Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju on Tuesday, June 2, 2026, posted a sharp statement on X expressing pride in India while voicing strong condemnation of individuals he described as 'selfish people who have no morals, who run after money only and defend terrorists, maoists and anti-India gangs and criminals.'

Context

Rijiju, a senior BJP leader from Arunachal Pradesh and a cabinet minister holding two portfolios — Parliamentary Affairs and Minority Affairs — made the remarks without naming any individual or referencing a specific incident. The post, written in English, drew an explicit contrast between patriotic citizens and those he accused of providing cover to extremist and criminal elements.

The statement reflects a pattern of rhetoric that has been consistent in BJP-led government communications since 2014, framing national security as a binary between those who stand with the state and those seen as sympathetic to anti-state actors.

Policy Backdrop

The Ministry of Home Affairs adopted the SAMADHAN doctrine in 2017 as a framework for coordinated action against Left Wing Extremism, combining security operations with development initiatives. Earlier, the Integrated Action Plan for Left Wing Extremism districts had been rolled out from 2010 onward across affected states in central and eastern India.

On the legislative front, the government amended the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in 2019 to allow designation of individuals — not just organisations — as terrorists, significantly expanding the state's legal toolkit. Maoists, whose insurgency has been active primarily across the so-called 'Red Corridor' states, remain listed under anti-terror provisions.

The BJP-led administration has consistently argued that legal critics of these measures and civil liberties advocates sometimes provide political legitimacy to groups the state classifies as insurgents or terrorists — a charge those groups strongly contest.

Stakeholders and Impact

Opposition parties and civil liberties organisations have historically pushed back against such characterisations, arguing that broad language risks conflating legitimate dissent with support for violence. They contend that laws such as the amended UAPA have been used against journalists, activists, and academics.

The government and security establishment counter that weakening counter-insurgency laws and narrative solidarity with extremist groups directly endangers the lives of security personnel and civilians in conflict-affected districts. Rijiju's post, though without a specific policy ask, reinforces that official position at the ministerial level.

What's Next

With the next parliamentary session approaching and several states heading toward assembly elections, internal security legislation and the government's posture on Left Wing Extremism are expected to feature prominently in political debate. Rijiju's statement signals that the ruling party intends to keep the framing of 'pro-India versus anti-India' as a live political and policy theme, and further legislative or administrative measures on internal security cannot be ruled out.