Debate on future strategy after Civil Disobedience Movement

Debate on future strategy after civil Disobedience movement

In the Aftermath of the withdrawal of the Civil Disobedience Movement, a debate emerged among the nationalists regarding the future course of action in the near term. Different debate was initiated as follows:

• While Gandhi emphasized constructive work, which he thought would consolidate the masses for the next phase of the mass struggle, another section of the Congress wanted to revive constitutional struggle and participate in the elections to the central legislative assembly.
• The second stage of the debate started in 1937 on the question of office acceptances in the context of provincial elections held under the Government of India Act 1935.

The first stage of the debate

Constructive work vs. Constitutional struggle

After the withdrawal of the movement in 1934, Gandhi was in favour of constructive work in the villages, especially the revival of the village crafts. At the same time, other members of Congress were in favour of a constitutional struggle through entry into the council. Different debates were:

• According to Gandhi, constructive work will consolidate people’s power and mobilise the masses in the next phase of the struggle.
• The other group in the Congress, led by M A Ansari and Asaf Ali, Bhulabhai Desai, and B C Pal, argued in favour of council entry to keep up the political interest and morale of the people.
• C Rajagopalachari, who was earlier a no-changer, recommended the Swarajist approach to Gandhi. According to him, legislative work would enable the Congress to gain prestige and confidence among the masses.
• The new swarajists argued that participating in legislative activity is not tantamount to faith in constitutional politics. It only means opening another political front which would build up Congress, extend its influence and prepare the masses for the next struggle.

The Third Front

• The strong leftist trend that emerged in the early 1930s was critical of both the traditional responses.
• According to them, both the traditional responses would side-track direct mass action and divert attention from the struggle against British rule.
• Nehru’s vision:
  • Nehru represented the new leftist alternative to Gandhi’s method.
  • He presented his ideas in Lucknow’s presidential address and the Faizpur session of Congress. According to him, the basic goal before the Indian people should be abolishing Capitalism and establishing socialism.
  • He also pointed out the shortcomings of the present nationalist ideology and stressed the need to inculcate socialist ideology.
  • Nehru considered the withdrawal of the movement, constructive work and council entry as “spiritual defeat”, “surrender of ideals”, and going back to the moderate phase of the national struggle.
  • Alienation with Gandhi: In his jail diary, Nehru wrote, “Our objectives are different, our ideals are different, our spiritual outlook was different, and our methods are likely to be different”.
• Nehru’s opposition to the Struggle-Truce-Struggle (S-T-S) strategy of Gandhi:
  • The Gandhian strategy was described as struggle-truce-struggle, which involved a vigorous extra-constitutional mass struggle followed by a truce phase.
  • In the truce phase, direct confrontation with the government is avoided, and the focus is on constitutional reform and concession from the government.
  • Nehru accepted that movements had to go through the upswing and downswing phases, but there should not be any passive phase or situation of compromise.
  • Struggle-Victory (S-V) strategy: Nehru was in favour of a continuous struggle against colonial rule till freedom was achieved.

Finally, the Compromise

• Gandhi averted another split in the nationalistic ranks by conceding the demands of the proponents of the council entry.
• He said that even though their path could not achieve freedom, they should not remain unoccupied. They could express their patriotic energies through council work when there was no mass movement, provided they didn’t resort to self-serving.
• In May 1934, Under Gandhi’s guidance, the AICC meeting at Patna decided to set up the parliamentary board to fight the elections under the aegis of Congress.
• Gandhi appeased the left by backing Nehru for the presidency of the Lucknow Congress despite opposition from rightist leaders like C Rajagopalachari.
• Gandhi, finding himself out of sync with the emerging trends of the Congress, announced his resignation from the Congress in October 1934.

Government of India Act 1935

The Government of India Act was formulated on the basis of the recommendations of the Simon Commission (1927) and the discussion in the Second Round Table Conference (1931). The Act aimed to establish the federal System of the Government of India for the first time.

Administrative System at the Centre

An All-India Federation

• The Act proposed a federation of British provinces and princely states in India.
• Accession was mandatory for the British provinces, but for Princely states, it was optional.
• The princely states were entitled to not less than 52 seats in the proposed council of states.
• The All-India Federation would come into existence when the Princely states representing the ½ of the population of the total population of all Indian Princely states should accede to the federation.
• The federation never came into existence since the given condition was not fulfilled.

Provisions for executive

• The central executive comprised the Governor General, executive councillors and the council of ministers, representing the majority party in the central legislature.
• The Act introduced Diarchy at the central level. It classified the central subjects into two categories. Defence, External Affairs, Religious Affairs and Tribal areas were treated as reserved subjects, while the rest were classified as transferred subjects.
• In reserved subjects, the Governor General acted at his discretion with the assistance of his executive councillors. The transferred subjects were administered by the Governor General on the advice of the ministers (Maximum 10).
• The ministers were responsible to the central legislature and were to resign on losing the confidence of the body.
• The Governor General could act in his individual judgment under certain conditions. In such cases, he was not required to consult the ministers.

Central Legislature

• The Act provided a bicameral legislature consisting of a council of states and a Legislative assembly.
• The Council of State was a permanent body; 1/3rd of the members retired every year, whereas the Legislative Assembly had a maximum duration of 5 years.
• There was a provision for direct elections in the Council of At the same time, in the central legislative assembly (the lower house), members were indirectly elected by members of legislative assemblies in states through the System of proportional representation.
• The Act provided franchise to nearly 1/6^th of the population.
• Division of subjects: For administrative convenience, the subjects were divided into three categories and residual power was with the Governor General.

1. 1. Federal List
   2. Provincial List
   3. Concurrent List

• The System of religion and class-based electorate was further extended. Reservation of seats within the general electorate was provided to women, the workers’ class, and scheduled castes.

Administrative System at the Provincial level

Provincial autonomy: The provincial autonomy was inytroduced which was the most significant feature of this Act.

• It replaced the earlier Diarchy system; now, all the subjects came under the council of ministers.
• Now, provinces derived their legal authority directly from the British crown.

Provisions for Executive

• The British government appointed governors. They could veto administrative and legislative measures under certain conditions concerning minorities, law and order, British business interests and civil servants.
• The Governor was empowered to take over the administration of a province and indefinitely run it.

Provision for Legislature

• Under this Act, six provinces were given bicameral legislature.
• All members of the legislative council were to be directly elected.
• The franchise was expanded, and now women could vote on conditions similar to those of men.
• The provincial legislature could legislate on subjects in the provincial and concurrent lists.

Other major features

• Abolition of India Council: Due to criticism from the Indian leaders regarding its functioning, the India Council was abolished. In its place, now the secretary of state for India could appoint advisors.
• Protection of Minority Rights: The Act empowered the Governor General and the Governors to override decisions of ministers and legislature in case they were deemed necessary for the protection of minority rights.
• Establishment of Federal Public Service Commission, Provincial Public Service Commission and Joint Public Service condition.
• Establishment of Federal court: The court was provided with original (Centre & Provinces), appellate & advisory jurisdiction.
• Establishment of Reserve Bank of India: On the recommendation of the Hilton Young Commission, the Reserve Bank of India was set up.

Responses

• Except for the Hindu Mahasabha and the National Liberal Federation, the Act was criticised by nearly all sections; the Congress unanimously rejected it.
• The Congress demanded holding a constituent assembly, which is elected based on adult franchise, to frame a constitution for independent India.

Evaluation of the Act

• Rigid constitution: The Act could only be amended by the British Parliament.
• Various special powers and safeguards were given to the Governor General, and the Governor curtailed the autonomy of the executive and the legislature.
• The franchise was still limited.
• The extension of the communal electorate promoted separatist tendencies and culminated in the country’s partition.

The Second Stage Debate

The second debate stage began with the announcement of provincial elections in 1936. There was agreement in the Congress that elections should be fought on detailed political and economic programmes. But the question was what to do after the elections. Should it form the government?

• While all in Congress agreed that the 1935 Act must be opposed, there was no consensus on the nature of the opposition, especially when mass movement was not feasible.
• The debate soon got equated with the emerging ideological divide in the Congress on conservative (Right) and Socialist (Left) lines.

Views of the Leftist Group

The group represented by J L Nehru, Bose, the Congress socialists and the Communists was totally opposed to office acceptance.

• Nehru, in his presidential address at Lucknow, opined that accepting office would negate the rejection of the 1935 Act and would be tantamount to self-condemnation.
• Office acceptance would decrease the revolutionary character of the movement and would be co-opted and deradicalised.
• While the Congress would be able to do little for the people, it would inadvertently be cooperating with the repressive apparatus of colonialism.
• This group wanted to employ the older Swarajist model of creating a deadlock in the assemblies and making the implementation of the Act impossible.
• In the long term, their policy was to integrate workers and peasant organisations with the Congress.

Views of the Rightist Group

The group (consisting of Rajendra Prasad and J B Kriplani, etc.), which favoured the acceptance of the office, claimed they were also committed to countering the 1935 Act.

• They denied that they were constitutionalists and that office acceptance was only a short-term tactic.
• They believed that the Congress should combine mass politics with work in assemblies to avoid any unfavourable political situation.
• Another argument was that offices should not be left to the pro-government elements.
• The provincial governments could be used to implement and promote constructive works like the abolition of untouchability, Harijan upliftment, Khadi, education and reduction of burden on peasants.

Conclusion

• Initially, Gandhi was opposed to office acceptance, but by the beginning of 1936, he was willing to give it a try, especially when the majority of the party wanted it.
• The Congress participated in the provincial elections with full force. Both left and right groups campaigned jointly. However, Gandhi did not attend a single political meeting.
• The Congress’ manifesto reaffirmed the rejection of the Government of India Act 1935. It also promised the restoration of civil liberties, the release of political prisoners, etc.

Congress Governments in Provinces

Election Results

The Congress performed very well in all the provinces except Bengal, Sindh and Punjab.

• In six provinces where the Congress was in the majority, its leaders were invited by the Governors to form ministries. However, this offer was turned down due to the refusal of Governors to give assurances on the conditions put forward by Congress.
• Finally, after six months, the resignation of interim ministries was followed by the formation of ministries by the Congress in Madras, Bombay, Central Provinces, Orissa, Bihar and UP. Later, the Congress ministries were also formed in Assam and NWFP.

Work under Congress ministries

The Congress accepted the offices under high expectations from the people. It also increased the prestige of the Congress party as an alternative power which could take care of the masses, especially peasants.

• Gandhi had a piece of advice for the Congressmen to hold these offices lightly and not tightly and urged them to prove that they could rule with the least assistance from the police or army.
• However, there were certain limitations on the power and financial resources of these Congress ministries.

Political Prisoners and Civil Liberties

• The Congress has committed to releasing political prisoners in its election manifesto. After forming the government, many prisoners were released. The most prominent were released of the Kakori
• The Congress also worked on lifting restrictions on political exiles like Rashbehari Ghosh, Abani Mukherjee, and Maulvi Abdullah Khan; however, it achieved little success.
• In the Congress provinces, the excessive power of police was curbed, and the shadowing of political workers by the CID agents was also stopped.
• All emergency powers previously acquired by the provincial governments were repealed.
• The ban on political organisations, journals and books was lifted. All restrictions on the Press were lifted.
• Confiscated arms were returned, and forfeited arm licenses were restored.
• However, there were some blemishes on the record of these ministries. SS Batliwala and Yusuf Meherally, the socialist leaders, were prosecuted by the Madras government under C Rajagopalchari for making inflammatory speeches. Similarly, K M Munshi, the home minister of Bombay, used the CID to snoop on communist Congressmen.

Agrarian reforms

• The Congress had committed itself to agrarian reforms, which included reform in the System of land tenure and reduction in rent, land revenue and the burden of debt.
• However, due to inadequate power, complexity and financial constraints, the ministries could not overhaul the oppressive agrarian System.
• Since the upper chamber was dominated by landlords and the propertied class, they had to be conciliated first before going for any reform.
• Despite these constraints, the ministries in different provinces managed to pass several legislations to provide relief to peasants.

Labour Cause

• In general, the ministries in different provinces adopted a pro-labour position.
• Their approach was to advance workers’ interests along with the promotion of industrial peace. They emphasised conciliation, arbitration and negotiations in place of direct action.
• Some of the legislation and actions of the ministries were criticised by leftist leaders in Congress.

Constructive Programs by the Congress ministries

• Untouchables or Harijans: Several measures were taken in the advancement of their interest.
  • The passing of legislation to enable Harijans to enter temples and unrestricted access to public offices, public sources of water, roads, hospitals, schools, etc.
  • Scholarships to Harijan students were increased, and efforts were made to increase their presentations in public services like police.
• Prohibition was introduced in several areas.
• A lot of attention was paid to primary, secondary and higher education with an emphasis on girls and Harijans.
• Public health and sanitation were also given attention.
• Support and subsidies were provided to Khadi, spinning and village industries.
• The Congress governments eased the process of setting up modern indigenous industries.
• In 1938, under Congress President S C Bose, the National Planning Committee was set up, and its recommendations were incorporated into the policies of the Congress governments.

Evaluation

The outbreak of World War II and the crisis brought by it led to the resignation of the ministries in October 1939. The 28-month-long Congress rule was significant for several reasons.

• Corruption and favouritism: Gandhi was worried about the rampant corruption that had crept in within the Congress.
  • The practice of bogus membership also started growing.
  • Cases of favouritism in terms of jobs, personal advantages, etc., were rampant.
• Factional strife: There was a great deal of factional strife and bickering both on an ideological and personal basis.
• Strengthening of the national movement: The Congress leadership used the state power to strengthen the national movement.
  • Public offices were used to enhance the national consciousness and expand the coverage of the national movement.
  • Even the bureaucracy, especially the lower one, was influenced by the nationalistic discourse, which brought down ICS’s morale.
• The ministries were successful in curbing communal riots.
• Despite factionalism, the Congress organisations as a whole stuck together.
• The resignation from the office showed that Congress did not accept the offices of power.
• The most significant achievement was to prove the British wrong that the Indians were unfit to rule.

Aftermath

• There was a dilemma within the Congress regarding the situation in the Princely states and whether the Congress should support the Prajamandal Movement or not.
• Antagonised by the Congress for not sharing power, the Muslim League set up the Pirpur Committee to investigate the atrocities allegedly committed by the Congress governments.

The crisis at Tripuri

During the period around late 1930s, the Indian National Congress was dominated by left-wing leaders. They wanted the phase of mass struggle to continue. Leaders like Nehru and Bose did not agree with Gandhi and other Congress leaders on the methods of freedom struggle. Gandhi, on the other hand, was disheartened by the rising corruption and favouritism in the party and wanted to put the house in order first before launching the mass struggle.

Background

• In 1938, at the Haripura session of the Congress, Bose was unanimously elected as the Congress president.
• In 1939, Bose again decided to stand in the president’s election. According to Bose, he represented “new ideas, ideologies, problems and programmes”.
• Bose won the election with the full support of the Congress Socialist Party and the Communists.

Tripuri session of the Congress

• In March 1939, The Congress session took place at Tripuri, in Central Province (Modern day Madhya Pradesh).
• Bose’s victory polarised the Congress since it was the president who appointed the Congress working committee; the president had the power to set the direction of the leadership in the Congress.
• Bose accused some working committee members of negotiating a compromise with the British on the matter of federation; this led to the resignation of those leaders.
• Bose also proposed to give the British an ultimatum on demand for independence and then launch the civil disobedience movement.
• However, Gandhi was against the idea of giving an ultimatum and launching a mass struggle, as he thought the time was not right and people were not ready. Gandhi was also not ready to lead a struggle on Bose’s radical lines.
• Bose failed in his effort to convince Gandhi; he also refused to nominate the working committee. This led to an impasse within the Congress.
• Even though the socialists and the communists supported Bose in the election, they did not want a split in the party and preferred a United Congress under Gandhi.
• These circumstances forced Subhash Chandra Bose to resign in April 1939. Rajendra Prasad was elected as the president of Congress. In May, Bose, with his followers, formed a new party within Congress, Forward Bloc.

Differences between Bose and Gandhi

There were some fundamental differences between them at the ideological level. However, they had a deep respect for each other and appreciated each other’s contribution to the national struggle. In fact, it was Bose who called Gandhi “the father of our Nation”.

	S C Bose	Mahatma Gandhi
Ideology	He was a radical socialist and hesitant to bring a violent revolution to overthrow the British.	Gandhiji was a conservative who wanted a peaceful transfer of power.
Approach towards National Movement	Bose’s approach can be summarised as a militant approach. He did not consider himself a ‘communist’ but a socialist and called it Samyavada. He also appreciated the discipline of Fascists and Nazis.	Gandhi objected to any kind of violence and believed in Ahimsa. In his view, when violence is involved, then the unarmed masses have little say or scope of participation.
Philosophical difference	Bose’s approach can be taken as an ‘ends’ approach, in which any means that leads to the desired end is acceptable.	Gandhi’s approach is the ‘means’ approach, according to which it is important to take the right means to reach the desired end.
Form of Government	Bose initially leaned towards a democratic form of government. However, he later felt that in the beginning, a democratic government would fail in nation rebuilding and eradication of socio-economic equality, such as the Caste system.	Gandhiji idealised his utopian ‘Ram Rajya’, which did not need a representative government, constitution, army or police. In his view, Gram–Swarajya (a highly decentralised form of government) was the valid means to achieve real democracy, where every village is a self-sustaining republic.
On Economy	He believed in state-controlled and state-owned industrialisation. He considered economic freedom as the essence of social and political freedom. He preferred large-scale industries but did not reject cottage industries.	He dismissed both Capitalism and Western socialism. His economic ideas included Sarvodaya (upliftment of all) and Gram Swarajya (self-sufficient villages). He favoured cottage industries against large-scale industries.
On Religion	He was a secularist and had an impartial view towards all religions. For him, religion was a private affair.	He had a firm belief in religion, and it was the basis of all his ideas. He considered all religions to be equal.