06-26-2009, 12:45 AM
From Deccan Chronicle, 25 June 2009
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Emergency: The mystery of the missing opposition</b>
June 26th, 2009
By Jagmohan Â
The emergency (June 1975-January 1977) was a tragedy. Its imposition led to a number of unjustified arrests and caused other aberrations.<b> But there are quite a few pertinent questions connected with it as well as with the post-Emergency period (January 1977 to December 1979) that have not been pondered over in depth.</b> One such set of questions pertains to the general health of the Indian society in these two periods.
Was it Indira Gandhi or her son Sanjay Gandhi or their few advisors who alone were responsible for the imposition of Emergency and all that happened during it? <b>What about the judges who, despite their high status, not only held that the declaration of Emergency was valid but also refused to safeguard even elementary liberties, the denial of which reduced the individual citizen to a âstate of utter rightlessnessâ? What about the pressman who started crawling, when they were asked only to bend? What about both the Houses of Parliament which endorsed the Emergency by an overwhelming majority â 336 to 39 in Lok Sabha and 136 to 33 in Rajya Sabha? And what about the people themselves, who just âmelted awayâ as soon as Emergency was declared? </b>Noting the absence of âangry voicesâ, the Guardian, London, observed: âIndiaâs State of Emergency is almost three months old now, and rapidly becoming the Mystery of the Missing Oppositionâ.
<b>Clearly, there was something wrong with the moral fibre of the nation.</b> That is why even <b>after the end of the Emergency and ouster of Indira Gandhi from power, the fundamental maladies continued; they merely assumed a different form, colour and direction.</b> The post-Emergency period (January 1977-December 1979) saw its own type of excesses and its own type of infirmities in our polity, administration and character of the people.
<b>There was a spate of inquiry commissions and committees â as many as 52. These agencies were set up with the main objective of painting everything that happened during the Emergency as black and put the blame on Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi and the handful of supporters they were left with.</b> The officers and erstwhile political colleagues of the Gandhis were subjected to subtle pressure and made to say before these commissions and committees that whatever wrong they did was done at the behest of Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi and their âcoterieâ, no matter what the written records indicated. Most of them, in fact, were themselves inclined to follow the dictum: âLet us lay all the evils on the Friar and rid ourselves of them allâ.
The depth to which the overall character of the nation and its value-system had gone down, over the years, could be gauged by the manner in which the Shah Commission functioned.
Partisan case summaries were prepared by the commissionâs staff by doctoring documents and isolating facts from their context. These summaries were highlighted on television, radio and in the newspapers. Yet they were given to the persons concerned only at the time of commencement of the proceedings. The intention was to surprise, confuse and pressurise witnesses and extract incriminating material. In the examination of witnesses, a pre-designed pattern was followed. Those who said anything to denigrate the Emergency-administration were encouraged, humoured, even applauded. These obliging witnesses were not stopped by the commission even when their statements clearly contradicted the written records. On the other hand, those who tried to defend their actions were jeered, taunted and insulted.
To expose the false propaganda about the âdemolitionsâ, I submitted a comprehensive statement to the Shah Commission explaining how the project was really one of clearance-cum-resettlement-cum-redevelopment, how immensely it benefited the poor squatters and slum dwellers and how it had been in operation even before the Emergency, with the approval of the Central government and Parliament. During the course of the proceedings, I wanted to read my statement. But Justice Shah would not allow it.
Noticing the highly tendentious reports in the press and on television, I published the facts contained in the aforesaid written statements and oral submissions in my book, titled Island of Truth. This book was filed as an affidavit by me in the special court of Justice M.L. Jain and no one dared to file a counter-affidavit.
Subtle hints were given to me that I should become a sort of âapproverâ and pass on the âblameâ to others. Was clearance of some of the most inhuman slums or allotment of 1,000 hectares of developed land with a market value of about Rs 2,000 crores, or disbursement of about Rs 9 crores of loan at only four per cent rate of interest, or the creation of stable and development-oriented avenues of employment, preservation of historical legacy, or general upgradation of environment of the city an âexcessâ for which one should feel ashamed?
The resettlers gratefully acknowledged what was done for them. In the elections to the Delhi Metropolitan Council and Municipal Corporation, held soon after the general elections of March 1977, these resettlers, as would be evident from election office documents, voted overwhelmingly for Indira Gandhi. At that time, Indira Gandhiâs party lost in almost all the constituencies except those that covered the resettlement colonies.
The excesses committed by the Shah Commission stood thoroughly exposed by the judgment of the Delhi high court, delivered on December 19, 1979, by Justice T.P.S. Chawla. The commissionâs findings were declared illegal and unconstitutional. The court, inter alia, observed: âIn my opinion, J.C. Shah acted in violation of the Constitution⦠If I may adapt the phrase used by Mr Justice Douglas, by doing so, the Commission abused its authorityâ.
Apart from the mutilation of history and truth, the basic question that arises out of the analysis of the events, in the Emergency as well as in the post-Emergency period, is: <b>How can there be a good state and healthy nation in a set-up which has a big crop of politicians, bureaucrats, parliamentarians, judges and pressmen of the type witnessed during the aforesaid two periods?</b> Great nations are built by people with character and commitment, and not by those who have convenient conscience and consider discretion to be the better part of valour.
* Jagmohan is a former governor of J&K and a former Union minister. During the Emergency he had served as vice-chairman of the Delhi Development Authority and had subsequently testified before the Shah Commission.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To me the lesson is how the Shah Commission due to its vindictive agenda instead of uncovering the truth hid the real perpetrators (the bureaucrats) and continued the malaise. A similar dog and pony show is going in the BJP election results analsyis.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Emergency: The mystery of the missing opposition</b>
June 26th, 2009
By Jagmohan Â
The emergency (June 1975-January 1977) was a tragedy. Its imposition led to a number of unjustified arrests and caused other aberrations.<b> But there are quite a few pertinent questions connected with it as well as with the post-Emergency period (January 1977 to December 1979) that have not been pondered over in depth.</b> One such set of questions pertains to the general health of the Indian society in these two periods.
Was it Indira Gandhi or her son Sanjay Gandhi or their few advisors who alone were responsible for the imposition of Emergency and all that happened during it? <b>What about the judges who, despite their high status, not only held that the declaration of Emergency was valid but also refused to safeguard even elementary liberties, the denial of which reduced the individual citizen to a âstate of utter rightlessnessâ? What about the pressman who started crawling, when they were asked only to bend? What about both the Houses of Parliament which endorsed the Emergency by an overwhelming majority â 336 to 39 in Lok Sabha and 136 to 33 in Rajya Sabha? And what about the people themselves, who just âmelted awayâ as soon as Emergency was declared? </b>Noting the absence of âangry voicesâ, the Guardian, London, observed: âIndiaâs State of Emergency is almost three months old now, and rapidly becoming the Mystery of the Missing Oppositionâ.
<b>Clearly, there was something wrong with the moral fibre of the nation.</b> That is why even <b>after the end of the Emergency and ouster of Indira Gandhi from power, the fundamental maladies continued; they merely assumed a different form, colour and direction.</b> The post-Emergency period (January 1977-December 1979) saw its own type of excesses and its own type of infirmities in our polity, administration and character of the people.
<b>There was a spate of inquiry commissions and committees â as many as 52. These agencies were set up with the main objective of painting everything that happened during the Emergency as black and put the blame on Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi and the handful of supporters they were left with.</b> The officers and erstwhile political colleagues of the Gandhis were subjected to subtle pressure and made to say before these commissions and committees that whatever wrong they did was done at the behest of Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi and their âcoterieâ, no matter what the written records indicated. Most of them, in fact, were themselves inclined to follow the dictum: âLet us lay all the evils on the Friar and rid ourselves of them allâ.
The depth to which the overall character of the nation and its value-system had gone down, over the years, could be gauged by the manner in which the Shah Commission functioned.
Partisan case summaries were prepared by the commissionâs staff by doctoring documents and isolating facts from their context. These summaries were highlighted on television, radio and in the newspapers. Yet they were given to the persons concerned only at the time of commencement of the proceedings. The intention was to surprise, confuse and pressurise witnesses and extract incriminating material. In the examination of witnesses, a pre-designed pattern was followed. Those who said anything to denigrate the Emergency-administration were encouraged, humoured, even applauded. These obliging witnesses were not stopped by the commission even when their statements clearly contradicted the written records. On the other hand, those who tried to defend their actions were jeered, taunted and insulted.
To expose the false propaganda about the âdemolitionsâ, I submitted a comprehensive statement to the Shah Commission explaining how the project was really one of clearance-cum-resettlement-cum-redevelopment, how immensely it benefited the poor squatters and slum dwellers and how it had been in operation even before the Emergency, with the approval of the Central government and Parliament. During the course of the proceedings, I wanted to read my statement. But Justice Shah would not allow it.
Noticing the highly tendentious reports in the press and on television, I published the facts contained in the aforesaid written statements and oral submissions in my book, titled Island of Truth. This book was filed as an affidavit by me in the special court of Justice M.L. Jain and no one dared to file a counter-affidavit.
Subtle hints were given to me that I should become a sort of âapproverâ and pass on the âblameâ to others. Was clearance of some of the most inhuman slums or allotment of 1,000 hectares of developed land with a market value of about Rs 2,000 crores, or disbursement of about Rs 9 crores of loan at only four per cent rate of interest, or the creation of stable and development-oriented avenues of employment, preservation of historical legacy, or general upgradation of environment of the city an âexcessâ for which one should feel ashamed?
The resettlers gratefully acknowledged what was done for them. In the elections to the Delhi Metropolitan Council and Municipal Corporation, held soon after the general elections of March 1977, these resettlers, as would be evident from election office documents, voted overwhelmingly for Indira Gandhi. At that time, Indira Gandhiâs party lost in almost all the constituencies except those that covered the resettlement colonies.
The excesses committed by the Shah Commission stood thoroughly exposed by the judgment of the Delhi high court, delivered on December 19, 1979, by Justice T.P.S. Chawla. The commissionâs findings were declared illegal and unconstitutional. The court, inter alia, observed: âIn my opinion, J.C. Shah acted in violation of the Constitution⦠If I may adapt the phrase used by Mr Justice Douglas, by doing so, the Commission abused its authorityâ.
Apart from the mutilation of history and truth, the basic question that arises out of the analysis of the events, in the Emergency as well as in the post-Emergency period, is: <b>How can there be a good state and healthy nation in a set-up which has a big crop of politicians, bureaucrats, parliamentarians, judges and pressmen of the type witnessed during the aforesaid two periods?</b> Great nations are built by people with character and commitment, and not by those who have convenient conscience and consider discretion to be the better part of valour.
* Jagmohan is a former governor of J&K and a former Union minister. During the Emergency he had served as vice-chairman of the Delhi Development Authority and had subsequently testified before the Shah Commission.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To me the lesson is how the Shah Commission due to its vindictive agenda instead of uncovering the truth hid the real perpetrators (the bureaucrats) and continued the malaise. A similar dog and pony show is going in the BJP election results analsyis.