Vol. 13 · pages 661–665

628 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES reserve for the Drafting Committee the right to reconsider the last part of sub-clause (c). Subject to that, I think the article, as amended, may be passed. [Article 152 as amended was added to the Constitution] ***** ARTICLE 153 The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir. I move : “That clause (3) of article 153 be omitted.” This clause is apparently inconsistent, with the scheme for a Constitutional Governor. ***** †Shri Gopal Narain : (United Provinces : General) : Mr. President, Sir, before speaking on this article, I wish to lodge a complaint and seek redress from you. I am one of those” who have attended all the meetings of this Assembly and sit from beginning to the end, but my patience has been exhausted now, I find that there are a few Honourable members of this House who have monopolised all the debates, who must speak on every article, on every amendment and every amendment to amendment. I know, Sir, that you have your own limitations and you cannot stop them under the rules, though I see from your face that you also feel sometimes bored, but you cannot stop them. I suggest to you, Sir, that some time-limit may be imposed upone some Members. They should not be allowed to speak for more than two or three minutes. So far as this article is concerned, it has already taken fifteen minutes, though there is nothing new in it, and it only provides discretionary powers to the Governor. Still a member comes and oppose it. I seek redress from you, but if you cannot do this, then you must allow us at least to sleep in our seats or do something else than sit in this House. Sir, I support this article. Mr. President : I am afraid I am helpless in this matter. I leave it to the good sense of the Members. Shri Brajeshwar Prasad : (Rose to speak). Mr. President : Do you wish to speak after tins ? ( Laughter) The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not think I need reply. This matter has been debated quite often. [Except Dr. Ambedkar’s amendment, none else was accepted. Article 153 was added to the Constitution.] ***** *CAD, Vol. VIII, 2nd June 1948, p. 555. † Ibid., p. 557.

629DRAFT CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 153-A *Mr. President : Does any one wish to say anything about this amendment ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I do not accept the amendment. [The amendment of Prof K. T. Shah was negatived and Article 154 was added to the Constitution.] ***** ARTICLE 160 ***** †Mr. President: Dr. Ambedkar. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I have nothing to say. Article 160 was adopted and added to the Constitution. NEW ARTICLE 163-A ‡Mr. President: There is the new article 163-A which has to be moved. That is amendment No. 39 List I. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, it has to be held over. ***** ARTICLE 165 ***** Shri T. T. Krishnamachari : The Chair has on previous occasions permitted Dr. Ambedkar to move such amendments, and I think the same practice may be continued and it may be moved formally. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That in article 165 for the words ‘a declaration’ the words ‘an affirmation or oath’ be substituted.” The motion was adopted. ***** ARTICLE 166 #The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That after clause (1) of article 166. the following new clause be inserted :— ‘(la) No peson shall be a member of the Legislature of two or more States and if a person is chosen a member of the Legislatures of two or more States, then at the expiration of .such period as may be specified in rules made by the President that person’s seat in the Legislatures of all the States shall become vacant, unless he has previously resigned his seat in the Legislatures of all but one of the States’.” This is a clause which provides for a case where a person is a member of the Legislatures of two States; the former clause dealt with a person who is a member of the Legislature of a State and of Parliament. *CAD, Vol. VIII, 2nd June 1948, p. 558. † Ibid., p. 564. ‡ Ibid., p. 566. # Ibid., P. 567.

630 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Mr. President : There is the amendment of Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, No. 2403, hut that is covered by the one now moved. No. 2404. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I move : “Thai clause (2) of article 166 be deleted.” ***** *Mr. President: I shall put the amendments moved by Dr. Ambedkar, one by one. Shri H. V. Kamath : Will not Dr. Ambedkar answer the point raised by me ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not consider it necessary. [All amendments by Dr. Ambedkar mentioned hereinbefore were accepted. Article 166, was added to the Constitution.] ***** ARTICLE 167 ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for sub-clause (d) of clause (1) of article 167, the following be substituted :— ‘(d) if he has ceased to he a citizen of India or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, or is under any acknowledgement of allegiance or adherence to a foreign State’.” Shri Mahavir Tyagi : What will be our position in regard to England, now that we are in the Commonwealth ? Will our allegiance to the King be also a disqualification ? Mr. President: That is a matter of interpretation of the Constitution. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : That will be dealt with by the Nationality Act. (Amendments Nos. 2420 to 2423 were not moved.) Shri H. V. Kamath : I think my amendment No. 2424 is a purely verbal amendment and I leave it to the Drafting Committee. Mr. President : I think it is of a substantial nature. Shri H. V. Kamath : If that be so, I will move it. I move : “That in sub-clause (d) of clause (I) of article 167, after the semi-colon at the end, the word ‘or’ be added.” ...Whether the word ‘and’ is deleted, or in its place ‘or’ is substituted, more or less comes to the samething, according to my untrained mind. Thai is why I said I leave it to the wise men of the drafting Committee, because I am a mere novice in these matters. I *CAD, Vol. VIII, 2nd June 1948, p. 568. †Ibid., pp. 570-71.

631DRAFT CONSTITUTION thought ‘or’ would be more appropriate, because if any one of these disqualifications arises—if a person disqualified for any of these reasons—then the article will apply. Mr. President : Dr. Ambedkar might consider it. Shri H. V. Kamath : As I said, I leave the decision to the wise men of the drafting committee. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I think it is perfectly all right, Sir. Mr. President : Won’t they read cumulatively ? Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : No, Sir, they won’t read cumulatively. Mr. President : If ‘or’ is added it will put it beyond all doubt. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not think it necessary. (Amendments Nos. 2425, 2426 and 2427 were not moved.) ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I rise only for the sake of my Friend. Mr. Tyagi, as he has asked me one or two pointed questions. As he himself says that he is an illiterate, I can very well understand his difficulty in understanding the word ‘adherence’. I would therefore explain to him what the word ‘adherence’ means. When one country is invaded by another country, what happens is this that the local people either out of fear or out of martial law sometimes give obedience to the laws made by the military governor who acts in the name of the invading country. Such a conduct is often excused while the invasion countinues and the military occupation continues. It often happens that when there is no real necessity to obey the invader or the military governor, either because there has been a relaxation of control or because the hostility has ceased, certain people still continue to render obedience to the military governor or the invader. Their conduct under law is referred to as ‘adherence’. It is distinct from acknowledging. It is to protect this kind of case that the word ‘adherence’ has been used. Mr. Friend, Mr. Tyagi, was also very much agitated over the question of who are to be regarded as foreign countries. I am sure about it that it is not the intention of my Friend, Mr. Tyagi, to involve me in any discussion about Commonwealth relationship which is a matter which has already been discussed and disposed of in the House, but I would like to tell him that I propose to introduce an amendment to article 303, sub-clause (1), to define what would be regarded as foreign country, *CAD, Vol. VIII, 2nd June 1948, pp. 573-74.

632 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES and if my friend, Mr. Tyagi has got Volume II of the printed List of amendments, he will see what the proposed amendment is. The proposed amendment gives power to the President to declare what are not foreign countries, and that declaration would govern whether a particular country is or is not a foreign country. For the benefit of my Friend, Mr. Tyagi, I would also like to add one word of explanation. Many people seem to be rather worried that when a country is declared not to be a foreign country under the proposed amendment, or the Commonwealth Agreement, all such people who are inhabitants of those countries would ipso facto acquire all the rights of citizenship which are being conferred by this Constitution upon the people of this country. I want to tell my friends that no such consequence need follow. The position under commmonwealth relationship would be this; In all the dominion countries, the residents would be divided into three categories, citizens, aliens and a third category of what may be called Dominion residents residing in a particular country. All that would mean is this, that the citizens of the dominions residing in India would not be treated as aliens, they would have some rights which aliens would not have, but they would certainly not be entitled, in my judgment, to get the full rights of citizenship which we would be giving to the people of our country. I hope my friend, Mr. Tyagi, has got something which will remove the doubts which he has in his mind. Shri Mahavir Tyagi : I heartily thank you for the interesting speech that you have made. [The amendments moved by Dr. Ambedkar and that of Shri T. T. Krishnamachari were carried. Article 167, was accordingly added to the Constitution] ***** ARTICLE 169 ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : (Bombay : General) : Sir, not very long ago this very matter was debated in this House, when we were discussing the privileges of Parliament and I thought that as the House had accepted the article dealing with the privileges and immunities of Parliament, no further debate would follow when we were really reproducing the very same provision with regard to the State legislature. But as the debate has been raised and as my Friend Mr. Kamath said that even the press is agitated, I think it is desirable that I should state what exactly is the reason for the course adopted by the Drafting Committee, especially as when the debate took place last time I did not intervene in order to make the position clear. *CAD, Vol. VIII, 3rd June 1949, pp. 582-84.