RSS pitches for removal of terms socialist, secular from Preamble
New Delhi: A fresh controversy erupted on Friday after Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale called for a review of the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution.
The remarks, made at an event in Delhi late Thursday night, drew support from Shiv Sena while Congress and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) criticised it on Friday. Hosabale, speaking at the Ambedkar International Centre, made a strong pitch to consider whether the words socialist and secular, which were added to the Preamble by the Congress government during the Emergency, should remain.
He further said: "The words 'socialist' and 'secular' were added to the Preamble during the Emergency. No attempt was made to remove them later. There should be a discussion on whether they should remain. I say this in a building named after Babasaheb Ambedkar, whose original Constitution did not include these terms in the Preamble."
"The days of the Emergency also witnessed large-scale forced sterilisation," Hosabale added.
Hosabale's remarks came after the BJP-led Central government on Wednesday observed June 25 as the 'Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas', marking the 50th anniversary of the imposition of the Emergency.
On Wednesday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi described the imposition of the Emergency as one of the darkest chapters in India's democratic history, saying the Congress not only violated the spirit of the Constitution but placed "democracy under arrest".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
21 minutes ago
- India Gazette
"Such incidents are happening again and again...govt has a significant role in this": Father of RG Kar Medical College victim on gang rape in law college
North 24 Parganas (West Bengal) [India], June 28 (ANI): Nearly a year after the horrific RG Kar Medical College and Hospital rape and murder case that jolted Kolkata, another gang rape of a student at a law college in South Kolkata has once again raised concern over safety of women in the City of Joy. The father of the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital rape and murder victim spoke out against the alleged gangrape case in Kolkata's law college, expressing his frustration and disappointment with the recurring incidents of violence. He accused the government of having a significant role to play in preventing such incidents and that the accused should be severely punished. He said, 'Such incidents are happening again and again. After what happened with my daughter, many people came out on the streets in protest. Even after that, such incidents continue to occur. People inside the college are committing such incidents. The government has a significant role in this, which is why all these incidents are happening. All three people arrested are from the TMC, so this political party should ensure that such incidents do not happen again. The accused should be severely punished.' BJP West Bengal in a post on X alleged that the full form of TMC was Terror, Molester and Corruption. Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Shashi Panja on Friday expressed her distress over the gang rape of the student. Addressing a press conference, Shashi Panja said, 'There was an immediate postmortem and dissection to look at the names and the religion. You have to condemn the incident. You are now trying to show photographs. Trinamool Congress Student wing is not teaching the students to rape. The police took immediate action, and within 12 hours of the complaint, three people were caught. They are in custody, and the investigation is on. Their mobile phones have been seized, and the victim's statement has been taken. She has named the accused. It has been taken seriously. The BJP cannot even think the way Kolkata police swung into action. They started maligning since such swift action is missing in the BJP-ruled states. If they want to be in Bengal as a responsible Opposition, then they have to behave responsibly.' A female student was allegedly gang-raped inside a law college in Kolkata's Kasba on Wednesday evening. The police have arrested all three accused within 24 hours. The three accused, named as Monojit Mishra (31), Zaib Ahmed (19), and Pramit Mukhopadhyay (20), were former students or staff members of the same law college. According to the police, the accused named in the FIR will be produced before the A.C.J.M. of Alipore, South 24 Parganas, with a prayer to remand them to Police Custody for the purpose of a proper investigation into the case. The alleged sexual assault took place between 7:30 pm and 10:50 pm on Wednesday within the law college premises. According to the official, one of the accused allegedly committed sexual assault, while the others were involved in the crime. The victim's family filed a police complaint against the accused, and the police have taken swift action in the matter. Two of the accused, Monojit Mishra and Zaib Ahmed, were arrested on Thursday, near Siddhartha Shankar Roy Sishu Udyan, close to Talbagan Crossing in Kolkata. Pramit Mukhopadhyay was arrested later the same night at his residence. The police have seized the mobile phones of all three accused. The official had visited the site and kept it under protection till they had done a forensic examination. They requested custody remand for further investigation. (ANI)
India Gazette
21 minutes ago
- India Gazette
MP: Case filed against Cong chief Jitendra Patwari for allegedly bribing villager to allege being fed human excreta
Ashoknagar (Madhya Pradesh) [India], June 28 (ANI): Madhya Pradesh Police, on Saturday, filed a case against state Congress President Jitendra Patwari for bribing a villager to make false allegations about being fed human excreta, Superintendent of Police (SP) Vineet Kumar Jain said. According to police, Jitendra (Jitu) Patwari asked villager Gajraj Lodhi to make allegations against Mungaoli village Sarpanch. SP Vineet Kumar Jain told ANI, 'Yesterday, Gajraj Lodhi met the collector of Ashoknagar personally and handed him an affidavit stating that some Congress leaders took him to Orchha, where he met Jitu Patwari. Jitu Patwari told him to allege about being fed faeces (by Mungaoli village sarpanch) and bribed him for it.' He added that the police found the allegations to be false and registered a case against the Congress leader. 'Later, he said that the allegations about this were false, and he made this allegation on Jitu Patwari's demand... Based on this, a case has been filed against Jitu Patwari and his aids under various sections of BNS,' SP Kumar said. Earlier on Wednesday, Patwari shared an X post, where he made the above allegations and said that the accused were supporters of BJP leader Brijendra Yadav. Addressing to Prime Minister Narendra Modi he wrote, 'Prime Minister Ji, @BJP4MP The jungle rule of power is crossing the limits of anarchy! A youth from the Lodhi community had 'human excrement' stuffed in his mouth just because he asked for a 'ration slip'! It is alleged that since the accused are supporters of @BJP4India MLA Brijendra Yadav, that's why @DGP_MP and @CMMadhyaPradesh are not allowing any action to be taken?' Referring to a previous incident of a man urinating on a tribal youth, he questioned law and order in Madhya Pradesh. 'In this same Madhya Pradesh, a shameful incident of urinating on the head of a tribal youth has already taken place! Why does #BJP consider Dalits, backward classes, and tribals as its enemies in Madhya Pradesh? The law and order in Madhya Pradesh have completely collapsed, yet @DrMohanYadav51 remains the Home Minister with arrogance! Meanwhile, the people of Madhya Pradesh now want freedom from this jungle rule,' the X post further read. (ANI)
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
Birthright citizenship case: US Supreme Court limits nationwide injunctions – what it means for immigrants
The US Supreme Court has curtailed the power of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions, clearing the way for President Donald Trump's controversial order to end birthright citizenship to take effect in over half the country. The ruling does not address whether the order is constitutional but allows it to be enforced in 28 states that had not challenged it, while keeping it temporarily blocked in 22 Democratic-led states. Immigrant rights groups have warned the decision could result in stateless newborns and a chaotic patchwork of laws across the US. The 6–3 decision came in response to President Donald Trump's controversial executive order ending birthright citizenship for children born to undocumented or temporary visa holders on US soil. The ruling was immediately hailed by Trump as a 'monumental victory for the Constitution,' while immigrant rights groups and Democratic leaders voiced concern that it could lead to a patchwork of legal standards across the country and leave some newborns stateless. 'By denying lower courts the ability to enforce that right uniformly, the Court has invited chaos, inequality, and fear,' said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Free P2,000 GCash eGift UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo Although the policy remains blocked in 22 Democratic-led states that sued to stop the order, the Supreme Court imposed a 30-day delay before it can take effect in the rest of the country. That window gives immigrant rights groups time to regroup and possibly file new challenges as class-action lawsuits. But with the door now open for selective enforcement, immigration advocates warn that confusion and legal uncertainty could have devastating consequences for vulnerable families. What Is Birthright Citizenship? Birthright citizenship is a constitutional right enshrined in the 14th Amendment, ratified after the Civil War to ensure citizenship for formerly enslaved people. It states, 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.' The principle was reinforced in the landmark 1898 Supreme Court case *United States v. Wong Kim Ark*, where the court ruled that a man born in the US to Chinese parents was a citizen, regardless of his parents' immigration status. Since then, birthright citizenship has been a cornerstone of US constitutional law. Exceptions have been extremely limited, such as children born to foreign diplomats. Trump's order seeks to broaden those exceptions dramatically. Trump's executive order and the legal backlash Signed in January, Trump's executive order attempts to end automatic citizenship for babies born to undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders. He has described the policy as a 'magnet for illegal immigration,' arguing that the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' in the 14th Amendment justifies excluding these children from citizenship. Lower federal courts, however, repeatedly blocked the order from taking effect. 'This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,' said US District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle. In Maryland, Judge Deborah Boardman wrote that 'the Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected and no court in the country has ever endorsed' Trump's view of the 14th Amendment. Despite these rulings, the Supreme Court declined to weigh in on the constitutionality of the order itself, focusing instead on the scope of the injunctions issued by the lower courts. The Supreme Court's ruling: what it changes The court's conservative majority, led by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, ruled that federal district judges do not have the authority to block a presidential policy nationwide. 'Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch,' Barrett wrote. The decision sends the current challenges back to the lower courts, instructing them to narrow their injunctions to only cover plaintiffs with standing in the 22 states that sued. In the remaining 28 states — including Arkansas, Mississippi, and Texas — Trump's order could go into effect after the 30-day delay. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the dissent, called the decision 'nothing less than an open invitation for the government to bypass the constitution.' What comes next for immigrants? Immigrant rights groups are already adjusting their legal strategies, preparing class-action lawsuits in states like Maryland and New Hampshire. However, legal experts warn that such efforts face numerous procedural hurdles. 'It's not the case that a class action is a sort of easy, breezy way of getting around this problem,' said Suzette Malveaux, a law professor at Washington and Lee University. The immediate concern is for babies born during the transition period. In the 28 states where the order may soon apply, children born to undocumented or temporary residents may be denied citizenship, risking statelessness and potential deportation. Sotomayor urged the lower courts to 'act swiftly' in adjudicating new challenges to the executive order, while Trump indicated he would move quickly on a broader slate of policies that had previously been blocked by nationwide injunctions. 'This morning, the Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law,' Trump declared at the White House, flanked by Attorney General Pam Bondi. 'We can now promptly proceed with numerous policies, including birthright citizenship.'
