Congress strongly reacted to RSS leader’s call for a debate on removing ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ from the Constitution’s Preamble, calling it an attack on India’s democratic foundation. The Supreme Court has already declared these values as core principles of the Constitution.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a new political clash, the Congress party has attacked Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) after its senior leader raised questions over keeping the words “secular” and “socialist” in the Indian Constitution’s Preamble. This move has again sparked a big national debate over what India stands for.
RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale said on Thursday that there should be a “debate” on whether the two words should stay in the Constitution or not. He pointed out that these words were added later, in 1976, during the Emergency period, through the 42nd Amendment, and were not part of the original Constitution.
Many critics believe these additions are controversial because they were done at a time when the Congress government, led by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, had declared an Emergency. During this time, civil rights were limited, and Parliament’s normal work was affected. Because of this, people question the legitimacy of the amendment.
Reacting sharply, Congress party’s communication chief Jairam Ramesh posted on X this morning. He attacked the RSS, saying the organization has “never” accepted the Indian Constitution and has always criticized its key makers like Dr. BR Ambedkar and Jawaharlal Nehru.
He further alleged that there was a “deliberate assault on soul of the Constitution” and a “long-standing conspiracy to dismantle” the idea of India that Dr. Ambedkar had imagined – one that is just, fair, inclusive, and democratic.
Jairam Ramesh also recalled how the RSS once said that the Constitution was not based on the old Hindu law book Manusmriti. He said,
“In the RSS’s own words, the Constitution was not inspired by Manusmriti”
which contains many rules criticized for being unfair to women and lower castes.
He also said:
“The RSS and BJP have repeatedly given the call for a new Constitution. This was (Prime Minister Narendra) Modi’s campaign cry during the 2024 Lok Sabha election. The people decisively rejected this cry… yet demands for changing the basic structure of the Constitution continue…”
In a sarcastic tone, Ramesh added-
“The Chief Justice of India himself delivered a judgment on November 25, 2024, on the issue now being raised by the leading RSS functionary. Would it be asking too much to request him to take the trouble to read it?”
This was in reference to a Supreme Court ruling led by then-Chief Justice Sanjiv Kumar, which strongly defended both the terms ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ as part of India’s constitutional values. The judgement reminded everyone that key past decisions by the court, like the Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and SR Bommai (1994) cases, had already said “secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution”.
The ruling also discussed the RC Poudyal (1994) case. It said that even though the word ‘secular’ was added later, its meaning was already part of the Constitution, as it shows India’s-
“Commitment to treat persons of all faiths equally and without discrimination.”
The judgment also said that even the original text of the Preamble supported secular values. It spoke about-
“Equality of status and opportunity… individual dignity – read alongside justice – social, economic, political and liberty; of thought, expression, belief, faith… reflect this secular ethos”.
Regarding the word ‘socialist’, the court said its meaning should not be limited to any one economic system. Instead, “socialist” denotes the State’s commitment to be a Welfare state… ensuring equality of opportunity and social justice.
The court further explained that-
“In the Indian framework, socialism embodies the principle of economic and social justice, wherein the State ensures no citizen is disadvantaged due to economic or social circumstances. The word ‘socialism’ reflects the goal of economic and social upliftment…”
The court also mentioned that these legal petitions started only in 2020 — “forty-four years after the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ became integral to the Preamble”, making the demand to change them “particularly questionable.”
Lastly, the court said-
“… these terms have achieved widespread acceptance, with their meanings understood by ‘We, the people of India’ without any semblance of doubt,” and added that these words “have not restricted or impeded legislations or policies pursued by elected governments…”
BACKGROUND OF THE CLASH
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale said that the inclusion of the words ‘secularism’ and ‘socialism’ in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution should be reconsidered, as these were not part of the original Constitution written by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
Mr. Hosabale was speaking at an event that marked 50 years since the Emergency (1975), where he also criticized the Congress party, asking it to apologise to the country for what he called a “Draconian Act of Indira Gandhi”.
He spoke about the “several injustices” committed during the Emergency by the then Congress-led government. He said that more than one lakh people were jailed, including 250 journalists, and that fundamental rights were badly violated.
He also said the government forced sterilisation on more than 60 lakh people, which was one of the most extreme and harmful steps taken during that time.
Talking about what happened to the Constitution during the Emergency, Mr. Hosabale raised questions on the ideological additions made.
He asked:
“Freedom of judiciary was also curtailed… but one more thing. Two words — that are, secularism and socialism — were added in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution during the Emergency. These two words were not there in the Preamble before. Preamble is eternal to the nation, but are the views and values of socialism, in terms of ideology, eternal for India?”
He said that the word ‘secularism’ was not there in the original Constitution:
“Yes, the ideas of secularism may have existed, they may have been part of governance and state policy — that’s a different matter. But should these two words remain in the Preamble? This is something that deserves a review.”
Mr. Hosabale reminded people that many parts of the Constitution were added later and were not written by Ambedkar.
He stated:
“Because I know — and I’m saying this while standing in the building named after Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, the architect of our Constitution — that these words were not included by him. These words were added during the Emergency when citizens’ rights were suspended, when Parliament was ineffective, when the judiciary was crippled. At that time, this was inserted.”
Without naming anyone, he also took a jab at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, saying that it was his ancestors who had damaged the Constitution during the Emergency, but now he tries to defend the Constitution by waving copies of it in Parliament:
“It was his ancestors who had shattered the Constitution, but now he protests in the Parliament with copies of the same Constitution in his hand.”
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Indira Gandhi’s Emergency
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Preamble
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
