Dec 25, 2024 09:05 IST
First published: 25 December 2024 at 09:05 IST
After entering Parliament on 20 May 2014, following the BJP’s victory in that year’s general elections, Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared, “We are here in the temple of democracy. We will work with all purity… for the people… of the country. Work and responsibility are paramount.” Yes.” But recently the temple scene has angered every citizen. The Constitution states: We the people of India are determined to make India a democratic republic. What happened in Parliament last week calls into question the commitment of our representatives on that issue.
To understand how far they have come from the point of view of the framers of the constitution, one must go back to the debate of the Constituent Assembly in 1946, the day the draft constitution was issued. For Purushottam Das Tandon, also known as Rajarshi, “Janata is all people”. Minu R. Masani quoted Mahatma Gandhi to emphasize the relationship between the state and the people: “The central problem of our time is whether the state owns the people or the people own the state. Where the state belongs to the people, the state is only an instrument subordinate to the people. It serves the people.” Our MPs have forgotten this message of service. Their conduct makes one wonder if our representatives are really sincere to the goals and hopes expressed by Shyama Prasad Mukherjee: “We will continue our work despite all obstacles and help make that great India, united and strong. The Motherland does not belong to this community, not to this class or that class, but to every person, man, woman and child who inhabits this great land, regardless of caste, creed or community…”
Tandon echoed these sentiments: “Our past urges us to move forward… different parts of the country have been given autonomy and India as a whole remains united with full sovereignty. We will be united in matters that demand our unity.” The Chairman of the Constituent Assembly, Rajendra Prasad Prasad, emphasized on how to facilitate the functioning of the assembly with diverse ideologies. “If we are honest, respect each other’s opinion, we will not only understand each other’s opinion, we will develop the insight that we will be able to go deep to the root and understand each other’s real pain. Then we will act in such a way that no one will give anyone a reason to think that they are being ignored or that their views are not being respected,” he said.
But are Om Birla and Jagdeep Dhankhar, whom I respect a lot, willing to listen and obey the Constitution makers? For Ambedkar, parliamentary democracy was a better system of government than the presidential form because there was a daily check on the executive through debates, motions, questions and other options available to the members of the House. Do these options exist today?
S. Radhakrishnan observed, “We have been kept apart. Now it is our duty to find each other.” Even after the passage of more than seven decades, we have not been able to do that and we are not making any serious efforts towards it. Radhakrishnan quoted the Mahabharata: “Nothing is impossible to conquer with humility, and therefore the sharpest weapon we have is gentleness.”
So why has it disappeared from our public life? Radhakrishnan described India as “in a symphony, various instruments, each with a particular voice, each with a particular sound, all combining to interpret a particular score”. Can’t our rulers create that symphony of peace and harmony?
Jawaharlal Nehru said, “The only way to influence India is through friendship, cooperation and goodwill. Any attempt to impose, even the slightest trace of patronage, is offensive and will be resented.” Most emphatically: “Our difficulty today is how to make a heterogeneous mass of people decide together and move in unison. The road that is bound to lead us to unity…This is to make us willing friends, to take every party, every class to the path of this country. It is the highest act of statesmanship to give leeway to the prejudices of the people who are not ready to march together even for the majority party, and for that I propose to make this appeal. Let’s leave the slogan. Let’s stop using words that scare people. Let us also discount the prejudices of our opponents. Bring them in, that they may willingly join us…”
Ambedkar was a prophet whom the nation needed to follow even if he did not worship.
How should our MPs start anew? Home Minister Amit Shah should apologize to the nation, the President should remove the words that offend the great Maharishi of the Constitution, every member should apologize to the nation and to each other. They should talk to each other and listen to each other. MPs are loyal to their parties, but they must also understand the value of mutual respect. The nation is facing serious challenges like poverty, illiteracy, social and economic inequality, marginalization. These must be removed. Parliamentarians must remember that the Mahatma dreamed of real democracy, not concentration of power in his hands.
We the people expect a bright picture of a new India, and so far you, the MPs, have disappointed us. We hope that you will change. We call upon all of you, irrespective of your party affiliation, to understand and abide by the Constitution as envisioned by the framers.
The author is a senior advocate and former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association of India
Why should you buy our membership?
You want to be the smartest in the room.
You want access to our award-winning journalism.
You don’t want to be confused and misinformed.
Choose your subscription package