One of the first tasks to which the Government addressed itself in terms of its mandate was the removal of the authoritarian provisions that had been introduced into the Constitution. The Constitution (Fourty-fourth Amendment) Bill, which has been passed by both Houses of Parliament ..... “etc. I think it was very necessary and I would like to say that they ought to have mentioned the co-operation extended to them by the Opposition in this particular matter. Mention is made about the discussions with the Opposition for the Bill that is yet to be introduced, but the Act which was passed could be passed only because the Opposition parties, and particularly my party, even though it might be divided into two now, gave complete and understanding support to it, not only in Parliament. But it does not fit, in the manners of Janata Party to recognise the cooperation, friendly cooperation that we offered. It was, as if, only they wanted it and other parties were against it. So the review which the President’s Address is expected to be, should be full of truths, but, unfortunately it contains half-truths. I thought I should mention this thing because we had certain role in the passage of that Act. We had deliberated and in the discussions that took place with the Government in the matter, we had supported the amendments.
The Prime Minister (Shri Morarji Desai) : I have acknowledged it publicly.
Shri Y. B. Chavan : I know that. Thank you very much. But I am discussing the President’s Address. If I were to discuss your Address, possibly I would speak differently. I approve one part of it. I just forgot to mention about the President’s Address ceremony. The President used to come to this House in a ceremonial manner and so far, we have always seen the President coming in a feudal buggy with all these things. Personally to me, this presidential buggy is a symbol of feaudalistic remnant in India. This time - I must give credit either to Government or to the President himself - they have given up that practice and did not resort to this buggy. If they do the same thing on the occasion of the Republic Day, that would be much better. That is my personal view.
What I was trying to say is that most of the paragraphs that followed, mention what law was to be pased, how it had been examined and how it had to be looked into and there the question of MISA comes maintenance of Internal security Act in. I entirely agree with my hon. friend who spoke before me - this is the view of my party also - that ‘repeal of MISA,’ the words used in the Address may be technically true, but then Government has seen to it very carefully that the minimum necessary legal sanctions in the interest of security and defence of India, maintenance of public order and all services and supplies essential to the life of the community, etc. are retained under the ordinary law. It is true, we had the preventive detention law and the first preventive detention Bill was moved in this House by our great Sardar Patel and it was accepted by our Parliament then. A series of amending Acts were introduced after that. But Government was always apoplgetic about it that they were doing it for a certain temporary period two years, three years normally - which used to be extended from time to time. But this time, now a Government which claims that it stands for civil liberties, democracy and what not - I do not want to use flowery language, I cannot use it - are coming out with a proposal to make in a part of the permanent, ordinary law of the land. So, the independence and liberty of the citizen is permanently damaged. Such a provision in the hands of some tiny officers sitting in some district or taluka or tehsil kechehri who give a report which normally is taken as a Bible by those who are supposed to give final sanction.
