Article 371 As an Instrument of Asymmetrical Federalism: Its Philosophical Intent and Contemporary Relevance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31305/rrjss.2025.v05.n02.015Keywords:
Article 371, Asymmetrical federalism, Indian Constitution Autonomy, Northeast India, Regionalism, Multiculturalism, Constitutional Design, Customary Law, Political IdentityAbstract
Article 371 and its sub-clauses constitute one of the Constitution’s most consequential, yet insufficiently theorized devices for institutionalizing asymmetrical federalism in India. Although the constitutional scheme is often described as quasi-federal with a pronounced unitary tilt, Article 371 indicates a parallel design logic: the deliberate use of differentiated arrangements to secure integration without erasure in a society marked by deep regional, cultural, and developmental heterogeneity. This article examines Article 371 as a constitutional architecture of accommodation, tracing its historical emergence, mapping the distinct purposes served by clauses 371A to 371J, and analysis the legal form through which autonomy, recognition, and distributive concerns are translated into governance. Drawing on debates in cooperative and polycentric federalism, multicultural citizenship, constitutional patriotism, and constitutional pluralism, it argues that Article 371 is best understood not as episodic political bargaining but as an enduring commitment to protect vulnerable communities, preserve culturally embedded institutions, especially customary law and land regimes in parts of the Northeast and address structural regional inequalities. The article further situates Article 371 in contemporary constitutional politics shaped by post-2019 centralizing impulses, renewed contests over uniformity, resource governance disputes, and persistent demands for autonomy. It concludes that Article 371 remains a stabilizing constitutional mechanism: it operationalize a substantive conception of equality by recognizing that, in a diverse federation, equal citizenship may require differentiated constitutional safeguards.
References
Adeney, K. (2015). Federalism and ethnic conflict regulation in India and Pakistan. Routledge.
Arora, B., & Verney, D. (1995). Multiple identities in a plural state: Indian federalism in comparative perspective. Current Politics and Economics of South and Southeast Asia, 4(3), 233–267.
Austin, G. (1999). The Indian Constitution: Cornerstone of a nation. Oxford University Press.
Baruah, S. (2005). Durable disorder: Understanding the politics of Northeast India. Oxford University Press.
Bento, M. (2016). Legal pluralism and indigenous rights. Journal of Legal Studies, 18(2), 145–168.
Bhaumik, S. (2009). Troubled periphery: Crisis of India’s Northeast. Sage Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9788132104797
Choudhry, S. (2016). Constitutional design for divided societies: Integration or accommodation? Oxford University Press.
Drèze, J., & Sen, A. (2013). An uncertain glory: India and its contradictions. Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/9781400848775
Griffiths, A. (2007). Asymmetrical federalism and the management of ethnic conflict. Journal of Federal Studies, 12(2), 45–67.
Horam, M. (2012). Naga polity: A study of Tatar Hoho and customary law. Mittal Publications.
Horowitz, D. L. (1985). Ethnic groups in conflict. University of California Press.
Kohli, A. (2004). State-directed development: Political power and industrialization in the global periphery. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511754371
Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/0198290918.001.0001
Mangat, R. (2008). Integrating Sikkim: Constitutional strategies and political negotiations. Indian Journal of Federal Studies, 19(1), 67–82.
Ostrom, E. (2010). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), 550–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004
Phanjoubam, P. (2016). The Northeast question: Conflicts and frontiers. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315661414
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674042605
Reddy, A. (2014). Regional disparities and constitutional mechanisms in Andhra Pradesh. Journal of Public Policy, 9(2), 112–134.
Shimray, U. A. (2007). Identity and gender in Northeast India. Mittal Publications.
Watts, R. L. (1998). Comparing federal systems. McGill–Queen’s University Press.
