SIR hearing in Supreme Court turns into a debate on ‘decolonisation’

The senior counsel told the bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi that in the case, “the exercise of powers by the Election Commission was upheld”. He, however, added, “But I am wondering why the court had to refer to Winston Churchill and William Pitt, the colonisers of India, in order to draw support for this proposition.” The judgment, authored by late Justice V R Krishna Iyer, had cited former British prime ministers Churchill, Pitt and Benjamin Disraeli.

Justice Bagchi said, “This idea is that democracy has been imported into India, which perhaps may not be a historically correct fact.” He added, “There were democratic republics even before the birth of Christ.”

“In fact, the Pal dynasty in Bengal had representative kinship. So, the king was not the son of the preceding king. He was elected by the noblemen. Bihar, which you are arguing (the SIR matter before the court began with challenges to the exercise conducted by the EC in Bihar), has been the bedrock of democracy. Number of these city states were democratic states,” Justice Bagchi said.

Dwivedi said, “This idea of Churchill was meant only for Britain, not for India. Whatever they were saying, they had democracy in Britain, but colony in India.” He added, “All that I wish to say is that when you quote something, there are much more appropriate (people to be quoted)…The idea need not have support of Churchill, the original idea itself is sufficient.”

Justice Bagchi said, “When you see the history of democracy in (the) UK, it was elitist democracy. People holding properties were permitted to vote. That is what was transposed in the Government of India Act which you started your submissions on…So, the Constitution does not actually copy the democracy which was envisaged (in the Government of India Act).”

Seconding the view, Dwivedi said, “It’s an incorrect formulation (to say the Constitution is a copy of the Government of India Act) that just because the three schedules are there, and some other provisions… (they are) completely different, the underlying spirit is different.”

Justice Bagchi said CJI Kant’s judgment upholding Section 6A of the Citizenship Act “has been most illuminating” on the subject of fraternity and equ­ality. “The CJI has been most illuminating in 6A where equality and fraternity are ingrained in the democratic principles of the Constitution,” he said.

Agreeing, Dwivedi said, “We need to break away from the colonised mindset. Decolonsiation of mindset is important.”