From: kumarv@paul.rutgers.edu (kumar vadaparty)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian.telugu
Subject: About our glorious constitution.
Date: 18 Dec 92 21:15:31 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <15m2ndg@rpi.edu>, divaka@vccsouth25.its.rpi.edu (Ajay Divakaran) writes:
> In article <1992Dec17.141622.22351@lgc.com>, thiru@lgc.com (Thiru Bollam) writes:
> |> In article <Dec.16.16.53.55.1992.10644@paul.rutgers.edu> kumarv@paul.rutgers.edu (kumar vadaparty) writes:
> |> >conduct according to the Indian Constitution. 
> |>                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	[stuff deleted]
> |>   Is it not the same book, made by bunch of mediocre legislators to suit
> |> Thiru
	[stuff deleted]
> Could you please be a little more specific about which mediocre people
> you are talking about? Babu Rajendra Prasad? B.R. Ambedkar? Pandit Nehru?
>                                                     ajay

Now, purely for the sake of intellectual pursuit after truth (not for
any practical reasons), I insist and justify that (i) neither our
constitution was a master piece (ii) nor was our constituent assembly
a collection of the best of the "nation builders", not even close.
They are a mere mediocre people AMONG THE NATION BUILDERS of the
world. They are NOT mediocre, if you take the average Indian
intelligence for comparison.  But, that is like comparing apples and
appricots. If you want to compare them with others, choose other
nation builders: "Jefferson-Madison-Franklin,...", "Lenin-Trotsky",
etc.  In such a company, ours are MEDIOCRE (sic). Ours are not the
worst because, there were others who are worse, such as those building
AFrican Nations. At best you can call our nation builders as "second
class", but the first class and teh second differ by a big margin. 

Next, our constitution was a hotch-potch of "India act" 1936 of the
British.  We made no significant changes to it, and simply called it
"made in India".

Our constitution did not address (for example), a significant and
important issue of "giving adminstration to states on the basis of the
language spoken". It had to wait until late 50's when Nehru (yes, the
Pandit Nehru; I love the word "Pandit") had to be forced to give in.

Our constitution builders did not address alternative methods of
governing. They could not think of anything like "states having
representation". Like the senate here. They simply followed the then
Brtish approach of Parliament. It was neither discussed nor debated as
to why the states can not and should not have equal representation
(independent of size and population) in the so-called upper house.

Our constitution builders did not address the issue of why we need the
ornamental "president" especially if he can not refuse to sign more
than once on a financial bill. They took the "governer general"
position and called it president (just like the English Queen).


Our constitution builders did not adopt some of the most important
issues in the cabinet mission plan that was originally signed by teh
Indian National Congress and the Jinnah's Muslim party. They did not
incorporate some of the fundamental issues: FEDERAL STRUCTURE.

Our constitution builders hardly had a discussion that is even
remotely close to the discussions of Bill of Rights, or the personal
property laws, the interaction between the "trinity" the executive,
the judiciary and the legislature. Our constitution is ambivalent on
whether or not we need "state council" (which was dismantled in some
states), or on its role.

Of course, the modicum of decorum the constitution ever had was
destroyed beyond measure by the ammendements made to it in the last
fifty years.

Let us not elevate "Pandit" Nehru and company into skies. They were
the best men we had? Maybe. But, that is like one-eyed man in the
kingdom of blind people.

I like Nehru more as a writer than as a politician. His books are
better than he ever was.

For more details on this, I recommend Azad's book "India Wins Freedom"
or the book by Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan's son. Both tell you about
Nehru and company.

Kumar.
--