Udhayanidhi Stalin has sparked renewed controversy in Tamil Nadu’s political landscape with his recent statements advocating for the ‘eradication of Sanatan’. Speaking in the state assembly on the first day of the session post the 2026 state elections, the Leader of the Opposition remarked, “Sanathanam, which separated people, should be eradicated.” His words echo previous comments where he controversially equated Sanatana Dharma to diseases and called for its eradication.

These statements, similar to his earlier remarks, have ignited considerable backlash. Following his last comments, multiple legal cases were initiated against him for allegedly promoting hate speech. However, political analysts suggest that this time, Stalin may be shielded from immediate legal repercussions due to protections offered to state legislators under Article 194 of the Indian Constitution, which grants them certain privileges and immunities during assembly sessions.

Legal experts point out that these protections ensure freedom of speech for state legislators, thereby mitigating any direct legal threat to Stalin from his statements made within the assembly. This point was highlighted by BJP national convenor Amit Malviya in his critiques of Stalin’s recent remarks.

Amit Malviya Critiques Stalin’s Platform Usage

In a social media post, Amit Malviya questioned Stalin’s choice to express anti-Sanatan sentiments in the assembly instead of in public forums, suggesting that such rhetoric had previously led to negative electoral consequences for the DMK. Malviya accused Stalin of using the assembly as a platform to demean the beliefs of millions, describing his actions as “arrogance” rather than political courage.

Malviya further remarked that Stalin’s prior comments had led to accusations of hate speech, adding that the electorate responded by diminishing the DMK’s political power. He warned that although Stalin might evade immediate consequences due to legislative immunity, there are limits to political discourse, especially regarding faith, which he implied could lead to broader repercussions.

His statement included a caution about the potential for ‘divine retribution’ against actions perceived as mocking collective beliefs, further intensifying the discourse surrounding the issue.

CM Vijay Observes Silence Amidst Controversy

Despite the escalating situation, Chief Minister C Joseph Vijay observed silence when Stalin made his remarks. His lack of response during the assembly session was noted by political commentators, who are analysing the implications of this non-action amid rising tensions between the DMK and BJP.

BJP leaders responded robustly to Stalin’s statements, with Vinoj P Selvam asserting that it is not the Sanatan Dharma that is at risk of eradication, but rather the DMK, citing Stalin’s previous comments as a factor in the party’s diminishing influence in the state. Selvam asserted, “Because of these speeches of yours, it was the @arivalayam which got eradicated from Tamil Nadu.”

Similarly, BJP leader Narayan Tirupathy echoed these sentiments, stating that the electorate’s decision to separate the DMK from power was a direct result of Stalin’s statements about eradicating Sanatan. His comments indicate a belief that the political fallout from such remarks could continue to impact the DMK and its future electoral prospects.

Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates!

App Store –  https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540 

Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share