Emergency at 50: Hard lesson, long shadow

The imposition of Emergency in India by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on June 25, 1975 remains the darkest hour for its democracy. The 50th anniversary of the event should serve as a stark reminder of the perils of authoritarianism which any society or polity may be prone to at any time, in different forms. The suspension of the constitutional rights of citizens including the right to life, arrests of Opposition leaders and rights activists, censorship of the press, arbitrariness of government actions and decisions, and a politics and governance built around an individual – all severely undermined democracy in the country where it is considered to have taken roots. Ironically, Emergency wrecked democracy in the name of democracy. In the authoritarian playbook, the need for stability, progress and governance, and internal and external threats are convenient excuses to assume absolute power. It should be noted that the Congress party, which has a moral and political responsibility for the 21-month period of Emergency, is yet to totally and unconditionally disown and denounce it, though it has admitted that excesses were committed during the period. Occasionally, there are even explanations which are justifications in disguise.

The Narendra Modi government has decided to undertake a year-long commemoration of the Emergency and has prepared a “schedule of activities” to remind the people of the “darkest period in India’s democratic history.” The people, especially young people, who have no memory of the Emergency’s depredations, need to be told about them. But Emergency is still not a dead letter. Even now, civil liberties are not unconstrained, free speech is not so free, preventive detentions take place and law enforcement and investigative agencies are used to selectively target Opposition leaders and rights activists. Democratic institutions are under stress. Parliament’s position has been degraded and there is intolerance of dissent and a personality cult around a leader. These are all characteristics of authoritarianism. Many Opposition leaders have said that there is an undeclared Emergency in the country. But it would be certainly wrong to use the current situation, however it is perceived, to legitimise what happened during the Emergency, to justify it, or to lessen its gravity.

Emergency is not just a legal and political device wielded by an authoritarian government. It is a state of mind that inheres in a sense of power which works against freedom and the best values of the Constitution. The hard lesson from the nation’s Emergency experience that needs to be underlined on its anniversary is that governments and political parties cannot be trusted with our freedom. The people themselves have to protect their freedom, strengthen the democratic institutions that shield it and be ever vigilant against transgressions. Our freedom is our responsibility.