Highlight
Controversial issue of imposition of under Hindi three-language policy of 1963
Promoting multilingual proficiency: Hindi, English and a regional language
Non-Hindi speaking states have been opposition to this policy.
The recent Census 2011 of our country recognises languages 1369 mother tongues and the 'unclassified' category spoken by one million or more citizens.1, 474 languages
Grouped into 121 mother tongues and then listed in the Schedule of the Constitution of India as 22 languages.
Preamble of the Constitution secures freedom of thought, expression, belief, religion and worship; equality of status and opportunity
Article 14 enforces equality before law
Article 19(1) (a) gives the right freely express their thoughts, opinions and beliefs.
Article 21 says, “Protection of life, liberty and equality before the law.
It must encourage mutual learning, not forced assimilation.
1. A comprehensive review of the three-language policy with inputs from all states, especially linguistic minorities.
2. Promoting multilingual education based on choice and relevance, not compulsion.
3. Equal recognition and status to all Schedule VIII languages focus on the preservation of endangered languages.
4. A parliamentary committee to evaluate language use in central institutions and ensure inclusiveness.
Uphold the spirit of cooperative federalism towards a truly inclusive language policy for the future; abide by the Constitution of India
Kanpur May 6th, 2025
Honourable delegates on the dais
I, H.D. Kumaraswamy, representing the Janata Dal (Secular), am speaking on a matter that is shaping the socio-political cultural fabric and constitutional commitments of our country – the three-language policy of 1963 and its long-term implications, particularly regarding the controversial issue of imposition of Hindi.
Let us begin by recalling the original purpose of the three-language formula. Conceived as a tool for national integration, it was aimed at promoting multilingual proficiency: Hindi, English and a regional language. However, over the decades, there has been opposition to this policy, especially from non-Hindi speaking states like Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, West Bengal and the Northeast, where linguistic identity is closely linked with regional pride and cultural autonomy.
As a citizen of India and a leader of Karnataka, I must express the growing concerns of my people. Our country has always embraced diversity, but not the imposition of any language. The recent Census 2011 of our country recognises 1369 mother tongues and the 'unclassified' category includes 1,474 languages spoken by one million or more citizens. They are grouped into 121 mother tongues and then listed in the Schedule of the Constitution of India as 22 languages. This - be it Hindi or any other - is contrary to the federal spirit of our Constitution. Language is not merely a medium of communication; it is a symbol of identity, a repository of heritage, and a matter of honour for every Indian citizen. I pay tribute to Bharat Ratna Dr Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, "the architect of the Indian Constitution" and recall the Preamble of the Constitution as it states to secure to all its citizens freedom of thought, expression, belief, religion and worship; equality of status and opportunity. Our country is a vast nation, Article 14 of the Indian Constitution enforces equality before law and Article 19(1) (a) gives the right to citizens to freely express their thoughts, opinions and beliefs. And Article 21 says, “Protection of life, liberty and equality before the law.
This covers the freedom to express oneself through speech, writing, printing, visual representation or any other medium. However, reasonable restrictions can be imposed on this right in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign countries, public order, decency or morality, contempt of court, defamation, incitement to an offence or the sovereignty and integrity of Parliament.
Unfortunately, recent moves by the Central government, including attempts to prioritise Hindi in the administrative, educational and digital domains, have rekindled fears of cultural homogenisation. This is not only unacceptable – it is unconstitutional. We must remember that India is a union of states, not a unitary state with one language, one culture and one ideology.
Citizens of our country must be given the freedom to learn languages that empower them – be it English for global relevance or their mother tongue for cultural roots. The option to learn Hindi should be optional, not compulsory. Our approach must be clear: language policy in India must promote diversity, not dominance. It must be based on respect, not resistance. It must encourage mutual learning, not forced assimilation. Therefore, I propose the following: 1. a comprehensive review of the three-language policy with inputs from all states, especially linguistic minorities. 2. Promoting multilingual education based on choice and relevance, not compulsion. 3. Equal recognition and status to all Schedule VIII languages, with a focus on the preservation of endangered languages. 4. A parliamentary committee to evaluate language use in central institutions and ensure inclusiveness. In conclusion, our strength lies in our plurality, not uniformity. As members of this great democracy, we must ensure that no Indian feels alienated in his own country because of his language. Let us uphold the spirit of cooperative federalism and work towards a truly inclusive language policy for the future, abiding by the Constitution of India. Thank you. Jai Hind. Jai Karnataka.
Honourable delegates on the dais
I, H.D. Kumaraswamy, representing the Janata Dal (Secular), am speaking on a matter that is shaping the socio-political cultural fabric and constitutional commitments of our country – the three-language policy of 1963 and its long-term implications, particularly regarding the controversial issue of imposition of Hindi.
Let us begin by recalling the original purpose of the three-language formula. Conceived as a tool for national integration, it was aimed at promoting multilingual proficiency: Hindi, English and a regional language. However, over the decades, there has been opposition to this policy, especially from non-Hindi speaking states like Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, West Bengal and the Northeast, where linguistic identity is closely linked with regional pride and cultural autonomy.
As a citizen of India and a leader of Karnataka, I must express the growing concerns of my people. Our country has always embraced diversity, but not the imposition of any language. The recent Census 2011 of our country recognises 1369 mother tongues and the 'unclassified' category includes 1,474 languages spoken by one million or more citizens. They are grouped into 121 mother tongues and then listed in the Schedule of the Constitution of India as 22 languages. This - be it Hindi or any other - is contrary to the federal spirit of our Constitution. Language is not merely a medium of communication; it is a symbol of identity, a repository of heritage, and a matter of honour for every Indian citizen. I pay tribute to Bharat Ratna Dr Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, "the architect of the Indian Constitution" and recall the Preamble of the Constitution as it states to secure to all its citizens freedom of thought, expression, belief, religion and worship; equality of status and opportunity. Our country is a vast nation, Article 14 of the Indian Constitution enforces equality before law and Article 19(1) (a) gives the right to citizens to freely express their thoughts, opinions and beliefs. And Article 21 says, “Protection of life, liberty and equality before the law.
This covers the freedom to express oneself through speech, writing, printing, visual representation or any other medium. However, reasonable restrictions can be imposed on this right in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign countries, public order, decency or morality, contempt of court, defamation, incitement to an offence or the sovereignty and integrity of Parliament.
Unfortunately, recent moves by the Central government, including attempts to prioritise Hindi in the administrative, educational and digital domains, have rekindled fears of cultural homogenisation. This is not only unacceptable – it is unconstitutional. We must remember that India is a union of states, not a unitary state with one language, one culture and one ideology.
Citizens of our country must be given the freedom to learn languages that empower them – be it English for global relevance or their mother tongue for cultural roots. The option to learn Hindi should be optional, not compulsory. Our approach must be clear: language policy in India must promote diversity, not dominance. It must be based on respect, not resistance. It must encourage mutual learning, not forced assimilation. Therefore, I propose the following: 1. a comprehensive review of the three-language policy with inputs from all states, especially linguistic minorities. 2. Promoting multilingual education based on choice and relevance, not compulsion. 3. Equal recognition and status to all Schedule VIII languages, with a focus on the preservation of endangered languages. 4. A parliamentary committee to evaluate language use in central institutions and ensure inclusiveness. In conclusion, our strength lies in our plurality, not uniformity. As members of this great democracy, we must ensure that no Indian feels alienated in his own country because of his language. Let us uphold the spirit of cooperative federalism and work towards a truly inclusive language policy for the future, abiding by the Constitution of India. Thank you. Jai Hind. Jai Karnataka.
