History was in the making when Narendra Modi, the Prime
Minister of the secular India, visited Ram Janmabhoomi and participated in a
purely religious ceremony of
Bhoomi pujan
of Ram Temple in Ayodhya. While laying the foundation stone of the biggest
Hindu temple in the world, P M Modi was in fact laying the foundation of a new
republic, a Hindutva Rashtra.
A year ago on 5th August 2019, the BJP fulfilled
another of its core ideological agenda by revoking article 370 and dividing the
Jammu and Kashmir State into two Union Territories. August 5 might have chosen for
the
Bhoomi
pujan either in view of celebrating the anniversary of the
abrogation of article 370 or to keep out of the memories of the people of India
the revocation of article 370 and the consequent curbs imposed on the freedoms
and rights of the people guaranteed by the Constitution of India. In the
absence of the
Bhoomi pujan the media
would have focused on the current situation in Jammu and Kashmir and asked
uncomfortable questions to the BJP government. Otherwise what was the urgency
for organizing the foundation laying ceremony in the midst of the unprecedented
spread of pandemic Coronavirus by infecting more than 20 lakh people and killing
more than 50,000 on 5th August?
Prior to the foundation ceremony of the temple the Hindutva
leaders made various statements to tell the people of India that the ceremony
planned and executed in the midst of extraordinary spread of Coronavirus is
symbolic of the fundamental transformation that has taken place in the republic
of
India
ever since the BJP came to power in 2014. According to senior
RSS
functionary Dattatreya Hosabale, the Ram temple in Ayodhya is a symbol of
"cultural nationalism" in the country. Virendra Parekh in an article
titled, “Founding the Hindu Rashtra, not just a temple” asserted that the
Bhoomi pujan of Ram temple is truly a
symbol of laying the foundation of Hindutva Rashtra.
It is
pertinent to quote what Pratap Bhanu Mehta wrote on 5th August in
his article in The Indian Express under the title, “Ayodhya’s Ram temple is
first real colonization of Hinduism by political power”. “
You know
this temple is not a product of piety, but retaliation and revenge for an event
centuries ago”.
He further writes about the intention of the
actors behind the temple project. “They made Ram synonymous with
revenge, with an insecure pride, with a blood curdling aggression, violence
towards others, a coarsening of culture, and the erasure of every last shred of
genuine piety in public devotion and public life”.
Observers
of Indian politics can easily understand that the first term of the Modi
government (2014-19) was the preparation of the ground for a new republic and the
last 15 months have been ruthless actions to rewrite the constitution of India.
The first stint of the Modi government was marked by proliferation of hate
speech, lynching by cow vigilantes with impunity, suppression of free speech,
filing false cases against the university students who espoused the cause of
democracy and dissent, branding anyone who disagreed with the BJP and the Sangh
Parivar as anti-national and putting behind the bars journalists and social
activist who raised the issues of injustice and oppression.
Suhas
Palsikar in his article titled, “At Ayodhya, we will see dismantling of the
old, and the
Bhoomi pujan of the new
republic” in the Indian Express on 4th August, has pointed out five
pillars on which the new republic is being built.
The first pillar is transformation of the
Indian State into a ‘repository of repression’. Enforcement and investigation
agencies are being used to target the mainstream politicians of the opposition
parties. Mehbooba Mufti, the former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, is in
detention for more than a year.
The
second pillar of the new republic is “delegitimization of dissent and
critique”. This was rampant during the first term of the Modi government. But suppression
of dissent has become more ferocious during the last fifteen months.
For example, the Delhi police have claimed
that the Delhi riots in February were a conspiracy by the CAA protesters. They
alleged
that the protestors were willing to “advocate and execute a secessionist
movement in the country by propagating an armed rebellion against the lawfully
constituted government of the day”. Fourteen people were arrested in the main
conspiracy case, which includes charges under India’s draconian anti-terror
law, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. Six of those arrested are
students.
At the same time no criminal
cases have been filed against the BJP leaders who made provocative hate speeches
which were mainly responsible for the outbreak of communal riots. Every act of
dissent is being criminalized whereas dissent is the lifeblood of democracy. Video
footages have appeared showing the complicity of the Delhi police during the
Delhi riots. The police is being used for suppressing dissent.
The
third political transformation is related to “the willingness of the judiciary
to look the other way”. In the Ayodhya dispute, the SC declared that the
demolition of Babri Masjid was a criminal, illegal and unconstitutional act.
At the same time, the court gave the disputed
land to the party that was responsible for the Ram Janamabhoomi agitation.
The
decision in the cases challenging the constitutional validity of CAA and
abrogation of Article 370 are still pending with SC. In a democracy the
judiciary is the guardian of freedom and the rights of the citizens and the protector
of the constitution. The inordinate delay in deciding some crucial cases
related to the constitution and individual freedoms by the SC has created
suspicion in the minds of some citizens regarding the impartiality and
independence of the judiciary.
The
statement of the human rights activist lawyer, Prashant Bhushan, on the failure
of the Supreme Court in defending democracy is to be seen against this
backdrop. “The Supreme Court (SC) remained a mute spectator as communal riots
ravaged north-east Delhi”, advocate Prashant Bhushan said on Sunday in his
counter-affidavit filed in response to the contempt of court case initiated
against him by the SC for his tweets against the apex court and the Chief
Justice of India (CJI), SA Bobde.
The
fourth is the indifference of the opposition parties. The opposition parties
failed to take a firm stand on various issues. Regarding the Kashmir issue
majority of the opposition parities supported the move of the Central
government. Many parties, including the Congress, has hailed the building of
Ram temple, forgetting the fact that it is built on debris of thousands of
people who were killed in the communal riots aftermath of the Babri Masjid
demolition. “If the BJP is guilty of dismantling the republic, all other
parties are silent approvers, writes
Suhas Palsikar.
Finally,
the new republic is founded on a militant culture of majoritarianism. This has
been in the making during the last three decades through the Ayodhya movement spearheaded
by the Sangh Parivar organizations. The failure of the Congress through its
omissions and commissions since 1980 is equally responsible for the present
scenario.
Some
political observers and activists have described the present political scenario
in India as ‘undeclared emergency’. Yogendra Yadav, president of Swaraj India
party, disagrees with the concept of undeclared emergency. He describes the
present situation as “authoritarian capture of democracy’. He agrees with the view
of
Suhas Palsikar that the first Republic
inaugurated with the Constitution of India is already over. According to
Yogendra Yadav, the formal procedures of democracy have been used to subvert
the substance of democracy. Hence it is more dangerous than declaring emergency
because emergency is for a short period, but subversion of democracy could be
for a long period.
In order to
substantiate his view Yogendra Yadv refers to a book published in 2018 under
the title,
How Democracies Die: What History Reveals About Our Future
by Steven Levitsky and Daniel
Ziblatt. The authors of the book hold the view that democracies mostly die an
unspectacular, slow and barely visible death, mostly at the hands of
democratically elected leaders, often through legal instruments. “The tragic
paradox of the electoral route to authoritarianism is that democracy’s
assassins use the very institutions of democracy – gradually, subtly, and even
legally – to kill it.” This takes three forms: capturing of referees,
sidelining of players and rewriting of rules.
In the context of
India the referees are investigating agencies like the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), oversight
institutions like the Central Information Commission (CIC) and Comptroller and
Auditor General (CAG), and, of course, the apex judiciary. Their capture by the
Modi government has been smooth and more or less complete as per the view of
Yogendra Yadav.
The second technique
used by the government is sidelining the players. The main players in a
democracy are opposition leaders, media, cultural icons and business leaders.
The Modi government has not been taking the opposition parties seriously mainly
due to two reasons. First of all, the main opposition, the Congress is in
disarray with minuscule number of 44 seats in the Lok Sabha and there is no
unity among the opposition parties.
Most
of the media in India is totally under the control of the government without
having the ownership. That is why they are given the nickname
godi (adopted) media. The business
leaders are generally on the side of the ruling party and the BJP is adept in
getting their support through a strategy of give and take.
The third technique
is rewriting the rules i.e. amending and changing the constitution. In order to
implement its Hindutva agenda the BJP has already made changes in the
constitutional provisions through CAA and abrogation of article 370. With the
support of a pliant judiciary and almost total control over the constitutional
bodies like Election Commission the government need not change the constitution
for the time being. The BJP has proved adequately that without changing the
words the spirit of the constitution can be killed.
Thus laying the
foundation stone of the Ram temple in Ayodhya by the Prime Minister in the
presence of Yogi Adityanath, the CM of UP and Mohan Bhagwat, the RSS sarsanchalak
is an open declaration of the arrival of the Hindutva Rashtra. Indeed, it is
not simply laying the foundation of a temple alone.
(The
writer can be reached at: jacobpt48@gmail.com)
(Published
on 10th August 2020, Volume XXXII, Issue 33)
