As Narendra Modi returns for a third term as prime minister, now leading a National Democratic Alliance (NDA) coalition with significantly reduced margins and seats, it appears to be business as usual for him. But certainly not in the best sense of the term. Two interrelated news items in The Indian Express, on June 15 and 17, 2024, illustrate how every citizen of the country continues to be exposed to the machinations of the Indian state (and the states). It is a surprise to see an immensely diminished prime minister forcing his lost mandate on the people to strike fear.
Delhi’s disputatious Lieutenant governor of Delhi, V.K. Saxena, sanctioned prosecution of Booker Prize-winning author Arundhati Roy and former Central University of Kashmir professor Sheikh Showkat Hussain. They have been booked under Section 13 (punishment for unlawful activities) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and Sections 153A and 153B of the IPC for allegedly “delivering provocative speeches in public” at an event of Committee for the Release of Political Prisoners in 2010. Its origins merits no guess.
In light of the Supreme Court’s stay on sedition, invoking UAPA against Roy and Hussain allows the bypassing of the statute of limitation and ensures that the court is able to accept the case despite the 14-year gap.
The Roy episode
Responding to a question during a Committee for the Release of Political Prisoners conference on October 21, 2010, Roy said that Kashmir was not an integral part of India irrespective of the government’s claims. She added that the Indian government has itself admitted this in the UN.
Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s government, which had amended the UAPA 1967 in 2008 in the wake of the Mumbai terror attack, did not take cognisance of the case filed against her, but did not close it either. Had they done so, the case could not have been opened so easily. The merit of the case lies in the question whether Roy’s statement was incorrect and, therefore, seditious enough to invite prosecution under the UAPA.
Following the repeal of the Article 370 and J&K’s constitution in 2019, its asymmetric status in India’s federal system does not exist. Shrinking of its geographical boundaries with the separate Union Territory status of Ladakh also downgraded the remainder of J&K to a UT, ruled directly from Delhi. Though it continues to be part of the Indian union juridically, provisions of the Indian Constitution (along with its own constitution) that made it integral to the country since the signing of the Instruments of Accession, are now history. This has made the redefinition of the integration hazy.
Secondly, following the 1948 Pakistan-sponsored tribal invasion that took away a large part of its territory, the Kashmir question acquired a complexity. The involvement of the UN and unwillingness of Pakistan to withdraw its army, which was a condition for a plebiscite, froze the situation. With J&K divided into an Indian state and Pakistan controlled ‘Azad Kashmir’, the dispute in the UN remained unresolved. Even as political rhetoric framed J&K as an integral part of India, it remains a disputed territory for the international community. The politics and governance in the state have been tumultuous since the 1950s. The emergence of terrorism sponsored by Pakistan and the arms training of Kashmiri youth through porous borders have further complicated the issue since 1989.
So Roy, at most, made a statement that can be contested, but it does not constitute a criminally chargeable dubious claim. The NDA government, headed by a depleted BJP, is merely making an ‘action’ statement that it is back with the same strength and can deal with critics and dissenters as forcefully as before.
Let us remember that Sardar Patel, India’s first home minister and deputy prime minister, was prepared to give J&K to Pakistan at the time of partition. He has been honoured with a Rs 3,000 crore statue. Further, there are copious studies on the J&K question, by Indian and other writers, recommending a mutual recognition of the Line of Actual Control as the international border between India and Pakistan. However, these studies rule out the remotest possibility of the breast-beating claims of several members of the Modi government about annexing (or integrating) the Pakistan occupied ‘Azad Kashmir’ by force to create an ‘Akhand Bharat’.
The MP Case
In another extreme move, 11 houses in BJP-ruled Madhya Pradesh were razed after bovine meat and remains were found in them. The government alleged that the houses were ‘built on government land’ following the appearance of the bovine remains!
The statement given by chief minister Mohan Yadav, who is apparently lettered in the saffron school more than his formal B.Sc and L.L.B. degrees, showed his ignorance of the constitutional notions of the ‘due process’ and the ‘rule of law’ on camera. displayed his ignorance of constitutional principles such as ‘due process’ and the ‘rule of law’ on camera. These principles are essential to governance, particularly concerning the Executive’s role in executing punishment through demolitions.
Evidently, the prime minister’s selection of chief ministers has more to do with saffron loyalty than skills for governance and administration. Yadav has been associated with controversies that reflect his irrational Hindutva predilection and ignorance of any scientific knowledge. The practice of ‘executive punishment’ and extrajudicial demolition of a suspect’s house, endorsed by Uttar Pradesh chief minister and previously used by former Madhya Pradesh chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, continues with Modi’s tacit approval, despite the latest electoral setback. Sadly, the civil bureaucracy – even the elite cadre IPS of the police – the trial judiciary and the media have been complicit in this demolition of the rule of law.
Modi’s selfdom
The Modi 3.0 narrative feeds the prime minister’s self-dom. His ambitious assertion of not just equaling but surpassing his proclaimed rival, former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, has fallen flat as his government unravels itself as Modi 2.1, with the same brazen demeanour. His petulant desire of leaving Nehru behind in every field is evident.
The government and all its leaders must recall the statements of former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee praising Nehru, Rajiv Gandhi and Narasimha Rao on various occasions for their bipartisan attitude, civility and sensitiveness towards the ‘pratipaksha’ (other party, not opposition). They should also remember his rich and emotional tribute on the Nehru’s death. He concluded, “sarkarein aayengi, jaayengi, partiyan banengi, bigadengi magar ye desh rahna chahiye (governments will come, go, parties will be made, destroyed, but this country must remain)”. A cordial relationship with the opposition, if pursued, will also raise the stature of the leader and image of the government. Given that it is a coalition government, the coalition partners must reign in Modi’s authoritarian instincts.
Ajay K Mehra is a political scientist. He was Atal Bihari Vajpayee Senior Fellow, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi, 2019-21 and Principal, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Evening College, Delhi University (2018).
