
The Japanese Constitution was made when the US occupation army was still in control of Japan after its defeat in the Second World War. The Japanese constitution could not have had any provision that the US government did not like.
Do you see any problem in this way of making the constitution? In which way was the Indian experience different from this?

Important Questions on Constitution: Why and How?

Harbans: The Indian Constitution has succeeded in giving us a framework of democratic government.

Neha: The Constitution made solemn promises of ensuring liberty, equality and fraternity. Since this has not happened, the Constitution has failed.

Nazima: The Constitution has not failed us. We have failed the Constitution.
Do you agree with any of these positions? If yes, why? If not, what is your own position?
