You dont have javascript enabled! Please enable it!

Clause 32, 33 সম্পর্কে বঙ্গবন্ধু

২০ ফেব্রুয়ারি ১৯৫৬

করাচী

The constituent assembly of Pakistan:

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman: (East Bengal: Muslim): There is no question of a Member speaking or not speaking. This thing was held over last time, when we were discussing this clause, by Sardar Amir Azam Khan because it …..

(Mr. Speaker: I have already given my ruling …..)

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman: But we do not know who will be the President and how will the election be done?

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman: That may be quite all right, but the question is this that without considering clause 32 and 33, how can you make 33A another clause?

(Mr. Speaker: I have carefully considered this point already and given my ruling ….)

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman: I am very sorry you are not giving a patient hearing ….

(Mr. Speaker: I have listened to Mr. Zahiruddin patiently and I have considered the point thoroughly.)

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman: I am raising another point because this clause had been held over last time when we discussed it in this House. So unless and until we finish clauses 32 and 33 we cannot come to 33A. Those caluses are about the President and the Vice-President. Now about this clause – it is categorically written – ‘Election of President or Vice-President, to be conclusive.’ This is a very important point. You should understand it. It is a question of the President and the Vice-President, not of the provisional President and Vice-President and I do not understand how my friend on the other side can take up this new clause 33A without first dealing with clause 32 and 33?

(Mr. Speaker: Let Mr. Gomez finish first. He is on his legs.

Mr. Peter Paul Gomez: Sir, as I was saying, all citizens of this country have equal rights …… our Constitution.)

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman: Sir, I rise to oppose the new clause proposed to be inserted by the Honourable Sardar Amir Azam Khan. Sir, I feel that we have committed a mistake in discussing the Constitution – we should have declared it a dynasty. This clause can provide for a dynasty.

Sir, when we are declaring ourselves to be a democratic country, naturally the opponents should have a right to challenge the election of a President in a court of law. What have we done here? If anybody is elected as President by manipulation, then the other candidates have no right to challenge. How can democracy function in this country is something which I cannot understand.

We have here our friends who have been declaring that this is an Islamic country; this is a democratic country and yet in the matter of the election of the President, nobody can got to a court of law!

Supposing the President is directly elected by the eight crores of people of Pakistan – people of East and West Pakistan participating. At the time of voting there can be troubles, there can be rioting; sometimes by manipulation at the time of counting of votes a man may be illegally elected. This man may hold office for more than one term. If a man is elected and he is with the Government party he can manipulate things to his advantage because he is the man who will be appointing the Election Commissioner and he can order him to do what he likes and one day the Election Commissioner shall declare that such and such a man has been elected as the President! In such circumstances we cannot say that this is a democratic country; why are they talking of Islam; why not adopt a dynasty and we all go home. It is no use making a farce of democracy; it is no use playing with Islam.

Take the alternative where the President is indirectly elected. East Bengal and West Pakistan will each send 50 per cent of the electors and supposing there are such 500 persons who have to elect the President. Now we have got the experience of the past eight years before us; we have seen the elections in the Punjab and in the Frontier. Things can be manipulated by the ruling clique. Desired results can be obtained by spending money or by the use of the Preventive Detention Act. Supposing one candidate expects 250 votes and the other a little less. Now put fifty persons in jail and the other man gets elected by a majority of two or three votes. This can happen as it has happened. I would, therefore, request Honourable Sardar Amir Azam Khan to withdraw this clause immediately if he has any respect for the Judiciary in our country, or if he has any respect for the democracy or to the history of Pakistan.

It might be a pressure from some individual who is thinking of becoming the President of our country and is very anxious to hold that office. Perhaps some man behind the scene has manipulated things in that fashion and has forced the Government side to accept this proposal.

Reference:

Iqbal, S. (1997) Sheikh Mujib in Parliament (1955-58), p. 225-228, Dhaka, Agami Prakashani

error: Alert: Due to Copyright Issues the Content is protected !!