We all know a lot about Dr. Ambedkar because we have been studying him since we were kids, but here I am going to tell you about some things that we have not read in a long time.
Fact 1. In the 1945 session of the Scheduled Castes Federation, Dr. Ambedkar insisted that India did not need a constituent assembly. "It is absolutely superfluous. I regard it as a most dangerous project". He preferred the government of India act 1935 sufficient that it does not require any amendment and hence no other constituent assembly is required. Despite this, the members of INC made Dr. Ambedkar the chairman of the drafting committee. The same members who had already rejected the Government of India Act, 1935. (Writings and speeches, Vol 1, pp. 360-1).
Fact 2. Once Ambedkar said that "if India became independent, It would be one of the greatest disasters that could happen" ( Transfer of power Vol 7, pp. 144-47). He claimed that "Swaraj (India under freedom) can not but be a Hindu Raj" (Writings and Speeches, Vol 9, p. 393).
Fact 3. Do you know? Dr. Ambedkar did not want to give political rights to the Scheduled Tribes (he called them ‘Aboriginal Tribes’), equal to those of the Scheduled Castes? In his address to the session of the All India Scheduled Castes Federation in Bombay on 6 May 1945, he states the “reasons why I have omitted them from my scheme”.
The Aboriginal Tribes have not as yet developed any political sense to make the best use of their political opportunities and they may easily become mere instruments in the hands of either a majority or a minority, and thereby disturb the balance without doing any good to themselves. (Writings and Speeches, Vol 1, p. 375).
When the interim government was formed, the Congress included Jagjivan Ram as the Harijan representative in its party, and later, when the Muslim League formed the Interim Government, it included Yogendra Nath Mandal. As the Congress and the Muslim League did not choose Dr. Ambedkar, he became irritated and ill. On 15 December, when the objective resolution was presented in the Constituent Assembly, Dr. M.R Jayakar, who was elected on a Congress ticket from Mumbai, was opposed in the Constituent Assembly on some issues and he was humiliated due to this, he resigned from the constituent assembly. After that Dr. Ambedkar was elected to the Constituent Assembly in his place, with the help of the Congress from Mumbai province.
Ambedkar was a brilliant orator with strong advocacy skills with the benefit of which he delivered a speech that stunned members of Congress, As a result, he was made the chairman of the drafting committee.
According to Ambedkar the villages were nothing "but a sink of localism, a den of ignorance, narrow mindedness and communalism" As a result of this the Constitution that was drafted under his chairmanship did not mention a word about Panchayati Raj. However, continuous persuasion of many Gandhians compelled the committee to accept the village panchayat in the directive principle of state policy vesting the responsibility in state legislatures and government.
But it is important to note that Mahatma Gandhi was vehemently opposed to the proposal for separate electorates for SCs. In September 1932, he also went on an indefinite fast to condemn both his demands. As a result, the 'Poona Pact' came into picture, which opposed the concept of separate electorates. It was therefore refused by the Constituent Assembly.
Fact 7. Ambedkar did not want to add secular and socialist in the constitution.
On 15 November 1948 at the Constituent Assembly debate in Parliament, a member, Prof K.T Shah from Bihar moved an Amendment to the original Preamble statement. He insisted that the words, “Secular, Federal, Socialist” be inserted into the statement. In a detailed reply, BR Ambedkar justified why he did not include the words “secular” and “socialist” in the Preamble:
Sir, I regret that I cannot accept the amendment of Prof. K. T. Shah. My objections, stated briefly are two. In the first place the Constitution, as I stated in my opening speech in support of the motion I made before the House, is merely a mechanism for the purpose of regulating the work of the various organs of the State. It is not a mechanism where by particular members or particular parties are installed in office. What should be the policy of the State, how the Society should be organised in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by the people themselves according to time and circumstances. It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself, because that is destroying democracy altogether. If you state in the Constitution that the social organisation of the State shall take a particular form, you are, in my judgment, taking away the liberty of the people to decide what should be the social organisation in which they wish to live. It is perfectly possible today, for the majority people to hold that the socialist organisation of society is better than the capitalist organisation of society. But it would be perfectly possible for thinking people to devise some other form of social organisation which might be better than the socialist organisation of today or of tomorrow. I do not see therefore why the Constitution should tie down the people to live in a particular form and not leave it to the people themselves to decide it for themselves. This is one reason why the amendment should be opposed.
Then Ambedkar remarked, “The second reason is that the amendment is purely superfluous.”
Fact 8. Do you know? Ambedkar was not in favour of the one-man-one-vote principle, which underpins the working of parliamentary democracy in India (Writings and Speeches, Vol 1, p. 413). He also disapproved of the concept of territorial constituencies, which has been adopted by the Indian Constitution and the constitutions of most democracies around the world (Writings and Speeches, Vol 9, p. 396).
Fact 9. Do you know? Sir B.N Rao, not Dr. Ambedkar, was the real architect of the Indian Constitution.
BN Rao played the most influential role in the Constituent Assembly. He was associated with the government of British India's reform office for the implementation of the Government of India Act, 1935, for a long time. The viceroy named Sir BN Rao as the Constituent Assembly's Constitutional Adviser in 1946, before the formation of the Constituent Assembly. Even before the President of the Constituent Assembly was appointed, he was in charge of the general structure of its democratic framework of the Constitution and prepared its initial draft in February 1948. The Constituent Assembly had no role in framing it. This draft was debated, revised, and finally adopted by the Constituent Assembly of India on 26 November 1949.
As part of his research in drafting the Constitution of India, in 1946, Rao traveled to the U.S.A., Canada, Ireland, and the United Kingdom, from there gathered the precedents of 60 countries. These precedents are divided into three parts and distributed among the members of the Constituent Assembly so that if any member of the Constituent Assembly encounters an issue, they may address it. Members of the Constituent Assembly later only made amendments to it.
The President of the Constituent Assembly Rajendra Prasad, before signing the Constitution on 26 November 1949, thanked Rau for having "worked honorarily all the time that he was here, assisting the assembly not only with his knowledge and erudition but also enabled the other members to perform their duties with thoroughness and intelligence by supplying them with the material on which they could work."
Fact 10. On 2nd December 1953 in Rajya Sabha, Ambedkar said, " People always keep on saying to me, 'oh! You are the maker of the constitution.' my answer is I was a hack. What I was asked to do, I did much against my will". I am quite prepared to say that I shall be the first person to burn it out. I do not want it. It does not suit anybody.
No comments:
Post a Comment