A Constitution that fostered and bolstered national cohesion and Indian nationalism was a core theme for Syama Prasad Mookerjee. He appreciated the fact that J&K’s accession to India was unique.
Born on July 6, 1901, Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee was a prominent proponent of a unified India as well as a strong sense of nationalism among citizens. In the Constituent Assembly in the 1940s, he advocated a smooth integration and harmony of states within the Union of India and advised against the drafting of the Constitution that might foster regional separatism. He observed that the ground realities of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), such as its unique cultural and geographic identity should be respected. Yet, it ought not to interfere with the unity and harmony of India.
In the Constituent Assembly debates, he discoursed that accommodating the distinct interests of J&K should not be at the cost of Union of India and this special status should not lead to a dangerous precedent for other states to perceive divisions within the Union. “The purpose of any special provisions should be to ease the integration process, not to create a separate constitutional country within our nation” (Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol. 10, pp. 735-736). He articulated that the special provisions for J&K ought to be temporary, reversible, and subordinate to the sovereignty of India. “The question of safeguarding the specific interests of Jammu and Kashmir must be balanced carefully against the need to keep India united. The special arrangements should be temporary and subject to change in the future as the situation evolves.” (Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol. 10, pp. 767-768).
A Constitution that fostered and bolstered national cohesion and Indian nationalism was a core theme for Syama Prasad Mookerjee. He appreciated the fact that J&K’s accession to India was unique. The partial autonomy was granted to J&K under the Instrument of Accession that was signed by the then king, Hari Singh on 26 October 1947. The king’s aim was to protect J&K from invasion by the newly created Pakistan as well as to integrate the region within the secular governance of India. Mookerjee’s advocacy was focused to ensure that the special status may not undermine the sovereignty and integrity of India. This special arrangement was a part of the means, and not an end. This ought to be removed from the Constitution once the Indian Union gains consolidation. He was wary of measures that granted special privileges or autonomy beyond what was necessary for the peaceful integration of various states into the Union of India. Although he did not draft the specific language of Article 370, yet his ideological stance and its bold and precise articulation, guided the framing of the clause that emphasized territorial integrity and national integration over regional self-rule.
Syama Prasad Mookerjee often reiterated in Parliament that federal architecture and arrangements ought to strengthen Indian nationalism. He believed and articulated that the strength of India is based on close-knit unity. Any step that risked creating a fissure among the states must be approached with utmost caution. The integration of J&K must be through a process that binds the people of the state with the rest of India, and not through separate autonomous provisions that could potentially foster separatism. He conveyed concerns that excessive regional autonomy might undermine national sovereignty and expressed his support for a more centralized approach to the national Union. He stated that the Constitution must be a unifying document, it must bring the states together and not become a tool of divergence. Also, special powers or privileges granted to one state must not become a template for others to follow and demand similar autonomy.
Syama Prasad Mookerjee’s consistent stance was nationalistic and pragmatic as well as statesmanlike. He showed respect for the ground realities and regional specifics, but he prioritized national integration. His resignation from the Union Cabinet in 1950 was a bold and principled stand against continuation of the special provisions granted to J&K under Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. His resignation letter conveyed his deep concern of how Article 370 symbolized a deviation from the goal of a united India. He stated that the special autonomy accorded to J&K created a divided and unequal Indian federation, undermining the very principles of national amalgamation and sovereignty. He expressed his conviction that the retention of Article 370 was incompatible with the Union of India. He mentioned that Article 370 of the Constitution allowed J&K to maintain a separate Constitution, laws, and privileges, which he viewed as obstacles to national harmony. He wanted all Indian states to be governed by common laws and that regional autonomy must not compromise the authority of the Indian Union. The consistency of Syama Prasad Mookerjee’s perspicuity was strengthened by his rigorous academic pursuit. In a lecture to the students in 1935, he famously stated, “Whatever work you undertake, do it seriously, thoroughly and well; never leave it half-done or undone, never feel yourself satisfied unless and until you have given it your very best. Cultivate the habits of discipline and toleration. Surrender not the convictions you hold dear but learn to appreciate the points of view of your opponents.”
In his Lok Sabha intervention on 7 August 1952, Mookerjee spoke about the fear of the “Balkanisation of India”. His speech is a brilliant summary of India’s commitment to democratic values that equally respect all citizens. “We must be able to show that India is not only in theory, but also in fact, a country where Hindus, Muslims, Christians, and everyone will be able to live without fear and with equality of rights. That is the Constitution that we have framed and which we propose to apply rigorously and scrupulously. There may be some demands to the contrary here and there. But do not regard that, whenever an attack is made on certain matters of policy, some narrow, sectarian, communal motive is prompting us. Rather it is the fear that history may repeat itself. It is the fear that what you are going to do may lead to the Balkanisation of India, may lead to the strengthening of the hands of those who do not want to see a strong united India, may lead to the strengthening of those who do not believe that India is a nation but is a combination of separate nationalities. That is the danger.”
On the completion of 125 years, Syama Prasad Mookerjee’s pious soul would be feeling more at peace and satisfied, after the revocation of those provisions of Article 370 of the Constitution that troubled his belief and vision has received the approval of the Supreme Court of India in December, 2023, as well as the current election outcome from his home state of West Bengal, which has opened the door for collaborative governance as well as closer cooperation with the Union Government.
*Dr Pushpinder Puniha is a Distinguish Fellow at the NITI Aayog. Pulkit Tyagi is a young professional with the NITI Aayog. The views expressed by them are personal and based on their studies.
