SHRI SAIFUDDIN CHOUDHURY: Very badly misunderstood by a lady! SHRI A. CHARLES: Sir, ours is a great country. There are

different languages, thousands of languages and different dialects, different traints and different cultures. Though we claim to have a composite culture as our heritage, it is our responsibility and duty to protect the identity of every small group, however small it may be.

Then only the unity and diversity which is the essence of the source of our democracy can be built up.

I am not against this Bill. However, from the statement of objects and Reasons it is seen that there are sufficient grounds that the demand made should be accepted. After all, there are atleast two Governments, Sikkim and West Bengal where this language has been accepted as an official language. And four other State Governments have recommended the inclusion of Nepali in the Eighth Schedule.

There are other cases also, like those in

505 Const (Amend.) Bill (Amend. of Eighth schedule)

Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh where there are some sections of people who speak the Dogri language. Even, the honorable from Goa he was a Minister for ten years there has mentioned that they are also demanding the inclusion of Konkani language. so, my point is that the Government should come forward as quickly as possible with suitable legislation under the procedure laid down in Article 345 whichever is necessary to accept this. Only then the long pending demand can be fulfilled and the aspirations of the people can be met.

I would like to day that the people who speak a number of languages, are demanding to include those languages also in the Eighth Schedule. That should not come in the way of including Nepali and Manipuri languages because these two languages have to be considered definitely. Certainly these two languages should get priority.

Our country is now undergoing a great period of crisis. There are a number of problems. Languages, religious and regional feeling - these are all some of the very dangerous messages that go in the disintegration of this country. So, it is time for us to have are- thinking on all these.

I must also give a word of caution or a sense of my feeling to the Members of the BJP. Though Kashmir issue is not directly connected with this, I am very concerned about what is happening in Kashmir. Every group of people or every race should have a sense of belonging to this great nation. Article 370 is the only Clause under the Constitution which binds Kashmir with this great country. and if a message (Interruptions)

[Translation]

SHRI RAJENDRA AGNIHOTRI (Jhansi): Sir, the hon. Member may be asked to be relevant to the subject. Whatever he is saying is not relevant.

[English]

SHRI A. CHARLES: Mr. Chairman, Sir,

by Statt. 506 Dil Kumari Bhandari -

I am not yielding. the moment I say about Article 370, he is not all right.

As a dutiful citizen of this country, it is our duty to respect our Constitution. Through you, Sir, may I ask a question to them?

Have not they given a declaration that they are under the Constitution and stand by every Clause of the Constitution? How boldly enough can they say that Article 370 shall be scrapped? That will be the greatest injustice done to this great country. That will go under the root of the national integration. Their Ekta Yatra and Rath Yatra will not carry this country anywhere. Shri Advani is a dear friend of mine. that is another thing. I must tell him that this is a country where even the minorities should have a sense of belonging and we will have to be very careful in dealing with such sensitive issues.

I am happy that this Bill has been presented at the very right time. I would request the hon. Minister, who is in charge of Home Affairs, who is looking after-this matter to consider this.

Definitely the Minister will understand the feeling of both the House.

I think, the feeling is unanimous. And the Nepali and Manipuri languages should be given due to recognition they deserve. This is a long pending case.

I mentioned about Konkani. I mentioned about Dogri language. I have also mentioned about some other language also. It is the responsibility of the Government to constitute a Committee for amending the Constitution and within a time frame to bring forwards a suitable legislation fulfilling the aspirations of the minorities and long neglected people so that they may not feel that they are out of the mainstream.

I hope that at least now Madam Bhandari will understand the spirit with which we on this side are supporting the great cause for which she and her people are fighting. They are about 10 million people. That is not a small number. We have to accept their feeling.

I am sure that it this great step is undertaken, those ten million people -they are already in the mainstream and they have contributed so much in building up this country - will be in the forefront to see that

507 Const. (Amend.) Bill (Amend. of Eighth schedule)

[Sh. A. Charles]

this great country march towards the 21st centre as a great country, giving a lead to the whole world.

SHRI SYED SHAHABUDDIN (Kishanganj): Mr. Chairman, Sir, I rise to support the Bill submitted by the distinguished Member Shrimati Dil Kumari Bhandari.

I recall at this moment that the question of inclusion of additional languages in the Eighth Schedule has been raised in the Parliament in many ways - in Parliamentary Questions, in Statements and, of course, through Private Members Bills. There has been a stock reply from the Government which has lost its cutting edge today. It is no longer relevant. In fact, it was never convincing. The Government's argument always been well all languages are national languages. We want all languages to develop. But, the, all languages need not be in the eighth Schedule. It is this discrimination which has caused a political situation in the country to which - in relation to Manipur-the Leader of the Opposition was kind enough to draw our attention. The question of language is not just a question of language. It is not just a linguistic question; it is an emotional question; it is a sentimental question; it is a psychological question; it is a national question. For all of us the sweetest language is one in which our mother has sung us the lullabys. Our sweetest language is one in which we first spoke out, first articulated ourselves first a uttered a few words. There cannot be anything more personal than that. Therefore, if a citizen gets a feeling in a ploy linguistic a state like ours that his language is not being treated as an equal language is not being given its due, is not being recognised, this surel hurts him. We must as co-citizens appreciate that feeling, appreciate that sentiment and do everything possible, for us to remove that sting from his heart, and make his feel absolutely at ease, feel equal and assure him that he cannot be discriminated against. Today, we are at the threshold of a new age in the world what has been called the age of ethnicity and when you consider the ethnic

by Statt. Dil Kumari Shandari 508

identity of any social group more than anything else it is the language. Therefore, it is not surprising that all languages demand recognition, all linguistic groups demand equality at the bar of the nation.

I would like to remind you of the example of Canada. Canada saved itself from destruction, form disintegration by giving equal status to French.

I recall one moment, a very surprising moment in my diplomatic life. I was at a Conference which was being addressed by the Foreign Minister of Canada. When I suddenly realised that he was no longer speaking in English and found that he was speaking in French and then again he started speaking in English. At the end of the Conference, I went up to him to find a solution to this riddle. He told me that they had accepted by law that French and English are equal.

Therefore, in every public statement, in every official statement, the spoke one paragraph in English and the next paragraph in French. He alternated. This is the way nations are built. This is the way national unity is established. This is the way the national integration is reinforced not by in position, not by negligence, not by omission and not by disrespect to peoples' sentiments.

Ours is a multi-lingual State. We must also recognise that although linguists speak about a score of languages and hundred of directs, there are some developed languages - languages which are not dialects by strench of imagination, which have grammar, which have literature. And among them are languages which are spoken by a substantial number of people which from a very high percentage of population. At least within a some administrative unit or in some state,or in some districts of some States or even in some sub- districts of some districts of some States. But there are concentrations.

Here, I have got some data from the 1991 Linguistic Census. The languages which are presently included in Schedule VIII of the Constitution, cover roughly 95 per cent of the people. Five per cent of the total

509 Const (Amend.) Bill (Amend. of Eighth schedule)

population is not covered by those languages. But then substantial number in various States are not covered. For example , in Jammu and Kashmir, over 27% of the people are not covered by the languages which are today included in Schedule VIII. In Manipur, for example, 98 per cent of the people are not covered by our present Schedule VIII. In Meghalaya, 86 per cent of the people are not covered by our present dispensation. In Nagaland, 90.7 per cent of the people are not covered by the present list. In Sikkim, 93.65 percent of the people are not covered by our present arrangements. In Tripura, we have again 23 per cent. If you take small States, in Arunachal Pradesh, 83 per cent; in Goa, 58 percent; and in Mizoram, 91 per cent are not covered. In at least, eight States, a majority of the people are not covered by our present Schedule VIII Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Mizoram, and Dadra and Nagar Haveli, which, of course, is a very small Union Territory. The point I am making is this that if we take at least the States which are equal members of the Union, a majority of the population of those States do not find their languages duly respected and included in Schedule VIII of the Constitution. We have no right to console them by saying yes, we care for your language but we are not prepared to put it in Schedule VIII. My Counter question to the Government has always been that why not then abolish Schedule VIII.

SHRI CHITTA BASU: All languages are national languages.

SHRI SYED SHAHABUDDIN: All languages are national languages and, therefore,you should have a national criteria. The linguistic picture, it is a dynamic picture, it is a evolving situation. We can lay down certain criteria and we can say that any language which can meet those criteria shall be automatically included in Schedule VIII at the appropriate time, if not today, tomorrow. There may be other grievances. Today we are talking only about Manipuri and Nepali though I would like to emphasise that it is not just a question of Manipuri and Nepali alones in my view, there is also the question by Statt. 510 Dil Kumari Bhandari

of Konkani, there is also the question of Santhali which is recognised in Bihar-and which is a full-fledged language. It is also a question of Dogri, it is also a question of Maithili, it is also a question of Khasi and it is also a question of Rajasthani Mr. Lodha is not here, he had submitted a bill in that regard-and, it I may say so, because I come from that area, also of Bhojpuri. But I am not speaking of all other variants; but at least Bhojpuri, I must mention .

Now we can have a uniform criteria, as I said, whether it is not a dialect but a language, that books and journals are published in it, that it has a literature, that a substantial portion of the national population, say one per cent, declares that languages as its mother tongue, that the substantial population in a given State, say ten percent, recognise it as its mother tongue and as its household language. One per cent, of the nation and ten percent of the given State or UT. Or that in absolute numbers, the number is large enough, say, it exceeds one million, if it is recognised as a medium of instruction - as Nepali is - not only upto high School level but right upto highest university level, if it is recognised as a language to be taught not only at the primary school level but upto university level, if it is recognised for national awards by Sahitya Academy - which Nepali is, which Dogri is, which Konkani is, which Maithili is - if it is a language of the media in which you produce films, in which you publish newspapers, then such a language - which meets some of this criterion - must, of necessity, be recognised as an official language, by one or more States, if not for the whole State at least for a district and included-Once it is recognised as an official language by one State for the whole of the State or a part of the State it must then be automatically included in the VIII Schedule of the Constitution.

As far as the case of Nepali is concerned, I can not do better than what Madan Bhandari has already done. She had pleased her case extremely well. She has pointed out that it is one language in whose favour the Legislature of four States have passed legislations. I have, here, some figures. There are

511 Const. (Amend.) Bill (Amend. of Eighth schedule) [Sh. Syed Shahabuddin]

substantial pockets of Nepali speaking people in Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Arunchal Pradesh and Delhi. I am taking the figures of over 10,000.

There are, of course, two States where substantial - very substantial - number of people speak this language. As I said Sikkim has 94 per cent of the people speaking Nepali and it commands a majority at least in some districts of West Bengal. So, the case of Nepali has been made our extremely well. Every party, including the ruling party, supported the cause -of Nepali and of Manipuri in the last elections.

I would suggest that the Government could do no better today than adopt this Private Members Bill submitted by Madam Bhandari. Let that be accepted unanimously by the entire House. We would, of course, like to have a commitment from the Government that they would then consider the other pending claims of the other languages which meet the criteria that I had mentioned about and give them simelar senior treatment as soon as possible.

I want to say one word about the question of Nepali being a foreign language. I simply do not understand this logic. Nepali is not a foreign language. For one thing it is an Indo- Aryan language and secondly more than a million-and- a- half people in India declared Nepali as their mother tongue.

SHRI PETER G. MARBANIANG (Shillong): No, it is ten million people.

SHRI SYED SHAHABUDDIN: I am talking about 1981 census. I do not know about your frigures. I find that in at least one State in the Union the majority of the Nepalese- speaking people. In that sense, please permit me to say, I do. not even consider English a foreign language any more. There are people in India whose mother tongue is English. There are States in India which -for their own reasons, like Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland - have accepted English as their official language.

by statt. Dil Kumari Bhandari 512

All languages belong to man and in the case of human language, we cannot, sort of draw a line cuffing mankind across. For example, shall U.S.A. discard English because English language's original home is England? I just gave you the example of Canada which has embraced French. Therefore, I frankly feel that this is a very farfetched argument that Nepali is a foreign language. The word' Nepal' is there. Nepal is the name of another country. That is there. I agree. But Indian Nepals are Indian citizens. There are millions of them they live in India. Their mother tongue is Nepali. Therefore, we should have the grace of accepting with an open heart, Nepali as an Indian language as a national Language.

With these words, I fully support the Bill that has been submitted in the House for consideration. Thank you.

SHRI CHITTA BASU (Barasat): Sir, I rise to support the Bill of Shrimati Bhandari. In this connection I also like to remind the House that a similar Bill was also introduced by me in the other House of the Parliament and it was also discussed. But due to the position taken by the Government at that time, the Bill could not be translated or transformed into an Act.

Sir, the case of Nepali and Manipuri have been well established by speakers who produced me, and it is not necessary for me at this stage to further dialate upon that particular aspect which entitled these two great languages of India to be included in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution. But, Sir, taking advantage of this discussion I want to draw your attenti to some other important aspects of our Constitution. The provisions of the Constitution- regarding language is incorporated in Chapter XVII of our Constitution.

Articles 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, and 351, all relate to the language of our country. Unfortunately, Sir there is no mention about the rationale, or no provision is there in the Constitution in spite of the I act that a whole Chapter is there in relation to the languages of our country. There is no specific provision in the Constitution regarding the qualification of a 513 Const. (Amend.) Bill (Amend. of Eighth schedule)

language for inclusion in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution - which are the languages, why, under what rationale and under what reason a particular language will be in the Eighth Schedule and a particular language will not be part of the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution. This is the most relevent question because-of course, if you excuse me, Sir, I have got a letter from Mrs. Indira Gandhi dated August 16, 1980. She was kind enough to write to me regarding this Nepali language after my moving the Bill in that year. Here a major question was raised by her. She wanted me to delink the Nepali language from other languages which also aspire after inclusion in the Eighth Schedule. Her simple treatment was--I am criticising her, I am not criticising any body in that way. I knew she had a particular problem. The problem was of pick and choose which language she will choose and which language the will not choose. That was the concern for her, and she was right in expressing her concern. Sir, I am not reading out the letter. She said, 'The case of Nepali may be considered if it is delinked from other languages. That was the promise made in her letter ;as I have mentioned earlier. On the other hand, I am reminded that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru made his position regarding language a little more flexible. What did he say? He said, "The List of the language in the Eighth Schedule is not completely exhaustive.' That is the Eighth Schedule which contains 15 languages is not the last one. It may be extended, Many other languages may be included. It indicates that. Therefore, Sir, my submission to you is, and I support the contention made by Shri Shahabuddin that there should be SOME) constitutional provision or some kind of' mechanism by which we can measure the standard of the language to be included in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution. As a mater of fact, my feeling is every language is a national languages There cannot be a regional language; there cannot be a national language, because in the words of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, each language has its own history,, development, assimilation and expansion. Each language has its own vocabulary, pattern of expression, construction etc. with distinctive by Statt. 514 Dil Kumari Bhandari