"Why socialism, secularism terms not in original draft?" Shaina NC backs RSS demand to Preamble amendments
Mumbai (Maharashtra) [India], June 27 (ANI): Shiv Sena leader Shaina NC on Friday said she 'supports' the remarks of RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale on the Constitution and said that the leader's demand to re-examine the original draft prepared by Dr BR Ambedkar stems from the view that in a republic like India, invoking terms such as 'socialist or pseudo-secular' is no longer necessary.
Speaking to ANI, Shiv Sena leader Shaina NC said, 'We support the RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale on this matter. Because if you see the preamble of the Indian constitution, we see that before 1975-76, there was no mention of the words 'socialist and secular.' As Congress declared an emergency on June 25, 1975, Indira Gandhi inserted the words 'socialist and secular' in the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in the preamble.'
'The RSS is demanding to look into the original draft of the preamble by Dr BR Ambedkar, in which there is no mention of these words. And the socialism, secularism, that is actually a symbol of India or a symbol of civilisational ethos, then why was it not in the original draft?' Shaina NC questioned.
Adding further, she said, 'This demand of Hosabale is in the context that India is now a republic and to use socialist secular or pseudo-secular words is unnecessary.'
This came after RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale questioned the legitimacy of including the terms 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution on Thursday.
Dattatreya Hosabale had earlier stated that the Emergency imposed in the country on June 25, 1975, was the 'biggest blow to Indian democracy.'
Hosabale made the remarks while 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.
He remarked that during the Emergency, terms like 'Socialism' and 'Secularism' were forcibly inserted into the Constitution -- a move that needs to be reconsidered today.
He emphasised that the Emergency wasn't just a misuse of power, but an attempt to crush civil liberties. Millions were imprisoned and freedom of the press was suppressed.
He said that those who imposed the Emergency and trampled the Constitution and democracy have never apologised. If they cannot apologise personally, they should do so on behalf of their ancestors. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
9 minutes ago
- Hans India
RSS mask comes off; it wants ‘Manusmriti': Rahul
Demanding an apology from the Congress for imposing the Emergency, he said, 'Those who did such things are today moving around with the Constitution's copy. They have still not apologised. Your ancestors did it. You must apologise for this to the country,' he said in his remarks aimed at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. Recalling the days of the Emergency, the RSS leader said while thousands of people were put in jail and tortured during that period, freedom of the judiciary and media was also curtailed. 'The days of the Emergency also witnessed large-scale forced sterilisation,' Hosabale added. Speaking to a news agency on Friday, Shiv Sena leader Shaina NC backed the RSS leader's remarks, stating: 'He is absolutely right. The words 'socialist' and 'secular' were not part of the original Preamble of the Constitution drafted by BR Ambedkar. These were added during the Emergency in 1975, when then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi introduced the 42nd Constitutional Amendment. This raises a question—why highlight only these two terms when India is already a sovereign, democratic republic?' She added that the Congress should apologise for the Emergency era amendments, saying: 'Shiv Sena demands that the Congress party apologise publicly for the Emergency. These terms were not in the original draft, and they should be removed.' On the other hand, Congress leader Tariq Anwar condemned Hosabale's remarks, saying: 'There's a clear scent of communalism in his statement. India is secular by nature and by history. The Constitution guarantees the right to equality, the right to vote, and the right to practice one's religion. As for socialism, it aims to reduce inequality. We are striving to create a just society, and the term 'socialism' symbolises that effort.' RJD leader Shakti Singh Yadav also slammed the RSS, accusing it of repeatedly attempting to undermine the Constitution's foundational principles. 'The RSS has always wanted to change the Constitution. The BJP is merely the political face of the RSS, and after coming to power, they are trying to implement the RSS's ideology. Narendra Modi is not just the Prime Minister of India; he represents the RSS's mission. Their agenda to remove socialism and secularism will not be accepted by the people.'
Indian Express
17 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Express View on Sensex closing at a 84,059 high: For now, a reprieve
This week has ended on a note of economic optimism, with the Sensex closing at 84,059, its highest level since October 1. The rupee has recovered to 85.5 to the US dollar, after having slid to below 86.9 on June 19. Brent crude prices, too, have softened to about $67 a barrel, after soaring to $79-plus at the start of the week. And the southwest monsoon has revived, with all-India average rainfall during June 1-27 being 10.3 per cent higher than the historical normal for this period. That's a turnaround from the situation till June 15, when cumulative rainfall was 31 per cent below normal and 30 out of the country's 36 meteorological subdivisions had registered deficits in excess of 15 per cent. That deficiency is now largely confined to Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Marathwada-Vidarbha, Chhattisgarh, Bihar and the Northeast region. To be sure, these optimistic cues are less about genuinely positive expectations of the future than relief over the worst apparently being put behind. The ceasefire between Iran and Israel since October 24 was preceded, only a day before, by the former launching missiles at a US air base in Qatar and threatening to block the Strait of Hormuz — through which a fifth of the world's oil and a third of its liquefied natural gas flow. Those tensions have ebbed, for now. So have the uncertainties from the tariff war that US President Donald Trump unleashed in early April; they have seen some de-escalation with his administration claiming to have signed a truce deal with China. There has been a pause on the implementation of Trump's so-called reciprocal tariffs on other countries, including India, as well. But that three-month deadline ends on July 9. Simply put, there is only a temporary reprieve from the trade policy and geopolitical strains that may come back to haunt the global economy. India must keep the focus on the medium term. That would mean ensuring macroeconomic stability (the best defence against short-term global financial market and commodity price volatility, linked to geopolitical events) and ease-of-doing-business reforms to leverage its strengths (favourable demographics, a large consumer base and a potential alternative for investors looking at a China-plus-one strategy of diversifying their manufacturing and supply chains). The Indian economy has so far demonstrated relative resilience, recording the highest growth among the world's major countries amid elevated global uncertainty. But India has to do well relative to not just the world, but to the aspirations of its young population and workforce — both current and those entering over the next couple of decades. Navigating short-run geopolitical uncertainty may be easier than meeting challenges and seizing opportunities beyond the immediate term.
Indian Express
17 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Delhi's lose-lose foreign policy approach with Israel and Palestine
There is perhaps no image more heartbreaking than that of Palestinian children longing for the beloved Parle G biscuits that have nourished generations of Indian children. In the rubble-strewn streets of Gaza, these most affordable Indian biscuits have become precious commodities, their exorbitant costs placing them beyond the reach of parents struggling to provide even basic sustenance for their children. This painful reality serves as a stark reminder of our shared humanity and our duty to protect children everywhere. If one has to decide between guns and children, one must always choose children. No matter whose guns, no matter whose children. Yet India's abstention on June 12 from a UN ceasefire resolution in the context of the Israel-Hamas conflict, titled Protection of Civilians and Upholding Legal and Humanitarian Obligations, marks a betrayal of our historical solidarity with the Palestinian cause. As I have written before, the relationship between India and Palestine was built on shared experiences of colonial subjugation and anti-imperial struggle. Mahatma Gandhi's words from 1938 remain as relevant today as they were then: 'Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs.' Jawaharlal Nehru was equally clear when he declared, 'Palestine is essentially an Arab country and must remain so.' For decades after Independence, India stood firmly with Palestine, recognising the Palestinian state early and consistently supporting their right to self-determination at international forums. This solidarity reflected India's broader leadership of the Global South in the post-Independence era, where we confidently and strongly championed the causes of decolonisation, self-determination, and justice for oppressed peoples worldwide. Our foreign policy was anchored in moral principles that transcended narrow strategic calculations, earning us respect and leadership among newly independent nations. India's stance on Palestine was emblematic of this principled approach as we consistently chose to stand with the dispossessed against powerful oppressors, regardless of their military or economic might. Contemporary India's foreign policy has become increasingly opportunistic rather than principled, marking a dramatic shift from our foundational ethos. This transactional approach, evident in our abstentions on the two recent Palestine-related resolutions, reflects what I have analysed in an earlier article ('Dear people of Palestine', IE, June 17, 2021) as the actions of a government which believes 'that an electoral majority is a licence to trample over anything, including history'. While pursuing perceived strategic advantages through closer ties with Israel, India has neither secured the opportunities it seeks nor maintained its moral leadership. The irony is quite stark. This unexplainable stance has left us diplomatically isolated on crucial global issues, contradicting the very 'vasudhaiva kutumbakam' philosophy we claim to uphold. Strong moral leadership itself constitutes a powerful diplomatic tool that India has historically wielded with great effect. Nations accumulate moral capital by standing on the right side of history. This capital is the crux of soft power and international influence. Mahatma Gandhi's non-violent resistance and India's anti-colonial struggle inspired liberation movements worldwide, giving India a moral authority that extended far beyond our economic or military capabilities. By abandoning this moral foundation, we have weakened our own diplomatic heft, trading long-term influence for immediate and cynical gains that may or may not materialise. It fundamentally does not serve India's interests to align with Israel, which in its current shape and form under the incumbent leadership can only be described as a morally corrupt and warmongering state. While Israel may appear powerful, it remains essentially an American client state, dependent on US military aid and diplomatic protection. India's growing alignment with Israel risks reducing us to an ally of a client state, a position that contradicts our aspirations for strategic autonomy. Moreover, global public opinion is overwhelmingly arrayed against the Zionist project and its ongoing occupation. Despite the media spin by political elites, the occupation of Palestine and what has been variously termed 'apartheid' and 'incremental genocide' deeply resonates with the moral conscience of citizens worldwide, making India's stance increasingly untenable. The international law implications of India's stance are equally troubling. By abstaining from resolutions condemning clear violations of international humanitarian law, India effectively becomes complicit in what reputed international human rights organisations have characterised as systematic oppression. This position undermines India's own claims to champion international law and multilateralism. India's alignment with Israel also jeopardises our relationship with Iran, a crucial ally in the region. Iran's steadfast support for Palestine represents a core element of its regional strategy. As India deepens its ties with Israel while abandoning Palestinian solidarity, we risk alienating Iran and other nations that view the Palestinian cause as a litmus test for moral consistency in international relations. This diplomatic calculus seems particularly shortsighted given Iran's strategic importance for India's energy security and regional connectivity. The recent Madleen flotilla effort and the global people's march to Gaza demonstrate the remarkable resolve and bravery of ordinary citizens challenging the status quo when their governments fail them. These grassroots initiatives remind us that moral leadership often emerges from below when those in power abdicate their responsibilities. As I have written to our Palestinian friends, 'Let me assure you that the civilisational ethos of India is far more powerful than any regime which believes that they can erase and rewrite memory and history.' When Palestinian children dream of simple Parle G biscuits, we are reminded that our choices have consequences that extend far beyond diplomatic halls. We owe help and support to every child who has ever reached for a biscuit and found only empty shelves, who has ever looked to India with hope and found only silence. The writer is Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha), Rashtriya Janata Dal
