Ever since
Narendra Modi became prime minister in 2014, the charge of “undermining
institutions” has been a constant refrain in what is popularly but not
factually known as the mainstream media. He has been accused of “undermining”
every known institution from the Indian Council of Historical Research to the
Reserve Bank of India. The raucous babble reached its crescendo after Urjit
Patel (a Modi appointee) announced his resignation for personal reasons as the
Governor of the Reserve Bank of India. The crescendo reached even a higher
pitch after Shaktikanta Das a former IAS official was appointed as RBI Governor
to replace Patel. Notwithstanding the fact that he served as the Revenue
Secretary, the Economic Affairs Secretary and as a member of the Fifteenth
Finance Commission, it was his educational qualifications that became the bone
of contention.
It must be
remembered that when Modi assumed charge as prime minister he left most of the ‘steel
frame’ that he inherited in place except for a few minor changes. It is against
this backdrop, it may be instructive to look back and review who “undermined
institutions” the most. Jawaharlal Nehru ruled for nearly eighteen years since
he became the interim prime minster in 1946 till his death in 1964. His
daughter Indira ruled the nation for sixteen years, from 1966 to 1977 and from
1980 till her death in 1984. Her son Rajiv ruled the nation between 1984 and
1989. His wife Sonia ruled by proxy between 2004 and 2014. Political chicanery of that magnitude – which amounts to
nothing less than undermining the highest political office in the land – would
not have been possible in any other democracy in the world.
Deception,
Disinformation and Psychological Operations have been originally employed by
intelligence agencies but politicians caught on to them fast. The Congress
party has for long invested in an ecosystem of academic institutions and the
media. They come in handy to discredit and disarm political rivals by deception,
disinformation and psychological operations. Coming back to the issue of
“undermining institutions”, here is a non-exhaustive list of examples of how
institutions were undermined or worse sabotaged to suit political whims and
fancies under various Congress leaders.
Jawaharlal
Nehru
Let us begin
with the reign of Jawaharlal Nehru who has been hailed as an epitome of
democratic values.
Curtailing freedom of expression India’s best and brightest minds toiled for about three years to craft the
longest written Constitution of the world. It was adopted on January 26,
1950. Even before the ink on the original Constitution dried, Nehru
proposed the first amendment. The Americans amended their Constitution
about thirty times in two hundred and forty years while we enacted a hundred
and one amendments in seventy years. Whereas the American first amendment strengthened
freedom of expression, Nehru’s first amendment, enacted on June 18, 1951 curtailed
freedom of expression.
Curtailing powers of the judiciary The Indian first amendment did more. It created the
Ninth Schedule which barred judicial scrutiny of legislations included in it.
Downgrading
the Finance Ministry Enamoured as he was of the Soviet system of governance, he
created the Planning Commission an extra-Constitutional body, which in
a way reduced the importance of the Finance Ministry.
Dismissing
state governments When Nehru used the Art. 356 of the Indian Constitution
to dismiss the Kerala state government in 1959, he set a dubious precedent.
Undermining
the Cabinet and Parliament Nehru took many decisions which have had
long-lasting adverse effects without consulting the parliament or his own
cabinet, thus undermining the institutions. The decisions include
Calling
a ceasefire in Jammu & Kashmir in October 1947 when the Indian army was
winning the war. The effect of this ill-advised decision was to lose a third of
the state and altering international borders with India’s neighbours. Had India
retained PoK, we would have retained Gilgit-Baltistan too. We would have had a
border with Afghanistan. His decision to refer the issue to the UNO was equally
inexplicable.
Dilly-dallying
on Junagadh and Hyderabad against the wishes of the Cabinet. But for Patel’s timely action, these states would now
have been part of Pakistan.
Concealing
intelligence reports about the construction of a mountain road network in Aksai
Chin by the Chinese.
Withdrawing
unilaterally the extra-territorial rights in Tibet which India inherited from
the British.
Sacrificing
Tibet by accepting the Chinese claim that Tibet was a part of it.
[The last two ill-advised decisions removed a buffer state between India
and China.]
Refusing
to accept United Nations Security Council seat when it was offered on a platter
to India but instead demanding that it be granted to China.
Refusing accession of Kalat and Nepal At
the time of partition, a few neighbouring States wished to accede to India.
These include Nepal and the Kingdom of Kalat which forms a large part of modern
Baluchistan. Nehru rejected them. Oman which owned the port of Gwadar on the
southwest coast of Baluchistan offered to sell it to India. Again for reasons
best known to him Nehru rejected the offer.
The
worst undermining of all was refusing to look after the needs of the Indian
armed forces in terms of manpower recruitment and training and equipment.
Inducting
dynastic succession. Nehru made his sister Vijayalakshmi ambassador to the
United Nations and the USSR. His daughter Indira was unofficially Nehru’s
personal assistant through his years as the prime minister. This made her privy
to government documents despite the Official Secrets Act. Later he made his
daughter the president of AICC.
Awarding
himself the Bharat Ratna The award is recommended by the prime minister. But
Nehru was the first recipient of the award in the year of its institution.
Nehru’s apologists argue that Rajendra Prasad did it off his own bat to signal
truce between them but nothing prevented Nehru from refusing to accept it.
Indira
Gandhi
Revocation
of Privy Purses to the former Maharajas. It was a sovereign guarantee given to them by the Constituent
Assembly. Her action amounted to undermining the authority of the
parliament.
In
the late 1960s and early 1970s she had had several judicial reverses. They
include the Bank Nationalization case, the Privy Purses case and the
Fundamental Rights case. Unlike her father who simply amended the Constitution
in response to adverse judicial verdicts, she went a step ahead and undermined
the judiciary itself. Within hours after the verdict in the Fundamental
Rights case was delivered in 1973, she superseded several judges and
appointed a pliant judge as the CJI.
Refusing
to heed the judicial verdict about her parliament seat.
Declaring
the (internal) Emergency which undermined democracy itself.
Technically the (external) Emergency declared in 1962 after the Chinese invasion
was still in force. Neither her father nor she saw it necessary to repeal it! Fundamental
rights including the right to life suspended.
Dismissing
state governments and Governors at will.
Her
refusal to accept a split in the Congress party and her lust for power
led to the 1969 Gujarat riots which lasted – six months – and resulted in the
death of about 5000 people. The 1983 Nellie massacre in which 3000 Muslims were
killed occurred in Indira’s reign. By the by, more than 90% of communal riots
in India occurred during the reigns of Jawaharlal, Indira and Rajiv.
Making
her son Snjay a supra-Constitutional authority. Chief Ministers danced
to his tunes.
Her
propping up Bhindranwale to undermine the Akalis and her war on the Golden
temple.
Awarding
herself the Bharat Ratna This time the fig leaf of Rajendra Prasad was not
there.
An
action that has long-lasting adverse effects was handing over the universities
and other intellectual institutions to the left-illiberal elite as a quid pro
quo for political support.
Rajiv
Gandhi
His
reign began with the Sikh genocide, in which between 8000 and 10000 Sikhs were
killed. The genocide was a blot on democracy, and the biggest undermining of
the institution of democracy.
Sacking
his Finance Minister to alter the import policy (for importing PTA and other
chemicals used in the manufacture of polyester fibre). This was to favour
Dhirubhai Ambani. The policy declaration was a replica (or was it a template)
of the 2G spectrum auction.
His
grandfather sought to control freedom of expression through his first
amendment. His mother used carrots and sticks to reign in the media. He sought
to control the media through an amendment to the Posts and Telegraphs Act, but
had to drop it due to widespread criticism.
He
sacked his Foreign Secretary, A. P. Venkateswaran in a press conference
Sonia
Maino
(the de facto PM)
Creation
of the institution of ‘UPA Chairperson’. It was an extra-Constitutional authority.
Creation
of the extra-Constitutional NAC which was a supra-Cabinet
superintending the work of the prime minister’s Cabinet.
Commissioning
social “activists” like Teesta Setalvad to draft legislation (the impugned
Communal Violence Bill) and school text books.
Now
let us see the other argument about an IAS officer being appointed as the
Governor of RBI. The following RBI Governors were from the IAS: B. Rama Rau, K.
G Ambegaonkar, H. V. R. Iyengar, L. K. Jha, S. Jagannathan, R. N. Malhotra, S.
Venkateswaran and Y. V. Reddy.
Finally,
let us look at the argument that only economists should head economic
institutions. In the years between 1970–1973; 1976–1983; 1985–1987;
1990–1997; 2000–2013 and 2017–2018 Americans won the Nobel Prize for economics.
India’s Amartya Sen won it in 1998 giving us bragging rights! While the
Americans won the maximum number of economics Nobel prizes or shared them with
others, the American economy has had its ups and downs. The American economy
saw recession in the years 1969-70; 1973-75; 1980-82; the early 1990s; the
early 2000s and the worst in 2007-8. The 2008 collapse wiped out life’s savings
of many Americans including Indian expatriates, making millions paupers
overnight. So much for economists!
