Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale and Union agriculture minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan have literally stirred up a hornet’s nest when they recently advocated removing the terms “secular” and “socialist” from the Preamble of the constitution. Two expressions-’secular’ and ‘socialist’ and the word ‘integrity’ were inserted in the Preamble vide the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976. These amendments were made in 1976 during the emergency. Addressing a program on the 50th anniversary of the Emergency held at Dr Ambedkar International Centre, jointly organised by the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts (under the Ministry of Culture), Ambedkar International Centre, Hosabale said that during the Emergency, terms like “socialism” and “secular” were forcibly inserted into the Constitution – a move that needs to be reconsidered today. Congress was quick to react when its spokesperson Jairam Ramesh attacked the RSS, and accused the Sangh of “never accepting the Constitution”. He said “the RSS has never accepted the Constitution of India. It attacked Dr Ambedkar, Nehru, and others involved in its framing from Nov 30, 1949, onwards. In the RSS’s own words, the Constitution was not inspired by Manusmriti”. Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah cautioned that the call for the removal of the words “secular and socialist” must not be understood as a “casual remark” but a “longstanding agenda” to reshape the country’s democracy. Several BJP leaders and alliance party Shiv Sena however, came to defend the Hosable, reiterating their stand that secularism has been imported from the West and represents Western values and not Indian culture. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi claimed that the “mask” of the RSS has come off again. He said the constitution hurt the Sangh because it emphasizes equality, secularism and justice and accused both RSS-BJP of not wanting the Constitution but Manusmriti. The contention is regarding the words ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ both added in 1976 when parliament was in literal limbo during the emergency. It is ironic that these two words were added at a time when civil liberties and freedom of speech and action were put under shackles by the same party(Congress) under the cloak of emergency. The word ‘secular’ is an antithetical to the RSS/BJP ideology which seeks to create a Hindu rashtra and manusmriti. They are also not in favour of word ‘socialist’ since it promotes welfarism instead of capitalism. There may be as many opinions on the matter but suffice to say that the Supreme Court had already settled the case on two occasions. It may be recalled that, the Supreme Court of India in the 1994 case S. R. Bommai v. Union of India established the fact that India was secular since the formation of the republic. Even recently, the Supreme Court upheld the inclusion of “socialist” and “secular” in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution, dismissing petitions challenging the 42nd Amendment which incorporated these terms. The court affirmed that these values are integral to the Constitution’s basic structure and that the amendment was valid. While dismissing a PIL on the subject, the Supreme Court on November 25,2024 held that the word ‘socialism’, in the Indian context should not be interpreted as restricting the economic policies of an elected government. In the end, what matters most is the main soul of the constitution- freedom and liberty and fundamental rights- which a mandated government must protect and people themselves remain vigilant to strengthen democratic rights for all.
Tuesday, July 1, 2025