The Indian parliamentary debate marking 75 years of the Constitution ignited fierce exchanges between opposition leaders and the ruling government on December 16. The discussions, held in the Rajya Sabha, saw prominent figures from the Indian National Congress and other opposition parties vehemently criticizing Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his administration for allegedly distorting historical facts and undermining democratic principles.
Leading the charge was Mallikarjun Kharge, the Leader of the Opposition, who took aim at Modi's statements concerning former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Kharge accused Modi of twisting facts to malign Nehru and demanded, "The PM forgot... the first amendment was made by the Provisional Parliament, and its members were members of the Constituent Assembly." Kharge’s remarks underscored his assertion of the importance of historical accuracy and the need for accountability from government leaders.
Kharge's critique was coupled with references to significant historical events, including the Emergency declared by Indira Gandhi, which he recognized as a mistake but also highlighted her return to power as evidence of the resilience of democratic processes. "Today, the 16th December, is the Bangladesh liberation day. Our brave leader Indira Gandhi broke Pakistan... The iron lady showed none working against India can be at peace," he said, emphasizing the patriotic achievements of past Congress leaders.
Countering the Congress narrative, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman launched her own attacks against the opposition. She accused the Congress Party of being "anti-women" for failing to pass the women's reservation bill during their governance. Sitharaman argued, "Clearly, they have always been anti-women. Shah Bano case is a clear example." She maintained her position by citing various amendments made under the Congress regime, which she claimed aimed to reinforce dynastic politics rather than serve the nation’s interests.
Sitharaman's arguments sparked outrage among Congress members, particularly as she highlighted the controversial amendments to the Constitution, claiming they were made to curtail freedoms during Indira Gandhi’s tenure. The Finance Minister declared, "Only five members voted against it in Lok Sabha, whereas in Rajya Sabha, it was passed unanimously because those who would have opposed it were in jail." This statement drew fierce protest from the Congress benches.
The discourse continued to grow heated, with leaders from various parties echoing worries about the current political environment. Debashish Samantaray of the Biju Janata Dal (BJD), who does not belong to either the ruling coalition or the opposition alliance, voiced concerns about the erosion of democratic norms. He stated, "The so-called Constitutional watchdogs have become pet dogs, anyone can be behind bars without justification. There is definitely an Emergency in the country, I will say it openly." This remark aligned with the sentiments of many who have suggested the current political climate resembles the oppressive conditions of the Emergency era.
Trinamool Congress MP Saket Gokhale added his voice to the critique, portraying minorities as victims of civil rights abuses under Modi's administration. Gokhale stated, "Where is social justice? Minorities are subjected to atrocities every day. The PM ran a poisonous communal campaign during the Lok Sabha elections." His statements reflected the broader frustrations expressed by opposition leaders toward the government’s handling of social justice issues.
With emotions running high and the stakes seemingly higher, the debate showcased the growing rift between the government and opposition parties. Each side hurled accusations, with the opposition calling for accountability and the ruling party defending its actions as necessary for national integrity and progress. The overall atmosphere suggested not just political rivalry but a fundamental disagreement over the very fabric of the country’s democratic architecture.
Kharge’s demands for Modi to apologize for purportedly distorting facts about Nehru encapsulated the controversy surrounding the debate. He urged the PM to clarify misleading statements made about historical events and figures, maintaining, "Modi distorted facts about Nehru's letters to CMs for which he should apologise to people of the country. He must apologise in both the Houses." This call for accountability squares up against the backdrop of accusations of dictatorial tendencies within the current government.
Reflecting on the session's proceedings, it is clear the political discourse surrounding India’s Constitution and its legacy remains contentious. The clash between the ruling BJP and opposition parties raises significant questions about how the country remembers its past and the values it upholds as it moves forward. With each debate, the future of India’s democracy hangs perilously on the words exchanged within its hallowed halls of power.
