Whose House Is It? Rajya Sabha Nominations and the Battle for India’s Constitutional Soul

– Dr. M. Iqbal Siddiqui

On July 12, 2025, President Droupadi Murmu exercised her constitutional prerogative under Article 80(1)(a) by nominating four eminent individuals – Ujjwal Nikam, Harsh Vardhan Shringla, Meenakshi Jain and C. Sadanandan Master – to the Rajya Sabha. Each nominee brings distinguished expertise in law, diplomacy, academia and social service. Yet, their perceived proximity to the BJP and its ideological mentor, the RSS, has provoked fierce debate over whether these appointments represent a genuine enrichment of the Upper House or a calculated move to entrench a majoritarian agenda.

The Constitutional Framework: Nominations Under Scrutiny

Article 80(1)(a) empowers the President, acting on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, to nominate up to 12 members to the Rajya Sabha for their “special knowledge or practical experience” in literature, science, art, the cooperative movement, or social service. This mechanism is intended to broaden the chamber’s expertise, yet in practice, the ruling party exerts significant influence over these appointments.

Nominees must be Indian citizens aged at least 30 and meet qualifications under Article 84 and relevant laws, though they cannot vote in Presidential elections as per Article 55. Historically, successive governments, including Congress, have drawn criticism for selecting party loyalists, with the absence of clear, objective criteria for “eminence” reinforcing perceptions of politicisation.

The Nominees: Merit or Motive?

Ujjwal Nikam: Celebrated for prosecuting landmark cases, including the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, Nikam has been lauded by Prime Minister Narendra Modi for upholding constitutional values. Critics, however, view his nomination as a nod to the BJP’s “tough-on-crime” narrative, suggesting political patronage more than impartial expertise.

Harsh Vardhan Shringla: Former Foreign Secretary during India’s G20 presidency, Shringla commands widespread respect. Although formally apolitical, his alignment with the government’s strategic foreign-policy outlook is deemed congruent with the BJP’s global vision – thus less controversial but still reflective of party priorities.

Meenakshi Jain: A Padma Shri-winning historian known for revisionist interpretations sympathetic to Hindutva, Jain’s work dovetails with the RSS’s project of recasting India’s past (such as “Flight of Deities and Rebirth of Temples” and “Rama and Ayodhya”). Her nomination has been criticised as an attempt to infuse academic discourse with majoritarian narratives.

1. Sadanandan Master: A Kerala-based educator and social worker with overt BJP affiliations, his appointment is widely perceived as a reward for unwavering party loyalty, despite his laudable record in grassroots reform.

Social media has amplified these critiques, with opposition leaders decrying the “RSS infiltration” of deliberative institutions. BJP figures, in turn, defend each selection on the grounds of individual merit, insisting that expertise – not ideology – determines nominations.

BJP’s Rajya Sabha Ascendancy: A Fragile Majority

As of June 2025, the Rajya Sabha comprises 245 seats (233 elected, 12 nominated). The BJP holds 95 seats, while the NDA, aided by six BJP-aligned nominated members and allies, commands 120 – just above the effective majority threshold of 119 (with five vacancies). This slim edge, secured through cross-voting, defections and by-election gains such as BJD’s Sujeet Kumar, has enabled the passage of contentious legislation like the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024, widely criticised for undermining Muslim endowments.

This narrow parliamentary advantage is not merely a statistic; it is the fulcrum on which transformative, and often controversial, legal reforms have pivoted. With elections for nine seats due in July-August 2025, the BJP faces a critical moment: either to consolidate this fragile ascendancy or risk legislative setbacks that could stall its broader constitutional agenda.

Constitutional and Legal Agenda: Beyond Nominations

While nominations shape parliamentary arithmetic, the BJP/RSS’s broader vision encompasses systemic constitutional and legal reforms to recalibrate India’s secular, federal structure in favour of a Hindu-majoritarian ethos. Key initiatives include:

These measures illustrate a concerted effort to reshape India’s legal edifice: curtailing minority safeguards, reinforcing a unified national identity, and consolidating central authority at the expense of federal autonomy.

Fears of Constitutional Overreach

Opposition parties and civil society warn that the BJP/RSS’s long-term blueprint entails further amendments to enshrine Hindutva principles – such as removing “secular” and “socialist” from the Preamble or diluting minority rights under Articles 25-30. Although no manifesto explicitly endorses such changes, remarks by BJP figures (e.g. MP Anantkumar Hegde’s 2024 comment on needing 400 Lok Sabha seats to “correct” the Constitution) have heightened unease.

Crucially, constitutional amendment under Article 368 demands a two-thirds majority in both Houses and ratification by half the state legislatures. The BJP’s burgeoning state-level presence and its Rajya Sabha foothold bring this within the realm of possibility, albeit still challenging given staggered terms and the federal balance.

Using the Constitution Against Itself?

Analysts describe a strategy of “using the Constitution against the Constitution”: employing legal processes – from nominations to legislative majorities – to wear away the very pluralist and secular commitments the Constitution enshrines. Stacking the Rajya Sabha with ideologically aligned nominees facilitates the passage of controversial bills that undermine the equality guarantee-enshrined in Article 14 and the protections for religious freedom under Article 25.

While BJP leaders maintain that these reforms enhance efficiency, transparency and inclusive development, constitutional scholars caution that such legalistic subtlety risks hollowing out the Rajya Sabha’s deliberative function, diminishing minority safeguards and unsettling India’s democratic equilibrium.

Voices in the Debate
Opposition Leaders

Opposition leaders, particularly from the Congress party, have strongly criticised the nominations of C. Sadanandan Master and Ujjwal Nikam. Congress leader Ramesh Chennithala questioned the criteria for Master’s nomination, stating, “I am puzzled by which yardstick of excellence the President had applied in elevating C. Sadanandan to Rajya Sabha” (The Hindu, July 14, 2025).

Similarly, Asokan Charuvil argued that Master’s primary qualification was his involvement in “Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s (RSS) strong-arm politics in Kannur district” (The Hindu, July 14, 2025).

V.D. Satheesan, Kerala’s Leader of Opposition, noted that Master’s nomination “has cast doubt in the public mind about the integrity and ethics of the process” (The Hindu, July 14, 2025). For Nikam, the Congress party described his nomination as “an attempt to morph democracy into dictatorship by misusing constitutional entities for political gain,” while Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sushama Andhare questioned his ability to deliver justice due to his ties with the ruling parties (Hindustan Times, July 14, 2025). Congress spokesperson Atul Londhe called Nikam’s nomination “a reward for working tacitly for the BJP” (Hindustan Times, July 14, 2025).

Scholars and Analysts

Political analyst Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay noted, “Nominations like Master’s reflect BJP’s strategy to reward loyalty over eminence” (The Wire, July 15, 2025).

Scholar Hilal Ahmed argued, “The opaque selection process undermines the Rajya Sabha’s intended diversity” (India Today, July 14, 2025).

BJP’s Defence

Prime Minister Narendra Modi defended Master, saying, “Violence and intimidation couldn’t deter his spirit towards national development” (Times of India, July 13, 2025), and praised Nikam’s legal achievements, alongside Shringla and Jain’s expertise.

Public Sentiment

On social media, opinions split: some laud the nominees’ credentials, while others, like @MR_CricAnalyst, question if they’re “BJP’s strategy to fill Rajya Sabha with loyalists” (X, July 13, 2025). The debate highlights the tension between merit and political influence.

Guarding the Gatekeepers of Democracy

President Murmu’s exercise of constitutional duty in nominating four eminent individuals is beyond reproach in legal terms. However, the seamless alignment of these appointments with the BJP/RSS agenda – coupled with a razor-thin majority that pivots on nominated members – amplifies concerns of politicisation and potential constitutional overreach.

To preserve the integrity of the Rajya Sabha, there is an urgent need for:

1. Transparent Nomination Protocols: Articulated criteria and independent appraisal panels to assess “special knowledge or practical experience.”
2. Enhanced Legislative Scrutiny: Empowered select committees and cross-bench participation to ensure rigorous debate on constitutional amendments.
3. Vigilant Civil Society Oversight: Media, academia and citizens must scrutinise all legislative proposals for impacts on secularism, equality and pluralism.

Ultimately, the BJP’s growing influence need not doom India’s constitutional spirit. But the warning signs – ideological nominations, majoritarian laws, and systemic centralisation – cannot be ignored. As power tilts, will pluralism, equality and federalism endure? Only a vigilant citizenry, an independent judiciary, and courageous political leadership can ensure that the Constitution remains not just a document, but a living promise.

How BJP’s Ideological and Legislative Journey has Unfolded

To understand today’s debate, it helps to trace how the BJP’s ideological and legislative journey has unfolded over a century.

Timeline of Key Developments

• 1923-1925: Vinayak Savarkar publishes Hindutva: Who is a Hindu? (1923), defining the Hindu Nation concept. The RSS is founded in 1925 to propagate Hindu nationalism.
• 1949: M.S. Golwalkar’s We or Our Nationhood Defined articulates a vision of India as a Hindu Rashtra; he controversially describes Muslims and Christians as “foreign” to India.
• 1951: Syama Prasad Mookerjee forms the Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS) (forerunner of BJP) on RSS lines. The BJS often championed Hindu cultural issues in Parliament.
• 1965: Deendayal Upadhyaya’s “Integral Humanism” (Ekatma Manavavad) becomes BJS ideology, stressing indigenous development and social welfare.
• 1975-77: National Emergency under Indira Gandhi. Hindu nationalists (including RSS/BJS members) harshly oppose it; this strengthens anti-Congress unity.
• 1980: The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is formed by the merger of the BJS and other Janata Party elements. The RSS continues as an extra-parliamentary ideological force.
• 1980s-90s: Rise of BJP-RSS campaigns on Ram Janmabhoomi (Hindu temple at Ayodhya). 1990: BJP leader L.K. Advani’s Rath Yatra for a Ram temple leaves a bloody trail.
• 1992: BJP/RSS activists demolish the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya; nationwide communal riots follow. This galvanises the Hindutva movement.
• 1998: BJP leads the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) to form the national government under PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee. BJP begins pushing its agenda from power (e.g. discussing RTE reforms, cow protection).
• 2000s: BJP loses power in 2004. During these years, several NDA/UPA governments carve out new states: Chhattisgarh (2000), Jharkhand (2000), Uttarakhand (2000), Telangana (2014). BJP had long agitated for some of these.
• 2002: Gujarat riots under then-Chief Minister Narendra Modi (BJP) shock the nation; Modi is later barred from foreign travel for three years due to US sanctions.
• 2014: BJP wins a decisive majority under Narendra Modi. Takes office promising development and Hindutva goals. Commences revoking Article 370 (vowed since 1980s), enacting strict criminal laws (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act broadened), and building Ram temple (ensuring funds).
• 2015: Union Government attempts to replace the Supreme Court Collegium with a National Judicial Appointments Commission (99th Amendment); the Supreme Court strikes it down as unconstitutional.
• 2016: “Demonetisation” policy causes upheaval; critics say it affects minorities disproportionately, but official rationale is curbing black money.
• 2017: Supreme Court allows Ram temple construction. Modi celebrates Independence Day with an emphasis on Hindustani culture. BJP’s Telangana ally loses seat.
• 2018: Triple Talaq (instant divorce) is banned by Parliament (supported by BJP) to “empower Muslim women”.
• 2019: BJP re-elected. Key actions: 1) Abrogation of Article 370 and bifurcation of J&K into UTs (Aug. 5, 2019) 2) Passage of Citizenship Amendment Act (Dec. 2019) for non-Muslim migrants 3) Constitution (104th) Amendment Act reserving 10% OBCs in higher education and jobs passes; 4) Modi inaugurates new Ram Temple site (Nov. 2019); 5) Parliament enacts Women’s Reservation Bill in Lok Sabha (Oct. 2023) for 33% seats (passed, but not yet in effect as Rajya Sabha approval pending). Indian Muslims see a series of alarm bells in these moves (especially CAA/NRC).
• 2020: Nationwide COVID-19 lockdown is imposed. Communal tensions flare: Delhi riots (Feb. 2020) after protests against CAA. Various BJP states pass “love jihad” anti-conversion bills (e.g. Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka). BJP later replaces the “sedition” law via new penal code.
• 2021: Government continues to promote cultural programmes (G20 summit highlighting Indian heritage, Islam promotion stalls). Opposition accuses BJP of curbing free speech (e.g. sedition/gag laws). Abolition of Triple Talaq Act challenged but upheld. Teachers’ bodies report pressure to teach Sanskrit/cultural myths.
• 2022: BJP-led Uttarakhand government introduces first-ever Uniform Civil Code bill (passed Feb. 2024). Hindu majoritarian rhetoric continues (e.g. BJP MP said all Indians should celebrate Hindu festivals). Critics say BJP has made secular democracy a relic.
• 2023: Parliament enacts the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and allied civil/criminal codes, replacing colonial-era laws. These reinforce traditional social norms and broaden state powers under nationalism. State BJP governments hold (and win) elections on nationalist platforms.
• 2024: BJP wins a third term (June 2024). Its manifesto (or “Modi Guarantee”) commits to “One Nation, One Election” and full rollout of UCC. Modi declares a goal of “Viksit Bharat 2047” (Developed India by 2047). Observers note the BJP is now openly melding development promises with a Hindu-nationalist ethos (Prime Minister states the 100-day plan has begun, while analysts warn of creeping authoritarianism).