On 19th November 1948 at the Constituent Assembly, Mr. Mahboob Ali Beg Sahib [Madras General] spoke as follows;
“The question of Directive Principles of State Policy should be examined from two pint of view i.e., Democratic Principle and secondly Enforceability of those Principles. With regard to the first, to know that in the Preamble to the Constitution a Democratic Republic or State is envisaged and is a body of the Constitution – the type of Democracy, which is commonly known as Parliamentary Democracy is embodied. And the Executive, which is embodied in the Constitution, what is termed the Parliamentary Executive, which comes into power on account of the majority of the particular party having been elected by the electorate; and the Executive is responsible to the people through the Parliament. Therefore, inevitably there would be parties in the Country, which seek election to Parliament and these political parties have different and distinctive ideas, ideals, ideology and programme and principles. Sometimes they are so different that they can be called antagonize; and it is on the merits of the Principles or Programme of particular party that the electorate return them to Parliament. And when a particular party is returned in a majority and is entitled to form the Government, the people and the electorate have got a right to expect the implementation of those programmes and principles. That is what is meant by Parliamentary Democracy as is obtained in the United Kingdom, and it is sought to be embodied in the Constitution. Now the question is, in these circumstances, what is the place of these Directive Principles of State Policy in the Parliamentary Democracy in which Executive is made responsible to the Parliament, which has been chosen and elected on the merits of the Principles and Programme laid down by that parties? That is the most important thing for us to consider we can conceive of cases where a party, which has been returned by the people has programmed and Principles which are contrary to the Principles that are laid down in this Chapter. Recently, we know that in the British Parliament, the Conservative have moved for rejection of Nationalization of Iron and Steel. Yesterday, we heard there was an uproar. It was no doubt defeated by Labour Government. That clearly shows that political parties have different and distinctive Programme and it is on their merit that the parties are returned to Parliament in the Parliamentary Democracy. What is the position envisaged and embodied in this Constitution, what is the place of these Directive Principles in it? They have obviously no place. It is undemocratic opposed to Parliamentary Democracy, which is envisaged here. Is it the process of these Principles to bind and tied out the political parties in the Country to a certain Programme and Principles laid down in this? Surely not; that will not be Democracy for at least Democracy of the time i.e. envisaged here, namely, Parliamentary Democracy, which is responsible to the people. Therefore my submission is that these Principles are out of place and contrary to the Principles of Parliamentary Democracy.”
The true nature, the shape of Parliamentary Democracy, has been brilliantly expounded and explained in this Speech.