The Constitution, for the first time, enshrined a system where rights were complemented by obligations. What the Constitution did was to combine individual liberty, dealt with in Part III, with social justice that would be detailed in Part IV. 1327 Such dualism reflected the aspirations of the framers; they wanted to set up both a liberal democratic state and a welfare state. They inherited the mix of justiciable civil-political rights from the British crown-colony experience. Besides these, they introduced a whole new range of non-justiciable "Directive Principles". The Irish experience had inspired them in this respect.1328 From the very beginning, something that leaders such as B.R. Ambedkar argued that the Directive Principles were "instructions to the future legislature" or "the moral core of governance," but not enforceable by courts. The Constituent Assembly explicitly provided (Article 37) for the Principles to be very "fundamental in the governance of the country" but "not enforceable by any court."1329 In his keynote role, Dr. Ambedkar insisted that both adjectives "Fundamental" and "Directive" be preserved, stressing that these guidelines must remain binding directions for state policy even if they are not judicially enforceable. The Principles were to be the very "soul of the Constitution," Ambedkar declared, and would guide all future legislation