ROLE OF THE OPPOSITION IN THE INDIAN PARLIAMENT BY H. S.fartyal, wa, v.pnii., Formerly, Lecturer in Political Science, D. S.B. Government College, Nainital 1971 CHAITANYA PUBLISHING HOUSE University Road, AllahabadJQ 298 ‘Al FS 1971 © H. S. Fartyal, 1971 Dedicated to Dr. Devi Datt Pant First Impression PUBLISRED BY CG, 8. JAIN FOR CHAITANYA PUBLISHING HOUSE, ALLAHABAD AND PRINTED AT SHIVA MUDRANALAYA, 2, LAJPAT ROAD, ALLAHABAD-2FOREWORD India of to-morrow, to an appreciable extent, will be what our legislators make it by their efforts to bring together the diverse elements of the nation in our body politic. Unless the interests of the nation are placed over personal interests the future of the country may be anything but bright. Grouping of parties, with avowed conflicting ideologies, is a day-to-day affair. This is holding up the progress of the country to attain the place it should have in the comity of nations, consider- ing the vastness of the resources it has, the manpower it has and the capabilities of the leaders of the land and its people. Opposition has a great part to play in the development of the country by bringing to the notice of the Parliament acts of the Government which, in its opinion, favour the classes to the detri- ment of the masses in a socialistic state which we wish to achieve. To effectively serve the nation it is essential that the opposition should know how to achieve its objects under the Constitution. This requires study of Parliamentary procedure and books like ‘Role of the Opposition in the Indian Parliament’ will be helpful to enable Parliamentarians to put up their views in the proper per- spective. The book covers a wide range of the subject matter be- sides the history of development and growth of the opposition parties in India. It provides valuable information to legislators of the procedure to be followed in ventilating the grievances of the people and effectively serve the electorate within the rules and regulations laid down in the Constitution. It deals, in detail, how opposition can discharge its functions in furthering the interests of the nation. The position of the opposition has been dealt with elaborately and so also of the party Governments, multiple party Governments and shifting alliances. The Ayarams and Gayarams are proving a menace in the various parties to parliamentary form of government in the country (°)(a) and unless they are put down firymly the future of parliamentra democracy is very bleak. The crumbs that are thrown to win them, when the Government does not find itself in majority, has a very demoralizing influence on the people and brings into disrepute the Government of the country. Defectors, who have won the election on a party ticket, in all fairness to the electorate should be asked to resign their seats and seek re-election when they leave the party which helped them to get elected. The author, in the end, makes some very valuable suggestions for making the role of the opposition more effective than what it is to-day. Some of them are: (a) the opposition be recognised by law, (b) reduction be made in the number of parties, (c) effective steps be taken to ban parties which are organised on the basis of caste, religion, language, communal and regional interests. The book will be found very useful in the study of the role of opposition in Parliament. Nainital S. D. PANDE 15. 5. 71 Professor Emeritus, B. I. T. S., Pilani Ex-Chancellor, Birla Vidyavihar, PilaniPREFACE Parliamentary democracy has developed through years of experience, It is a form of government in which the executive is responsible to the elected representatives of the people and is remo- vable by them. There are many conditions for the successful work- ing of parliamentary government and one of them is the existence of parliamentary opposition as distinct from the ruling authority. The function of the Opposition is as important as that of the Govern- ment. It constitutes the demarcation line between democracy and dictatorship, for, it functions as the watch-dog of the liberties of the people. It is the alternative government and focus of the discontent of the people. Therefore, the study of the working of parliamentary opposition is essential. But no comprehensive study has so far been made, The few articles written by some scholars on the subject are limited in their scope. The present study of the role played by the Oppo- sition in the Indian Parliament is probably the first ‘attempt to fill thisgap. Originally, it was submitted as a dissertation at Allahabad University which awarded the D. Phil. degree on it. It has now been revised and covers the period from 1952 to 1970. The work is based on a varicty of sources, I had to go through debates of the House of the People and the Council. of States, reports of the various Parliamentary Committees and other literature dealing with the Parliament. Numerous works, pamph- lets and journals on the different political parties have helped me in writing this book, specially the chapter on “Nature of the Oppo- sition Parties”. I had also interviewed Members of Parliament, especially leaders of different political parties. The chapter on “Party Organisation in the Parliament” is mainly based on these interviews, 1 am grateful to late Lal Bahadur Shastri, Prime Minister of India, who gave me half-an-hour of his precious time for an inter- view on the working of the Opposition. I am also thankful to ( vif ){ vit ) Acharya J. B. Kripalani, Sarvashri Atal Behari Vajpayee, N. G. Ranga, Ram Manohar Lohia, Surendra Nath Dwivedi, Bhupesh Gupta and Prakash Vir Shastri who freely gave me their time for discussion on the subject. I express my gratitude to my supervisor Shri Mohan Lal. It was only on account of his keen interest that I had been able to complete the thesis, I also take this opportunity to record my sense of gratitude to Professor A. B. Lal, formerly Head of the Political Science Department and now Vice-Chancellor, Allahabad University, and Dr Ganesh Prasad Onial, Reader in Political Science, Banaras Hindu University, who always extended their valuable help and guidance. I am grateful to Dr. Devi Datt Pant, Principal, D. S. B. Government College, Nainital, under whose inspiration I completed the book. I wish to express my thanks toKm. Shanti Devi Dangawal and Shri Ganga Singh Rawat for supplying valuable material from the newspapers, Nainital, January 1, 1971, Hayar Sinon FARTYALHOP, DEB, LS, DEB, H.O.P, RULES INA, KLP, LIC, P.P, DEB, P.P.R, PAC. PS. PLWP. R.S.S. SGF. UK, U.S.A, V.K.K.S. ABBREVIATIONS All-India Congress Committee All-India Trade Union Congress All-India Newspaper Editors Conference Communist Party of Soviet Union Communist Party of India Constituent Assembly Debates Council of States Debates Council of States Rules Dravida Munnetra Kazagham Estimates Committee Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry House of the People Debates Lok Sabha Debates House of the People Rules Indian National Army Krishikar Lok Party Life Insurance Corporation Provisional Parliament Debates Provisional Parliament Rules Public Accounts Committee Praja Socialist Party Peasants and Workers Party Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh Scheduled Castes Federation United Kingdom United States of America Vannia Kulla Kshatrias SangamCONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER 1: The Opposition in Parliamentary Democracy ... 1 CHAPTER 2: Nature of the Opposition Parties - 68 CHAPTER 3: The Opposition and the General Elections.. 35 CHAPTER 4; Party Organization in Parliament .. 58 CHAPTER 5: Meeting of the Newly Elected Parliament and its Officers -. 70 CHAPTER 6: Ventilation of Grievances -. 81 CHAPTER 7: Distribution of Time and Motions +» 100 CHAPTER 8: Attitude to Government Bills and Resolutions... 138 CHAPTER 9: Private Members’ Bills and Resolutions «+ 163 CHAPTER 10: Contribution to the Development of Parliamentary Procedure . 171 CHAPTER 11; Committees of Parliament os 186 CHAPTER 12: Relation between the Government and the Opposition «+ 204 CHAPTER 13: Members and their Behaviour oe 214 CHAPTER 14: Pressure Groups -- 228 CHAPTER 15; Quest of a National Opposition ++ 243 Select Bibliography +. 254 Index ++ 258CHAPTER 1 The Opposition in Parliamentary Democracy The word Opposition is derived from the Latin word ‘oppo- sitio’ which means to oppose. In ancient Greece and Rome where a limited form of democratic system prevailed, we find many indications of the working of a separate organised opposi- tion. The intercessio right of the Tribunes of the plubs before the fifth century B. C. in Rome,! the role of the Church towards the feudal monarchies in the Middle Ages, the institution of the Assembly to limit the power of the King and the separation of legislature from the executive correspond to the same idea2 We also find many traces of democracy in ancient India. The Oppo- sition was, however, not a distinct institution, The idea of a parliamentary opposition emerged in the centuries following 1688. The phrase ‘His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition’ in the modern form was first used early in the nineteenth century. During the second- half of the last century, the forms and conventions associated with such opposition took something like their present shape, With the development of political parties,.the Opposition has been transformed into a distinct entity, The British Parliament offers the classic example of what the Opposition is, and what it does and how it functions. The Oppo- sition, though of historic lineage and recognised in parliamentary practice by conventions, was unknown till 1937 to the law in Britain. The Ministers of the Crown Act, 1937 prescribed an annual salary of £ 2000 to the Leader of the Opposition—‘that member of the House of Commons who is for the time being the Leader in that House of the party in opposition to His Majesty’s Government having the greatest numerical strength’’.* In case 1 Ram Prasad Das Gupta, A Study in Hindu and European Political System, First edition, 1958, pp. 31-41. 2 Maurice Duverger, Political Parties, First edition, 1954, p. 413. 3 Ministers of the Crown Act, 1937, quoted by Norman Hill and Harold, W. Stroke, Background of European Governments, p. 52. 1kee 2 The Opposition in Indian Parliament of doubt as to the numerical strength of the parties in opposition or their leader, the Spealer gives the final decision. Likewise, Canzda, Australia and the Union of South Africa had also accorded statutory recognition to the Leader of the Opposition in 1905, 1920 and 1946 respectively. Several other countries have valso adopted the parliamentary form of government with the ‘Opposition as an integral part of the legislature. The Opposi- tion is generally termed as the ‘shadow cabinet’ or the ‘alternative cabinet’. Gilbert Campion has rightly defined the parliamentary opposition in the following words : “The Opposition is the party for the time being in the minority organised as a unit and officially recognised, which has had experience of office and is prepared to form a government when the existing Ministry has lost the con- fidence of the country. ust have_a positive policy of its own and not merely oppose a The composition of the Opposition is a factor to contend with. In one-party system, since the Opposition is not allowed to exist as a separate institution, it may take the form of a dissident group with minority tendencies and criticise the Government at party meetings with varying degrees of freedom. In Italy, for instance, the Fascists always displayed a clear division into ‘eft, right and the centre and in Germany also differences within the Nazi Party before 1934 were present. In the contemporary Soviet system, the members and the leaders of the Communist Party at all levels are allowed to make personal criticism of their own actions and policies, But this kind of opposition is not always possible. In the latter days of Stalin’s rule, for instance, the internal opposition was not allowed; likewise, when the Nazi Party came into power in 1934, the internal opposition was disallowed. Tn a two-party system, the Opposition is generady the poven- Yal_government. There is a definite distinction in the organita- tional sphere between the Government and the Opposition. The people choose between the majority and the minority fairly with full knowledge. When the Government and the Opposition are in a state of equilibrium, the greatest mental and physical strain is experienced by both the sides and the whips on both the sides 1 Gilbert Campion, ‘Development in Parliamentary System since 1918” in British Government since 1918, p. 19.Opposition in Parliamentary Democracy 3 have to be alert all the time. This is the experience of Britain. In 1950-51, the Labour Party had the uncomfortable majority of ‘seven over all parties combined and nineteen over the Conser- vatives. Likewise between 1951-54, the Conservatives had a ‘slightly less uncomfortable majority of eighteen over all others and twenty-seven over the Labour Party. Thus, under the British ‘system the Cabinet in esse, an actual Cabinet, is confronted, criti- cised and checked by a Cabinet in posse, an anti-Cabinet, which hopes to be an actual Cabinet. In a multi-party system, the Opposition comprises hetero- geneous groups and these groups often fight against each other. ‘Where no single party is returned in strength to form the Govern- ment, shifting alliances lead to the fall of the Government and the rise of a new combination which administers the country for a brief period until it meets with the same fate as the former. The role of the Opposition in such circumstances is different. It does not talk and act as an alternative government because of its heterogeneous composition, There is another possibility—the party in power may be in an absolute majority and hence free from the fear of being overthrown in the near future due to the action of the divided Opposition. The numerous groups compos- ing the Opposition then function in a state of frustration. The Opposition is a fundamental part of the legislature which functions mainly on the basis of a parliamentary or cabinet form of government. There are:several factors which have contributed to the growing importance of the Opposition in a parliamentary democracy. Chief among them is the temperamental differ- ence. All menina societydo not think alike and differences of opinion are-natural. The people seck like-minded people and come together and organise themselves into groups, Such groups may become parties holding similar opinions on political ques- tions, There may be as many parties as there are opinions. In practice, it so happens that the people to act together subor- dinate their minor differences to be able to co-operate effectively in support of some major issues on which they agree. Political : parties are thus organised on various issues—political, economic, social, religious, etc. The electoral results give authority to a certain party or group of parties to form the Government and other party or parties, which represent the minority opinions, e -9e74 The Opposition in Indian Parliament function as the Opposition. The Opposition tries to win the support of the people by exposing the defects, loopholes and blunders of that Government. It is always a ready-made alter- native government. “The general election produces not only a Government but also an Opposition. Facing the Prime Minister in normal times is the leader of the Opposition; opposite the treasury bench, where sit the members of ‘His Majesty’s Government’, is. the front Opposition bench, where sit the leaders of ‘His Ma- jesty’s Opposition’. The Leader of the Opposition is the alterna- tive Prime Minister; only a slight shift in public opinion is necessary to give ‘His Majesty's Opposition’ a majority in the House and so to convert it into ‘His Majesty’s Government’. The result is to make the Government and the House very sensitive to public opinion.** The Opposition differentiates democracy from dictatorship. Under dictatorship only one party or group wields all the power and patronage of the state. The result under monarchial rule is the rise of king-makers, and in the case of military rule, the rise of self-perpetuating junta of generals who are opportunists and are against democratic system. They do not have any prin- ciples or policies to be given effect to. Their main mission or motive is the capture and retention of power for personal or family aggran- disement. In one-party system, all rival parties are destroyed. The ruling party ceases to be an organ of discussion, claiming the monopoly of all economic, social and political thinking in the society. The ordinary man becomes a machine and is compelled to accept what is presented to him. The Opposition is put down by abolishing those freedoms of speech, association and elections which are the foundations of democracy. ‘Indeed one party or a no party system”, says Ivor Jennings, “necessarily leads to fascism and bureaucracy.”* On the contrary, in a democracy there is more than one party and all sections of the people are represented in the legislature. The Opposition checks the enormous power of the Government. “The constant presence of a recognised Opposition,” writes Lowell, “is an obstacle to despotism....the existence of a party in Opposi- 1 W, I. Jennings, The British Constitution, p. 11. 2 W. I. Jennings, Parliament must.be Reformed, pp. 17-18.Opposition in Parliamentary Democracy 5 tion, with a programme fairly within the limits of a possible public opinion, is a bulwark against the tyranny not only of a despot but also of a fanatical majority. *1 “The Opposition’’, says Jennings, “fs at once content of the people. Its functions are almost as important as @ Government. If there be no opposition, there is no democracy. His Majesty’s Opposition is no idle phrase. His Majesty needs an Opposition as well as a Government”.® In the legislature, the Opposition exposes the Government ‘omissions and opposes the measures contrary to the public interest. “The majority party has a mandate from the people for the manage« ment of the affairs of the nation for the time being. The Govern- ment, therefore, maintains political peace and stability in the administration. The Opposition by its constant scrutiny and criticism of the Government policy makes the Government a more useful instrument of democracy, An organized Opposition makes the use of various parliamentary method; to compel the ‘Government to admit its mistakes and adopt appropriate remedies. Its members, therefore, ask questions from Ministers regarding their departments and discussions are initiated. Even motions of no-confidence are moved against the Government. By all these means, the arbitrary character of those in power is kept in ‘check and they have to save their skin from adverse criticism or the displeasure of the House. The Opposition, thus, highlights ‘the weaknesses in the administration and compels the Govern- ment to make improvement. An energetic Opposition may succeed not only in compelling the Government to modify its legislatiye programme, but also in winning the office from the party in power, The appeal of the Opposition is neither to the members on the Treasury benches nor to the walls of the House ‘but to the public opinion outside. ‘The iti oses alternative measures differi thosé of the party in power, Tt ve Public grievances through various parliamentary methods, such as questions, half-an-hour discussions, adjournment motions, etc., and secures discussions particularly on questions that agitate the public mind and tries 1A. L, Lowell, Public Opinion and Popular Goverament, pp. 97-98. ® Ivor Jennings, Cabinet Government, p. 15.6 The Opposition in Indian Parliament to press the Government to solve them. Sometimes, the Opposi~ tion may find necdless loopholes and use all means to discredit the party in power. It is, however, not always so because the Opposition tends to be responsible as it has to implement its owm policies. ‘ Although the party in power and the Opposition appear as hostile factions, yet there often exists understanding about the fundamentals of democracy. They work together, ‘especially in the arrangement of business in the House. The Government often consults the Opposition on major policies. It also incor~ porates some of the amendments moved by the Cpposition. The Opposition sometimes supports the Government proposals and. both the Government and the Opposition conduct themselves so as to catch the voter’s ear. Sir William Harcourt is, thus, not wholly right when he asserts that “the function of the Opposition. is to oppose”’! The Opposition directly partakes in the making of laws and. its members are by right-elected to Select Committees, Standing Committees, Joint Committees, etc. The party in power, for fear of criticism, tries to bring in well thought out legislation:before the legislature, while the Opposition does its best to point out any weakness or defects in the Government’s proposals. The result of this party government is that laws come to be made with great care and deliberation, and whenever the majority party fails to carry out its policies and programmes, dissatisfaction grows against it and in course of time its government is discredited and it is forced. to resign. The Opposition then comes to be the ready-made alternative Government and the country has not to face the risk of disorder or revolution. To avoid defeat or resignation, the majority party, therefore, from the very beginning tries to hold together its members in such a way that they may concentrate their efforts and energies on the principles that it had been advo- cating throughout. Hence, Tirney is not right in his glib asser- tion that the duty of the Opposition is to propose nothing, to- oppose everything and to turn out the Government. In a democracy, it is necessary that the administrative appa- ratus of the country should be non-political. An effective Oppo~ 1 Quoted by Ivor Jennings, ‘Parliament, p. 167.Opposition In Parliamentary Democracy Tv sition prevents the formation of monopolies in politics which are worse than economic monopolies. It enables the armed forces to remain non-partisan and ensures a neutral and non-political civil service. In a country where there is no effective Opposition and no alternative government, the civil services tend to identify themselves with the party in power. The Opposition is also the watchdog of the civil liberties of the people. The presence or absence of these liberties cannot be judged by the number of res- trictions imposed upon the people for the purpose of order and social convenience. The test of liberty lies in the fact that the people have the opportunity to criticise such restrictions, “The essence of liberty”, J. Chuter Ede says, ‘‘is freedom to criticise the authorities, to persuade others that the Government is wrong... and to be in a position, if one can persuad= enough people, to bring about changes in the laws or in the methods of administra- tion. "72 The Opposition educates the public opinion. It enables an average ARIES To EERE H-Opinion Treely and fearlessly. It regularly provides information and knowledge about different public affairs to the electorate and makes them capable of debat~ ing party decisions, The Opposition, as it places alternative programmes before the electorate, helps them to exercise their judgment on vital issues, for in the absence of such programmes they would have neither the knowledge of intricate problems involved nor the capacity to understand them. It inculcates team spirit with a feeling that the team counts far more than the individual champion. It demonstrates that there are several aspects ofa question and that the one adopted by the Government is not the only one or the correct one. 1 J. Chuter Ede, “Parliament and the Liberty of the Subjects,” in Perlia- mentary Government in Britain—A Symposium, Hansard Society, p. 79.CHAPTER 2 Nature of the Opposition Parties A political party is an organised group of citizens who profess to share the same political views and who, by acting as a political unit, try to control the Government. Political parties are orga- nised on variovs issues such as political, economic, social, religions, etc. In India, there were a large number of political parties and groups during the period, under review. Ideologically, there were four-fold opposition parties in the Parliament, namely, the right-wing, the moderate left-wing, the extreme left- wing and the sectional and regional opposition parties. RIGHT-WING OPPOSITION PARTIES The first group of opposition parties comprised those reac- tionary and conservative partics which were against the radical social and economic reforms, e.g. the Hindu Mahasabha, the Bha- yaya Jan Sanch, the Ram Rajya Parishad_and the Swatantra eS —— fads Mabasebha.—Though the Hindu reform movement had begun since the start of the ninctcenth century, there was, however, no strong organisation of Hindus which could work for safeguarding the interest of the Hindu community. In the nineteenth centuryRam Mohan Roy and Swami Dayanand Saras- wati worked only for preventing the conversion of Hindus to Christianity and removing the social evils from the Hindu commu- nity. The Hindu Mahasabha was, therefore, formed in 1907 in Punjab mainly with the purpose of reforming, reviving and defending Hinduism.1 The first session of the All-India Hindu Mahasabha met in 1915. After the first world war, the Maha- sabha because of the growing anti-Hindu activities of the Muslim 1 Indra Prakash, A Reviaw of the History and Work of Hindu Mahasabha ond Hindu Sangaion Movement, pp. 43-44. 8Nature of Opposition Parties 9 League, began to direct ‘its activities against the Muslim League. In 1925, the Mahasabha was re-organized and its main objectives were to organize its units throughout the country and help Hindus in case of communal riots. The Mahasabha now emerged as a party of all-India status, In 1925, the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh was formed to fight for the Hindu interest and during communal riots to serve as defence forces for the Hindu enclaves. After the ’thirties, the Mahasabha made both the Congress and the Muslim League its targets of attack. It condemned the Communal Award of 1932 and accused the Congress of Muslim appeasement. In 1938, Vinayak Savarkar was re-elected as its president who propagated the ideal of the Hihdu’ nation. In 1939, the Mahasabha decided to support the War effort, but it demanded the annulment of the Communal Award, immediate enactment of a Constitution for India based on Dominion Status and complete Indianization of the army as soon as possibile. In 1943, Dr. S. P. Mukherjee succeeded Vinayak Savarkar as the President of the Mahasabha and under his powerful leadership the Mahasabha flourished. In 1947, when the Congress accepted the partition of India, the Mahasabha did not approve of it and declared that the partition was a party, not {a national commit- ment and that Akhand Hindustan should be re-established. In 1948-49, the Mahasabha suffered a set-back when Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by a Maharashtrian Brahamin who had past affiliations with the R. S. S. The Mahasabha also went through a period of factional disputes within the party, since the more orthodox section of the party was dissatisfied with the progressive attitude on the question of social reforms. They, therefore, formed their own party—the Ram Rajya Parishad. In 1949, Dr. S. P. Mukherjee resigned from the Mahasabha and in 1951 formed the Bharatiya Jan Sangh. Since 19$0, the Maha- sabha directed its activities against secularism and raised the slogan of Akhand Hindustan. It contested four general elections which were held during the period 1951-67, but lost ground as an all-India party. Policy und progrimme. The chief objective of the Mahasebha was the establishment of the Hindu raj in Bharat with a form of10 The Opposition in Indian Parliament government in accordance with the Hindu concept of polity and economy. Itdid not approve of secular democracy! It advocated the re-unification of India and Pakistan through all legitimate means. It had advocated the reorganization of States and re- adjustment of boundaries of the existing States. However, it was opposed to the formation of linguistic States in border areas. In economic matters, the Mahasabha accepted the principle of the sanctity of private property. It had declared itself in favour of measures -to increase food production, encouraging co-operative farming, supplying good seeds, fertiliser and mecha- nized implements, preventing fragmentation of land and bring- ing cultivable waste land under the plough. It advocated the abo- lition of landlordism: with due compensation. Since 1960, it also advocated the adoption of ‘Hindu socialism’? It stood for the nationalisation of all key industries, but it was in favour of pro- tecting industries against foreign competition. It advocated the rapid development of cottage and small-scale industries in order to remove the problem of unemployment of agricultural labour. Jt was in favour of providing maximum freedom in trade and commerce, but advocated effective control over banking, credit and currency. It did not approve of the policy of non-alignment and advo- cated a policy guided by the principle of enlightened self-interest. Though it favoured the withdrawal of India’s membership from the Commonwealth, it favoured treaty ‘of alliance with the U. K., U. §. A. and other western countries for mutual help and coopera- tion. The Mahasabha had recognised the whole of Jammu & Kashmir, including the illegally occupied territory by Pakistan, as integral parts of India. It had not given recognition to Chinese suzerainty over Tibet Other programmes of the Mahasabha included the improvement of the lot of middle class, adoption of a policy of decontrol, imparting free and compulsory primary education, adoption of Hindi as the national language, promo- tion of Sanskrit, and abolition of untouchability. It is opposed to radical social and economic reforms, 1 Election Manifesto of the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha, p. 7. 2 The Statesman, May 30, 1960. ® Keesing's Contemporary - Archives, 1957-58,- p. 15496.Nature of Opposition Parties u The Mahasabha, because of its narrow principles; could not become a major political force in all these years. Hindu nation- alism, hostility towards Pakistan, and opposition to the Hindu Code Fill:were the principal issues of its policy and propaganda. Communalism, militant spirit and cult of violence found an important place in its thought, The leadership of the Mahasabha had been little concerned with the specific task of building a poli- tical organization that could assume power and it took little interest in the problems of economic development. In fact, communal questions rather than political or economic issues dominated the thinking of the Mahasabha. Ram Rajya Parishad. It was formed in 1948 under the leadership of Swamal Karpant as the more orthodox section of the Hindu Mahasabha was dissatisfied with its progressive attitude on social questions. It was confined mainly to central and nor-. thern India. The main objective of the Parishad was the revival of ‘Ram-Rajya in which “every citizen was contented, happy, gifted with learning and religious minded.....All were truthful..... none was close fisted and rude; none lacked prudence; and above all, none was atheist....all followed the path of religion.”* It did not approve of the Constitution of 1950 on the ground that it was only-a patchwork of the constitutions of western countries. The party conceded the right of ownership of land to farmers and desired reducing taxes, giving due compensation in case of con- fiscation of property, removal of unemployment, encouragement to cottage and small scale industries. The Parishad favoured reorganization of existing’ system of administration on the basis of Bharatiya culture and the formation of a State department of religious affairs. It was in favour of promotion of the study of Sanskrit, adoption ‘of Hindi as national language, banning of cow-slaughter, recognition of Ayurveda as national system of medicine, and abolition of untouchability. The Parishad advocated the reunification of India and Pakis- tan. It regarded the whole of Jammu and Kashmir as integral part of India. It believed in the maintenance of good rela- tions with all countries friendly to Bharat, but advocated with- drawal from the Commonwealth. On the whole, the Parishad, 1 Blection Manifesto of the Ram Rajya Parishad, 1951, p. 3.12 The Opposition in Indian Parliament like the Hindu Mahasabha, has no wide mass appeal. It is a reactionary organization, since it stands for returning to the methods and institutions of ancient India, opposing ail kinds of social, economic, political and religious reforms. indepen es Immediately after the attainment of i endence, Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee proposed that the Mahasabha should leave political activities and enter social and cultural field; but this proposal was rejected which led to the resignation of Dr. Mukherjee from the Mahasabha in May, 1949. Dr. S. P. Mukherjee was then a Minister in the Nehru Cabinet, but in 1950 he differed with Nehru and the Government over the question of relations with Pakistan. Some of the R. S. S. men, like Vasanta Rao Oak, Deen Dayal Upadhyay and Mahavir took advantage of the situation and urged Dr. Mukherjee to resign from the Cabinet. They assured him that they would help him in forming a new party. In 1951, he formed the Jan Sangh which achieved prominent place due to the popularity of Dr. Mukherjee. Its organization was primarily limited to northern and central India, but gradually its units were formed thrdughout the country. The Jan Sangh had rapidly increased its strength in the Parlia- ment as well as the State Legislatures during the period 1951-1970. Its membership increased from 4,00,000 in 1955 to 9,00,000 by the end of 1969. Policy and programme. The cardinal goal of the Jan Sangh was the rebuilding of Bharat on the basis of Bharatiya culture and tradition as a political, social and economic democracy granting equality of opportunity and liberty to the individual. It aimed at making India a prosperous, powerful, modern and enlightened nation able to withstand the aggressive designs, of others and to pull her weight in the Council of Nations for the establishment of world peace? It stood for one nation, one country, oné culture and Dharmarajya, not theocracy but rule of law. ‘{t considered the partition of India a tragic event and ativecdted reunification through all legitimate means? } The: Hincistan Times, December 27, 1969. ® Manifesto of the Jan Sangh, 1951, p. 3. . 8 Presidential Address of Dr. S. P. Mukherjee, cited in Keesing’s Contemporary Archives, 1950-51, p. 11844.Nature of Opposition Parties 13 The Jan Sangh advocated the abolition of zamindari and jagirdari with que compensation, consolidation and checking of fragmentation of holdings ang popularization of better seeds and improved methods of agriculture. It was in favour of helping the cultivators to build small dams, encouraging the use of mechanical appliances in agriculture, fixing a ceiling on land holdings and the establishment of service-cooperatives free from Government control. It advocated the expansion of industry, nationalisation of large scale industries, especially defence industries, and encoura- gement of-private enterprise subject to State control. It stood for providing tariff protection to deserving industries against unfair foreign competition, The Jan Sangh believed in planned development in order to utilise the resources of the nation. It advocated the recons- truction of the Planning Commission to make it an expert body free from political control. Tt discouraged strikes and lock-outs but favoured the establishment of Industrial Tribunals for settle- ment of industrial disputes, It stood for civil liberties and equal rights to all citizens irrespective of caste, creed or community. Since 1955, the party stood for a unitary form of government, decentralisation of power and abolition of second chambers in the States. It stood for the division of the present States into janpadas based on considerations of history and traditions, The Jan Sangh advocated co-ordinated development of land, water and air transport, fixation of minimum and maximum salaries of Rs, 100 and 2,000 a month, abolition of excise and death duties and indirect taxes, separation of the judiciary from the executive, abolition of untouchability and removing social and educational disabilities of women. It was also in favour of recognizing Ayurveda as national system of medicine, reorganiz- ing educational system on the basis of Bharatiya culture. Till 1967, the Party advocated the adoption of Hindi as national language and opposed the. regional languages as media of ins- truction in educational institutions. At the Calicut session of 1968 it changed the language policy and adopted the three-point formula which was as follows: immediate steps should be taken to enable the candidates appearing for the U. P. S.C. examination to take them through the media of regional languages, the knowledge of neither Hindi nor English should be compulsory at the time of14 The Opposition In Indian Parliament recruitment to Central Services and the appointees whose mother tongue is Hindi must acquire a working knowledge of one -addi- tional ' ndian language besides Hindi during the probation period.+ The Jan Sangh stood for a foreign policy guided by enlightened national self-interest, world peace, friendly relations with all countries friendly to Bharat and opposition to imperialism and colonialism. It advocated the re-examination of the whole ques- tion of Bharat’s remaining in the Commonwealth and following a policy of reciprocity towards Pakistan.? It regarded the whole of Jammu and Kashmir as integral part of India and advocated the withdrawal of the Kashmir question from the United Nations Organization and full integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India. After 1969, the Jan Sangh also stood for the Indianization of all persons living in India. By Indianization, it means subor- dination of all narrower loyalties like those of religion; language or dogma to the overriding loyalty to the nation of all fissiparous elements, especially those with xtra-territorial loyalties or allegiance, overt or covert to the two-nation or multi-nation theory. It also advocated the take-over of foreign banks and foreign trade with the Communist countries.* ‘Fhe Jan Sangh ideology was the amalgamation of the old and the new concepts. Its programmes regarding the revival of Pharatiya culture, opposition to cow-slaughter, Hindu Code Bill, the revival of Ayurveda system, etc. were reactionary. On the contrary, its belief in the democratic system of government, civil liberties and fundamental rights, abolition of zamindari, mecha- nization of agriculture, public ownership of key industries, removal of untouchability, etc were essentially modern concepts. The Jan Sangh was wedded to Indianism and derived its inspiration from the eternal values of Bharatiya culture and life and was not prepared to accept blindly the western ways and ideals. Unlike other parties, the Jan Sangh did not recognise the concept of majority and minority since it had faith in one nationhood. 1 Asian Recorder, January 22, 1968, pp. 8134-35, 3 Election Manifesto, 1962, pp. 26-27. 3 Resolution adopted by the Party at the Annual Session (Patna), Decem- ber, 1969.Nature of Opposition Parties 15 Swatantra Party. The Swatantra Party was formed in 1959 in opposition to the increasingly socialist bias in programme, In June 1959, some fifty persons, who were anxious to unite in opposition to communism and to what they regarded as the statist policies of the Congress, met in Madras under the chairmanship of Rajagopalachari. The new party, conceived at the meeting, was named the Swatant-a Party. With the emer- gence of the Swatantra Party, a large number of minor conservative parties, namely, the Krisikar Lok Party, the Common Weal Party, the Nag Vidharba Andolan, the Janta Party and the Gantantra Parishad, merged with it. It was organized on all-India basis and the membership of the party at the end of September 1960 stood at 3,19,353.1 The Swatantra Party had made rapid headway during the period under review. Policy and programme. The Swatantra accepted the principle of sanctity of property :rights of the peasants in their holdings. It had declared itself in favour of providing facilities in the form of waiter, fertiliser, seed, tools, credit and improved techniques to the farmer for intensive cultivation of his land. While the party did not oppose.genuine cooperaiive effort such as service-coopera- tives .and cooperative banks, it opposed cooperative farming. It favoured the.annulment of the amendments to the Constitution by which the Government had expropriated land belonging to peasant proprietors on payment of grossly inadequate compen- sation and desired giving real compensation to those who had been so expropriated under the guise of land reforms: It was also in favour of giving adequate wages to landless agricultural jJabour and permanently employed labour in agriculture and reducing taxes on land,* The party was opposed to the nationalisation of industries and trade and favoured the encouragement of private enterprise, It, however, advocated the balanced development of capital goods industries and cottage industries. It believed in mixed economy where State and free enterprise twork side by side and, therefore, opposed the monopoly and concentration of power 2 Report of the General Secretary to the Swatantra Party, Second National Convention, 1960, p. 3. % Election Manifesto, 1962, pp. 6-8.16 The Opposition in Indian Parliament whether in the State or in the free sector. The party had rejected existing pattern of centralised and top heavy planning and favoured a planning which could be carried out within the limits of freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. It also favoured the flow of foreign capital into private enterprises which might contribute to- wards rapid industrial growth. It also advocated theabolition of the much boosted Planning Commission. It advocated the inde- pendence of judiciary and freedom of press as they were originally embodied in the Constitution. It was in favour of non-party President of India and Governors of States. In foreign affairs, the party advocated joint defence agreements with Asian countries, other than China, and if necessary open alliance with the non- communist West for adequate defence against China, The party was of the view that India should not enter the nuclear race and instead should accept the U.S. nuclear umbrella.? MODERATE LEFT-WING OPPOSITION PARTIES The second group comprised the moderate left-wing oppo- sition parties advocating socialist ideology. Noteworthy among such parties vee ihe Prope Socialist Perry and the Samyukta Socialist Party. The socialist thought in India developed since the ’twentics of the present century. Educated Indian youths were influenced, in one way or other, by Fabian Socialism, Syndi- calism, Guild Socialism and Marxism. These different schools of Socialism instilled in them the concept of liberty, equality, national- ism and self-government. The socialist-minded youths, there- fore, turned against imperialism and capitalism, since they felt that imperialism was the enemy of liberty and equality. All through the ’ thirties, socialist thought grew rapidly. Since the ’ thirties, the Socialists wanted the Congress to pursue a more revolutionary leftist policy, in order to drive out the British from India. They, therefore, organised the Congress Socialist Party inside the Congress and actively tried to influence the policy of the Congress. During the pre-war years, the main efforts of the Socialists were directed, first, toward influencing the Congress against accepting office under the new Constitution of 1935 granted by the British; second, toward launching a revolutionary move- 1 Resolution adopted by the General Council of the Party in May, 1966.