Amit Shah, the supremo of Bhartiya Janta, gave an interview last week. In the Interview, he threw mud on ruling party in Kerala by saying that the ruling party is letting women enter in the Sabarimala temple and “suppressing the Ayyappa devotees”. When he said so, doesn’t he meant that women cannot be the devotees of Ayyappa?
Article 25 of the Indian constitution ensures that everyone is free to worship their God. And women are included in that. The supreme court’s verdict clearly mentioned that article 25(1) includes women, too.
And what’s the remarks/comments of Amit Shah all about? The question arises by the following facts is; Is Amit Shah above “the law of the land”?
Amit Shah also threatened to “uproot” the Kerala government in that interview. He confirmed his position on Sabarimala by saying that Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s move to enforce the Supreme court’s judgement of allowing women of all age is nothing but “politicisation”.
Now, the question arises; since when has enforcing Supreme Court’s order become “politicisation”? Amit Shah is a member of parliament. And while becoming one, he took an oath to abide by the law of the land. Now, according to article 141; Orders of Supreme shall be the law of the land and cannot be
forsaken, under any pretext by any authority or court.
By suggesting that Ayyappa devotees can only be men, isn’t Amit Shah breaching his oath to abide by the law of the land? Or is it the case that Amit Shah, the supremo of Bharatiya Janta Party is above “the law of the land”. Is he the only authority who falls outside of Indian Consitution.
This is not the only question that arises when a president of a national party openly called for defying the Supreme Court's verdict. The question also arises that is BJP trying to overrule federalism? In our constitution, it is clearly mentioned that India is a federal state. By federal, it means powers are distributed between Central and State Govt.
When Amit Shah says that he will “uproot” Kerala Govt, isn’t he trying to weaken the federalism of Indian Constitution? Surely, Amit Shah can challenge the majority of Kerala’s ruling party. Surely, he can defeat the party by gaining votes of citizens in the next election. But “Uprooting” a party just because it is trying to enforce the rule of Supreme Court, isn’t Amit Shah clearly trying to say that he is above “the law of the land”.