Skip to main content

Amit Shah’s 'symbolic appropriation and material destruction' of Ambedkar’s legacy: PUCL

By Our
 Representative 
The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has issued a scathing statement condemning Union Home Minister Amit Shah for his remarks during a Rajya Sabha debate commemorating the 75th anniversary of India’s Constitution. Shah’s comments about Dr. B.R. Ambedkar have sparked widespread protests and a fiery debate about the government’s stance on the Constitution and the Ambedkarite legacy.
During the debate, Shah’s sarcastic remark—“It has become a fashion to say Ambedkar, Ambedkar, Ambedkar... If they took God’s name this many times, they would have secured a place in heaven”—has been criticized as belittling Ambedkar’s profound influence on India’s Constitution and his significance to marginalized communities. The PUCL described Shah’s tone as emblematic of the BJP’s and RSS’s “contempt” for those who uphold constitutional values and demand accountability from rulers.
In its detailed statement, PUCL highlighted what it called Shah’s “symbolic appropriation and material destruction” of Ambedkar’s legacy. While lauding BJP-led initiatives to establish Ambedkar memorials in locations significant to his life, the PUCL questioned the government’s commitment to Ambedkar’s ideals of fraternity, dignity, and social justice.
“Dr. Ambedkar himself was an iconoclast who prioritized public works like libraries and educational institutions over memorials,” PUCL noted, contrasting this with the BJP’s emphasis on symbolic politics.
The statement also pointed out the increasing violence against Dalits and persistent caste discrimination as evidence of the government’s failure to advance Ambedkar’s vision of equality.
The PUCL accused Shah of misrepresenting Ambedkar’s resignation from Nehru’s Cabinet, falsely attributing it to differences on Article 370 and foreign policy. In reality, Ambedkar’s resignation was primarily over the lack of progress on the Hindu Code Bill, a landmark social reform initiative aimed at dismantling regressive practices in Hindu law.
The organization also criticized Shah for ignoring the RSS’s historical opposition to the Hindu Code Bill. They cited archival statements from RSS-affiliated publications condemning the bill as contrary to Hindu culture.
PUCL emphasized Ambedkar’s lifelong struggle against the “orthodox” Hindu social order, which he believed perpetuated caste-based oppression. They referenced Ambedkar’s scathing critique of Hinduism as incompatible with liberty, equality, and fraternity—the core ideals of the Indian Constitution.
“Liberty, equality, and fraternity are anathema to the Hindutva framework, which prioritizes conformity, assimilation, and graded inequality,” the PUCL stated, accusing the BJP of undermining these constitutional principles.
Shah’s remarks have triggered protests across the country, with Dalit groups, student organizations, and civil rights activists taking to the streets. Demonstrators are demanding an apology and urging the government to recommit to Ambedkar’s vision of an inclusive, egalitarian society.
The PUCL concluded its statement by urging citizens to defend the Constitution from what it described as the “threats posed by Hindutva forces.” They called the protests a “wider awakening” to the dangers faced by India’s constitutional democracy.
As the controversy unfolds, the BJP has yet to issue an official response to the PUCL’s allegations. Meanwhile, opposition leaders have joined the chorus of criticism, accusing the government of attempting to appropriate Ambedkar’s legacy while dismantling the values he stood for.

Comments

TRENDING

Manufacturing, services: India's low-skill, middle-skill labour remains underemployed

By Francis Kuriakose* The Indian economy was in a state of deceleration well before Covid-19 made its impact in early 2020. This can be inferred from the declining trends of four important macroeconomic variables that indicate the health of the economy in the last quarter of 2019.

Incarceration of Prof Saibaba 'revives' the question: What is crime, who is criminal?

By Kunal Pant* In 2016, a Supreme Court Judge asked the state of Maharashtra, “Do you want to extract a pound of flesh?” The statement was directed against the state for contesting the bail plea of Delhi University Professor GN Saibaba. Saibaba was arrested in 2014, a justification for which was to prevent him from committing what the police called “anti-national activities.”

Food security? Gujarat govt puts more than 5 lakh ration cards in the 'silent' category

By Pankti Jog* A new statistical report uploaded by the Gujarat government on the national food security portal shows that ensuring food security for the marginalized community is still not a priority of the state. The statistical report, uploaded on December 24, highlights many weaknesses in implementing the National Food Security Act (NFSA) in state.