Skip to main content

Maybe Ambedkar Was Not The Father Of The Indian Constitution


Recently a rat race concluded amongst all the major political parties in commemorating ‘father of the Indian Constitution’ on his 127th Birth Aniversary a.k.a 'Ambedkar Jayanti'. Though there are gossips that it was solely to up-ease a substantial segment of voters in the country who take Dr. Ambedkar as their leader but as I said, just gossips. Before I begin advancing my contentions, lets me state some of the facts that even I for one cannot deny. That Dr. Ambedkar played a decisive role in the up easement of the ‘Scheduled Castes’( Scheduled Tribes are deliberately excluded here), In the eradication of untouchability and the making of the Constitution of India but here comes the problem, I certainly feel that the contribution of Dr. Ambedkar in the framing of the Constitution is a hyperbole.  He like many other members of Constituent Assembly played an important role but I doubt that he was anyway near to the role of a ‘Father’.

“I Came into Constituent Assembly just to safeguard the Interests of Scheduled Castes….” (The exclusion of ST’s again is deliberate on his part here)
In his final speech before the Constituent assembly on November 25th, 1949, he, the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee reiterated that his only object of being a member of Constituent Assembly was to safeguard the interests of Scheduled Castes. It is pertinent to mention here that Mr. Ambedkar was the leader of All India Scheduled Caste Federation and had every intention to boycott the Constituent Assembly because Mr. Ambedkar for one felt that an assembly arguing and shaping the future of India was a dangerous project (Dr. B.R. Ambedkar; Writings and Speeches, Vol. 1, pp. 360-1). So, basically making him the chairperson of the Drafting Committee was more like giving ‘candy’ to convince a displeased kid.

B.N. Rau is the neglected one….
B.N. Rau( extrme Right), an unsung diplomat and statesman, Image Courtesy: kenfolios.com

A guy goes around the world, goes through all the major Constitutions available at that time and reviews the working of those political systems where that Constitution has been in place, he consults all the legal luminaries across the globe. If someone can really be credited with the title of ‘Father of the Indian Constitution,’ it would be the Constitutional Advisor to Constituent Assembly, Mr. B.N. Rau. He was the one who submitted the draft of the Constitution which was later modified by the Drafting Committee lead by none other than Babasaheb. On the day of the Signing of the Constitution, the President of Constituent Assembly, Dr. Rajendra Prasad gave special mention to the unmatched efforts of B.N. Rau (Dr. Rajendra Prasad; Words of Freedom: Ideas of a Nation, p. 12). Even B.R. Ambedkar in his concluding speech divides the whole credit between Mr. B.N. Rau and Mr. S.N. Mukharjee, The chief Draftsmen of the Constitution but we barely know who they are or remember them.

Ambedkar submitted another document labeled as ‘Constitution of the United States of India’ which was rejected…
When Ambedkar became a part of the Constituent Assembly he brought with him his version of Indian Constitution on the behalf of All India Scheduled Caste Federation which was nearly rejected in its entirety. His narrow interests and motives can be ascertained from the fact that it was presented by him as ‘Memorandum on the safeguards for the Scheduled Casts’ (Dr. B.R. Ambedkar; States and Minorities: What are their rights and how to secure them in free India).

He wanted 'Separate Villages' for Scheduled Castes
We all are told that Jinnah wanted a separate nation for protecting the interests of Muslims but I guess people often forget that he was not the only one working on that line of demand. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar led All India Scheduled Casts Federation passed a resolution for ‘Separate Settlements’ for Scheduled Casts (B.R. Ambedkar; Writings and Speeches, Vol. 9, p. 393).  His demands were quite similar to the demands of Muslim League to protect the interest of his community at the cost of national interest (V.P. Menon; Transfer of Power, Vol VII, pp.197-98)

Against giving rights to Scheduled Tribes (ST’s)
Today we see that both Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes stand on the same pedestal in terms of Constitutional protection but this is not what was envisaged by Babasaheb.  He was strictly against conferring any right to ST’s and called them ‘Aboriginal Tribes.’ As quoted by Sudheen Kulkarni, Ambedkar was of the opinion that ST’s had not developed any political sense to make full use of their political opportunities and will easily become an instrument in the hands of majority doing no good to themselves.

“I shall be the first person to burn the Indian Constitution!” (Ambedkar in 1953, Rajya Sabha)
In 1953 during a Rajya Sabha Debate in a volte-face to his stand in Constituent Assembly he wanted that Power of Veto should be given to Governor against the State legislature. When his motion was declined he went on to say that he would be the first person to burn the Indian Constitution. He was not happy with the functioning of it after he could not enter Lok Sabha Twice after losing elections from two different places namely, Bombay and Bhandara in 1952 general Elections (Sudheen Kulkarini; Ambedkar the architect of the constitution? His words prove otherwise)

One thing that can be gathered from the above material for sure is that Indian Constitution was not the Brainchild of Mr. Ambedkar. He never wanted to be part of it, he was skeptical of its functioning and was never working for the interest of the whole nation but for a particular community. He made things much clearer by saying openly “I was a hack.  What I was asked to do, I did much against my will!” Even if he can be accepted as a father of Indian Constitution then he won't be amongst the best fathers for being so cruel to his child, our sacred document.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thanos is a utilitarian!

Image Courtesy- TeePublic If a close analysis is undertaken of all superhero movies, then a common denominator underlying all plots will be discovered. Every superhero tale has a moral dimension, but it is quintessentially limited to the protagonist. That is to say, the superhero alone has the might of the right with him. Invariably accompanying him is the badness of the villain. Badness in the sense, the values that he stands for and things he fights for. This element is indispensable because goodness is relative. You need to give something worse to the viewer, to which he can compare the alleged good part and arrive at the conclusion which storyteller wants to sell; the superhero was indeed good! This is the cliché tale of every superhero movie and Marvel Entertainment has been no different about it. Start watching Marvel Universe movies starting from Iron Man (2008), Captain America, Thor, Avengers, and all their sequels and you will possibly get my point. But in Avenger

Ms. Marvel adds the jewel of South Asia to MCU’s crown of diversity

For Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) ‘superhero’ has a standard definition. They are intelligent, sedulous, good looking, sacrificing, male, white and the hope of humanity. The conception is so immutable that even though recently there have been number of female characters portraying such characters, we still don’t have a word for female super'hero'? Merriam Webster says it is ‘superheroine’, as it logically should be. But it hasn’t really caught up and also it does not have that ‘superhero waali feeling’ as is also the case with ‘superhuman’, which misses the concept of ‘protagonist’ altogether. Even the storyline of these superhero movies is quite standard. A city in the US is in danger. It falls in the hands of a superhero, as defined above, to save millions of lives because it is his destiny to do so. A fight ensues between the superhero and the villain amongst the high-rise buildings of a metropolitan American city. It is the fantasy story of an ordinary westerner which is

Why you should read 'Crime and Punishment'

The book Crime and Punishment,  written by Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky is based on a random murder of an old moneylender by a former student of law. But the book is not a crime thriller, for the murder takes place in the first part in a seven-part long storyline. Regarded as Dostoevsky’s magnum opus and one of the best literary works of Russian literature, Crime and Punishment  offers a view into Raskolnikov’s mind (the murderer and the protagonist). The novel can be best characterized as a psychological thriller. In his book, Dostoevsky grapples with questions like- what pushes a man into committing a hideous crime as murder in cold blood?   Unlike the ideal state of the human mind and soul, as is often depicted, Crime and Punishment shows the turbulent state of the mind of Raskolnikov and the contradictions within his soul- completely naked. In the plot, Raskolnikov, a bright young student, has to drop out of university because of the lack of money to support his studie