1. Lai Mohammed rejects the claim of a Christian genocide in Nigeria, noting that Boko Haram has killed more Muslims than Christians.
2. The violence in Nigeria stems from a mix of extremism, criminality, governance failures, and socio-economic issues, not simply Muslim–Christian tensions.
3. The group began by attacking Muslims who opposed its extremist ideology, showing its takfiri
4. Its actions such as killings, kidnappings, and opposition to education go against core Islamic principles, making it an adversary rather than a representative of Islam.
5. The “genocide” narrative oversimplifies reality and can mislead international responses, highlighting the need for a more accurate and nuanced understanding.

In an era shaped by rapid information flows and polarised narratives, conflicts are often reduced to simplistic binaries; frequently framed along religious lines. Recent remarks by Lai Mohammed, former Minister of Information and Culture of Nigeria, offer a timely intervention in correcting one such narrative: the claim of a targeted “Christian genocide” in Nigeria. Speaking at Abbey College Cambridge, Lai Mohammed argued that insurgent violence, particularly by Boko Haram, has claimed more Muslim lives than Christian ones, challenging widespread assumptions about the nature of the conflict.

This assertion does not seek to minimise the suffering of any community. Rather, it compels a more comprehensive understanding of Nigeria’s security crisis: one rooted not in religious extermination, but in a complex web of extremism, criminality, governance challenges, and socio-economic distress.

The Misleading Simplicity of Religious Framing

The tendency to interpret violence in Nigeria as a straightforward Muslim-versus-Christian conflict has gained traction in global discourse, particularly in parts of the Western media and advocacy circles. Yet, as Lai Mohammed pointed out, such a framing risks distorting reality. Boko Haram, whose name loosely translates to “Western education is forbidden,” did not begin as an anti-Christian movement. Its early targets were, in fact, Muslims, particularly those who embraced modern education and rejected extremist interpretations of Islam.

This internal targeting reveals a critical truth: Boko Haram’s ideology is fundamentally takfiri, meaning it declares other Muslims as apostates and legitimate targets. In its formative years, the group’s violence was directed overwhelmingly inward, against Muslim communities that did not conform to its rigid worldview.

Over time, the group widened its scope of attacks to include Christians, driven less by theological motives and more by strategic intent. As Lai Mohammed frankly noted, assaults on Christians tend to draw greater international attention. In a media-driven age, the spectacle of interfaith violence heightens visibility, attracts funding, and enhances the notoriety of extremist organisations.

Terrorism Without Theology

To understand Boko Haram solely through a religious lens is to misunderstand its nature. As highlighted in earlier scholarly critiques, the group’s actions—from mass killings to the abduction of schoolgirls in Chibok—stand in stark contradiction to Islamic teachings. Renowned Islamic scholars and institutions worldwide have unequivocally condemned such acts as un-Islamic.

Islam’s foundational principles emphasise the sanctity of life, the pursuit of knowledge, and the dignity of women. These are the values that Boko Haram systematically violates. Its campaign against education, especially for girls, directly opposes the very first Qur’anic revelation: “Read.” Similarly, practices such as forced marriages and abductions have no legitimacy within Islamic jurisprudence.

Thus, Boko Haram is not merely a violent group operating under religious pretexts; it is, in many ways, an adversary of the very religion it claims to represent. It exploits religious language while undermining its ethical core.

Banditry and the Politics of Crime

Lai Mohammed’s remarks also addressed another critical misconception: the religious interpretation of banditry in northern Nigeria. He argued that these acts are primarily criminal, not ideological. The perpetrators and victims often share the same ethnic and religious backgrounds, predominantly Hausa-Fulani Muslims.

This observation underscores a broader point: much of Nigeria’s violence is driven by economic desperation, weak state capacity, and organised crime rather than doctrinal conflict. Cattle rustling, kidnapping for ransom, and territorial disputes are manifestations of governance gaps, not religious wars.

Reducing these issues to religious persecution not only obscures their root causes but also risks inflaming tensions that are otherwise manageable within Nigeria’s historically pluralistic society.

A Tradition of Coexistence

Despite its challenges, Nigeria has long been a model of interfaith coexistence. Lai Mohammed pointed to the example of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and his wife, representing a Muslim-Christian household, as emblematic of the country’s social fabric. Across Nigeria, interfaith marriages, shared communities, and everyday interactions reflect a lived reality far removed from the narrative of existential religious conflict.

As Lai Mohammed aptly noted, ordinary Nigerians are more likely to disagree over economic issues than theological ones. This insight is crucial. It suggests that the primary concerns of citizens, jobs, security, and stability, transcend religious identity.

The Danger of “Fake News” in Conflict Zones

Labelling the “Christian genocide” narrative as “fake news,” Lai Mohammed raises an uncomfortable but necessary question: how do misinformation and selective reporting shape international perceptions?

In conflict zones, narratives can be weaponised. Advocacy groups, political actors, and even well-meaning observers may inadvertently amplify incomplete or skewed accounts. While highlighting human rights abuses is essential, doing so without context can lead to policy missteps and deepen divisions on the ground.

A more responsible approach requires distinguishing between targeted persecution and indiscriminate violence. In Nigeria’s case, the latter is far more representative of reality.

None of this is to deny the severity of Nigeria’s security crisis. Boko Haram remains a brutal insurgency responsible for thousands of deaths and widespread displacement. Its atrocities against Muslims and Christians alike demand urgent and sustained action.

However, effective responses must be grounded in accurate diagnosis. Mischaracterising the conflict as a religious genocide risks diverting attention from the structural issues that sustain violence: poverty, corruption, weak institutions, and lack of education.

The international community, therefore, has a responsibility to engage with Nigeria based on evidence rather than assumption. This includes supporting counter-terrorism efforts, strengthening governance, and investing in education and economic development, especially in the country’s most vulnerable regions.

The tragedy of Boko Haram is not that it represents Islam, but that it distorts it. The greater tragedy would be if the world, in its haste to categorise, fails to see this distinction. Lai Mohammed’s remarks serve as a reminder that truth in complex conflicts is rarely convenient. Nigeria’s crisis is not a story of one religion targeting another; it is a story of extremism preying on vulnerability, of criminals exploiting chaos, and of a nation striving, despite immense challenges, to preserve its pluralistic identity. Recognising this complexity is not an exercise in denial. It is the first step toward meaningful solutions.

A regular Columnist with NewAgeIslam.com, Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi Dehlvi is a Classical Islamic scholar with a Sufi background and English-Arabic-Urdu Translator.

Courtesy: newageislam.com

The post Beyond the Narrative of “Genocide”: Understanding Boko Haram, Religion, and Reality in Nigeria appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Though often overlooked in official narratives, Shariati remains one of the most influential intellectual figures behind the Iranian Revolution. His ideas, which linked Shi’ism with modern revolutionary theories drawn from thinkers such as Frantz Fanon and Jean‑Paul Sartre, helped shape the ideological climate that culminated in 1979.

Revisiting his legacy is essential not only for understanding Iran’s modern history but also for examining the broader intersections of religion, social justice, and political transformation in the Muslim world.

Born in 1933 in Mazinan, Shariati grew up in a religious household during a turbulent era. The 1953 overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and the Shah’s subsequent modernization drive—perceived by many as an attempt to erase cultural and religious roots in favor of Western approval—formed the backdrop of his intellectual evolution. Shariati’s activism led to imprisonment, and later, study in Paris, where exposure to existentialist and anti‑colonial thought profoundly shaped his worldview. He rejected Marxist materialism but embraced its critique of inequality, reinterpreting Islamic history to highlight figures such as Abu Dharr al‑Ghifari as symbols of resistance and social equality.

From this synthesis emerged Shariati’s concept of “Red Shiism,” a dynamic, activist Islam rooted in sacrifice, justice, and resistance, inspired by the legacy of Karbala. His slogan “Return to the Self” urged Muslim societies to break from blind imitation of the West and rediscover their intellectual heritage. His lectures and writings reframed Islam not as a passive spiritual refuge but as a force for liberation, capable of mobilizing the masses against tyranny. By the late 1970s, his ideas circulated widely among students and activists, laying the intellectual foundations of revolution.

Shariati’s critique extended beyond Marxism to liberalism and existentialism, which he faulted for neglecting the spiritual dimension of humanity. In works such as Marxism and Other Western Fallacies: An Islamic Critique, he argued that Islam offered its own emancipatory paradigm, distinct from Western secular traditions. He did not seek to make Islam socialist but rather employed Marxist sociological tools to galvanize Muslims into revolutionary action. His criticism of Iran’s Marxist Tudeh Party underscored his insistence on adapting political thought to Iran’s cultural and religious context.

Although Shariati died in 1977, two years before the revolution, his intellectual imprint was unmistakable. Pakistani writer Mukhtar Masood recorded that Iranians across social strata identified Shariati as the architect of the movement. Yet, as the revolutionary state consolidated power, charismatic leadership overshadowed intellectual activism, and Shariati’s role receded into obscurity. His story illustrates how revolutions often celebrate political victories while neglecting the thinkers who shaped their ideological foundations.

Shariati’s legacy endures as a reminder that religion, when reinterpreted through the lens of justice and resistance, can become a powerful agent of social transformation. His vision of Islam as a force for liberation continues to resonate in debates over faith, identity, and political change across the Muslim world.

Author is freelance journalist.

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Faith recast as social justice? Revisiting Shariati’s vision of Islam as liberation appeared first on SabrangIndia.

People were astonished when Radhika from Chandan Panchayat (then part of Raipur district) was elected sarpanch. Coming from a family of former bonded laborers recently freed by Supreme Court orders, she disrupted entrenched social hierarchies. With support from an organization of released bonded workers, Radhikabai implemented development works such as deepening tanks and constructing a school building. Villagers, especially from weaker sections, testified to her contributions. She also advanced claims for land distribution recommended by the Supreme Court. Yet, she considered her greatest achievement the closure of a liquor shop, which reduced alcohol consumption and village quarrels.

In Meethiberi Panchayat (Dehradun district), Radhadevi overcame resistance from influential villagers who attempted to buy votes with liquor and money. She won her first election when the seat was reserved for women, and later secured victory even without reservation. During her two terms as pradhan, she accelerated development works, fought successfully to restore a diverted road, and ensured benefits reached needy families. Villagers praised her compassion, with child widow Ramrati Yadav noting, “She is the only person in the village who visits me regularly.” The village demonstrated confidence in women’s leadership by electing women to six of seven panchayat posts, resulting in improved development and social harmony.

In the Patha region of Chitrakut district, Uttar Pradesh, Sonia Kol’s tenure as pradhan of Nihi village was transformative. Belonging to the marginalized Kol tribal community, she ensured benefits of housing schemes, pensions, food security cards, and scholarships reached the poorest families. She enforced land rights for landless households despite opposition from powerful villagers. Her leadership inspired women in neighboring villages to field strong candidates in subsequent elections.

In Sultanpur Chilkana (Saharanpur district), Suraiya Begum and Rajjo formed a remarkable team. Suraiya, from a traditional Muslim family, and Rajjo, a Dalit from a cobbler’s household, worked together with social activists to revitalize their indebted nagar panchayat. Their efforts won recognition as a model nagar panchayat.

These examples highlight the transformative potential of women’s reservation in panchayati raj institutions since 1993, which enabled the election of nearly one million women at village, block, and district levels. While leaders like Radhikabai, Radhadevi, Sonia Kol, Suraiya Begum, and Rajjo demonstrated exceptional capability, many women pradhans remain sidelined by “pati pradhan” practices, where husbands or male relatives dominate decision-making. Sonia Kol observed, “At block meetings, I often see men attending in place of elected women. With some support, these women could play an effective role, but family pressures hold them back.”

To strengthen women’s participation, stricter enforcement of rules ensuring their active involvement is essential. Training programs can equip newly elected women with knowledge of rights and responsibilities. Voluntary organizations and grassroots movements have also played a crucial role, as seen in Radhikabai’s collaboration with bonded laborers’ groups and Sonia’s association with the newspaper Khabar Lahariya.

Women leaders often prioritize issues overlooked by men, such as closing liquor shops, resolving conflicts amicably, supporting distressed families, and addressing sanitation needs. Their focus on nutrition, health, drinking water, and environmental protection underscores the broader social impact of women’s leadership in panchayats. Moreover, their visibility encourages ordinary village women to mobilize before elections, ensuring strong candidates emerge from within their communities.

These stories illustrate how women’s participation in rural governance not only advances development but also reshapes priorities, strengthens social harmony, and empowers marginalized voices.

The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, Man over Machine, and When the Two Streams Met

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Beyond 33%: The inspiring rise of women in rural decentralization appeared first on SabrangIndia.

be a tree sated with fertility, be a tree.

And if you are not a tree, my love, 

be stone saturated with humidity, be stone.

And if you are not a stone, my love, 

be a moon in the dream of your beloved one, be a moon.

(So spoke a woman to her son at his funeral.)

 Mahmoud Darwish, State of Siege (2002)

Mahmoud Darwish

To sit with these lines for five years is to realise that Mahmoud Darwish was not writing a poem. He was drafting an ontology of indestructibility. Written during the 2002 Siege of Ramallah, when Israeli forces confined him to his apartment under tanks and demolition orders, these verses are not an elegy. They are a war manual for the soul. A mother at her son’s funeral refuses to grieve as the world expects. Instead, she issues commands. She transforms her dead son into a landscape that cannot be evicted. This is the purest expression of “Sumud” (refusing to be erased or to leave one’s home), the Palestinian art of remaining, not as an act of passivity but as a furious, creative, and elemental refusal to vanish. The Arabic word “Sumud” is a crucial concept in Palestinian identity and resistance. It is often simply translated as “resilience”; it carries a much deeper meaning that bridges the gap between endurance and political defiance. At its core, “Sumud” is the act of maintaining a normal life under abnormal conditions, and refusing to be erased.

The repetition of “be” (the Arabic imperative kun) is not just a request; it is a command of creation. In the Quran, God creates the universe with the phrase “Kun fa-yakun” (“Be, and it is”).

By having a mother use this imperative at a funeral, Darwish is portraying a subversive act of creation. She is refusing to let her son vanish into nothingness. If he cannot exist as a human, his soul will be refashioned into the landscape by the power of language.

The Anatomy of a Siege: Beyond the Blockade

A siege is not merely a military act or tactic. It is a slow erasure of a people’s future. In Palestine, the “plight” is concrete. In the Palestinian context, this “plight” manifests as the systematic and brutal killing of children and young people, the uprooting of ancient olive groves, the restriction of water (the “rain” of the poem), the fragmentation of families by concrete walls, and the fragmentation of bodies by checkpoints. But Darwish teaches us that a siege is also metaphysical. It aims to reduce the human being to bare life, a hungry, terrified, statistically invisible creature stripped of history, name, and narrative.

For the Iranian people, the siege wears a different mask: economic sanctions and diplomatic strangulation. It is a blockade of medicine, knowledge, and global conversation. Yet the Zionist logic is identical: isolate, impoverish, and make the people beg for their own humanity. In both cases, the besieged are told they are temporary. Darwish’s mother replies: You have confused death with disappearance.

Global Sumud Flotilla For Palestine

The Alchemy of Elements: Resistance as Metamorphosis

When the human form is rendered illegal, when a son can be shot and his name erased from a registry, the mother refuses nothingness. She performs alchemy. She reincarnates her son into three elemental forms, each a higher degree of defiance.

The Tree (Rootedness as Land Title):

When the Zionist regime uproots ancient groves to plant Jewish settlements, the mother says: Be a tree. Not just any tree, but one “sated with fertility”, heavy with olives, with memory, with the sweat of ancestors. This is the ultimate rebellion. The tree does not hold a deed; it is the deed. Its roots argue with the bulldozer in a language that predates all modern borders. To become a tree is to say: You cannot deport geography.

The Stone (The Pulse Beneath the Weapon):

The stone is the icon of the Intifada. But Darwish does something extraordinary. He adds, “saturated with humidity.” Humidity is the breath of the living earth, the sweat of the farmer, the moisture that turns dust into clay. This is not the dry, dead stone of a ruin. It is the wet, resistant stone that grows moss and holds the coolness of the morning. For the Palestinian youth facing a military tank, or the Iranian student enduring a morality squad, the stone is the hard reality they throw back at power. But the humidity is their poetry, their cinema, their whispered jokes in the back of a taxi, the life that persists within the hardness.

The Moon (The Unreachable Sovereignty):

If the tree is cut and the stone shattered, the mother sends her son to the moon. Not the moon of astronomy, but a moon in the dream of your beloved one. This is the interior fortress. You can occupy a city, but not a dream. You can sanction a country, but not a lover’s memory. The moon represents a light that requires no passport, no fuel, no permission. It is the sovereignty of the inner life, the space where a displaced family still sings the old songs, where a Tehran artist paints in a basement, and where a refugee draws the key to a house that exists only in the mind.

Aftermath of a bombed area in Palestine

From Ramallah to Tehran: The Shared Geography of the Soul

What unites the Palestinian and Iranian resistance is not a shared history but a shared architecture of survival. Both people have learned that when the external world is blocked, you build inward and downward.

For Palestine, “Sumud” is literal: staying on the land, harvesting the olives under a military curfew, planting a sapling where a home was demolished. It is the insistence that even if the map is redrawn by force, the poetry remembers the original names.

For Iran, resilience takes the form of a cultural fortress. Facing decades of sanctions and ideological isolation, Iranians have turned to a deep well: Rumi, Hafez, and the cinema of Kiarostami and Panahi. They produce art that does not seek Western validation. They prove that their humanity is not a commodity to be granted or withheld by embassies, but a historical fact, an unbroken civilisation that has outlasted every invader, from Alexander to the narcissist Trump.

In both cases, the besieged become metamorphic. They change shape faster than the siege can adapt.

Image from the 2026 Protests in Iran

Art as the Final Frontier: The Ghazal as a Weapon

Darwish weaponises the traditional ghazal, a form of love poetry, for a funeral. He addresses a dead son as “my love”. This is not sentimentality. It is a radical humanisation. The occupier wants the dead son to be a number, a martyr statistic, a security threat even in the grave. The mother says: No. He was the rain I waited for. He was the moon in someone’s dream.

By using the intimate, erotic language of the ghazal, Darwish smuggles tenderness into a war zone. He reminds the world that every political casualty is first a beloved person. The siege cannot calculate grief, and that is its fatal weakness.

The Invincible Landscape

The final reveal: (So spoke a woman to her son at his funeral)- is the most devastating line. It reframes the entire poem as a whisper over a grave. But it is also the ultimate act of defiance. The mother tells the occupier: You have killed a man, but you have given birth to a landscape.

The son is no longer a body that can be buried. He is a tree that will keep fruiting, a stone that will keep striking, a moon that will keep haunting every dream. The siege, for all its military tanks and sanctions, cannot kill what can become something else.

Whether it is the farmer in Gaza planting saplings under drone surveillance, or the student in Tehran memorising Hafez in a blacked-out apartment, they are all following the mother’s command. They are becoming the rain, the tree, the stone, the moon. They are proving that the architecture of survival is not made of concrete and steel. It is made of metamorphosis. And that is why they are impossible to ignore and even more impossible to conquer. The mother in the poem is not just a mourner; she is the custodian of a history the occupier can’t erase. She is the pillar of strength and the stream of the nation’s collective sorrow. The poem is ultimately about refusing the silence of death. In a “State of Siege”, where people are threatened with erasure, the mother performs a ritual of metamorphosis. She ensures her son is never gone, but simply translated into the rain, the trees, and the stone of the home they are defending.

Courtesy: The AIDEM

The post The Metamorphic Resistance: Mahmoud Darwish, Resilience (Sumud), and the Architecture of Survival appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The issue was the discrepancy in the rise of population in Northern and Southern states. Roughly in Northern states the TFR (Total Fertility rate) being higher than the one in Southern states, this delimitation exercise will give more weightage to Northern states, where the hold of Hindu nationalist BJP is higher. The southern states are wary of this and so came out in full strength to oppose it. BJP is crying hoarse that opposition parties are humiliating the women by opposing the amendment. This apparent support of BJP to Women’s representation is just a façade. The other steps in the empowerment of women have generally been taken up by the Indian National Congress in general. We see that right from the freedom movement when it was leading the national movement against colonial powers INC gradually ensured that women are not only part of the process of ‘India Nation in the making’ but also part of the movements opposing British rule.

It did encourage women’s being part of the various phenomena of national life. After the marathon efforts by Jyotiba Phule and Savitribai Phule to give education to women, they did start coming to social space and played an important role in the struggle for independence. Chayanika Shah points out that INC had several women Presidents, then a woman Prime minister, woman Chief Minister, and woman President in its trajectory. Taking this process of empowerment at grass root level structures, Rajiv Gandhi was keen not only in Panchayati Raj but also for increased representation of women in these institutions.

Let us contrast all this with the hyperbole of Narendra Modi. There is no record of any affirmative action of women during the BJP (i.e. NDA) rule of Vajpayee years or Modi years. There seems to be an ideological connection between the BJP politics of Hindu Nationalism and their agenda of the role of women in politics. BJP is the political progeny of RSS, which is an exclusively male organization. When Laxmibai Kelkar (1936) requested the then RSS Chief Hedgewar to let women be part of RSS, she was advised to form a subordinate organization, Rashtra Sevika Samiti (Rss) and not permitted to join the RSS.

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh stands for Volunteers, while Rashtra Sevika Samiti stands for servants. This tells us that the Swayam (being) of women is in control of men. This is in tune with the mandate of Manu smriti. This holy book was upheld by RSS all through and even now this RSS combine holds that Indian Constitution is based on Western values and so should be scrapped (Rajendra Singh, Rajju Bhaiyya’s statement) and be replaced by a Holy Indian book, i.e. Manu Smriti (as per Sudarshan, another Sarsanghchalak of RSS)

In BJP’s policies, this is also reflected in the awarding of Gandhi Peace Prize to the Gita Press, Gorakhpur a year ago. This was done by a jury headed by Narendra Modi. While giving the award Modi stated that “They have done commendable work over the last 100 years towards furthering social and cultural transformations among the people,”  Akshaya Mukul in his masterly study of Gita Press shows how Gita Press has played a major role in transforming the teachings of Manu Smriti into popular small booklets which are sold in lakhs of copies. These uphold husbands’ beating of wives, glorifying playing second fiddle to men and total subordinating to men in their lives, Father; Husband and Son in different phases of life. Reported ACADEMIA.

BJP’s own history is full of such humiliating statements from their office bearers, which uphold the abominable practices against women including Sati. In the context of the Roop Kawar incident, the then BJP Vice President Vijaya Raje Scindia took out a procession supporting the practice of Sati. The slogan of the procession was that committing sati is not only a glorious tradition of Hindu women, it is also their right!

Another leader Mridula Sinha, (BJP Mahila Morcha) who was Governor of Goa a few years back had given an interview to Savvy Magazine. (April 1994) In this she upholds the wife beating by husband and dowry system.

The 2021 data of the National Crime Records Bureau reveals that on average, eighty-six women were raped every day in India, while forty-nine cases of crimes against women were lodged every single hour. The overall number of crimes against women per one hundred thousand of the population increased from 56.3 in 2014 to 66.4 in 2022.

During the present regime how the cases of sexual violence and harassment have been handled become clear in the cases of women’s sexual harassment. Several of these cases found their way into the mainstream news, such as the gang rape of a minor girl by a BJP legislator in Unnao, Uttar Pradesh, in 2017; the repeated gang rape and murder of an eight-year-old Muslim girl in Kathua, Kashmir, in 2018; and the gang rape of a Dalit girl in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh, in 2020” Women wrestlers complaints against Braj Bhushan Sharan Singh were ignored in toto. The case of women’s plight in Manipur is beyond words. As per reports in the JACOBIN.

While women MPs of BJP and others are making a lot of noise over the fall of this amendment bill the issue is why link it with delimitation. Why no move that with present strength of MPs only; why it should not be implemented with 2023 bill? We need to raise our voice to delink delimitation from the Women’s reservation bill and to call for its implementation right away as per the 2023 bill.

Related:

Women’s Reservation – 13 Questions to Modi And His Associates in Government – Just Asking !!

Womens Reservation Bill 2026: Women’s Rights & the RSS

Procedure for tabling bills on women’s reservations & delimitation both opaque and non-consultative: Experts and Citizens

The post Amendment to Women’s Reservation Bill: BJP’s hyperbole on women appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Samrat Choudhary has been saying, on no less than half a dozen occasions that the Bihar government has struck of 22-lakh names off Bihar’s electoral rolls (a power only with the Election Commission!). He goes further to state that Aadhar and other benefits of these ‘22-lakh persons’ will also be snatched away.  Who are these 22-lakh persons anyway?

Three days after he was appointed as CM of the state on April 15, replacing the doyen of the Janata Dal United (JD-U), Nitish Kumar, Choudhary made this extraordinary claim as reported by The Indian Express. Prior to this appointment, since late February 2026, during campaign stints in West Bengal he had been boastful of this ‘achievement’ by the new Bihar government. “So far, we have struck off the names of 22-lakh people and stopped their ration as well in Bihar. We will cancel their driving licenses and other cards as well,” Choudhary has stated emphatically.”

Ironically, antithetical to these hysterical claims are the facts from the ground. Bihar was the first state, pre-assembly poll to conduct a hurried and unchecked Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of its electoral rolls in 2025, an exercise that came under sharp criticism and much scrutiny. During this controversial process, while approximately 65-lakh deletions took place without sufficient time for independent adjudication of the action, the 22-lakh figure only corresponded to “deletions.” Now deletions are usually on account of duplicate enrolment, shifting of voters or the fact that they may be deceased. The media had widely reported between June-November 2025 that no largescale existence of “illegal immigrants” was identified or noticed by the Election Commission of India (ECI).

One issue of crucial concern therefore then is ‘where has the figure of 22-lakhs being projected by the Bihar CM come from?” Second, what about the adjudication process for the entire 65-lakh exclusions in the state? Third, the  moot question of whether or not an elected government in secular, democratic India is empowered to simply deny the right to an Aadhar card, or government scheme benefits to any person previously accessing these benefits without application of mind or independent judgement?

Before, during and after the SIR exercise in Bihar the Election Commission of India (ECI) under CEC Gyanesh Kumar has been squarely accused of partisan conduct, conduct unbefitting a Constitutional body since its actions aligned squarely with the ruling dispensation.

Ironically, but not coincidentally, the first week of April 2026, also saw a spate of “news reports” from Bihar around union home minister, Amit Shah’s visit to the Seemanchal areas of the state. As reported by ETV Bharat, Shah’s visit to the Seemanchal region during which he reviewed border security, the issue of illicit foreign settlers, law and order and other security-related situations in Kishanganj, Araria, Purnea, Katihar and other adjoining districts.

In line with this development, the news channel quoted a senior official of the state’s home department, additional chief secretary, Arvind Kumar Chaudhary stating that a ‘fresh letter had been written to all districts to identify suspected foreigners in their jurisdiction and if such persons are not living with valid documents, ‘their process of deportation would begin!’  Bihar government officials also ‘revealed that biometric data of those identified would be collected and uploaded to a central database maintained by the Union Home Ministry to streamline identification and prevent their re-entry.’

Where does the 22-lakh figure come from?

In early 2026, Vote for Democracy’s report on the Bihar polls, “An Audit of the Stolen Mandate” Bihar 2025 VFD Report Findings had recorded details of what the report termed “Mass disenfranchisement by design.” These stated that, according to official ECI data, the numerical impact of a hastily conducted SIR was staggering:

• On June 24, 2025, Bihar had 7.89 crore registered electors.
• By the Draft Roll of August 1, 2025, this fell to 7.24 crore, reflecting 65.69 lakh deletions.
• The Final Roll of September 30, 2025 stood at approximately 7.42 crore electors.

Yet, the report found that only 3.66 lakh voters were actually confirmed as ineligible. The scale of deletions was therefore grossly disproportionate, pointing not to routine correction but to electoral roll engineering.

Between July 21 and 25 alone, over 21.27 lakh voters were deleted in just three days—an implausible figure by any administrative standard. During this period, 5.44 lakh voters were marked ‘dead’, while 14.24 lakh were labelled ‘permanently shifted’. The number of voters marked ‘untraceable’ rose by 809% overnight, while not a single “foreigner” was identified—despite this being cited as a key justification for the revision.

Opaque ‘rectification’ and mathematical impossibilities

The report further exposed deep inconsistencies in the ECI’s claims of rectification. While the Commission stated that approximately 17 lakh objections or applications were received, the actual changes reflected in the rolls affected around 22-lakh entries. Even after accounting for corrections, the final voter count should have mathematically stood at approximately 7.38 crore, yet the ECI declared 7.42 crore electors, leaving an unexplained excess of 3.24 lakh voters.

No independent audit, reconciliation statement, or transparent explanation has been provided for this discrepancy.

Pre-poll manipulation after election notification

Electoral norms require that voter rolls be effectively frozen once elections are notified. However, the report documents that even after notification:

• On October 6, 2025, Bihar had 7.43 crore electors.
• By poll day, this had increased to 7.46 crore.

This means 3.34 lakh voters were added in just ten days, including a sudden and unexplained spike in youth voters—raising serious questions about roll sanctity during the election period.

1.3 The “Rectification” Fraud

• Discrepancy in Objections: ECI claimed only 17,00,000 (16,56,886+ 36,475 = 16,93,361)
• Applications were received by the September 1 deadline. However, actual changes were
• Performed on as many as 22-lakh entries.

The Calculation Anomaly:

• ECI reported additions of 16,56,886 (Form 6) + 36,475 (Claims) and exclusions of

2,17,0493.

• Net Addition Calculation: Should have been 14,76,312 added to the 7.24 Crore

base, totalling 7.38 Crore.

• Actual Figure (Sept 30): ECI declared 7.42 Crore (No. ECI/PN/313/2025)—a

hike of 3.24 Lakh over the calculated figure without explanation.

Multiple petitions were filed before the Supreme Court in July 2025 challenging the SIR process. These were moved by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), RJD MP Manoj Jha, TMC MP Mahua Moitra, and Social Activist Yogendra Yadav among several others. These petitions alleged that the SIR lacked statutory backing

under the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and Registration of Electors Rules,

1960, imposed onerous documentation requirements, and risked large-scale

disenfranchisement, particularly of migrants, the poor and marginalised communities.

Petitioners had also argued that the SIR effectively resembled a citizenship-style verification exercise

Unfortunately, while the irregularities in the Bengal SIR continue to be scrutinised by the Supreme Court of India due to an assertive role played by the Trinamool Congress ruling that state, Bihar’s excluded voters –whatever the actual number—remain abandoned and forgotten. By both the political Opposition and the Institutions of Democratic Governance. Even as the new CM makes boastful claims of ‘disenfranchising’ a staggering 22-lakh persons!

Related:

Bihar’s SIR process reveals an exercise of illegitimate powers, ECI forcing district machinery to resort to unethical practices: CCG’s Open Letter

Bihar SIR: 65 Lakh electors flagged for deletion, SC said “if there is mass exclusion, we will immediately step in”

ECI to SC: Voter ID insufficient for Bihar roll, defends citizenship verification power

Punjab University’s former dean writes to CJI: Bihar SIR threatens democracy, alleges ECI overreach & voter disenfranchisement

Non-Electors Within Electors: ECI reports over 61 lakh potential exclusions

The post Bihar “Infiltrator” Hysteria: Samrat Choudhary’s claims of disenfranchising 22-lakh people corresponds to ECI’s “deceased voters” figure appeared first on SabrangIndia.

These 13 questions – sharp, insistent, and impossible to brush aside – cut through the carefully crafted and cunning narrative on women’s empowerment projected by Narendra Modi and his government. Shivasundar is not merely interrogating policy; he is challenging the very intent, timing, and political calculus behind this charade of a law

Through this Shivasundar exposes how the women’s reservation issue has been transformed from a long-awaited democratic reform into an electoral instrument — announced with fanfare, deferred with design, and deployed in moments of political convenience. Here are the questions. Read On.

Question #1

After amending Article 334A of the Constitution in 2023 with unanimous support of all parties and making women’s reservation a law, what was the need for another constitutional amendment?

Question #2

As demanded unanimously by opposition parties in 2023, why was 33% reservation not implemented within the existing 543 seats? Why were unnecessary conditions added—such as implementing it only after delimitation based on the 2026 census—making it impossible to enforce women’s reservation until 2034?

Question #3

Why was the Act, passed in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha in 2023, approved by the President and gazetted, not notified until April 16, 2026?

Question #4

If the intention of bringing the 2026 constitutional amendment bill was to implement women’s reservation quickly, why were manipulative sub-conditions like delimitation based on the 2011 census included?

Question #5

Even knowing that adding highly controversial delimitation conditions would prevent securing a two-thirds majority in Parliament, why was this process initiated?

Question #6

Even now, why is your government unwilling to call a special session and introduce a simple amendment to provide 33% reservation within the existing 543 seats?

Question #7

In 2023, you introduced a women’s reservation bill that could not be implemented until 2034—just one year before elections.

Now, during ongoing elections in five states, despite clearly knowing the bill would fail (due to delimitation conditions), you deliberately introduced and ensured its defeat. You have also started a false and divisive campaign blaming opposition parties for this failure.

Was this bill introduced merely to defame the opposition?

Does this not mean you have consistently betrayed women’s reservation for petty electoral gains?

Question #8

Since 1996, proposals for women’s reservation have been repeatedly introduced in Parliament by Congress governments, United Front governments, your own Vajpayee government, and later the UPA government. One major reason as to why they were not passed was the objection that there was no sub-quota for OBCs within women’s reservation.

Why did even the Vajpayee government not attempt to implement women’s reservation with an OBC sub-quota, like other governments?

Why does the 2026 bill you introduced also not include an OBC sub-quota?

Question #9

One of the reasons why attempts between 1996–2014 failed was coalition governments. But in 2014 and 2019, the Modi government had a full majority. Why did you not use that to pass women’s reservation without delimitation conditions, as you did for EWS reservation for upper caste?

Instead,

a) In 2023, you ensured it could not be implemented until 2034

b) In 2026, you added malicious delimitation conditions and ensured the bill’s defeat

Does this not make the Modi government the most anti-women and opposed to women’s reservation?

Question #10

If the BJP truly has commitment to women’s empowerment, why not voluntarily give 33% tickets to women in Lok Sabha and Assembly elections without waiting for a law? Except for TMC, why does BJP—like most other parties—still limit women’s tickets to around 12–15%?

Question #11

After the bill’s defeat, Prime Minister Modi allegedly misused government machinery and, acting like a BJP leader, delivered hate-filled election speeches falsely branding opposition parties as anti-women. Since institutions like the Election Commission and Supreme Court are not acting against this, does this not further prove that the bill was introduced just to label opposition parties as anti-women and gain women’s votes?

Question #12

In yesterday’s speech, Prime Minister Modi called himself a protector of women.

But over the past 11 years, in cases like Manipur, Kathua, Unnao, harassment of women wrestlers, and honoring of Bilkis Bano case convicts by BJP leaders—why has he remained silent, even when BJP MPs and leaders themselves were accused of crimes against women? Why protect such perpetrators instead of speaking out?

Question #13

Modi compared the failure of women’s reservation to female foeticide. Female foeticide reduces the proportion of women in society compared to men.

In reality, why do states like Gujarat (long ruled by BJP), and Haryana and Uttar Pradesh (with strong BJP and Sangh influence), have among the lowest female-to-male ratios in the country?

Conversely, why do states like Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Telangana, and West Bengal—where BJP influence is relatively weaker—have higher female population ratios compared to “Hindi-Hindu” states?

Just asking.

Courtesy: The AIDEM

The post Women’s Reservation – 13 Questions to Modi And His Associates in Government – Just Asking !! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Sadly, as a core cadre member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Modi’s avtar as a messiah of women is fraught with deceit.

Not delving into the glut of sex scandals involving RSS top cadres which were exposed by RSS leading ideologues like Balraj Madhok (Zindagi kaa Safar 3: Deendayal Upadhyay kee Hatya se Indira Gandhi kee Hatya Tak, 2003) and Hemendra Nath Pandit (The End of a Dream: An Inside View of the RSS Today, 1950) we today need to scrutinize the RSS archives to know the deep and core levels of this male chauvinistic anti-Hindu women ideology. This is also evident in their practice.

1. Inside the RSS: Males are Volunteers

RSS founded in 1925 was to be an exclusive male organisation, its cadres were to be known as swayamsevak or volunteers. The RSS top brass made its intentions clear of treating women as of lower status than males when it decided to start its women wing; Rashtra Sevika Samiti in 1936. Its nomenclature made it clear that women members were not called as swayamsevak or volunteers but Rashtr Sevika (servants for the nation) or female servants for the Hindu nation. This identity of women in the Rashtr Sevika Samiti as servants was not only a technical issue but outcome of RSS’ attitude towards Hindu women which glorifies the subservient role of women in the society.

These are Rashtr Sevika Samiti members [who according to its website number around three lakh] only who pledge to maintain ‘faithfulness/virginity’, remain ‘modest’, ‘steadfast’, and not fall prey to ‘immorality and evil habits’. The RSS male swayamsevaks make no such commitment.

RSS Demands Manusmriti as Constitution Of India

In fact, this anti-woman attitude of RSS was glaringly visible when on the eve of the ratification of the democratic secular constitution by the Indian Constituent Assembly [November 26, 1949] it rejected it and demanded promulgation of Manusmriti or Manu Code as the constitution of India. A perusal of chapters V and IX will show how Hindu women were to be treated as sub-human creatures.

Laws of Manu concerning women

1. Day and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their (families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they must be kept under one’s control. (Chapter IX/sloka 2)
2. Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence. (IX/3)
3. Considering that the highest duty of all castes, even weak husbands (must) strive to guard their wives. (IX/6)
4. Women, confined in the house under trustworthy and obedient servants, are not (well) guarded; but those who of their own accord keep guard over themselves, are well guarded. (IX/12)
5. Women do not care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age; (thinking), ‘(It is enough that) he is a man,’ they give themselves to the handsome and to the ugly. (IX/14)
6. Through their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their natural heartlessness, they become disloyal towards their husbands, however carefully they may be guarded in this (world). (IX/15)
7. (When creating them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct. (IX/17)
8. For women no (sacramental) rite (is performed) with sacred texts, thus the law is settled; women (who are) destitute of strength and destitute of (the knowledge of) Vedic texts, (are as impure as) falsehood (itself), that is a fixed rule. (IX/18)

3. GANDHI PEACE PRIZE to GITA PRESS Which Denigrates Hindu Women

Gita Press, Gorakhpur was awarded the 2022 Gandhi Peace Prize, the prestigious international award instituted by Government of India in 1995 while commemorating 125^th birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi. It was to be conferred on those individuals/organisations which contributed to carrying forward the ideals espoused by him. The jury which conferred it to Gita Press was headed by PM Modi.

PM Modi congratulated Gita Press, “on being conferred the Gandhi Peace Prize 2021. They have done commendable work over the last 100 years towards furthering social and cultural transformations among the people,” Incidentally, Gita Press was also celebrating its centenary in 2022.

Award to Gita Press was not only shocking for all those who cherished Gandhian values, humanism and civilized norms but all those who opposed gender-based persecution. It was a sad day for the Indian democratic-secular Republic as that Modi government idolized Gita Press which publishes  ‘Hindu’ literature  propagating Sati  and beating  of  women.  It publishes “popular” religious, ‘Hindu’  literature  which opposes remarriage of widowed/divorced/discarded women, seeking employment by them and even reporting rape as we will find by the perusal of some of its publications. According to this literature, this is the way for Hindu women to end in swarg or paradise.

Gita Press has published more than a dozen titles on the subject, the most prominent of which are: Nari Shiksha (Education of Women) by Hanuman Prasad Poddar, Grahsth Mein Kaise Rahen [How to Lead a Household Life] by Swami Ramsukhdas, Striyon ke Liye Kartawya Shiksha (Education of Duties for Women) and Nari Dharm (Religion of Woman) by Jai Dayal Goindka and a special issue of magazine Kalyan on women. These are available in English and other Indian languages. The English titles are popular with the non-resident Indians.

Some glimpses of anti-Hindu women content of Gita Press publications:

‘What should the wife do if her husband beats her and troubles her?” Swami Ramsukhdas offers the following sagely advice to the battered wife and her parents:

“The wife should think that she is paying her debt of her previous life and thus her sins are being destroyed and she is becoming pure. When her parents come to know this, they can take her to their own house because they have not given their daughter to face this sort of bad behaviour.”

And there is another piece of heavenly advice for a rape victim and her husband.

“As far as possible, it is better for woman (rape victim) to keep mum. If her husband also comes to know of it, he too should keep mum. It is profitable for both of them to keep quiet.”

Can a woman remarry? The answer is very straight forward,

“When once a girl is given away in marriage as charity by her parents, she does not remain virgin any more. So how can she be offered as charity to anyone else? It is beastliness to remarry her.”

But can a man remarry? No problem,

“A man can have a second wife for an issue in order to be free from the debt which he owes to manes (pitr-rin) according to the ordinances of the scriptures, if there is no issue from the first wife.”

But this is not the only reason for which a man is allowed re- marriage. A man, “whose desire for pleasure has not been wiped out, can get remarried because if he does not get remarried, he will indulge in adultery and    go to prostitutes and will incur a badly sin. Therefore, in order to escape the sin and maintain the decorum he should get remarried according to the ordinance of scriptures.”

Of course, no widow is allowed to remarry. However, she may be allowed to choose to be some male’s concubine.

“If she cannot maintain her character, instead of indulging in adultery here and there, she should accept her affinity for a person and live under his protection.”

Is it proper for woman to demand equal rights? The sagely answer is quite unambiguous:

“No, it is not proper. In fact, a woman has not the right of equality with man…in fact it is ignorance or folly which impels a woman to have desire for the right of equality with man. A wise person is he/she who is satisfied with less rights and more duties.”

This literature about Hindu women openly preaches and glorifies the ghastly practice of Sati. To the question:

“Is ‘Sati Pratha’ (viz., the tradition of the wife being cremated with the dead body of the husband on the funeral pyre) proper or improper?”

The sagely answer is:

“A wife’s cremation with the dead body of her husband on the funeral pyre is not a tradition. She, in whose mind truth and enthusiasm come, burns even without fire and she does not suffer any pain while she burns. This is not a tradition that she should do so, but this is her truth, righteousness and faith in scriptural decorum…It means that it is not a tradition. It is her own religious enthusiasm. On this topic Prabhudatta Brahmachariji has written a book whose title is Cremation of a Wife with her Husband’s Dead Body is the Backbone of Hindu Religion, it should be studied.”

Apart from glorifying Sati, the Gita Press publication like Nari Dharm produces dozens of shlokas from ‘Hindu’ scriptures to establish that women are not capable of enjoying independence. This book begins with the chapter swatantarta ke liye striyon ki ayogeta (incapability of women for independence). Another notable facet of this literature is that long a list of rituals is laid down to be practiced by pregnant women so that ‘bright, talented, brave and religious inclined son’ is born.

Unfortunately, parliamentary opposition which intends to confront PM Modi on his hoax of love for women did not confront him with the above stated facts due to ignorance of the dehumanized ideology and practices of RSS. The moral of the story is that RSS-BJP government juggernaut led by PM Modi is able to befool the women specially Hindu women of India not due to its respect for women but because opponents are totally ignorant of the criminality of RSS. For Modi ignorance of his opponents is blessing!

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Related:

November 26: How RSS mourned the passage of India’s Constitution by the Constituent Assembly

Indian tricolour & the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh

Rewriting NCERT school textbooks: ‘Muslim Raj’ is a mere excuse, the project is to conceal historical facts

The post Womens Reservation Bill 2026: Women’s Rights & the RSS appeared first on SabrangIndia.

More MPs, Less Debate

India’s Constitution distributes legislative sovereignty between Parliament and State Assemblies, defining powers through the 7th Schedule of the constitution – Union, State, and Concurrent Lists. Under this system, Parliament legislates on Union subjects. Bills are introduced, debated, and passed by the required majority.

But in practice:

Even in the current Lok Sabha of 543 members, the speaking time is allocated based on ‘party strength’. Individual MPs — especially those outside dominant parties — are given little to no space. Often, they are not allowed to speak for more than a minute, as repeatedly pointed out by Thol. Thirumavalavan MP. This goes against the grain of representative and inclusive democracy that should give every voice, regardless of party or political strength, the space and time to express views, even dissent.

So:

• Will increasing MPs improve deliberation?
• Will it strengthen representation?

It will only further compress individual voices.

The Real Problem: Centralisation

Why is there no time for debate? Because Parliament is overloaded.

Why is it overloaded? Because it interferes in too many subjects — especially in the name of Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS).

One Example is the Union Government’s Jal Jeevan Mission – A centrally sponsored scheme.

On April 16, 2026, DMK Member of Parliament (MP), senior advocate, P. Wilson raised a question in Rajya Sabha. He pointed, ‘Tamil Nadu has been one of the best performing states in the country providing functional household tap connection to 1.12 crore out of 1.25 crore households achieving nearly 90% but, only Rs 5914 crores have been released for funds under this scheme leaving Rs 3112 crores pending. For 2024 – 2025, while Rs 2434 crores was allotted but only Rs 732 crores have been released. Due to this unreasonable fiscal control by the regime at the centre, the Tamil Nadu government itself has to advance Rs 2550 crores. He went on to explain, how, for the Hogenakkal combined water supply scheme phase – III, the project was approved at the cost of Rs 8428 crores with the union government share of Rs 2283 crores under the Jal Jeevan mission framework but today (early 2026), the union government (unilaterally) says the project stands cancelled and suddenly informs that the assistance cannot be extended! Besides the MP exposed how, ten additional multi village drinking water schemes worth about Rs. 7590 crores proposed by Tamil Nadu for full rural coverage are also pending for approval.  MP Wilson demanded an answer to this state of affairs which he has not, to date, received.

Parliament is not a one way traffic. The Union Government is answerable to states. West Bengal has raised similar concerns. However this regime steamrolls through with its undemocratic methods.

Encroaching on Schedule VII of the Constitution, Items under the State List: Entry 17 under the List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule in Constitution of India clearly marks that the ‘Water’ is a State Subject. Also the Minister of State for Jal Shakti, V. Somanna, in a written reply presented in the Rajya Sabha stated, ‘Drinking Water is a state subject, and hence, the responsibility of planning, approval, implementation, operation, and maintenance of drinking water supply schemes, including those under the Jal Jeevan Mission, lies with State/UT Governments. The Government of India supports the States by providing technical and financial assistance.’

Do the facts suggest that the Centre is really providing assistance? NO. They are promising to support and cut the rope while the state attempts to climb a mountain!

Another encroachment on State Subjects: Similarly Entry 14 of the List II states that ‘Agriculture’ is a state subject. However, we all are well aware that three farm laws favouring corporates were brought in by the Union Government, inviting months’ long protests and finally their withdrawal! The Centre has also interfered in the procurement, with the tag of price control and food safety. Due to that the paddy procurement was affected in the past month. Tamil Nadu’s request is not a dilution of procurement norms but a legitimate invocation of flexibility already embedded in the Union’s framework.

Under the Fair Average Quality (FAQ) standards administered by the Food Corporation of India and the Department of Food and Public Distribution, paddy moisture is capped at 17%, but relaxations are permitted in exceptional conditions with prior approval. Citing unseasonal rains, the state has formally sought permission to procure paddy with slightly higher moisture (18–20%), even agreeing to value cuts as per official norms. The core issue is fiscal and federal: unless such procurement is accepted into the Central Pool, the burden falls on the state, effectively penalizing farmers for climatic factors—making this a case for cooperative federalism, not regulatory compromise.

The solution is clear:

• Do not interfere in the State List
• Share Union List powers with states and local bodies
• Retain only essential subjects like foreign affairs, defence, and currency at the Union level

With this, a limited number of MPs can still have meaningful discussions. However, the Union government is doing the opposite — it is centralising power further. This is not governance. This is authoritarian centralisation — fascism in practice.

What Can an MP actually do?

In reality, MPs are reduced to:

• Asking questions, mostly written — a power even citizens have through RTI
• Raising basic constituency issues like drinking water and bridges crossing railways. But should such issues even reach Parliament?

This is not governance efficiency. It is an enforced dependency.

Fiscal Centralisation

Why should states depend on Parliament for funds? If taxation powers are devolved properly, states can govern independently. Why should drinking water schemes or farmer incentives require Union approval? This is a systemic flaw — not something delimitation can fix.

Collapse of Institutional Mechanisms

MPs can also work through Parliamentary Standing Committees.

But from 2014 to 2026:

• How many committee reports have been discussed?
• How many have been implemented?

These committees have been reduced to symbolic bodies. Their reports are ignored. Without them, transparency collapses.

The solution lies in reform of the working of the constitution, Not in Delimitation:

• Redefine Union, State, and Concurrent Lists
• Except for foreign affairs, defence, and currency, powers should lie with states & local bodies.

Democracy being suffocated

What we see today:

• MPs are prevented from functioning meaningfully
• Constitutional structures are weakened
• Parliamentary democracy is being suffocated

This is not accidental. It is a deliberate project of a supremacist and fascist Union BJP government — bending institutions to concentrate power.

Unfair Delimitation and the Betrayal of Federal Justice

Delimitation, in theory, is about determining the number of representatives based on population. That is the legal argument.

The policy of population control in India was not accidental; it was a conscious national direction shaped through constitutional design and public policy. The Constitution of India (1950) distributed legislative powers through the Seventh Schedule, placing subjects across the Union, State, and Concurrent Lists. While public health and population-related matters were initially within the domain of states, a decisive shift occurred during the 42nd Constitutional Amendment of 1976, when “family planning and population control” were placed in the Concurrent List (Entry 20A), enabling both the Union and states to legislate and act.

This was followed by clear policy articulation at the national level. The National Population Policy of 1976, framed during the Emergency, and later the National Population Policy of 2000, set explicit demographic goals, including achieving replacement-level fertility. These were not symbolic declarations; they were calls for coordinated national action.

It was the South Indian states that responded with seriousness and administrative discipline. From the 1980s through the 2000s, states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, and undivided Andhra Pradesh implemented population control measures effectively, bringing down fertility rates early and stabilising population growth. This was not merely a demographic achievement — it translated into better allocation of resources, improved public health systems, and higher human development outcomes.

In contrast, several North Indian states failed to implement these policies with the same urgency or effectiveness. Population growth continued at high levels well into the 2000s and even the 2010s, creating a widening demographic imbalance within the Union.

The Constitution itself recognised the risk of penalising states that performed well.

Under Article 81 of the Constitution of India, representation in the Lok Sabha is linked to population. However, to ensure that states which successfully controlled their populations were not politically disadvantaged, Parliament intervened. Through the 42nd Amendment (1976), the allocation of seats was frozen based on the 1971 Census. This freeze was later extended by the 84th Constitutional Amendment (2001) until 2026, with the 87th Amendment (2003) allowing adjustments based on the 2001 Census without altering the total number of seats.

The principle was clear: demographic responsibility should not lead to political punishment.

Today, that principle stands on the verge of being reversed.

With delimitation expected after 2026, the Union government is preparing to re-link parliamentary representation strictly to population. The implications are profound. States that adhered to national policy, controlled population growth, and managed their resources responsibly will see their political weight reduced. States that failed to do so will gain greater representation and influence in Parliament.

This inversion of justice is not a technical correction — it is a structural distortion.

States that cooperated with Union policy in the national interest are now being “rewarded” with a loss of rights and voice. States that disregarded the same policy are being “rewarded” with expanded political power. One is forced to ask: is this justice? And more importantly, who is being asked this question — a government that increasingly exhibits fascist tendencies in its centralisation of power?

When this contradiction is placed before constitutional forums, the deeper tensions within this approach will become evident.

At the same time, the Union government continues to repeatedly invoke the Constitution to justify delimitation. But this raises a more fundamental question: why is delimitation being pushed with such urgency, while far more pressing structural issues remain unaddressed?

The real crisis in Indian governance today is not a shortage of representatives; it is the over-centralisation of power. Parliament is burdened with subjects that rightfully belong to states. Fiscal powers remain concentrated at the Union level, forcing states to depend on central allocations even for basic welfare and infrastructure. A town should not have to wait for Union schemes for drinking water, nor should farmers depend on central approvals for incentives. These are failures of federal design — not problems that delimitation can solve.

Instead of correcting these imbalances by strengthening states and local bodies, the Union government is pursuing a path that further concentrates power. This is not administrative reform. It is authoritarian consolidation — fascism expressed through institutional control.

The consequences extend beyond federal structure into economic reality. The government that has failed to significantly improve development outcomes or quality of life in lagging regions is now attempting to extract from the more productive states. The burden of demographic imbalance is being shifted onto the South — not to uplift the North in any meaningful way, but to redistribute power and resources.

Will this extraction benefit the ordinary people of North India? There is little evidence to suggest so. Instead, the pattern increasingly points toward concentration of economic gains in the hands of a few corporate entities — most notably a select coterie.

Thus, delimitation is not merely a constitutional exercise. It is a political project — one that seeks to reconfigure representation, alter federal balance, and entrench a particular ideological dominance.

The question, therefore, is not whether delimitation is constitutionally permissible. The question is whether it is just. And in its current form, it is not.

Why Delimitation Now?

If delimitation does not solve governance issues, why push it? Because the objective is political. Southern states have identified and are exposing the fascist tendencies of the Union government. They are taking this message across India. This creates a threat to the Fascist Propaganda.

So BJP is trying to,

• Increase MPs from northern states where the BJP has stronger control
• Reduce the relative political strength of southern states
• Entrench RSS ideology structurally

Delimitation becomes a tool of political domination.

A Pattern of Imposition

This fits into a larger pattern:

• Hindi imposition through the three-language policy
• Sanskrit cultural imposition through the New Education Policy
• Sanatana imposition through schemes like Vishwakarma
• Minority property targeting through Waqf amendments
• Citizenship insecurity through CAA-type laws
• Public sector, transport, and infrastructure assets being handed over to private corporate entities

States like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, and Telangana have resisted all of this. Unable to handle these states politically, the Union government is attempting to weaken them structurally.

The Federal Resistance

As Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy pointed out, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin was among the first to bring these issues to light. He has also pushed for unity among states. This is critical. Because this is not just policy — it is a battle over India’s federal structure.

Conclusion: What India Actually Needs

India does not need more MPs.

It needs:

• Stronger states
• Empowered local governance
• Fiscal autonomy
• Respect for federalism

Delimitation offers none of this.

Instead, it risks:

• Weakening federal balance
• Reducing real representation
• Expanding centralised, fascist control

This is not democratic reform. It is democratic distortion in the service of power.

Tamil Nadu will fight — Tamil Nadu will win. And along this path, states across India will unite and speak the truth.

(The author is an independent Tamil journalist with YouTube channels, Peralai, AranSei)

Related:

Will delimitation have severe, undemocratic consequences following the SIR?

PM Narendra Modi’s frequent visits to Tamil Nadu, his “love” for Tamil culture exposed

The post Delimitation: A false solution driven by centralised power appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Following delimitation, the parliamentary representation of southern Indian states is projected to decline from 23.6% to approximately 20%, whereas the representation of the Hindi-speaking northern and central states—where the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has substantial electoral strength—is expected to increase from 38.1% to 43.1%. This shift enables the ruling BJP to maintain political dominance even without substantial support from southern states.

Beyond its federal implications, this issue also raises normative concerns regarding democratic principles.

The delimitation process is grounded in the principle of “one person, one vote and One Vote One Value”, that is  the equal value of each vote. Ideally, each parliamentary or legislative constituency should represent a comparable number of voters across the country. Based on this principle, the allocation of seats in state assemblies and the Lok Sabha is determined.

For instance:

In the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, Uttar Pradesh (UP) had approximately 15.4 Crore registered voters and 80 parliamentary seats, implying that each Member of Parliament (MP) represented around 19.3 lakhs voters.

In contrast, Tamil Nadu (TN) had about 6.24 crore voters and 39 seats, with each MP representing roughly 16 lakh  voters. This discrepancy suggests that the relative value of an individual vote varies across states.

From a theoretical standpoint, delimitation could address such disparities by standardising representation—for example, by ensuring one MP per 10-15 lakh voters nationwide. However, such an approach would increase representation for more populous states while comparatively reducing it for states that have achieved lower population growth.

This raises a fundamental question for a democracy with many regional complexities and existing regional imbalance in political representation:

How can equitable representation be ensured without exacerbating regional imbalances?

The Modi governments’ approach to delimitation intended to reinforce existing myopic political advantages for the BJP at the cost inciting regional unrest leading to centrifugal tendencies which is already brewing in the republic.

An additional dimension of the debate concerns the interaction between delimitation and SIR. While delimitation determines the number of parliamentary seats, SIR determines the electorate itself.

The combined effect of these processes result in disproportionate disadvantage to southern states. To illustrate let us take the examples of both UP and TN where the SIR process has been completed and check the impact of Delimitaion.

Under the proposed framework (based on the 2011 Census):

Uttar Pradesh’s Lok Sabha seats may increase from 80 to 143.

Tamil Nadu’s seats may increase from 39 to 49.

Following the SIR:

Uttar Pradesh is estimated to have approximately 13.39 Cr voters, after the SIR, resulting in one Member of Parliament (MP) per about 9.36 lakhs voters.

Tamil Nadu, after the SIR, is estimated to have around 5.67 million voters, leading to one MP per approximately 11.57 lakhs voters. Thus, disparities in voter-to-representative ratios would persist, with southern states potentially experiencing relatively lower vote value.

A similar pattern is projected for Karnataka. After delimitation, the state may receive 41 seats. Depending on changes in the voter base following SIR, the number of voters per MP could remain comparatively higher than in northern states.

In comparative terms, if all states were represented at the same ratio as Uttar Pradesh (approximately one MP per 9.36 lakhs voters), Tamil Nadu should get 60 seats instead of 49, with similar implications for Karnataka. Thus both the SIR and delimitation of the Modi government as currently proposed, is a lethal attack on Parliamentary Democracy.

It is for this reason that the country should say a clear NO to both the SIR and the Delimitation.

An alternative framework that preserves the principle of equal vote value while minimizing regional disparities in representation need to be evolved through democratic consultation with the People and States of the Republic.

Related:

Procedure for tabling bills on women’s reservations & delimitation both opaque and non-consultative: Experts and Citizens

“Inside the SIR”: Booklet flags ‘mechanical disenfranchisement’ in electoral roll revision

No Hearing, No Notice, Just Deletion: How Bengal’s SIR Erased a Decorated IAF Officer

The post Will delimitation have severe, undemocratic consequences following the SIR? appeared first on SabrangIndia.