STATEMENTS
Contents
1. A Critique of the proposals of
the Cabinet Mission: by Dr. Ambedkar
2. The Cabinet Mission and
the Untouchables: by Dr. Ambedkar
STATEMENTS
A Critique of the Proposals of
the
Cabinet Mission for
in
so far as they affect
the Scheduled Castes
(Untouchables)
by B. R.
AMBEDKAR
*[f.1]Does the Indian National Congress Represent the Scheduled Castes (Untouchables) of India?
The
Cabinet Mission sent out to India by the Labour Government early this year to resolve the
political deadlock in India set out a Scheme for the framing of the constitution by a
Constituent Assembly. This Constituent Assembly is to be composed of representatives
chosen by the members of the Provincial Legislatures by a single transferable vote. For
the purposes of the composition of the Constituent Assembly the Cabinet Mission's Scheme
has divided the members of the provincial legislatures into three categories (1) Muslims,
(2) Sikhs and (3) General, each with a fixed quota of seats. Each category has a separate
electorate whereby the Muslim representatives of the Constituent Assembly will be elected
by the Muslim members of the Provincial Legislature, the Sikhs by the Sikh members and the
General by all the rest. The ' general ' includes (1) Hindus, (2) Scheduled Castes, (3)
Indian Christians, and (4) Anglo-Indians.
2.
The Scheduled Castes of India were greatly surprised to find that they were lumped
together with the Hindus. It has been declared time and again by His Majesty's Government
that His Majesty's Government recognises that the Scheduled Castes are separate element in
the national life of India and that His Majesty's Government will not impose any
constitution to which the Scheduled Castes are not a willing party. The question is asked
why the Cabinet Mission recognised the Muslims and the Sikhs as separate elements and why
they refused to give the Scheduled Castes the same status?
In
the debate that took place in Parliament on the 18th of July, on the proposals of the
Cabinet Mission, Sir Stafford Cripps, Mr. Alexander and Lord Pethick-Lawrence tried to
defend themselves against this criticism. Their argument was two-fold :—
(1) That
in the elections to the Provincial Legislature which took place in February last the seats
reserved for the Scheduled Castes were captured by the Congress and that this shows that
the Scheduled Castes were with the Congress and trusted their destiny to the Congress i.e.
the Hindus and that there was no ground for separating them.
(2)
That there is to be an Advisory Committee on the minorities in which the Scheduled Castes
will be represented and will have a voice in the framing of the safeguards necessary for
them.
The
second defence is worse than useless. The reasons are obvious. The status and powers of
the Advisory Committee are not defined. The quantum of representation of the Scheduled
Castes is not prescribed. The decisions of the Advisory Committee are left to be carried
by a bare majority. Lastly the Advisory Committee cannot be anything else than a mere
reflection of the Constituent Assembly. The representatives of the Scheduled Castes in the
Constituent Assembly all belong to the Congress Party and they do not represent the
Scheduled Castes. They are therefore subject to the Mandate of the Congress Party. Those
of them who will be put in the Advisory Committee will be subject to the same Party
Mandate. They cannot put forth the real point of view of the Scheduled Castes either in
the Constituent Assembly or on the Advisory Committee.
The
principal line of defence used by the members of the Cabinet Mission in justification of
their failure to give the Scheduled Castes separate and independent representation is that
the Congress won the Scheduled Caste seats in the last election. Even this line of defence
cannot stand. It is true that in the final
election the Congress did capture the Scheduled Caste seats. But the reply is that this
election results should not have been taken as the test for various reasons.
Firstly
the parties such as the Scheduled Castes who had co-operated with the British Government
were at a discount with the people on that very account.
Secondly
the trial of the Indian National Army men which synchronised with the election placed the
Congress at an advantage and other parties at a disadvantage. If the Indian National Army
trial had not been staged at the time of the election the Congress would have lost
completely, so low was its stock.
Apart
from these two reasons why the election results should not have been as a test, there is a
special reason why it should not have been taken to determine whether the Congress did or
did not represent the Scheduled Castes. That reason is that the final elevation for the
Scheduled Castes seats is by a system of joint electorate in which the Hindus also vote.
The Hindus vote being preponderant it is easy for the Congress to elect a candidate
belonging to the Scheduled Castes standing for the Scheduled Caste seats entirely by Hindu votes. That the Scheduled Castes
representatives in the Provincial Legislatures who stood on the Congress ticket were
elected solely by Hindu votes and not by the votes of the Scheduled Castes is a fact which
even the Cabinet Mission will not be able to deny.
The
real test by which to determine whether the Congress represents the Scheduled Castes is to
examine the results of the Primary Elections which preceded the Final Elections, for in
the Primary Election the Scheduled Castes have a separate electorate in which the Hindus
have no right to vote. The Primary Election therefore reflects the real sentiments of the
Scheduled Castes. What does the result of the Primary Election show? Does it show that the
Scheduled Castes are with the Congress?
The
Scheduled Castes have been allotted 151 seats in the Provincial Legislatures. They are
distributed among the different Provinces except Sindh and the North-West Frontier
Province.
Primary
Election is not obligatory. It becomes obligatory only if there are more than four candidates contesting for a seat.
In the last Primary Election, which preceded the Final Election, Primary Election became obligatory in 40 constituencies out of 151. They were distributed as follows: —
Madras
...
...
10
Bombay ...
...
3
Bengal ...
...
12
United Provinces
...
3
Central Provinces
...
5
Punjab ...
...
7
There
were no Primary Elections in the Provinces of Bihar and Orissa.
The
results of the Primary Elections in the 40 constituencies are tabulated in the Appendix,
which accompanies this note. The results prove: —
(I)
That out of 283 candidates the Congress put up only 46 candidates on its ticket (See Table I) and out of 168 successful candidates
had only 38 to its credit (See Table V).
(II)
The object of a Party in entering into a Primary Election is to drive out all rival
parties from the Final Election by putting up at least four candidates on its party
ticket. Whether a party can put up four candidates on its ticket depends upon how much
confidence it has in the voters to vote for its party ticket. The Congress has not
ventured to put up more than one candidate in
each constituency. This shows that the Congress had no confidence that the Scheduled Caste
voters would vote for the Congress ticket. If there is any party, which has ventured to
put up four candidates for each seat it, has contested, it is the Scheduled Castes
Federation. (See Table II, Parts I, V, Columns 3
and 4).
(III)
Measured in terms of votes cast in favour of the Congress it is proved beyond dispute that
the Congress obtained only 28 per cent of the total votes polled in the Primary Election (See Table IV).
(IV)
If there was not the temptation to get oneself elected in the final election with the help
of the Hindu votes the Independents would all be members of the Scheduled Castes
Federation. On that assumption the Scheduled Castes Federation is the only party which
represents the Scheduled Castes and the 72 per cent voting in favour of the Non-Congress
Parties should be set out to its credit (See Table
IV).
The
members of the Cabinet Mission argued that Dr. Ambedkar's following was confined to the
Scheduled Castes in the Bombay Presidency and the Central Provinces only.
There
is no foundation for this statement. The Scheduled Castes Federation is functioning in
other Provinces as well and it has won notable electoral success as great as in Bombay and
the Central Provinces. In making this statement the Mission has failed to take account of
the signal victory Dr. Ambedkar secured in the election to the Constituent Assembly. He
stood as a candidate from the Bengal Provincial Legislature Assembly. He secured 7 first
preference votes and topped the poll so far as the general seats were concerned beating
even Mr. Sarat Chandra Bose, the Leader of the Congress party. If Dr. Ambedkar has no
influence outside Bombay and Central Provinces how did he get elected from Bengal? It must
be further remembered that there are 30 seats for the Scheduled Castes in the Bengal
Provincial Assembly. Out of the 30 as many as 28 were elected on the Congress ticket. Of
the two who belonged to his party one fell ill on the day of election. This means that 6
Scheduled Caste members elected on the Congress ticket broke the Congress Mandate and
voted for Dr. Ambedkar. This shows that even these Scheduled Caste members who belong to
the Congress regard him as the leader of the Scheduled Castes. This is complete disproof
of the statement made by the Mission.
The
Congress has been so much encouraged by the surrender of the Mission that a letter
addressed to the Mission the Congress has gone to the length of denying that the Scheduled
Castes are a minority. This means that the Congress is not prepared to give the Scheduled
Castes the same safeguards as they would to other minorities. The Mission has not
repudiated this suggestion of the Congress. Herein lurks a great danger and it is
necessary to pin down the Mission in the course of the debate and compel them to say if
they do or do not regard the Scheduled Castes as a minority.
The
Cabinet Mission have said in their proposals that before sovereignty is transferred
Parliament will have to satisfy itself that the safeguards for Minorities are adequate.
The Mission has nowhere defined the machinery for examining the safeguards. Whether there
would be a Joint Committee of the two Houses of Parliament to examine the minority
safeguards has not been made clear. The Mission has not even stated that His Majesty's
Government will exercise its independent judgement in coming to its conclusion on the
adequacy of the safeguards. It is necessary to have these matters defined because this
provision was an afterthought with the Mission and did not form part of its original
proposals which gives the impression that this was intended merely to act as a sop to the
minorities.
(Preliminary to the General Election in India Held in February 1946) for Choosing Candidates from the Scheduled Castes (Untouchables) for the Seats Reserved for the Scheduled Castes in the Provincial Legislatures of India
Note.
—The
Tables in this Analysis are prepared from official figures.
TABLE
I
Parties
which contested the Primary election for seats reserved for Scheduled Castes shown
Province-wise
|
The number of Candidates
put up by each Party in - |
Total number of
Candidates put up by the Party in all the Provinces |
|||||
Name of Party which
put up Candidates to contest primary elections |
Madras |
Bombay |
Bengal |
United Provinces |
Central Provinces |
Punjab |
|
1. Congress |
10 |
3 |
13 |
11 |
5 |
4 |
46 |
2. Scheduled Castes
Federation |
35 |
6 |
8 |
9 |
12 |
none |
70 |
3. Harijan League |
none |
None |
none |
1 |
3 |
none |
4 |
4. No-Party
Candidates (Indepadants) |
5 |
9 |
76 |
3 |
8 |
52 |
153 |
5. Hindu Maha sabha |
none |
None |
1 |
1 |
none |
none |
2 |
6. Communists |
6 |
None |
1 |
none |
none |
none |
7 |
7. Radical
Democratic Party |
none |
None |
1 |
none |
none |
none |
1 |
Total |
56 |
18 |
100 |
25 |
28 |
56 |
283 |
TABLE
II
Parties
which contested the Primary Election for seats reserved for the Scheduled Castes shown
constituency-wise.
PART
I - MADRAS
|
|
Parties which fought the
election and the number of candidates put up by each. |
|||
Constituency in which
Primary election was contested |
Total Candidates who
took part in the contest |
Congress |
Scheduled Castes
Federation |
Communists |
Non-Party Candidates (
Independents) |
1. Amalpuram |
7 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
none |
2. Coconada |
5 |
1 |
4 |
|
none |
3.Bandar |
5 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
none |
4. Cuddappa |
5 |
1 |
4 |
none |
none |
5.Penukonda |
5 |
1 |
4 |
none |
none |
6. Tiruvannanali |
6 |
1 |
5 |
none |
none |
7.Tindivanam |
6 |
1 |
5 |
none |
none |
8.Mannergudi |
5 |
1 |
none |
1 |
3 |
9.Pollachi |
7 |
1 |
4 |
none |
2 |
10.Nammakal |
5 |
1 |
4 |
none |
none |
Total |
56 |
10 |
35 |
6 |
5 |
PART II – BOMBAY
|
|
Parties which fought the
election and the number of candidates put up by each. |
||
Constituency in which
Primary election was contested |
Total Candidates who
took part in the contest |
Congress |
Scheduled Castes
Federation |
Non-Party Candidates
(Independents) |
Bombay City (North) |
7 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
Bombay City (Byculla
& Parel) |
6 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
East Khandesh (East) |
5 |
1 |
4 |
none |
Total |
18 |
3 |
6 |
9 |
PART III - BENGAL
|
|
Parties which fought the
election and the number of candidates put up by each. |
|||||
Constituency in which
Primary election was contested |
Total Candidates who
took part in the contest |
Congress |
Scheduled Castes
Federation |
Hindu Maha Sabha |
Non-Party Candidates
(Independents) |
Communists |
Radical democratic Party |
1. Hoogly |
5 |
1 |
none |
none |
3 |
… |
1 |
2. Howrah |
7 |
3 |
none |
none |
4 |
… |
… |
3. Nadia |
12 |
1 |
none |
none |
11 |
… |
… |
4. Jessore |
7 |
1 |
2 |
none |
4 |
… |
… |
5. Khulna |
11 |
none |
none |
none |
11 |
… |
… |
6. Dinajpur |
16 |
2 |
none |
none |
13 |
1 |
… |
7. Bogra |
6 |
1 |
none |
none |
5 |
… |
… |
8. Mymansing |
7 |
1 |
none |
none |
6 |
… |
… |
9. Faridpur |
18 |
2 |
3 |
none |
13 |
… |
… |
10. Bakergunj |
6 |
none |
3 |
1 |
2 |
… |
… |
11.Tipperah |
5 |
1 |
none |
none |
4 |
… |
… |
Total |
100 |
13 |
8 |
1 |
76 |
1 |
1 |
PART
IV – UNITED PROVINCES
|
|
Parties which fought the
election and the number of candidates put up by each. |
||||
Constituency in which
Primary election was contested |
Total Candidates who
took part in the contest |
Congress |
Scheduled Castes
Federation |
Harijan League |
Hindu Maha Sabha |
Non-Party Candidates
(Independents) |
Agra City |
11 |
1 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
Allahabad City |
6 |
1 |
4 |
none |
none |
3 |
Almora |
8 |
3 |
none |
none |
none |
3 |
Total |
25 |
5 |
9 |
1 |
1 |
9 |
PART V –
CENTREAL PROVINCES
|
|
Parties which fought the
election and the number of candidates put up by each. |
|||
Constituency in which
Primary election was contested |
Total Candidates who
took part in the contest |
Congress |
Scheduled Castes
Federation |
Harijan League |
Non-Party Candidates
(Independents) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nagpur-cum Sakoli |
5 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
Hinganghat |
6 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
Bhandara |
5 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
None |
Yeotmal |
6 |
1 |
2 |
none |
3 |
Chikhali |
6 |
1 |
3 |
none |
2 |
Total |
28 |
5 |
12 |
3 |
8 |
PART
VI - PUNJAB
|
|
Parties which fought the
election and the number of candidates put up by each. |
||
Constituency in which
Primary election was contested |
Total Candidates who
took part in the contest |
Congress |
Unionists |
Non-Party Candidates
(Independents) |
Gurgaon |
10 |
|
1 |
9 |
Kurnal |
10 |
1 |
|
9 |
Ambala |
8 |
|
|
8 |
Hoshiyarpur |
9 |
1 |
1 |
7 |
Jullunder |
6 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
Ludhiyaya |
10 |
1 |
|
9 |
Lyalpur |
6 |
|
|
6 |
Total |
59 |
4 |
3 |
52 |
TABLE
III
Showing Province-wise
the Votes obtained by different Parties which contested the primary Elections.
|
Votes
secured by each Party in |
|||||||||||
Name
of Party |
Madras |
Bombay |
Bengal |
United
Provinces |
Central
Provinces |
Punjab |
||||||
|
aggregate |
p.c. |
aggregate |
p.c. |
aggregate |
p.c. |
aggregate |
p.c. |
aggregate |
p.c. |
aggregate |
p.c. |
1.
Congress |
27838 |
33 |
5333 |
14 |
56848 |
33 |
4101 |
41.8 |
1131 |
10.7 |
8298 |
18 |
2.
Scheduled Castes Federation |
30199 |
36 |
28489 |
74 |
21129 |
12 |
3093 |
30.5 |
8685 |
82.8 |
nil |
0.5 |
3.
Independents |
4648 |
4.5 |
3814 |
10 |
83869 |
47 |
1773 |
18.8 |
551 |
|
24618 |
|
4.
Harijan League |
nil |
|
nil |
|
nil |
|
370 |
|
113 |
|
nil |
|
5.
Hindu Maha Sabha |
nil |
|
nil |
|
760 |
|
452 |
|
nil |
|
nil |
|
6.
Unionist |
nil |
|
nil |
|
Nil |
|
nil |
|
nil |
|
13521 |
|
7.
Communists |
20814 |
25 |
nil |
|
10049 |
5.8 |
nil |
|
nil |
|
nil |
|
Total |
83499 |
|
37636 |
|
172655 |
|
9789 |
|
10480 |
|
46437 |
|
TABLE
IV
Distribution
of Total Votes Polled in Primary elections all through India and
their distribution between Congress and Non-Congress parties.
|
In
favour of Congress parties |
In
favour of Non-Congress parties |
|
|||||||||
Total
Votes Polled throughout India in Primary election |
Congress |
Harijan
League |
Total |
P.C. |
Scheduled
Castes Federation |
Independents |
Hindu
Maha sabha |
Communists |
Unionist |
Radical
Democratic Party |
Total |
P.C. |
359532 |
103449 |
483 |
103932 |
28 |
91595 |
119273 |
1212 |
30863 |
13521 |
136 |
255600 |
72 |
TABLE
V
Number
of Candidates who became successful in Primary Elections in different Provinces classified according to their Party
Affiliations
Name of Party |
Madras |
Bombay |
Bengal |
United Provinces |
Central Provinces |
Punjab |
Total |
1. Congress |
10 |
3 |
12 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
38 |
2. Scheduled Castes
Federation |
24 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
11 |
none |
51 |
3. Independents |
3 |
4 |
36 |
2 |
3 |
21 |
69 |
4. Harijan League |
none |
none |
1 |
1 |
1 |
--- |
3 |
5. Hindu Maha sabha |
none |
none |
none |
none |
none |
--- |
--- |
6. Communists |
3 |
none |
1 |
none |
none |
--- |
4 |
7. Radical
Democratic Party |
none |
none |
none |
none |
none |
--- |
--- |
7. Unionist |
none |
none |
none |
none |
none |
3 |
3 |
Total |
40 |
12 |
56 |
12 |
20 |
28 |
168 |
2
*[f.2]
The Cabinet
Mission and the Untouchables
How
the Cabinet Mission have Ignored the Untouchables ?
The
Cabinet Mission in their Statement of 10th May set out their Interim and Long-term
proposals for the solution of the political deadlock in India. The most galling and
astounding feature of their proposals is their refusal to recognise the Untouchables as a
separate and distinct element in the national life of India. The Mission has so completely
ignored the Untouchables that not even once have they mentioned them in their long
statement. To what extent the Cabinet Mission has gone in ignoring the Untouchables will
be apparent from the following:—
(i) The Untouchables have not been given the right to nominate their representatives in the Central Executive as has been done in the case of the Sikhs and the Muslims. In the present Interim Government they have got two representatives of the Scheduled Castes neither of them owe any allegiance or obligation to the Scheduled Castes. One is nominated by the Congress and the other is nominated by the Muslim League.
(ii)
In the Interim Government, the Untouchables have not been given a fixed quota of
representation as was done in the case of the Muslims. At the Simla Conference of 1945 it
was agreed that Scheduled Castes should have at least two members in a Cabinet of 14. The
reason for a change of front between 1945 and 1946 is not known.
(iii) They have not been given the right to separate
representation in the Constituent Assembly.
How
the Cabinet Mission's decision constitutes a departure from established policy of H.M.G.
2.
The decision of the Cabinet Mission has not only done a grave wrong to the Untouchables
but it has registered a serious departure from the principles which have guided H.M.G. in
its policy regarding Indian politics and regarding the position of the Untouchables.
(i)
Before 1920, the Constitutional changes in the Government of India were made by the
British Government on their own authority and in accordance with their own wishes. It was
for the first lime, that in 1920 that the British Government decided to frame the
Constitution of India in consultation with Indians. Accordingly, a Round Table Conference
was called to which Indians were invited. Among the Indians, there were representatives of
the Untouchables who were invited separately and independently of the Congress or of any
other political party.
(ii)
Mr. Gandhi, the Congress representative, at the Round Table Conference fought against the
recognition of the Untouchables as a separate element in the national life of India and
contended that they were part of the Hindus and were therefore not entitled to separate
representation. The British Government overruled Mr. Gandhi and by their Award recognised
that the Untouchables were a separate and distinct element in the national life of India
and were therefore entitled to the same safeguards as the other minorities of India such
as the Muslims, Indian Christians etc.
(iii)
The British Government adhered to this principle in the Simla Conference which was held in
June 1945. Among the Indians invited to that Conference there was a representative of the
Untouchables who again was invited separately and independently of the Congress or any
other political party.
(iv)
It may be said that in the Constituent Assembly which formed part of the Cripps proposals
of 1942, there was no provision for separate representation of the Untouchables and that
therefore, the present proposals of the Cabinet Mission cannot be said to mark a
departure. The answer is that they do. In the Cripps Proposals of 1942, it is not that the
Untouchables alone were not given separate representation. The fact is that no minority
community was given separate representation in the Constituent Assembly. But in the
Constitution of the Constituent Assembly of the Cabinet Mission, the Muslims and the Sikhs
have been given separate recognition and separate representation which is denied to the
Untouchables. It is this discrimination which constitutes the wrong of which the Untouchables are complaining.
3.
The inequity of the proposals of the Cabinet Mission thus lies in the fact that it departs
from the policy of recognising the Untouchables as a separate element in the national life
of India and discriminates them by not recognising them while recognising the Muslims and
Sikhs.
How
the Cabinet Mission's decision abrogates the pledges given by H.M.G. to the Untouchables ?
4.
The non-recognition of the Untouchables as a separate element by the Cabinet Mission is
contrary to the pledges given to them by and on behalf of the British Government. The
following are some of the pledges worth mentioning.
(i)
"
Nor must we forget the essential necessity in the interests of Indian unity, of the
inclusion of the Indian States in any Constitutional Schemes.
I
need refer only two of them—the great Muslim minority and the Scheduled
Castes—There are the guarantees that have been given to the minorities in the past ;
the fact that their position must be safeguarded, and that those guarantees must be
honoured."
—Extract from the speech made by Lord Linlithgow, at the
Orient Club, Bombay on January 10, 1940.
(ii)
"
These are two main points which have emerged. On these two points. His Majesty's
-Government now desire me to make their position clear. The first is as to the position of
the minorities in relation to any future Constitutional Scheme...... It goes without
saying that they (H. M. Government) could not contemplate the transfer of their present
responsibilities for the peace and welfare of India to any system of Government whose
authority is directly denied by large and powerful elements in India's national life. Nor
could they be parties to the coercion of such elements into submission to such a
Government."
— Extract
from the Statement by Lord Linlithgow on 8th August 1940.
"
Congress leaders...... have built up a remarkable organisation, the most efficient
political machine in India...... if only they had succeeded. If the Congress could in fact
speak, as it professes to speak, for all the main elements in India's national life, then
however advanced their demands, our problem would have been in many respect far easier
than it is today. It is true that they are numerically the largest single party in British
India, but their claim in virtue of that fact to speak for India is utterly denied by very
important elements in India's complex national life. These others assert their right to be
regarded not as mere numerical minorities but as separate constituent factors in any
future Indian policy. The foremost among these elements stands the great Muslim community.
They will have nothing to do with a Constitution framed by a Constituent Assembly elected
by a majority vote in geographical constituencies. They claim the right in any
constitutional discussions to be regarded as an entity against the operations of a mere
numerical majority. The same applies to the great body what are known as the Scheduled
Castes who feel, in spite of Mr. Gandhi's earnest endeavours on their behalf, that as a
community, they stand outside the main body of the Hindu community which is represented by
the Congress."
—Extract from the speech by the Rt. Hon'ble Mr. L. S.
Amery, Secretary of State for India, in the House of Commons on August 14, 1940.
(iv)
"
Without recapitulating all these reasons in detail, I should remind you that His Majesty's
Government at that time made it clear:—
(a)
That their offer of unqualified freedom after the hostilities was made conditional upon
the framing of a Constitution agreed by the main elements of India's national life and the
negotiation of the necessary treaty arrangements with His Majesty's Government;
(b)
That it is impossible during the period of hostilities to bring about any change in the
Constitution by which means alone a " National Government " such as you suggest
could be made responsible to the Central Assembly.
The
object of these conditions was to ensure the fulfilment of their duty to safeguard the
interest of the racial and religious minorities, of the Depressed Classes and their treaty
obligations to the Indian States. "
—Extract
from the letter by Lord Wavell to Mr. Gandhi, dated 15th August, 1944.
5.
The Cabinet Mission's proposal not to give separate representation to the Untouchables is
not the result of their individual judgement arrived at on an honest examination of the
relevant facts. On the other hand, what the Mission has done is to pamper to the
prejudices of Mr. Gandhi. Mr. Gandhi is vehemently opposed to the recognition of the
Untouchables as a separate element in the national life of India. He opposed their
recognition at the Round Table Conference. When he found that notwithstanding his
opposition they were recognised as a separate element by the Communal Award of Mr. Ramsay
Macdonald he threatened to fast unto death if the separate recognition of the Untouchables
was not withdrawn. Again in 1945 at the First Simla Conference Mr. Gandhi raised his
opposition when he found that H.M.G. had given separate recognition of the Untouchables.
The Cabinet Mission were anxious to make a success of their proposals. That was not
possible unless they could secure the consent of Mr. Gandhi. Mr. Gandhi demanded his price
and the Mission gave it. That price was the sacrifice of the separate political existence
of the Untouchables. Indeed one can go further and say that the proposals of the Cabinet Mission, so far as the minorities
are concerned, are nothing but the reproduction of Mr. Gandhi's formula which he resounded
at the Second Round Table Conference. Mr. Gandhi said that he would recognise only three
communities for political purposes (1) Hindus, (2) Muslims and (3) Sikhs. The Mission's
formula is a ' mere copy of Mr. Gandhi's formula. There is no other explanation.
Grounds
urged by the Cabinet Mission in Justification of its decision.
6.
For justifying their decision not to recognise the Untouchables as a separate element the
Cabinet Mission has relied upon the results of the elections to the Provincial Legislative
Assemblies which took place in February 1948. In the course of the debate in Parliament on
the Cabinet Mission's proposals which took place on 18th July 1946, the members of the
Mission have tried to make out the following points:—
(i)
That in the election, the Congress captured all seats reserved for the Untouchables; that
therefore the Congress represented the Untouchables. That being the case there was no
justification for giving separate representation to the Untouchables.
(ii)
That the following of the All-India Scheduled Castes Federation and my own was confined
only to Bombay and Central Provinces.
Futility
of the grounds
7.
These are monstrous propositions and will not stand close and honest scrutiny. The Cabinet
Mission, to start with committed a great mistake in adopting the results of the election
as a basis for assessing the representative character of the Congress. In doing so, the
Mission failed to take into account the following circumstances:—
(i)
The Hindu electorate was throughout the war intensely anti-British and although it did war
work it did not do it willingly. The Congress Party which was anti-British and had
non-co-operated with the war effort was a hot favourite of the Hindu electorate. The other
parties particularly the Scheduled Castes suffered in the election because they were
pro-British and had co-operated in the war effort.
(ii)
Just before the date fixed for election, the Viceroy and the Commander-in-Chief staged the
trial of the I.N.A. men. The Congress at once took up the cause of the I.N.A. men and made
it an election issue. The trial was the principal factor which enhanced the influence of
the Congress which was on the wane.
(iii) The issue over which the election was fought
was Independence and Quit India. The nature of the future Constitution of India was never
the issue. If it had been the issue the Congress would never have got the majority it did.
(iv)
The Cabinet Mission did not take into account the open hostility shown by the Returning
Officers and the Polling Officers— all of whom were Caste Hindus—against the
Scheduled Caste candidates who were opposing the Congress. They went to the length of
rejecting their nomination papers and refusing to issue ballot papers. The Cabinet Mission
did not take into account the degree of terrorism and intimidation to which the
Untouchable voters were subjected by the Caste Hindus on the ground that they were not
prepared to vote for the Congress candidates. In the Agra City 40 houses of the
Untouchables were burnt down. In Bombay one man from the Untouchable was murdered and in
the moffusil Untouchable voters in hundreds of villages were not allowed to go to the
Polling stations. In Nagpur a Police Officer became so much of a partisan of the Congress
that he fired without the permission of the Magistrate on a crowd of Untouchable voters
just to frighten them away. There were innumerable such cases all over India.
8.
If the Cabinet Mission had taken into account these circumstances they would have realised
that the success of the Congress at the elections was due to purely advantageous
circumstances. The results of the elections held under such circumstances should not have
been taken as a justification for not giving separate representation to the Untouchables
in the Constituent Assembly.
9.
The criterion adopted by the Mission to decide whether the Congress did or did not
represent the Untouchables was how many seats reserved for Untouchables were won by the
Congress in the Final Election. This criterion was a false criterion because the results
of the final elections are beyond the control of the Untouchables. Under the Poona Pact
the final elections are determined by the Hindu votes. The true criterion which the
Mission should have adopted was to find out how the Untouchables voted, how many votes
were cast in favour of the Congress and how many against the Congress. This can be judged
from the results of the Primary elections only and not from the results of the final
elections. For in the Primary election only the Untouchables vote. If the results of the
Primary elections are taken as a basis, the decision of the Cabinet Mission, would be
found to be absurd and contrary to facts. For only 28 per cent of the votes polled in the
Primary elections were cast in favour of the Congress and 72 per cent against it.
10.
It is said if the Untouchables felt that they were not in the Congress they should have
had a Primary election for every one of the 151 seats reserved for them. As a matter of
fact, there were Primary elections for 43 scats only all throughout India. Why did the
Untouchables not stage a Primary election for the rest of the 108 seats ? The argument is
absurd for the following reasons:—
(i)
Primary election is not obligatory. It becomes obligatory only when there are more than
four candidates contesting one seat. It is not realised that anyone who stands for Primary
election must also face the necessity of having to stand for final election. The inability
of the Untouchables to bear the expense of double election make it very difficult to
induce members of the Untouchable communities to stand for Primary election. The fact that
there have been Primary elections only for 43 scats cannot be made the basis for the
inference that the Untouchables do not claim to be separate from the Congress.
(ii)
It is the Congress who must be asked as to why it did not put up 4 candidates in every
constituency in the Primary elections. For if the Congress claims to represent the
Untouchables, it should have put up more than 4 candidates on Congress ticket in every
constituency and brought about Primary elections in each of the 151 constituencies and
ousted every other party from coming into the final election. The Congress did not do
this. On the other hand, even in the 43 Primary elections, the Congress put up only one
candidate in each constituency on the off-chance of his coming within the first 4 and then
getting him returned in the Final Election with the Hindu votes. This shows that the
Congress knew that the Untouchables had no confidence in the Congress. (iii) It is only in
1937 that the Untouchables for the first time got their right to vote. It is only after
1937 that the Untouchables started organising themselves for conducting elections. From
the mere fact that Scheduled Castes Federation was outmatched by the Congress in the
elections, it is wrong to conclude that the Untouchables are with the Congress. The
Cabinet Mission ought to have made allowance from the unequal strength of the Congress and
the Scheduled Castes Federation in fighting elections drawing any conclusions adverse to
the Federation from the results of the elections.
Futility
of other grounds urged by the Mission in justification of their decisions
11.
The members of the Cabinet Mission argued that Dr. Ambedkar's following was confined to
the Scheduled Castes in the Bombay Presidency and the Central Provinces only. There is no
foundation for this statement. The Scheduled Castes Federation is functioning in other
Provinces as well and it has won therein notable electoral successes, as great as, if not
greater than, in Bombay and the Central Provinces. In making this statement the Mission
has failed to take into account the signal victory Dr. Ambedkar obtained in the election
to the Constituent Assembly. He stood as a candidate from the Bengal Provincial
Legislative Assembly. He topped the poll as the general seats were concerned, beating even
Mr. Sarat Chandra Bose the Leader of the Congress Party. If Dr. Ambedkar has no influence
outside Bombay and Central Provinces how did he get elected from Bengal ? It must be
further remembered that there are 30 seats for the Scheduled Castes in the Bengal
Provincial Assembly. Out of the 80 as many as 28 were elected on the Congress ticket. Of
the two who belonged to his party one fell ill on the day of the election. Notwithstanding
this Dr. Ambedkar topped the poll. This could not have happened unless the Scheduled Caste
members of Bengal elected on the Congress ticket had voted for him. It must also be
remembered that Scheduled Castes in Bengal do not belong to the community to which Dr.
Ambedkar belongs. This shows that even those Scheduled Caste members who belong to the
Congress and who do not belong to his community regard him as the leader of the Scheduled
Castes. This completely disproves the statement made by the members of the Mission.
12.
The members of the Cabinet Mission argued that for the sake of maintaining uniformity in
the composition of the Constituent Assembly they had to adopt in the case of the
Untouchables the result of the Final elections as they had done in the case of the other
communities. The argument is a form of special pleading which has no force. The Mission
knew the final election of the Muslims, the Indian Christians and the Sikhs was by
separate electorates. 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
Stafford Cripps in the debate that the system of election of the Untouchables as
determined by the Poona Pact was inequities. Why did the Mission then adopt it as a basis
for its decision ?
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.
(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 recognises 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
jeopardised. 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 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
recognised as late as the Simla Conference of 1945. They realise that this wrong it may be
difficult to redress now. But if circumstances change and the 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 cessation 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) ".
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 necessary 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. —B. R. AMBEDKAR