Why the President of India is also Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces

Source: The post is based on the article “Why the President of India is also Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces” published in the Indian Express on 4^th August 2022.

Syllabus: GS 2 – Indian Constitution—historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant provisions and basic structure.

Relevance: About the President as a supreme commander.

News: The recent debate in Parliament provoked the question “Why did the founding fathers vest this supreme command on the President despite India being a parliamentary democracy, not an executive presidency?”

What is the constitutional status of the President as a supreme commander?

Article 53 of the Constitution states that the executive power of the Union shall be vested in the President of India.

Article 53(2) mentions “Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision, the supreme command of the Defence Forces of the Union shall be vested in the President and the exercise thereof shall be regulated by law”.

Article 74 states that the president shall exercise his functions only on the aid and advice of the council of ministers headed by the prime minister.

Debates on Constituent Assembly on President as a Supreme Commander

KM Munshi in the Constituent Assembly once argued that “The strongest government and the most elastic executive has been found to be in England and that is because the executive powers vest in the Cabinet supported by a majority of the lower house”.

He also said that the cabinet advises the head of the state namely the king or the President. “The King or the President is thus placed above the party. He is made really the symbol of the impartial dignity of the Constitution.”

However, in the Constituent Assembly, there is absolutely no discussion on vesting the supreme command of the defence forces in the president. It almost seems that the Constitution framers had taken it as a given that the supreme command of the armed forces would be vested in the presidency.

Similarly, the term “defence forces of the Union” is nowhere defined in the Constitution.

Who is the Supreme Commander in other countries?

According to British practice where the supreme command of the armed forces is vested in the monarch.

In both the American and French constitutional schemes, the supreme command of the armed forces vests in the president. However, both these countries have an executive presidency.

China had an interesting institution dating back to 1925 called the Central Military Commission. But, the present form of China made the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party as the president of the republic and chairperson of the Central Military Commission.

In Pakistan, Article 243-1A, as amended by the Constitution Eighteenth Amendment Act 2010, states: “the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces shall vest in the President.” However, that has not stopped Pakistan from being convulsed by a series of coups.

Hence, it is evident that rather than any deliberate plan or design the President of India ended up becoming the Supreme Commander of the Indian Armed Forces for the simple reason that the members of the Constituent Assembly decided to follow British precedent.