Shri M.C. Chagla
Address by Shri M.C. Chagla at the
First National Convention
of the Bharatiya Janata Party at
Samata Nagar, Bombay,
December 29, 1980.
THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE
Shri Vajpayeeji, fellow citizens
of Bombay and Friends coming from all over the Country, I am not a member
of your party nor am I addressing you as a representative of any one. Nonetheless,
I do assure you that while so addressing you, I do not consider myself
as an outsider or a stranger. I sincerely tell you that I am one of you.
The objective that has brought you all here is as endearing to me as it
is to you. The vast multitude of people that I am seeing here is an apt
reply to Smt. Indira Gandhi. This vast multitude is evidently telling her
that those present here stoutly oppose her passion for becoming a virtual
dictator by adopting arbitrary and capricious style of functioning. These
people have come to fight for democratic principles. They have come here
to show her that the Country is in utter disarray, there is political anarchy
all over and corruption and maladministration is rampant. There is no rule
of law; and the opportunists, dishonest people, and cheats hold their sway
and rule the country. In these circumstances your party has a very significant
role to play.
I was extremely delighted to read
in The Times of India a report about the grand procession of Shri Vajpayeeji.
However, this procession was not taken out to display personality cult,
since I do not think that Shri Vajpayeeji aspires for such personality
cult in any form. The procession was taken out and the praises showered
on him were as a result of the fact that he is one of the few decent and
modest personalities in India.
The most accomplished Foreign Minister
I do not want any favour from Shri
Vajpayeeji. I would like to assure him that as and when he becomes the
Prime Minister, I shall not approach him for a post either as a Minister
or as an Ambassador. I shall continue to serve this Country in my humble
way. Still, from my own personal experience I can say that Shri Vajpayeeji
has been one of the most Competent and accomplished Foreign Ministers India
has had so far. He has raised India's image in the eyes of the world to
a great extent and has also caused the neighboring Countries to realise
that we are true to our spiritual heritage and culture and we do not feign
to assume "big-brotherly" attitude towards anyone. A highly placed individual
had told me that while Shri Vajpayeeji was on his first ever sojourn to
Pakistan as India's Foreign Minister, the people there were greatly astonished
to see as to how a person belonging to Jana Sangh could come there and
how could he expect to establish friendly and cordial relations between
the two countries. Nevertheless, when they met him and he talked to them
in his sober diplomatic style, he won their hearts and they expressed their
reaction by saying that India could not have sent a better emissary than
Shri Vajpayeeji.
Prior to this I knew Shri Vajpayeeji
well while he was in Parliament. I had faced him both in Raj Sabha and
Lok Sabha. He opposed me vehemently, but the manner in which he opposed
was always very polite and dignified. And, it is for this very reason that
we continue to be good friends and understand each other very well. I would
like to state here that Shri Vajpayeeji was one of the most adroit speakers
whom I have heard in Parliament. As a matter of fact usually he speaks
in Hindi. But he also speaks in English exceedingly well. Subsequently,
during the course of the Emergency period, I had occasion to go to Bangalore
to contest the detention orders passed in respect of Shri Vajpayeeji, Shri
Advani and others. I do remember on this occasion the learning and wisdom
displayed by Shri Advani, of which I became aware during the course of
the trial, while Shri Advani was sitting by my side. On behalf of the Government
an application was made to the court not to allow Shri Advani to sit by
my side. However the court ruled by it commendable order saying Shri Advani
has the absolute right to sit by the side of his counsel, and to render
required assistance and consultation in the matter. Not only this, the
court also held the logic of the Government behind the application as being
without substance. Such was the independence of Judiciary then. While I
was arguing the matter before the court, although there was nothing particular
to be noted, Shri Advani was taking down certain points in his diary minutely
and with all seriousness. I do hope that those notes must have been of
some use to him subsequently. In this way I have been in close contact
with the leaders of this party.
Honest Party
I was indeed extremely happy when
there was unification of different ideologies under leadership of Shri
Jay Prakash Narayan and its outcome was the birth of the Janata Party.
I was delighted to see that a well organised party has come into existence
and Jan Sangh is one of its constituents. I have been an admirer of Jan
Sangh because of its discipline and honesty. The present day politician
has virtually become the symbol of dishonesty, but Jan Sangh was an honest
party fully dedicated to its ideologies.
I do see that the present party
i.e., the Bharatiya Janata Party believes in the established tenets and
doctrines and adheres to them. News about defectors from any party to another
appear in the press quit frequently. However I have not read about defection
by any member of this party to any other. Conversely it has been found
that some people from other parties have joined this party.
Shri Vajpayee has said that this
party of which he happens to be the President, is the only alternative
to Indira Congress and this assertion by him is proper and fully justifiable
since, in my opinion, there is no other party to replace Indira Congress.
Such opportunity may come itself in the next general elections or even
earlier. It is for this reason that we have now to consider and see whether
the Bharatiya Janata Party has the capacity to meet this challenge. The
erstwhile Jan Sangh was principally an urban party or political organisation,
a party forum for the middle class and mainly concerned with local problems
and issues.
Time has now come to shred the wings
and fly across the periphery.
I am happy to know from the available
figures that above fifty thousand people from different parts of the country
have assembled here. They are not only from the Hindi speaking region,
but there are people who have come from other parts of the country where
Telegu, Tamil and other languages are spoken. This fact belies the allegation
that the party is a parochial organisation. On the contrary it is a national
Party in the truest sense of the term. It is concerned not only with a
particular region or regions but is deeply interested in solving diverse
problems and difficulties faced by people all over the country.
It was alleged against this party
when it was know as Jan Sangh that it is a communal organisation. Every
second or third day Indira Gandhi was harping on the radios and in the
press that the R.S.S organisation has tremendously influenced the Jan Sangh
and that the R.S.S Organisation or similar ideological groups are responsible
for the communal riots that erupt in the country. I deny this allegation.
Bharatiya Janata Party is not a communal organisation and I am happy to
know today that a majority of the representatives, who have assembled here
in such large number, are those who are not even members of the RSS. When
there was a debate on this issue I had fully supported the Jan Sangh. And
I had then said that the formula, which could have enabled the Janata Party
to remain united and which formula was approved by Shri Advani, was discarded
and those members who were unable to continue in the party with self-respect
and self-esteem were obliged to leave the party. This was a very shameful
event.
The veil of Secularism
So far as communalism is concerned,
you must have read in the press recently that a judge of the Supreme Court
Shri Chenna Reddy, an eminent jurist, has expressed his opinion in his
speech while presiding over a Conference of the Rationalists Society that
secular parties are those parties who have encouraged religious intolerance,
backwardness and blind faith. In other words, there is no factual secularism
in India. It has merely assumed the name and pulled a veil over it, while
at heart it is nothing but communalism. I firmly believe that all the Governments
that rule the country so far have been communal. Our constitution proclaims
that we are a secular nation, while our acts and deeds make it manifestly
clear that our conduct is not at all secular.
The British believed in communalism
because they wanted to keep Hindus & Muslims divided so that they could
rule over India indefinitely for a longer period. Lord Morley, British
Government Secretary for India, said, "Unite the minorities; support the
minorities". The Romans had also shared the same view while the British
actually followed their policy of "Divide and Rule". But the sacrifices
of many Indians as well as that of Gandhiji did not go in vain, and as
a result of the impact of these events, the British failed in their plan
and we gained Independence.
But what happened after Independence?
Did we realise the true import of Independence? All of them should have
thought and understood - here the word "All" purports to mean the Muslims
who are said to be the largest minority community of India and refers not
to all Muslims but only to those who have their sympathies with Pakistan
- that with the formation of Pakistan, the Muslims have got their own separate
land. However personally for myself I have always construed it to mean
that the creation of Pakistan was criminal and stupid act and if we had
acted with adroitness and skill, we could have saved partition of the country.
Unfortunately, Pakistan was created and our country, our India was partitioned
when that division should not have taken place at all. Look at the world
map, look at the map of Indian subcontinent and we could see that the Almighty
God desired to see it as one country and wanted that there should be one
culture all over India and it should spread in the whole world.
But after the partition, no minority
group in this country has a right to call itself as politically minority
group. People in the minority communities have got the right to their own
culture, education and religion. No other constitution in the world mentions
the position in such specific and clear terms. Today no member of any minority
community can say that his religion or culture is in danger.
Vote Bank
After the partition those belonging
to the minority group who stayed on in India and liked to continue their
stay and accepted the Indian Constitution are as much Indians as the Indian
Hindus, Christians and Parsis. Now that there is an end to any further
division between the communal groups and we all together constitute the
Indian nation. Why should there be division of minority groups politically?
The answer to this lies in the fact that the Congress party deliberately
encourage the formation of separate minority groups because they want to
secure their votes. They have also minted a new term, "Vote Bank", in regard
to the votes of the minority community. For them the right to govern and
the status and prestige that go with it are of more significant than the
unity of the nation. The result is that we are still in the same position
as we were prior to the partition. Today there are Hindu parties, Muslim
parties and other caste based parties, and for the purpose of election,
candidates are selected on the basis of castes and religion. Candidates
are also elected and are inducted in the ministry too on this basis only.
It is being vociferously said that
the Directive Principles of State Policy provided in our Constitution are
more significant than the fundamental rights. It is the members belonging
to Indira congress, who want to canvass on behalf of her, are responsible
for this uproar. If this is really so, then in my view the most significant
of all the principles would be that India should have a uniform civil code.
Why are we not working towards this objective? In order to achieve this
objective it is enough if a Bill is presented and get it passed by the
Parliament. No expenditure is involved in such exercise.
However, what happened when there
was an attempt to make a small alteration in the Succession Act? Only Hindus
are able to legally adopt and there is no protection of such type provided
for the Non-Hindu children. Therefore a similar bill was drafted for the
non-Hindu children and with a majority vote of 45 the committee concerned
accepted it, only two members who were Muslims voted against it, and it
was placed before Lok Sabha. The then Law Minister Shri Shanti Bhushan
stood up and announced in effective language that after the passing of
this Bill the problem of Child Welfare will get a new facet and he knew
that this bill would be passed by the House. But then, what happened? All
members belonging to all the political parties said that they are opposed
to this bill because their Muslim friends would not like it. The result
of all this is that till today there is no provision for legal adoption
amongst the non-Hindus.
Why was this so done? Why were the
Members of Lok Sabha not told that we are amenable to Indian law, not Muslim
law? Why were the Muslim members in the House not reminded of the Directive
Principles of State Policy? This was because those members who wanted the
bill to be passed in the House were afraid of losing the Muslim votes.
The Real Problem
In the Parliament any democracy,
vote is the symbol of democracy. It is also the symbol of Casteism, Communalism,
linguism and regionalism. It pains me to say that in our country 'vote'
is becoming the symbol of many more such things. In a debate on 'Presidential
Democracy' and 'Parliamentary Democracy' the principle issue is not about
the system but of the right to vote and the manner of the voting. The main
problem is about the manner and basis of selection of the candidates and
about all that happens thereafter. Therefore such problems are there both
in Parliamentary and Presidential Democracy System: And all this is happening
in the country in the name of secularism.
Therefore it is baseless and stupid
to say that the Bharatiya Janata Party is a communal organisation. Indira
Gandhi has not so far shown any proof which could establish that Bharatiya
Janata Party was involved in inciting communal riots. Still she has been
harping parrot like on the allegation that the Bharatiya Janata Party or
the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (she does not make any discrimination in
these two names) is responsible f or all riots that are taking place in
the country. There is no substance in this allegation and in my opinion
this party has established well its claim as the alternative party in p
lace of the present government.
As I have stated earlier I am deeply
impressed by your discipline, sincerity and honesty and faith. I would
now suggest that you should keep the ideal of being a national party in
future. Go to all part of the country and convince the people that your's
is not a regional patty and that you are now no more the erstwhile Jan
Sangh. As is aptly said by Shri Vajpayee, this is a new party, a national
party and is the only alternative party which can replace Indira Congress.
Look at the other parties like Lok Dal and Congress (Urs). These parties
have a leader but without any followers. The Communists have followers
but they are not national parties. They have to look to Moscow and Peking
for directions and because of this their capacity or ability to dislodge
Indira Gandhi gets dissipated. Therefore, there only remains the Bharatiya
Janata Party.
India is such a country which has
a wide range of spiritual heritage, vast cultural background and enormous
material resources which no other country has. And still why are we lagging
behind? How can the Chief Minister of Bihar say that the blinding of prisoners
has helped in the prevention of crime? While making such statements he
did not feel ashamed. If you want to adopt such barbarous and cruel methods,
then why don't you pelt stones and lynch unchaste women or adulteress,
why don't you chop the hands of thieves? Logically it may enable prevention
of crimes. But is this our spiritual heritage? Is it that heritage which
Chief Minister of state proposes to represent? I am fully confident inn
my mind that every one present here is hurt by the above said barbaric
and cruel acts while the Chief Minister coldly says that whatever was done
was a good step to prevent crimes.
Lack of Character
If we properly and efficiently use
the natural resources, we can become a leading nation of the world. We
have made enough progress in the industrial sector and still we are lagging
behind. Why? This is because of the lack of character. Unless the palms
of any one are greased, no work could be got done. Corruption has become
the way of life. And no country can ever progress and no country can become
great unless it has men of upright character.
Finally I would like to stress and
emphasize that you should spread the message that today the nation is facing
the crisis of character and that we shall endeavor to improve our character
by resorting to all available means. Certain institution are trying to
do this job but they are narrow-based and limited in size. Carry this message
to the entire nation and in this manner if you are able to improve the
character of politician, bureaucrats, police personnel and all those responsible
for running the Government of this country, that will indeed be the greatest
service to the country.
