Vol. 13 · pages 1091–1095

1058 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES If that is not the ground on which the argument rests, then the other ground is that this Constitution proceeds on some wrong principles. Sir, so far as this matter is concerned, it seems to me that a modern constitution can proceed only on two bases : One base is to have a parliamentary system of government. The other base is to have a totalitarian or dictatorial form of government. If we agree that our Constitution must not be a dictatorship but must be a Constitution in which there is parliamentary democracy where government is all the time on the anvil, so to say, on its trial, responsible to the people, responsible to the judiciary, then I have no hesitation in saying that the principles embodied in this Constitution are as good as, if not better than, the principles embodied in any other parliamentary constitution. The other argument which perhaps might have been urged—I was not able to hear every Member who spoke—is that this Assembly is not a representative assembly as it has not been elected on adult suffrage, that the large mass of the people are not represented in this Constitution. Consequently this Assembly in framing the Constitution has no right to say that this Constitution should have the finality which article 304 proposes to give it. Sir, it may be true that this Assembly is not a representative assembly in the sense that Members of this Assembly have not been elected on the basis of adult suffrage. I am prepared to accept that argument, but the further inference which is being drawn that if the Assembly had been elected on the basis of adult suffrage, it was then bound to possess greater wisdom and greater political knowledge is an inference which I utterly repudiate. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : It would have been worse ! The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It might easily have been worse, says my Friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, and I agree with him. Power and knowledge do not go together. Often times they are dissociated, and I am quite frank enough to say that this House, such as it is, has probably a greater modicum and quantum of knowledge and information than the future Parliament is likely to have. I therefore submit, Sir, that the article as proposed by the Drafting Committee is the best that could be conceived in the circumstances of the case. Mr. President: I shall now put the amendments to vote. [The amendments were negatived and those of Dr. Ambedkar, as mentioned earlier were adopted. Article 304, as amended, was added to the Constitution.] *****

1059DRAFT CONSTITUTION *Shri Brajeshwar Prasad : Sir, now the time is seven o’clock. Seth Govind Das : There is so much still to be done that I do not think that we shall be able to finish It. So, I propose that either we should sit at nine o’clock tonight and go on till twelve o’clock or we may sit tomorrow morning. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: We have got only three articles. Shri T. T. Krishnamachari: We have only three articles, two of which are of a formal nature. Mr. President: I think it would be very inconvenient to adjourn now and come back again to the House. So we have to sit until we finish or we have to sit tomorrow. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : We have got two or three articles and I am sure they are non-contentious and it would not take even half an hour. Seth Govind Das : I do not think we can finish in one hour. There is the question of the name of the country in article I to be settled. I do not think we shall be able to finish all these. Mr. President: The majority of the House seems to think that we shall continue. Am I correct ? Many Honourable Members : Yes, Sir. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : We can finish the thing. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : It cannot be done. There is article 1 and unless the sweets are arranged by Dr. Ambedkar, the namkaranam ceremony cannot be done today. ARTICLE 99 Mr. President: Then we shall take articles 99 and 184. †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move. “That for article 99, the following article be substituted :— ‘99. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Part XIVA of this constitution but subject to the provisions of article 301-F thereof, business in Parliament shall be translated in Hindi or in English. Provided that the Chairman of the Council of States or Speaker of the House of the People or person acting as such, as the case may be, may permit any member, who cannot adequately express himself in either of the languages aforesaid to address the House in the mother tongue. Language to be used in Parliament. *CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, p. 1665. †Ibid., p. 1666.

1060 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES (2) Unless Parliament by law otherwise provides, this article shall, after the expiration of a period of fifteen years from the commencement of this Constitution, have effect as if the words ‘or in English’ were omitted therefrom.’ ” May I move the other one also. This is an analogous thing. Mr. President: I suppose the argument will be the same in respect of both. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: They are substantially the same. Mr. President: I shall put them separately to vote. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : We can have one discussion. So far as the discussion is concerned, the argument will be more or less the same. Sir, I move : ‘That for article 184, the following article be substituted :— ‘184. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Part XIVA of this Constitution but subject to the provisions of article 301-F thereof, business in the Legislature of a State shall be transacted in the official language or languages of the State or in Hindi or in English. Provided that the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly or Chairman of the Legislative Council or person acting as such, as the case may be, may permit any member who cannot adequately express himself in any of the languages aforesaid to address the House in his mother tongue. (2) Unless the Legislature of the State otherwise provides, this article shall, after the expiration of a period of fifteen years from the commencement of this Constitution, have effect as if the words ‘or in English’ were omitted therefrom’.” Sir, I think no observations are necessary. The articles are very clear in themselves. ***** *Mr. Nazaruddin Ahmad : ...If you do not allow the regional languages also to develop, their contribution towards the development of the official language will be very small. Mr. President: Is that not given in the amendment as proposed now ? Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: I shall ask the Drafting Committee to consider that. This is only a suggestion; it should fit in somehow. I know this is only a pious sentiment on my part because it is not going to be accepted. Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra : Are you going to allow discussion on the language question ? The whole language question is coming before the House. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : No, No. The whole question has been discussed and decided. Language to be used in the legislatures of States *CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, p. 1667.

1061DRAFT CONSTITUTION [Amendments of Dr. Ambedkar mentioned above were adopted Articles 99 and 184, as amended were added to the Constitution.] ***** ARTICLE 1 *Mr. President: There is one more article, article 1. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I propose to move amendment No. 130 and incorporate in it my amendment No. 197 which makes a little verbal change in sub-clause (2). Sir, I move: “That for clauses (1) and (2) of article 1, the following clauses be substituted :— “(1) India, that is, Bharat shall be a Union of States. (2) The States and the territories thereof shall be the States and their territories for the time being specified in Parts I, II and III of the First Schedule.’ ” ***** †Mr. President: If I adjourn at all, it will be for the next session. It will be best to adjourn till the next session. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, this can be finished in a short time. Mr. President: What can we do ? It is open to any Member to obstruct. Eighty six Members are present and under our rules one-third of the total number of Members should constitute the quorum, and that is about 97. So now, there is no quorum. I have to adjourn the House, there is no help. An Honourable Member : Let this article go to the next session. Another Honourable Member : We can meet tomorrow. Another Honourable Member: There is no guarantee of quorum even tomorrow. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : We can bring some Members who may be outside. The bell may be rung. ***** ‡Shri H. V. Kamath : ...Some ascribe it (name of Bharat) to the son of Dushyant and Shakuntala who was also known as “Sarvadamana” or all conqueror and who established his suzerainty and kingdom in this ancient land. After him this land came to be known as Bharat. Another school of research scholars hold that Bharat dates back to Vedic... *CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, p. 1669. . †Ibid., p. 1670. ‡Ibid., 18th September 1949, p. 1674

1062 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Bombay : General): Is it necessary to trace all this ? I do not understand the purpose of it. It may be well interesting in some other place. My friend accepts the word “Bharat”. The only thing is that he has got an alternative. I am very sorry but there ought to be some sense of proportion, in view of the limited time before the House. Shri H. V. Kamath : I hope it is not for Dr. Ambedkar to regulate the business of the House. Mr. President: What amendment are you moving ? ***** *Mr. President: You can move one. I permitted you to move both of them, but I find that the two amendments are contradictory. Shri H. V. Kamath: Are they contradictory, Sir ? If you say they are contradictory, I have nothing to say. Mr. President: Yes, if one is accepted, the other is ruled out. Shri H. V. Kamath : My object is that if one is not accepted, the other may be accepted. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Why all this eloquence over it ? Shri Shankarrao Deo (Bombay : General): There should be no arguing with the Chair. Shri H. V. Kamath : I know the rules, Mr. Shankarrao Deo. Mr. President: You can move one. ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: It is proposed to alter the clause in article 3 dealing with the reorganisation of the provinces and States. States in both Parts I and III will be brought on the same level. There is an amendment to the article and that difference is going to be eliminated and it will disappear. Shri B. M. Gupte: That is alright but as I was saying I am not against making the Centre strong. But at the same time we have given a glorified name to the units. We are taking away the powers of the States and bringing them in the Central or Concurrent list; and yet we have adopted the word State for the unit.... ***** *CAD, Vol. IX, 18th September 1949, p. 1675. †Ibid., p. 1685.