Lengthy Disclaimer: The purpose of this piece is not to either
justify the Emergency or to defend it. The purpose is not to attack its ‘purpose’.
The purpose is placing the facts leading
to the Emergency in the right context. The purpose is to tell the young
students of Indian politics that we have to see the background in which such a
measure was taken. Certain events in history have wide ranging repercussions,
but as time goes, we also need to move on instead of earning cheap political
brownie points which the BJP-RSS are indulging into.
I
do not want any acknowledgement for this piece, even from my Liberal friends,
because I know nobody, including me can justify the excesses of the Emergency.
I only attempt to bring in some unread facts in public domain. For this, I have
taken the liberty to refer many books on the same topic written by people who
were actually in the midst of it. All the views expressed by me here are my
personal views and does not reflect the views of any political organization.
We
are in 2018 now. But every year, the BJP devoid of any core developmental
issues tries to reignite a malicious politically driven propaganda by panning
Emergency and raking up a discourse, in which it gets significant support from
the most liberal section of the media as well. I would not blame the media-
because they were one of the casualties of the Emergency.
Yes,
for the Congress party too- Excesses of Emergency were definitely a chapter for
which it has publically apologized and which it does not want to touch at all.
When provoked, every June; by the BJP – the Congress has little to offer except
its reiteration that it had already apologized and that Indira Gandhi herself
had accepted that it was a mistake, following it up by calling General
Elections in 1977, where she faced the wrath of the electorate. They also
remind the narrative creators that- Indira Gandhi later came back with a
thumping majority, after the Janata party- Janasangh Government collapsed under
its own contradictions and people again reposed faith in Indira Gandhi.
There
are a lot of deeper factors and some immediate factors which led Indira Gandhi Government
to take such a drastic step. Before coming to that, let me also make it clear
that Invocation of Emergency is a Constitutional provision which is explicitly
covered in Article 352 of the Indian Constitution. So, one may have their
reasons to oppose the Emergency and its excesses- but it has Constitution
validity.
So
how the Emergency did came about? There are layers and layers of factors.
I.
Disobedience of
law in India has always been given a political colour, and rightly so. Since
the Independence was won by Gandhian means of Non-cooperation, Civil
Disobedience and Satyagraha. And we can still see hues and shades of it all
across India even now. Dissent in a Democracy is one of the most powerful tools
to keep it intact. But various organizations have time and again taken the law
in their own hand to serve their narrow vested interests and disobeyed and disregarded
the state, thereby trampling upon its powers and enfeebling it. Before 1947, the protagonists of the National
Movement were fighting a Foreign Power. Weakening the state by unlawful means
was at the core of their struggle; this was perfectly legitimate because a
foreign power is ruling you for 200 years. But post-Independence, these tactics
of blackmailing the state by hartals, strikes and even armed rebellion was
still regarded as perfectly legitimate, particularly by those who want to usurp
power through unconstitutional means. The opposition in the 70’s was determined
to usurp power and when it tasted its first success in dislodging a
Constitutionally elected Government in Gujarat- they had smelt blood and were
hell-bent to replicate that modus operandi throughout the country. Economic
distress and Inflation of the people, ravaged by successive wars also played a
significant amount of part, as also some big mistakes by the Congress party in
the state that further precipitated the situation.
II.
In 1972 India
faced an extreme drought. In Gujarat, the situation became worse, followed by a
poor kharif crop, thereby resulting in sharp increase in prices of the staple
wheat, jowar, bajra and essential commodities. Sensing an opportunity for
political gains by exploiting genuine hardship, opposition parties particularly
the Congress (o) and Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS), CPI(M), SP cynically organized ‘Nav Nirman Samiti’ of
students. In December 1973, students of L D College of Engineering in Ahmedabad
went on a strike to protest against a hike in school fees and mess charges. A month later, students of Gujarat University
erupted in protest, demanding the dismissal of the state Government. How can
student organizations demand dismissal of an elected state Government having a
majority of 140 out of 168, is beyond imagination! They cannot do it without
political patronage.
As the disturbances
continued unabated, the Government led by Chimanbhai Patel (who had corruption
charges against him too) resigned and President’s rule was imposed on 9
February 1974, but Assembly was not dissolved.
Now Jayaprakash Narayan
(JP) got into the picture, by visiting Ahmedabad two days after the imposition
of President’s rule. He complimented the students and actively encouraged them
to continue the stir, leading to atleast 95 deaths in the coming days and 933
innocent people getting injured, besides loss of public property. The motive
was to create anarchy and disturb the wheels of law by taking law into their
own hands. Opposition parties were determined to get the house dissolved,
especially because they were miserably thrashed in the state elections in UP
and Odisha in February. They needed to retrieve lost ground in Gujarat, where
they felt their electoral chances were better.
Later, Morarji Desai
undertook an indefinite fast, starting from 11 March, thereby forcing the
Centre to dissolve the Assembly on March 15.
III.
With the success
of the ‘Nav Nirman Movement’, the opposition had tasted blood. It became a
symbol for similar agitations across India in several states. Nobody shed a
tear for the demise of rule of law and the ‘murder of democracy’ by usurping
power through unconstitutional means. And JP was particularly enthused by these
happenings. Never a realist, always a believer in grand gestures of life, ‘the
underground revolutionary’, JP gave a call of ‘Sampurna Kranti’ in Bihar.
Such a call by any
other leader would have easily been dismissed in the Indian political realm.
But since JP had this moral, almost Gandhian aura of not accepting Pandit Nehru’s
offer for a Cabinet post, after Independence, his call for ‘Total Revolution’
provided a degree of moral credibility resulting in coming together of
ideologically opposite political entities like the Left, Right and the
Socialists because they found this quick method to usurp power, through this
short cut, a much better one. Using extra-Constitutional advocacy, they sought
to replicate ‘Nav Nirman Movement’ though- student bodies, Sangharsh Samitis of
Dalits and Adivasis and particularly the labour unions.
IV.
In Bihar, when
the elected Government almost acceded to the students’ demands, the opposition
still pressed for newer demands and dissolution of Assembly. Well sequenced
calls of bandhs were organized unleashing widespread violence and disruption.
Notwithstanding the violence associated with the bandh, JP gave a call for a
gherao of the Assembly and residence of MLA’s, leading himself a procession to
the secretariat. But Government did not relent. JP called a conference of opposition
parties and by December, Jantata Sarkars and Janata Adalats in villages as
organs of parallel governance.
In fact, On 26 January
1975, rival Republic Day celebrations were held at different places in Bihar.
Would any democratically elected Government allow that, is a question which can
be left open to the ‘Constitutionalists’ who oppose the basic principle of
Emergency!
Inaugurating an all –India
youth conference at Allahabad in June 1974, he said ‘though he himself would
not take part in any armed rebellion, he would not restrain revolutionaries
from to the gun’ (Times of India | 22 June, 1974). He also said, ‘he had never
taken up arms against the state, nor did he want violence, but if the people
wanted it from him, he would do that at an appropriate time’ (UNI report | 31
August 1974) It is apparent that, JP had very little faith in gradual reforms
which were taking place under the Indira Gandhi Government. We can infer that
policies like Green Revolution which made India self-sufficient in food grains,
or the Nationalization of Banks- which increased India’s Saving Rate from 12%
(1969) to 20% of the GDP (1980) did not cut much ice with the opposition whose
one point agenda was ‘Indira Hatao’!
The PMO made attempts
to form a consensus with JP. But JP did not respond, nor did he spell out any
concrete manner how he would battle against rising prices or eliminate
corruption. He took no note of Government’s package which later brought down
inflation.
V.
Even Atal Bihari
Vajpayee, who was an accomplished Parliamentarian, wrote in a paper which he
read at the Bharatiya Jana Sangh’s Conference in Hyderabad in September 1974. –
“The established
leadership has been using Parliamentary method only as a cover for protecting
their evil designs. (sic). The response cannot be confined to the Parliamentary
level. … This was has to be fought in the streets… and in all sensitive power
centres of the establishment’
Thus the opposition was
fighting the battle to attain power only on ‘rhetoric’ and slogans like ‘communitarian
society’ and ‘party less democracy’ with no vision or alternative policy
roadmap for the future.
VI.
Another event
which defined the precipitation of Emergency was the Railway Strikes of
1973-74. Apart from the All India Railwaymen’s Federation (AIRF) affiliated to
the Socialist Party and the National Federation of Indian Railwaymen (NFIR)
dominated by the Congress- around 200 big/small separate unions of different
categories of railway personnel had cropped up through the efforts of CPI, CPM
and the Jan Sangh. The competition of influence was intense. The Government in
one such strike surrendered to All India Loco Running Association in August
1973, which gave an impetus to fresh demands from Sangh-Left backed Unions as
they tasted their first success.
Peter Alvares, the moderate
leader of the AIRF was replaced by George Fernandes in 1973. Before taking over
the leadership, George Fernandes (India’s future Defence Minister) declared
openly that ‘he could organize a strike that would bring down the Indira Gandhi
Government at any time by paralyzing railway transport to a dead stop’.
In a speech meant to
mobilize railway men for strike he said
“Realize the strength
which you possess. Seven days strike of the Indian Railways- every thermal
station of the country would close down. A ten day strike of the Indian
Railways- every steel mill in India would close down and the industries of the
country would come to a halt for the next 12 months. If once the steel mill
furnace is switched off- it takes nine months to refire. A fifteen day strike
in Indian Railways- the country would starve” (The Hindu | 30 March 1974)
The opposition’s main
aim was to wreck the economy and paralyse the administration. This is why they
pitched their demands so high and displayed little interest in negotiation of
their demands.
It was clear to the Government
that the strike was politically motivated and was planned to paralyze the country.
With its back to the wall, the Government had to defend the state and assert
its right to govern. Indira Gandhi’s Government came down heavily on the
protesters. Thousands of employees were arrested and their families were driven
out of their quarters.
VII.
There were other
important factors for the proclamation of the Emergency. There were some
external factors too. The US showered praise on JP and his role in fighting the
Indira Gandhi Government in 1974. The Nixon administration wanted to punish her
defiance to the US in 1971 and for conducting India’s first Nuclear Test later.
The hectic activity of Peter Burleigh, a US consular officer who was constantly
in touch with the agitators was proof of the meddling of foreign powers.
Intelligence reports of how Nixon’s administration wanted to overthrow Bangabandhu
Mujib’s Government in Bangladesh added to more suspicion.
In an interview with
journalist Jonathan Dimbleby in 1978, when Gandhi was asked the precise nature
of the danger to Indian security that drove her to declare a state of emergency,
she promptly replied, “it was obvious, isn’t it? The whole subcontinent had
been destabilized.”
VIII. The
disqualification of Indira Gandhi in the Rae Bareli election through the High
Court Judgement of June 12, 1975 came as last straw and precipitated the
Emergency. On June 24, the Supreme Court put a conditional stay on the High
Court order: Gandhi could attend Parliament, but would not be allowed to vote
unless the court pronounced on her appeal.
IX. The opposition
wasted no time in mounting a full-fledged campaign against Indira Gandhi
Government. They planned demonstrations outside PM’s residence, gherao of industrialists
and businessmen supporting the Prime Minister, gate meetings outside mills,
lunch-hour meetings of Central Government employees etc.
Jan Morcha- a motley
group of 10 parties, with Morarjee Desai as Chairman was formed. In a rally in
Ramlila Grounds, he asked the army, the police and the Government servants not
to obey orders and challenged the Government to try him of treason. He even said
encouraged the military to plan a coup and gherao the PM’s residence.
X.
A day after the
Supreme Court judgment, an ordinance was drafted declaring a state of internal
emergency and the President signed on it immediately. In her letter to the
President requesting the declaration of Emergency, Gandhi wrote, “Information
has reached us that indicate imminent danger to the security of India.”
Early next morning,
Indira Gandhi announced the declaration of National Emergency.
It is no secret that
they were fears of a military coup to overturn a democratically elected Government
in India had forced the PM to take this extreme step which, technically was Constitutionally
valid.
It is no secret that the
opposition called upon the military, police and government employees to flout
“illegal” orders. They urged students to walk out of classes, taxpayers to
refuse to pay taxes and factory workers to strike. They also advocated that the
Information Minister should be barricaded for allowing All-India Radio to “lie”
for the Prime Minister.
There are many excesses
during the Emergency which nobody is condoning. Some were real, some were
highly exaggerated. Similar conditions or even worse conditions were created
during the Morarjee Desai Government too. But then it did not have a legal, Constitutional
and Parliamentary sanction of the Emergency.
Coming back to 2018, Forty-three long years have passed since
Emergency was declared. UPA Chairperson, Sonia Gandhi in an interview already
said that her mother-in-law, Indira Gandhi had regretted it. Congress party has
apologized for it, time and again.
But we do not know, why
the BJP, is hell bent to invoke it every year. Is it because the present Modi
Government has nothing to show?
India has moved on, but
the BJP is stuck with the Emergency.
Comments