Which of the following is/are true?

1) Critics claim that emergency provisions undermine the Fundamental Rights.

2) President becomes dictator by emergency provisions as per the critics.

a. Only 1

b. Only 2

c. Both 1 and 2

d. Neither 1 nor 2

ANSWER: Both 1 and 2

Explanation:

Some members of the Constituent Assembly criticized the incorporation of emergency provisions in the Constitution on the following grounds -

(a) The federal character of the Constitution will be destroyed and the Union will become all.

(b) powerful.

(c) The powers of the State - both the Union and the units - will entirely be concentrated in the hands of the Union executive.

(d) The President will become a dictator.

(e) The financial autonomy of the state will be nullified.

(f) Fundamental rights will become meaningless and, as a result, the democratic foundations of the Constitution will be destroyed.

However, there were also protagonists of the emergency provisions in the Constituent Assembly.

Sir Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar labelled them as ‘the very life-breath of the Constitution’.

Mahabir Tyagi opined that they would work as a ‘safety-valve’ and thereby help in the maintenance of the Constitution.

While defending the emergency provisions in the Constituent Assembly, Dr B. R. Ambedkar also accepted the possibility of their misuse.

He observed, ‘I do not altogether deny that there is a possibility of the Articles being abused or employed for political purposes’.