Vol. 9 · pages 181–185

152 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES (b) In both cases the poll is declared on the basis of majority votes. But in the case of a separate electorate the majority is and must be of the voters belonging to the same community as that of the candidate, while in the case of a joint electorate majority need not be of the same community as that of the candidate. (ii) Joint Electorate compared with General Electorate: — (1) A Joint electorate is akin to a General Electorate in as much as in both a voter is free to vote for any candidate standing for a general Constituency. (2) A Joint Electorate differs from a Separate Electorate in two respects :— (a) A General Electorate may be a single member electorate. But a Joint Electorate must at least be a two-member electorate one general and one reserved. (b) In a General Electorate no seat is earmarked for any community. But in a Joint Electorate one at least must be reserved. 7. Special Features of Joint Electorate. A Joint Electorate with Reserved Seats is essentially a General Electorate with the following distinguishing features:— (1) A General Electorate may be a single member electorate. But a Joint Electorate must necessarily be a plural member Electorate. (2) In a General Electorate the seat or seats to be filled by Election are open to all, and all communities not enclosed in separate electorates are entitled to contest and the result of the election is determined by majority of the votes polled by the candidates without reference to community of the voter or the candidate. But in a Joint Electorate at least one seat is reserved for some particular community which means that the right to stand as a candidate for such reserved seat is restricted to members of that community. (3) While the right to stand in a Joint Electorate is restricted, the right to vote is unrestricted and all

153 WHAT CONGRESS AND GANDHI HAVE DONE TO THE UNTOUCHABLES : A FALSE CLAIM voters in the General Electorates, i.e., even voters of communities other than the one for which the seat is reserved are free to vote for the election of the candidate for the Reserved Seat. (4) In declaring the result of the election to the reserved seat, there is no requirement that the successful candidate must have obtained a specified quantum of votes of the voters of this community. The rule is that the candidate of the community for which the seat is reserved if there is only one or if there be more than one candidate then the one who polls the highest number of votes must be declared to be elected even if another candidate belonging to the general community has secured a greater number of votes than the community’s candidate. Such is the Electoral system which obtains in India. The system made applicable to the Untouchables is the one referred to as the system of Joint Electorates with Reserved Seats and described under 7 above. To give effect to the principle of reservation for the Untouchables what is done is to pick out a requisite number of General Electorates, convert them into plural member electorates and reserve in each such electorate one or two seats for the Scheduled Castes. Different Provinces have different number of such Joint Electorates. Their actual number is determined by the number of seats allotted to the Scheduled Castes in the Provincial Legislature and by the number of seats reserved for them in each Joint Electorate. Attention may also be drawn to some features of the plan, which from the point of view of results are of crucial character. The Joint Electorate is a general electorate. But it must not on that account be supposed that it is a constituency consisting of the generality of voters. As has already been pointed out, the Muslims, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians and Europeans have been given separate electorates and consequently, the Muslim, Indian Christian, Anglo-Indian and European voters are excluded from a Joint Electorate. The result is that the Joint Electorate is a constituency in which the only voters who are included are those belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Hindus, Parsis and Jews. As the Parsis and Jews are negligible except in Bombay, the Joint Electorate consists of Hindus and Scheduled Castes only.

154 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Although the General Electorate selected for reserving a seat for the Untouchables may be bigger than a two-member constituency and although it is open to reserve more than one seat for the Untouchables in one General Electorate, in all provinces the general plan is to select a two-member General Electorate, and to reserve one seat for the Hindus and one seat for the Scheduled Castes. It is only in Bengal there are three constituencies in which two seats are reserved for the Scheduled Castes. The Joint Electorate is thus a linked constituency. Two features of this Joint Electorate should be noted: (1) The Hindu voters in a Joint Electorate are almost always in a majority, if not in an overwhelming majority and the Scheduled Castes voters are almost always in a minority, if v not in a hopeless minority. (2) A Hindu voter can vote for the election of a Scheduled Caste candidate standing for the seat reserved for the Scheduled Castes and a Scheduled Caste voter can vote for the election of a Hindu candidate standing for the Hindu seat. Under the system what are the probabilities ? Will the Scheduled Castes be able to elect a Scheduled Caste candidate who has their confidence to the seat reserved for them or will the Hindus be able to elect a Scheduled Caste candidate who is their tool and who has no confidence of the Scheduled Castes ? The probabilities will be determined by two considerations: (1) by the number of seats reserved for the Hindus and (2) by the nature of the political organizations prevailing among the Hindus. If there is only one seat reserved for the Hindus and if the Hindus are so organized that they can prevent a contest for their seat and avoid frittering away their votes then it is absolutely certain that the Hindu nominee from the Scheduled Castes will win. The reason is that the Hindus who have a larger voting strength will find a surplus of votes which they do not need for election to their seat and which they can bestow upon their nominee from the Scheduled Castes and help him to win the seat reserved for the Scheduled Castes. The system of joint electorate and reserved seats which is in operation is a system of two member constituency. The Hindus under the Congress are so completely organized that there is no possibility of an electoral contest and consequent waste of votes. The result is that the system helps the Hindus to win the reserved seats and works against the Scheduled Castes. The Hindus are greatly aided in this matter by reason of the fact that for

155 WHAT CONGRESS AND GANDHI HAVE DONE TO THE UNTOUCHABLES : A FALSE CLAIM winning the seat reserved for the Scheduled Castes in a Joint Electorate it is not necessary that the majority of voters should belong to the Scheduled Castes for whom the seat is reserved. How these weaknesses in the system of joint electorate were exploited by the Congress in the Elections which took place in 1937, will be explained later on. For the moment, I am only drawing attention to the Electoral plan devised for the purpose of giving representation to the Scheduled Castes and how vulnerable some of its features are. III WE may now proceed to examine the Election Returns. It may be well to begin by asking a simple question: What do Congressmen mean when they say that the Election of 1937 shows that the Congress represents the Untouchables ? A clarification is necessary, because quite obviously the question can have two meanings. It may mean that those Untouchable candidates who stood on the Congress ticket for seats reserved for the Untouchables were elected as against those Untouchable candidates who did not stand on the Congress ticket. It may also mean that more votes were cast by the Untouchable voters in favour of those Untouchable candidates who stood on the Congress ticket than other Untouchable candidates. I propose to examine the returns from both points of view. The results of the Election, in terms of seats won, have already been presented. It is not necessary to repeat those figures here. It was shown that out of 151 seats the Congress won 78. One cannot say that this result of the contest between the Congress and the Untouchables is a strong piece of evidence : to support the Congress claim that it represents the Untouchables. If the Congress got 78 the Untouchables got 73. It was a neck to neck race. Let us examine the claim of the Congress to represent the Untouchables in term of votes cast in favour of the Congress Untouchable candidates. The total number of votes cast by the Untouchable Voters in the election of 1987 numbered 1,586,456. The following table shows how they were distributed, now many were cast in favour of the Congress Untouchable

156 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES candidates and how many in favour of Non-Congress Untouchable candidates : Table 10 Province Voting by Untouchable Voters In favour of Congress Against Congress Total of Un- touchable Votes cast in the Election United Provinces ... ... 52,909 79,571 132,180 Madras ... ... ... ... 126,152 195,464 321,616 Bengal ... ... ... ... 59,646 624,797 684,443 Central Provinces ... ... 19,507 115,354 134,861 Bombay ... ... ... ... 12,971 158,076 171,047 Bihar ... ... ... ... 8,654 22,187 30,841 Punjab ... ... ... ... Nil 69,126 69,126 Assam ... ... ... ... 5,320 22,437 27,757 Orissa ... ... ... 5,878 8,707 14,585 Total ... ... ... 290,737 1,295,719 1,586,456 It is well-known that the number of seats captured by a party is not always in proportion to the number of votes cast in favour of the party and often a party carries a majority of seats with a minority of votes. This is particularly true where the single member constituency system prevails as it does in India. The real strength is measured by the number of votes secured by the party. Applying this test, it is clear that out of 1,586,456 votes only 290,737 i.e., eighteen per cent have been cast in favour of the Congress. Eighty-two per cent have been against the Congress. Can there be any evidence more conclusive against the Congress claim to represent the Untouchables ? Congressmen may not accept voting strength as a measuring rod. They may continue to base the claim of the Congress to represent the Untouchables on the ground of seats captured. No sane man will look upon 78 out of 151 or majority of five as a victory worth talking about. As a matter of fact the Congress claim even on the basis of seats is futile. For, a further analysis of the Election Returns shows that the Congress far from capturing a majority of seats got only a minority of seats reserved for the Scheduled Castes. If the credit side of the Congress is to be real and not bogus, then the following deductions must be made from the total of 78 which the Congress has won: