Former Supreme Court judge Santosh Hegde has weighed in on the controversial discussion around banning the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), calling such moves politically motivated and unconstitutional. Speaking to reporters in Dharwad, Hegde cautioned that attempts to ban the RSS could backfire, highlighting the cyclical nature of political power in India.
Hegde specifically noted that if the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were to come to power in a state or at the center, it could retaliate by attempting to ban the Congress. According to him, proposals to ban organizations like the RSS are often more about political maneuvering than genuine concern for law or public order. He described such actions as part of a larger “political game,” warning that banning an established organization could set a dangerous precedent.
The former judge stressed the constitutional implications of such a move. He argued that banning an organization like the RSS would violate the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution, particularly the freedom of association and expression. Hegde’s remarks underline the need for caution when political parties consider actions that could infringe on civil liberties, irrespective of ideological differences.
Hegde’s commentary comes amid increasing political rhetoric in some states calling for restrictions or bans on the RSS, which has been active in India for decades. While the organization has been a key player in shaping nationalist discourse, critics argue it has also influenced politics in controversial ways. Hegde’s warning highlights that any attempt to curb the organization must navigate complex legal and constitutional frameworks.
Political analysts suggest that Hegde’s observations reflect a broader concern in India’s democracy: the tendency of parties to use institutional powers to target rivals when in power. By framing the RSS ban as a politically motivated move, Hegde emphasizes the importance of maintaining democratic norms and legal integrity rather than succumbing to partisan impulses.
Hegde’s remarks have sparked discussion among legal experts, political commentators, and civil society groups. While some see his statement as a defense of constitutional principles, others interpret it as a critique of opportunistic politics. Regardless, it has reignited debates about the limits of state action and the balance between political ambition and legal propriety.
In conclusion, Santosh Hegde’s comments serve as a reminder of the delicate balance between politics and the Constitution. Attempts to ban organizations like the RSS are not merely administrative decisions; they carry significant implications for democratic norms, civil liberties, and the credibility of political institutions. Hegde’s warning encourages policymakers to think carefully before using power as a tool in political chess, emphasizing that short-term gains could have long-term consequences for India’s democratic fabric.
