Professor Bidyut Chakrabarty’s tenure as Vice-Chancellor of Vishva-Bharati University, which ends today, has been a very turbulent one. He is a political scientist who has authored a number of books including one called The Socio-Political Ideas of B.R. Ambedkar: Liberal Constitutionalism in a Creative Mould published in 2018 by Routledge.
In this book’s preface, Chakrabarty writes:
“It is a relatively less-known fact that without Mahatma Gandhi;’s personal intervention, Ambedkar may not have had the opportunity to serve as the chairman [of the drafting committee of the Constitution] since Jawaharlal Nehru had already zeroed in on Ivor Jennings, an eminent Constitutional lawyer and an equally renowned Cambridge academic, for the responsibility… Mahatma Gandhi…was keen that Ambedkar should have been in the [Constituent] Assembly; it was made possible because Jogendra Nath Bengal, a prominent Dalit leader from Bengal, sacrificed his seat for Ambedkar.”
There is obviously a typographical error in this paragraph. The reference should be to Jogendra Nath Mandal and not ‘Jogendra Nath Bengal’. But there are far more serious issues here that reflect both shoddy and mischievous right-wing writings that masquerade as scholarship.
First, while Mahatma Gandhi was certainly very keen that Dr. Ambedkar be a member of the Constituent Assembly, Ramachandra Guha in his 2018 magnum opus Gandhi: The Years That Changed the World, 1914-1948 has revealed the role that Rajkumari Amrit Kaur and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel played, with the full backing of Gandhi, in ensuring that Dr. Ambedkar became a member of the Constituent Assembly.
And Ashok Gopal in his 2023 biography A Part Apart: The Life and Thought of B.R. Ambedkar has described why and how Dr. Ambedkar was keen on becoming a member of the Constituent Assembly in spite of his long opposition to both Gandhi and the Congress.
It is also true to say that Jogendra Nath Mandal masterminded Dr. Ambedkar’s election to the Constituent Assembly from then-undivided Bengal. The definitive 2018 biography of Mandal by Dwaipayan Sen The Decline of the Caste Question: Jogendranath Mandal and the Defeat of Dalit Politics in Bengal, describes Mandal’s crucial role in Dr. Ambedkar’s victory in great detail. But contrary to what Chakrabarty claims, Mandal did not give up his seat for Dr. Ambedkar. Both were elected. Mandal later became the first law minister of Pakistan before returning to India in 1950.
Second and this is far more insidious, Chakrabarty provides no evidence whatsoever for his extraordinary claim that Nehru wanted Ivor Jennings as chairman of the Drafting Committee. This allegation of Chakrabarty’s has most recently been repeated in a book on the constitution by Arghya Sengupta who simply writes that his source is Chakrabarty who himself, it should be reiterated, has given no source whatsoever in the first place. This is how falsehoods get repeated and gain currency of their own. Jennings, incidentally between 1946 and 1948, did draft a constitution – that of what was then called Ceylon.
I was most intrigued and reached out to Chakrabarty on October 23, 2023.
I wrote to him thus:
“I am writing to you after reading Arghya Sengupta’s new book on the Indian Constitution. He quotes you as having written that Nehru opposed Dr. Ambedkar’s appointment as Chairman of the Drafting Committee and wanted Ivor Jennings instead.
“I then looked up your book which Arghya has drawn from but could not find the source that you have used for your definitive statement. I also relooked at Shiva Rao and Austin as also two recent bios of Dr. Ambedkar and of Jennings too. I also went through the CA papers of Rajendra Prasad and a few other materials as well.
“I just could not find any confirmation – even remote – of what you have written. But since you are a distinguished academic I am sure you would have had your own source for the statement in your book. More as a semi-academic myself I would very much like to get educated and enlightened on the primary source of your statement.
“With regards and congratulations for the UNESCO heritage tag,
Three days later, he replied to me on WhatsApp:
“I was under the impression that you are a sensible person and above petty politics. Your irresponsible comment is explicable because you are oath-bound to what sycophants like you consider the first family of India. I understand your predicament because given your servility to specific individuals you can’t lose an opportunity to show your loyalty to them because your irrational statement is also meant to make the fools believe that a futile conglomeration INDIA is realistic coalition. Cracks have already been visible!”
I was flabbergasted to say the least to receive this response to what I thought was a perfectly straight-forward request. I immediately replied on the same medium:
“That does not answer my question Professor. I would like to know your source.”
His reply was, I must admit, quick:
“Please do come down to Viswa-Bharati and then the source will be shared with a sycophant like you.”
I could not resist messaging back:
“Sure will do so but abuses ill-become an academic like you.”
Chakrabarty was not done however and replied instantly:
“This is not an abuse but a realistic description of individuals like you who thrive by being sycophant without assessing whether what you stated in your email is also an abuse.”
I wanted to put an end to this exchange and signed off saying
“Oh well. If you don’t want to reveal the source of your definitive statement it is fine.”
But the Professor was not done and had the last word:
“I know you are good at distorting truth. What I stated in my message is to get the input please come down to Viswa-Bharati if you have the courage to face the bitter truth where you will not be saved by your God father or God mother!”
What to make of this somewhat bizarre conversation?
Frankly, Chakrabarty wants to impart intellectual respectability to the appropriation of Gandhi and Dr. Ambedkar by the right-wing. If, in the process, more mud can be flung at Nehru without rhyme or reason all the more better.
I am 100% sure that he has no clinching archival proof for his statement on Nehru and Jennings – a statement that is blatantly and patently mischievous. There is every reason to believe that what Granville Austin termed the guiding ‘oligarchy’ of the Constituent Assembly – Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel, Rajendra Prasad and Maulana Azad – had between themselves decided on Dr. Ambedkar as chairman of the Drafting Committee.
On August 29, 1947, members of the drafting committee chose Dr. Ambedkar from among themselves to be the chairman. His obvious distinction had made him a natural candidate for chairmanship. Besides, Dr. Ambedkar was also Union law minister. Nehru had, in fact, written to Patel on July 30, 1947:
“I have spoken to Ambedkar and he has agreed [to be Union law minister]. He said Law would not give him enough work. I told him he need not worry about that. There will be plenty of work of many kinds to do.”
I would normally not have bothered too much but discovered that Ivor Jennings’ Wikipedia entry has a reference to Chakrabarty’s claim. This is how lies are spread in the digital world and need to be exposed.
Jairam Ramesh, Congress MP, is a part-time author.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
visit website
