Fly on the Wall : Babri case may not be fast tracked, CJI blinks

by Harish Gupta, National Editor, Lokmat Group

Babri case may not be fast tracked, CJI blinks

It is now clearly emerging that the Ayodhya case hearing in the Supreme Court is unlikely to be fast-tracked. Contrary to popular perception that the Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra will constitute the bench and commence hearing of the highly emotive dispute and settle the case before he retires on October 2. It was expected by the ruling BJP leadership that the SC will constitute the bench and commence hearing within the week of its opening. But now it is emerging that the CJI Justice Dipak Mishra will not play ball and the case will be taken up in due course. In the run-up to the 2019, all eyes are on the Supreme Court that it will commence hearing the contentious Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute. Before the vacation, when the Ram Bhakts pressed for a day-to-day hearing, Muslim litigants in the case had expressed strong reservations against it. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal had pleaded that the appeals should be deferred until the next Lok Sabha elections. Government lawyers have been nudging the court to decide the issue at the earliest. Without giving a clue of his thinking, CJI Mishra adjourned the case to be taken up after the long summer vacation. Now two weeks have gone by and the date and the bench is nowhere in sight. Highly placed sources say that unless something dramatic happens, the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri land dispute case is headed to the south.

Govt. disappointed with Justice A K Sikri

There was a time when ruling BJP leaders were throwing hints that the sitting Supreme Court judge, Ranjan Gogoi may be superseded after CJI Dipak Mishra retires in October. It was also whispered that Justice A K Sikri who is fourth in the line of succession will be the new Chief Justice of India instead. The government was peeved with Ranjan Gogoi as he had addressed a joint press conference with three other brother judges and questioned the functioning of the SC under the leadership of CJI. Indirectly, the judges had taken a dig at the working of the Modi dispensation in influencing the judiciary. But things didn't work the way the government may have thought. When the Karnataka Governor's decision to allow 15 days time to the BS Yedurappa to prove his majority on the floor of the state assembly was challenged, the matter was listed before the bench of Justice A K Sikri. PM Modi made a personal phone call to former AG Mukul Rohtagi to appear for the BJP and seek relief. Sensing that the BJP is losing the game, Rohtagi pleaded with the bench to give time until Monday. But Justice Sikri's bench was unmoved and no relief was granted. The BJP lost its face and credibility. As if this was not enough, Justice Sikri did not give favourable verdict in favour of the Centre in the bitter battle with AAP's Delhi government. These two set backs changed the thinking of the government and it is felt that super-session is not a good idea particularly in an election year. Secondly, the BJP will lose its main plank against the Congress if does the same what late Indira Gandhi did when Justice A N Ray superseded three senior judges and all quit in protest.

Will Sonia pave way for Priyanka from Rae Bareli?

The Capital is agog with speculation that Sonia Gandhi may bid adieu to the electoral politics and may not contest from Rae Bareli Lok Sabha seat. Instead, she may pave for Priyanka Gandhi Vadra. Sonia Gandhi is withdrawing from the day-today political activities and passed on the baton to Rahul Gandhi in December last year when he took over as Congress president. There has been clamour for a long time in the Congress that Priyanka Gandhi may be brought to the fore and it will boost the prospects of the party in the run up to the 2019 Lok Sabha polls. It will electrify the workers in UP and elsewhere. In any case, priyanka Gandhi has been working a backroom boy for Rahul Gandhi for a long time and managing affairs from behind the curtains. Sonia Gandhi, it may said contested from the Amethi constituency in 1999 and shifted to Rae Bareli in 2004 which she continues to represent till date. However, she has not been keeping a good health and unable to campaign intensively which she used to do earlier. Sonia Gandhi wants that the family bastion Rae Bareli seat be retained in the family and Priyanka Gandhi may be brought to the fore. The assessment is Priyanka's induction will improve the bargaining chip of the Congress in the Hindi heartland.

When Modi tried to charm Kharge

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is mending fences with the Opposition leaders lately. On Tuesday after the all-party meeting ended, Modi saw senior Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge walking slowly. Modi asked him to come along as he was to drive home after the meeting and Kharge was also leaving. However, Kharge recited a small poem in Hindi to the surprise of Modi. He said, “Jab Raja Hilta Hai to Mulk Hilta hai, Jab Kazi Hilta Hai to Dadhi Hilti Hai, Aur Jab Aapki Gadi Hilegi to Hum Bhi Hilenge”. (When the King moves, the country moves, when the judge of the Sharia court moves, his beard moves, and when your cavalcade moves out only then I can leave). Kharge was telling him that due to the security, the PM has to leave first and only then others can leave. This caused a huge laughter in the entire corridor and Modi enjoyed the dig.

Conscience vote goes abegging

by Harish Gupta, National Editor, Lokmat Group

In this space last week, I doubted if the secret ballot system in the presidential and vice-presidential elections could be entirely to the advantage of the BJP-led NDA. The opposition looked like having an ace up its sleeve as its candidate for Presidency, Meira Kumar, was bubbling over for what she thought could be “vote according to conscience”.

It wasn’t. Cross-voting had benefited not Kumar but Ram Nath Kovind, BJP’s victorious candidate. In Gujarat, as a prelude, perhaps, to former chief minister Shankar Sinh Baghela quitting the Congress, at least 11 Congress MLAs ditched Kumar to vote Kovind. In West Bengal, Kovind bagged the votes of 11 MLAs though BJP and its allies could have openly garnered only six MLAs. But its largely some dissidence in Congress & the Left that may have gone in favour of Kovind. Mamata devised a mechanism through which she ensured that there is no cross voting in her party except one MP who is suspended. In Maharashtra, Meira Kumar’s tally was 77, which fell short of her calculation by at least ten. In Uttar Pradesh, eight MLAs had violated their party instructions by voting Kovind; they could be ‘renegades’ from the Akhilesh Singh Yadav-faction of the Samajwadi Party. The numbers in the tiny north-eastern state of Tripura are baffling; in a state with no BJP legislator, Kovind found seven silent supporters. There were opposition reversals in Punjab too, as two of the Aam Aadmi Party’s four MPs are suspected to have for the BJP candidate.

There was a reverse trend as well. In Rajasthan, Meira Kumar was supported by ten more MLAs than her expected tally, a feat which is not possible without some BJP MLAs having been driven by the ‘call of conscience’. But volume-wise, the trend of cross-voting was overwhelmingly dominated by the BJP. Like Kumar, Gopal Gandhi, Opposition’s Vice Presidential candidate,  too has pinned his hope on the electors’ “conscience”.

The failure of the appeal to ‘good sense’ is not a recent phenomenon. In the years between Independence and promulgation of the Constitution in 1950, the so-called idea of India got delineated in the very preamble of the Constitution. It was made on behalf of the “people of India”, which is, by itself, an assertion that the country would make no discrimination on the ground of caste, creed, gender or religion. The preamble defined the Constitution’s four pillars: justice, liberty, equality and fraternity. B. R. Ambedkar, the acknowledged architect of the Constitution, said on the last day’s session of the Constituent Assembly on November 25, 1949: “Political democracy cannot last unless there is at the base of it social democracy. What does social democracy mean? It means a way of life which recognises liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life”. Ambedkar had also said that these three principles of liberty, equality and fraternity were “not to be treated as separate items in a trinity” because (a) equality without liberty would kill individual initiative, (b) without equality, liberty would produce the supremacy of the few over the many, and (c) without fraternity, liberty and equality could not become a natural course of things…it would require a constable to enforce them”.

I have cited this long passage from one of the most sparkling discourses in Indian politics because it provides, in a sense, the essence of the “conscience” or “good sense” that UPA, the loser, has vainly tried to invoke. Such ideal is embedded in the Constitution and is made explicit in Ambedkar’s radiant prose. As the first to form government, it was the Congress’ turn to follow the principles laid down in the Constitution. But it failed and failed the people of India.

It was during the Congress rule that equality got divorced from liberty by a bizarre quality of government and its myriad rules and regulations. It snuffed out “individual initiative”, exactly as Ambedkar had predicted. Again, it was in the Congress rule that equality of opportunity was denied to the poor while the rich had the liberty to influence policy and get richer. Another Ambedkar prophesy that came true.

However, the absence of fraternity has a long history. The communal holocaust and partition in 1947 itself is a testimony to the dismal fact that the Indian society was revelling in fratricide instead of being fraternal. Nor was the Congress any less divisive than what it accuses Modi of, in its handling of caste and communal issues. From the 1980’s, when infusion of militancy turned Islam into a security threat, successive Congress or Congress-led governments had, instead of promoting fraternity, tried to put the communities into their separate silos. In the Shah Bano case, by refusing to reform the obsolete Muslim marital system, Congress PM Rajiv Gandhi pushed the community back into its medieval isolation. A fraternal approach would have been to help the community to reform itself. On the other hand, the Rajiv administration, by allowing a Hindu group to perform worship of Ram in the Babri mosque, virtually ignited the communal fire which is still blazing. Equality and fraternity became victims of decades of vote-bank politics.

The problem with Congress’ recent and vociferous appeal to people’s conscience is that most people—the new generation, in particular—do not think of BJP’s adversaries as repositories of conscience. Instead, they are seen by the younger Indians as a picture of ineptitude and corruption. Its the loss of credibility on policy and conduct.  It is not that the Congress doesn’t understand it, but it has few options. If it must keep its own conscience clear, it has to snap ties with Lalu Yadav. With that vanishes its toehold on power in Hindi-speaking India.