Vol. 13 · pages 491–495

ARTICLE 44 *Mr. Vice-President : We shall now take up article 44. The motion is : The article 44 form part of the Constitution. I am going to call over the amendments one by one. Amendment No. 1075—Dr. Ambedkar. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move— “That in sub-clause (c) of clause (2) of article 44, for the words “such member” the words “the elected members of both Houses of Parliament” be substituted.” Before proceeding to give the reasons for the amendment I would like with your permission to go back for a minute to clause (2) of this article and explain the scheme as set out in sub-clauses (a) and (b) of that clause. Honourable Members will see that the President is to be elected by elected Members of the Lower House of each State Legislature and by elected Members of both Houses of Parliament— the two to form a single electoral college. Sub-clause (1) of article 44 says that as far as practicable there shall be uniformity in the scale of representation of the different States in the election of the President. It would have been possible to achieve this uniformity by the simple method of assigning each member of the electoral college one vote. But this is not possible because of the disparity between the members of the Legislature and their ratio to population that exists between the different classes of States. In the case of States in Part I of the First Schedule, article 149(3)fixes the scale of representation—one representative for every one lakh of population. In the case of States in Part III, no such scale is laid down. The scale may vary from State to State. In one State, it may be one representative for every 10,000 population. In another, it may be one for every 20,000. That being the position, the value of the votes cast in the election of the President by the members of the Slate Legislatures cannot be measured by the simple rule of assigning one vote one value. The problem, therefore, is how to bring about uniformity in the value of the votes cast by members who do not represent the same electoral unit. The formula adopted to obtain the value of a vote cast by an elected member of the Legislature of a State is to divide the population of that State by the total number of elected members of the Legislature of that State ; and to divide the *CAD. Vol. VII. 13th December 1948, pp. 1001-03. 458 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

quotient so obtained by 1,000 and if the remainder is not less than 500 then add one to the dividend. This is what is stated in subclauses (b) and (c) of clause (2). I now come to the amendment to sub-clause (c) which I have moved. With regard to the votes cast by members of Parliament, we are confronted by the same problem, namely, the disparity in the electoral units and consequent disparity in the value of the votes cast by them. This disparity also arises from the same causes. In the first place, the Council of States being elected by the State Legislature reflects the same disparity which exists between States in Part I and States in Part III. In the second place, there is the same disparity in the ratio of seats to population as between States in Part I and Part III in the election of members of Parliament. There are two ways of achieving uniformity in the voting by members of Parliament. One is to divide the total number of votes capable of being cast by members of all the State Legislatures by the total number of members of all the State Legislatures and the quotient will be the number of votes which each member will be entitled to cast. The other method is to divide the total number of votes capable of being cast by members of the Legislatures of all the States by the total number of elected members of both Houses of Parliament. The first method is set out in sub-clause (c) as it stands. The second method is embodied in the amendment to sub-clause (c) which I have moved. The difference between the two methods lies in this. In the first method all members of the electoral college taking part in the election of the President are treated on the same footing in the matter of valuation of their votes. According to the second method the members of Parliament are given equal strength in the matter of voting as the members of the State Legislautres will have. It is felt that members of Parliament should have a better voice than what sub-clause (c) as it stands does. Hence the amendment. ***** ARTICLE 44 (Could.) *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. Vice-President, Sir, I accept the amendment No. 25 of List 1 to amendment No. 1083 moved by my friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad. The other amendments I am sorry, I cannot accept. Now, Sir in the course of the general debate, two *CAD, Vol. VII. 13th December 1948. pp. 1016-18. 459DRAFT CONSTITUTION

questions have been raised. One is on the amendment of Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad. It has been pointed out by various speakers that it would be very wrong to base any election on the last census viz., of 1941. I am sure there is a great deal of force in what has been said by the various speakers on this point. It is true that the 1941 census was in some areas, at any rate, a cooked census ; a census was cooked by the local Government that was in existence, in favour of certain communities and operated against certain other communities. But apart from that, it is equally true that on account of the partition of India there has been a great change in the population and its communal composition in certain provinces of India, for instance, in the East Punjab, Bombay, West Bengal and to some extent in U.P. also. In view of the fact that the Constitution provides for representation to various communities in accordance with their ratio of population to the general population, it is necessary that not only the total population of every particular province should be ascertained but that the proportion of the various communities to which we have guaranteed representation in accordance with their population should also be ascertained before the foundations of the Constitution are laid down in terms of election. I have no doubt about it that the Government will pay attention to the various arguments that have been made in favour of having a true census of the people before the elections are undertaken. If I may say so, one of the reasons which persuaded me to accept the amendment of my friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad is that he used the word ‘latest’ in preference to the word ‘last’. I thought that the word ‘ last’ had a sort of a local colour in the sense that the last census may mean the periodical census which is taken every ten years ; and the ‘latest’* census means the census taken before any operation of election is started. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I did not use those words. I said the last preceding census. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Anyhow, I did not pay much attention to what he said. But that certainly is my idea, that this clause shall not prevent the Government from having a new census before proceeding to have elections for the new legislature. I think that should satisfy most Members who have an apprehension on this point. *Misprinted as ‘last’ in the debates. 460 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

Shri Mahavir Tyagi : May I take it that you give an assurance that such a census will be taken ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I cannot possibly give an assurance. But no government will overlook the vast changes that have taken place in the composition and the total population of the different provinces. We have guaranteed representation to a great population consisting of various minorities. There has been a great deal of debate, as Honourable Members know, over the question of weightage, and we know that weightage has been disallowed. If we now have the elections and allow them to take place and the seats to be assigned on the existing basis of population, when as a matter of fact, that basis has been lost by migrations, it might result in weightage to various communities, and no representation to certain communities. Obviously in order to avoid such a kind of thing and to see that no community has any weightage, undoubtedly, government will have to see that the census is a proper census. Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra : I want to know whether the Honourable Member means that no election under the new Constitution should be held unless this census was taken. Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Well, it seems to me only a natural conclusion, because the seals for the elections cannot be assigned unless the populations of the various communities are ascertained. Therefore, that seems to me the logical conclusion, and a new census will be inevitable. The other question that was greatly agitated by Mr. Tyagi and by Begum Aizaz Rasul and certain other members related to the election of the President. Now, there are two ways of electing the President. One way is to elect him by what is called a bare majority of the House. If a man got 51 per cent, he would be elected. That is one way of electing the President and that is the simple and straightforward one. Now, with regard to that, it may just happen that the majority party would be in a position to elect the President without the minority party having any voice in the election of the President. Obviously no Member of the House would like the President to be elected by a hare majority or by a system of election in which the minorities had no part to play. That being so, the election of the President by a bare majority has to be eliminated, and we have to provide a system whereby the minorities 461DRAFT CONSTITUTION

will have some voice in the election of the President. The only method of giving the minorities a voice in the election of the President is, so to say, to have separate electorates and to provide that the President must not only have a majority but he must have a substantial number of votes from each minority. But that again, seems to me, to be a proposition which we cannot accept having regard to what we have laid down in the Constitution, namely, that there shall be no separate electorates. The only other method, therefore, that remained was to have a system of election in which the minorities will have some hand and some play, and that is undoubtedly the system of proportional representation, which has been laid down in the Constitution. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : There is to be transferability. How can there be proportional representation when there is only one man to be elected ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I really cannot go into this question in detail. To do so I will have to open a class and lecture on the subject ; but I cannot undertake that task at this stage. However, it is well-known and everybody knows how the system works. Mr. Vice-President: These interruptions show that some Members are not aware of the true nature of proportional representations. You need not pay attention to these interruptions. Maulana Hasrat Mohani: What are you going to do if there is only one candidate ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : If there is only one candidate, he will be elected unanimously (Laughter), and no question of majority or minority arises at all. The other question asked by Mr. Tyagi was whether there was any procedure for eliminating candidates. Shri Mahavir Tyagi : On a point of information, Sir. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : No. I cannot yield. I am answering your point. Your point was whether there was a process of elimination. The point before me is that I want that the election of the President or the General representation involves elimination. Otherwise it has no meaning. The only thing that we have done is that instead of having several proportional representations, we have provided one single proportional represenation, in which every candidate at the 462 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES