Distortion of the Articles 25-31 : Part 2

The Constitution of a country is the basic document for governing the country. However, if for any reason, some Articles or concepts therein get distorted and continue for decades, the distortion becomes the standard. This is the case of the Articles 25-30, and to an extent Article 31 as well.

The Fundamental Rights in Articles 29 and 30 in the Constitution were to assure minorities – linguistic, racial, caste and religious. There is no mention in the Constitution that one category of minority is more important than the other. So all four categories of minorities, according to the Constitution, are of equal status. That they shall get whatever will be available to others in independent India. But other than religious minorities, linguistic or caste minorities hardly even matter in our polity ! This is just one distortion.

Here are excerpts from Part 1 of this article.

The idea of ‘minority protection’ was included in the draft Constitution in the years 1946-47, when Partition of India was not decided (in fact, till March 1947 the demand of Partition was not even taken seriously by anyone in the country). But, the same idea and Articles were retained even after Partition ! In retrospect, one may observe that it was one of the great blunders of the Constitution makers. India had not known such minority, majority problems which the term conveys in modern political parlance.

The meaning of ‘minority’ in political terms the world over is very different. It generally means a recognized community historically oppressed and threatened, irrespective of its number, in a country. That way Muslims in India, if anything, were oppressors and definitely privileged for centuries.

The Muslims attacked, conquered, subdued and ruled India. Thus, their being a ‘minority’ in a threatened sense was a very wrong assumption, an artificial construct to (unwittingly) harm Hindus by their own leaders !

1. The Articles 25-31 of the Constitution nowhere say that the rights and statements made are not available to non-minorities.

2. The Article 14 clearly says that all citizens are equal. This must be in consonance with, not in contradiction to, what follows in further Articles in the same Constitution.

Articles 25-28 in the Indian Constitution are given under the heading ‘Freedom of Religion’. Then the Articles 29-30 are there under the heading ‘Cultural and Educational Rights’. Thus also, it is meant for all, not any particular section of the population. The rights of minorities are part of cultural, educational rights of the entire population.

To understand what minority rights mean internationally, it would be useful to go through the UN document on the subject. The UN had adopted, dated 18 December 1992, a ‘Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities’ in New York (GA resolution 47/135). It contains 9 Articles.

In practice too, there is no country in the world where the ‘minority’ enjoy such rights which is not available to the rest, that is, the majority. It is quite logical. Because legal equality in theory and practice of all the population, in a country, itself effectively removes any apprehension on the part of any minority.

Now, on to the concluding Part.

In this way the meaning of Articles 25-30 had been manipulated by the Nehruvian leaders and their socialist-communist cohorts. They were turned into something which was never the intent of the Constitution makers.

This is a case to understand, too, that the meaning of words and statements in politics are decided by determination, strength and consistent education (or stubborn propaganda). That is why, the exact same words and sentences written in different political documents could mean entirely different, even contrary, things.

The wrong interpretation of the Articles 25-30, and selective anti-Hindu application of Article 31 have been gradually established and made acceptable by decades of cunning and conditioning. This has been one of the sources of instigating minoritism and anti-Hindu secularism, both totally against the philosophy of the Constitution.

It can be corrected by an equally determined, but clear-headed movement by conscious Hindus. Perhaps only after a sustained effort in educating the Hindus and campaigning for it. The select, privileged minorities (Muslims and Christian missionaries) will accept the original and just meaning only when they understand that Hindus are fully awakened in demanding EQUAL rights and would no longer accept being second class citizens in their own country

Till then it is the de-jure and de-facto lower status for Hindus in India. Which is why, many organized spiritual traditions of Hindu society in present day India try to distance themselves from the Hindu Dharma and Hindu society. Simply, because no one wants to remain in a lowly situation and associated with a weak society. Sometimes they went even to Courts to be declared non-Hindus and be given the status of a ‘minority’. It is precisely because a minority tag in India enjoys more power; and a Hindu tag-less, a pure Hindu tradition wants to be recognized as a non-Hindu !

This is an additional evidence that the Hindus in this country have become unprotected by the practice of the political system.

Another practical proof of the lower status of the Hindus in India is : The Muslims and Christians enjoy double rights in Indian Courts. They can go there either as a citizen or as a member of ‘minority’ community to seek redressal. But a Hindu can go to Court only as a citizen. As a Hindu one has no right at all. Thus, it has become a de-facto and de-jure case of two types of citizens in India. Minority and non-minority. The former having two rights, the later only one.

Definitely, this situation was nowhere envisioned in the Constituent Assembly. In any case it is unjust and harmful for the national feelings.
Yet another testimony of distorting the meaning of the Articles 25-30 in practice is that the indication of minority protection has been with reference to ‘religion, race, caste, language’ in Article 29. Then, why any caste in India, on the basis of caste category, is never mentioned as ‘minority’ and given similar exclusive privileges ?

Likewise, all the languages in India are minority; even Hindi speaking people are minority in two-third States in India. So where is the vociferous concern or exclusive rights for a Brahman minority or Punjabi minority anywhere in the country ?

All the above shows that the case of only ‘Muslim’ minority being the overriding issue in Indian politics has been a willful distortion by the dominant Nehruvian -leftist political leaders and their intellectual cohorts.

They were helped by the carelessness of the general intelligentsia including those from the legal fraternity. Everything was determined by the convenience and collusion of some high-placed individuals. A Constitutional theft, so to speak, was done so openly and confidently – that it looked quite normal. As Sherlock Homes had said about a heist, ‘It is so overt, it is covert’.

All the while the victims of the heist – the Hindus – remained leaderless, thus voiceless. When will this situation change ?

– Prof. Shankar Sharan, Professor of Political Science at the NCERT and Senior Columnist, New Delhi. (31.1.2023)
(Courtesy : indiafacts.org)

This is an additional evidence that the Hindus have become unprotected by the practice of the political system !