What it will take to change India’s name to Bharat

Is India going to be renamed Bharat? The question has raised political temperatures in the country. After dinner invites by Droupadi Murmu for world leaders coming for the G20 Summit referred to her as the President of Bharat, reports emerged that the Narendra Modi-led government may bring a resolution during the five-day Special Session of Parliament that begins on 18 September to rename the country. However, the Centre has said that the buzz around name change is a mere rumour. But, what would it take to change India’s name to ‘Bharat’? What constitutional amendments would be required, and what do legal experts think? We take a closer look. One name for the country ‘India, that is Bharat’ written in Article 1 of the Constitution is only descriptive and the two cannot be used interchangeably, constitutional expert P D T Achary said on Tuesday and underlined that any change in name from the Republic of India will require several amendments. His remarks come after a G20 dinner invitation has triggered a massive debate over the name of the country with the Opposition alleging that the government is planning to drop India and stay with just Bharat. Also Read: From India to Bharat: A brief history of the many names of the country Asked about what it would take to bring about changes in the current position on the name of the country, former Lok Sabha secretary general Achary said, “They will have to amend the Constitution. Article 1 (will have to be changed) and then there will be resultant changes in all the other articles.” “Wherever India is used will have to go. You can have only one name for the country. There cannot be two names interchangeable, that will create a lot of confusion not only in India but outside also,” he told PTI. [caption id=“attachment_13084032” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] A G20 dinner invitation issued in the name of ‘President of Bharat’ has triggered a massive debate over the name of the country with the Opposition alleging that the government is planning to drop India and stay with just Bharat. Image Courtesy: @erbmjha/Twitter[/caption] In the United Nations, India’s name is the Republic of India, and tomorrow if it has to be written as the Republic of Bharat then the Constitution has to be amended and communication has to be sent to all the relevant countries, saying that “our name has been changed”, he said. “That change has to be brought about by an amendment in the Constitution, otherwise India’s name is India only. India that is Bharat written in Article 1 is only descriptive, it is not that these two are interchangeable. It will be suicidal to use them interchangeably. There is only one name for one country,” Achary explained. Opposition legal eagles say… Legal experts from the Opposition feel a change in name is easier said than done. “The fact is that the terms Bharat and India can be used interchangeably, especially in view of the authorised Hindi version of the Indian Constitution, but the government cannot stipulate that everyone use only one name: either is permissible and usable interchangeably,” senior Supreme Court advocate and Congress member Abhishek Singhvi told The Hindu. An amendment would be required only if the government insisted on the use of any one term or wanted to remove a particular term, he added.

A new constitutional amendment law will be required if the government chooses to change the name. The bill must be passed by a two-thirds majority in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, and it must be ratified by the states. Article 368 authorises the amending of the Constitution by either a simple majority amendment or a special majority amendment. According to Majid Memon, a lawyer-turned-politician, ratification would be difficult because a number of states currently have non-BJP governments, reports News 18. P Wilson, a Rajya Sabha member of the DMK, told the publication, “If they wish to drop the word ‘India’ entirely, it would necessitate amendments to all the laws where the word India is present.” Given the number of laws and sections involved, this will be a massive legislative exercise, similar to the IPC/CRPC/Evidence Act, which they have dubbed Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill." “The change is possible but is it necessary," former Additional Solicitor-General and senior Supreme Court advocate Aman Lekhi asked when talking to The Hindu. He added that there are certain things that should be free of controversy and the name of the country should be highest on that list. He said, the country was officially called the “Republic of India,” and the G-20 presidency was also known as the “Indian Presidency.” ‘Bharat’ is not new According to government sources, Bharat already exists under the Indian Constitution. It specifies in Article 1(1), “India, that is Bharat, will be a union of states,” and this paves the path for incidents such as the President of India sending out G20 dinner invitations as “President of Bharat.” [caption id=“attachment_13084052” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] Legal experts claim that the rumoured “change of the country’s name” from India to Bharat is easier said than done. PTI[/caption] Union Minister Dharmendra Pradhan explained the move by claiming that the President merely prioritised Bharat among the two names mentioned in the Constitution. “This should have happened earlier. This gives great satisfaction to the mind. ‘Bharat’ is our introduction. We are proud of it. The President has given priority to ‘Bharat’. This is the biggest statement to come out of the colonial mindset," Pradhan said, as per a News 18 report. One view advanced by government officials is that the President’s invitation just reflects the President’s desire to use the word Bharat more frequently in governance. Because the name is already in the Constitution under Article 1, such usage would not necessitate constitutional revisions. INDIA effect The Opposition, on the other hand, claims that the administration is scared of the INDIA bloc , hence changing the country’s name to Bharat and dropping India entirely. [caption id=“attachment_13084042” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] The Opposition believes that the administration is afraid of the INDIA bloc, so it is changing the country’s name to Bharat and dropping India totally. PTI[/caption] Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh took to his microblogging website, X (formerly Twitter), to cite Article 1 in the Constitution and accused the government of assaulting the idea of a Union of State. On Tuesday, Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal asked a “flustered” BJP whether it would change the name of Bharat if the Opposition alliance INDIA renamed itself ‘Bharat’. “Why is this happening? It is being said that this is being done because we have formed an alliance named INDIA… The country belongs to 140 crore people and not to one party. If INDIA alliance rechristens itself Bharat, will they change the name of Bharat also," Kejriwal said, reports Mint. West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee also questioned the need to “suddenly use only Bharat” while referring to India in an official communique. With inputs from PTI