Kerala Chief Minister V D Satheesan reaffirmed his position by using his father's name, 'Damodara Menon', during his MLA oath, despite previous controversy regarding caste identity.

Kerala Chief Minister V D Satheesan reaffirmed his position by using his father's name, 'Damodara Menon', during his MLA oath, despite previous controversy regarding caste identity.

Kerala Chief Minister V D Satheesan reaffirmed his position by using his father's name, 'Damodara Menon', during his MLA oath, despite previous controversy regarding caste identity.

Kerala Chief Minister V D Satheesan on Thursday once again used his father’s name, ‘Damodara Menon’, while taking oath as an MLA in the Kerala Assembly, days after a similar reference during his swearing-in as Chief Minister triggered controversy and debate over caste identity.

While taking the oath as a legislator, Satheesan repeated the expanded version of his name, including ‘Menon’, alongside his own name. During the swearing-in ceremony as Chief Minister on May 19, Satheesan had introduced himself as ‘Vadassery Damodara Menon Satheesan’, drawing sharp reactions online. Critics pointed out that during his oath as MLA in 2021, he had identified himself simply as ‘V D Satheesan’. Congress activist Jinto John indirectly criticised the move in a Facebook post, saying that “a Congress without caste tails is more inclusive.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Responding to the criticism earlier, the Chief Minister had said that mentioning his parents’ names was a matter of pride. Thursday’s oath in the Assembly, where he again included his father’s name, is being seen as a reaffirmation of that position.

The issue has divided opinion. Critics argue that a Chief Minister sets an example for the state and that reviving an upper-caste title goes against decades of social reform movements in Kerala aimed at reducing caste divisions.

ADVERTISEMENT

Meanwhile, Satheesan’s supporters maintain that “Vadassery Damodaran Menon Satheesan” is his official legal name as listed in election documents. They argue that using the full legal name during a constitutional oath should not be interpreted as caste signalling or political messaging.

ADVERTISEMENT