Desecrating Ambedkar

Some parts of the Constituent Assembly Debates make fascinating reading. One is struck by the high quality of the debates and the breadth of vision and farsightedness of the Founding Fathers.

Some parts of the Constituent Assembly Debates make fascinating reading. One is struck by the high quality of the debates and the breadth of vision and farsightedness of the Founding Fathers. The contribution of Dr B. R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Constitution, was outstanding. Article 32 of the Constitution guarantees to every person the right to move the Supreme Court directly for enforcement of fundamental rights. It provides an inexpensive and expeditious remedy. In Ambedkar8217;s memorable words: 8220;If I was asked to name any particular Article in the Constitution as the most important 8212; an Article without which this Constitution would be a nullity8212; I could not refer to any other Article except this one. It is the very soul of the Constitution and the very heart of it.8221;

Social justice was Babasaheb8217;s passion. He believed that political democracy cannot last unless there lies at its base social democracy. He was anguished that 8220;in politics we will have equality and in social and economic life we will have inequality8221; and wondered 8220;how long shall we continue to deny equality in our social and economic life8221;? He warned that if this contradiction was not removed at the earliest, 8220;those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of democracy which this Constituent Assembly has so laboriously built up8221;. We have not yet heeded Ambedkar8217;s warning. Unfortunately, we have got used to this life of contradictions. Wide disparities in wealth and income persist and may be accentuated in the wake of unregulated globalisation. Social justice, the signature tune of our Constitution, still eludes us.

Babasaheb was not in favour of hero worship and the personality cult that flourishes in our country. In the Constituent Assembly he underlined these dangers because, in his prophetic words, 8220;In India, Bhakti or what may be called the path of devotion or hero-worship, plays a part in its politics unequalled in magnitude by the part it plays in the politics of any other country in the world. Bhakti in religion may be a road to salvation of the soul. But in politics, Bhakti or hero-worship is a sure road to degradation and to eventual dictatorship.8221;

The esecration of Ambedkar8217;s statute was reprehensible. But the reaction of violence and the resort to vandalism and scorching the famous Deccan Queen was more reprehensible. It was a gross insult to the memory of Babasaheb, who strongly disapproved of 8216;the Grammar of Anarchy8217; and attached great importance to constitutional morality and its diffusion not merely among the majority of any community but throughout the whole. Babasaheb must have turned in his grave at these occurrences and their condonation by the political leaders and his admirers who profess to follow his teachings and in effect worship him as a deity.

Universality of Cricket

Cricket is our most favourite sport. Cricket fans range from judges, ministers and parliamentarians to the man in the street. The late Justice Tendulkar of the Bombay High Court would discharge his board for the rest of the day with the active cooperation of counsel appearing in the case and thereafter, because of subsequent non-availability of some important document or witness, the case would have to be adjourned and Justice Tendulkar would be seen in the Barbourne stadium thoroughly enjoying the cricket match. The late Justice Venkataramaiah of the Supreme Court would constantly obtain the latest score from the court master and share it with lawyers appearing in his court.

Cricket has recently figured in Parliamentary proceedings, with the Speaker admonishing members for their unruly behaviour and reminding them of coach Greg Chappell8217;s unflattering remarks. There has been a foolish suggestion that cricketers should be paid according to their performance. This overlooks the fact that cricketers are not robots but human beings whose performance depends on many factors and imponderables, as in the case of lawyers. It would be unthinkable, indeed a sacrilege, to suggest that lawyers should be paid depending on their successful performance. A substantial majority would experience a sharp drop in their earnings.