Very soon elections will be held in Maharashtra and Haryana. Both states are interesting and important for different reasons. We shall come to that in a moment but before that, a few other matters need sorting out. Before the ballots are cast, or to be precise, the button on the EVM is pressed, the hearing on Ayodhya will be over in the Supreme Court. This case has been accorded top priority and is being heard on a day-to-day basis. The Chief Justice of India has referred all other pressing matters, like the bunch of writ petitions arising out of the ‘extraordinary’ situation in Jammu and Kashmir post-reorganisation of the state and dilution of the special status enjoyed by that state (now split in twin Union Territories), to a separate Constitution bench.
Will the nation witness a closure of this festering dispute (Ayodhya) or the court reserve its judgment? Will the hearing in the court have any effect on these elections? Speculation is rife and your guess is as good as ours.
Another disturbing development concerns the decision of the Election Commission drastically reducing the period of disqualification of the Chief Minister in Sikkim barring him from contesting elections from six years to one. As he has already served a sentence after conviction for a year, he is now free to contest. The Constitution empowers the Election Commission to be the ultimate arbiter in matters concerning elections and under normal circumstances this decision would not have raised any eyebrows. But the ‘logic’ that led to this decision appears dangerously flawed.
The Commission is of the opinion that Prem Singh Tamang has demonstrated that he has the mandate of the people and enjoys undisputed support of his party and thus his criminal offence and conviction can be condoned. What is more, the case dating back to 1977 cited as precedent is even more shocking. A person convicted for murder escaped the noose as the SC felt he had suffered too long awaiting hanging on the death row. After serving four years of the sentence, he was released. Though we don’t know the details, political influence may well have resulted in the remission and reprieve. His disqualification from contesting elections was set aside by the Election Commission following the same logic—the convicted criminal appeared to enjoy the ‘mandate of the people’.
We don’t have to labour the point how perilous this logic is. Once we bow before the ‘mandate of the people’ there is no chance for rule of law to survive. No politician with muscle or money power will suffer the consequences of a conviction in courts. The independence of judiciary will become a cruel joke. As it is, politicians in power mock the majesty of law with impunity. Claiming political vendetta and support of their party they exercise enough clout to browbeat police investigating cases against them into ‘weakening’ the charge, and intimidate witnesses. We have seen this happen recently in the Unnao rape case and the allegations against Swami Chinmayananda.
It is interesting how the Shiv Sena, an ally of the BJP, has jumped the gun and given a clean chit to Sharad Pawar who is under Enforcement Directorate’s scrutiny. No leader in contemporary India, who is believed to be clean as a whistle by his family or friends and has obliged supporters and opponents when in power, can be made an accused in a criminal case or charged with corruption, it seems.
Alas, no political party is free from such partisan, flawed logic. Legal eagles defending P Chidambaram have been shouting themselves hoarse that their client is a most honourable man who has been a former Cabinet minister, Parliamentarian and eminent lawyer for over four decades. He should, thus, be treated differently from others, they argue. The adage—‘However high you may be, the law is higher than you’—seems to have lost all meaning. Past reputation is weak defence. The trial courts must decide on facts. The more powerful the accused the greater the pressure on investigative agencies to build a watertight case.
Time to go back to the elections. Maharashtra is one of the largest and most prosperous states in India. It has also suffered due to virulent parochialism, communal strife and organised crime. The affairs of civic body have been in a sorry mess for long. Sub-regional discontent is simmering dangerously. How will the electorate vote in the hinterland? Haryana among the smaller units of the Union too has prospered and suffered due to rise and fall of elected leaders. It, too, has been aggressively parochial occasionally exploding violently. Our anxiety is not unreasonable.
Pushpesh Pant
Former professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University
pushpeshpant@gmail.com