Vol. 15 · pages 571–575

554 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES My own view is this. I cannot say that I have much of experience of voting. But such experience as I have has given me this idea that the lowest class of people in this country and the highest are politically most conscious. In my experience in my province, the Scheduled Castes, who stand last in the scale of social order, vote to the extent of 80 per cent. I have never found any election in which they have voted less than that. I also feel—and I think I am sure in my statement— that the Brahmins in my province vote about 80 per cent. The reason is obvious. One community is a depressed community. It is conscious of the fact that its moral and material elevation depends upon the place it occupies in the legislatures of this country. Consequently they never waste their time, their energy in anything else, however profitable they may be except to go to the poll and vote on the day when the poll is called. My experience with regard to the Brahmins is also the same and my analysis is also the same. They today stand almost on the precipice. Everybody wants to push them out from all the places that they have occupied. Consequently they also know that unless they have a certain amount of solidarity among themselves, that unless each one of them goes to the poll they shall not be able to exercise the influence which they must exercise in order to secure themselves from a harsh pushing out immediately and to secure at least a transition from one stage to another. Shri Kamath (Madhya Pradesh): Not all Brahmins. Dr. Ambedkar: The class which is apathetic and which does not care to vote is the middle class. Their existence does not seem to depend so much upon the Governmental activity. They have their granaries, if not full, half full and they know that without resort to any kind of Government help they can carry from season to season and from year to year. They therefore do not care about it. That is my experience. Therefore, what we need do at the present moment is to tell those Members who represent the middle class that there is a duty cast upon them, to see that this class becomes politically conscious and to call them to the election so that

555PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES they may participate in the same way as those at the top and those at the bottom do. I do not think that any legal remedy is necessary. Then I come to the last point raised by my hon. friend Mr. Sonavane. It is really no argument that he presented. He wanted to know certain facts. He wanted to know what was the system of voting that was going to be. He was under the impression that there was going to be some kind of marking on the ballot paper as used to be in former times. My friend will know that under the single-member constituency system, with one-man-one-vote, crossing is absolutely unnecessary. Voting now becomes very much like buying a post card, writing the address of the addressee on it and dropping it in the postal box on the road. All that the voter has got to do is to go to the ballot clerk and to obtain the ballot paper which is a blank thing. He will know beforehand that there is a particular kind of coloured ballot box assigned to a particular candidate with a symbol chosen by him, out of the many that are improvised by the Election Commissioner and if he is properly informed beforehand he can take the paper and drop it inside without any necessity for marking. That is going to be the system. Shri Sonavane (Bombay): What about the colour and symbol ? Dr. Ambedkar: It is a matter of convenience. Shri Sidhva: Separate box for each candidate ? Dr. Ambedkar: Yes, certainly. Otherwise how would it happen ? There are, Mr. Speaker, the points which I thought I ought to touch upon because they were not covered by any particular amendment. I do not think that there is any other point of a similar sort which requires any explanation at the outset. With these words, Sir, I commend my motion to the House. Shri Kamath: May I ask one question ? Though the Law Minister said that he is not in favour of imposing a penalty or fine upon electors who......

556 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Mr. Speaker: I am afraid he is asking for some explanation and going into the merits. Shri Kamath: I am asking for information. Mr. Speaker: It is coming of course, in the form of asking for information ; in substance it comes to an argument again. The question is: “That the Bill to provide for the conduct of elections to the Houses of Parliament and to the House or Houses of the Legislature of each State, the qualifications and disqualifications for membership of those Houses, the corrupt and illegal practices and other offences at or in connection with such elections and the decision of doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with such elections, as reported by the Select Committee, be taken into consideration.” The motion was adopted. Mr. Speaker: We will now take the Bill clause by clause. We shall take up clause 2. Dr. Ambedkar: May I suggest. Sir, that clause 2 is the definition clause and might be taken up last? Mr. Speaker: All right. Then we shall begin with clause 3 and the consideration of clause 2 will be postponed. I shall call the amendments one by one and hon. Members wishing to move them will please indicate that they want to move them. In case I miss any, my attention may be invited. *Mr. Speaker: All right. Let him move his first amendment. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad: I beg to move. In sub-clause ( 1) of clause 3, for the words “A person shall not be qualified” substitute the words “No person shall be qualified”. This is only a verbal amendment. Dr. Ambedkar: Is each one to be disposed of, Sir ? Mr. Speaker: Yes. *P,D., Vol. 14, Part II, 14th May 1951, pp. 8657-58.

557PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES Dr. Ambedkar: As the author of the amendment himself has said it is a purely verbal amendment. But I would like to add one more point. That is that the form that has been adopted in the Bill is the form which has been adopted in the Constitution. We would like to follow the form used in the Constitution consistently in all the Bills which relate to this matter. I therefore cannmot accept the amendment. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad: I do not wish to press it. Mr. Speaker: Then I am not putting it to the House. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad: I beg to move. In sub-clause ( 1) of clause 3 for the words “Parliamentary Constituency” substitute the words “House of the People Constituency”. *Shri Naziruddin Ahmad: ...... There are a number of amendments and if this is accepted or rejected, it would dispose of a large number of similar amendments. As the expression appears frequently in this Bill, I think it is better not to encourage any confusion of thought. Dr. Ambedkar: I cannot accept this amendment. In the first place there is no difference in substance. The effect remains the same. All that we are trying to do is to keep up the uniform phraseology which is used in this Act as well as . in the Representation of the People Act already passed. If my hon. friend were to see the definition in sub-clause (f) of clause 2 he will see that ‘Parliamentary constituency’ is defined to mean “a constituency provided by section 6 or by order made thereunder for the purpose of election to the House of the People.” Therefore, there is really no difference at all. Secondly, I would like to draw his attention to the interpretation clause, clause 2, sub-clause 1(a) where it is stated: “each of the expressions defined in section 2 of the expressions defined in section 2 or sub-section (2) of section 27 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (XLIII of 1950), but not defined in this Act, shall have the same meaning as in that Act.” Therefore, this is quite unnecessary. *P.D., Vol. 14, Part II, 11th May 1951, pp. 8659-60.

558 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Mr. Deputy Speaker: The question is: In sub-clause ( 1) of clause 3, for the words “parliamentary constituency” substitute the words “House of the People constituency”. The motion was negatived. *Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : I believe that the Constitution has laid down that parliament may lay down the qualifications as well as the disqualifications. I suppose the Constitution likes that these articles should be taken advantage of. If Mr. Bhattacharya’s argument is going to be carried to its logical conclusion it will set at nought two, or rather four, articles of the Constitution relating to the Central and State Legislatures. I therefore submit that Mr. Bhattacharya has displayed more enthusiasm than wisdom in this respect. Dr. Ambedkar: When the Resolution was moved by Prof. K. T. Shah some time ago in this House I pointed out to him that his Resolution was very vague, that he had not set out any category of people whom he regarded as specially qualified for standing as candidates to Parliament or to the State Legislatures. We have now from Prof. K. T. Shah distinct categories of people whom he regards as suitable candidates for election to parliament. That is undoubtedly an improvement, because we have got now concrete proposals to consider on their own merits. One thing is quite clear and that is that these are disqualifications for candidature. It means that if the amendment is accepted only a certain category of people who fall in one of the seven categories mentioned here will alone be entitled to stand as a candidate. I hope my friend. Sardar Hukam Singh realizes that although it is not possible to say what will be the total number of people who will become eligible for standing as a candidate if this amendment was accepted, there can be no doubt about it that the number of people who will become eligible for standing as candidates as compared to the vast number of the voters would’ be very small. In fact the effect of this amendment would be to create a sort of monopoly for certain people, who by adventitious *P.D., Vol. 11, Part II, 14th May 1951, pp. 8687-90.