REWIND

New Delhi, 1 March 2024

Constitution Review

A JUVENILE CONTROVERSY

By Inder Jit

(Released on 6 March 2000) 

India faces and has faced in the post-Nehru era many crises mainly on one score. It has lots and lots of politicians, but very few statesman. While a politician merely thinks of today, a statesman also thinks of tomorrow. But the situation has greatly worsened in India over the years. Sadly, most Indian politicians do not think of the whole day any more. They only think of the moment and live for the moment --- and talk about yesterday, not tomorrow.

This has made most of our politicians brazenly opportunistic. Self is unabashedly placed before the country and power exploited for personal ends. There is little attempt among most of them to educate and inform themselves. Mere literacy is mistaken for knowledge and wisdom. Few care to remember that a parliamentary democracy is a civilised form of Government based on discussion, debate and consensus. Consequently, the Opposition ignores its positive role and acts as though its only job is to oppose.

These thoughts are prompted by a wholly unnecessary and indeed a juvenile controversy which erupted when the President, K.R. Narayanan, surprisingly chose valour to discretion and publicly expressed his strong reservations against the NDA Government’s decision to set up a Constitution Review Commission in accordance with its election manifesto. Sadly, the wrangle has continued, fanned by unbelievable ignorance on all sides. Hardly a day passes when the Opposition does not denounce the exercise as politically motivated, machiavellian and designed to “saffronise” and undermine the democratic Constitution. In fact, Sonia Gandhi has led in New Delhi a Congress rally to protest against the review and other policies of the Vajpayee Government.

We need to ask a few questions. Is the Congress justified in its opposition to the review? The answer is an emphatic no. In fact, it would have talked differently if Sonia Gandhi and her aides on the one hand, and the powers that be and their advisers on the other were not ignoramuses. Even as Congressmen object mindlessly to a review of the Constitution after a reasonable span of 50 years, they are blissfully unaware that Jawaharlal Nehru had got the Congress Working Committee to set up a 10-member Committee on 4 April 1954 under his own Chairmanship “to study the question of changes in the Constitution and the Representation of People Act and to suggest amendments” in the light of difficulties experienced by the Centre and the State Governments. That was just four years after the Constitution came into effect!

Indira Gandhi next set up a Congress panel, headed by Swaran Singh, in 1976 to take a good, fresh look at the Constitution and make whatever recommendations it considered necessary for stability, development and the well-being and happiness of the masses. It was even permitted to go into the question whether India should continue with the Westminster model or switch over to the presidential form of Government. That the panel favoured the former is another matter.

The Swaran Singh panel also went into the bar imposed by the Supreme Court on Parliament in the Kesavanand Bharati case against amending the basic structure of the Constitution. He proposed that Parliament’s supremacy in the matter be restored by providing that the Constitutional amendments made by it “shall not be called into question in any court on any ground.” The idea was, however, dropped when top legal experts cautioned that the Constitution could well become a book of contradictions if Parliament was allowed unlimited power to amend and upset the delicate equilibrium between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.

Top Congress leaders are presently talking ad näuseum of the “basic structure” of the Constitution and how Parliament is barred from changing it. Yet they (and even Government leaders and their aides) are unaware that Indira Gandhi rubbished the concept in the Lok Sabha on 27 October 1976. She said: “Revision and adjustment in changing conditions are part and parcel of our Constitution. Those who want to fix it in a rigid and unalterable frame do not know the spirit of our Constitution and are entirely out of tune with the spirit of new India... We have always maintained that Parliament has an unfettered, unqualified and unbridgeable right to amend the Constitution. We do not accept the dogma of basic structure!”

That is not all. At one stage Indira Gandhi even toyed with the idea of setting up a Constituent Assembly to ensure that the Constitutional amendments she favoured did not run into difficulty with the Supreme Court because of the Kesavanand Bharati case. But she dropped the move once it was pointed out that a proposal mooted in the Constituent Assembly for providing for such a body was turned down by the Founding Fathers. Expert opinion eventually persuaded Indira Gandhi to get Parliament to amend the Constitution as Parliament on the ground that “there is something bigger than all of us, that is the nation and the future.”

In my opinion, the review has not come a day too soon. In fact, the demand for a fresh look at the Constitution has grown with each passing year in preference to hasty ad hoc amendments totalling 70. Way back on 31 March 1974, I raised the issue nationally through a cover story in the Illustrated Weekly, then India's leading magazine edited by Khushwant Singh, fervently pleading for effective steps “to stop the slideback to a feudal, sham democracy.” A welcome and heart-warming endorsement came from Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan who wrote from Patna: “I congratulate you on your article on the erosion of democracy in our country.”

Another question. Can the BJP use the review to subvert democracy and saffronise the Constitution? No way, even if it so wanted. The BJP, indeed the NDA, lacks the strength both in the Lok Sabha and in the Rajya Sabha to get any Constitutional amendment adopted. An amendment of the Constitution requires to be passed “by a majority of the total membership of the House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting.” The NDA has 303 members in the Lok Sabha with a strength of 545. It has only 84 members in the Rajya Sabha with a strength of 245. Furthermore, such an amendment has to be ratified “by the legislatures of not less than one-half of the States. This is well nigh impossible at present.

No less astonishing and absurd are some recent statements made by top leaders, who should know, better (or be better advised) before speaking. Former Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar reportedly criticised the Vajpayee Government the other day for “by passing” Parliament in regard to the Constitution Review Commission. Sonia Gandhi, for her part, said the Vajpayee Government appeared to be in “a great hurry to rewrite India’s Constitution” and added: “they have not even bothered to take Parliament into confidence.”

Yet, as we all know President Narayanan informed the first session of both Houses of Parliament on 25 October 1999: “A Commission comprising noted constitutional experts and public figures will be appointed to study a half-century’s experience of the Constitution and make suitable recommendations to meet the challenges of the next country.”

Finally, would the proposed review then prove to be pointless and futile? Once again, the answer is an emphatic no. The exercise would still be most useful so long as it tells us “whether it is the Constitution that has failed us or whether we have failed the Constitution” -- and what needs to be done. The Swaran Singh panel came out strongly against any change in the parliamentary system. But it failed to tell us what precisely had gone wrong with the system as practised in India and what might be done to get it to function in a clean, smooth and effective way. Democracy, after all, is only a means to an end. Ultimately, it must deliver and serve the best interest, welfare and happiness of our people.—INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Open Forum

New Delhi, 29 February 2024

Electoral Calculations

ALL ABOUT MODI MAGIC?

By Dhurjati Mukherjee 

The battle for Lok Sabha elections 2024 is turning out both intriguing and exciting on the political landscape of the country. The popularity of Prime Minister Narendra Modi is reflected in his claim that he would return to office in May with a landslide victory, with his party, BJP, winning more than 370 seats on its own and the NDA crossing the 400 mark! The over-confidence came during the reply to President’s address, but at this point of time when INDIA bloc is making every effort to work out seat-sharing formulas, the figure appears inflated. The score of 370, if at all the BJP reaches this figure, will be the highest since 1984 when Congress rode the sympathy wave following Indira Gandhi’s assassination. 

Notably, the BJP is going all out to emerge victorious with a big margin. A move which is bolstered with the shift of Nitish Kumar back to the NDA along with the RLD after Charan Singh was honoured with the Bharat Ratna and former Chief Minister Ashok Chavan leaving the Congress in Maharashtra and may well join the BJP. Clearly, the efforts to muster more support won’t stop here, as in Delhi, the AAP flogs the claim that BJP is offering big sums of money to wean away its MLAs.    

Undeniably, following the overwhelming response to the Ram temple consecration and other such temples expected to follow suit in Kashi and Mathura, Modi’s popularity has risen, and the NDA is eyeing regional parties for support. Political analysts believe that the religious card is over-shadowing the economic rights of the marginalised and backward sections, including their justified demand for a dignified existence. 

At same time, it’s evident that BJP is seeking to win back its old allies. The Bihar effect is being felt in other places as in Punjab and West Bengal, where the ruling AAP and TMC have decided to go it alone respectively. Much depends on what happens in Maharashtra and whether the seat-sharing between the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray group), Congress and NCP is worked out well amongst all three. Latest reports indicate that Arvind Kejriwal has decided that AAP will contest all 90 Assembly seats alone in Haryana but shall continue to be part of INDIA bloc in the battle for Lok Sabha.   

Alliances in the Opposition bloc are still being worked out even if there’s no alliance among AAP and Congress in Punjab as also between TMC and Congress in West Bengal. In Uttar Pradesh, the Samajwadi Party and Congress have reached an agreement with the latter contesting 17 of the 70 seats. Moreover, while in Delhi, AAP and Congress will be jointly fighting in four and three seats respectively, the situation in Haryana is quite complex. 

Recall in August 2023, the India Today-C’Voter survey predicted the vote share gap between the NDA and INDIA coalition had narrowed down to just two per cent. The momentum has been somewhat lost and in its latest February survey, the lead has increased to six per cent and the NDA seems headed for a clear majority. Modi has claimed Congress won’t get even 50 seats!   

While many would say it’s an absurd claim, the fact that Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge has hardly any following in the northern and eastern states may not be totally wrong. As it appears the Congress is relying heavily on Rahul Gandhi and his Bharat Jodo Nyaya Yatra, which is reportedly drawing large crowds. Plus, grass-root leaders of the party in Rajasthan, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh are expected to help the grand old party in its calculations. But as things stand today, it would be extremely impossible for the Congress to get a sizeable number of seats to make a claim to form the next government.   

The power needed for a strong working alliance is somewhat missing in the INDIA bloc. One reason being the Congress’ incapability and the results in got in the recent Assembly elections. Though Rahul has been highlighting the right social and economic issues that affect the impoverished and backward sections, the neglect of OBCs, the dalits and tribals, the induction of religion into politics and the aggressiveness of the Hindutva brigade appear to be influencing the semi-literate masses of the northern states, where the BJP is now dominating.   

It would be pertinent to refer to a book titled Modi’s India: Hindu Nationalism & The Rise of Ethnic Democracy by Christopher Jaffrelot published in 2022 which dealt with Modi’s spectacular popularity in spite that his was a pro-rich government, ideologically opposed to policies of redistribution, those that worked towards a welfare State. Moreover, the violent intimidation of minorities coupled with Modi’s authoritarianism choked democracies by elected governments themselves beginning with Parliament and extending to the judiciary, the media, the Election Commission, the CBI, the Lokpal etc. 

Perhaps, the pursuance of religion and aggressive Hinduism has tilted the balance in favour of the ruling dispensation. It is indeed distressing that the country navigated from a flawed yet hopeful experiment in building democracy with equal citizenship of people of every faith to a place where it is increasingly dangerous to be a minority, dissenter or even to report the truth as dissent and protest are being thwarted, not just by the Centre but in the states as well, West Bengal being a glaring example.   

In the present situation, even though the Modi government has been pro-rich and favouring this section along with the middle class, the higher castes, the poor and the lower castes appear to be mesmerised with Modi’s religious overtures. He has portrayed himself as a saintly person, possibly the first of its kind to occupy the chair of the prime minister. The skills of Modi, including his articulation and gestures, seem to have had a great impact on the masses. 

It is worth mentioning that Modi’s image has been bolstered in a big way while it’s not so in the case of Rahul. Modi’s skills of mesmerising the masses with talks of achievements that possibly lack justification has caught on well with people from northern, central and western India, who don’t have the real power to analyse. On the other hand, Rahul has been focussing on basic social and economic issues that affect the common man. His yatra, no doubt, may have an effect, but doesn’t match either BJP’s money power or its surreptitious methods of harassing Opposition leaders by unleashing the ED or IT agencies after them. 

In this big ensuing electoral battle, it remains to be seen whether Modi’s experiment of a sharper thrust on religion, will get him the massive majority that he claims to be heading towards and drastically change politics in the country.  ---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Economic Highlights

New Delhi, 28 February 2024

Goodwill Train To Delhi

SAVES TONNES, HELPS KISANS

By Shivaji Sarkar 

The farmers’ determination to march to Delhi stems from the profound belief that voices resonating in the capital echo throughout the nation. Allowing them access to the National Capital to articulate their concerns would validate their sense of being heard and acknowledged. 

A simple act of facilitating their travel by train from Ambala, a mere two-hour journey, to New Delhi could alleviate tensions and reflect positively on the government’s willingness to resolve a longstanding issue. This pragmatic approach not only avoids congesting roads but also signifies a proactive step towards dialogue and reconciliation. 

Kisans are struggling since 1960s and their demands remain unchanged. They want minimum prices and the political system has been denying the right prices to them while unmindful of the rising commodity prices since the time of Late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. 

It has been a problem during the Nehruvian era as well. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru himself started as a farmers’ leader of the Congress party, that led to the enactment of the UP Tenancy Act in 1938, considered those days a revolutionary act on land reforms. This law set in motion significant changes in agrarian structure setting in the abolition of the zamindari system in 1950s. It was an important milestone in land reforms. 

Still without a “foreign” hand the MSP for crops had not been possible. In 1959, a team of the Ford Foundation comprising US agricultural officials and scientists travelled to different states, met the people in villages, officers and chief ministers to understand the food production problems. It submitted a report to then minister for agriculture AP Jain called “India’s Food Crisis”. It paved the way for “guaranteed minimum price, publicised before the planting season, a market and its availability within bullock-cart hauling distance”. That is how the Agriculture Produce Market Committee (APMC) or Mandi Samitis came into being. It, however, took five years to start the MSP in 1964 from paddy season shortly after Nehru’s death. 

The country remembers the intense drought of the 1960s leading to food grain imports from the US, proverbially known as ‘ship to mouth’ existence. Though a good beginning in a country that had no system of organised kisan market, it faced a mismatch between the production price and input costs. Still the MSP ensured that farmers prosper in many states. 

One of the biggest farmers’ rallies was organised by Indira Gandhi as prime minister at the Boat Club, India Gate, lawns in March 1981, for launching son, Rajiv Gandhi. It was her reaction to the danger of a widespread, opposition-led kisan movement and erosion of the agrarian base of the Congress(I). Interestingly, kisan leader and father of defections Charan Singh never organised a farmers’ stir. 

A still bigger rally at the Boat Club was held during Rajiv Gandhi’s prime ministership by western UP, Bharatiya Kisan Union, leader Mahendra Singh Tikait in 1988. They had a langar there for days together. Over a lakh kisans continued their sit-ins. They were addressed by opposition leaders, ministers and Rajiv Gandhi himself. It was a major media story even on Doordarshan.

All over the country several farm movements were held at states. Shetkari Sangathan held several rallies between 1980 and 2014 led by Sharad Joshi. Many of these confined to Vidarbha did not get much publicity.  The Left resolved West Bengal land issues. 

In 2009, the Tata group was forced to abandon plans to set up a factory at Singur in West Bengal to build Nano - the world’s cheapest car - after protests by farmers. It caused a political upheaval in West Bengal bringing the end to 34 year-long Left rule and rise of maverick Mamata Banerjee’s TMC. In 2011, there were violent clashes between farmers and police in the Bhatta-Parsaul villages of northern Uttar Pradesh over the acquisition of farmland for road and industry. 

On October 2, 2012, Gandhi Jayanti day, about 50,000 poor farmers, members of rural communities, including the landless and the tribal community, on a Jan Satyagraha, marching from different parts of southern India converged at Gwalior to continue their march to New Delhi. An alarmed UPA government, sent Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh and Commerce Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia to meet the organisers -- a non-governmental organisation called Ekta Parishad -- to accept the government’s promise that a draft national land reform policy would be prepared in six months. 

The Jan Satyagrah protesters did get lukewarm response in the media, but they were firm that welfare programmes like the rural jobs (MNREGA) were no solution to poverty. They demanded that their land be not acquired for roads and industry as land sustained livelihood and could lift tens of millions out of poverty. The ministers’ promises were not fulfilled during the UPA regime. 

The next NDA regime in 1920 brought three legislations allowing farmers freedom to sell their produce to anybody and anywhere; with price assurances and contract farming. It stirred a 17-month long agitation by farmers of UP, Punjab and Haryana at borders till these were withdrawn on December 11, 2021. 

Those unfulfilled promises, rising prices, severe mismatch between input cost and MSP stirred the present agitation by Punjab farmers on February 13 for marching to Delhi only to be prevented by the Haryana Chief Minister ML Khattar’s highhanded police action with one death and 177 hurt at the Shambhu border in Punjab off Ambala. Borders around Delhi are sealed with barbed wire, fencing, sharp spikes, concretised walls and posse of policemen. Four rounds of talks were held at Chandigarh with central ministers. But farmers rejected diversion of cropping pattern and MSP guarantee on five crops other than wheat and rice. The Sanyukt Kisan Union led farmers from UP is now joining it. 

The government can solve it with empathy. It could arrange a two-hour local EMU train ride to New Delhi, allow a rally at Ramlila Ground, a km from New Delhi station, and hold talks with their leaders. Intelligently government leaders could address the farmers and win their hearts with a promise to holistically review the myriad farm issues and the vexed MSP. Satisfied farmers could go back by the same train in the evening possibly ensuring a political bonanza for the government on poll-eve. It would save tonnes in fortifying Delhi, may be enough to fund guaranteed MSP with immense goodwill.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Political Diary

New Delhi, 27 February 2024

Gyanvapi Mosque

TIME FOR BHARAT BHAKTI?

By Poonam I Kaushish 

It was music to Shiv Bhakts as Har Har Mahadev had his way, say and came out trumps. In a big win for Hindus, Allahabad High Court Monday dismissed Gyanvapi mosque management committee's appeals challenging Varanasi district judge's order last month allowing “puja” to be performed in Vyas Tehkhana, averring “worship will continue.” 

Recall, Samajwadi’s Mulayam Singh Government had stopped prayers in the Tehkhana 1993 post Babri Masjid demolition.  On Shailendra Vyas’s petition claiming cellar was with his family since 1551and prayers were being held since British times till 1993 and State could not arbitrarily take away his right of freedom of religion granted by Article 25, the district judge  allowed puja. 

Certainly, the temple-masjid symbolism is an intoxicating potent being used by Hindus and Muslims, depending on which side of the template one is on. History tells us Aurangzeb built Gyanvapi Mosque 1669 after demolishing Vishweshwar Mandir. The temple’s plinth was left untouched and continued to serve as the mosque’s courtyard which reportedly has a Shivling in the pond used for “wasoo” (purification) before namaz and why Hindus are being deprived of their religious right to offer water to the ‘lingam.’ 

In 1936, three Muslim petitioners moved Varanasi’s District Court demanding the entire Gyanvapi complex be declared mosque’s part. The Court granted right to offer namaz alongside prayers anywhere in the complex. 

However, just like Places of Worship Act (PoW) the present case too has its roots in 1991 when a Vishwanath temple priest’s descendant and two others filed a suit in Varanasi’s civil judge court demanding declaration that Gyanvapi complex is part of Kashi temple, removal of Muslims from therein, mosque’s demolition as it was built on old Visweshwar temple’s remnants and land be returned to them, bypassing the PoW. 

In 1998 Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (AIM) moved Allahabad High Court asserting temple-mosque land dispute could not be adjudicated by a civil court as it was barred by PoW Act citing Section 3 which prohibits converting place of worship of a different religious denomination or a different class of the same religious denomination. Section 4(2) states all litigations, appeals or other proceedings relating to changing nature of the place of worship (which were pending till August 15, 1947) shall cease after the enactment of this Act and no fresh action can be taken on such cases. 

The petitioners contended the 1991 Act did not apply to the mosque as the mandir was partly demolished to construct it. Also, as change in nature of worship place had occurred after the cut-off date of August 15, 1947 legal action could be initiated, resulting in the High Court staying proceedings in the lower court for 22 years. 

The issue was revived in 2019 demanding an Archeological survey of the entire disputed area. This was ceded by the city-court on 8 April 2021. Alongside, a five-member committee comprising archaeology experts with two members from “minority community” was constituted to determine whether any temple existed at the site, prior to the mosque. The AIM challenged this in Allahabad High Court which indefinitely stayed the survey. 

On 18 August 2021 five women filed a petition demanding right to worship in Shringar Gauri temple daily without restrictions along-with other “visible and invisible deities within the old temple complex”. Presently, devotees are allowed to worship only on fourth day of Chaitra Navratra. 

In April 2022 Varanasi District Court allowed videography. AIM moved Supreme Court stating it went against PoW Act which was rejected. In July Allahabad’s High Court upheld Varanasi Court ordering ASI survey to determine if mosque was built upon a temple. In August last Supreme Court refused to stop ASI continuing their “scientific investigation of mosque’s complex”.

Questionably, is the genesis of the dispute just to rectify history? Is it only about worship in Tehkhana? Or ensure BJP’s political future of Hindu consolidation? “Ayodhya to bas jhaanki hai, Kashi-Mathura baaki hai? Saffronites allege Mathura’s Shahi Idgah Masjid was built by demolishing a temple at Lord Krishna birthplace. A case is pending before a local court seeking to reclaim Katra Keshav Dev Mandir complex. 

Undoubtedly, the judgment’s larger implications are that it paves path for suits of similar nature. To buttress its claim, a senior BJP leader underscores Kashi Vishwanath Temple as Lord Shiva’s most significant shrine and prominent among 12 ‘Jyotirlingas’ mentioned in Puranas. It’s part of our national heritage and symbol of nationalism which is at the core of Indian consciousness.  We have given Kashi a political thrust for installing Hindu nationalism as India’s dominant political credo. 

More. The Saffron Sangh avers idea of communal harmony and unity flies in the face of historical evidence even as Muslims use historic religious sites as reference points to articulate their socio-political goals and build modern identities with different visions of a modern State. 

Musim clerics aver Hindutva Brigade has found its golden goose: Reclaiming temples by breaking mosques to get Hindu majority to keep bringing them back to power on an emotive issue built on the foundation of aastha and badla from Muslim invaders, who are history. The method is simple: instill a feeling of victimisation within Hindus that they had been dealt unfairly by Muslim minority, first by Mughals and now by Congress and Opposition Parties which believe in Muslim appeasement. 

Today, this victim complex has now culminated into a superiority complex within a cross-section of the majority community which wants to assert its identity by demolition of mosques and “reclaiming” temples. Ayodhya and Babri were the political investments made three decades ago. 

Adding, “For the BJP it is a political issue for which they will gain benefits in 2024 elections, specially, as it Prime Minister Modi’s constituency. The Saffron Sangh wants to dip into their interest earnings from Ayodhya and make fresh investments — basically go on an expansion drive, inject fresh fuel in religiosity via Kashi and Mathura which are part of a grand effort to undermine India’s Islamic history. The motive is clear. Monuments that remind presence of Muslims ruling India must be destroyed.” 

Already, there are four instances beside Varanasi where the origin of various structures are being challenged before courts despite the PoW law: Mathura, Agra, Madhya Pradesh’s Dhar and New Delhi. 

In a sense, the dispute with its political undertones, underscores the nemesis of depending wholly and pathetically on the judicial process to tackle an issue of faith. Perhaps a way forward is to learn from the Ayodhya verdict. The judgment went a long way in becoming a catalytic agent to integrate India and make it a cohesive whole. 

It strengthened the basic features of the Constitution and confidence of people, especially of minorities, on independence of judiciary and rule of law. People showed their inherent maturity. There were no untoward incidents, fiery and inciting speeches, celebration or despondency.

Clearly, a long legal battle lies ahead as Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi temple is related to faith and posturing of assertion is not the best formula for amity. In a pluralist society, with multiplicity of religions, Hindu-Muslim religious leaders need to sit together and work on a solution. For starters why don’t ShivBhakts and Rahim Abids evoke the spirit of Rashtra Bhakti. What gives? ----- INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)