India News Online » News Analysis » Indian Politics » 

Transforming the BJP : Obligations of Governance

	September 22, 2003

The BJP is reacting strongly to Sonia Gandhi’s allegations in the run up to the state elections due in November. This is seen as possibly the setting of panic in the party - so crucial are the state elections.

The party has often been blamed by various organisations for having failed to follow the raj dharma (Law of Governance considered sacred in India since ancient times).

The Congress repeatedly reminds the BJP of its raj dharma. The BJP recently entered into a verbal war with Congress when it advised the Congress president, Sonia Gandhi to “take lessons in rashtra dharma (national duty) before talking about raj dharma. Sonia Gandhi has charged the Vajpayee Government with “making money out of coffins for soldiers killed in action” and for allowing the internal security scenario to go from “bad to worse”.

The BJP general secretary, Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, objected to her making security an issue in the coming State Assembly elections instead of focussing on what the Congress has done or not done in the States ruled by it. Naqvi said: “It is becoming a fashion to talk about `raj dharma’... She is talking about national security instead of the corruption and inefficiency of her party’s Governments... She should stop making such statements... She should take lessons in `rashtra dharma’ before talking about `raj dharma’... her statements are giving oxygen to terrorism in its dying moments.”

Naqvi had earlier charged Sonia Gandhi with being anti-national while raising the “foreign origin” issue. Though Naqvi did not explain what he meant by saying that Ms. Gandhi needed lessons in `rashtra dharma’, the indication clearly was that she lacked sensitivity to national issues and was, therefore, not competent to speak about the duty of a ruling party to govern.



Extra-constitutional pressures

The pressure from the states have an impact on national parties as well. The BJP Government in Gujarat is affecting the party beyond the frontiers of the state. According to analysts, instead of resenting the apex court’s oral observations against the Narendra Modi regime in the context of the Best Bakery Case, the BJP and its partisans should seize upon the judicial invocation of the raj dharma concept as an opportunity to metamorphose the organisation into a mainstream political party.

Indeed the noises that have been heard from the friends and leaders of the BJP, first against the National Human Rights Commission and now against the Supreme Court, only draw the nation’s attention to the party’s continued weakness for wanting to operate outside the legal system.

Like all political parties, the BJP announces itself to be committed to the Constitution of India, though it often finds the Constitution and its constraints irritants. Yet it is perceived by others as a party that wants to have it both ways, within the law of the land and still outside the law; on its part, the party believes it can get away with operating outside the law. This is the reason why the party often finds itself in bizarre situations when it has to defend its political affiliates and cadres as they challenge the very law of the land that its Government is duty bound to enforce.

Observers say the biggest problem with the BJP is its attachment with various Hindu organisations which have chosen not to commit themselves to the Constitution of India and its institutions. These Sangh Parivar (RSS family of BJP, VHP, Bajrang Dal etc.) organisations have cast themselves in an adversarial mode with the democratic and secular ethos of modern India; more than that, these outfits remain mired in a past that no longer serves the aspirations and dreams of India in the 21st century. These groups and their individual leaders make demands on the legitimate authority that cannot be conceded.

As Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee has off and on sought to get around the problem sometimes by humouring the RSS cabal and sometimes by bypassing it. But the Vajpayee line merely postpones the problem for another day; and, whether or not the BJP will ever be able to graduate out of the RSS shadow is a problem that can only be sorted out by the party’s next generation of leaders.

According to analysts, the second set of partisans standing in the way of the BJP’s graduation to political normality is a small group of western educated “intellectuals”. These people fancy themselves as the saffron edition of the “neo-conservatives” and they generally stand out in a crowd of under-educated BJP leaders. Most of them are perennial aspirants for a Rajya Sabha seat; some even manage to get it. This group earned its saffron spurs by breaking ranks with the liberal mainstream (or, from the `pseudo-secular’ crowd, if they will) and now has a vested interests in keeping the BJP a prisoner in its political backwardness. In the last five years this group has tasted blood in the form of patronage and influence peddling. It will not allow any outbreak of pragmatism in the BJP ranks; any time the party tries to come to terms with modern India and undertakes the necessary course correction, this group comes down heavily on it for betraying the “movement”, argue analysts.

The partisans in these two groups have come together in devising arguments and formulations in defence of the Narendra Modi regime in Gujarat. Once the BJP won a famous victory in Gujarat, its own political interest demanded it move on without getting bogged down in the bloody divisiveness of the post-Godhra riots. The party is now being held hostage to the slogans, reflexes and devices of those violent months.

The National Human Rights Commission has correctly points out, in its petition in the Best Bakery case: “Whenever a criminal goes unpunished, it is the society at large which suffers because the victims become demoralised and criminals encouraged.” No civilised society or its Government can pretend to be indifferent to demands of justice; otherwise the legitimacy of the lawful authority stands eroded.

The BJP’s apologists often point out the Congress Government’s culpability in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. Apart from the fact that past mistakes cannot be a licence for similar mistakes in future, what ought to be kept in mind is that the Congress never won a national majority after its famous post-riots electoral success. The voters who voted so overwhelmingly for a stable Centre also expected the Rajiv Gandhi Government to purge the polity of its criminal elements and impulses that had manifested themselves so violently; it was a mandate to return us to our civil ways and habits.

Analysts say the Rajiv Gandhi establishment dithered, tried to protect the guilty in its own ranks, and thereby began the process of alienating its most vibrant and insistent constituency of the middle classes. Because the Rajiv Gandhi regime did not perform its raj dharma, the middle classes were prepared to accept at face value the worst of the Bofors allegations and insinuations. This failure to perform its raj dharma was the beginning of the end of the Congress as a national institution.

The Gujarat model has already been rejected in other parts of the country, like in the last assembly polls in Himachal Pradesh. And the BJP dare not try to replicate the Narendra Modi formula or even invoke the Gujarat animosities in order to consolidate its “Hindu vote bank” in the four States later this year. Observers point out that no ruling party can hope to earn the trust of the voters if it goes on behaving as if it was committed to a programme of riots and lawlessness.



Gujarat : Modi Govt assurance on Best Bakery massacre case

Chastised by the Supreme Court to observe “raj dharma” (sacred rules of governance) , the Gujarat government has admitted before it that witnesses in the Best Bakery case trial could have been “coerced or won over” to turn hostile leading to acquittal of all the accused but pledged to do “everything possible” to bring the guilty to book. Shaken by the apex court’s severe criticism of the manner in which the state had filed the appeal before the High Court, Gujarat government through Additional Solicitor General said that it would amend its appeal challenging the acquittal of the accused, seek retrial of the case and a direction for further probe into the case to collect more evidence.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice V.N. Khare, Justice Brijesh Kumar and Justice S.B. Sinha, which was hearing a petition filed by National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) alleging miscarriage of justice and transfer of trial of four riot cases outside the state, warned the state that it would “not allow the mistake committed before the trial court to be repeated before the High Court”.

It allowed the state two weeks time to file an affidavit detailing the steps it was taking in the case and posted the matter for further hearing on October 9.

To assuage the court, Additional Solicitor General Rohtagi assured it that the state would within a week appoint seasoned advocates as special public prosecutor to conduct the riot cases pending before various trial courts.

As directed, state Chief Secretary Praveen Kanubhai Laheri and Director General of Police K Chakroborty were called in separately in quick succession to the courtroom. They were asked as to why the state did nothing even after noticing that witnesses in the case were turning hostile on each day of the trial. Both the officers were examined by the court without putting them on oath and probed as to how the state could remain silent when such a serious lapse was taking place in the trial court.

It was the DGP who was questioned more incisively by the Supreme Court Bench and at one point conceded that he had sought to know from the Commissioner of Police of Baroda district as to why so many witnesses were turning hostile. “The Commissioner had told me that the witnesses appear to have been either coerced or won over.” Laheri said the grounds of appeal filed before the High Court would be suitably amended to bring out specifically the prayer for retrial in the case as many witnesses have turned hostile.

Asked would the state be ready for a CBI investigation into the case, Laheri said, “I have no instruction from the state government.”

Of the 43 witnesses in the Best Bakery Massacre case, 37 had turned hostile including star witness Zaheera Shaikh, who also has approached the apex court seeking transfer of the trial of the case to a place outside Gujarat. The trial court, while acquitting all 21 accused in the case, had castigated the police for doing a shoddy job by collecting wrong evidence and roping in wrong accused.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in its petition had sought probe by an independent agency as it apprehended that fair trial was not possible on the basis of the evidence collected by the Gujarat police. Opposing this plea, the state government had said as it was seeking a direction from the High Court to order re-trial and further probe into the matter, there was no need for an independent agency to take over investigation.

Appearing for NHRC, senior advocate P.P. Rao criticised the Gujarat government for not seeking investigation by an independent probe agency as there has been a serious miscarriage of justice in the case. Rohtagi said, “We do not want an independent probe agency. The evidence collected by the police was enough to convict the accused, the trial court has erred by acquitting them. The statements made by the witnesses before the police under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) were correct and should not have been overlooked by the trial court.”

The only issue that has remained unresolved is the NHRC’s prayer that further investigation should be entrusted to an independent agency like the CBI. Rohatgi objected, saying that the NHRC is “casting aspersions on the entire administrative machinery in the state.” The NHRC, on its part, has quietly given up its rather radical proposal that the retrial of the Best Bakery case and the trial of other serious Gujarat carnage cases be held outside the state.

Responding to reports on the saffron antecedents of public prosecutors chosen for the riot cases still pending trial, the state gave a written undertaking to the apex court that it would appoint special public prosecutors from the best legal talent available in the districts. In another confidence building measure, Gujarat said the appeal in the Best Bakery case before the High Court would be argued by no less than the Advocate General of the state.

The Bench, while adjourning hearing on the petitions to October 9, said, “We will ensure that justice is done in the case.”



Missionary killing case : Orissa contrast with Gujarat

The conviction of Dara Singh and 12 others in the sensational Staines murder case will help re-establish the people’s shaken confidence in the criminal justice system in the country, according to legal experts. The verdict was in sharp contrast to the findings in the Best Bakery case where every one of the accused was declared not guilty.

It was due to the painstaking efforts made by the Central Bureau of Investigation to present a large number of witnesses and voluminous evidence before the judge that helped in early verdict. The conviction vindicates the decision to transfer the case to the CBI, particularly when the state police had initially botched up the investigation. The quantum of punishment the court finally awards after hearing both sides is not of much significance as the crucial finding about their culpability has already been arrived at. The 13 have been found guilty of a host of charges, including conspiracy, unlawful assembly, arson and murder.

Few incidents of murder have caused as much shock, shame and sensation as when the Australian missionary, Graham Staines, and his teenage sons, Philip and Timothy, were burnt alive when they were fast asleep outside a church at Manoharpur in Keonjar district four years ago. That he had abandoned the comforts of his native land to work for the welfare of the leprosy patients in one of the most backward areas of Orissa had lent the murder an element of poignancy.

And when his widow, Gladys Staines, pardoned her husband’s killers while expressing her steely determination to continue the noble work Graham Staines had initiated, it pricked the conscience of the nation. For the people at large, the verdict is a reminder that justice, however delayed, will finally be done. It has come soon after the Supreme Court has set in motion a process that will, hopefully, undo the injustice done in the Best Bakery case.

The Staines case shows the depths to which human depravity can plummet. To all intents and purposes, Dara Singh had no personal animosity towards the missionary. He is a victim of the climate of hate generated by political forces, which are out to capture power by exploiting the primordial passions of the people. He began his career by harassing Muslim businessmen and relished the sobriquet of Hindu Rakshak the communal forces bestowed on him. Emboldened, he began taking the law into his own hands till the law finally caught up with him.