An Emergency-era constitutional amendment inserting a couple of words to the Preamble—socialist and secular—is back in public gaze. That it was flagged by RSS General Secretary Dattatraya Hosabale, a politically savvy leader, made its latest iteration consequential. Emphasising that they were added at a time when the fundamental rights were suspended, parliament was dysfunctional, and the judiciary had become pliant, Hosabale suggested a debate on the Preamble’s reset. But that came in the teeth of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s assertion in 2023 that any talk of amending the Constitution was “meaningless”. Rumours about tinkering with the Constitution through the parliamentary supermajority the BJP sought played its part in opposition consolidation in the run-up to the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. It contributed to the BJP’s slide, as the party fell short of majority in the Lower House. Yet, when the second-most senior leader in the RSS makes a point, the BJP listens. Soon enough, people holding high offices—Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma and Union ministers Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Jitendra Singh—concurred with Hosabale.
However, last November, the Supreme Court had thrown out petitions seeking the purge. A bench led by the then Chief Justice, Sanjiv Khanna, ruled that the concept of secularism represents one of the facets of the right to equality. Several landmark Supreme Court verdicts have also upheld secularism as part of the Preamble and the Constitution’s basic structure. On socialism, the court said, “The way we understand socialism in India is very different from other countries. In our context, socialism primarily means a welfare state. That is all.”
With the judiciary drawing the red line and closing the door, the issue can only be dealt with by parliament. The opposition is already sharpening its knives, warning it will not allow any such change to the Constitution. When the government says on record that it holds the Constitution as the ‘holiest of holy books’, there can be no ifs and buts about the amended Preamble. Despite multiple debates in the past on the insertion of the two words and scoring polemical points, there was no parliamentary consensus on removing them. India’s social fabric of a multi-ethnic, multi-religious welfare state must be kept out of harm’s way.