Somnath Lahiri’s Amendment
Somnath Lahiri of Bengal proposed an amendment to the main resolution presented by Nehru. Chairman considered that amendment out of order, and asked Lahiri to explain the order of the amendment. Lahiri’s amendment laid down certain action to be taken that was not in the main Resolution. For instance, it proveded to declare a Republic here and now. It called upon the Interim Government to act in a particular way and there are several other matters of this character. It was a resolution which directs action to be taken here and now and in that sense it was suggested that it was out of order.
Rai Bahadur Syamanandan Sahaya’s Amendment
Rai Bahadur Syamanandan Sahaya of Bihar also moved an amendment for the original resolution of Nehru, he suggested to combine the para (1) and (2) of the original amendment in following words:
This Constituent Assembly declares its firm and solemn resolve to constitute India, within the shortest time, into an Independent Sovereign Republic, comprising initially of-
(a) The territories that now form British India, and as soon as possible, also of,
(b) The territories that now form the Indian States,
(c) Such other parts of India as are outside British India and Indian States, and
(d) Such other territories as are willing to join the Independent Sovereign Republic of India,
and further resolves that a constitution for the future governance be framed and laid down’.
….
(4) wherein all power and authority are derived from the people.
This amendment was in accordance to that of the original resolution and was not in accordance of what Dr. Jayakar proposed to wait for League to join, by creating doubt about the State’s view regarding the Constitution. He countered the view of Dr. Jayakar and pointed out that although there might be limitations placed on the Constituent Assembly, it had the inherent right of getting over them.
In his amendment, Sahaya altered the word ‘proclaim’ into ‘constitute’, he omitted word ‘Union’, introduced words ‘within the shortest time’ and he proposed that the constitution should be laid down. He said that many of the words used in the original resolution were borrowed from the American Constitution or from any other country’s constitution. In case of India, the provisions should be written in more precise and clear manner and easily understandable language. According to Sahaya, words should not be used only because they were present in previous constitutions.
According to him proclamation of independence had to be made on other occasion. It is duty of the Assembly to actually constitute the State into an Independent Sovereign Republic. Hence he used word ‘constitute’ instead of ‘proclaim’. As he believed that India is India and there was no need of Union, so he left the word ‘Union’ from his proposed amendment.
He then stated that the State paper / declaration of Dt. 16.5.1946, did no state that the Constitution passed by this Constituent Assembly would require the sanction of the British Parliament. The cabinet mission plan imposed only two conditions that the treaty would be entered into between England and India, and that the minorities would be protected. Hence the Assembly had the right and power to frame and lay down the Constitution and enforce it. Hence he used words ‘frame and lay down’ instead of ‘draw up’. This Sahaya’s amendment was clearer in stating the goal, rights and powers of the Constituent Assembly.
In original resolution, in Para (2), all the territories were mentioned, where this Constitution would be enforced. Sahaya rewritten all the territories by giving them different numbers, elaborating the stages of implementation of the Constitution in different territories as they join with India.
In Para (4) Sahaya suggested to omit the words “Sovereign Independent India, its constituent parts and organs of government”. It proposed this amendment to omit these words, because in British Rule, the power was derived from the sovereign and not from the people. Use of these words may create a difference of opinion. Para (4) of the original resolution was a democratic factor introduced in the law of the land. Sahaya made it very precise and clear.
After proposing amendments by Dr. Jayakar, Dr. Gour, Lahiri and Sahaya, other amendments were withdrawn by the proposers. Hence they were not discussed in the House. Then by putting a remark of time limit, Chairman Dr. Rajendra Prasad asked the members to keep their speeches short to save the time. Then he asked members to speak after coming to rostrum.
Speech of Shri Krishna Sinha
He supported original resolution moved by Nehru by calling it Sacred. The said resolution gave a picture of the vision of future India. According to the resolution India would be democratic, decentralized republic and ultimate sovereign. The sovereignty would lie with the people and in fundamental rights would be safeguarded. He stated, “Certainly, Sir, not long ago, the world did not believe that all individuals composing society had an equal right to liberty and happiness. Society was composed of classes and the individual had no place in society. The place of man in society was determined by the class to which he belonged and so there was no individual liberty to be safeguarded. Poverty was not thought to be a disease which society must get rid of. Some of the great thinkers of the 18th century France, were of the opinion that the presence of poverty in society was necessary for the proper production of wealth. In such a society, Sir, there could be no place for the principle of the sovereignty of the people. Sovereignty belonged to the King whose privilege it was to rule. The people existed merely to pay the taxes demanded of them by the king and obey the laws enacted by him.”
He pointed out that all members were in the Constituent Assembly not because of the British rulers but because of the 1942 revolt under the leadership of M K Gandhi. People participated in various revolts over the decades and hence it was very first duty of all members to draw up picture of future free India and present it to the people. By making the provision for decentralized republic, the resolution of Nehru had already taken care of the feelings of the League.
As he was administrator in past he claimed that the Britishers had not made up their mind to peacefully transfer power to people of India. Churchill never ever had spoken any word of cheer for working of Constituent Assembly, as he had fling on Congress and Nehru. He praised Nehru for his role in protecting Muslims from Hindus of Bihar during the Dt. 24.10.1946 to Dt. 11.11.1946.
But he did not criticized Nehru or Gandhi, when in Noakhali innocent Hindus were attacked by Muslim mob under the name of protest called Direct Action Day called by the Muslim League of Jinnah, even Sinha did not mentioned a single word of condolence for killing of Hindus. All were busy in either appeasing or creating fear and were arguing to wait for League to join the Assembly including staunch Hindu leaders like Dr. Jayakar. Even not a single word was uttered about direct action day by any of the members.
After speech of Sinha, Chairman asked a question to continue the meeting or to adjourn it, as it was 5:00pm. Most of the members supported to adjourn the meeting. Thus the meeting, which debated very important resolution for two days only due to absence of Muslim League and long explaining speeches of members revolving around it, was adjourned till 11:00am of 17.12.1946.
As per Dr. Jayakar, and other speeches it can be seen that Muslim League had played a dirty game for Pakistan. They tried to keep all things in control in any way. British rulers were giving more favorable conditions to them, as they didn’t want to transfer power smoothly and peacefully. Still we as a nation not able to learn from the dirt politics of England, and our present politicians are also becoming expert players of the same game. This is how everyone is ruling thing country by dividing the societies into classes on legal and policy level.
Note: This article is completely based on Constituent Assembly Debates and only for knowledge purpose.
Read Previous Parts
CAD: Resolution to Proclaim Independence of India: Part 2
CAD: Resolution to Proclaim Independence of India: Part 3
CAD: Resolution to Proclaim Independence of India: Part 4
Bookmark this site for more such informative articles related to law and legal history. Share it on your social circles and don’t forget to comment your opinion to shape the ongoing law making process.
Read your own Dhrama Granthas.
