Should elected reps be granted a free pass into clubs? No!

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.

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.

Related Articles

Rajvir vs Bangalore Club: Is there a lesson from such incidents?

Comments:

  1. N V Krishnakumar says:

    If only you had told the truth to your readers they would have come to a different conclusion. These elite clubs are corrupt to the core, taxpayers pay for their subsidized liquor and have been paying off Inspectors for survival. Century Club has violated every rule of Cubbon Park, Bangalore Club has no title to their land and has been operating bars without proper liquor license. And other clubs …..

    In a country where law applies equally to everyone, they would have either been shut down or imposed humongous fines that they would have been bankrupt by now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Similar Story

The real estate shift: How Karnataka’s proposed apartment law shortchanges homeowners

Karnataka apartment owners may not get a fair share of their land as the KAOMA 2026 replaces value-based UDI with an area-only formula.

The Karnataka Apartment (Ownership and Management) Bill, 2026 (KAOMA) changes how a homeowner's share of the land is calculated — and the new formula gives the individual less than what the old law, that is the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 (KAOA), promised. The KAOMA Bill was passed by the Karnataka legislature in August, but is yet to receive assent from the Governor, who has sought clarifications on certain provisions. What is UDI and why does it matter? When you buy an apartment, you buy two things: The flat — a depreciating asset (buildings lose value over time). Your Undivided…

Similar Story

Big promises, unheard residents: Bengaluru’s new parking rules need a rethink

The draft rules meant to manage road space demand end up expanding supply, outsourcing enforcement, and pricing residents out of their streets.

On August 11, the Urban Development Department quietly published the draft Greater Bengaluru Authority (Parking) Rules, 2026 — the legal framework  meant to give teeth to Bengaluru's much-discussed Parking Policy 2.0. Citizens have thirty days to send in objections. Yet, few will read all eighteen pages of the notification. Fewer still will notice that a law framed as a way to curb traffic demand is, on close reading, a plan to expand parking supply and hand over enforcement to private players, while leaving the ordinary resident worse off.  That gap between the promise and what’s on paper matters, because parking…