Congress leader Jairam Ramesh on Tuesday intensified his attack on the Union government, accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah of systematically undermining India’s constitutional values. His sharp remarks added a new layer of political friction to the national discourse that followed the recent Constitution Day events. Speaking to the media, Ramesh argued that the actions of the top leadership reflect a “calculated attempt to subvert constitutional principles”, a charge that immediately triggered responses from both political supporters and critics.

The Congress leader, who has been one of the party’s most vocal critics of the Modi government, framed his remarks within the broader context of what he described as an ongoing deterioration of democratic norms. According to him, the government’s policies, institutional decisions, and political strategies collectively reveal a pattern of weakening the checks and balances that form the backbone of India’s constitutional democracy. His comments also reignited a long-standing ideological clash between the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) over the political and philosophical foundations of the Indian Constitution.

One of the most striking elements of Ramesh’s statement was his assertion that the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) — the ideological parent of the BJP — “had no role whatsoever” in the drafting of the Constitution. The remark was aimed at countering what the Congress claims is an attempt by the ruling establishment to project itself as the guardian of the constitutional ethos. Ramesh insisted that the historical record clearly shows that leaders and thinkers aligned with the RSS tradition were, at the time, critical or dismissive of several foundational principles of the Constitution, including secularism and social equality.

The Congress leader’s remarks were made in the backdrop of Constitution Day celebrations, during which the Prime Minister emphasised the importance of preserving and strengthening democratic institutions. Modi highlighted the relevance of civic duties, constitutional values, and public participation, particularly through informed voting. Critics, however, say that such messaging from the government contrasts with its political actions, especially concerning dissent management, federalism, and institutional autonomy.

Ramesh argued that the rhetoric of constitutional responsibility is undermined by consistent actions that concentrate power, weaken accountability, and marginalise opposition voices. According to him, the conduct of Parliament in recent years — including reduced debate time, frequent disruptions, and the passage of key bills without thorough scrutiny — reflects a political environment that is increasingly dismissive of democratic engagement. Ramesh has long maintained that the health of India’s democracy cannot be assessed by rhetoric alone but must be evaluated by the government’s willingness to uphold the constitutional spirit in practice.

He further alleged that democratic institutions, including investigative agencies and regulatory bodies, are being used selectively to target political opponents and shape public narratives. These actions, he argued, amount to a structural weakening of constitutional safeguards, designed to consolidate the political power of the ruling party. Ramesh also pointed to instances where state governments ruled by opposition parties have claimed discrimination in financial allocations, administrative approvals, and central interventions, arguing that the principle of cooperative federalism has been eroded.

The BJP, as expected, dismissed the allegations. Party leaders argued that Ramesh’s critique is rooted in political frustration and reflects the Congress’s struggle to remain relevant in the current national political landscape. According to the BJP, the government’s policies are firmly anchored in constitutional values and are aimed at promoting development, transparency, and accountability. They also highlighted that the government has undertaken several initiatives to digitalise governance, improve welfare delivery, and strengthen national security — actions that the ruling party argues demonstrate its commitment to the Constitution.

However, political analysts note that Ramesh’s remarks tap into ongoing public debates about the nature of institutional independence, the functioning of Parliament, and the broader health of India’s democracy. Several recent controversies — including the role of data protection laws, central oversight mechanisms, and tensions between state and central governments — have contributed to questions about constitutional balance. Critics from academia and civil society argue that India is witnessing a transformation in the relationship between state power and citizens’ rights, making the opposition’s concerns relevant even if politically charged.

Ramesh’s reaffirmation that the RSS played no role in drafting the Constitution also carries symbolic significance. The Constituent Assembly, which debated and adopted the Constitution between 1946 and 1949, was composed mainly of leaders from the Congress and other democratic, socialist, and regional parties. The ideological framework of the RSS during that period, historians argue, was distinct from the pluralistic and secular approach embedded in the Constitution’s values. By invoking this historical fact, Ramesh sought to emphasise what he described as a mismatch between the RSS’s ideological lineage and the constitutional ethos.

Congress leaders have repeatedly accused the BJP and RSS of attempting to reinterpret constitutional ideals to align with a majoritarian worldview. The ruling party, however, argues that it is simply correcting long-standing historical imbalances and promoting a cultural consciousness that was neglected in earlier decades. This ideological tug-of-war over the meaning and ownership of the Constitution has intensified in recent years, and Ramesh’s latest remarks reflect the ongoing political struggle to define the nation’s constitutional identity.

Another aspect of Ramesh’s critique focused on civil liberties and the treatment of dissent. He argued that the government’s approach to protest, activism, and public mobilisation reveals a shrinking space for democratic expression. Cases filed against activists, journalists, and civil society organisations have been at the centre of this debate. According to Ramesh, such actions represent an attempt to silence alternative voices and reshape public discourse in a manner that favours the ruling establishment.

He also addressed concerns about media freedom, pointing to the increasing concentration of media ownership and the alleged use of regulatory pressure to influence editorial direction. Critics argue that while India continues to have a vibrant media landscape, the pressures on independent journalism have escalated. Ramesh insisted that the strength of India’s democracy lies in the diversity of voices and the willingness of institutions to protect those voices, irrespective of political alignment.

As with most political confrontations in India, reactions to Ramesh’s remarks were sharply divided. Supporters of the Congress welcomed the critique, arguing that it reflects a much-needed defence of constitutionalism in the face of creeping authoritarianism. Critics, however, accused the Congress of hypocrisy, pointing to past instances where the party was itself accused of overreach or misuse of power during earlier eras.

Nonetheless, Ramesh’s remarks have reinvigorated discussions on the Constitution’s role in contemporary India. Observers note that as the political landscape becomes more polarised, the Constitution continues to serve as a critical reference point — both as a legal framework and as a moral compass. The opposition’s concerns, even if contested, highlight the enduring relevance of constitutional debates in shaping the country’s political future.

Join our Telegram Channel for Latest News and Regular Updates.

Start your Mutual Fund Journey  by Opening Free Account in Asset Plus.

Start your Stock Market Journey and Apply in IPO by Opening Free Demat Account in Choice Broking FinX.