There are two separate issues in the Bangalore Club case, which the government is now trying to tackle through a law. And of the two, only one is legitimate.
Reliable, useful journalism needs your support.
Over 600 readers have donated over the years, to make articles like this one possible. We need your support to help Citizen Matters sustain and grow. Please do contribute today. Donate now
The first issue is whether Indian dress code should be disallowed from any premises, even a private one. I don’t think so. It’s not nice, and some would say it seems undignified. Possibly. But if a private group wants to set up rules for its own members, and they’re all ok with it, I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it. By the same token, if the government wants to wage war on such a group, it’s their own lookout, and I wouldn’t lose sleep over that either.
The second is whether MLAs, MPs, and other elected representatives should be automatically entitled to membership in a private club. That one is a big stretch, and the answer is clearly ‘no’. Being a lawmkaer gives someone membership into the law-making body, and it is not one of the privileges of that body to be granted a free pass into any institution that its members want to be part of.
There is more public support for the first issue, but zero support for the second one. Which may be why the two have been clubbed together – to get the second one in the name of the first.
The irony is also that long-standing issues in development are pending the attention of lawmakers for years, but distractions like club memberships and resorts seem to have no trouble getting on the radar.