THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY:

 Gandhi- Indians must shape own destiny- said in 1922 that swaraj not gift of British
parliament, but must spring from wishes of the Indian people as expressed through freely
chosen representatives- words repeated in opening session of Constituent Assembly-
these words considered as origin of Assembly by some, justification of the same by all.
 1934- demand for constituent assembly part of INC’s official policy
 White Paper of 1933 rejected- did not express will of the people of India- only satisfactory
alternative to white paper would be -a constitution drawn up by a Constituent Assembly
elected on the basis of adult franchise or as near it as possible- important minorities, if
necessary would have the power to have their representatives elected exclusively by
electors belonging to those minorities.
 Congress also reiterated on many later occasions- India could only accept constitution
drawn from people and w/o interference from foreign authorities
 During WW2- Indian people’s mood more self-assertive- by the time of independence,
Indians had a general awareness of nationality and national dignity and public felt itself to
be adult and one corporate unit- Independence no longer an ideal but important part of
public life- now, in such a situation, Indians would accept *only* a self-drafted
constitution
 In December 1946, Constituent Assembly created- derived all its power and authority
from the people of India- indigenous nature of the drafted Constitution major reason for
its success- people less likely to critique and more likely to view as source of pride b/c –
(1) they created it themselves and (2) since they wrote it themselves, it was better suited
to their needs
 Unusual thing about the Assembly- essentially under control of one party (INC), however
it made attempts to be representative of the Indian population and also, the internal
decision-making processes were democratic- charismatic and immensely powerful INC
leaders needed the support of the rank and file in the Assembly and sometimes were
controlled by them too.

The Origins and Creation of the Assembly:

 By the end of WW2- India ready for Const. Assembly and leaders demanding one –
Gandhiji no longer skeptical, rather accepting of the idea now
 Britain accepted that an elected body of Indians should frame the constitution, through Sir
Stafford Cripps
 Increased demand for self-determination supported by India’s war-augmented power –
industry expanded, better trained and armed men, stronger sense of unity – also, British
force in India decreased because they were occupied with Palestine (and other such
problems abroad) and war-weariness at home.
 Sept 1945- Britain government announced contemplation of creation of Const. Assembly
in India and announced national elections in the winter so that freshly created provincial
legislatures could act as electoral bodies for a Const. Assembly
 Jan 1946- Parliamentary Delegation sent to India- they reported that tide of independence
was running high in India- Cabinet-level mission dispatched the following March
 Cabinet Mission- purposes- assist the viceroy to setup machinery by which Indians could
devise their own constitution and mediate between Congress and Muslim League (to
constitutionally unite Indian communities)
 The latter task should not have been attempted by non-Indians- inherently doomed-
During late 1920s and 30s, there was considerable communal tension b/w Hindus and
Muslims- Muslim leader emerged in Jinnah, a channel for muslim dissatisfaction who
turned the then infant Muslim League into his vehicle of power, championing muslim
rights and pushing the two-nation theory as a core tenet of muslim politics (muslims
culturally and religiously distinct from Hindus, must seek state of their own)
 Muslim League distrusted Hindu dominated INC- wanted extended British stay as
deterrent to Congress power (for them synonymous to Hindu domination)- in 1940, ML
demanded assurance of autonomous areas- in 1945, they demanded for two separate
Const Assemblies, one for India and one for Pakistan and that independence should come
only when both constitutions had been completed and both the nations were established.
 INC belief- people of India Indians regardless of religion, first Brits must leave and then
they could settle differences and shape future- India should be one nation under one
Constitution, with each group’s rights being protected by the Const and as much
autonomy provided as possible- however, government must be sufficiently strong to bring
about social revolution India needed if it was to survive.
 The Cabinet Mission tried to reconcile these 2 views w a compromise plan- India would
remain one state, but Central Govt would only have powers of foreign affairs,
communications and defense- 3 geographical provinces (1 predominantly Hindu, 1
predominantly Muslim, other both equal)- provincial representatives to the All-India
Const. Assembly would meet in three assemblies to frame constitutions for their
provinces, and if desired, for their groups too- Government functions other than the 3
mentioned for the Centre were to be distributed amongst the three constitutions – after
this, these representatives would return to the all-India assembly to draft the national
Constitution.
 Plan accepted by both INC and ML with certain reservations- Jinnah accepted the plan
because he believed that the foundation of Pakistan was inherent in compulsory grouping
and the ML hoped that this plan would eventually lead to independent Pakistan – INC
accepted subject to own interpretation of certain provisions being accepted by the British
and the ML.
 Because of this compromise, the Const. Assembly was elected under the terms of one
portion of the plan- adult suffrage rejected because it was too slow, INC too agreed,
forsaking own demands – provincial legislatures elected the Assembly.
 Ratio of representation of provinces approximately one to one million of their populations
respectively- Muslims, Sikhs and General (Hindus + others) would vote separately
according to percentage of population in provinces
 Princely States would get 93 members- method of selection left to consultation b/w
Assembly and States’ rulers
 Although elected, however, Assembly far from being in session yet- Jinnah not fully
convinced about the Plan and the INC’s conditional acceptance of it- withdrew his
acceptance, under the pretext of some tactless remarks made by Nehru at a press
conference about ‘grouping’ and the INC’s intentions in the assembly- ML representatives
were also instructed to boycott the Assembly and this boycott was never lifted- Only ML
reps to attend the Assembly did so because they had remained in India after partition-
 Hence, the Cabinet Mission had failed- differences b/w ML and INC too much for
reconciliation, which was impossible anyway as long as the British were a third party each
 side could appeal to against each other- however, portion of the effort lived on in the
Assembly
 Leading up to this, in August 1946, when India was headed towards independence-
problem was how to bring together INC and ML to form interim govt envisaged in the
Plan- Viceroy Wavell’s task to reconcile disparate views and quite suspicions regarding the
Assembly- meanwhile INC went ahead w its plans for the Assembly, appointing an Experts
Committee to draft fundamental rights and to arrange the early sessions- at Viceroy’s
behest, INC formed the interim Govt (Nehru was its head, as the VP of the Viceroy’s Exec.
Council/ de-facto Prime Minister)- ML joined this Gov begrudgingly w the stated purpose
of wrecking it.
 Assembly was to meet on 9 December, invitations sent to those elected- ML boycott in
place, no last-minute agreement reached- when the assembly began its 3 year long task,
no ML representative present- hence, around ¼ of India’s population not represented in
the Assembly, so could it really speak and act for India, and was it sovereign? Not acc to
Gandhi, he believed somebody else’s creation cannot be a sovereign body, whereas
Nehru, Maulana Azad, and Dr Rajendra Prasad, who had been elected Pres. of the
Assembly in its second sitting believed it was sovereign because it drew its authority from
the people of India (they did recognize that the CMP placed some limitations on its
activities)
 To answer these questions, Assembly gave itself authority to control own being- “ The
Assembly shall not be dissolved except by a resolution assented to by at least two-
thirds of the whole number of members of the Assembly”- now British could dissolve
Assembly only through force.
 While Nehru and other Assembly leaders hoped ML would rejoin, they never did- all but
certain they wouldn’t rejoin in Jan 1947, Assembly kept working- adopting an Objectives
Resolution, electing committees to begin drafting fundamental rights and a federal system and
opening negotiations with the Princely States
 Next time they met, partition in the air (end of Apr 1947)- debate on primary federal
provisions postponed, however, they kept working within the framework of the Plan
throughout May.
 June 3 1947- Viceroy Mountbatten announced on 15 August, India would recognize two
separate states of India and Pakistan, the latter incorporating more than half of India’s
muslim population within itself- Indian Independence Act came into effect on 15 August
1947- giving legally to the Constituent Assembly the status it had assumed since its
inception - Cabinet Mission Plan outmoded, Assembly settled to draft free India’s
constitution.

INDIA IN MICROCOSM:

(1) The Assembly, the Congress, and the Country:

 Assembly one party body in essentially one-party nation- Congress dominated both the
Assembly and the elected government (both provincial and national)- separate entities
but lots of overlapping membership.
 However, contrary to expectations, INC administration not rigid and narrow in outlook-
“The membership of the Congress in the Constituent Assembly and outside held social,
economic, and political views ranging from the reactionary to the revolutionary, and it did
not hesitate to voice them “- INC’s Assembly leaders national heroes and had near
 unlimited power- however, working of the Assembly was still democratic- “ The Indian
Constitution expresses the will of the many rather than the needs of the few”
 Congress got its overwhelming majority in the Assembly from 1945 provincial legislature
elections and the partition- both INC and ML campaigned furiously for the 1945 elections
to establish strongest claim to popularity for the upcoming negotiations
 ML got most muslim seats, INC got 925/1585 seats in provincial assemblies (58%) but it
got about 85% of the non-muslim seats.
 According to the Cabinet Mission Plan, the Assembly was to reflect the complexion of the
provincial legislatures, hence, in 1946 elections to the Assembly, ML members won all but
7 muslim reserved seats and INC won 203/212 general seats, 4 Muslim seats and one Sikh
= 208/296 total seats- 16 remaining seats went to 5 small groups (Akali Sikhs and the
Unionists—both Punjab parties, three seats each; the Communists and the Scheduled
Castes Federation (Dr. Ambedkar), one each; and eight Independents.
 Hence, INC had 69% built in majority, which rose to 82% after partition (no of ML reps fell
to 28)
 Apart from the numbers, the INC also had the prestige of its senior members- 6
past/present INC pres. in the assembly, along w many others- notable: 4 party chiefs:
Nehru, Azad, Patel, Prasad
 However, despite this superiority in both numbers and prestige, party policy ensured INC
members in the assembly represented the country- result of unwritten and unquestioned
belief amongst members that the party should be socially and ideologically diverse, and of
a deliberate policy that reps of various minority communities and viewpoints should be
present in the assembly.
 Electoral process couldn’t have produced a representative body- based on restrictive
franchise established by the Sixth Schedule of the 1935 act (many like most peasants,
small shopkeepers etc excluded)- only 28.5 of the adult population of the provinces could
vote in the 1946 provincial elections- but because the INC and its candidates covered a
broad ideological spectrum, those elected to the Assembly represented the diverse
viewpoints of both voters and non-voters


 During war years, INC base grew even broader, character resembled national front- role of
Congress as a national movement was to blend disparate elements- in post-war era, to
continue this, they must bring capable leaders representing new dynamism of the
country.
 Congress election committees undertook this task in autumn 1945- mainly carried out by
Provincial Congresses w little interference from Central Elections Committee created by
the All-India Congress Committee (AICC)
 One of the primary qualifications for a candidate - record of active work in Independence
Movement- produced group of determined people of above average ability whose
viewpoints were varied.
 Similar policy followed during election of Constituent Assembly members (by provincial
legislatures)- provincial machinery selected its own members- diversity already present in
legislatures preserved and added to this way- Assembly would deliberate on dist of
powers b/w Union Govt. and Provinces, and also on province rights in general, hence it
was necessary for each Provincial Congress Committee to ensure its delegations (or as
 many of its individual members as possible) would represent provincial interests at the
bargaining table – helped make the Constitution’s federal provisions more durable.
 Exception to this policy- national leadership of INC intervened at provincial level to ensure
people of exceptional ability found their way in the Assembly and minorities were fully
represented- Parsis, Anglo-Indians, Christians, SC/ST, women brought into the assembly
under general seats by INC high command’s initiative
 The Congress Working Committee gave explicit recommendations to the PCCs regarding
selection of candidates for the provincial assembly elections- Some PCCS recommended to
set nominations aside for Christians, Adivasis, women and all provinces were
recommended to nominate members of the SC in proportion to their membership in that
particular provincial assembly- Apart from these recommendations though, the PCCs were
more or less given a free hand regarding the elections to the provincial legislatures.