Dec 25, 2024 09:05 IST First published on: Dec 25, 2024 at 09:05 IST
After entering Parliament on May 20, 2014, following the BJP’s victory in the general elections that year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared, “We are here in the temple of Democracy. We will work with all purity… for the… people of the country. Work and responsibility are the biggest things.” But scenes in the temple recently make every citizen cringe. The Constitution says: We the People of India have solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Democratic Republic. What happened in Parliament last week raises questions about the commitment of our representatives on that score.
They need to go back to the Constituent Assembly debates on the day of the introduction of the Draft Constitution in 1946 to get a sense of how far they have deviated from the vision of the Constitution framers. For Purushottam Das Tandon, also known as Rajarshi, “People meant all the people”. Minoo R. Masani quoted Mahatma Gandhi to underline the relations between the State and people: “The Central problem of our times is whether the State is to own the people or the People are to own the State. Where the State belongs to the people, the State is a mere instrument subordinate to the people. It serves the People”. Our Parliamentarians have forgotten this message of service. Their conduct makes one wonder if our representatives are really sincere about the the aims and hopes expressed by Syama Prasad Mookerjee: “We shall go ahead with our work in spite of all obstacles and help to create that great India, united and strong, which will be the motherland of not this community or that, not this class or that, but of every person, man, woman and child, inhabiting this great land, irrespective of race, caste, creed or community…”
Tandon echoed these sentiments: “Our past urges us to go forward… The different sections of the country have been given autonomy and India as a whole remains one with fully sovereignty. We shall stand united in affairs which demand our unity”. The chairman of the Constituent Assembly, Rajendra Prasad, underlined how the difficult task of the functioning of the Assembly with diverse views could be made easy. “ If we are sincere, if we respect each other’s opinion, we shall develop so much insight that we will not only be able to understand each other’s thoughts, but also be able to go deep to the root and understand each other’s real troubles. We will then function in a manner that no one will give no one cause to think that he has been ignored or that his opinion has not been respected,” he said.
But are Om Birla and Jagdeep Dhankhar, for whom I have great regard, willing to listen to and follow the constitution framers? For Ambedkar, parliamentary democracy was a better form of governance than the presidential form because of the daily check on the executive through debates, motions, questions and other options available to members of the House. Do these options exist today?
S Radhakrishnan had observed, “We have been kept apart. It is our duty now to find each other.” After more than seven decades we have not been able to do so and are not even making serious efforts in that direction. Radhakrishnan quotes The Mahabharata: “There is nothing impossible to be overcome by gentleness, and therefore the sharpest weapon we have is gentleness.”
So why has this disappeared from our public life? Radhakrishnan had described India as “In a symphony, different instruments, each with its particular sonority, each with its special sound, all combine to interpret one particular score”. Can our rulers not create that symphony of peace and harmony?
Jawaharlal Nehru said, “The only way to influence India is through friendship, cooperation and goodwill. Any attempt at imposition, the slightest trace of patronage, is resented and will be resented.” It was B R Ambedkar, in whose name this unfortunate set of events occurred in Parliament last week, who put it most emphatically: “Our difficulty is how to make the heterogeneous mass that we have today take a decision in common and march in a co-operative way on that road which is bound to lead us to unity…In order to make us willing friends, in order to induce every party, every section in this country to take on to the road it would be an act of greatest statesmanship for the majority party even to make a concession to the prejudices of people who are not prepared to march together and it is for that, that I propose to make this appeal. Let us leave aside slogans. Let us leave aside words which frighten people. Let us even make a concession to the prejudices of our opponents. Bring them in, so that they may willingly join us…”
Ambedkar was a prophet who needs to be followed if not worshiped by the nation.
most read
How should our parliamentarians begin afresh? Let Home Minister Amit Shah apologise to the nation, let the Chair expunge the words which offend the great Maharishi of the Constitution, let each member apologise to the nation and to each other. They must talk to each other and listen to each other. Parliamentarians have loyalty to their parties, but they should also realise the value of mutual respect. The nation faces grave challenges — poverty, illiteracy, social and economic inequality, marginalisation. These must be overcome. The MPs must remember that the Mahatma had dreamt of real democracy, not concentration of powers in their hands.
We the people do expect a bright picture of New India, and so far you, the parliamentarians, have disappointed us. We hope you will change. We call upon each one of you, irrespective of your party, to understand and follow the Constitution as was envisaged by the framers.
The writer is senior advocate and former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association of India
Why should you buy our Subscription?
You want to be the smartest in the room.
You want access to our award-winning journalism.
You don’t want to be misled and misinformed.
Choose your subscription package
