Vol. 17, Part II · pages 296–300

273THE CABINET . . . . . . . . . UNTOUCHABLES The Final election of the Scheduled Castes was not by separate electorates. Consequently, for the sake of uniformity the Mission should have taken the results of the Primary elections for giving representation to the Untouchables in the Constituent Assembly. The Mission was bound to do so because it was admitted by Sir Strafford Cripps in the debate that the system of election of the Untouchables as determined by the Poona Pact was iniquitious. Why did the Mission then adopt it as a basis for its decision ? IV What could be done to save the Untouchables from impending peril 13. The Cabinet Mission has by the Constitution of the Constituent Assembly left the Untouchables entirely at the mercy of the Caste Hindus who have an absolute majority in it. The Untouchables want the restoration of separate electorates given to them by the Communal Award by H.M.G. and the abrogation of the Poona Pact which was forced upon them by coercion practised by Mr. Gandhi through his fast unto death. This, the Hindus are bound to oppose. In reply to the criticism that they have been left to the mercy of the Hindu majority the Cabinet Mission has been advertising their proposal for an Advisory Committee on Minorities as a means of safeguarding minority rights. Anyone who examines the powers and Constitution of the Advisory Committee will know that the body is worse than useless. (i) In its composition it is only a pale reflection of the Constituent Assembly. The Hindus will dominate it in the same way as they do the Constituent Assembly; (ii) The fact that there will be a certain number of Untouchables in the Constituent Assembly as well as in the Advisory Committee elected by the goodwill of the Congress can be of no help to them for the Untouchable members of the Assembly and of the Committee are but the creatures of the Hindus; (iii) The decisions on questions relating to the minority protection by the Advisory Committee are left to the bare majority which means that the decision will be taken by the Caste Hindus and imposed upon the minorities.

274 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES (iv) The decision of the Advisory Committee even if they are favourable are no more than recommendations. They are not binding on the Constituent Assembly. 14. The device of an Advisory Committee is thus a hoax if not a humbug and cannot be relied upon to counteract the mischief the Hindu majority may do to the cause of the minorities. The Hindu majority has singled out the Untouchables for their malicious intention and seems to be determined to deprive them of the right to claim the political safeguards which are due to a majority. This is apparent from the letter addressed by the Congress on 25th June 1946 (Item 21 in Cmd. 6861). In that letter the Congress has taken the stand that the Untouchables are not a minority. This is an astounding proposition. For according to Mr. Gandhi’s own admission in his weekly called the Harijan of 21st October 1939 the Untouchables were the only real minority in India, The Congress has thus taken a complete somersault. The stand now taken by the Congress is contrary to the underlying principles of the Government of India Act, 1935, which recognizes them a minority. What mischief is contemplated by this somersault it is not possible to know. If the Congress does not regard the Untouchables to be a minority it is possible that the Constituent Assembly might refuse to give them the same safeguards which it might agree to give to the other minorities. The Advisory Committee cannot therefore save the Untouchables from peril. 15. Parliament must, therefore, intervene to see that the position of the Untouchables is not jeopardized. This Parliament must do, not merely because of the pledges it has given but also because of the fact that the discussions of the Constituent Assembly are not subject to ratification. 16. What can Parliament do ? The Untouchables would like that the wrong done to them in regard to the Interim Government be-redressed. They would like their quota fixed. They would like to be given the right to nominate their representatives to the Executive Council. These rights are not new claims. They are vested rights of the Untouchables which were recognized as late as the Simla Conference of 1945. They realize that this wrong it may be difficult to redress now. But if circumstances change and the

275THE CABINET . . . . . . . . . UNTOUCHABLES Government is reconstituted they expect Parliament to press H.M.G. to right this wrong. 17. Much can be done now to save the Untouchables from the injury which the Constituent Assembly, dominated by the Caste Hindus who are determined to deprive the Untouchables of their political safeguards may do. To prevent this mischief the following steps could be taken :— I. Press H.M.G. to make a declaration that they regard the Untouchables as a minority. This is essential in view of the stand taken by the Congress in its letter of the 25th June 1946 (Item 21 in Cmd. 6861). This is all the more necessary because the Viceroy in his reply to the Congress dated 27th June 1946 (Item 38 in Cmd. 6861) has avoided giving a specific denial to the contention of the Congress that the Untouchables are not a minority. If the Government is not pressed to make a declaration now the Untouchables will suffer in two ways :— (a) The Constituent Assembly dominated by the Hindus will deny them the rights of the minority. (b) H.M.G. will be free not to come to their rescue on the ground that they were not committed to regard the Untouchables as a minority. II. Press for a declaration as to whether H.M.G. will institute machinery, if so of what sort, to examine whether the safeguards for minorities framed by the Constituent Assembly are adequate and real. (a) In their Supplementary Statement dated 25th May 1946 (Cmd. 6835) the Cabinet Mission say :— “When the Constituent Assembly has completed its labours, His Majesty’s Government will recommend to Parliament such action as may be necessary for the cessasion of sovereignty to the Indian People, subject only of two matters which are mentioned in the statement and which we believe, are not controversial, namely : adequate provision for the protection of the minorities (Paragraph 20 of the statement) and willingness to conclude a treaty with H.M.G. to cover matters arising out of the transfer of power (Paragraph 22 of the statement)”.

276 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The idea behind this paragraph is not quite clear. It is necessary to press H.M.G. to clarify their intention. (b) If the words ‘subject to’ mean that H.M.G. reserve to themselves the right to examine the safeguards for the minorities framed by the Constituent Assembly in order to find out whether they are adequate and real it is necccessary to press H.M.G. to state what machinery they propose to institute for such an inquiry. The machinery of a Joint Parliamentary Committee with power to examine witnesses from minorities communities would be most appropriate. There is a precedent for it. A Joint Parliamentary Committee was appointed when the Government of India Act of 1935 was on the anvil. There would be nothing wrong in following the precedent in dealing with the report of the Constituent Assembly. III. Press H.M.G. to declare if they will insist upon the Constitution framed by the Constituent Assembly containing clause circumscribing the power of the future Indian Legislature to do away with minority safeguard by bare majority. (a) Neither the first Statement of the Cabinet Mission of May 16,1946 nor the Supplementary Statement of May 25,1946 deal with the question of providing against the Legislature of a Free India altering the Constitution and abrogating the clauses dealing with the protection of minorities. There is no use in Parliament introducing safeguards if these safeguards can be done away with by the Indian Legislature. The only safeguards against such action is to see that the Constitution framed by the Constituent Assembly contains clauses putting limitations on the Constituent powers of the Indian Legislature and prescribing conditions precedent to be fulfilled before alterations in minority safeguards are made. Such provisions exist in the Constitution of U.S.A. and Australia. (b) Though this is a matter of vital importance to the minorities the Cabinet Mission has given no thought to the subject. It is necessary to press H.M.G. as to what they have to say on this question. DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR” 1 zz 1: Khairmode, Vol. 8, Pp. 124-139.

22 DR. AMBEDKAR’S MEMORANDUM London, October 25 “Dr. B.R. Ambedkar sent letters last night to the British Prime Minister, the Secretary of State for India, Mr. Winston Churchill and other statesmen. The letters requested interviews so that Dr. Ambedkar may state his case. Others with whom he has communicated include Lord Templewood (formerly Sir Samuel Hoare), Lord Scarborough (formerly Sir Roger Lumley), Lord Linlithgow and Lord Salisbury. Dr. Ambedkar last night told Reuter’s political correspondent, “I have written also to various other friends who took part in the Round Table Conferences and know the conditions of the Scheduled Castes. I have prepared a memorandum analysing the figures for the primary elections with a view to showing that it is quite untrue to say that the Congress represents the Scheduled Castes.” The memorandum is being printed and copies will be given to the various statesmen approached.—Reuter.” 1 zz 1: The Times of India, dated 26th October, 1946.