Argument: We must follow the policy of peace and non-violence because Gandhiji used to practice it. 

Statements:
I. Our culture and religious beliefs require us to follow and practise the principle of non-violence.
II. The practices and ideologies of our political leaders need not necessarily reflect the best course of action for us. 
III. Non-violence is our constitutional obligation.

Which of the following best reflects the relationship between the given statements and the argument?

Let's analyze each of the statements in relation to the argument that we must follow the policy of peace and non-violence because Gandhiji used to practice it:

Statement I reinforces the argument by suggesting that the principle of non-violence is deeply rooted in our culture and religious beliefs, providing additional support for following this policy.

Statement II weakens the argument because it suggests that just because Gandhiji practised non-violence doesn't automatically make it the best course of action for everyone - it introduces the idea that political leaders' actions may not always be the best guidance for individual behaviour.

Statement III strengthens the argument by indicating that non-violence is not just a personal choice but a legal obligation as well; it implies that adhering to non-violence is not only a moral or cultural imperative but also a legal one.

Thus, Statements I and III strengthen the argument, while Statement II weakens it. Only Option A presents a correct representation.