Political Tensions Rise Over Constitutional Preamble Amendments
RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale has said that the words 'socialist' and 'secular' added to the preamble of the Constitution should be reviewed. He says that these words were not a part of the original preamble of the Constitution and were later added by the 42nd amendment in 1976 during Indira Gandhi's emergency. These were added when the fundamental rights were taken away, Parliament was stalled and the judiciary was paralyzed. Congress has criticized his statement and said that the mask of RSS has come off again and they want Manusmriti, not Ambedkar's Constitution. But is there really an attempt to change the Constitution? What Hosabale said was a trial blow, released to know the reaction of the people?
The top leaders of BJP are silent but Union Minister Jitendra Singh has clearly said that BJP supports the removal of 'secular' and 'socialist' from the preamble of the Constitution. Shivraj Singh Chauhan has also said that there should be a consideration on removing these two words from the Constitution. But what Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar said after that raises grave concerns about the direction in which the country is being pushed? His Excellency says, “The Preamble of the Constitution is very sacred. But secularism and socialism were added to it…this was such a change that gives rise to an existential crisis. These words are canker sores. They will create turmoil…this is an unholy disrespect to the soul of Sanatan”. The Vice President has the right to express his views but one word hurts, canker sore! Does the Vice President of the country really understand that secularism and socialism are canker sores? These have been going on for 50 years, what turmoil has they caused? And if these are removed, will all the problems of the country, roti, kapda, makaan, inflation, employment, China-Pakistan etc. be solved?
The Emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi will always be a blot on the country. To save her chair and to protect her son Sanjay Gandhi, who had started thinking of himself as above the government, she turned the country into a prison. 1.2 lakh people were jailed. Freedom of expression, freedom of the press were all taken away. Newspapers were censored and 250 journalists were arrested, including Lala Jagat Narayan and Ramesh ji. When Pratap and Veer Pratap started leaving blank space, the censor did not allow that either. Many newspapers resisted but many surrendered, on which Lal Krishna Advani's sarcasm is famous till date that "when they were asked to bend, they thought it better to crawl".
Interestingly, while RSS workers were the backbone of the JP movement, Sangh chief Bala Saheb Deoras had different views. He wrote letters of praise to Indira Gandhi from jail. When this too did not succeed, he wrote a letter to Vinoba Bhave, “I request you to try to remove the wrong impression about the Sangh from the mind of the Prime Minister so that the ban on the Sangh can be lifted and the workers can be released from jail…and can contribute to progress under the leadership of the Prime Minister”. That is, the then Sangh chief was ready to accept the leadership of Indira Gandhi during the Emergency. He also had no problem with ‘socialism’ or ‘secularism’. Senior journalist Neerja Chaudhary has told this entire incident in her book How Prime Ministers Decide. Abhishek Chaudhary confirms this in his book Vajpayee The Ascent of the Hindu Right, “Deoras had written two letters each to both the Prime Minister and the Home Minister from Pune’s Yerwada Jail…in which he requested that the ban on the Sangh be lifted and offered the services of his organization to the government”. As Jyotsna Mohan and I write in our book Pratap: A Defiant Newspaper, “It is overlooked that this was an unpleasant chapter not just for the Congress but also for the RSS.”
Why did Indira Gandhi impose the Emergency? In 1971, she had created Bangladesh by dividing Pakistan into two parts. Her popularity was at its peak, so much so that Atal Bihari Vajpayee had called her an incarnation of Durga. But after that, crisis after crisis came. The cost of war, famine and oil crisis had made life difficult for the people. Former Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral, who was the Information and Broadcasting Minister at the time and was removed at the behest of Sanjay Gandhi, had said, “Indira Gandhi was not able to understand how to deal with the rising wave of discontent.” Jayaprakash Narayan started a movement across the country on the lines of Ramdhari Singh Dinkar’s poem, Singhasan Khaali Karo Ki Janata Aati Hai. It was Indira Gandhi's misfortune that at that time Justice Jagmohanlal Sinha of Allahabad High Court cancelled her election from Rae Bareilly on the charges of electoral malpractice. This decision was given on 12 June 1975. Indira Gandhi came under the influence of her younger son Sanjay and thirteen days later on 25 June, Emergency was imposed in the country.
Just as the Emergency was suddenly imposed, it was also suddenly lifted and elections were announced. Why was it done so suddenly when legally the Lok Sabha had fifteen months left? Sanjay Gandhi was completely against holding elections but Indira had made up her mind to hold elections. Neerja Chaudhary writes in her book, “Sanjay's growing power and unpopularity, her own weakening authority, international opinion, internal pressure, her own restlessness… she decided that it was better to hold elections”. Historian Gyan Prakash writes, “Indira Gandhi wanted legitimacy of her rule and she thought that elections would legitimize her rule”.
I personally believe that she also had in her mind that she was the daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru and she was destroying the family legacy. Elections were held and she lost badly. The country's first non-Congress government was formed. Both Indira and Sanjay lost. But the leaders of the Janata Party could not handle the situation. The government started tottering due to their egos. Elections were called and Indira Gandhi came to power again in 1980, just three years after imposing emergency.
The relationship of RSS with the constitution is also noteworthy. When the constitution was accepted, Sangh chief Golwalkar refused to accept it. His complaint was that nothing was taken from Manusmriti in it. He wanted a Hindu nation. Golwalkar called it a bundle of western ideas. But later the Sangh compromised with it, but some distance remained which is evident from the statement of Dattatreya Hosabale. It is true that the two words added to the preamble were added during the emergency when the country was a prison. But the people of the country have accepted them. The Janata Party government also removed many things from the 42nd amendment but did not touch these two words. Last year the Supreme Court also said that these two words have received general acceptance and 'we the people of India' clearly understand their meaning. They are valid. In its landmark decision in the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973, the Supreme Court had said that 'secularism is part of the basic structure of the Constitution'. And what is the objection to socialism which gives equality to all? Do they want capitalism? Where there is so much poverty, what other 'ism' will work? The government can make any economic policy, the preamble does not create any obstacle. At present, 1% of the country's population owns 50% of the wealth. Today there is the highest inequality in a century. Who stops the government from correcting the balance? Secular means that no government policy will be decided on the basis of religion.
The government is neutral in matters of religion. Our culture is liberal and tolerant, which Swami Vivekananda has also said repeatedly. But more important than this is that the people of India have no problem with socialism and secularism. BJP should be cautious anyway because if the impression spreads that they want to change the constitution, then they may have to pay a huge price. In the last election also, crossing 400 proved very costly because the impression spread that after this they will change the constitution.
The nation requires neither a declared nor an undeclared emergency for progress; it needs peace rather than disputes. There's already a language controversy, and next will be the caste census, which could lead to conflict. The issue of the preamble was raised unnecessarily amidst this. The citizens appreciate their constitution and diversity, and they will resist efforts to homogenize them. Despite 82 percent of the population being Hindu, the BJP has never received more than 38 percent of the votes, securing 37 percent this time. This is significant.
While the excesses of the Emergency are unforgivable and unforgettable, the enduring Preamble should remain unchanged. There has been no public demand for constitutional amendments. Ultimately, the true authority lies with the public, not any leader, party, or unelected body.