Hindu Editorial Analysis : 16-September-2023
The recent controversy surrounding the nomenclature of India’s President, referring to the position as the “President of Bharat” in an official invitation for the G-20 summit, has ignited a broader debate. This debate touches upon the political atmosphere, constitutional nuances, and the need for a consensus-driven approach in a diverse and historically rich nation like India.
Constitutional Perspective: “President of India” Under Article 52
From a constitutional standpoint, the title of the head of state in India is officially designated as the “President of India” under Article 52 of the Constitution. Changing this title would require a constitutional amendment, a process that involves legal procedures and broad consensus.
Interchangeability of Names: Interpretation of Article 1
The heart of the controversy lies in the interpretation of Article 1 of the Constitution, which mentions “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.” While some argue that this suggests interchangeability of “India” and “Bharat,” this interpretation is disputed.
Use of “Bharat” in the Constitution: A Matter of Translation
It is crucial to note that while “Bharat” is used in the Hindi version of the Constitution, it does not stand as an independent word in the original Constitution. It is intended solely for the Hindi translation. Article 394A(2) reinforces this point by stating that translations of the Constitution should have the same meaning as the original text.
Official Name Confusion: Impact on International Agreements
Using “Bharat” interchangeably with “India” in official communication could potentially lead to confusion, especially in international agreements and treaties. India’s official name, used in dealings with foreign countries and international bodies, is the “Republic of India.”
Historical Background: Constituent Assembly Debates
The inclusion of “Bharat” alongside “India” in Article 1 of the Constitution resulted from compromises made during the Constituent Assembly debates. Various members suggested different formulations, but the final wording aimed to clarify that “India, that is Bharat” implies that “Bharat” is a translation of “India” and not an independent designation.
Consensus and National Identity: A Unifying Approach
Changing the name of a country is not a matter of political party agenda but one that requires broad consensus, considering the diverse nature of India. Ensuring that every citizen can emotionally connect with the country’s name is essential to prevent feelings of alienation among certain sections of the population.
Anti-Colonial Sentiment: Balancing Historical Reflection
The recent debate about changing the country’s name raises questions about the newfound anti-colonial sentiment. While it’s essential to address aspects of colonial history, it is equally important to do so in a manner that aligns with the country’s motto of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam,” emphasizing the interconnectedness of all nations.
Why In News
The recent controversy surrounding the nomenclature of India’s President, referring to the position as the “President of Bharat” in an official invitation for the G-20 summit, has ignited a broader debate. This debate touches upon the political atmosphere, constitutional nuances, and the need for a consensus-driven approach in a diverse and historically rich nation like India. Furthermore, it underscores the ongoing dialogue about preserving cultural identity while embracing globalization in an increasingly interconnected world.
MCQs about The ‘President of Bharat’ Controversy
-
What is the official title of the head of state in India according to the Constitution?
A. President of Bharat
B. Prime Minister of India
C. President of India
D. Chief Executive of the Republic
-
What does Article 1 of the Indian Constitution mention regarding the names “India” and “Bharat”?
A. Article 1 does not mention these names.
B. It clearly states that “India” and “Bharat” are interchangeable.
C. It specifies that “Bharat” is the primary name, and “India” is a translation.
D. Article 1 is not related to names.
-
What is the potential issue with using “Bharat” interchangeably with “India” in official communication?
A. It enhances international diplomacy.
B. It simplifies language.
C. It can lead to confusion, especially in international agreements and treaties.
D. It has no impact on international relations.
-
Why is consensus important when considering a change in the country’s name?
A. It aligns with a particular political party’s agenda.
B. It fosters division among citizens.
C. It ensures a unified national identity in a diverse nation.
D. It speeds up the decision-making process.
Boost up your confidence by appearing our Weekly Current Affairs Multiple Choice Questions
