The culmination of the Congress’ negotiations with Prashant Kishor has had mixed reactions among party leaders and workers. What is clear, though, is the confidence the party rank and file has in the leadership and the widespread desire among Congress persons to be led from the front. Election machinery and management are undoubtedly critical to any modern-day political party and certainly for us as we attempt to reverse the trend of the last few years. But more than that is the trust one has in the leadership and the persuasive force of the political message. We know that the Congress is in a make-or-break situation with no option other than to succeed.
Curtailing of freedom and undermining of rights do not always happen suddenly. They are pushed back a little at a time, both to test the reaction and to take advantage of the credulous and less vigilant. But there is a vanishing point beyond which all is lost and only prolonged battle can reverse the situation. We are today almost at that point and failure to hold the line will not be forgiven by history. Let us quickly look at the recent steps taken by the Narendra Modi government that might point to the nature of things to come.
On ‘teaching a lesson’ mode
On the rights front since the NRC-CAA protests, the State has refused to draw a line between dissent, disagreement and unlawful resistance, including the use of the law of sedition and UAPA. Having attempted to impose pecuniary liability on select protesters in Uttar Pradesh and putting up posters with their pictures, the State held its hand only when the Allahabad High Court expressed its displeasure. Now in all states, the governments are resorting to demolition of properties of persons alleged to have participated in violence. It may well be that some of these properties do not have prior permission but there is an elaborate system of notices and appeals before demolitions can be carried out.
Government ministers have gone on record to say that rioters shall be and are being taught a lesson. For long, we have known that India functions on an uneasy daily exercise of balance between strict law and practical accommodation. Whenever the administration of the day becomes inimical, it finds little technical irregularities of one kind or another, especially under income tax laws or other instruments of financial regulation. The black listing laws are a convenient instrument of harassment or ‘teaching a lesson’. Threat of incarceration to independent journalists and even stand-up comedians. The message is clear, ‘No jokes please, we are Indians.’ A modern, proud democracy that cannot laugh at itself and with people who want to laugh would be in great trouble. Or indeed as a High Court judge said in one hearing, “The State is not so weak as to be shaken by slogans of a few students.”
Clearly there are two dominant themes of thought in India right now, one backed by evident political and electoral power, the other by the history of modern India up to 2014. These have been labelled as ‘Bhartiyata’ versus Vote bank appeasement. Fortunately, no one has shown the audacity to question the Constitution, except the fringe on both sides. Whatever the two dominant forces seek to achieve must be discovered in the Constitution. The words of the text might be clear but interpretations have varied. The contest of interpretations will continue in public discourse and court proceedings. The ultimate test, at least for the present, might lie in implementing the Uniform Civil Code, enjoined by the Directive Principles of State Policy and not just the political agenda of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Also Read: 5 reasons why Prashant Kishor and Congress ‘deal’ fell through
Constitution as our national identity
Curiously the confident pronouncements of the protagonists seldom disclose the contours and character of such a code when it is implemented and what will happen to myriad extant laws that mght not be consistent with it. How much of the code will be impacted by the provisions of different personal laws? Or is this a precursor of a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ that does not have a similar endorsement by the text of the Constitution. To have adequate reflection of the ‘Hindu way of life’ in the Constitution and the laws of the country is a perfectly legitimate aspiration and expectation of Indian citizens but not at the cost of rights guaranteed to citizens of other religions and denominations.
There can be dispute about the relative balance between competing rights but no executive or legislative steps can take away the very ground for seeking a balance. It cannot be seriously argued that the Constitution has been understood to give rights to citizens of all religions and that amounts to appeasement. The strength of the Constitution comes from our emotional and psychological attachment to it as part of our national identity and the idea of India. If the political compulsions and aspirations of any person logically lead to the questioning of the noble document, they must come out in the open and be judged by the people without the camouflage of envy, hate, false perceptions.
This will make it clear that the management skills and election techniques of Prashant Kishor were only a small part of the challenge that the Congress party has to confront and so it will. Political outfits contest with political ideas that reflect their ideology, even if communications and electoral management skills are indispensable.
Salman Khurshid is a Congress leader, senior advocate and author. He tweets @salman7khurshid. Views are personal.
(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)