1106 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
The reason for this is, as I told the House the other day on behalf of Dr. Ambedkar, that we do not propose to move Schedule IIIA and also the Schedule which deals with Instructions to Governors. The clause in question reads thus : “( 5a ) In the choice of his ministers and in the exercise of his other functions under this constitution, the President shall be generally guided by Instructions set out in Schedule IIIA.” Actually, since Schedule IIIA is not moved, this clause becomes superfluous. Therefore I have moved for its omission.
Shri H. V. Kamath : Sir, you might remember that some months ago you raised the important point whether the President would always be bound to accept the advice of his Council of Ministers. Our Constitution is silent on that point. It only says that there shall be a Council of Ministers to aid and advise the President. Dr. Ambedkar at that time undertook to insert some provision somewhere in the Constitution in order to make this point clear. That is my recollection. The President will kindly say whether I am right or wrong. Nowhere in the Draft Constitution has this point been clarified. I hope Dr. Ambedkar will do so, and not leave it vague as at present.
- The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I wish I had notice of this, so that I could give the necessary quotations. But I can make a general statement. The point whether there is anything contained in the Constitution which would compel the President to accept the advice of the Ministry is really a very small one as compared with the general question. I propose to say something about the general question.
Every Constitution, so far as it relates to what we call parliamentary democracy, requires three different organs of the State, the executive, the judiciary and the legislature. I have not anywhere found in any Constitution a provision saying that the executive shall obey the legislature, nor have I found anywhere in any Constitution a provision that the executive shall obey the judiciary. Nowhere is such a provision to be found. That is because it is generally understood that the provisions of the Constitution are binding upon the different organs of the State. Consequently, it is to be presumed that those who work the Constitution, those who compose the Legislature and those who compose the executive and the judiciary know their functions, their limitations and their duties. It is therefore to be expected that if the executive is honest in working the Constitution, then the executive is bound to obey the Legislature without any kind of compulsory obligation laid down in the Constitution.
Similarly, if the executive is honest in working the Constitution, it must act in accordance with the judicial decisions given by the Supreme Court.
*CAD, Vol. X, 14th October 1949, pp. 269-70.