Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi’s newfound love for the Indian Constitution and his penchant for using it to criticize the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have devolved into a political volleyball match. Both the Congress and BJP are twisting historical facts to score points, with names and legacies being bandied about in the process.
Rahul Gandhi accuses the BJP, its predecessor Bharatiya Jana Sangh, and their ideological parent Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) of disrespecting the Constitution and Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar, who chaired the committee that drafted India’s Constitution. The BJP counters by alleging that India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Rahul’s great-grandfather, marginalized Ambedkar. Both sides are partly right but equally guilty of distorting the truth.
It is undeniable that the Jana Sangh and RSS opposed sections of the Constitution that empowered women. In 1949, they even burned effigies of Nehru and his law minister Ambedkar in protest against the Hindu Code Bill, which aimed to ban polygamy.
However, Nehru’s treatment of Ambedkar as a political outlier is equally damning. While it ostensibly had nothing to do with Ambedkar’s caste, Nehru’s Brahmin pride may have subtly influenced his decisions. Nehru invited Ambedkar to serve as the law minister in India’s first government but kept him at arm’s length. Ambedkar himself acknowledged the law minister’s role had little administrative significance and sought additional portfolios or inclusion in key cabinet committees, only to be consistently sidelined by Nehru. This culminated in Ambedkar’s resignation.
The deeper reason behind Nehru’s attitude lies in Ambedkar’s non-membership in the Indian National Congress. Ambedkar’s inclusion in the cabinet was not Nehru’s idea but Mahatma Gandhi’s recommendation to represent all Indians, not just Congress loyalists. Despite both being brilliant lawyers, Nehru’s domineering personality clashed with Ambedkar’s independent streak. Ambedkar’s vocal criticism of Nehru’s pro-Muslim stance, particularly regarding Kashmir, only deepened their rift.
Ambedkar’s resignation speech in the Lok Sabha stands as a stark testament to their ideological divide. His disillusionment drove him to consider converting to Sikhism before ultimately embracing Buddhism, seeking to uplift Dalits by transcending Hindu orthodoxy.
Today, both Congress and BJP cynically invoke Ambedkar’s name for political gain. While Rahul Gandhi professes love for the Dalit icon, it remains unclear whether he has read Ambedkar’s Lok Sabha resignation speech. Similarly, the BJP’s adulation of Ambedkar rings hollow given the RSS’s historical animosity—evidenced by its 1949 effigy-burning protests against Ambedkar.
Ambedkar’s legacy is neither owned by Congress nor respected by the RSS. Born untouchable, he died as a political untouchable—a tragic testament to India’s enduring hypocrisy.
Ajay Jha is a senior journalist, author and political commentator.
