Asaduddin Owaisi on Thursday strongly objected to the Union Cabinet’s decision to provide ‘Vande Mataram’ the same statutory protection as the national anthem ‘Jana Gana Mana’, arguing that the national song cannot be placed on the same constitutional footing as the anthem because it is essentially an ode to a goddess.
The AIMIM chief stated that India as a nation does not function in the name of any god or goddess and does not belong to a single religious identity. According to him, the Constitution defines India through its people rather than through religious symbolism.
In a post shared on X, Owaisi said that ‘Jana Gana Mana’ represents India and its citizens collectively rather than promoting any one religion or religious identity. He further claimed that the author of ‘Vande Mataram’ held views sympathetic to the British Raj and was critical of Muslims. Owaisi also pointed out that several major leaders of India’s freedom movement, including Subhas Chandra Bose, Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Rabindranath Tagore, had rejected giving ‘Vande Mataram’ the same status as the national anthem.
Referring to constitutional principles, Owaisi said the Preamble of the Constitution begins with the words “We, the People” and not “Bharat Maa.” He argued that the Constitution guarantees liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship to all citizens, which reflects a secular and inclusive national identity rather than one centred around a deity or goddess.
He further referred to Article 1 of the Constitution, which defines “India, that is Bharat” as a Union of States. According to Owaisi, this constitutional wording clearly establishes that the nation belongs equally to all its citizens and is not tied to any singular religious or cultural symbol.
The AIMIM leader also cited debates from the Constituent Assembly, stating that some members had proposed beginning the Preamble in the name of a goddess and had specifically invoked ‘Vande Mataram’ during those discussions. Others, he claimed, wanted the Constitution to begin “In the name of God” and suggested replacing the phrase “its citizens” with “her citizens.” However, Owaisi noted that all such amendments were ultimately defeated during the drafting process.
Reiterating his argument, he stated that India is fundamentally defined by its people and not by the worship of a goddess. According to him, the nation neither runs in the name of a god or goddess nor belongs exclusively to one religious tradition.
Meanwhile, N Ramchander Rao criticised Owaisi’s objections and defended the Union Cabinet’s decision. The Telangana BJP president alleged that the AIMIM leadership sees every attempt at cultural integration and national cohesion as a threat to what he described as “religious exclusivism.”
Rao further drew a comparison with Muhammad Ali Jinnah, claiming that Jinnah too had not initially opposed ‘Vande Mataram’ during his early years in the Congress, but later changed his stance after leaving the party. According to Rao, this shift demonstrated how politics rooted in religious exclusivism often portrays civilisational and national symbols as threats.
In another post on X, the BJP leader argued that AIMIM’s opposition extends beyond ‘Vande Mataram’ and includes issues such as the Uniform Civil Code and the abolition of Triple Talaq. He claimed that the party consistently opposes efforts aimed at creating a common national framework and strengthening social cohesion.
According to Rao, such opposition reflects a political mindset that considers cultural integration and national unity dangerous to its political relevance and ideological positioning.
The controversy emerged after the Union Cabinet approved a proposal to amend the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971. Under the proposed amendment, any obstruction to the singing of the national song ‘Vande Mataram’ would become a punishable offence under law.
With this decision, ‘Vande Mataram’ would receive the same statutory protection currently provided to the national anthem ‘Jana Gana Mana’, a move that has now sparked a political and constitutional debate between opposition leaders and the ruling BJP.
