Union Home Minister Amit Shah Responds in Malayalam to Kerala MP Amid Linguistic Equality Debate

Amit Shah has responded to CPI(M) MP John Brittas in Malayalam

New Delhi:

In a significant departure from usual practice, Union Home Minister Amit Shah has replied to CPI(M) MP John Brittas in Malayalam, marking what appears to be the first official response from a Union Home Minister in this language. This comes at a time when the ruling party often faces accusations from southern states of promoting Hindi at the expense of regional languages.

The timing of this linguistic gesture is notable as Kerala prepares for elections, with the BJP working to strengthen its position after securing its first-ever Lok Sabha seat in the state during the 2024 general elections.

The choice of Malayalam carries particular significance as Brittas has consistently advocated for linguistic equality in parliament. He has previously called for translation devices to assist MPs who find it difficult to follow extended Hindi speeches during debates, arguing that effective legislative participation requires equal language access.

Shah's November 14 letter formally acknowledged Brittas' October 22 representation regarding the notification that establishes chargesheeting as grounds for cancelling Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) registration. In his original communication, Brittas argued that this measure undermines due process, compromises natural justice, and subjects OCI cardholders to potential arbitrary action without judicial determination.

Brittas emphasized that the OCI program has long functioned as an important connection between India and its diaspora, representing inclusiveness, continuity, and emotional ties.

While the Home Minister's response was procedural in nature, the inclusion of a complete Malayalam translation alongside Hindi was particularly noteworthy. It demonstrated political acknowledgment of the language in which the concerns were originally expressed, coming at a time when debates about linguistic federalism are growing more intense.

Brittas maintains that the fundamental constitutional objections remain unaddressed and that the August 12 notification exceeds the authority granted under the Citizenship Act of 1955. However, even as these legal questions continue, the language chosen for the response has added a new dimension to political discourse in a region where language and identity remain central to political expression.