Former Minister and former PCC president Niranjan Patnaik on Wednesday said, “It is ironical that a Chief Minister, and the only one in Indian history, who can’t speak or write the State’s official language is talking of Odia Swabhiman.” More shocking is that Naveen Patnaik has virtually refused to learn Odia after 14 long years in power, he rued.
“Swabhiman to any Odia means economic development as well as protecting the State’s language and culture,” he said and asked Naveen Patnaik either to learn Odia or quit the State. To Naveen’s “Delhi Chalo”, Niranjan asked Naveen “Odisha Chhodo”.
Niranjan Patnaik also shot off a letter to Union law Minister Kapil Sibal asking for an amendment to Article 173 of the Constitution of India to make it mandatory for all members of a State Assembly to be able to read, write and speak the language of the State. The copy of the letter was sent to Congress president Sonia Gandhi, Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi, leaders of Opposition in lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, important political leaders of India as well as presidents of all political parties in Odisha for generating a debate on this issue.
Patnaik also said it is astoundingly ironical that a person can’t become a sarpanch in Odisha without knowing Odia, but he can be an MlA, a Minister or even Chief Minister! He said that not only Odisha but all the backward States are demanding Special Category State status and the Congress has supported the demand. As the matter is under consideration by an expert committee headed by Raghuram Rajan at the Centre, Naveen Patnaik’s Swabhiman rally in Delhi is a mere gimmick. Niranjan Patnaik in his letter pointed out that the language issue has been critical to the formation of the States in the Indian Union. Odisha was the first State to be formed on the linguistic basis.
The language issue was debated in the Constituent Assembly on September 14, 1949 and it was agreed that the official language of the Union shall be Hindi and further that a State legislature may, as per law, adopt one or more languages in the State as the language or languages to be used for all or any official purposes of that State. Indeed, the Odisha Assembly decided more than a quarter of a century back that Odia would be the official language of the State, the letter pointed out.
“With a great degree of reluctance it was agreed by the members of the Constituent Assembly to let English be used for official purposes for a period of 15 years. At the same time, regional languages were given a Constitutional status and kept in a separate schedule. But it is a travesty of the democratic Constitution if members elected to the legislature have no sensitivity for cultural nationalism and significance of a regional language and flout the norms laid down in Article 345 of the Constitution,” the letter lamented.
The letter mentioned that Odia is the official language of Odisha under the Constitution and yet, “The present Head of the Council of Ministers, i.e., the Chief Minister does not read, write, speak or understand Odia, particularly when Odisha happens to be the first State to be formed on linguistic basis. It is absolutely in no way parochial to expect that the Chief Ministers of Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Assam, Gujarat or any of the other States know the languages of their States.”
“You are the law Minister of the country as well as a renowned legal luminary. You would agree that the loophole permitting members of legislature to be ignorant of the language of their state, needs to be plugged forthwith. Accordingly, there is a need to revert to Article 173 of the Constitution and add the following clause: ‘Can speak, read, write and understand the official language of the State’,” said Patnaik.
“The idea of a linguistic organisation of a State first originated in Odisha through a language movement spearheaded by the Utkal Sammilani while we were still a British colony and it is only appropriate that the demand for an amendment to Article 173 of the Constitution to make it mandatory for a public servant to know the language of the State originates from our State,” he maintained.
“I am sure such an amendment will receive support from most political parties and a consensus for the required Constitutional amendment will be evolved for its enactment,” he further stated in the letter.