NEW YORK – An Indian-American academician has denounced what he calledthe “systematic” abuse of police and judicial powers in India—with theapparent blessing of the Modi government— that threaten Indian democracy.
“(T)here’s a growing body of evidence that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi is using state powers tointimidate its political opposition as well as critics,” Sumit Ganguly, apolitical science science professor at Indiana University, Bloomington,wrote in an opinion piece in ‘Foreign Policy’, a prestigious US magazine.
“And amid a coronavirus pandemic and other concerns for the internationalmedia, there is a danger that New Delhi’s erosion of democratic values maygo unnoticed before it is too late.” Ganguly cites a number instances ofthe Modi government’s attempts to silence critics of its policies,including the arrest and incarceration in August 2019 of PalaniappanChidambaram, a former finance minister from the opposition Indian NationalCongress party, on charges of bribery and corruption.
Chidambaram, a lawyer, was able to obtain appropriate legal counsel and waseventually released on bail. “Without taking a stance on the veracity ofthe charges, the move in effect muzzles a prominent opposition politicianwho has long been vocal in his criticism of the Modi government,” he wrote.“Of course, corruption is rife in India, but the BJP has yet to explain whyChidambaram in particular was singled out.”
Ganguly said the Modi government was also using anti-terrorist laws, mostnotably the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), whichallows the state to designate individuals as terrorists on extremely flimsygrounds.
One of the most prominent such cases, the professor cited stemmed from ariot that took place in January 2018 at an annual gathering of Dalitsmembers of India’s so-called lowest caste—in the village of Bhima Koregaonto commemorate a military victory against high-caste rulers more than 200years ago.
Several left-wing intellectuals and activists were detained under the UAPAlast February on the grounds that they were guilty of “promoting enmitybetween groups” and involved in abetting terrorism it was pointed out.
They included, among others, Varavara Rao, a 79-year-old left-wing poet andwriter; Arun Ferreira, a criminal lawyer; Sudha Bharadwaj, a trade unionleader; and Gautam Navlakha, a human rights activist and a long-standingcritic of state coercion in India.
“It was hardly a group of people likely to be involved in terrorism. Worsestill, local police claimed that they had unearthed a plot to assassinateModi,” Ganguly wrote.
Despite concerted attempts on the part of the National Investigation Agency(NIA), which had brought the legal proceedings against the activists in thefirst place, the authorities were unable to gather evidence linking them toany of the professed charges,” he said. “Even so, the Bombay High Courtrefused to grant bail to several of the key detainees—highlighting thecourt’s unwillingness to stand up to the present government.
Read Top Stories
“Worse still, the NIA’s persistence in legally harassing these activistshighlights how a premier investigative body has been rendered into aplaything of the government in office.”Ganguly wrote, “As their legal fate remains in limbo, the government hasnow chosen to go after another group of politicians, university professors,and activists whom it claims were responsible for instigating riots in NewDelhi last February.
Among them are Jayati Ghosh, a noted economics professor from JawaharlalNehru University; Sitaram Yechury, the general secretary of the CommunistParty of India (Marxist); Yogendra Yadav, a well-known pollster and theco-founder of a civil society organization; and Rahul Roy, a prominentdocumentary filmmaker. Each of them has been accused of participating in awide-ranging conspiracy to provoke the inter-religious riots that sweptthrough the capital.
In reality, the professor wrote that the riots largely stemmed fromprotests against Modi’s anti-Muslim Citizen Amendment Act. “The bulk of theprotesters were university students and civil society activists—and mostdemonstrations were peaceful.
But there is ample evidence that Hindu mobs, many of them affiliated withthe BJP, set upon the protesters and attacked them. They also used thecover of the disturbances to attack vulnerable Muslim communities in NewDelhi.
Perhaps most disturbingly, the New Delhi police, which is directly underthe control of the federal Ministry of Home Affairs—and not the local stategovernment—either supported the rioters or stood by as the riots proceededapace.
“Far from prosecuting those who were actually involved in organized mobviolence against hapless communities, the central government is now usingits powers to intimidate those whom it deems to be critics of thegovernment’s policies.
This blatant, partisan use of police powers threatens to further underminethe already troubled rule of law in India.Police partisanship is not new.The most egregious historical examples are the anti-Sikh riots in New Delhiin 1984 following the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, forwhich blame lies at the door of Gandhi’s Congress party, and anti-Muslimriots in Gujarat in 2002 during Modi’s term as the state’s chief minister.”
In conclusion, Ganguly wrote, “Both sets of incidents are a stain on thecountry’s judicial record—but they are largely seen as lapses in the widerhistory of democratic India. The systematic abuse of police and judicialpowers that is now underway—with the apparent blessing of the Modigovernment—amounts to a new and major challenge to India’s commitment toimpartial justice. It is a dangerous trend that could, if unchecked, upendIndian democracy.”
