In connection with this Controversy, I may mention that I am one of those persons who feel that the present context of conditions in the country is not suitable for the purpose of discussing a Constitution Bill, which should be given necessary thought in a very calm atmosphere, and the democratic norms. Which are held very high on mind, should be the guiding principles. At the present moment, when the very democratic ideals are being attacked and obstructed from outside, it may perhaps be not possible to consider these matters in a very deatched and calm atmosphere! For that purpose, I should have liked of this bill had been postponed or withdrawn from discussion. Sir, under Article 53 of the Constitution, the President in the Executive head of the State, and under Article 74 the Prime Minister is appointed by the President, and the council of Minister is appointed on the advice of the Prime Minister! In defining the relationship between @ the president and the prime minister and the council of ministers, the words used are, "to aid and advice". I have been of the opinion, having read some of t he commentaries about the British constitution, that the position occupied by the President or the British "Monarch" is more or less the same. It has been the opinion expressed by various jurists not only in this country but outside also. If I had not listened to the speeches, I could have, without the least hesitation, "said" that probably the Amendment was Uncalled for. But having listened to these two speeches, irrespective of the 'Merits' to be considered, there seems to be some controversy or at least some difference of opinion in interpreting a particular statute. It has been even told that once a statute is passed by Parliament or a Legislature and it is placed in the hands of the lawyers who are to interpret it before courts, the intention of the statute, the purpose with which it is passed. He is getting more cloth at a very reasonable price compared to other consumer goods and other things that are available to him. So, while  the difficulties that have been mentioned are real, I would like to say that the policy has by and large succeeded in its aim and has proved quite satisfactory. Therefore, to review it in a manner that would satisfy everybody is just not possible.
