Stephanie G. Mathis The constitution, which was written by Indians themselves, incorporated the vision and values of India’s first Prime Minister, as well the values that guided their freedom struggle. The constitution, with its principles and the strong institutional architecture that it created, has helped India overcome multiple challenges throughout the years.
The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party appears to be determined to erase Nehru’s legacy. The BJP, in order to consolidate its position and beat its political rivals, has manipulated the national institutions. It has undermined and excluded its opponents and even short-circuited competition.
In 2014, BJP leaders promised a radical break from the United Progressive Alliance-II led by the Congress Party and rode into power with the slogan ” Good days are Just Ahead.” The UPA-II was characterized by economic decline and slow policymaking, but also corruption.
Under the leadership of Narendra Modi today, the optimism that characterized 2014 is rapidly fading. A “my way or the highway” mode of government shows a culture where one party dominates, violating standard operating procedures as well as “dharma”, the Hindu concept of right conduct when performing duties, to gain the upper hand over its political rivals.
Dharma lost
Some people assumed that the BJP, with its experience in the state legislatures and as the major opposition party for over a decade, would have a more generous perspective. Some assumed that the BJP’s massive mandate and quest for recognition would lead it to be more generous with its opponents, as well as show respect for moral values embedded in the constitution.
Dharma is right conduct when exercising duty: “Dharma Wheel” at the Sun Temple, Konark, Orissa in February 2014. Ramnath Bhatt/Wikimedia CC BY SA
The BJP’s 2014 election campaign was based on cooperative federalism. The issue of center-state relations has played a major role in the politics of states outside Hindi-speaking areas of central and northern India. Modi, who was Gujarat’s chief minister between 2002 and 2014, had been highly critical of the central government’s functioning and blogged about the ” systemic disruption of our nation’s federal structural both in letter and in spirit.”
The BJP, when in opposition, was critical of Congress’ use of governors to serve the ruling party. Within a month of taking office, however, the NDA II government had thrown federal niceties to the wind and replaced UPA-II appointed governors.
Controlling States
In the past three years, the central administration has used Article 356, a provision of the constitution that places a state under the direct control of the center via the Governor and the administrative and financial power of the center to advance the partisan goals.
Arunachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand were easy targets for central meddling. These intrusions are gross breaches of the federal spirit, and they are not good examples of cooperative federalism.
Modi masks were sold during the 2014 BJP election campaign. Subhankar Kenny Sahu/Flickr, CC BY-SA
In Arunachal, for example, the Governor convened a state legislative assembly meeting without consulting with the government. Only BJP and rebel Congress lawmakers attended. In Uttarakhand, the central government implemented Art. Just a day prior to the chief minister’s majority declaration in the assembly, the central government imposed Art. In both cases, the BJP encouraged defectors to overthrow the ruling Congress government.
The Inter-state Council, a constitutional forum to engage inter-governmental engagement, met more often than when either the Congress or BJP dominated. Modi has called the ISC ” the most significant platform to strengthen centre-state relationships.” Still, his government did not use it to include the states in the national-level decision-making.
Parliament is undermined
The BJP has undermined the parliament by its attempts to gain a position and checkmate opposition. For instance, the NDA-II introduced a potentially institution-weakening step by passing a controversial bill in a way that allowed it to bypass the opposition – this was contrary to the spirit of the constitution and served merely to corrode government-opposition relations further.
The government is often criticized for its intolerance and its “shooting the messenger” approach to criticism. Unfavorable judgments of policy or functionaries, as well as opposing positions, are often interpreted by the ruling cadre as threats to the nation.
Various government ministers and party spokespersons have tried to restrict the right to freedom of speech to preserve national security.
When student groups at certain universities took a stance on the armed struggle that was in opposition to the government’s position, they were called anti-national.
Kanhaiya Kumar, leader of the JNU Student Union, after his release from prison in February 2016.
The government has criticized media organizations and individuals for not following the government’s line.
At best, pyrrhic victory can be achieved by bypassing the opposition, limiting freedom of speech, and violating the rights of the state. It is against the law for a ruler to violate their office terms by not following certain canons. Constitutions are negotiated restrictions designed to achieve specific goals and results. Normally, some people are not happy with the current arrangements. Dharma, however, requires that you work within institutional logic. Ignoring the subtlety of institutional logic and inventing practices that undermine it is a violation of the spirit of the Constitution: the bedrock for this democracy, celebrating seven decades of independence.
