Editorial

The introduction of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour (Amendment) Bill, 2026, in the Rajya Sabha marks a significant step in elevating Vande Mataram to the same legal plane as the national anthem. Amid Opposition protests, the measure seeks to criminalise intentionally preventing the singing of the national song or disturbing any assembly engaged in it, with punishment of up to three years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both—mirroring the existing protections under the 1971 Act for Jana Gana Mana, the national flag, and the Constitution.

Composed by Bankim Chandra Chatterjee and immortalised in Anandamath, Vande Mataram was a rallying cry of the freedom struggle. On 24 January 1950, Constituent Assembly President Dr Rajendra Prasad declared that it should be honoured equally with Jana Gana Mana. The government’s Statement of Objects and Reasons invokes this history and the ongoing 150th anniversary celebrations to close what it calls a legislative gap. In an era of competitive nationalism, the impulse to protect symbols that bind a diverse republic is understandable. Deliberate disruption of collective expressions of patriotism can wound public sentiment and invite disorder.

Yet symbolism enforced by the criminal law carries risks. The Opposition, particularly Left members, has objected that patriotism cannot be legislated into existence and that the Bill raises constitutional questions about freedom of speech and expression. Article 51A of the Constitution lists respect for the Constitution, the national flag and the national anthem as fundamental duties; the national song does not appear. The Supreme Court, only months earlier, had observed that the Home Ministry’s advisory protocol on Vande Mataram imposed no penal consequence. Converting guidance into criminal sanction invites the charge of using legislation to achieve what executive direction could not.

Vague terms such as “preventing” or “causing disturbance” leave room for selective enforcement and political vendetta. In a polarised climate, genuine dissent, artistic critique, or even passive non-participation could be misconstrued as insult. True national honour is deepened by voluntary reverence, not fear of the jailor. History shows that coercive patriotism often breeds quiet resentment rather than shared pride.

Parliament must therefore debate the Bill with care. If the intent is genuine protection of a historic song, the language should be tightly drawn to target only deliberate, disruptive malice—not silence or disagreement. Symbols matter. So does the liberty that allows citizens to embrace them freely. The measure of a confident republic is not how sternly it punishes disrespect, but how generously it inspires respect.

The Union Cabinet’s approval of the BHAVYA-Rasayan Scheme marks a welcome, if overdue, recognition of the chemical industry’s foundational role in India’s manufacturing ambitions. With an outlay of ₹3,030 crore over five years, the Centre will support the creation of three large, dedicated chemical parks—each on at least 2,000 acres of contiguous land—equipped with shared infrastructure such as common effluent treatment plants, hazardous waste facilities, solvent recovery units, steam systems and logistics hubs.

Announced in the 2026-27 Budget and implemented through a competitive challenge route, the scheme requires states to contribute a minimum of ₹500 crore for every ₹1,000 crore of central grant. The model is sensible: it leverages public investment to de-risk private capital, lower logistics costs, and encourage clustering of upstream, downstream and ancillary units. In a sector that supplies critical inputs to pharmaceuticals, textiles, electronics, agriculture and defence, such parks can accelerate import substitution, boost exports and generate substantial employment while improving resource efficiency.

Yet the real test lies beyond the announcement. India’s chemical industry has long been fragmented, environmentally strained and lagging in global competitiveness. Centralised treatment and disposal facilities are necessary, but they must be rigorously enforced and continuously upgraded if the parks are to avoid becoming new pollution hotspots. Transparent selection of sites, genuine state capacity, and time-bound execution will determine whether the scheme delivers world-class infrastructure or merely another set of under-utilised industrial estates.

Sustainability cannot be an afterthought. The chemical sector’s environmental footprint is significant; success will depend on integrating circular economy principles, green chemistry and strict monitoring from the design stage itself. Equally important is skill development and research linkages so that the parks become engines of innovation rather than mere assembly points.

If executed with discipline and environmental seriousness, BHAVYA-Rasayan can strengthen India’s position in global value chains and advance the goal of Atmanirbhar manufacturing. The opportunity is clear. The delivery must now match the ambition.

• SAS Kirmani