ARCHIVE: BIOGRAPHICAL ESSAYS WOMEN POLITICIANS OF CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY BEGUM AIZAZ RASUL (1908-2001) EARLY LIFE: Begum Qudsia Aizaz Rasul was born to the royal family of Malerkotla (situated in erstwhile united Punjab) on 4th April, 1908. Her father was Nawab Zulfiqar Ali Khan and her mother, Mahmuda Sultan was the daughter of the Nawab of Loharu, Allauddin Ahmad Khan. Qudsia had a progressive upbringing, surrounded by all the riches and comforts of life, and was encouraged from a very early age to lead a modern life, as opposed to several stringent restrictions imposed upon other contemporary Muslim women, such as that of the purdah. INTRODUCTION TO POLITICS: Born to a princely family of Maler Kotla, a Muslim state in Punjab in the early 20th century, Aizaz Rasul’s introduction to politics started early. Her father had carved a niche for himself in political, social and intellectual circles. Rasul, from a young age, accompanied him to various political meetings, even working as his secretary. She got married at quite an early age to Nawaab Aizaz Rasul from the erstwhile province of Awadh. Her husband held the position of a taluqdar, or a landowner. Qudsia had political exposure both before and after marriage, but her formal political participation took place after she got married. BEGINNING OF HER POLITICAL CAREER: Qudsia, along with her husband, joined the Muslim League in mid-1930s, soon after the passing of the Government of India Act in 1935. This was also her official entry into electoral politics, as she contested in the elections of 1937 from the U.P. legislative assembly, where she successfully held her seat till 1952. Aizaz was one of the very few female candidates to have contested and won from a non-reserved constituency during the pre-independent times. As an MLA, she also held several important posts, such as the Leader of Opposition (1950 to 1952) and the Deputy President of the Council (1937 to 1940). She was the first Indian woman to achieve such feats, and this was truly commendable and noteworthy at a time when most formal political positions were almost implicitly reserved for men. Moreover, to rise to prominence at a politically significant province such as the U.P. indeed made Qudsia Aizaz Rasul a trailblazer. In the summer of 1941, she recalls her meeting with M.A Jinnah, the founding leader of ‘Indian Muslim League’. She remembered Jinnah asking her about why she did not join the League, “when people in thousands were flocking to join”. The idea of Pakistan did not convince her. Qudsia was one of the 28 Muslim League members to join the Constituent Assembly of undivided India, and she was the only Muslim woman to be a part of the assembly A STAUNCH CRITIC OF THE ZAMINDARI SYSTEM: Though she was married to a Talukdar (landowner) of the former princely state of Oudh, Nawaab Aizaz Rasul, Begum was a fierce critic of the Zamindari system. As a member of the “Tenancy reform committee”, she was committed to the abolition of the Zamindari System in UP. In 1939, when the bill was discussed in the House, she advocated for more rights for the farmers. More than 1,000 amendments were made to the bill where more hereditary rights were given to tenants. “The bill should not be opposed and Zamindars should see the writing on the wall and graciously give these rights to the tenants who toil and sweat. If they did not, their land would be forcibly taken away from them,” she writes in her autobiography. However, quite understandably, a lot of Zamindars, who saw their privileges vanishing, fiercely opposed the bill. Later, it is said that Rasul believed her support to this anti-Zamindari bill cost her dearly, as it affected her re-election to the UP legislative council in 1940. ROLE IN THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY: With the partition of India, only a handful of Muslim League members joined the Constituent Assembly of India. Begum Aizaz Rasul was elected the Deputy Leader of the Delegation and the Deputy leader of Opposition in the Constituent Legislative Assembly. When Chaudhry Khaliquzzaman, the party leader left for Pakistan, Begum Aizaz succeeded him as the leader of the Muslim League and became a member of the Minority Rights Drafting Subcommittee. It is quite interesting to note that during the discussion on the Report of the Advisory Committee on Minority Rights, Rasul spoke against separate electorates for minority communities. At the time of Partition, Begum Aizaz Rasul stood in Parliament opposing reservation for minorities in legislative assemblies. She was against a separate electorate for minorities formed by the colonial government in 1909. Her debates were focused on the principle of ‘equality’ and the political rights of minorities in a ‘secular’ state. “To my mind, reservation is a self-destructive weapon which separates the minorities from the majority for all time. It gives no chance to the minorities to win the goodwill of the majority. It keeps up the spirit of separatism and communalism alive which should be done away once and for all,” she said in the advisory committee meeting chaired by Vallabhbhai Patel in December, 1948. When arguing against separate electorates she made her point clear stating that “We have to depend upon the good-will of the majority community. Therefore, speaking for the Muslims I say that to ask for reservation of seats seems to my mind quite pointless, but I do agree with Dr. Ambedkar that it is for the majority to realise its duty not to discriminate against any minority. Sir, if that principle that the majority should not discriminate against any minority is accepted, I can assure you that we will not ask for any reservation of seats as far as the Muslims are concerned. We feel that our interests are absolutely identical with those of the majority, and expect that the majority would deal justly and fairly with all minorities.” Making her point clear, “Sir, we do not want any special privileges accorded to us as Muslims but we also do not want that any discrimination should be made against us as such. That is why I say that as nationals of this great country we share the aspirations and the hopes of the people living here hoping at the same time that we be treated in a manner consistent with honour and justice.” She also said,“I spoke very strongly about the abolition of reservation…It was absolutely suicidal for religious minorities to keep alive the spirit of separatism by demanding reservation on communal lines.“ While Rasul faced severe criticism from her community on abolishing separate electorate for minorities, she also introduced resolutions to safeguard their interest. One of them was moving an amendment for any minority residing in any part of India “having a distinct language or script shall be entitled to have primary education imparted to the children through the medium of that language and script”. “Chairman” of several committees and sub-committees, Rasul was a strong voice in the assembly. Her speeches and ideas carried clarity of thought and purpose. She supported India’s membership to the Commonwealth, when many members opposed it. She was critical of the limitations put to the Fundamental Rights in the framing of the Constitution. “I find that what has been given with one hand has been taken away by the other,” Rasul said, demanding an agency to make sure that fundamental rights and directive principles were observed in all provinces in letter and spirit. Rasul was in favor of autonomy to Ministers from party affiliations. As someone well versed in law and with knowledge of constitutions of other countries, she believed at that time, “In India which is so young in democracy, where the sense of responsibility is neither ingrained nor so well developed, we should have a strong and stable Ministry which can initiate long-range policies and be uninfluenced daily by the repercussions in its party.” Responding to the demands of making ‘Sanskritised Hindi’ the National language, she pointed out that very few people understood the language. Instead, she argued for Hindustani. During the discussion around the government's power to acquire property, Rasul highlighted the need for ensuring ‘just compensation’. She also spoke in favour of naming the parliament as Indian National Congress. “My object in moving this amendment is that the word ‘Parliament’ may be substituted by a name which will convey to the people of India and to the world the name of the party that instituted the struggle for the freedom of the country. If the words ‘Indian National Congress’ are substituted for the word ‘Parliament’, the participation of the Congress in the national struggle will be permanently commemorated. This will also save the Congress from degenerating in course of time as all political parties are bound to do…..This is more necessary because the Congress in the past was a movement rather than a party. It represented the Nation's urge to freedom and attracted people to suffering and sacrifice.” When the assembly discussed the powers of the parliament and the president, she argued for an amendment asking for more clarification regarding the position of the President, stating, “My object in moving this amendment is to do away with this ambiguity and to make it clear that the President can return the Bill to Parliament with his suggestions once only, but if Parliament does not agree to the amendments that are suggested by him and returns the Bill to him, he should not in that case return the Bill a second time for the reconsideration of Parliament” ON WOMEN’S RIGHTS: “There was much propaganda against me, specially a ‘Fatwa’ by the Ulemas that it was un-Islamic to vote for a non-purdah Muslim woman,” writes Begum Aizaz Rasul in her autobiography, “From Purdah to Parliament”.