopolitical friction that arise when enforcing judicial rulings that clash with deep-rooted religious customs, bringing the debate between constitutional morality (Right to Equality) and freedom of religion back into the spotlight.
Key Points
- The Kerala government has stepped back from strictly enforcing the 2018 Supreme Court verdict that allowed women of all ages (including 10-50 years) into the Sabarimala temple.
- The state is now advocating for broad consultations with religious scholars and stakeholders before altering traditional customs, reflecting a more cautious approach to avoid social backlash.
- The 2018 Supreme Court ruling originally struck down the ban on women, citing that the exclusion violated Article 14 (Equality) and Article 25 (Freedom of Religion), and invoked the principle of 'Constitutional Morality'.
- This shift highlights the practical challenges the executive faces when implementing judicial rulings that interfere with deeply entrenched socio-religious practices.
- The overarching constitutional questions concerning the balance between fundamental rights and the 'Essential Religious Practices' doctrine remain under review by a larger 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court.
Important Terms
Essential Religious Practices Doctrine
A judicial test to determine which rituals are integral to a religion; only 'essential' practices receive constitutional protection under Articles 25 and 26.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Polity); tests the judiciary's role in balancing religious traditions with constitutional reforms.
Constitutional Morality
Adherence to core constitutional values like equality and justice, prioritizing the 'spirit' of the Constitution over social or popular morality in legal rulings.
UPSC context
GS Paper II & IV; tests the ethical foundations of governance and judicial interpretation.
Article 25 (Freedom of Religion)
Guarantees an individual's right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order, health, morality, and other Fundamental Rights.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Polity); examines individual religious liberty versus the State's power for social reform.
Article 26 (Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs)
Grants religious denominations the collective right to manage their own religious affairs, typically viewed as more autonomous than individual rights under Article 25.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Polity); focuses on the autonomy of religious groups and institutional rights.
Article 14 (Right to Equality)
Guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of laws within India, preventing the State from making arbitrary or discriminatory classifications.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Polity); a core 'Golden Triangle' right often used to challenge discriminatory customs.
Judicial Review
The power of the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine and invalidate legislative or executive acts that contravene the Constitution.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Polity); tests the 'basic structure' doctrine and judicial checks on legislative power.
Prelims Trap
"The 'Essential Religious Practices' doctrine is defined under Article 25 of the Indian Constitution."
The ERP doctrine is nowhere mentioned in the Indian Constitution. It is entirely a judicial creation, first established by the Supreme Court in the 1954 Shirur Mutt case.
Static Concepts Connected
What is the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) doctrine?
- Origin: First propounded by the Supreme Court in the landmark 1954 Shirur Mutt case.
- Core Test: It limits Article 25 protection only to practices integral to a religion, allowing the state to regulate peripheral or secular activities associated with religious practices.
- Judicial Determination: The Judiciary determines what constitutes an essential practice on a case-by-case basis by examining core religious texts, tenets, and historical context.
How does Article 25(2)(b) qualify religious freedom in India?
- Social Reform: It explicitly allows the State to intervene in religious affairs to provide for social welfare and social reform.
- Temple Entry: It empowers the State to throw open Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.
- Definition scope: For the purpose of this specific constitutional provision, the term 'Hindus' is construed to include Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists.
Cross-Topic Patterns
Constitutional Morality vs. Tradition
The Sabarimala debate mirrors Navtej Johar (decriminalization of homosexuality) and Joseph Shine (adultery) cases, where the Supreme Court wielded 'Constitutional Morality' to strike down deeply entrenched traditional and social norms.
Limits of Judicial Decrees
Kerala's hesitation highlights executive reluctance to enforce socially sensitive judicial rulings, akin to the spotty state-level implementation of SC mandates on firecracker bans, stubble burning, or forest eviction.
A 2026 Prelims Q will likely test the origin of the ERP doctrine (Shirur Mutt) and the exact wording of Art 25(2)(b) vs Art 26 autonomy.
Linked PYQs · 4
Linked PYQs · 4
- 2021MainsGS2
‘Constitutional Morality’ is rooted in the Constitution itself and is founded on its essential facets. Explain the doctrine of ‘Constitutional Morality’ with the help of relevant judicial decisions.
- 2020PrelimsGS1
Consider the following statements: 1. The Constitution of India defines its 'basic structure' in terms of federalism, secularism, fundamental rights and democracy. 2. The Constitution of India provides for 'judicial review' to safeguard the citizens' liberties and to preserve the ideals on which the Constitution is based. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- 2024MainsGS2
Discuss India as a secular state and compare with the secular principles of the US constitution.
- 2024MainsGS1
Distinguish between gender equality, gender equity and women's empowerment. Why is it important to take gender concerns into account in programme design and implementation?
