DRAFT CONSTITUTION 1055
constitution of States in Part II and their modification to Parliament to be decided by a simple majority.
Again take Schedule V and VI. They are also left to be amended by Parliament by a simple majority. I can cite innumerable articles in the Constitution, such as article 255, which deals with grants and financial provisions which leave the matter subject to law made by Parliament. The provisions are ‘until Parliament otherwise provides’. Therefore in many matters—I have not had time to examine the whole of the draft Constitution and so I am only just illustrating my point—we have left things in our Constitution in a way which is capable of being amended by a simple majority. If my friends who have been persisting in the criticism that Parliament should have more extenstive powers of amending or altering the Constitution by a simple majority had suggested to me a concrete case and referred to any definite article that that should also be put in that category, it would have been open to the Drafting Committee to consider the matter. Instead of that, to say that the whole of the Constitution should be left liable to be amended by Parliament by majority is, in my judgement, too extravagant and too tall an order to be accepted by people responsible for drafting the Constitution.
Therefore, the first point which I wanted to emphasise was that it is absolutely a misconception to say that there is no article in the constitution which could not be amended by Parliament by a simple majority. As I said, we have any number of articles in our Constitution which it would be open for Parliament to amend by a bare majority.
Now, what is it we do ? We divide the articles of the Constitution under three categories. The first category is the one which consists of articles which can be amended by Parliament by a bare majority. The second set of articles are articles which require two-thirds majority. If the future Parliament wishes to amend any particular article which is not mentioned in Part III or article 304, all that is necessary for them is to have two-thirds majority. Then they can amend it.
Mr. President: Of Members present.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes. Now, we have no doubt put certain articles in a third category where for the purposes of amendment the mechanism is somewhat different or double. It requires two-thirds majority plus ratification by the States. I shall explain why we think that in the case of certain articles it is desirable to adopt this procedure. If Members of the House who are interested in this matter are to examine the articles that have been put under the proviso, they will find that they