The cries of ‘Oh, constitutional morality, oh, constitutional values!’ are meant to divert people’s attention from vote theft. It’s a ploy to manipulate the minds of the ruled, adorn it in headlines, and hold debates for this purpose— that’s why 'Godi' media exists.
Published Aug 27, 2025 | 7:00 PM ⚊ Updated Aug 27, 2025 | 7:00 PM
By citing a judgement given by Justice B Sudarshan Reddy as a Supreme Court judge, Union Minister Amit Shah depicted him as a Naxal sympathiser.
Synopsis: Including the Prime Minister in the 130th Amendment Bill is a farce, but the entire Bill itself is a grand drama. How will such an amendment bill, which requires a two-thirds majority in both Houses, get passed? Have N Chandrababu Naidu and Nitish Kumar descended so low to support this Bill? It is only to argue that the Opposition is obstructing the Bill, though they wanted to bring back the era of truth. This could serve as a flimsy justification, and nothing more.
Whether you call it etiquette, protocol, or civility, there is certain decorum in the world. There’s a fine line between internal affairs and external conduct.
Even emperors who embarked on victorious campaigns and became world conquerors maintained humility as a mark of dignity in royal courts. But sometimes, those who rise to power by turning people into mobs, transforming enthusiasm into frenzy, and riding on waves of hatred, discard all decorum and speak only the language of corporate aggression.
Look at Donald Trump. Even when he speaks softly, his words are arrogant. When he speaks harshly, it’s like the ferocity of a raging bull unleashed. Until recently, a supporter traveling with Trump spoke one word about the tariff war, and the FBI raided his home. Is Narendra Modi learning from Trump? If so, India should demand royalty from him.
‘Listen to what I say, or I’ll double the tariffs, buy from him, not from that one, or from that coalition’ — this is how Trump berates everyone from the global stage. Were there no pressures from superpowers in the past?
There were plenty, some even cruel and horrific. But back then, such intimidations were subtle, veiled behind diplomacy. Smaller nations understood, some complied, some didn’t, but somehow diplomacy was maintained.
Statements like ‘I’ll annex that country, empty Gaza, and build resorts’—Trump’s words surpass the arrogance of past superpower leaders. If Benjamin Netanyahu speaks like this now, it’s not just because of America’s backing but also because of a shameless audacity. In an era where right-wing fanaticism is spreading globally, trampling on old decorum, needless to say, becomes their revolution!
The Bill introduced as the 130th amendment to the Indian Constitution is shaped purely by crude recklessness. If someone can stay in office after a month in jail, what need is there for morality or constitutional morality? This is the anguish expressed by the Prime Minister and the Union Home Minister.
If their outrage seems ridiculous, it’s not our fault. The history of the past decade shows that the central government and its investigative agencies have the power to jail any chief minister or state minister for a month. It’s also history that those who have had to face such imprisonment are always from the Opposition.
If we ask whether this amendment is to harass opposition state governments, the central government’s leaders innocently and humbly reply, ‘Haven’t we brought the Prime Minister under its purview?’ Is there any prosecution agency in the country capable of jailing a Prime Minister for a month? Is there any possibility or probability that any investigative agency can touch a BJP Prime Minister even from a distance?
It’s all empty talk. Including the Prime Minister in the Bill is a farce, but the entire Bill itself is a grand drama. How will such an amendment bill, which requires a two-thirds majority in both Houses, get passed? Have N Chandrababu Naidu and Nitish Kumar descended so low to support this Bill? It is only to argue that the Opposition is obstructing the Bill, though they wanted to bring back the era of truth. This could serve as a flimsy justification, and nothing more.
But wait. It does serve a purpose, and a significant one at that. In a time when those listening to Rahul Gandhi’s warnings about vote theft and appreciating his activism are growing, a deceptive role is needed to mislead the public. The cries of ‘Oh, constitutional morality, oh, constitutional values!’ are meant to divert people’s attention from vote theft. It’s a ploy to manipulate the minds of the ruled, adorn it in headlines, and hold debates for this purpose— that’s why ‘Godi’ media exists.
What’s surprising is that even ordinary people understand this. The developments are unfolding so shamelessly. This audacity is not just a display of rogue power but also a bold declaration that civility and propriety are nowhere near them.
The central government’s leaders have no defence to Rahul Gandhi’s challenges, nor to the notices and threats issued by the Election Commission, which only reflect their cunning and overbearing arrogance.
The INDIA bloc has announced retired Supreme Court Justice B Sudarshan Reddy as its Vice Presidential candidate. In a situation where constitutional values are at risk, Justice Reddy’s candidature is seen as a symbolic resistance, providing scope for an ideological fight. His long service in the judicial system has also transformed the electoral atmosphere into one of gravitas.
If something is serious and dignified, we don’t like it, do we? We immediately bring it down to a trivial level that suits us and compete, don’t we? The honorable Home Minister Amit Shah did just that. By citing a judgement given by Justice Reddy as a Supreme Court judge, he depicted him as a Naxal sympathiser.
Since Hamid Ansari’s time, the government’s top leaders have been belittling the Vice President’s office. Venkaiah Naidu was given the post with respect, but everyone discussed the motives behind it. We recently saw how Jagdeep Dhankhar was treated.
Now, they are attempting to sully the dignity that the Vice President’s office should have as the election is set to take place. Until now, no such degrading accusations have been heard in the history of Vice Presidential or Presidential elections. They are establishing new milestones in this, too!
You can criticise a judgement, but you shouldn’t attribute motives to judges, they say. By that logic, Amit Shah’s remarks are worthy of a contempt of court controversy. Are judges evaluated based on the judgments they deliver?
Every judge who declares an accused innocent must then be a sympathiser of the crime alleged against the accused. As running a private army like ‘Salwa Judum’ is against the Constitution, Justice Reddy gave that judgement. Should a Home Minister make a criminal accusation against a Supreme Court judge for fulfilling his duty?
In Kerala, a state with high literacy and political awareness, how can such words be uttered so shamelessly on a media platform? What about the journalists sitting in front, the viewers watching on TV or mobile phones, the readers worldwide — think about making such accusations? What intoxicating power gives such licence?
Sanatana Dharma says that humility earns respect. Those who don’t know the difference between respect and disrespect lose balance at some level. That’s what verbosity leads to. But it is not a malaise. It is only a symptom of a deeper one.
(Views are personal. Edited by Majnu Babu).
