Mediaboss Marketing

Text Size:A- A+

The 45th anniversary of the imposition of Emergency must not be wasted on bashing dead villains or on silly nostalgia. The experience of Indias past brush with authoritarianism must be used to think about how democracies die.

Emergency is at once an energising and misleading prism to think about the state and the fate of our democracy. It is energising as the struggle against Indira Gandhis authoritarianism invokes powerful memories.

I recall my fathers grim face as he listened to Indira Gandhis radio broadcast on the morning of 26 June 1975 in our villageSaharanwas in Rewari, Haryana). I was barely 12 then, more agitated about Gavaskar scoring 36 runs in 60 overs in the first World Cup than about Indira Gandhis insult to Jayaprakash Narayan. The coming 19 months were going to be a period of political education for me, as my moderate, law-abiding father would find non-heroic ways of protesting against the Emergency, much to the horror of everyone around us.

We would tune in to BBC Hindi every evening to learn the truth about our country. In my small town, Sriganganagar (Rajasthan), I gave a passionate speech against the Emergency under the garb of a debating competition. Finally, when elections were announced in 1977, the entire family contributed to the Janata Party campaign. I wasnt even 14 when I addressed my first election rally! I can never forget the vote counting day when I found myself in the middle of an electrifying crowd celebrating the defeat of Indira Gandhi. That was the beginning of my interest in elections and involvement in politics.

Millions of such small stories were woven with a handful of heroic tales of resistance against the Emergency to forge a collective memory that people rejected authoritarianism. This may have been a myth, because the real resistance was very feeble, nothing compared to the resistance offered by the pro-democracy movements in Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Yet, it remains a source of inspiration.

Also read: Legal autocrats are on the rise. They use constitution and democracy to destroy both

At the same time, Emergency is a misleading prism for us today. It invites us to ask the wrong questions: are we likely to see a repeat of Emergency? Are we already in an undeclared Emergency? Will the current government go for an Emergency-like suspension of fundamental rights, media censorship and jailing of opposition leaders?

Thinking of the demise of democracy through the experience of Emergency lulls us into believing that suspension of democracy must take the same form every time. Undeclared Emergency weaves an image of softer and invisible replay of the same experience. That is, of course, not true. Under the Narendra Modi government we are not reliving the experience of 1975-77. Our times may look better, but these may actually be worse than the Emergency. The danger is not that we may face another Emergency, but that we are in the midst of a democracy capture.

The Emergency was an exception to a norm; what we now have is a different norm. Emergency needed a formal legal declaration. Capturing democracy does not. The Emergency had a beginning and was, at least on paper, required to have an end. The new system that we now live under has a beginning, but no one is sure if it has an end. The challenge to democracy does not await us in a distant future. We are living in it. By looking for an Emergency in our times, we forget to notice that the first Republic inaugurated with the Constitution of India is already over.

I call it democracy capture, rather than authoritarian capture of democracy or crisis of democracy. This phrase reminds us that democracy is both the object and the subject of this capture. The apparatus being seized is democracy. And the means being deployed for this capture are also democratic, at least seemingly so. It reminds us that the formal procedures of democracy have been used to subvert the substance of democracy.

Also read: We the people must save the software of Indian democracy beyond BJP-Congress whataboutery

This is the message of the book How Democracies Die: What History Reveals About Our Future. Published in 2018 by two Harvard professors of political science, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, this bestseller chronicles democratic breakdowns in our times. It reminds us that democracies mostly die an unspectacular, slow and barely visible death, mostly at the hands of democratically elected leaders, often through legal instruments. The tragic paradox of the electoral route to authoritarianism is that democracys assassins use the very institutions of democracy gradually, subtly, and even legally to kill it.

Instead of a military overthrow or a constitutional coup like the Emergency, authoritarian rulers usually kill democracies through everyday subversion of the political game. This takes three forms: capturing of referees, sidelining of players and rewriting of rules. The book draws examples from Peru under Alberto Fujimori, Russia under Vladimir Putin, Venezuela under Hugo Chavez, Hungary under Viktor Orban and, of course, the US under Donald Trump to document how democracies die in our times.

The book does not mention India, but it is hard not to see parallels between these countries and the India of Narendra Modi and Amit Shah. If anything, the capture of the referees investigating agencies like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), oversight institutions like the Central Information Commission (CIC) and Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), and, of course, the apex judiciary has been more smooth and complete in Modis India. The government did not have to exhaust the full armoury of purging, packing, threatening, bribing, hijacking or even dissolving these institutions to ensure their more or less assured compliance.

Also read: Authoritarian streak among Indians on the rise and its helping BJPs hard Right turn

Similarly, the techniques used by the Modi government for sidelining players opposition leaders, media, cultural icons and business leaders are not very different from those used by authoritarian leaders in countries where democracy was killed. It is especially instructive to see how these leaders have captured media without formal censorship. Fujimoris henchman Vladimiro Montesinos was caught saying this about the Peruvian media: All of them, all lined up. Every day, I have a meeting at 12:30 and we plan the evening news. Sounds familiar?

The only thing the Modi government has not done rather, has not had to do so far is a major change in the constitutional rules of the game. As yet, the rules of elections have not been changed, nor have elections been postponed. Its popularity with the voters and its success with the media, the Election Commission and the judiciary makes this unnecessary. But dont rule it out. As the authors say: One of the great ironies of how democracies die is that the very defense of democracy is used as a pretext of its subversion. Would-be autocrats often use economic crises, natural disasters and especially security threats wars, armed insurgencies, or terrorist attacks to justify anti-democratic measures.

Did you think it was written for India of 26 June 2020?

The author is the national president of Swaraj India. Views are personal.

ThePrint is now on Telegram. For the best reports & opinion on politics, governance and more, subscribe to ThePrint on Telegram.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Go here to read the rest:
This is no Emergency. Modi and Shah are using democracy to subvert democracy - ThePrint

I am addressing this letter to voters who look honestly at the issues and vote for what is best for our country. In this election, forget about whether you are Republican or Democrat. You are going to make the most important vote in your lifetime. You are going to vote if you want to live in a democracy or under socialism.

As serious as all the other problems we face today, they dont compare to this biggest question. If socialism gets a foothold, it will be end of democracy, and democracy is what has made America the greatest nation in the world. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party has been taken over by socialists, and I dont think Joe Biden is strong enough to stand up to them. He is already bending. It is likely he will choose a socialistic vice president candidate to appease the far left.

If Biden is unable to remain as president for one reason or another, we will have a socialist president. And the takeover will be that easy. Too many brave men and women have given their all to defend democracy. All of our wars have been to defend our freedoms. Have they given it in vain? Now it is our turn to defend our country. This election is not between Democrats and Republicans, it is between democracy and socialism. Ask this question: What is more important, your country or your party? If socialism prevails, what is next, communism? Dont laugh.

Ken Coombs

Holladay

Continued here:
Letter: This years presidential election is between democracy and socialism - Deseret News

US President Donald Trump's decision to suspend certain categories of non-immigrant visas, including the H-1B, will help absorb India's knowledge workers locally and create another Silicon Valley in the country, a former top Indian-American CEO said, calling the move a "tragedy".

In an exclusive interview with ET, Dinesh Paliwal, former chairman and CEO of Samsung-owned audio giant Harman, said the new talent base in India will feed Indian and multinational companies and likely kickstart a shift of fortune from West to East. Paliwal, who retired from Harman last month, is on the board of four companies - Bristol Myers Squibb, Harman, Nestle and Raytheon.

Trumps decision to suspend all immigrant visas is a tragedy forced on a democracy which has thrived on immigration. This is a political decision to blindside Americans in this election year that it will lead to job growth locally, said Paliwal.

The decision will impact the American economy, which is running low on technology talent, he added. "America benefited greatly by being able to draw talent from around the world, making us more competitive, innovative and creating economic opportunity. These new restrictions wont necessarily stop the work but it may drive it off our shores and potentially inhibit investment and job creation in the US, a concern expressed by many American companies," Nisha Biswal, President of the U.S.-India Business Council told ET.

Such short-sighted and politically motivated policy will likely divert incredibly talented STEM educated workforce to other high growth countries and in the coming years; these hungry knowledge workers may not find America as attractive as before, the Stamford, Connecticut-based Paliwal added. STEM is an acronym for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics.

Organic job creation in America is needed but it will take fundamental education policy reform. However, politicians dont gain instant gratification from long-term policy impact like education and immigration reform, Paliwal, who is originally from Agra, told ET. The move has also been criticised by almost all the top CEOs, including Googles Sundar Pichai and Apples Tim Cook.

Snapdeal's Kunal Bahl is a case-in-point Indian talent, who went on to launch a leading start-up in India after his visa was rejected. India is the land of big opportunities... I didn't know this 13 years ago when my H-1B visa was rejected, but haven't regretted a moment since, Snapdeal founder Kunal Bahl, who was slated to join Microsoft in Seattle, tweeted on Tuesday. Snapdeal today competes with the likes of Amazon and Walmart-owned Flipkart in India.

Despite the unemployment rate in the US technology sector falling below 3% and most global technology giants telling the US government that suspending the visas would hurt the economy, the Trump administration has gone ahead to suspend issuance of fresh visas till December 31. In 2019, seven of the top ten beneficiaries of the visa grants were US companies such as Google, Apple and Facebook that have been hiring Indian engineers. In contrast, Indian IT services firms have progressively reduced their dependency on the H-1B visa. Indian nationals account for 70% of the 85,000 work permits issued to high technology workers each year.

It is unfortunate and, in some sense, misguided and harmful to the US economy. It prevents not only our companies but thousands of other organizations from accessing critical talent from overseas UB Pravin Rao, chairman of IT industry lobby group Nasscom, told ET on Tuesday. Access to talent is very critical and very pivotal in a post-Covid-19 recovery, he had said.

Link:
Decision to suspend visa is a tragedy forced on a democracy which has thrived on immigration: Dinesh Paliwal - Economic Times

As the story goes, Benjamin Franklin was walking out of Independence Hall after the Constitutional Convention in 1787, when someone asked him, Dr. Franklin, what have we got- a republic or a monarchy? Franklin supposedly responded, A republic, if you can keep it. 233 years later America may be losing the republic Franklin and the founders crafted.

A republic form of government is one where elected individuals represent the citizens and exercise power according to the rule of law under the Constitution. In America, those representatives are democratically elected. In a direct democracy the citizens directly deliberate and decide on legislation. When elected officials in a republic abrogate their responsibility, citizens often take matters into their own hands. True democracy is mob rule. Based on the recent civil unrest, the U.S. is looking more and more like a true democracy.

Some believe the United States has moved from a republic to an oligarchy. A study by two political scientists Martin Gilens, (Princeton), and Benjamin Page, (Northwestern) concludes the wealthy have a disproportionate amount of influence in politics. Gilens and Page write: When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.

Gilens and Page are liberals and clearly had a predetermined outcome, but they are correct: The wealthy are more engaged in politics than the poor. But no oligarchy can survive mob rule. The numbers just wont work. So how does America get back to a representative democracy? How does the United States get back to the form of government the founders intended? Three ways:

1.The average citizen must actively engage in government. They have to do more than vote. They must pay attention to what is happening all the time, not just every two years at election time. That involves attending meetings, getting to know elected officials, helping candidates and contributing money. The reason big money has taken over politics is because so few average people are engaged in the process.

2. The American system of government must be taught to the next generation. Most millennials have little knowledge of our system of government and the genius of the founders. Pew Research, in a March 2020 poll, found two-thirds of millennials want the Electoral College eliminated and the president be elected by popular vote. They fail to not understand it is a fundamental principle of a representative democracy.

3. Americans must commit to a democratic republic. The mindset to understand the importance of being involved in a republic is critical. Without widespread commitment from individual citizens taking equity in their self-governing system of government, America will not survive.

The U.S. Constitutions First Amendment guarantees the right of citizens to assembly peacefully, but not to destroy private or public property. What we are seeing in America is mob rule because some elected leaders capitulate to a mob. Until citizens hold them accountable at the ballot box, Americas system of government is doomed.

View original post here:
Steve Fair: Direct democracy is mob rule, and we're headed there, Three ways to get back to a representative democracy - Tulsa World

Written by Gaurav Bhatia | Updated: June 25, 2020 8:14:02 pm Prime Minister Indira Gandhi addressing the nation from the Doordarshan studio during Emergency. (Express archive)

The Emergency destroyed the light of freedom and democracy in our country, impinging upon the rights of the citizens. It marks the darkest moment of Indian democracy. On the intervening night of June 25-26, Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India, invoked Article 352 of the Constitution and declared National Emergency.

The trigger to invoke Emergency was an order of June 24, 1975, passed by Justice V R Krishna Iyer, judge, Supreme Court of India. The judge did not grant a blanket stay of the impugned judgment delivered by Justice Jagmohanlal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court, setting aside the election of Indira Gandhi.

He granted only a partial stay and limited relief to Indira Gandhi, allowing her to sign the register kept in the House and attend sessions of the Lok Sabha. But she was disallowed from participating in any proceedings of the lower house and was debarred from voting or drawing any remuneration in her capacity as an MP.

The Emergency era witnessed Indira Gandhi in her dictatorial and self-serving style brutally assaulting the four pillars of Indian democracy.

Opinion | Ruler alone is not accountable, everyone who succumbs to authority is no less guilty

On June 25, Indira Gandhi unilaterally declared Emergency and she addressed the nation at 8 am the following day. She informed a shocked nation that Emergency has been declared due to internal disturbance and there was nothing to panic about. To use the words of L K Advani, the weak Indira cabinet when asked to bend, gleefully crawled. The meeting lasted for 15 minutes and the issue of the proclamation of Emergency was neither deliberated upon nor were the cabinet members allowed to discuss it. They were merely informed about the decision. The historical blunder was justified citing internal disturbance in the country when there was dissatisfaction amongst the masses.

The Congress tried to spread the propaganda that Indira Gandhi is indispensable to the country in their belief that she was above the Constitution. Slogans like Indira is India and India is Indira were coined by loyalists. It was made to appear that she is not to serve the Constitution, rather the Constitution is to serve her and the family.

In our parliamentary democracy, the Constitution is supreme the legislature, executive and judiciary are a creation of the Constitution. During the disturbing times of Emergency, the legislature failed to perform its function as per the mandate of the Constitution.

Opinion | Those who have not seen the dark side of dictatorship, dont truly appreciate the value of freedoms today

Around 1,10,000 citizens of our country were illegally detained and not even informed about the grounds of their detention. Almost all political leaders from the Opposition were put in prison.

The detention of these opposition members was done for a sinister purpose to drastically reduce the participative strength of Parliament. After reducing the sitting strength, self-serving unconstitutional amendments amending the Constitution were introduced by Indira Gandhi and were passed by a fraudulent two-thirds majority of the present and voting members.

Such was the subservience of MPs from the Congress that they violated their oath to serve the Constitution and spinelessly served Indira Gandhi. During this period, Indira Gandhi brought the 42nd amendment to the Constitution, extending the term of the elected parliament to six years, which was violative of Article 83(2), mandating a term of five years for the Lok Sabha. The 42nd Amendment was later revoked by way of the 44th Amendment in 1978. It remains the only instance when a Parliament term was extended, ignoring the will of the people.

The Constitution and the Representation of People Act, 1951 were also amended with retrospective effect so that the grounds on which Raj Narain succeeded before the Allahabad High Court are not available to him against Indira Gandhi.

Opinion |It is unlikely that Emergency will return, but eternal vigilance is the price for freedom

The judiciary, the guardian of the Constitution, was also made subservient to the executive.

In the appeal filed by Indira Gandhi before the Supreme Court, just before the matter was to be heard, the then Law Minister H R Gokhale brazenly called Justice V R Krishna Iyer, who was to hear the matter and requested a personal audience. Justice Iyer politely inquired about the purpose of his visit, upon which the then Law Minister being frank and expecting an audience, told Iyer (as per his memoirs) that he wanted to discuss the case with him. The judge, upholding the doctrine of separation of powers, refused to meet the law minister.

By way of the 42nd amendment, the order of detention was placed beyond the scope of judicial review. The judiciary was at its weakest during this time. The citizens challenged illegal detentions in various high courts of the country. The high courts of Allahabad, Bombay, Delhi, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana and Rajasthan upheld the spirit of the Constitution and held that even during Emergency, when Article 359 is invoked and the enforcement of fundamental rights is suspended, a detenu has the right to move the court.

April 28, 1976, can be termed as the darkest day for the Indian judiciary. A constitution bench comprising five judges of the Supreme Court in ADM Jabalpur vs. Shivkant Shukla reversed these pro-liberty judgments given by various high courts and held that Liberty is the gift of law and can be forfeited by Law.

Opinion |The unsung heroes of the Emergency

The sole dissenter judgment was Justice H R Khanna, considered by many as one the finest judges the country has ever produced. Justice Khanna held that even when right under Article 21 is suspended, the state has no power to deprive a person of his life and liberty without the authority of law. He was punished for not being committed to Indira Gandhi and for upholding the Constitution. Going against the established norms of appointing the senior-most puisne judge as the next Chief Justice of India, the government superseded him by Justice M H Beg.

Justice Khanna has been aptly rewarded by the citizens of the country and lives in the heart of every Indian as a saviour of democracy. His portrait hangs in court no. 2 of the Supreme Court, the court where he last presided. Every day, lawyers and litigants pay reverence to him for the exemplary courage he showed in protecting the rights of the common citizens of the country.

Even the media, the fourth pillar of democracy, was not spared from the autocratic functioning of Indira Gandhi. On the night of June 25, 1975, electricity supply to the offices of leading newspapers was withdrawn. This was done so that news declaring Emergency by Indira Gandhi does not reach the common citizens. Members of the censor board were stationed at the offices of all leading newspapers to dictate and monitor the content they publish.

The most important lesson learnt from the Emergency is that India as a democracy can only remain strong if we strengthen our constitutional institutions like Parliament, the Supreme Court, Election Commission of India and the PMO rather than sycophantically strengthening an individual or a family.

India has learnt that placing an individual above the country is detrimental to our democracy. Indian democracy under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has set an exemplary precedent, showing how the three organs of democracy can function in complete harmony, despite differences, as their respective roles have been well-defined by the Constitution.

The writer is national spokesperson, BJP and Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India

The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Opinion News, download Indian Express App.

IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd

Read the rest here:
When the pillars of democracy were shaken - The Indian Express