The Government of India Act, 1935 was originally authorized in August 1935 (25 & 26 Geo. 5 c. 42), and is said to be the oldest law (UK) of Parliament ever endorsed by time. Because of its length, the Act was retroactively broken down by the Government of India Act, 1935 (Reprinted) (26 Geo.5 & 1 Edw 8 c 1) into two separate Stories:
- The Indian Government Act, 1935 (26 Geo. 5 & 1 Edw. 8 c 2), has 321 sections and 10 schedules.
- The Government of Burma Act, 1935 (26 Geo. 5 & 1 Edw. 8 c 3), has 159 sections and 6 schedules.
References in the literature on India's political and constitutional history are usually the shortened Government of India Act, 1935 (ie, 26 Geo.5 & 1 Edw 8 c2), not to the text of the Act as originally enacted.
Video Government of India Act, 1935
Ikhtisar
The most important aspects of the Act are:
- granting large amounts of autonomy to the provinces of British India (ending the system of diarki introduced by the Government of India Act, 1919)
- the provision for the establishment of the "Indian Federation", comprising of British India and some or all of the "prince states"
- the introduction of direct election, thus increasing the franchise from seven million to thirty five million people
- reorganization of some provinces:
- Sindh is separated from Bombay
- Bihar and Orissa are divided into separate provinces from Bihar and Orissa
- Burma is completely separated from India
- Aden is also separated from India, and is designated a separate crown colony
membership of the provincial assembly was amended to include a number of elected representatives of India, who can now form a majority and are appointed to form a government. - the establishment of the Federal Court
However, the degree of autonomy introduced at the provincial level is subject to important constraints: The provincial governor maintains an important reserve force, and the British authorities also retain the right to suspend the government responsible.
The parts of the Act intended to establish the Federation of India have never begun to operate, because of the opposition of the rulers of the princely nations. The remaining sections of the Act came into force in 1937, when the first election under the law was also held.
Maps Government of India Act, 1935
Indian Government Act, 1935
Background Act
Indians have increasingly demanded a greater role in the government of their country since the late 19th century. India's contribution to British war effort during the First World War meant that even the more conservative elements in the formation of British politics felt the need for constitutional change, which resulted in the Indian Government Act, 1919. The law introduced a new system of government. known as provincial "diarchies", ie, certain areas of government (such as education) are placed in the hands of ministers responsible to provinces even for areas where they gain nominal control, "purses" still in the hands of British officials.
The point is a review of the constitutional arrangements of India and the prince countries willing to follow. However, the division between Congress and Muslim representatives proves to be a major factor in preventing the deal as too many important details about how federations work in practice.
Against this practice, the newly dominated Conservative National Government in London decided to go ahead by drafting its own proposal (white paper). A joint parliamentary select committee, chaired by Lord Linlithgow, reviewed the white paper proposal at length. On the basis of this white paper, the Government of India Bill was framed. At the committee stage and then, to appease the atehards, "protection" is strengthened, and indirect election is restored to the Central Legislative Assembly (lower house of the central council). The bill was proposed in April 1931 but the bill was passed into law in August 1935.
As a result of this process, although the Indian Government Act of 1935 was intended to meet Indian demands, both the details of the bill and the lack of Indian involvement in drafting its contents meant that the Act met lukewarm. The best response in India, while still proving to be too radical for a significant element in the UK.
Diarki
The system of diarki includes a list of subjects provided by the British Government and a list of subjects transferred to the Indians. That is the governor's rule. The UK has full control over the subject protected by law and may use "special powers" (they may alter any action or project proposed by the Indians) into the subject being transferred.
The protected subjects are: Taxation, Revenue, Foreign Relations/Policy, Department of Justice, Police, Resources and Publications/Press.
Transferred Subjects include: Ministry of Forestry, Local Government, Education, Public Health and Social Welfare.
Some Features of the Act
No further ado: British ambiguity of commitment to domination status
While it became unusual for the British Parliament to include the opening, the absence of one of the Indian Government Act, 1935 contrasted sharply with the 1919 Act, which established a broad philosophy of the Law's aims in relation to Indian political developments..
The opening of the 1919 Act quoted, and centered on, the statement of the Secretary of State to India, Edwin Montagu (17 July 1917 - 19 March 1922) to the House of Commons on 20 August 1917, who promised:
... the gradual development of self-governing institutions, with a view to the progressive realization of responsible government in India as an integral part of the British Empire.
The current Indian demands centered on British India reaching constitutional parity with the existing Dominion (Australia, Canada, Ireland Free State, New Zealand and the South African Union) which would mean full autonomy within the British Commonwealth. An important element in British political circles doubts that Indians are able to run their country on this basis, and see the status of Dominion as possible, possibly, aimed for after a long period of gradual constitutional development, with sufficient "protection".
The tension between and in India and Britain's view resulted in a clumsy compromise of the 1935 Act which had no preamble to itself, but remained at the opening of the 1919 Act even while canceling the rest of the Act. Not surprisingly, this is seen in India as a more diverse message from Britain, showing the warmest and worst attitude suggesting a "minimum required" approach to satisfying Indian desires.
No Bill of Rights
In contrast to most modern constitutions, but similar to the Commonwealth's constitutional legislation at the time, the Act did not include "bill of rights" in a new system aimed at establishing. However, in the case of the proposed Federation of India, there are further complications in incorporating such a set of rights, since the new entity will include princeally nominally (and generally autocratic) nations.
However, different approaches are considered by some, because the draft constitution outline in the Nehru Report includes a kind of rights law.
Relationship to the Constitution of Power
In 1947, relatively few amendments in the Act made it an interim constitution functioning in India and Pakistan.
The law is not only very detailed, but also filled with 'safeguards' designed to allow the British Government to intervene whenever looking at the need to retain British responsibility and interests. To achieve this, in the face of increasing Indiaisation of Indian Government agencies, the Act centralized the decision for the proper use and administration of security at the hands of the Governor of Young and appointed British governors. subject to the control of the Secretary of State for India.
'Given the enormous power and responsibility that the Governor-General should exercise his wisdom or in his personal judgment, it is clear that he (the Young King) is expected to become a Superman kind. He must have wisdom, courage, and ability and be blessed with unlimited capacity for hard work. "We have put a lot of protection into this bill," said Sir Robert Horne... "but all that protection revolves around one individual, and that is Viceroy.He is the vanguard of the entire system... If Viceroy fails, can save the system you've set. "This speech reflects a stubborn Tories perspective that is horrified by the prospect that someday there might be a Young King appointed by the Labor government. '
Reality of the Responsible Government Below Below Act - Is the Cup Half Full or Half Emotion?
A close reading of the Act reveals that the British Government equips itself with legal instruments to take full control whenever they consider this to be desirable. However, doing so without a good reason will completely drown their credibility with groups in India that support the action it aims to secure. Some contrasting views:
"In the federal government... the resemblance of the responsible government is presented, but the reality is lacking, for power in defense and external affairs, of course, depends on the vital public-governor limits within the scope of ministerial activity, and the size of representation given to the rulers of the State of India negating any possibility even the beginning of democratic control, will be the most interesting issue to witness the development of such a unique form of government, of course, if it operates successfully, the highest credit will be due to the political capacity of Indian leaders, a much more serious difficulty to face than to have a colonial statesman who evolved a system of self-government that now culminated in the Dominion status. "
Lord Lothian, in the talk that lasted forty-five minutes, went straight out with his view of Bill:
"I agree with the shamans that it has surrendered.You who are unfamiliar with any constitution can not realize what great power you will use.If you see the constitution it looks as though all power is in the hands of the Governor.-General and Governor , But is not every power here given to the King? Everything is done in the name of the King but does the King ever intervene? After the power is transferred to the legislative hand, the Governor or the Governor-General will never intervene... Civil Service will help. will realize this Once the policy is established, they will carry it out faithfully and faithfully...
We can not help it. We must fight the worshipers here. You can not realize what great courage Mr. has shown. Baldwin and Sir Samuel Hoare. We do not want to avoid the cowards because we have to speak in different languages ​​... These meetings - and of course GD (Birla), before returning in September, met almost all the important people in Anglo-Indian affairs - confirmed GD's original opinion that the differences between the two countries were largely psychological, the same proposal open to interpretation diametrically opposed. He did not, presumably, have taken before his visit how great, in the eyes of the British conservatives, the concession has been... If nothing else, the conversation in a row explains to GD that the agents in the bill have at least as great opportunity. against them at home like in India.
False Equalization
"The law, in great equality, forbids the rich and the poor to sleep under a bridge, begging on the streets, and stealing bread."
Under the Act, UK citizens living in the UK and UK-registered companies in the UK should be treated on the same basis as Indian citizens and Indian registered companies unless British law refuses mutual treatment. The injustice of this arrangement is clear when one considers the dominant position of British capital in many modern sectors of India and its complete dominance, retained through unfair trade practices, the interests of British shipments in international shipping and coastal traffic of India and of no importance at all. The capital of India in the UK and the absence of Indian involvement in deliveries to or in the UK. There is a very detailed provision requiring Viceroy to intervene if, in his unimaginable view, any Indian law or regulation is intended, or will, in fact, discriminate against British Britons, UK-registered companies and, in particular, the interests of British shipping.
"The Joint Committee considers a suggestion that trade with foreign countries should be undertaken by the Minister of Trade, but decides that all negotiations with foreign countries should be carried out by the Foreign Office or Foreign Affairs Department as they are in the UK In concluding this character agreement , The Minister of Foreign Affairs always consulted with the Council of Commerce and assumed that the Governor-General would in such a way consult with the Minister of Commerce in India.This may be true, but the analogy itself is wrong.Royalty, both departments are subject to the same legislative control, India is responsible to the federal legislature and the other to the Imperial Parliament. "
UK Political Needs vs. India's Constitutional Needs - Sustainable Dysfunction
From the time of Montagu's statement of 1917, it is essential that the reform process remains ahead of the curve if Britain should hold strategic initiatives. However, imperialist sentiments, and the lack of realism, in British political circles make this impossible. Thus the conditional power concessions in Acts 1919 and 1935 caused more resentment and in fact failed to win Raj's support from India's much-needed influential groups. In 1919, the 1935 Act, or even the plan of the Simon Commission would be well received. There is evidence that Montagu will support something like this but his colleagues in the cabinet will not consider it. In 1935, a constitution that founded the Dominion of India, comprised of British Indian provinces might be acceptable in India although it would not pass the British Parliament.
'Considering the balance of power in the Conservative Party at the time, the liberalization of a liberal bill than imposed in 1935 is inconceivable.'
Provincial Section of Act
The provincial section of the Act, which is effective, basically follows the recommendations of the Simon Commission. Provincial Dyarki removed; that is, all provincial portfolios should be placed to serve ministers who enjoy the support of the provincial legislature. The appointed British provincial governor, who is accountable to the British Government through Viceroy and the Minister of Foreign Affairs for India, should receive a recommendation from ministers unless, in their view, they negatively affect his territory from "special responsibilities" under the law such as the prevention of any grave threat to the peace or tranquility of a province and the safeguarding of legitimate minority interests. In the event of a political collapse, the governor, under the supervision of the Viceroy, can take full control of the provincial government. This, in fact, allowed the governors to gain more control than any British official ever enjoyed in Raj's history. Following the resignation of the provincial ministries in 1939, the governors did directly govern the former congress provinces during the war.
It is generally acknowledged that the provincial part of the Act provides much power and patronage to the provincial politicians as long as both British officials and Indian politicians play by the rules. However, the paternalistic threat of intervention by the British governor was outlined.
Federal section of the Act
Unlike the provincial part of the Act, the Federal section will apply only when half the countries weighing heavily agree to fellowship. This never happened and the establishment of the Federation was postponed indefinitely after the outbreak of the Second World War.
Legal Terms
The laws provided for Dyarchy at the Center. The British Government, within the Secretary of State for India, through the Governor-General of India - the Young King of India, will continue to control India's financial obligations, defense, foreign affairs and the British Indian Army and will make key promises to the Reserve Bank of India exchange) and the Railway Council and the Act stipulates that no financial bill may be placed in the Central Legislature without the consent of the Governor-General. Funding for UK responsibilities and foreign obligations (eg loan payments, pensions), at least 80 percent of federal expenditure, will be non-votable and taken from above before any claim can be considered for (eg) social or economic development programs. The Viceroy, under the supervision of the Secretary of State for India, was granted with overriding and certifying power which, theoretically, allowed him to rule autocratically.
UK Government Goals
The federal part of the Act is designed to meet the Conservative Party's goals. For a very long time, Conservative leaders expected the law to lead to a nominal nominal status of India, a conservative view, dominated by alliance of Hindu princes and right-wing Hindus who would be well placed under guidance and protection. from the United Kingdom. In the medium term, the Act is expected (in order of rough importance):
- win the support of moderate nationalists because its official purpose is to lead eventually to the Dominion of India which, as defined under the Statute of Westminster 1931 is almost equivalent to independence;
- maintaining British control of Indian Army, Indian finance, and Indian foreign relations for other generations;
- won Muslim support by recognizing most of Jinnah's Four Points;
- convince the princes to join the Federation by giving the conditions of princes to enter who will likely never equal. It is expected that enough will join to allow the formation of the Federation. The provisions offered to the Princes include:
- Each Prince will choose his country's representative in the Federal Legislature. There would be no pressure on the Prince to democratize their administration or allow elections for state representation in the Federal Legislature.
- The Princes will enjoy the heavy burden. The Princely States represents about a quarter of India's population and generates less than a quarter of its wealth. Under the Act:
- The Upper House of the Federal Legislative Council, the State Council, will consist of 260 members: 156 (60%) elected from British India and 104 (40%) nominated by rulers of princely nations.
- The Lower House, the Federal Assembly, will consist of 375 members: 250 (67%) elected by the Legislative Assembly of the Indian provinces of England; 125 (33%) nominated by the ruler of the prince state.
- ensure that Congress will never be able to self-rule or get enough seats to bring down the government
This is done by representing more than the Princes, giving each possible minority the right to independently vote for the candidates belonging to their respective communities (see separate electorate), and by making executives theoretically, but not practically, released by the legislature.
Gambles Taken by the British Government
- The feasibility of the proposed federation . It is hoped that artificial federations, which include units of very different sizes, sophistication and various forms of government from autocratic Mind nations to democratic provinces, can provide the basis for a viable country. However, this is not a realistic possibility (see eg India Paper Federation Creation, 1927-35 in Moore 1988). In fact, the Federation, as planned in the Act, is almost certainly not worth it and will be quickly broken up with the remaining UK to pick up pieces without a viable alternative.
- The Princes see and act in their own long-term interests - That the Princes will see that their best hope for the future will quickly join and become a united block without any group can expect, mathematically, to hold power. However, the princes did not join, and thus exercised the veto power provided by the Act preventing the Federation from being present. Among the reasons for the outgoing Princes are as follows:
- They have no foresight to realize that this is their only chance for the future.
- The Congress has begun and will continue, agitating for democratic reform within the Main Countries. Because one common concern of 600 or more Princes is their desire to continue to govern their country without interruption, this is indeed a deadly threat. It is a card that will ultimately lead to a more democratic state regime and the election of state representatives in the Federal Legislature. Most likely, these representatives are mostly members of Congress. Should the Federation be formed, the election of state representatives in the Federal Legislature would be a congressional coup from within. Thus, contrary to their official position that the British will see well on the democratization of the Principal Countries, their plan requires that states remain autocratic. This reflects a profound contradiction to Britain's view of India and its future.
At a party in the kingdom of Benares, Hailey observes that although the new federal constitution will protect their position in the central government, the internal evolution of the states themselves remains uncertain. Most people seem to expect them to develop a representative institution. Whether an alien graft from Westminster will succeed in British India, however, itself is still in doubt. Autocracy is "a principle firmly held in the Indian states," he points out; "round it burns the sacred fire of the old tradition," and it must be given a fair chance first. Autocratic rule, "informed by wisdom, done with moderation and vitalization by the spirit of service for the interests of the subject, may prove that he can appeal in India as strong as the representative and responsible institution." This passionate defense is reminiscent of Nehru's classical paradox of how advanced and dynamic Western representatives aligned themselves with the most reactionary forces of the backward and stagnant East. '
Under the Law,
'There are a number of restrictions on freedom of discussion in federal legislatures. For example, such action prohibits... any discussion of, or questions concerning, issues relating to the State of India, in addition to matters relating to federal legislation which have the power to make laws for the country, unless the Governor-General in his policy is satisfied that the problem this affects the federal interests or affects the English subject, and has given its consent to the issues being discussed or questions asked. '
-
- They are not a cohesive group and may realize that they will never act as one.
- Every prince looks consumed by the desire to get the best deal for himself is his country to join the Federation: the most money, the greatest autonomy.
- It was enough to be offered at the Center to win support from moderate Hindu and Muslim nationalist support. In fact, so little has been offered that all the important groups in British India reject and denounce the proposed Federation.. The main contributing factor is the continual distrust of British intentions that are actually quite basic. In this vital area, the Act failed the Irwin exam:
"I do not believe that... it is impossible to present a problem in such a form that would make shop windows look respectable from an Indian point of view, which is really what they care about while keeping your hands strong enough on the things that matter." (Irwin to Stonehaven, November 12, 1928)
- That broader voters will turn against Congress . In fact, the 1937 election showed tremendous support for Congress amongst Hindu voters.
- That by giving Indian politicians enormous powers at the provincial level, while denying their responsibilities at the Center, it is expected that Congress, the only national party, will be destroyed into a series of provincial powers.
Indian Reaction to the Proposed Federation
There is no significant group in India that accepts the Federal section of the Act. The typical response is:
'Furthermore, there are five aspects of each Government that are worth it: (a) External and internal defense rights and all measures for that purpose; (b) The right to control our external relationships; (c) The right to control our currency and exchange; (d) The right to control our fiscal policy; (E) day-to-day land administration.... (Under the Act) You shall have no connection with external affairs. You will have nothing to do with defense. You will have nothing to do, or, for all practical purposes in the future, you will have nothing to do with your currency and exchange, as indeed Bank Reserve Bill just graduated has a further reservation in the Constitution that there is no law which can be exercised with the view to substantially amend the provisions of the Act except with the approval of the Governor-General.... no real power is given at the Center. '(Speech by Mr. Bhulabhai DESAI on the Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Reform of the Constitution of India, 4 February 1935).
However, the Liberals and even elements in Congress are warmly willing to try it out:
"Linlithgow asked Sapru whether he thought there was a satisfactory alternative to the 1935 Act scheme. Sapru replied that they must stand firm on the Law and the federal plans contained in it.It is not ideal but at this stage it is the only thing.... A few days after Sapru's visit, Birla came to meet the Young King, thinking that Congress was moving toward the Federation's acceptance.Gandhi was not too concerned, Birla said, with defense reservations and external affairs to the center, but concentrated on the method of selecting representatives America.B Birla wants the Young King to help Gandhi by persuading a number of Princes to move towards democratic representation election.... Birla then said that the only chance for the Federation is in the agreement between the Government and Congress and the best hope of this is in the discussions between Young Kings and Gandhi. "
Workmanship Act
The British government sent Lord Linlithgow as the new young king with authority to enforce the Act. Linlithgow is smart, very hard working, honest, serious, and determined to succeed out of the Act. However, he is also unimaginative, rigid, legalistic, and very difficult to "accept terms" with people outside his immediate circle.
In 1937, after provincial elections, Provincial autonomy began. From that point until the declaration of war in 1939, Linlithgow tirelessly tried to get enough of the Princes to agree to launch the Federation. In this case, he received only the weakest support from Home Government and ultimately the Prince rejected the Federation en masse . In September 1939, Linlithgow simply stated that India was at war with Germany. Although Linlithgow's behavior is constitutionally correct, he also alludes to many Indian opinions that Viceroy did not consult with elected representatives of the Indian people before making a very important decision. This led directly to the resignation of the provincial congressional ministry.
From 1939, Linlithgow concentrated on supporting the war effort.
Comments created by Political Leaders
Nehru called it, "a powerful brake machine but no engine." And the "Charter of Slavery"
Jinnah calls it, "utterly rotten, basically bad and totally unacceptable."
See also
- Indian Government Act (disambiguation)
- The Indian Constitution, a legal instrument replacing the Indian Government Act, 1935 with respect to modern India
- The 1956 Constitution of Pakistan, a legal instrument replacing the Indian Government Act, 1935 in post-partition Pakistan (comprising modern Pakistan and Bangladesh)
Note
1 ^ Keay, John. India: A History . Grove Press Books, distributed by Group West Publishers. United States: 2000 ISBNÃ, 0-8021-3797-0, pp.Ã, 490
2 ^ Keay, John. India: A History . Grove Press Books, distributed by Group West Publishers. United States: 2000 ISBNÃ, 0-8021-3797-0, pp.Ã, 490
Further reading
- Bridge, Carl. Holding India to the Empire: The British Conservative Party and the 1935 Constitution (Oriental University Press, 1986).
- Muldoon, Andrew. Empire, politics and the creation of Indian Law 1935: the last act of raj (Routledge, 2016).
References
- References
- Essay on Indian Government Act 1935
- Muldoon, Andrew Robert, "Making India 'moderate': conservative English, imperial culture, and Indian political reform, 1924-1935"
External links
- The text of the Act as originally passed in 1935, from OPTIONS
- Act changed to August 15, 1943, from the Indian Ministry of Justice
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments