DRAFT CONSTITUTION 1143
Shri Raj Bahadur : Sir, I want to refer to only one point. May I request that the order about Sirohi be placed before the House so that we may know what its contents are, and whether this Assembly can ratify or endorse it, or in any way take note of it or not.
Mr. President : I do not think that is a matter which comes before this House. It is a matter for the other House, not for this House. Dr. Ambedkar.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. President, Sir, in my reply I propose to take certain articles which have been subjected to stronger criticism by the Members of the Assembly. It is, of course, impossible for me to touch upon every article to which reference has been made by the members in the course of their observations. I therefore, propose to confine myself to the more important ones against which serious objections were raised.
I begin with article 22. Listening to the debate, I found that this article 22 and its provisions as amended by the Drafting Committee’s amendments, have not been completely understood, and I should therefore like to state in some precise manner exactly what the article as amended by the Drafting Committee’s amendments proposes to do. The provisions of article 22, as amended by the Drafting Committee, contain the following important points.
First, every case of preventive detention must be authorised by law. It cannot be at the will of the executive.
Secondly, every case of preventive detention for a period of longer than three months must be placed before a judicial board, unless it is one of those cases in which Parliament, acting under clause (7), sub-clause (a) has, by law, prescribed that it need not be placed before a judicial board for authority to detain beyond three months.
Thirdly, in every case, whether it is a case which is required to be placed before the judicial board or not, Parliament shall prescribe the maximum period of detention so that no person who is detained under any law relating to preventive detention can be detained indefinitely. There shall always be a maximum period of detention which Parliament is required to prescribe by law.
Fourthly, in cases which are required by article 22 to go before the Judicial Board, the procedure to be followed by the Board shall be laid down by Parliament. I would like Members to consider the provisions of this new article 22 as amended by the Drafting Committee, with the original article 15-A. It will be seen that the original article 15-A was open