Who is Involved in the Reform of Indian Constitution?

Who is Involved in the Reform of the Indian Constitution? British politicians and bureaucrats tried to cure India’s ailing body politic with periodic infusions of constitutional reform. The separate electorate formula introduced for Muslims in the Government of India Act of 1909 (the Morley-Minto Reforms) was expanded and applied to other minorities in the Government of India Acts (1919 and 1935). Sikhs and Christians, for example, were given special privileges in voting for their own representatives comparable to those vouchsafed to Muslims.

The British raj thus sought to reconcile Indian religious pluralism to representative rule and no doubt hoped, in the process of fashioning such elaborate constitutional formulas, to win undying minority support for themselves and to undermine the arguments of Congress’s radical leadership that they alone spoke for India’s “united nationalist movement.” Earlier official support of, and appeals to, India’s princes and great landowners had proved fruitful, especially since the inception of the crown raj in 1858, and more concerted efforts were made in 1919 and 1935 to wean minorities and India’s educated elite away from revolution and noncooperation.

The Government of India Act of 1919 (also known as the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms) was based on the Montagu-Chelmsford Report that had been submitted to Parliament in 1918. Under the act, elections were held in 1920, the number of Indian members to the viceroy’s Executive Council was increased from at least two to no fewer than three, and the Imperial Legislative Council was transformed into a bicameral legislature consisting of a Legislative Assembly (lower house) and a Council of State (upper house). The Legislative Assembly, with 145 members, was to have a majority of 104 elected, while 33 of the Council of State’s 60 members were also to be elected.

Enfranchisement continued to be based on property ownership and education, but under the act of 1919 the total number of Indians eligible to vote for representatives to provincial councils was expanded to five million; just one-fifth of that number, however, were permitted to vote for Legislative Assembly candidates, and only about 17,000 elite were allowed to choose Council of State members. Dyarchy (dual governance) was to be introduced at the provincial level, where executive councils were divided between ministers elected to preside over “transferred” departments (education, public health, public works, and agriculture) and officials appointed by the governor to rule over “reserved” departments (land revenue, justice, police, irrigation, and labor).

The Government of India Act of 1935 gave all provinces full representative and elective governments, chosen by franchise extended now to some 30 million Indians, and only the most crucial portfolios—defense, revenue, and foreign affairs—were “reserved” to appointed officials. The viceroy and his governors retained veto powers over any legislation they considered unacceptable, but prior to the 1937 elections, they reached a “gentleman’s agreement” with the Congress Party’s high command not to resort to that constitutional option, which was their last vestige of autocracy. The act of 1935 was also to have introduced a federation of British India’s provinces and the still autonomous princely states, but that institutional union of the representative and despotic rule was never realized since the princes were unable to agree among themselves on matters of protocol.

The act of 1935 was itself the product of the three elaborate sessions of the Round Table Conference, held in London, and at least five years of bureaucratic labor, most of which bore little fruit. The first session—attended by 58 delegates from British India, 16 from the British Indian states, and 16 from British political parties—was convened by Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald in the City of Westminster, London, in November 1930. While Jinnah and the Aga Khan III led among the British Indian delegation a deputation of 16 Muslims, no Congress Party deputation joined the first session, as Gandhi and his leading lieutenants were all in jail at the time. Without the Congress, the Round Table could hardly hope to fashion any popularly meaningful reforms, so Gandhi was released from prison before the second session started in September 1931.

At his own insistence, however, he attended it as the Congress’s sole representative. Little was accomplished at the second session, for Hindu-Muslim differences remained unresolved and the princes continued to argue with one another. The third session, which began in November 1932, was more the product of official British inertia than any proof of progress in closing the tragic gaps between so many Indian minds reflected in the earlier debate. Two new provinces emerged, however, from those official deliberations. In the east Orissa was established as a province distinct from Bihar, and in the west Sind (Sindh) was separated from the Bombay Presidency and became the first Muslim-majority governor’s province of British India since the reunification of Bengal. It was decided that Burma should be a separate colony from British India.

In August 1932 Prime Minister MacDonald announced his Communal Award, Great Britain’s unilateral attempt to resolve the various conflicts among India’s many communal interests. The award, which was later incorporated into the act of 1935, expanded the separate-electorate formula reserved for Muslims to other minorities, including Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, Europeans, distinct regional groups (such as the Marathas in the Bombay Presidency), and special interests (women, organized labor, business, landowners, and universities).

The Congress Party was, predictably, unhappy at the extension of communal representation but became particularly outraged at the British offer of separate-electorate seats for “depressed classes,” meaning the so-called “untouchables.” Gandhi undertook a “fast unto death” against that offer, which he viewed as a nefarious British plot to wean more than 50 million Hindus away from their higher-caste brothers and sisters. Gandhi, who called the untouchables “Children of God” (Harijans), agreed after prolonged personal negotiations with Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1891–1956), a leader of the untouchables, to reserve many more seats for them than the British had promised, as long as they remained within the “Hindu” majority fold. Thus, the offer of separate-electorate seats for the untouchables was withdrawn.

In 1919, the Montague-Chelmsford Reforms were approved, under which the bicameral system was introduced at the Centre:

(1) The Council of States, and

(2) The Legislative Assembly.

About 70 percent of the members were elected to these councils. The principle of direct election was recognized. Separate electorates were maintained for Muslims, Anglo-Indians, Europeans, Sikhs and Christians, and for non-Brahmanas in Madras (now Chennai). Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi were of the view that the reforms should be implemented on a trial basis.

In 1920, Gandhi launched a non-violent and Non-Cooperation Movement, and at the same time rejected the reforms. The Ali brothers (Shaukat Ali and Muhammad Ali), the pioneers of the Khilafat movement, joined hands with the Mahatma in the national struggle against the British.

The peasants and workers were also drawn into the struggle against the British. The Non-Cooperation Movement, a revised form of the Swadeshi movement, urged people to resign from government offices, shun the law courts, withdraw from English schools and colleges, and boycott elections. The use of indigenous goods, khadi, and home-spun cloth were strongly advocated. Gandhi was arrested in 1924, for steering the Non-Cooperation Movement.

By this time, the Congress party was a divided house consisting of:

(1) The Swaraj Party led by Motilal Nehru and C.R. Das;

(2) The followers of Tilak;

(3) The Justice Party of Madras; and

(4) The independents led by Jinnah.

Consequently, there was no cohesion in the Indian National Congress. Communal riots broke out in 1924. However, the Mahatma dedicated himself to the restoration of communal harmony and to the upliftment of Harijans. The Hindu Mahasabha, which was formed in 1915, also became active as a result of communal disturbances.

The government, without bothering about the popular senti­ments against its policies, implemented the reforms of 1919. Elections were held. The central and the provincial governments were reconstituted. The Moplah rising (August 1921) worsened communal relations.

The Non-Cooperation Movement was reacti­vated. A violent incident occurred at Chauri Chaura in Uttar Pradesh. The Khilafat movement weakened. Gandhi was arrested in 1922, and with his arrest, the Non-Cooperation Movement came to a standstill. The Indian National Congress became weaker. Communalism raised its ugly head. Elections were fought on communal lines. Nationalist forces lost their vigor.

Previous Post Next Post