What can France learn from the Indian Constitution's approach to secularism?

The secularism practiced in France (Laïcité) and India (Sarva Dharma Sambhava) emerged from entirely different historical contexts. French secularism developed as a rebellion against the absolute dominance of the Catholic Church, resulting in a strict wall of separation between state and religion. Conversely, Indian secularism evolved in a deeply religious, pluralistic society, aiming to enable diverse communities to coexist peacefully.

In recent years, demographic changes and rising immigration have exposed the limitations of the rigid French model, leading to social friction, alienation of minorities, and radicalization. In this context, France can draw valuable lessons from the Indian Constitution's approach to secularism.

1. Transitioning from "Strict Separation" to "Principled Distance"

• The French Issue: Laïcité demands strict non-interference and absolute neutrality. The state ignores religion, which often leaves minority communities feeling unrepresented and marginalized.
• The Indian Lesson: The Indian Constitution follows a model of 'principled distance'. The state is not actively hostile or strictly detached from religion; rather, it engages with or distances itself from all religions equally, based on the ideals of the Constitution. France can learn to engage constructively with religious communities to address their grievances rather than ignoring their socio-religious realities.

2. Accommodating Public Expression of Faith

• The French Issue: France views religion strictly as a private affair. The ban on conspicuous religious symbols (e.g., the hijab, Sikh turbans, or large crosses) in public schools and spaces enforces a superficial uniformity.
• The Indian Lesson: Indian secularism recognizes that religion is deeply tied to personal identity. Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the freedom to publicly profess, practice, and propagate religion. Accommodating practices like allowing Sikhs to wear turbans in the military or police fosters a sense of belonging and patriotism. France can learn that allowing diversity in the public sphere strengthens, rather than weakens, national integration.

3. Balancing Individual Rights with Community Rights

• The French Issue: The French Republic recognizes only the individual citizen and refuses to acknowledge religious or ethnic communities. This often leaves minority groups vulnerable to majoritarian cultural assimilation.
• The Indian Lesson: The Indian Constitution balances individual rights with collective rights. Articles 26, 29, and 30 grant religious minorities the right to manage their own institutions and preserve their distinct culture. By constitutionally protecting community rights, France can alleviate the insecurities of its immigrant and minority populations, promoting multiculturalism over forced assimilation.

4. Positive State Intervention and Reform

• The French Issue: Because of strict separation, the French state cannot intervene in religious affairs to bring about internal reforms, relying instead on blanket bans that are often perceived as targeted attacks on specific communities.
• The Indian Lesson: Indian secularism permits positive intervention. The state can intervene in religious practices to uphold fundamental rights—for example, the abolition of untouchability (Article 17), the opening of Hindu temples to all classes (Article 25(2)), and the criminalization of Triple Talaq. France can adopt this nuanced approach, working collaboratively with progressive elements within minority communities to drive internal social reform.

5. Embracing "Integration" over "Assimilation"

• The French Issue: French secularism often expects minorities to shed their religious identities in public to assimilate into a homogenized French culture.
• The Indian Lesson: India relies on the "salad bowl" model of integration, where different communities maintain their distinct identities while contributing to the national fabric. Promoting "Unity in Diversity" rather than enforcing uniformity can help France build social cohesion and reduce the radicalization that stems from identity suppression.

6. State Support for Religious Pluralism

• The French Issue: The French state cannot legally fund or support any religious activity, treating all religions with a posture of mutual exclusion.
• The Indian Lesson: The Indian state provides non-discriminatory support to all religions, such as subsidizing pilgrimages (historically the Haj, or the Kumbh Mela) and providing financial aid to minority educational institutions. A policy of positive accommodation and equal respect could help the French state build trust with its minority citizens.

Conclusion While India's approach to secularism has its own operational challenges and cannot be blindly copy-pasted due to differing socio-historical realities, its core constitutional philosophy offers a pragmatic blueprint. As France grapples with the complexities of a modern multi-faith society, shifting from the negative secularism of Laïcité (freedom from religion) to the positive secularism of the Indian Constitution (freedom of religion) can help it transform diversity from a perceived threat into a national strength.