BJP slams RJD of undermining PM's efforts to uplift backward classes, accuses Tejashwi of pushing ‘Sharia agenda'
"Tejashwi Yadav's party, RJD, is destroying the idea of empowering these marginalized sections. While they talk about Sharia, the BJP will continue to talk about the Constitution," he said during a press conference at BJP headquarters in Delhi.
Asserting that 'Mahathugbandhan' is openly against the Constitution , the BJP spokesperson said, "The Congress manifesto said that it wanted to implement Sharia Law. Personal Laws will be implemented. Reservations will be based on religion, which is against the Constitution. NDA will never allow their plans to succeed. On 2010 May 7, Lalu Prasad Yadav said that the Waqf board has snatched the land of the government and the common man and strong laws are required to control it.RJD Chief Lalu Yadav has never apologized for the disrespect he showed towards Bharat Ratna Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar.'
Referring to Bihar's former Deputy CM and Leader of Opposition, Tejashwi Yadav's remarks on Wakf Amendment Act, Bhatia said, "Yesterday, a 9th-grade fail, Tejashwi Yadav, was saying that he would throw the Waqf Amendment Bill, passed by the Indian Parliament, into the trash. How can a state government dismiss a law passed by the Centre?"
Taking on the INDIA alliance, the BJP spokesperson said, "If Tejashwi Yadav gives hate speech against the Waqf Amendment Act, then his purpose is to create a division in society. Our government in Bihar talks about development, and they talk about Sharia Law. In Karnataka, they snatched the rights of the backwards and gave them to Muslims," he said.
Recalling the lawlessness that prevailed during the "Jungle Raj" of Lalu, he said , "The first rule of Jungle Raj is the destruction of the Constitution and the law, and that is exactly what Tejashwi Yadav is doing while sitting in the opposition."
Questioning the RJD's so-called socialist agenda, Bhatia stated, "Those who call themselves 'samajwadi' (socialists) in Bihar are in fact 'namazwadi'. They do not want Babasaheb's Constitution and neither do they respect it. Their sole objective is the imposition of Sharia law in India, and to empower only one community."
He took a direct jibe at Tejashwi Yadav, asking, "The so-called master of appeasement, Maulana Tejashwi Yadav, have you ever read the Constitution? Can a state government disregard a law passed by Parliament and signed by the President?"
In another sharp remark, Bhatia reminded Tejashwi Yadav about his family's long tenure in power. "Tejashwi Yadav is now demanding 20 months, but the people of Bihar gave more than a decade to the Yadav family. What was the result? The value of human life was lost. Now they talk about youth, but have they ever given an opportunity to anyone outside their family to become CM or even party president?" Bhatia asked.
Bhatia also questioned Tejashwi Yadav's stance on the Waqf Amendment Bill, pointing out that the matter is still pending in the Supreme Court. "Why does Tejashwi Yadav have such an anarchist approach? Why is he trying to demean the SC before it has even passed its verdict? Has Tejashwi Yadav become more important than the Supreme Court itself?"
UNI AJ AAB GNK 1602
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
36 minutes ago
- The Print
The Preamble won't be changed back to the original. Here's why
The very first sentence of the Constitution has been studded with a lie for the last fifty years. We don't mind misattributing even grave things to the deceased Constitution makers. The Preamble, a one-sentence credo, carries the date 26 November 1949 in present tense, despite being altered 26 years afterwards. All this while leaders have been propagating with gusto that it is given by a demigod-like leader, BR Ambedkar. The irony of Indian politics can be understood by the condition of the Preamble of the Constitution. Our habit of playing with words and phrases is in full play here. Just review the issue. The Preamble of the original Constitution (1950) described India as a democratic republic. Twenty-six years later, two heavy political terms were added to it: 'secular' and 'socialist'. India was re-christened as 'democratic socialist secular republic' only on 26 November 1949. Now, fifty years after that deceit—intended or not—there is again a clamour to revert it to the original. No surprise if this turns out to be just another game of our leaders. The change was made during the Emergency. And the amendment was passed in the Parliament without genuine deliberation, as the Opposition was put in jail. It was perhaps a plot of an intellectual coterie that convinced Indira Gandhi to do it—she was not an ideologue like her father to flaunt such heavy terms. Also read: JP wasn't a saviour of Constitution. He called Mao his guru Tampering with basic structure The amendment proved to be a great distortion of the Constitution. Look at the facts: First, all political theorists considered the original Preamble remarkable. The famed British political scientist Ernest Barker began his 1952 book Principles of Social and Political Theory with the Preamble of the Indian Constitution. He said that it stated 'in a brief and pithy form the argument of much of the book'. This was a unique commendation for the original Preamble. Second, in political science or law teaching in India, the Preamble was called the soul and foundation of the Constitution. Therefore, to tamper with it was interfering with its soul. Third, the Supreme Court of India in the Berubari Union case (1960) described the Preamble as not part of the Constitution but an overall guiding principle of it, through which other provisions of the Constitution may be understood. So, the Preamble was itself a standard, a scale. And whoever heard of tampering with a scale? Fourth, the Supreme Court again, in 1973, in the Kesavananda Bharati case, declared that while the Preamble of the Constitution is not exempt from amendment, its basic structure cannot be changed. It grates against what was done three years later with it. Their Lordships, too, turned a Nelson's eye to this great contradiction. On all those four counts, it is undeniable that the alteration made to the Preamble was grave. The consequences have been graver still. The change made in 1976 hit the basics of the Constitution. It was especially damaging as it was an ideological amendment. It must also be noted that 'socialist' and 'secular' were known concepts to the Constitution makers. In fact, they discussed the issue of adding 'socialist' and 'secular' and rejected it. It is, therefore, a sin on the part of the leaders of the country to cheat the people by falsely propagandising this distorted Preamble for the last fifty years. Current propaganda, that it all is a 'legacy of Dr Ambedkar', is still more sinful. It is more so because it was Ambedkar himself who categorically rejected the proposal to include the words 'secular' and 'socialist' into the Constitution. It happened in the Constituent Assembly on 15 November 1948. A member of the Constituent Assembly, Professor KT Shah, had proposed to include the words 'secular, federal, socialist' into the Constitution. Rejecting it in toto, Ambedkar said: 'Mr. Vice‑President, Sir, I regret that I cannot accept the amendment of Prof. K. T. Shah. My objections, stated briefly, are two. In the first place, the Constitution…is merely a mechanism for the purpose of regulating the work of the various organs of the State…What should be the policy of the State, how the Society should be organised in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by the people themselves according to time and circumstances. It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself, because that is destroying democracy altogether…It is perfectly possible today, for the majority people to hold that the socialist organisation of society is better than the capitalist organisation of society. But it would be perfectly possible for thinking people to devise some other form of social organisation which might be better…I do not see therefore why the Constitution should tie down the people to live in a particular form…This is one reason why the amendment should be opposed…The second reason is that the amendment is purely superfluous…If these directive principles…are not socialistic in their direction and in their content, I fail to understand what more socialism can be. Therefore my submission is that these socialist principles are already embodied in our Constitution and it is unnecessary to accept this amendment.' Though he did not separately comment on the word 'secular', he dismissed the entire proposal. The Constituent Assembly concurred with him. Despite such rejection, the very terms were inserted into the Preamble through the 42nd Amendment in 1976. It is noteworthy, too, that the Janata Party government comprising the Jana Sangh, socialists, and other non-Congress parties continued with the distorted Preamble. They repealed many sections of the 42nd Amendment through the 44th Amendment in 1978, but they chose to keep the distortion of the Preamble. Thus, all political parties have injured the 'soul' of the Constitution. Also read: Hosabale, Dhankhar, Shivraj & Himanta give Modi yet another reason to amend BJP constitution Vote-bank politics After that, the character of the Constitution itself began to change. It gradually bore bitter fruit. It led to the establishment of an unstated anti-Hindu mindset in Indian politics, which slowly infiltrated the entire political and educational sphere. It is a dark irony that until the word 'secular' was added, the Constitution was indeed secular, treating all communities equally. But after inserting the word 'secular', most Indian leaders—knowingly or unknowingly—interpreted and applied it in ways that effectively rendered Hindus as second-class citizens. Now Hindus have become 'eighth-class citizens', to use the term from Anand Ranganathan's book Hindus in Hindu Rashtra. With time, Indian leaders competitively turned the terms 'minority' and 'secular' into mere tools of vote-bank politics. In the process, the original intent of the Constitution and the universal principles of common justice and morality have been undermined. Since all this unfolded gradually, it constituted a double betrayal of the Indian people. All political parties used the excuse of the 'Constitutional' mandate of secularism and a distorted reading of 'protection of minorities' as per Article 29 to provide facilities and privileges exclusively to non-Hindus. This, too, was against the intent of the Constitution makers, who had taken care to ensure every benefit to minorities without excluding the non-minorities from any benefits. But this exclusion is perpetrated by all rulers, especially after the distortion of the Preamble. In the absence of any political party to sincerely oppose it, Hindus were left with no means to even detect the wrong being done, let alone counter it. Most political leaders intended to woo bulk votes from a particular non-Hindu community. They quietly but openly cheated the unaware, helpless Hindu citizens. Therefore, any hope of correcting the distortion in the Preamble seems futile. Our political parties are deeply immersed in the quagmire of 'minority-ism'. It is unlikely that any of them will find the courage to come out of it. The issue will most probably be used to create a public uproar, each party using it to consolidate its constituencies. There will be talks of discrimination, accusations, and counter-accusations. Nothing more should be expected. Shankar Sharan is a columnist and professor of political science. He tweets @hesivh. Views are personal. (Edited by Theres Sudeep)
United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
G7 Foreign Ministers reaffirm support for Israel, say Iran can never have nuclear weapons
The Hague, July 1 (UNI) G-7 Foreign Ministers have reaffirmed their support for Israel and asserted that Iran can never have nuclear weapons. The G7 Foreign Ministers in their meeting at The Hague said in a Joint Statement that Israel has a right to defend itself and urged Iran to refrain from reconstituting its enrichment activities. They called for resumption of negotiations resulting in a comprehensive, verifiable and durable agreement that addresses Iran's nuclear programme. For a "sustainable and credible resolution, we call on Iran to urgently resume full cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as required by its safeguards obligations and provide the IAEA with verifiable information about all nuclear material in Iran, including by providing access to IAEA inspectors. We condemn calls in Iran for the arrest and execution of IAEA Director General Grossi." The Foreign Ministers underscored the centrality of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as the cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime and said it is essential that Iran remains party to and fully implements its obligations under the Treaty. Iran has already announced its decision to withdraw from the IAEA and expressed lack of faith in NPT. ''We reiterate our commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East. In this context, we reaffirm that Israel has a right to defend itself. We reiterate our support for the security of Israel.'' Reiterating support for the ceasefire between Israel and Iran, the G7 Foreign Ministers urged all parties to avoid actions that could further destabilize the region. They appreciated Qatar's role in facilitating the ceasefire and expressed solidarity with Qatar and Iraq following the recent strikes by Iran and its proxies and partners against their territory. "We welcome all efforts in the region towards stabilization and de-escalation." UNI RB SS
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
5 BJP workers suspended for assaulting BMC officer
Bhubaneswar: A day after Odisha Administrative Services (OAS) officer and Additional Commissioner of Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation (BMC) Ratnakar Sahoo was assaulted by some alleged supporters of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Jagannath Pradhan, the party State unit president Manmohan Samal on Tuesday suspended five BJP workers, including a corporator, from the primary membership of the party. The suspended party workers include Corporator Aparup Narayan Raut, Rashmi Ranjan Mohapatra, Debashis Pradhan, Sachikant Swain and Sanjeev Mishra. Acting on the FIR lodged by the victim OAS officer Sahoo, the police had earlier arrested three BJP workers, Raut, Mohapatra and Debashis for their involvement in the assault. Meanwhile, senior BJP leader Jagannath Pradhan on Tuesday claimed that the allegations made against him by Mayor Sulochana Das and other BJD leaders were nothing but political vendetta. 'I condemn the attack on the Additional Commissioner. Action has already been taken against the accused, and the Chief Minister has also held discussions with BMC officials and other stakeholders. We extend full sympathy to Ratnakar Sahoo. This incident should not have happened,' said Pradhan. Pradhan further said that if anyone from his constituency takes his name while committing a crime, it does not imply his involvement. 'How could such an incident happen inside a secure office when the Mayor herself was present? It appears they allowed this to happen, filmed the incident, and circulated it in the media to politicise the matter,' alleged Pradhan, while questioning the security arrangements at the BMC office. Giving the background of the incident, Pradhan alleged that the public outrage against the senior officer of the BMC stemmed from an issue involving a Swachh Sathi — a sanitation volunteer supported by Mission Shakti — from his constituency. 'She was assigned the task of mobilising beneficiaries for a recent government event marking one year of the State government's formation, where Prime Minister Narendra Modi was scheduled to join. She fulfilled her duty, but BJD-backed people and the Additional Commissioner targeted her for helping make the event successful,' claimed Pradhan. Pradhan said he had raised the matter with the BMC Commissioner after learning that the volunteer was harassed by officials. 'The persons involved had only gone to the BMC office to discuss the issue. Unfortunately, an altercation broke out, which could have been avoided. But the Mayor unnecessarily escalated the matter,' he added. On the other hand, the Swachh Sathi concerned, Rebati Rout, claimed that BMC Additional Commissioner Sahoo had allegedly threatened that she would lose her job for facilitating people to take part in the recent rally of Prime Minister Modi in Bhubaneswar. Notably, at around 11.30 am on Monday, when the public grievance meeting was in progress in the presence of other officers, staff and general people at the BMC office, six to seven unknown individuals entered the premises unauthorisedly and assaulted Sahoo after enquiring whether he had a conversation with BJP leader Jagannath Pradhan over the phone. The Odisha Administrative Service Association (OASA) came out in support of Sahoo announcing that it would go on mass leave from Tuesday.
