Debate on Dt. 17.12.1946
On 17.12.1946, at 11:00 am the Constituent Assembly again started its working to debate on the Resolution moved by Nehru regarding Aims and objects of the Assembly. On that day Vijayalakshmi Pandit joined the House. She was representing India in the International Conference in America. Why she was in that conference will be discussed later in this series as it was very important event related to the independence of India.
Near about 50 members were interested in giving speech on the said resolution of aims and objects. As already members were too much time to give speech on the said resolution and time was running from the hands of India, Chairman again reminded all the members to keep their speeches as short as they can. It was third day, on which they were discussing about the fundamental structure of our Constitution. All the speeches were too long, revolving around the absence of Muslim League, either creating fear of futile, fruitless labour or creating hopes in appeasing way.
Speech of M R Masani
M R Masani of Bombay was a congress leader. He belonged to Parsi community, which is one of the actual minorities in this nation. He said, “Either the nation absorbs these minorities or, in course of time, it must break up. Therefore, while welcoming the clause in this Resolution which promises adequate safeguards for the minorities, I would say that it is a good thing that we have these legal and constitutional safeguards, but that ultimately no legal safeguard can protect small minorities from the overwhelming domination of big masses, unless on both sides an effort is made to get closer and become one corporate nation, a homogeneous nation. That process has been shown to us by the United States of America, where peoples of different races have, with one unfortunate exception, been absorbed into one nation.” The idea of one corporate nation which is sheltering all the races, apart from status of majority or minority, is one of the great ideas.
He pointed out that the said resolution would not tolerate wide and gross inequality of this nation, present at that time, would not tolerate exploitation, which means that everyone who contributed for good, would get is fair share of his labour. It also provides for equal opportunities, equal facilities of education and in development of talent.
He suggested that it should be made clear that India would not be a Police State or Totalitarian State. He referred idea of de-centralisation of power among the 7 lakh villages of India by M K Gandhi from ‘A Week with Gandhi’ by Louis Fischer. According to idea of Gandhi, all these villages would the voluntarily cooperate with each other and that would produce real freedom and a new order.
Then he referred thoughts of Jai Prakash Narain of Indian Socialist Party, “By, dispersing the ownership and management of industry and by developing the village into a democratic village republic, we break this strangle-hold to a very’ large extent and attenuate the danger of totalitarianism. Thus my picture of a socialist India is the picture of an economic and political democracy. In this democracy, men will neither be slaves to capitalism nor to a party or the State. Man will be free.” Jai Prakash Narain was not a member of Constituent Assembly, but his thought of true development of villages were referred in the House.
According to Masani, the present resolution would implement this idea of true socialism without compromising individual liberty, as the State belonged to people and it was a mere instrument subordinate to the people and it was meant to serve the people. He supported the resolution.
Speech of F R Anthony:
F R Anthony supported the amendment moved by Dr. Jayakar. He was nominated representative of Anglo Indian community. According to him the Resolution moved by Nehru was an article of faith with the Congress Party, having supreme objective to free India. The resolution affirmed the pledge of every Indian. Then he pointed out that Dr. Jayakar’s amendment was also containing the solemn resolve to frame constitution for the free and democratic sovereign State. He further supported the Amendment by Dr. Jayakar in words, “That, I believe is the intention of this amendment-to ask us to defer a declaration, however just it may be a declaration which may expose us to the charge, however baseless, that we are prejudging matters of detail which have to be traversed in this Assembly and on which decisions should be made after they have been fully canvassed and discussed here.” As only one big party i.e. Congress was present in the House and other big party of India was absent, hence he supported Dr. Jayakar’s amendment to wait for Muslim League.
Note: This article is completely based on Constituent Assembly Debates and only for knowledge purpose.
Read Previous Parts
CAD: Pledge to Proclaim Independence of India: Part 3
CAD: Pledge to Proclaim Independence of India: Part 4
CAD: Pledge to Proclaim Independence of India: Part 5
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.
