Sir, I am entirely in agreement with the amendment of Prof. K. T. Shah. I know that the system approved by the Constituent Assembly is a Parliamentary system of government but even then I had urged the adoption of a non-parliamentary system of government in India. We have seen since 1920, that the working of the Government of India Act and other Local Self-Government Acts based on the Parliamentary system of Government has demonstrated a miserable failure. In the Parliamentary system of government, it is as clear as daylight that the political opponents are practically crushed, neglected and ignored; we have no conventions and we have no discipline and it is very difficult for our people who are not trained in Parliamentary system of Government to put up with opposition in the country. What we have seen in India is this: that the Ministers are slaves of the legislature and they have to depend for their existence and for their continuance in office on the popular views of the people in the country. They cannot use their independent judgment; they cannot use their independent discretion; the result is that those who keep them in power influence the judgment and the discretion of the Ministers to the great detriment of those who are in opposition. In this country there are heterogeneous people, with different principles and with different programmes. We have seen in the country, particularly in Noakhali, in Bihar and in the two Punjabs, arson, murders and looting. It has all happened because the Governments were based on Parliamentary systems. The Ministers in both the Punjabs, in Noakhali and in Bihar did not take up a strong attitude partly because they cannot go against the popular frenzy of the people which was prevailing in Bihar, Noakhali and in the Punjab. Therefore, if you want perfect peace in the country, if you want tranquility in the country, if you want political parties or political opposition to thrive in the country, it is very necessary that there should be a non-parliamentary system of government.
