THE CONGRESS AND NON-CO-OPERATION

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Gandhian Scholar

Gandhi Research Foundation, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09415777229, 094055338

E-mail- [e-mail];[e-mail]

 

 

 

THE CONGRESS AND NON-CO-OPERATION

 

 

 The Hon’ble Pundit Malaviyaji, for whom I entertain the highest regard and whom I have so often described as dharmatma, has appealed to me both publicly and privately to suspend non-cooperation till the Congress has pronounced upon it. The Mahratta has also done likewise. These appeals have made me pause and think, but I regret to say that I have not been able to respond to them. I would do much and give much to please Panditji. I am anxious to receive his approbation and blessing for all my actions. But a higher duty requires me not to turn from the course mapped out by the Non-cooperation Committee. There are moments in your life when you must act, even though you cannot carry your best friends with you. The “still small voice” within you must always be the final arbiter when there is a conflict of duty. The reason for asking me to suspend action is that the Congress will presently meet and consider the whole question of non-cooperation and give its verdict. It would therefore be better says Panditji to await the Congress decision. In my humble opinion it is no Congressman’s duty to consult the Congress before taking an action in a matter in which he has no doubts. To do otherwise may mean stagnation. The Congress is after all the mouthpiece of the nation.

And when one has a policy or a programme which one would like to see adopted, but on which one wants to cultivate public opinion, one naturally asks the Congress to discuss it and form an opinion. But when one has an unshakable faith in a particular policy or action, it would be folly to wait for the Congress pronouncement. On the contrary one must act and demonstrate its efficacy so as to command acceptance by the nation. My loyalty to the Congress requires me to carry out its policy when it is not contrary to my conscience. If I am in a minority I may not pursue my policy in the name of the Congress. The decision of the Congress on any given question therefore does not mean that it prevents a Congressman from any action to the contrary, but if he acts, he does so at his own risk and with the knowledge that the Congress is not with him. Every Congressman, every public body has the right, it is sometimes their duty, to express their own opinion, act upon it even and thus anticipate the verdict of the Congress. Indeed it is the best way of serving the nation. By initiating well-thought-out policies, we furnish data for a great deliberative body like the Congress to enable it to form a well-informed opinion. The Congress cannot express national opinion with any definiteness, unless at least some of us have already firm views about a particular course of conduct. If all suspended their opinion, the Congress must necessarily suspend its own. There are always three classes of people in an institution: Those who have favourable views on a given policy, those who have fixed but unfavorable views on it and those who hold no fixed views.

The Congress decides for this third and large group. I hold fixed views on non-co-operation. I believe that if we are to make anything of the reforms we will have to create a pure, clean and elevating atmosphere instead of the present foetid, unclean and debasing atmosphere to work them in. I believe that our first duty is to compel justice from the Imperial Government in regard to the khilafat and the Punjab. In both these matters injustice is being sustained by untruth and insolence. I therefore consider it to be the duty of the nation to purge the Government of the uncleanliness before they can co-operate with each other. Even opposition or obstruction is possible where there is mutual respect and confidence. At the present moment the governing authority has no respect for us or our feelings. We have no faith in it. In these circumstances co-operation is a crime. Holding these strong views I can serve the Congress and the country only by reducing them to practice and thus affording to the Congress material for forming an opinion. For me to suspend non-co-operation would be to prove untrue to the Mussulman brethren.

They have their own religious duty to perform. Their religious sentiment has been deeply hurt by a total disregard of laws of justice and their own promises by British ministers. The Mussulmans must take action now. They cannot await the Congress decision. They can only expect the Congress to ratify their action and share their sorrows and their burdens. Their action cannot be delayed till the Congress has decided on a policy nor can their course be altered by an adverse decision of the Congress unless their action is otherwise found to be an error. The khilafat is a matter of conscience with them. And in matters of conscience the Law of Majority has no place.