Original Preamble in focus, how the socialist-secular debate played out in recent years

Indian Express

a day ago

Over the past week, several BJP leaders have spoken about revisiting the inclusion of the word 'secular' in the Preamble to the Constitution during the Emergency, pointing out that the words 'socialist' and 'secular' were not part of the original founding document. This has brought to the fore the question of whether these words should continue to remain in the Preamble, a question first raised by RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale last week.
Following Hosabale's comments, BJP leaders and Union Ministers such as Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Jitendra Singh, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, and even Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar have waded into the debate.
In the past decade, this debate has prominently come up twice, with the Opposition accusing the government of trying to omit the words from the Preamble.
On January 26, 2015, newspaper advertisements issued by the Union Information and Broadcasting Ministry had a backdrop with the Preamble stating, 'We, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Democratic Republic…'
This was the original Preamble and not the current one that was changed through the 42nd Amendment in 1976, and reads, 'We, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic…'
The advertisement drew flak from the Opposition, with Congress leader Manish Tewari saying that 'stifling and trampling' the Constitution was an 'unforgivable sacrilege'. 'The Constitution of India, as it stands today, is very clear that India would be a Sovereign Democratic Secular and Socialist Republic … Action should be taken against the officers involved and the minister should explain how it has happened,' he said.
A month later, then Union Minister Arun Jaitley told the Rajya Sabha that the representation was from the original Constitution and was aimed at honouring the founding fathers without any malafide intentions.
'The Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity (DAVP) annually issues print advertisements to all empanelled publications on Republic Day to commemorate the date and the moment when India became a Republic by adopting the Constitution. This year also a similar practice was followed and six different designs were given to all the empanelled publications. In one of the advertisement designs issued, the photograph of the original calligraphic representation of the Preamble to the Constitution has been used in the background as a water-mark for enhancing the aesthetic and artistic value,' he said.
'The calligraphic representation and decorated Preamble as available in the Parliament Museum is the only such decorated copy till date… The photo of the original Preamble was a way of honouring founding fathers of the Constitution and there was no mala fide intention to the publication of the unamended version,' Jaitley added.
However, this wasn't all. While former Vice-President M Venkaiah Naidu, then a Union Minister, said the words would stay in the Constitution, Ravishankar Prasad, also a Union Minister, hit back at the Congress, asking it if it thought that former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru did not understand secularism.
'Secularism is in the blood of Indian people, that's part of our culture. It was not there in the original Preamble and was inserted during Emergency. But the government advertisement was about the original Preamble. We are committed to secularism and we don't have any idea to drop it,' Naidu said on January 30, 2015, at a conference organised by the Confederation of Indian Industries.
The following day, Prasad told journalists, 'Did Nehru have no understanding of secularism? These words were added during the Emergency. Now what is the harm if there is a debate on it? We have put before the nation the original Preamble … The Preamble and the Constituent Assembly that prepared it had leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru, B R Ambedkar, and others. These two words were not there then.'
Union Home Minister Amit Shah, then the BJP national president, also weighed in, telling The Hindu in an interview, 'This debate too is meaningless. The BJP believes that the Preamble as it stands today is fine. There is no need to change it.'
When Parliament began functioning from the new building two years ago, a similar controversy erupted after the Congress leader in the Lok Sabha at the time, Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, said the copy of the Constitution distributed to MPs to mark the occasion did not have the current Preamble.
'They (the government) can say it is an older version. But they should have included the amended version too. They may say they have given us the original version. I think there is a deliberate design,' Chowdhury told The Indian Express on September 20, 2023.
However, Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal played down the issue, saying the MPs may have been given a copy of the original Constitution. 'It (Preamble) was like this when the Constitution was adopted. After that, the 42nd amendment came… So it must be the original copy.'
The Lok Sabha Secretariat also clarified the matter. In a bulletin issued on September 18, it said that MPs would be given a copy of the Constitution and a calligraphed copy of the original document.
'To mark the historic first sitting in the Parliament House of India (new building of Parliament) a copy of the Constitution of India, calligraphed copy of the original Constitution of India, newsletter 'Gaurav', and the commemorative stamp and coin released on the occasion of inauguration of the new building of Parliament will be presented to Hon'ble Members,' read the bulletin.