Latest news with #RamjiLalSuman
India.com
3 days ago
- Politics
- India.com
Ram Ji Lal Suman Controversy
Ramji Lal Suman's harsh words! New uproar begins! While giving a statement on Kalash Yatra, he said, 'They provide route for Kalash Yatra but want to stop Baba Sahib's Shobha Yatra.
The Print
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Print
No plans to drop ‘socialist' or ‘secular' from Constitution, govt tells Rajya Sabha
'Any discussions regarding amendments to the preamble would require thorough deliberation and broad consensus, but as of now, the government has not initiated any formal process to change these provisions,' Meghwal added. Responding to a question by Rajya Sabha MP Ramji Lal Suman, the Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal stated in a written reply on Thursday that 'the government's official stand is that there is no current plan or intention to reconsider or remove the words 'socialism' and secularism' from the preamble of the Constitution'. New Delhi: The Central government has no current plan or intention to reconsider or remove socialist or secular from the Constitution, nor have any proceedings been initiated for the same, government has informed the Rajya Sabha. The Union Minister mentioned that the Supreme Court has already affirmed the validity of 42nd Constitutional amendment in 1976, which inserted the words socialist and secular in the preamble. 'In November 2024, the Supreme Court of India in the case of Dr Balram Singh and others Vs Union of India and another's, the Court has also dismissed petitions challenging the 1976 amendment (42nd Constitutional Amendment), affirming that Parliament's power to amend the Constitution extends to the Preamble. The Court clarified that 'socialism' in the India context signifies a welfare state and does not impede private sector growth, while 'secularism' is integral in the Constitution's basic structure,' Meghwal said in the reply. He said that while certain office bearers of social organizations have expressed their opinions to remove the words to create public discourse, this has not changed the official stance of the government. Referring to the statements of office bearers of certain social organisations, he stated, 'Regarding the atmosphere created by office bearers of some social organisations, it is possible that certain groups are expressing opinions or advocating for reconsideration of these words. Such activities can create a public discourse or atmosphere around the issue, but do not necessarily reflect the official stance or actions of the government,' he added. In June earlier, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale had said that terms like 'Socialism' and 'Secularism' were forcibly inserted into the Constitution — a move that needs to be reconsidered. The RSS leader was 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), where he said that the Emergency imposed on the country on June 25, 1975 was the 'biggest blow to Indian democracy.' The comments were later criticised by several Opposition leaders. This report is auto generated from the Reuters news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content. Also Read: The Preamble won't be changed back to the original. Here's why
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
‘No move to drop secular, socialist from Preamble'
The government has not initiated any formal legal or constitutional process to remove the words 'socialist' and 'secular' from the Preamble of the Constitution, the Union law and justice ministry informed Parliament on Thursday. Responding to a question by Rajya Sabha MP Ramji Lal Suman, Union minister of state (independent charge) for law and justice Arjun Ram Meghwal said that no formal decision or proposal has been made on the matter. The remarks come amid ongoing calls by some public figures and BJP leaders to revisit the inclusion of the two terms, added during the Emergency in 1976. (PTI) Meghwal acknowledged the 2024 Supreme Court observation that socialism reflects India's welfare state status and secularism forms part of the Constitution's basic structure. He underlined the difference between public discourse and official policy, stating, 'Regarding the atmosphere created by office bearers of some social organisations, it is possible that certain groups are expressing opinions or advocating for reconsideration of these words… but this does not necessarily reflect the official stance or actions of the government.' The remarks come amid ongoing calls by some public figures and BJP leaders to revisit the inclusion of the two terms, added during the Emergency in 1976. Former Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar called the insertion a 'betrayal' of the Constitution's original vision. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma echoed similar sentiment. And Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale said a debate should be held on the relevance of the two terms. 'During the Emergency, the country had no functioning Parliament, no rights, no judiciary and yet these two words were added,' he said at an event in Delhi on June Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan also criticised the terms as not being a reflection of India's cultural values. The remarks sparked sharp political pushback. 'The Constitution irks them because it speaks of equality, secularism and justice,' Rahul Gandhi said on X. Jairam Ramesh accused the BJP and RSS of pushing for a new Constitution, despite electoral rejection of such ideas. '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,' he said. Meghwal concluded in his response that any amendment to the Preamble would require broad consensus, and that no such process is currently underway. 'Any discussions regarding amendments to the preamble would require thorough deliberation and broad consensus, but as of now, the government has not initiated any formal process to change these provisions.'
NDTV
5 days ago
- Politics
- NDTV
India's Actions Were Measured, Non-Escalatory: Centre On Op Sindoor
New Delhi: Operation Sindoor was launched in response to a "barbaric" attack by "Pakistan-sponsored terrorists", and the action focussed on dismantling terror infrastructure and neutralising terrorists likely to be sent across to India, the government said on Thursday. In a written response to a query in the Rajya Sabha, Minister of State for External Affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh also said India's actions were "focussed, measured and non-escalatory". The Ministry of External Affairs was asked whether it is a fact that Operation Sindoor was "announced under international pressure", and the "factual position" in this regard. Rajya Sabha MP Ramji Lal Suman also asked about the impact of "sudden announcement of ceasefire in Operation Sindoor" on the morale of the Indian forces which were "achieving significant success", but suddenly "declaring ceasefire was against their morale and the sentiments of the people of the country". Union Minister said Operation Sindoor was launched to respond to a "barbaric cross-border terror attack by Pakistan-sponsored terrorists. It focussed on dismantling terrorist infrastructure and neutralising terrorists likely to be sent across to India". Pakistan, however, attempted targeting Indian civilian areas, in addition to some military facilities, he said. "These provocations and escalatory actions by Pakistan were met with a strong and decisive response from the Indian armed forces, inflicting significant damage on the Pakistani military. Subsequently, on 10 May 2025, the Director General of Military Operations of Pakistan approached his Indian counterpart to request cessation of firing and military activities, which was agreed to later that day," the MoS said. Under Operation Sindoor, India had decimated nine terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) on May 7 in pre-dawn precision strikes. It was carried out to avenge the April 22 Pahalgam terror strike. In a separate query, the MEA was also asked whether the ministry had taken efforts to "alienate" Pakistan in the world forum. As part of the UN Security Council's routine annual process, the Chairs and Vice-Chairs of its subsidiary bodies and committees are selected from amongst its permanent and elected non-permanent members. In addition to Russia and France, Pakistan has been selected as one of the Vice-Chairs of the UN Counter Terrorism Committee for 2025, Singh said. It may be noted that India was the Chair of the UN Counter Terrorism Committee in 2022. Similarly, India was also the Chair of the same committee during its 2011-12 term, the MoS added. "The Government of India has been sensitising all concerned interlocutors on the menace of cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistan. Due to India's persistent efforts, the global community has a greater understanding of India's concerns on cross-border terrorism," he said. India's efforts over the years have led to the listing of several Pakistan-based terrorists and terrorist entities under the UNSC 1267 Sanctions Committee and the FATF (Financial Action Task Force) "grey listing of Pakistan", the minister said. The UNSC press statement in the aftermath of the Pahalgam attack also "strongly condemned" the terror attack and acknowledged the need to hold the perpetrators, organisers, sponsors and financiers of the attack accountable, he said. Several world leaders have recognised and supported India's actions to combat terrorism following the Pahalgam attack. Most recently, the US has designated The Resistance Front (TRF), a proxy of the Pakistan-based terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation and a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, he said. In a separate query, the MEA was asked whether the government has "formally raised concerns" with the US regarding continued military aid and arms supplies to Pakistan, which could be "misused against India"; and whether India has taken "diplomatic steps" to counter "growing China–Pakistan military cooperation, particularly in PoK". Mr Singh, in his written response, said the government of India "closely monitors" all military and security-related developments in its neighbourhood and regularly takes up "our concerns in this regard in interactions with our partners at appropriate levels". "India has consistently conveyed its concerns in this regard to the United States, with a view to ensuring that these developments do not compromise India's security or regional stability," he said. It has been India's consistent and principled position that the entire Union Territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh "are, have been, and will always remain an integral and inalienable part of India". The government closely monitors all developments that have a bearing on India's national interest and takes timely and necessary steps to safeguard its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security interests, the MoS said. "Counter-terrorism remains a vital pillar of the India-US comprehensive global strategic partnership. India and the United States maintain a robust institutional framework for cooperation, including a dedicated Counter-Terrorism Dialogue mechanism that meets regularly. "Both sides collaborate closely on terrorist designations at domestic and international forums, and extend mutual legal assistance, including on extradition matters," he added.
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
‘No move to drop secular, socialist from Preamble': Govt amid calls to revisit inclusion of terms
The government has not initiated any formal legal or constitutional process to remove the words 'socialist' and 'secular' from the Preamble of the Constitution, the Union law and justice ministry informed Parliament on Thursday. Union Minister Meghwal acknowledged the 2024 Supreme Court observation that socialism reflects India's welfare state status and secularism forms part of the Constitution's basic structure. Responding to a question by Rajya Sabha MP Ramji Lal Suman, Union minister of state (independent charge) for law and justice Arjun Ram Meghwal said that no formal decision or proposal has been made on the matter. Meghwal acknowledged the 2024 Supreme Court observation that socialism reflects India's welfare state status and secularism forms part of the Constitution's basic structure. He underlined the difference between public discourse and official policy, stating, 'Regarding the atmosphere created by office bearers of some social organisations, it is possible that certain groups are expressing opinions or advocating for reconsideration of these words… but this does not necessarily reflect the official stance or actions of the government.' The remarks come amid ongoing calls by some public figures and BJP leaders to revisit the inclusion of the two terms, added during the Emergency in 1976. Former Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar called the insertion a 'betrayal' of the Constitution's original vision. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma echoed similar sentiment. And Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale said a debate should be held on the relevance of the two terms. 'During the Emergency, the country had no functioning Parliament, no rights, no judiciary and yet these two words were added,' he said at an event in Delhi on June 26. Union Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan also criticised the terms as not being a reflection of India's cultural values. The remarks sparked sharp political pushback. 'The Constitution irks them because it speaks of equality, secularism and justice,' Rahul Gandhi said on X. Jairam Ramesh accused the BJP and RSS of pushing for a new Constitution, despite electoral rejection of such ideas. '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,' he said. Meghwal concluded in his response that any amendment to the Preamble would require broad consensus, and that no such process is currently underway. 'Any discussions regarding amendments to the preamble would require thorough deliberation and broad consensus, but as of now, the government has not initiated any formal process to change these provisions.'
