Vol. 2 · pages 591–595

570 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Dr. Ambedkar : Just as Parliament in the Act suggested that there should be a Public Service Commission, so it could be suggested that there should be the appointment of a Committee. Sir Cowasji Jehangir: By the Central Government ? Dr. Ambedkar: Yes. Chairman: I think I know enough now to draft a Report on this subject, but I should like to know what is your view—not that we shall here and now recommend that any Expert Franchise Committee or any other Committee should be set up after 15 years, say, but in view of possibility that one Province might extend its franchise much more generously than another, so that the whole thing might get out of step, ought we to contemplete the possibility of anybody being constituted to look into the matter then, to try and adjust things, or shall we merely content ourselves with leaving things to the Provinces, or ought we to follow Dr. Ambedkar’s idea of a Committee ? We need not say that it has to come into being, or when it is to come into being, but that it might function if it came into being. Mr. Basu : At any period when the Central Government desired to appoint a Committee. Chairman: We will not say how it is to be appointed, but what do you say about the possibility of appointing such a body ? Diwan Bahadur Ramachandra Rao : I think the Government of India should set up such a body, not that Parliament should set up such a body. Dr. Ambedkar: What difference does it make? Diwan Bahadur Ramachandra Rao: We are leaving great freedom in all these matters. I would like to eliminate parliamentary control. I should like to know what the proposal is. If you say that after a number of years it shall be competent for the Government of India to appoint a Committee to look into this question in the whole of the Provinces, I shall have no objection, but if it is a question of Parliament going into this question again in ten years, I object to it entirely. I have no objection to the Committee being appointed by which the franchise will be extended, but I should like that power vested entirely in the Government of India and to be exercised at its discretion whenever there is necessity for such a thing within a certain number of years, or after a certain number of years. Dr. Ambedkar: How has it any bearing on the functions of this SubCommittee whether this Committee is appointed by Parliament or by the Government of India? Diwan Bahadur Ramachandra Rao: We are devoluting authority to India from Parliament, because in 1919 when this question came up before the Parliamentary Committee, I and several others with me contended that there should be devolution of questions like this to authorities in India ; and because such a step was not taken, we are now confronted with the accumulated complaints about franchise which are now being investigated and they could not be investigated because parliamentary permission

571IN SUB-COMMITTEE NO. VI was required. Therefore I suggest that any step taken in that direction should be devolution of complete power to the Government of India, to be exercised at its discretion to go into the whole question of franchise in a certain number of years. That is a point upon which I really desire to lay some stress. ***** †Dr. Ambedkar: It is now evident, at least to myself and some of my friends, that we shall have to record a note of dissent from certain propositions that will be placed before the Sub-Committee. Will it be permissible for us to submit to you a note of dissent on the various points, which you may be kind enough to append to the report, or will you allow us some other method? Chairman: I do not think that up to the present any of the Sub-Committees have appended minority reports, as it were ; I think the report of the SubCommittee has been one report, but has indicated on its face that certain members—naming them if necessary—have dissented. Dr. Ambedkar: I should like, with your permission to point out one disadvantage which I see in that procedure. If we are not allowed to record our minute of dissent, you do not give us an opportunity to put our suggestions in a concrete form, which we should like to do if we may be allowed to do so. We are allowed the negative liberty of saying we do not agree, and that is all. Chairman : I am not sure we cannot meet you. I think you have made your objection quite clear. What you want really is adult suffrage, and I think we have got a sentence in to indicate that certain members of our Sub-Committee—naming them—objected to this because they thought the system of adult suffrage was the only satisfactory system. That states the point. Dr. Ambedkar: What we should do would depend on the report. Chairman: Let us leave the difficulty until it arises, and then see if we cannot meet you. I think we can. Fourth Sitting—1st January 1931 ‡DRAFT R EPORT—POINT 4 4. Extension of the Franchise: While it was generally held that adult suffrage was the goal which should ultimately be attained, it was agreed that the basis of the franchise could forthwith be broadened and that a large increase was desirable. Some difference of opinion existed as to the extent to which this was † Proceedings of the Sub-Committee No. VI (Franchise), pp. 147-48. ‡ Ibid., pp. 149-50.

572 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES practicable in present circumstances, and it was realised that the SubCommittee had not the necessary material to determine the precise limits of the advance. The Statutory Commission suggested such an increase in the number of electors as would bring that number up to ten per cent of the population. Some of our members thought that an increase to twenty-five per cent of the adult population was immediately practicable. We recommend that an expert Franchise Commission should be appointed with instructions to provide for the immediate increase of the electorate so as to enfranchise not less than ten per cent of the total population and indeed a larger number—but not more than twenty-five per cent of the total population—if that should, on a full investigation, be found practicable and desirable. We recommend that, in addition to providing for this increase the Commission should consider the introduction of a scheme by which all adults not entitled to a direct vote would be grouped together in primary groups of about 20, for the election of one representative member from each group, who would be entitled to vote in the Provincial elections either in the same constituencies as the directly qualified voters or in separate constituencies to be formed for them. (Mr. Joshi, Mr. Shiva Rao, Dr. Ambedkar and Mr. Srinivasan regard these proposals as only “second best” and consider that the immediate introduction of adult suffrage is both practicable and desirable. Sir Cowasji Jehangir, Sir P. C. Mitter and Mr. Basu do not assent to the maximum or minimum we have suggested, but desire the discretion of the Franchise Commission to be entirely unfettered.) † Discussion on point 4 of Draft Report Dr. Ambedkar: I beg to move an amendment to paragraph 4, namely. that in the second section, line 2, to add the following words after the word “practicable”— “with the electoral machinery available in present circumstances”. It would then read “Some difference of opinion existed as to the extent to which this was practicable with the electoral machinery available in present circumstances.” Several Members: There are other grounds. Dr. Ambedkar: That is my amendment. I leave it to the Chairman as the best judge to sum up the sense of the Committee, but the impression that was left upon my mind was that the majority of those who opposed universal adult suffrage as being practical politics for the immediate future did so mainly upon the ground that there was not sufficient electoral machinery in India to cope with the situation if everybody was allowed to vote. Chairman : I do not think myself, Dr. Ambedkar, that was the sole ground on which the matter was put. It was one of the main grounds, but in † Proceedings of the Sub-Committee No. VI (Franchise), pp. 152-54.

573IN SUB-COMMITTEE NO. VI recording the view of the Committee I do not think we should limit ourselves to saying that that was the sole ground. For instance, the difficulty of communications, and the lack of facilities for travel, and so on, were also very much stressed. Dr. Ambedkar: I would rather like to have it made clear in the Report. Mr. Joshi: You might put in some such words as “practical electioneering difficulties”. Sir Cowasji Jehangir: But there are other objections. Mr. Joshi: We are talking of the general majority, and not of those people who do not want to vote on principle. Chairman: I think what is already stated meets the point. After all, you and Mr. Joshi come in under the note at the end. Dr. Ambedkar: I quite see that. Although we stand for the ideal, we may have to accept the second best, but we should like to have the second best as good as it can possibly be made. I think my point ought to be made clear, so that the expert Franchise Committee might consider it. Chairman : I do not think that would meet the majority of the Committee. I think the majority of the Committee would rather feel that the words should not be qualified. Very well. Now what about the next sentence beginning, “We recommend that an Expert Franchise Commission should be appointed with instructions to provide for the immediate increase of the electorate so as to enfranchise not less than ten per cent of the total population and indeed a larger number— but not more than twenty-five per cent of the total population—if that should, on a full investigation, be found practicable and desirable.” Dr. Ambedkar: I have an amendment on page 3. Instead of the words “but not” I should like to have the words “and even substituted”. Chairman: Many of us felt, and I am one of them, that an immediate increase of twenty-five per cent was straining it somewhat, and I do not think we should be asked to strain it further. Again, you come in under your reservation, Dr. Ambedkar. Dr. Ambedkar: My second amendment is to strike out the words “and desirable”. This matter, whatever increase is desirable or not, is really one which must be decided by this Committee. It cannot be decided by the Expert Franchise Commission. That Commission is to be appointed to devise ways and means to carry into effect the decisions we take. How much increase is desirable is certainly a matter which cannot be left to the competence of the new Franchise Commission. From that point of view I think it is necessary to drop these words. Chairman : It is very difficult to separate what is practicable and what is desirable. “Practicable” is an elastic word. It may be a very difficult thing to achieve or it may be a comparatively easy thing to achieve ; but it may be possible of achievement and therefore you will say it is practicable. In considering the desirability, you can hardly shut out of your mind the

574 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES extent to which the thing is practicable. The two must come in together to a certain extent. Dr. Ambedkar: We have decided that in our opinion an extension which covers twenty-five per cent of the population is desirable, Chairman: You use such an elastic word as “practicable”. That is the difficulty I feel. You cannot put the two words in completely watertight compartments. What is practicable must react on what is desirable, and you use a very elastic word. I think it would be wiser to keep both there. We give a clear view of our indication by saying at the very outset that we look forward to adult suffrage as an ideal. ***** †Chairman: We had better take it line by line. Will anybody interrupt if they have an amendment to propose : “We recommend that, in addition to providing for this increase, the Commission should consider the introduction of a scheme by which all adults not entitled to a direct vote would be grouped together in primary groups of about 20,”—then it is proposed to insert “or in some other suitable manner”. Is there any objection? —“for the election of one representative member from each group, who would be entitled to vote in the Provincial elections either in the same constituencies as the directly qualified voters or in separate constituencies to be formed for them”. “(Mr. Joshi, Mr. Shiva Rao, Dr. Ambedkar and Mr. Srinivasan regard these proposals as only ‘second best’ and consider that the immediate introduction of adult suffrage is both practicable and desirable.)” Dr. Ambedkar: I should like to say that Mr. K. T. Paul was also of the same opinion as ourselves. Chairman: That will be noted. Mr. Joshi: I propose that instead of the words “second best” the words “quite inadequate” should be substituted. Chairman: That is really a matter for you gentlemen. If you prefer those words “quite inadequate” instead of the words “second best”, that is a matter for you really. So it will read : “Mr. Joshi, Mr. Shiva Rao, Dr. Ambedkar, Mr. Srinivasan and Mr. K. T. Paul regard these proposals as quite inadequate and consider that the immediate introduction of adult suffrage is both practicable and desirable.” Mr. Jadhav: My name also should be added to that list. Chairman: A note will be made of that. Then it goes on : “Sir Cowasji Jehangir, P. C. Mitter, and Mr. Basu do not assent to the maximum or minimum we have suggested, but desire the discretion of the Franchise Commission to be entirely unfettered.” Obviously that is a matter for them to say what they want. ***** † Proceedings of the Sub-Committee No. VI (Franchise), p. 159.