Union Minister of State for Tourism Suresh Gopi has come under fire from various quarters for his remarks on Sunday, suggesting that individuals from the “upper caste” should be appointed to oversee the tribal affairs portfolio.

Criticizing the statement, CPI(M) leader and Alathur MP K Radhakrishnan said Gopi’s remarks were a violation of the Constitution. “The idea that a high-caste person should govern is fundamentally flawed. Why has there been no change even though people from Suresh Gopi’s caste have held power for the last 78 years?” he questioned.

Advertisement

Calling Gopi a “piper of the Chaturvarna system,” CPI Kerala Secretary Benoy Viswam demanded his removal from the Union Ministry. Prominent tribal leader CK Janu also condemned Gopi’s remarks as “demeaning” and accused him of lacking an understanding of tribal issues and their struggles.

Dalit activist Sunny M Kapicad questioned whether Gopi was aware that India has no separate departments or portfolios based on caste. “India is a democratic country. There are no upper or lower castes here—only citizens with equal rights,” Kapicad asserted.

Speaking at a BJP election campaign meeting in New Delhi, Gopi had expressed his long-standing desire to be part of the Tribal Welfare Ministry. He argued that individuals “born in the upper caste” should be given the responsibility of overseeing tribal welfare.

“It is my dream and expectation that someone from outside the tribal community be appointed for their welfare. Let a Brahmin or a Naidu take charge—there would be significant change. Similarly, people from backward communities should be given the portfolio for the welfare of forward communities,” he said. “Such a shift should happen within our democratic system,” the Thrissur MP added.

Facing severe criticism, Gopi later backtracked, insisting that his remarks were made with good intentions. “If my comment has not been well received or if my explanation is unsatisfactory, I withdraw my remarks,” he said. He further clarified that his intention was to eliminate discrimination. “I did not label anyone as good or bad; my only aim was to break free from this framework,” he added.