Minister of State for Employment and Skill Development Anantkumar Hegde has clearly violated the oath he took under Article 75(4) of the Constitution to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India (“Minister deriding Constitution: Cong.”, December 27). Evidently, he has no faith in the Constitution leave alone the question of following it. As such, he cannot be allowed to continue in office. It is not enough for the BJP to distance itself from the issue by saying that Mr. Hegde’s remark is not an issue for it. On the contrary, this will only show how the party itself takes the Constitution very lightly. The Prime Minister must immediately ask for his resignation, failing which he should be dismissed by the President. Unless something is done, the very purpose of making the provision for oath of office will be lost. Inaction will also encourage more such attempts to weaken the Constitution. Mr. Hegde is also liable for breach of privilege for violating the oath he took as an MP.
S.N. Shukla,
Lucknow
Mr. Hegde’s remarks on secularism are in bad taste and are not befitting of an elected representative who swears allegiance to the Constitution. While deriding secularism may help Mr. Hegde fetch votes from the advocates of Hindutva, his statement is in direct contrast to Prime Minister’s Narendra Modi’s claim that the Constitution is the holy book for the government. The Prime Minister needs to drop such elements from the Council of Ministers.
K. B. Dessai,
Fatorda, Goa
It is unfortunate that a Minister should now say that the Constitution should be changed. How can a Minister who took oath as Union Minister under the Constitution question its relevance? What is more disconcerting is that the BJP leadership has chosen to distance itself from his irresponsible remarks. Is it not time for the Central government to rein in those leaders who cause damage to the Indian polity?
K.S. Sundaram,
Bengaluru
Mr. Hegde’s remarks at a meeting in Karnataka need to be condemned. The trouble starts when anyone identifies oneself with caste and religion in public life. He does not seem to understand that to be secular is not to repudiate religion but to treat all religions with equal respect. I have visited Nagore Dargah, Velankanni church and taken part in prayers in a famous church when a high dignitary from Rome visited the town where I was posted. That hasn’t prevented me from listening to renditions with devotion in the local temple. No one has suggested that I am disqualified from these activities because of my visit to a dargah or church. This kind of remark from a responsible minister shows a narrow mindset.
N.K. Raghavendran,
Bengaluru
