Identity Politics, Local Governance, and the Misuse of “Hindutva” A Legal–Political Counter-Response to Mr Aadhavan Thula (France) By Nila Bala – United Kingdom 31 December 2025

I. Introduction

Mr Aadhavan Thula’s response from France to the Nallur Pradeshiya Sabha’s resolution restricting the sale of meat near temples and places of worship raises concerns that extend far beyond a single municipal decision. At issue is not merely cultural regulation, but the selective deployment of identity politics while leaving entrenched structures of economic and political power unexamined.

The immediate invocation of “Hindia” and “Hindutva” reflects a habitual political reflex rather than secular vigilance. Those who fail to critique economic encroachments by outsiders, yet suddenly protest a local administrative decision, reveal the selective nature of this identity-based rhetoric.

II. Historical Context

*The establishment of biriyani outlets adjacent to Hindu temples by Sri Lankan Moors historically provoked significant social and cultural controversy.

*The Nallur Pradeshiya Sabha’s resolution is therefore a preventative governance measure, not an ideological imposition.

*Within the LTTE administrative framework, preparing or consuming chicken pongal on Thai Pongal day was considered a serious breach of cultural discipline, with violators removed from office. This demonstrates that culturally sensitive regulation is not new or externally imposed.

III. Legal Framework

A. United Kingdom

Local Authority Powers

Local Government Act 1972 empowers councils to regulate matters affecting community welfare and public order.¹

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 authorises regulation of street trading and location-specific licensing.²

Equality and Proportionality

Equality Act 2010 prohibits discrimination on protected grounds such as religion or ethnicity.³

UK jurisprudence confirms that differential treatment is lawful where it pursues a legitimate aim and is proportionate.⁴

B. European Union

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU

Article 21 prohibits discrimination on grounds including religion or belief.⁵

Article 22 recognises the rights of persons belonging to minorities to preserve and develop their culture.⁶

Principle of Proportionality and Subsidiarity

EU law requires that measures affecting fundamental rights must be necessary and proportionate.⁷

ECtHR Case Law

Article 9 (freedom of religion) may be lawfully limited to protect public order, morals, or the rights of others.⁸

Spatial regulation of commercial activity around religious sites is recognised as a legitimate, proportionate limitation.

C. United Nations

ICCPR (1966), Article 18 – Guarantees freedom of religion, allowing lawful limitations to protect public order and the rights of others.⁹

ICESCR (1966), Article 15 – Obliges authorities to protect cultural life and cultural spaces.¹⁰

UN Declaration on Minorities (1992) – Requires authorities to enable minorities to preserve culture and religion, without unrestricted commercial activity.¹¹

IV. Analysis and Legal Conclusion

From the UK, EU, and UN perspectives, the Nallur Pradeshiya Sabha’s resolution:

Is not inherently discriminatory

Does not violate secular governance

Cannot lawfully be equated with ideological extremism absent evidence of discriminatory intent

Political framing of the decision as a “Hindutva conspiracy” is therefore misleading and lacks legal foundation.

The selective outrage from diaspora actors, compared to historical sacrifices and internal governance practices (LTTE chicken pongal regulation), demonstrates politically opportunistic identity rhetoric.

V. Footnotes

Local Government Act 1972, c.70 (UK).

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, Part II (UK).

Equality Act 2010, c.15 (UK), ss.4, 13, 19.

Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223; R (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] UKHL 26.

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2012/C 326/02), Article 21.

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 22.

Treaty on European Union, Articles 5(3) and 5(4) – principle of subsidiarity and proportionality.

ECtHR, S.A.S. v France [2014] ECHR 695; ECtHR, Leyla Şahin v Turkey [2005] ECHR 739.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), Article 18.

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966), Article 15.

UN General Assembly, Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, Resolution 47/135 (1992).