logo
No official Bharat Mata image, cannot be allowed in events: Kerala govt

No official Bharat Mata image, cannot be allowed in events: Kerala govt

The Left government in Kerala on Friday made it clear that it was not in agreement with the use of the Bharat Mata portrait at the Environment Day event at the Raj Bhavan here as the picture was not authorised as the official version by the Constitution or the Indian government.
Kerala Agriculture Minister P Prasad, who boycotted the event at the Raj Bhavan a day ago over the use of the portrait, said that those in constitutional offices cannot convert government programmes into political events.
A similar view was also expressed by state General Education Minister V Sivankutty who said that the Raj Bhavan and the Governor were above politics and said that Arlekar should withdraw from the stand taken by him.
The government's stand came a day after Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar asserted that there would be no compromise on Bharat Mata.
Prasad, while talking to a TV channel, said that no Bharat Mata portrait has ever been acknowledged as the official or authorised version by the Constitution or any of the governments in power since independence.
He further said that the portrait about to be used at the event was not carrying the Indian flag, but that of a political organisation, and therefore, it could not be honoured during a government event.
The minister said that the particular political organisation and the Governor were free to pay homage to the portrait at private events, but it cannot be done in state government programmes.
"We all have a political view, but those in constitutional positions have restrictions on how they express it," he added.
He said that the government view was that such a stand ought not to have been taken by a constitutional establishment and expressed hope that it will be corrected by the concerned persons.
"It actually should not be repeated in our country. We cannot accept it in Kerala," he added.
The minister also questioned why the Governor was "rigid" on the issue, when none of the earlier Governors in the state and not even the Presidents of the country have carried out such a practice in the past.
For the World Environment Day event, the Raj Bhavan came out with a minute-to-minute programme, but it initially did not have anything about paying floral tributes to the portrait of Bharat Mata, he said. On eve of the programme, a new schedule was sent to us and it included the paying of floral tribute to Bharat Mata portrait.
"So, I enquired with the Raj Bhavan about the floral tributes and asked them to send me a picture of the portrait. The portrait was the one used by the RSS and was not recognised or authorised as an official version, I informed the Raj Bhavan that we cannot offer floral tributes to it," he said.
The minister said that the Raj Bhavan in response said they cannot remove the portrait.
On being told that the opposition was criticising the lack of response on the issue by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, Prasad said that the Congress-led UDF was trying to gain political mileage out of it especially in view of the upcoming bypoll in Nilambur assembly constituency.
After knowing Raj Bhavan's stand, the state government relocated the event to the Secretariat's Durbar Hall and the Raj Bhavan went ahead with its programme.
Later, in a statement issued by the Raj Bhavan, the Governor said, "Whatever be the pressure, from whichever quarters, there will be no compromise whatsoever on Bharat Mata." In his speech at the Raj Bhavan programme, the Governor said two ministers--state Education Minister and Agriculture Minister--had agreed to attend the function but they did not turn up for the event.
While Sangh outfit Bharatiya Vichara Kendram strongly backed the Governor, the ruling CPI(M) and the Congress criticised the Raj Bhavan on the matter.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Himanta says drive to identify foreigners to be 'accelerated'; AAMSU protests 'harassment'
Himanta says drive to identify foreigners to be 'accelerated'; AAMSU protests 'harassment'

Hindustan Times

time35 minutes ago

  • Hindustan Times

Himanta says drive to identify foreigners to be 'accelerated'; AAMSU protests 'harassment'

Guwahati, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday asserted that the process of identifying illegal foreigners, which was "paused" due to NRC-related matters, will be accelerated, even as protests were witnessed in different parts of the state during Eid prayers on Saturday over "pushback" and "harassment" of minorities in the name of detecting illegal immigrants. Sarma maintained that the state government was looking into the details of an old law, which allows it to "push back" the declared infiltrators without having to mandatorily approach the judiciary. Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a programme in Nalbari, Sarma said that a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, had said that there is no legal requirement for the Assam government to always approach the judiciary in order to identify foreigners. "There exists an immigrants expel order, which is an old law. The Supreme Court has said that this law is in force and a deputy commissioner can give permission for immediate pushback under it," he maintained. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us and we too didn't know about it. The entire matter has come to light in the last few days. We will now discuss it further," he added. The chief minister said pushing back illegal migrants will continue, adding that the process of identifying foreigners, which had been paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be accelerated. "And when the identification of a foreigner happens, there will be no need to send the case to any tribunal. We will directly push them back. We have been preparing for it," he added. Sarma said the process of pushback will continue, though no person with a case pending before the court will be sent back. Meanwhile, members and supporters of the All Assam Minority Students' Union wore black badges and displayed placards against the purported recent pushback of Bangladeshis in the state. They carried out the protest in different parts, including Chirang and Jogighopa, after Eid namaz. AAMSU president Rejaul Karim Sarkar maintained that more intensified protests will be carried out if the government does not stop "harassment" of genuine citizens. "We have seen cases where the entire family is Indian but one member is taken away as an illegal foreigner. Such acts are against humanity. The government should stop harassment of genuine citizens, else we will carry out more agitations in a democratic manner," he said.

'Indira Gandhi Fixed Elections': BJP's Nishikant Dubey Cites 1975 Verdict To Hit Back At Rahul
'Indira Gandhi Fixed Elections': BJP's Nishikant Dubey Cites 1975 Verdict To Hit Back At Rahul

News18

time40 minutes ago

  • News18

'Indira Gandhi Fixed Elections': BJP's Nishikant Dubey Cites 1975 Verdict To Hit Back At Rahul

Last Updated: The 2024 Maharashtra Assembly Election resulted in a sweeping victory for the BJP-led Mahayuti alliance, which clinched 235 seats in a commanding performance. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Nishikant Dubey on Friday hit out at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, urging him to revisit the 1975 Allahabad High Court judgment that found then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi guilty of electoral malpractices. Dubey's remarks followed Rahul Gandhi's recent statement alleging that the BJP had undermined democratic processes by 'rigging" the 2024 Maharashtra election in its favour. 'Rahul Baba, how is the election fixed or stolen? Read the exploits of your grandmother, Indira Gandhi, which is the judgment of the Allahabad High Court," Dubey said in a post on X. राहुल बाबा इलेक्शन फ़िक्स या कैसे चुराया जाता है,अपने दादी इंदिरा गांधी जी का कारनामा पढ़िए जो इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट का जजमेंट है1. 1971 के चुनाव में सेना तथा उसके हेलीकॉप्टर का इस्तेमाल हुआ2. प्रधानमंत्री इंदिरा गांधी जी के चुनाव में शराब,कपड़ा खुले आम बाँटे गए3. हिंदू धर्म के… — Dr Nishikant Dubey (@nishikant_dubey) June 7, 2025 The Allahabad High Court, in its June 12, 1975 ruling, had found Indira Gandhi guilty of electoral misconduct and invalidated her election to the Lok Sabha from Rae Bareli. The verdict led to her disqualification and became a key trigger for the imposition of Emergency later that month. Dubey also criticised the Congress party's track record on democracy, adding, 'The army and its helicopters were used in the 1971 elections. Liquor and clothes were openly distributed during the election of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Ask for votes in the name of Hinduism. Voters were brought in vehicles. Money is distributed indiscriminately. Government employees engaged in an election campaign. You create the election drama, your family ruins the country, and you will not get the liberty to loot the elections anymore." On Saturday, Rahul Gandhi alleged that the Maharashtra assembly election held in November 2024 was 'rigged", and claimed that the same will be repeated in Bihar assembly polls due later this year. In a post on X, Gandhi shared his article published in a newspaper, explaining the 'rigging" in the Maharashtra assembly polls. 'Maharashtra assembly elections in 2024 were a blueprint for rigging democracy. My article shows how this happened, step by step," Gandhi said on X. The 2024 Maharashtra Assembly Election resulted in a sweeping victory for the BJP-led Mahayuti alliance, which clinched 235 seats in a commanding performance. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) solidified its dominance by emerging as the single-largest party, securing 132 seats. First Published:

‘Despite its flaws, the Collegium system preserves judicial independence,' says SC judge Justice Surya Kant
‘Despite its flaws, the Collegium system preserves judicial independence,' says SC judge Justice Surya Kant

Indian Express

time40 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

‘Despite its flaws, the Collegium system preserves judicial independence,' says SC judge Justice Surya Kant

Strongly defending the collegium system of judicial appointments, Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant said on Saturday that, 'despite its imperfections, it serves as a crucial institutional safeguard … preserving the Judiciary's autonomy.' Speaking at Seattle University on the topic 'The Quiet Sentinel: Courts, Democracy, and the Dialogue Across Borders,' Justice Kant noted that the collegium 'significantly limits interference by the Executive and Legislature, thereby preserving the Judiciary's autonomy and insulating judges from extraneous pressures that could otherwise compromise their impartiality.' He acknowledged that the system 'has been subject to sustained criticism—particularly regarding the opacity of its deliberative processes and the lack of publicly articulated criteria—but recent efforts by the Supreme Court signal a growing commitment to enhancing transparency and public confidence in it.' Referring to proactive judicial interventions that advance constitutional compassion, he asked in his June 4 address, 'How far can courts go in shaping policy?' and 'Is judicial creativity a virtue or a vice?' 'The answer, I believe, lies in intent and integrity. When courts act to empower the powerless, grounded in constitutional text and moral clarity, they do not usurp democracy—they deepen it,' he said. Justice Kant conceded that the judiciary 'has not remained impervious to criticism that at times it breaches the fine line between judicial activism and judicial overreach' and added that 'in recent years, there has been a discernible shift toward greater institutional self-restraint in select domains. The Court has increasingly sought to nudge rather than command, and to engage with other branches of government in efforts to increase dialogic remedies. This evolving balance reflects an awareness that judicial authority is most enduring when it is exercised with a sense of humility—when the Court is seen not as an omnipotent arbiter but as a co-traveller in the democratic journey, grounded in constitutional values.' He described the judiciary as 'the sentinel of constitutional morality' and said it 'has been instrumental in shaping this very democracy's moral spine.' Recalling past challenges, Justice Kant observed that 'the Indian judiciary, too, traversed periods of profound trial and transformation. Particularly during the Emergency, the Court grappled with serious challenges to its independence and, at times, exhibited troubling deference to executive power. Yet, this phase of institutional strain gave way to a renewed judicial consciousness.' He added that 'the judiciary's evolving relationship with its own independence lies at the very heart of how India's vast, pluralistic democracy continues to function with remarkable cohesion. It is not merely the existence of judicial independence that is noteworthy, but rather the degree and contours of that independence—how it is asserted, negotiated, and exercised—that renders the Indian experience particularly distinctive within the global constitutional landscape.' On the role of courts in a democracy, he said, 'constitutional democracy is … a system where majorities are checked, where minorities are protected, and where principles cannot be sacrificed at the altar of popularity,' and 'in such a system, courts cannot function as mere referees.' He stressed, 'in a democracy as vast and diverse as India's, it is only when the judiciary wears its power lightly, and its conscience visibly, that it can remain not only the last word, but also a trusted voice among many in our collective democratic journey.' 'Judiciary may not be the most visible arm of the state, it may not command battalions or shape budgets, but it performs a task more difficult: it keeps alive the promise of justice. In India, this task has often been thankless, occasionally triumphant, and always essential. The judiciary is not a saviour; it is a sentinel. It does not march. It watches. And when necessary, it speaks—not to please, but to preserve.' Earlier, during a visit to the Washington State Supreme Court's Temple of Justice in Olympia on June 3, Justice Kant highlighted the SC's defence of free speech rights, noting that 'pre-censorship and vague notions of public order cannot trump the right to free expression,' and adding, 'these are not merely legal precedents; they are constitutional declarations—that democracy without dissent is a contradiction, and that silence in the face of injustice is not neutrality, but complicity.' Drawing parallels between the Indian and American judiciaries, he said, 'in both countries, the Judiciary has consistently pushed back against the temptation to suppress dissent under misguided and deceptive notions that the Executive may hold … Both our systems were designed not to trust power blindly, but to restrain it.' At a fireside chat at Microsoft Corporation headquarters on June 6, Justice Kant touched on the rise of technology such as artificial intelligence in the judicial process. He said he was 'firmly convinced that any contemplation of AI must be guided by a deep moral compass. Shaping the future demands more than innovation—it calls for an unwavering adherence to foundational values. Transparency, equity, responsibility, and respect for human dignity must not be afterthoughts, but the pillars upon which all technological advancement rests.' He warned that 'technology, if left unchecked, can reflect and reinforce societal inequities. AI is not a perfect technology and it can perhaps never replace the human element that the entire Rawlsian theory of justice hinges on,' and added, 'technology must remain subordinate to our higher commitments to fairness, equity, and human dignity' and 'must adapt to the lived realities of the people it seeks to serve.' Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store