Socialist-secular debate: ‘Dattatreya Hosabale seeks regression, not reform'
Socialism, too, is not an alien transplant. It means social justice. It means the state must look after the weak. It means wealth cannot be the only source of power. Ambedkar didn't oppose the idea. He only warned against locking in an economic model. But the Directive Principles say enough: reduce inequality, ensure fair wages, protect the dignity of labour. These are socialist values, Indian in spirit.Hosabale says the amendment came during dark times. True. But a bad moment doesn't make every act bad. Courts didn't strike down that part of the amendment. Even the Janata government, which reversed much of the Emergency's excesses, retained those words, and Atal Bihari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani, as important ministers in that government, raised no objection to the continuation of those words.The Supreme Court has settled this. In Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala (1973), secularism was enumerated among the Constitution's basic features. In S.R. Bommai vs Union of India (1994), the court said secularism is part of the Constitution's basic features. These are not footnotes. These are judgments of large constitution benches.You cannot amend the basic structure. You cannot touch the foundation without breaking the house. Parliament is powerful, but not absolute. Hosabale's demand is not about semantics. It is about reshaping the state. It is about shifting India from a secular republic to a majoritarian democracy. That's not just a constitutional problem. It's a national one.advertisementIndia is not one colour, one language, one faith. It is a complex, layered society. Secularism is how we manage that diversity. Not by denial. But by respect and neutrality. You don't need the word 'secular' to act secular. But once you drop the word, you make space for its opposite. That is the risk. Words matter. That's why the RSS wants to drop them. To clear the path for something else. They want a Hindu Rashtra, not a secular republic. Let us not pretend otherwise. This is not about constitutional clarity. It's about political ambition. The Preamble is not a draft. It is a declaration. It says who we are. It says what we aspire to be. We may not always live up to it. But we do not give up on it or allow our national covenant to be rewritten by those who never believed in its words to begin with.—The author is a senior advocate at the Supreme CourtadvertisementSubscribe to India Today Magazine- EndsMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Daily subject-wise quiz: Polity and Governance MCQs on panchayat elections, Article 356 of the Constitution and more (Week 121)
UPSC Essentials brings to you its initiative of daily subject-wise quizzes. These quizzes are designed to help you revise some of the most important topics from the static part of the syllabus. Attempt today's subject quiz on Polity and Governance to check your progress. 🚨 Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for July 2025. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at With reference to article 356 of the Constitution, consider the following statements: 1. According to the provisions of Article 356, the President's Rule in a state can be imposed for one month at a time. 2. It empowers the President to withdraw only legislative powers and not the executive powers and financial powers of any state. 3. Article 356 was inspired by the Government of India Act of 1909. How many of the above statements are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None Explanation — The Union Home Minister moved a resolution in Rajya Sabha to extend the President's Rule in Manipur for another six months. Article 356 of the Indian Constitution contains provisions for the imposition of 'President's Rule' in a state, removing an elected government. — Article 356 was inspired by Section 93 of the Government of India Act of 1935. Hence, statement 3 is not correct. — Article 356 empowers the President to withdraw executive and legislative powers of any state 'if he is satisfied that a situation has arisen in which the government of the state cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution'. Hence, statement 2 is not correct. — According to the provisions of Article 356, the President's Rule in a state can be imposed for six months at a time for a maximum duration of three years. Every six months, Parliamentary approval to impose President's Rule will be required again. Hence, statement 1 is not correct. Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer. Consider the following statements: 1. The Chairman or Speaker, or person acting as such, shall not vote in the first instance, but shall have and exercise a casting vote in the case of an equality of votes. 2. The quorum to constitute a meeting of either House of Parliament shall be one-fifth of the total number of members of the House. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 Explanation — The Chairman or Speaker, or person acting as such, shall not vote in the first instance, but shall have and exercise a casting vote in the case of an equality of votes. Hence, statement 1 is correct. — Either House of Parliament has the authority to act despite any vacancy in its membership, and any proceedings in Parliament are valid even if it is later discovered that someone who was not entitled to do so sat, voted, or otherwise participated in the proceedings. — Until Parliament by law otherwise provides, the quorum to constitute a meeting of either House of Parliament shall be one-tenth of the total number of members of the House. Hence, statement 2 is not correct. — If at any time during a meeting of a House there is no quorum, it shall be the duty of the Chairman or Speaker, or person acting as such, either to adjourn the House or to suspend the meeting until there is a quorum. Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer. (Source: Constitution of India) With reference to the panchayat elections, consider the following statements: 1. All the seats in a Panchayat shall be filled by persons chosen by indirect election. 2. The ratio between the population of the territorial area of a Panchayat at any level and the number of seats in such Panchayat to be filled by election varies throughout the state. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 Explanation — There shall be constituted in every State, Panchayats at the village, intermediate and district levels. — Panchayats at the intermediate level may not be constituted in a State having a population not exceeding twenty lakhs. — The ratio of the population of a Panchayat's territorial area at whatever level to the number of seats to be filled by election shall, to the greatest extent possible, remain same throughout the State. Hence, statement 2 is not correct. — All seats in a Panchayat shall be filled by people elected directly from territorial constituencies in the Panchayat area. Hence, statement 1 is not correct. Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer. (Other Source: Constitution of India) Consider the following statements about the Ninth Schedule: 1. The schedule became part of the Constitution by the Twenty-Seventh Amendment. 2. It contains a list of central and state laws that cannot be challenged in court on the violation of fundamental rights. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 Explanation — The Ninth Schedule contains a list of central and state laws which cannot be challenged in court. Currently, 284 such laws are shielded from judicial review. — Most of the laws protected under the Schedule concern agriculture/land issues. — The Schedule became a part of the Constitution in 1951 when the document was amended for the first time. Hence, statement 1 is not correct. — It was created by the new Article 31B, which along with 31A was brought in by the government to protect laws related to agrarian reform and for abolishing the Zamindari system. While A. 31A extends protection to 'classes' of laws, A. 31B shields specific laws or enactments. — The First Amendment added 13 laws to the Schedule. Subsequent amendments in 1955, 1964, 1971, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1984, 1990, 1994, and 1999 have taken the number of protected laws to 284. — When the Tamil Nadu law was challenged in 2007 (I R Coelho v State of Tamil Nadu), the Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous nine-judge verdict that while laws placed under Ninth Schedule cannot be challenged on the grounds of violation of fundamental rights, they can be challenged on the ground of violating the basic structure of the Constitution. Hence, statement 2 is correct. Therefore, option (b) is the correct answer. With reference to the preamble, consider the following statements: 1. The ideals behind the preamble were first laid down in the Objectives Resolution. 2. The preamble is 'non-justiciable'. 3. The 42nd Amendment to the Constitution replaced the words 'sovereign democratic republic' with 'sovereign socialist secular democratic republic'. How many of the statements given above are correct? (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three (d) None Explanation — A preamble serves as an introduction to a document and contains its basic principles and goals. — When the Indian Constitution was being drafted, the ideals behind the preamble were first laid down in the Objectives Resolution, adopted by the Constituent Assembly in 1947. Hence, statement 1 is correct. — Additionally, the violation of any principle mentioned in the preamble cannot be a reason to go to court, meaning the preamble is 'non-justiciable' — however, judgments of courts can cite it as an additional factor in their reasoning, given that it constitutes the spirit of the Constitution. Hence, statement 2 is correct. — The 42nd Amendment to the Constitution, passed in 1976 when the Emergency was in place, replaced the words 'sovereign democratic republic' with 'sovereign socialist secular democratic republic'. Hence, statement 3 is correct. — The amendment also changed 'unity of the nation' to 'unity and integrity of the nation'. Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer. Daily Subject-wise quiz — History, Culture, and Social Issues (Week 119) Daily subject-wise quiz — Polity and Governance (Week 120) Daily subject-wise quiz — Science and Technology (Week 120) Daily subject-wise quiz — Economy (Week 120) Daily subject-wise quiz — Environment and Geography (Week 120) Daily subject-wise quiz – International Relations (Week 120) Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
Tej dares RJD to act against MLA
Patna: Former minister Tej Pratap Yadav , elder son of Lalu Prasad, on Tuesday challenged the RJD leadership to take action against its MLA Bhai Birendra over a viral audio clip in which he is allegedly heard threatening a govt official. "I was expelled from the RJD under a conspiracy by betrayers. But will the RJD show similar strictness against Bhai Birendra?" Tej Pratap asked in a post on social media. Accusing the party of double standards, he said, "Respect for the Constitution must be reflected in action, not in speeches." He alleged that Bhai Birendra had made derogatory remarks against members of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (SC/ST) community and even issued death threats to the official over the phone. The controversy erupted after Bhai Birendra, an RJD MLA, allegedly used abusive language in a telephonic conversation with a panchayat secretary. Although the MLA has since expressed regret for his remarks, he denied making any casteist slurs during the exchange. Tej Pratap, who was expelled from the RJD two months ago, is said to have been angered by what he sees as selective disciplinary action. His expulsion followed a social media post in which he disclosed his relationship with a young woman, prompting the RJD chief to suspend him from the party for six years. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Bulk buying rush at Mannings! 40+ men hair changed KAMINOWA Learn More Undo In a recent sign of widening rifts within the Yadav family, Tej Pratap unfollowed several of his sisters on the social media platform X, just ahead of the Rakshabandhan festival. This public move has further fuelled speculation of internal discord. According to those close to him, Tej Pratap is considering contesting as an Independent candidate from Mahua, the assembly seat in Vaishali district that he won in 2015. In 2020, he shifted to Hasanpur in Samastipur district. Mahua is currently represented by RJD MLA Mukesh Kumar Raushan, who has been actively cultivating his constituency over the past five years. If Tej Pratap enters the electoral fray from Mahua, it could lead to a split in the vote share, potentially clearing the path for a third contender to emerge victorious, political observers said.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Kerala CM Pinarayi says nuns' arrest reveals Sangh Parivar's true anti-Christian character
Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan said the arrest of two Keralite nuns on 'trumped-up' charges of human trafficking and forced conversion has let slip the Sangh Parivar's true anti-minority character. In a statement here, Mr. Vijayan said the local Bajrang Dal activists were responsible for the wrongful detention and subsequent incarceration of the sisters. He said the supporters of the perpetrators of the atrocities against Christians had no compunction in calling on Bishops' palaces in Kerala with cakes and smiles. Mr. Vijayan said he had written to Prime Minister Modi seeking justice for the nuns immediately after their arrests. Mr. Vijayan said the Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh, a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader, had defended the arrests and endorsed the charges of human trafficking and coerced conversion. Mr. Vijayan urged civil society to close ranks against the Sangh Parivar, which has obstinately sought to undermine secularism and negate the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
