Preamble politics: Tracing the socialist-secular debate through the recent years

Over the past decade, the debate over the inclusion of the two words in the Preamble has surfaced prominently on atleast two occasions

Almost five decades after the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution, the inclusion of the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ has reignited a heated national debate. In the past week, several BJP leaders have called for revisiting the Emergency-era addition of the words – noting that they were not part of the original document.

The debate on the inclusion of the terms was first ignited by RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale, who called for a review of the two words. “The preamble of the Constitution Baba Saheb Ambedkar made never had these words. During the Emergency, when fundamental rights were suspended, Parliament did not work, judiciary became lame, then these words were added,” he said at an event in Delhi.

Over the past decade, the debate over the inclusion of the two words in the Preamble has surfaced prominently on atleast two occasions.

Republic Day advertisement in 2015

On Republic Day in 2015, the Union Information and Broadcasting Ministry released newspaper advertisements that a backdrop of the preamble stating, “We, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Democratic Republic…”

The advertisement showcased the original version of the preamble, not the amended one introduced through the 42nd Amendment in 1976, which reads, “We, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic…”

Opposition parties reacted strongly to the advertisement, 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, according to an Indian Express report.

In a statement to Rajya Sabha a month later, union minister Arun Jaitley clarified that the version was shown from the original Constitution and was intended to respectfully acknowledge the founding fathers, with no malafide intent.

The then union minister Venkaiah Naidu, who later went on to become vice-president, maintained that the words would stay in the Constitution, while union minister Ravi Shankar Prasad hit back at the Congress -- asking if it was suggesting that Jawaharlal Nehru didn’t understand secularism.

Union home minister Amit Shah, who was at that time the BJP national president, told The Hindu, “This debate too is meaningless. The BJP believes that the Preamble as it stands today is fine. There is no need to change it.”

Socialist, secular words missing in 2023 too

Similar tensions flared two years back when Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury alleged that the Constitution copies distributed to lawmakers during the first sitting in the new Parliament building did not include “socialist” and “secular” in the 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.

Arjun Ram Meghwal, however, downplayed the matter stating that the distributed copies may have been of the Constitution’s original draft. “When the Constitution was drafted, it was like this. An amendment was made later. This is the original copy,” he said, according to IANS.

“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 commemorative stamp and coin released on the occasion of inauguration of the new building of Parliament will be presented to Hon’ble Members,” the Lok Sabha secretariat had said in a bulletin.

Can these words be removed?

Amending the preamble is technically possible under Article 368, but legally complex. The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Kesavananda Bharati case prohibits changes to the Constitution’s “basic structure,” making the deletion of these terms highly vulnerable to judicial invalidation.