Hon. Members, the House will notice that
in this Resolution, we have not used the word 'democratic'
because we thought it is obvious that the word 'republic' contains that
word and we did not want to use unnecessary and redundant words, but
we have done something much more than using the word. We have given
the content of democracy in this Resolution and not only the content of
democracy but the content of economic democracy in this Resolution. Others
might take objection to this Resolution on the ground that we have
not said that it should be a Socialist State. Well, I stand
for Socialism, and I hope India will stand for Socialism and that India will go
towards the120 constitution of a Socialist State and I do
believe that the whole world will have to go that way. 140 It is another matter for
your consideration as to what form of Socialism it will be. But
the main thing160 is that in such a Resolution, if I had put in that
we want a Socialist State, we would have put in something which
may be agreeable to many and may not be agreeable to some and we wanted
this Resolution not to be controversial in regard to such matters.
Therefore, we have laid down, not theoretical words and formulae, but rather
the content of the thing we desire. This is important and there can be
no dispute about it. Some240 people have pointed out to me that our
mentioning a republic may somewhat displease the Rulers of Indian
States. It is possible that this may displease them. But I want to
make it clear personally and the House knows280 that I do not believe in the
monarchical system anywhere, and that in the world today monarchy is a
fast disappearing institution. Nevertheless, it is not a question of my
personal belief in this matter. Our view in regard to320 these Indian States has been, first of all, that the people of
those States must share completely in the freedom to come. It is quite
inconceivable to me that there should be different standards and
degrees of freedom as between the360 people in the States and the people outside
the States. In what manner the States will be parts of that Union is a
matter for this House to consider with the representatives of
the States, and I hope in all matters relating to the States, this
House will deal with the real representatives of the States. We are
perfectly420 willing to deal in such matters as
appertain to them, with the Rulers or their representatives also, but finally
when we make a constitution for India, it must be through the
representatives of the people of the States as with the rest of India. In
any event, we may lay down or agree that the measure of
freedom must be the480 same in the States elsewhere. It is a possibility and personally
I should like a measure of uniformity too in regard to the
apparatus and machinery of the Government. Nevertheless,
this is a point to be considered in co-operation and in consultation
with the States. I do not wish, and I imagine this Constituent Assembly
will not like to impose anything on the States against their will. If
the people of a particular State desire to have a certain560 form of administration, even though it might be monarchical,
it is open to them to have it. The House will remember that even in the
British Commonwealth of Nations today, Eire is a Republic, and yet in
many ways it is600 a member of the British Commonwealth. So, it
is a conceivable thing. I do not know what will happen because that
is partly for this House and partly for others to decide. There
is no incongruity or impossibility about a640 definite form of administration in the
States, provided there is complete freedom and responsible Government
there and the people really are in charge. If monarchical figure-heads
are approved by the people of a particular State, whether I like it or not, I
certainly will not like to interfere. So, I wish to make it clear
that so far as700 this Resolution or Declaration is concerned,
it does not interfere in any way with any future work that this
Constituent Assembly720 may do, with any future negotiations that
it may undertake. Only in one sense, it limits our work, that is, we adhere
to certain fundamental propositions which are laid down in the Declaration.
Those fundamental propositions are not controversial in any real sense of
the word. Nobody challenges them in India and nobody ought to challenge
them and if anybody does challenge, we accept that challenge and we hold our
position.
Yesterday I told the Members that I
would be800 able to give some decision with regard to the
programme of the work of the Assembly this morning. I have been
considering that matter and some Members have seen me also in that
connection. The work we have to get840 through is this. We have this Resolution,
which we are considering. Then we have got the Rules to pass. Then there
is another question with regard to the reference of the disputed point
of interpretation to the Federal Court, with regard to which the
Assembly may have to express some opinion and lastly, we must have to elect at
any rate some of the Committees which will be provided for in
the Rules. So, these are the four items that we have to finish
before we go home after this session. The Rules have been
practically considered and the final shape is being given to them. I propose to
place them before the Rules Committee tomorrow morning and if the960 Rules are finally passed by the Rules
Committee, they will be Presented to this House day after
tomorrow. If the980 Members so desire, we can take up the
question of referring the point of interpretation to the Federal Court on
Saturday and thereafter we may take up the rules. I think that will take
about two days or so. I think it all depends on the number of amendments
which the Rules may evoke. Thereafter we may give a day for the appointment of
the Committees. Now in this way if we work on Saturday, also on Sunday
and on Monday, we might, possibly finish all this work if Members have
some sort of self-denying ordinance and all1080 who speak little and take as little time as
possible. If we cannot complete by Monday, then in that case we
shall have to go on after Christmas, that is to say, we shall have to take
some days in this month1120 after the 25th. We cannot sit on public holidays. So, we can take up
the discussion again on the 27th and 28th. So, unless the Members are prepared
to sit on a Sunday and to work harder on Saturday and on Monday, there is no
chance of finishing the work before Christmas and I do not like to
go over to the next month, that is, the next year. I want to complete
the work within this month. 1200 I would, therefore, suggest that we take up this programme. We
start discussing the rules in the afternoon of Saturday and if Christian Members particularly
have no objection, we should sit on Sunday and then on Monday we may complete
the whole thing. That would be rushing the business to some extent,
if you want to avoid sitting after the 25th, 1260 otherwise we shall have to sit after the 25th
and go on until we finish it. In this matter, 1280 this is the difficulty which I have
placed before the Members and I should like to know which they
would prefer. Personally, I would like to finish it by Monday, if
possible.
Mr. Chairman, my honourable friend, who
has grown grey in the service of interpreting British Imperialist laws,
has probably interpreted the limitations of the Cabinet Mission Plan
correctly. As he said, the limitations are probably correct. But we
need not be frightened by them. My esteemed colleague wants to
wait for their Highnesses, the Princes, to come in and have a hand in
distorting our future freedom. We need not have that. We do not want
the autocratic Princes to come in and have a hand in distorting our1400 future. Of course, so far as the Muslim
League is concerned, that is on a different footing altogether. But I am
not sorry that the Muslim League is not here; I am only sorry that the
Congress also has1440 not gone out of the British Plan and left the
British Plan to itself, to stew in its own juice. Agreement with
the Muslim League for gaining independence of our country and for drafting a
really free constitution of our country, is essential. But if you
think that by waiting for the Muslim League, or by the Congress remaining here
and the Muslim League remaining outside, you will be able to have a
properly framed constitution, I am afraid you are sadly mistaken
and you are counting without your host, the British imperialist, who have made
this Plan. You have seen the example of the Interim Government. Both
the League and the Congress are there, but that has not solved the
problem of our quarrels and internecine warfare in this country.
It has happened there just as the British wanted it to happen. They
wanted the parties to fight against each other with the prospect of the
British giving support1600 in one party's favour against
the other with the result that in between these quarrels the British become
more firmly entrenched. 1621
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Redundant - Not necessary or wanted
Internecine - Mutually destructive
