The Tribune chronicle of India’s darkest hours
Political Dharma
THE fundamental question raised by Mr. Justice Krishna Iyer — but not answered by him — in his judgement on Mrs. Gandhi’s appeal is: What is political propriety or democratic dharma? These, he said, are polemical issues on which judicial silence was the golden rule. Read along with his other observation that the tidal wave in favour of the petitioner could not breach the legal dykes of the Supreme Court, it is perhaps the most eloquent silence in a judgement which otherwise, as the judge has admitted, was a departure from the usual practice of brevity. No doubt, it is always and everywhere the proper judicial approach to shy away from political thickets and view problems with institutionalised blinkers. At the same time, it must be said to Mr. Justice Iyer’s credit that he did not lose sight of the integral yoga of law and society, because life was larger than law. On the other hand, he also had no hesitation in rejecting Mr. Palkhiwala’s plea for private justice and accepting the contention of Mr Raj Narain’s counsel that justice between two private persons was alien to an election litigation, even though “at first flush" he was disposed to prolong the absolute stay granted by the High Court. In the result, his verdict has pleased both sides, in varying degrees and for different reasons.
The jubilation in the opposition camp is evidently greater, because Mrs. Gandhi’s plea for an absolute stay has been rejected, and she has only been given a conditional stay. The Congress is pleased — at least so it says — that Mrs. Gandhi has been permitted to continue as Prime Minister anyhow. It is impossible to conceive of a British Prime Minister sitting in the House of Commons without the right to vote or the right to take part in proceedings in the capacity as a member. Yet this is precisely the tragedy which Mrs. Gandhi is being forced to endure. One does not really know whether Mr Jagjiwan Ram was kidding when he said that there was nothing wrong in it, and advanced his own case as a conclusive example. “I am a member of the Lok Sabha, but I cannot vote in the Rajya Sabha, even though I can participate in its proceedings." The two things are not on par. Mr Jagjiwan Ram can at least vote in the Lok Sabha whereas Mrs. Gandhi cannot vote anywhere. Mr. Justice Iyer has said that, for the moment at any rate, the question is only of academic interest because Parliament was not in session. Far from it. It is very much a live issue politically, and it goes right into the heart of the democratic dharma on which Mr. Justice Iyer chose the golden rule of silence. India is not an “academic" democracy, but very much a living, pulsating and high-kicking one. The case for her resignation has only become stronger, not weaker, after the Supreme Court’s conditional stay of the High Court order, and those who refuse to see this fact are no friends of hers.
In one passage of his judgement, Mr. Justice Iyer has observed: “In politics, ‘red in tooth and claw’, power lost is not necessarily followed, after legal victory, by power regained."
President Declares Emergency
“Threat to Security from Internal disorder"
New Delhi, June 26 (PTI, UNI)
The President has declared a state of emergency to forestall internal disturbances threatening the security of India. The President signed the order declaring the emergency at about 7 this morning. Earlier, the Cabinet met at 6 am and considered the situation and approved the recommendation of the President for the declaration of emergency.
The emergency declared in 1971 and still in force relates to threat to the security of India from external aggression. Today’s declaration comes under the provision relating to internal disturbances.
Step Taken to Preserve Unity, Says Zail Singh
From Our Special Correspondent
Chandigarh, June 26
The proclamation of emergency in the country has been welcomed unanimously by leaders of the Punjab Government and the state Congress. Mr Zail Singh, Chief Minister, said in a press statement here today that he welcomed the step because for quite some time an atmosphere of violence was being created to shake the confidence of the people in democratic institutions and processes.
676 Arrested All Over Country
New Delhi, June 26 (UNI)
As many as 676 arrests were made today throughout the country in the context of the new proclamation by the President to cope with the internal security of the country. The highest number of arrests — 450 — were made in Madhya Pradesh, according to the Principal Information officer of the Government of India.
No voting right in House but can continue as PM under the Constitution
New Delhi, June 24 (UNI, PTI)
Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was today granted “conditional stay" by Supreme Court Vacation Judge V.R. Krishna Iyer under which she will be fully entitled to participate in the proceedings of Parliament in her capacity as Prime Minister but without the right to vote.
The Supreme Court rejected Mrs Gandhi’s plea for an “absolute and unconditional stay" of the operation of the Allahabad High Court judgement but ruled that her powers and privileges as Prime Minister will be unaffected during the pendency of her appeal in the court. The stay order made it clear that Mrs Gandhi will “neither participate in the proceedings of the Lok Sabha nor vote or draw remuneration in her capacity as member of the Lok Sabha."
JP To Announce Form of ‘Quit PM’ Stir
From Our Special Correspondent
NEW DELHI, June 24
The joint conference of the Executives of the five non-CPI Opposition parties today decided to launch a country-wide movement, including satyagraha, to demand the resignation of Indira Gandhi, if she did not do so in the light of the Supreme Court’s “conditional stay" on the operation of the Allahabad High Court judgement.
Oppn ups the ante
Raj Narain to File Appeal
New Delhi, June 22 (UNI)
Mr Raj Narain, on whose election petition the Allahabad High Court has set aside the election of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha, has stated in an affidavit that he will also file an appeal against the High Court’s judgement on the points which have been decided in favour of Mrs Gandhi.
In Para 3 of counter-affidavit of Raj Narain in reply to the application for directions scheduled to come up before Justice VR Krishna Iyer, the vacation Judge of the Supreme Court, along with Mrs Gandhi’s application for absolute stay of the operation of the judgement and the order of High Court, it is stated that “on the opening of the court, Respondent No 1 (i.e. Raj Narain) will also file an appeal against that part of the judgement of the High Court which has been decided against Respondent No 1."
Gandhi’s Rejoinder To Raj Narain’s Affidavit
New Delhi, June 22 (UNI)
In her rejoinder to the counter-affidavit of Mr Raj Narain, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi has stated that the Supreme Court had the power to grant “absolute and unconditional stay" in any case, and it was wrong to say that the court had followed any “practice" of granting only limited stay orders in election cases.
The rejoinder said it was wrong to say that it would not be in public interest if a person who had been found guilty of corrupt practices by a High Court was allowed to function in a high public office.
Comments