Simon Commission (1927)
Background & Appointment
- The Government of India Act, 1919 included a provision for appointing a commission after 10 years to evaluate constitutional progress and suggest reforms.
- The British Government, under Stanley Baldwin’s Conservative Ministry, set up the Indian Statutory Commission (Simon Commission) on November 8, 1927—two years earlier than scheduled.
- Reason for early appointment: The Conservatives feared losing power to the Labour Party, which might take a different approach to India's constitutional reforms.
- Composition: All seven members were British, with Sir John Simon as the chairman.
- Objective: Assess the working of 1919 Act and recommend whether India was ready for further reforms.
What was the Simon Commission?
- It was a British-appointed commission to review India's governance and suggest reforms.
- Formed 2 years early (in 1927 instead of 1929) because the Conservative government feared losing power to the Labour Party.
- Members: 7 British members, no Indians included.
- Chairman: Sir John Simon.
- Purpose: To study the working of the 1919 Government of India Act and recommend future steps.
Factors Leading to Simon Commission
Several parliamentary reports indicated that the 1919 Act had failed:
- Lee Commission (1923): Highlighted failure to recruit adequate British officers in administration.
- Mudiman Commission (1924-25): Identified a deadlock within the dyarchy system (division of powers between elected and non-elected members in provincial governments).
- Linlithgow Commission (1925-26): Examined agricultural crises in India.
- Lord Birkenhead’s Challenge (1925-27): The Secretary of State for India often criticized Indian leaders for not formulating a concrete constitutional proposal.
Indian Response to the Simon Commission
1. Political Opposition & Boycott
- Congress: At its Madras session (1927), presided by M.A. Ansari, the Congress resolved to boycott the Simon Commission at all levels.
- Jawaharlal Nehru: Managed to pass a resolution declaring complete independence as the Congress’ ultimate goal.
2. Support and Opposition from Different Groups
-
Supported Boycott:
- Liberals from Hindu Mahasabha.
- Muslim League (Jinnah’s faction)—session at Calcutta (1927) supported the boycott.
-
Opposed Boycott:
- Muslim League (Mohammad Shafi’s faction)—session at Lahore (1927) supported the government.
- Unionists in Punjab & Justice Party in the South—chose to cooperate.
-
Ambedkar’s Role:
- The Bombay Legislative Council nominated Dr. B.R. Ambedkar to work with the Commission.
- He submitted a memorandum on behalf of Bahishkrit Hitakarini Sabha, advocating:
- Universal Adult Franchise
- Provincial Autonomy
- Dyarchy at the Centre
- Social Rights for Depressed Classes
Public Protests and Reactions
- The Commission arrived in Bombay on February 3, 1928.
- A nationwide hartal (strike) was observed, with black flag demonstrations and slogans of “Simon Go Back”.
- Youth movements actively participated, especially through organizations like:
- Punjab Naujawan Bharat Sabha
- Hindustani Seva Dal (Karnataka)
- Workers’ and Peasants’ Parties
- Key leaders who emerged: Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhas Chandra Bose became symbols of the radical youth movement.
Police Repression & Lala Lajpat Rai’s Death
- Severe police crackdown: Many leaders, including Jawaharlal Nehru and Govind Ballabh Pant, were beaten.
- Lala Lajpat Rai (Lahore, October 30, 1928):
- Led a peaceful protest against Simon Commission.
- Brutally lathi-charged by police under James A. Scott.
- Succumbed to injuries on November 17, 1928.
- His famous words:
“The blows that fell on me today are the last nails in the coffin of British imperialism.”
- This incident motivated Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, and Sukhdev to assassinate J.P. Saunders (mistaken identity for Scott).
Impact of the Simon Commission
1. Strengthened Radical Movements
- The boycott movement created a strong anti-British sentiment and encouraged a shift towards complete independence.
- Younger leaders like Nehru and Bose took center stage, advocating socialist reforms.
2. Led to the Nehru Report (1928)
- The challenge of Lord Birkenhead prompted Indians to formulate their own constitutional proposal.
- Motilal Nehru Report (1928) became the first comprehensive Indian-drafted constitutional framework.
Recommendations of Simon Commission (1930 Report)
- Abolition of Dyarchy: Provinces should have fully responsible governments.
- Provincial Autonomy: Provinces should have autonomous, representative governments.
- Governor’s Discretionary Powers:
- Retain control over internal security.
- Protect minorities and communities.
- Expansion of Provincial Legislatures: More elected members should be included.
- No Responsible Government at the Centre:
- Governor-General to retain complete power.
- Government of India to have full control over High Courts.
- Separate Communal Electorates:
- Retained for Muslims, Sikhs, Anglo-Indians.
- Extended to other communities (till communal tensions subsided).
- No Universal Franchise: Denied universal adult suffrage.
- Federation Proposal:
- Federalism accepted in principle but suggested a Consultative Council of Greater India for future implementation.
- Separate Legislatures for NWFP & Baluchistan: Recommended local representation at the Centre.
- Sindh to be Separated from Bombay.
- Burma to be Separated from India: It was considered not a natural part of India.
- Indianisation of Army: Increase Indian recruitment but retain British forces.
Criticism & Failure of Simon Commission
- Absence of Indian Members: Indians saw it as insulting and undemocratic.
- No Immediate Federalism: Disappointed Indian political aspirations.
- No Universal Franchise: Ignored growing demands for democratic representation.
- Retaining Communal Electorates: Deepened communal divisions.
- No Responsible Government at the Centre: The Governor-General’s absolute power was unacceptable.
- Redundant by 1930: Events like the Nehru Report (1928), Lahore Resolution (1929), and Civil Disobedience Movement (1930) had overtaken its importance.
Conclusion
- The Simon Commission deepened nationalist fervor and accelerated the demand for Purna Swaraj (Complete Independence).
- It failed to address Indian political aspirations, but its rejection unified various political factions for a common cause.
- The Congress’s reaction to Simon Commission paved the way for mass movements, leading to the Civil Disobedience Movement (1930).
- Its recommendations were partially incorporated in the Government of India Act, 1935, but by then, India had moved further towards complete independence.
This comprehensive note covers Prelims and Mains aspects, ensuring key points are included with proper context. Let me know if you need any modifications! 🚀
