Aftershocks of 1975 Emergency: When Referendum almost made it to Constitution
NEW DELHI: Founding fathers of the Constitution of India fought hard to keep 'Referendum' out of it, but it almost made it to the statute in 1978 in the aftermath of Emergency.
The then Janata government proposed 'referendum' being part of the Constitution as an additional 'safeguard' to thwart any repeat of Emergency-like situation and even got it passed in the Lok Sabha, but the idea had to be dropped as it could not cut the mustard in the Rajya Sabha.
Several Janata Party leaders and their allies were also not very comfortable with the idea of going back to the public despite having their own government being in power.
The Constitution Amendment Bill of 1978, proposed by the then Law Minister Shanti Bhushan, cited the Emergency as an example when fundamental rights, including those of life and liberty, granted to citizens by the Constitution can be taken away by a transient majority.
It said that it was necessary to provide adequate safeguards against the recurrence of such a contingency in future and to ensure to people themselves an effective voice in determining the form of government under which they are to live.
The bill sought that "certain changes" in the Constitution can be made only if they are approved by the people of India by a majority of votes at a referendum in which at least 51 percent of the electorate participate.
It would have been applicable for Constitutional amendments that were capable of impairing its secular or democratic character, abridging or taking away fundamental rights prejudicing or impeding free and fair elections on the basis of adult suffrage and compromising the independence of judiciary.
Bhushan faced strong opposition in Parliament, including from some of his own colleagues, and many asked was it not akin to not trusting the mandate already given by people while electing the government.
Some MPs also raised question of huge expenses that could be incurred by going to the public again and again, while some suspected a "referendum" could be used by the government in power to push majority agenda like imposition of Hindi etc.
A few supported the idea but said the referendum should be for 75 percent of voters, while a few others went out to demand that the Constitution also mostly provide for a referendum provision giving people the power to recall an MP or a government if they were not satisfied with their work.
While the long-winding debates in the two houses saw several interesting friendly and not-so-friendly exchanges among the MPs, the idea had to be dropped with the minister himself admitting on several occasions that he could probably not project the idea properly.
This was also the first time in the country's parliamentary history that a Constitution Amendment Bill passed by the Lok Sabha was returned by the Rajya Sabha and the bill had to be changed according to the portions rejected by the house of elders.
During one such exchange, he asked AR Antulay, then Congress Rajya Sabha MP, if he would accept if it is passed by two-third majority of two houses of Parliament that he was a "small girl" and should there not be a provision to get it corrected.
Antulay responded jokingly what the minister will do if it is passed by Parliament that Bhushan is "an old girl."
Bhushan replied that he would not challenge it, to which Antulay replied still he was not convinced that the Supreme Court should get into it.
Bhupesh Gupta, a Left MP, joined the banter and said that he was quite sure Antulay will welcome it if the Supreme Court says he is a small girl.
In the Lok Sabha also, Bhushan's referendum proposal triggered an intense debate and some of the most interesting nuggets came from socialist MP HV Kamath, who was also a member of the Constituent Assembly when the Constitution was being framed.
Kamath, known for joining almost all discussions in the Lok Sabha and in the Constituent Assembly before that, suggested to Bhushan that the referendum should be successful only with 75 percent of votes though he could also agree to one-third support of electors.
In the Constituent Assembly, where he was among the few members to strongly oppose any Emergency provision being added, he had also suggested that voters of a constituency should be given power to recall their MP or for failure to properly discharge his or her duties.
Kamath's proposal was rejected.
The original draft of the Constitution did not provide for direct voting by people on law-making matters through a referendum, but several members in the Constituent Assembly called for it on issues like national language, national script, national anthem, international numerals and cow slaughter.
Some members said that a referendum could empower sovereignty of people and address adverse issues arising from absolute power, while others proposed it as a tool to handle situations when legislature and executive are not on the same page.
Mahavir Tyagi, elected to the Constituent Assembly from the United Provinces on a Congress Party ticket, advocated for the Constitution empowering people with the right to overthrow a government which acts destructively against the rights of people.
Several members cited examples from other countries, including Switzerland, US, Canada and Ireland to call for a referendum provision, but others opposed it vehemently as unpractical, expensive and restrictive.
President Rajendra Prasad rejected all those demands citing lack of any provision for referendum in the Constitution.
BR Ambedkar was very categorical: "The Draft Constitution has eliminated the elaborate and difficult procedures such as a decision by a convention or a referendum." He said the powers of amendment are left with the central and provincial legislatures.
Almost similar logics came up in Parliament nearly 30 years later in 1978 in favour of referendum, but they met similar opposition with one additional point made by most anti-referendum voices -- even general elections hardly see more than 50 percent voting and expecting more than 50 percent electors voting in a referendum was unthinkable.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
"Attack on Baba Saheb's Constitution," Congress MP Rahul Gandhi condemns cruel treatment of two Dalit youths in Odisha
New Delhi [India], June 24 (ANI): Congress MP Rahul Gandhi on Tuesday condemned the alleged cruel treatment of two Dalit youths in Odisha, where they were reportedly forced to crawl on their knees, eat grass, and drink dirty water. Gandhi called the act inhumane and linked it to caste discrimination, saying such incidents are increasing in BJP-ruled states. He said these incident tramples the dignity of Dalits and are an attack on Baba Saheb's Constitution, a conspiracy against equality, justice, and humanity. In a post on X, Rahul Gandhi wrote, 'Forcing two Dalit youths in Odisha to crawl on their knees, eat grass, and drink dirty water is not just inhumane but a barbarity rooted in Manuwadi ideology. This incident is a mirror for those who claim that caste is no longer an issue. Every incident that tramples the dignity of Dalits is an attack on Baba Saheb's Constitution, a conspiracy against equality, justice, and humanity.' Gandhi demanded that the culprits be immediately arrested and given strict punishment. 'Such incidents are becoming common in BJP-ruled states because their politics is built on hatred and hierarchy. Atrocities against SCs, STs, and women have alarmingly increased, especially in Odisha. The culprits must be immediately arrested and given strict punishment. The country will run by the Constitution, not by Manusmriti,' the post reads. Earlier on June 21, Congress MP and Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi accused the Election Commission of 'match fixing' the elections, claiming that the new instructions to delete CCTV footage of the election after 45 days of polls is just a way to 'delete evidence.' The Leader of Opposition raised concerns about the integrity of the electoral process, citing the destruction of evidence as a potential indicator of election rigging. He warned that a fixed election would be 'poison for democracy,' highlighting the need for a free and fair electoral process. The Congress leader alleged that the CCTV footage is being hidden by changing the law, raising suspicions about the intentions behind this move. (ANI)
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
Lawyer moves Supreme Court seeking suspension of Air India Boeing fleet
New Delhi [India], June 24 (ANI): A Public Interest Litigation plea has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking an interim suspension of all of Air India's Boeing flights following the fatal Air India crash in Ahmedabad on June 12 that killed 241 of the 242 passengers. The plea has been filed by Advocate Ajay Bansal, who has sought a safety audit of all of Air India flights and those of other airlines to address systemic safety failures in Air India's operations, particularly its Boeing fleet. The plea has raised several grounds, the foremost being the gross violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty. The petitioner argues that passenger safety is an integral part of this right, and chronic maintenance failures, such as those evident in the present case, constitute an infringement of the same. Further, the petition highlights a breach of statutory duties under the Aircraft Act and Rules, especially Rules 30 and 134, which mandate periodic airworthiness and fitness checks. It alleges that Air India's conduct demonstrates clear non-compliance with these mandatory requirements. Additionally, the petitioner emphasises that the statutory obligation to conduct regular safety audits and provide adequate passenger facilities on international flights has not been met, resulting in a major accident and the loss of 241 passengers, including many aspiring doctors, thereby affecting families and communities at large. The plea also asserts that there has been inadequate enforcement of safety regulations by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS). The plea further alleges that systemic maintenance gaps, including malfunctioning air conditioning systems before take-off, routinely evade the oversight of these authorities, showing a failure to implement mandatory pre-flight procedures. The petitioner highlights that the Supreme Court has, in the past, issued guidelines in similar public interest matters concerning safety in the transportation sector, such as in MC Mehta v. Union of India (1987). Therefore, there is a pressing need to strictly enforce all rules, regulations and guidelines under the Aircraft Act, 1934; the Aircraft Rules, 1937; DGCA directions; Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR); advisory circulars; and international conventions such as the Montreal Convention, 1999, which establishes a carrier's duty of care, the plea adds. On these grounds, the petitioner seeks interim reliefs, including the issuance of mandatory, time-bound guidelines for safety and operational checks; unannounced audits with public disclosure of findings; immediate grounding of any non-compliant aircraft until rectification and re-certification; and stringent enforcement of airworthiness norms across all airlines operating in India. (ANI)
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Emergency made part of school syllabus during UPA rule, 3 decades after imposition
Getty Images Representational Image It took three decades for the Emergency imposed by then-prime minister Indira Gandhi, a 21-month period marked by censorship and mass arrests of opposition leaders, to make an entry into NCERT political science textbooks. Curiously, it happened under the Congress-led UPA rule in 2007. While there are still complaints that school textbooks are yet to reflect the full excesses of the Emergency, several passages about the dark period got pruned as late as 2023 under the BJP as part of a curriculum rationalisation exercise following the COVID-19 to Krishna Kumar, former NCERT chairman, the Emergency was introduced in class 12 political science textbooks in 2007 after the revision of the National Curriculum Framework (NCF).He, however, did not elaborate on the process of introducing the subject into the curriculum. In the textbook published in 2007, 25 pages of a chapter, "the crisis of democratic order", detailed the nature of the crisis, the argument behind it, the supporters and the opponents, and how the Emergency shaped the politics of the Emergency and anti-Sikh riots were included in the textbooks despite the Congress government being in power as academia was fully autonomous then, said Anita Rampal, who was the chairperson of some committees constituted by the NCERT for the development of textbooks. "The textbook advisors had met then HRD Minister Arjun Singh to let him know what was being incorporated into textbooks and there was absolutely no government interference. "NCERT or for that matter academics was fully autonomous then. The fact that Emergency or anti-Sikh riots could be included in the curriculum that too with cartoons critical of Indira Gandhi... it is unthinkable in today's time," Rampal, also a former Dean of Delhi University's Faculty of Education, told PTI. The chapter included excerpts from Indira Gandhi's speech to the nation on All India Radio, critical cartoons by RK Laxman, details of the Shah Commission report on the excesses of the period, several newspaper clippings about the announcement of Emergency and subsequent defeat of the Congress in Lok Sabha polls, Amul's tongue-in-cheek take on forced sterilisation, clippings on power shutdown that stopped newspapers from printing and Telegram messages reflecting attempts to censor the press. Some of the news clippings read: "State of Emergency declared", "State of security in peril, says PM", "Several leaders arrested" and "Rights suspended". Another set of news clippings highlighted the end of the Emergency: "Mrs Gandhi defeated", "Cong rout in total", and "Nightmare is over, says Vajpayee". The Amul cartoon strip showed the Amul girl dressed up as a nurse with butter brick on her tray saying "We have always practised compulsory sterilisation". A satirical cartoon included in the textbook shows a man lying on the floor marked as Congress, while with the "common man" stood leaders who opposed the Emergency such as Jagjivan Ram, Morarji Desai, Charan Singh and Atal Behari Vajpayee. Other cartoons on factional fights within the Janata Party and Indira Gandhi's confrontation with the Shah Commission were also included. The preface of the political science earlier said it was a "tribute to the maturity of Indian democracy". Political scientist and Swaraj India President Yogendra Yadav, who was a member of the drafting panel then, noted that prior to 2007, political school textbooks were limited to India's Independence, leaving students to understand 21st-century politics without any knowledge of the events that took place in the latter half of the 20th century. "Introduction of Emergency in school textbooks was no oversight, it was consciously done because the idea was to produce totally non-partisan textbooks so sordid details about the Emergency period were mentioned in a factual manner, without wondering that it was embarrassing for the Congress government," he told PTI. "You cannot teach political science to students sidestepping the major events, which had a significant influence on society and polity, no matter whether controversial or not. The books only mentioned established facts taken from government sources, which cannot be disputed by anybody," he added. Yadav and political scientist Suhas Palshikar had opposed the latest revisions in NCERT textbooks in 2023, which were also criticised by opposition parties. They wrote to the NCERT objecting to the new textbooks carrying their names and disassociated themselves from the revisions. This was the first time the two political scientists stood against the NCERT. In 2012 under the UPA rule, Yadav and Palshikar resigned from the drafting panel in the wake of a row over a cartoon of B R Ambedkar in school textbooks. In the recent rationalisation exercise in 2023, at least five pages from that chapter have been pruned. The deleted content pertains to paras on controversies surrounding the decision to impose the Emergency, and the abuse of power and malpractices committed by the Indira Gandhi government. While some of the cartoons have been truncated in size, box items on the Shah Commission's report, Indira Gandhi's address to the nation, the Naxalite movement and the custodial death of a student during the period have been dropped. In 2018, the then-HRD Minister Prakash Javadekar alleged that the textbooks did not reflect the "whole story" of the Emergency in school curricula for students to understand the reality of the time."In our textbooks, there are some chapters and columns on the Emergency that will be reviewed and this black chapter and assault on democracy of the country will figure some more in the books..." "We will include the whole story of Emergency in the curriculum. Children should know the reality of that time. That is why the Emergency period is considered to be the second freedom struggle," he said. The Emergency was imposed 50 years ago on June 25, 1975, following a period of political unrest and a court verdict that declared Gandhi's election null and void.
