Narendra Modi । নরেন্দ্র মোদী

Long before Congress, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) or the Trinamool Congress started raising their voices against the Election Commission’s alleged bias, a group of some 150 retired officials of the IAS, IFS, IPS and Central Services had already started waving the ‘yellow card’ at the Commission that is led by three officers of the same tribe.

Narendra Modi’s record in office being quite pathetic and people having neither forgotten nor forgiven him for the economic mess that he created with his ‘demonetisation’ that caused havoc in the economy and destroyed livelihoods, it is hardly surprising that he has fallen back on faux nationalism as the cornerstone of his poll campaign.

On December 30, last year, we were treated to the most unusual spectacle of the Prime Minister of India sitting on the floor or a cell of a jail, his legs crossed over each other, and his palms joined in prayer.

He was, however, not praying to God — he was actually worshipping his guru, Veer Damodar Savarkar, who had once been imprisoned in this cell and his eyes were transfixed on his portrait that was propped up a few feet away.

প্রধানমন্ত্রীর দৃষ্টি নিবদ্ধ ছিল কয়েক ফুট দূরত্বে রাখা সাভারকরের ছবির ওপর। ‘হিন্দুত্ব’-এর ধারণাটির স্রষ্টা সাভারকর এই মতবাদের জনক হিসাবে স্বীকৃত। তিনি প্রজন্মের পর প্রজন্মকে এক হিন্দু ভারতের স্বপ্ন দেখতে এবং তার জন্য দাবি জানাতে উদ্বুদ্ধ করেছিলেন। যে কারাগার পরিদর্শনে মোদী গিয়েছিলেন, সেটি হল আন্দামানের সেলুলার জেল। ভয়ঙ্কর ‘কালা পানি’র কথা ভারত কখনও ভুলতে পারবে না।

কথায় বলে, ভাগ্য মানুষকে গৌরবের পথে নিয়ে যায়, কিন্তু নিয়তি যা দেয় অহঙ্কার তাকে নষ্ট করে। খুব উচ্চ পদে আসীন মানুষদের কাছে মানুষ আশা করে যে তাঁরা কিছু দায়িত্ব স্বীকার করবেন। সব চেয়ে গুরুত্বপূর্ণ দায়িত্বটি হল, তাঁরা আপন পদটির উপযুক্ত আচরণ করবেন। পদমর্যাদা তাঁরা যদি বাড়াতে না-ও পারেন, পদটির যাতে অবমাননা না হয়, সেটা নিশ্চিত করা তাঁদের কর্তব্য। ভারত এ ব্যাপারে বিশেষ ভাগ্যবান— এক জন ছাড়া সব প্রধানমন্ত্রীই তাঁদের পদের যোগ্য এবং প্রত্যাশিত আচরণই করে গিয়েছেন, এমনকি তাঁদের ব্যক্তিগত মতামতের বিরুদ্ধে গিয়েও।

In 2014, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi assumed office he could have—and should have—pushed through urgently required structural reforms to improve India’s conservative bureaucracy. He had an unprecedented mandate and had charmed voters into believing that he would cleanse Indian governance as none before him ever had.  In reality, however, he appeared quite comfortable with the creaky bureaucratic apparatus that he had inherited, for he had assumed that his first-hand experience in running it at the State level for over a dozen years would suffice.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has mastered the art of utilising insecurity as an instrument of his state policy and needs to demonstrate this at frequent intervals. Or else, when he has better things to do — and rather quickly, as time is running out — he has decided to rattle the complacent and over-secure babudom of New Delhi. That may explain his intention to recruit 10 new “professionals” — the definition of “professionals” has been kept delightfully vague — for lateral entry as joint secretaries in the Central government.

What amaze every liberal in India and abroad are Narendra Modi’s unending and brazen attempts to centralise all power and decision making in a federal, democratic setup. To achieve this, he has been systematically weakening or subverting every national institution that has flowered and flourished in Independent India. Their autonomous and professional functioning apparently stand in his path towards an unabashed one-man rule.

European explorers of yore never ceased to be amazed at how the eerie silence of the night in tropical and equatorial forests was suddenly shattered at the crack of dawn, by the loud crescendo of numerous sounds appearing out of nowhere. The genetically argumentative Indian who had suddenly remained so quiet for three long years, even when fellow Indians were systematically dragged out and killed in the name of religion, has finally started speaking out. Rather loudly.

It was sad to see Prasar Bharati getting into an avoidable controversy and, as its former CEO, I was asked endlessly: was it legitimate and proper to ‘censor’ the pre-recorded Independence Day speech of the chief minister of Tripura, Manik Sarkar? Legitimacy and propriety are two distinct issues, but let us first look at the legal aspect.

Narendra Modi is definitely the best orator India has seen in a long while, but we must remember that he chooses his words with extreme care. So when he referred to the slaughter of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002 by saying that he would feel fain even if puppy came under the wheels of  his car, he meant to convey something that many of us missed. In the same vein, the very sharp words that he selected for the farewell speech of India’s longest-serving vice president carried a message that we need to understand.

In the normal course, one would like to stay away from any controversy surrounding an organisation that one has headed for over four and a half years. But since the matter has a bearing on India’s democratic traditions and its federal polity, I would need to clear the air.

None can forget the painful scenes of mindless violence that followed the Partition, but as Govind Nihalani's iconic film, Tamas, showed, all that one needed to start a riot was to kill a particular animal and place its carcass before a place of worship. The business of riots is not really mindless, but what surprises old 'district magistrates' like us who have handled 'riots' is why they are allowed to recur and feed the new cult of communalism that has penetrated Bengal.

As a defining moment, the twenty fifth of June of 1975 has more than secured its position on the timeline of Indian history. While the Congress prays hard to just forget the ignominy of Emergency, the prime beneficiaries of this tragic phase, namely the Yadav-led socialist parties, are burping after feasting on power for several decades. As the most fearless and uncompromising opposition to India's Emergency, the Akali Dal earned lucrative political rewards, but the most interesting contender is the ruling party. It is hell-bent on appropriating all credit for everything remarkable, whether in the past or at present.

Every major nation in the world has a public broadcaster and there must be some reason why they do. Before we can discuss the shortcomings of Prasar Bharati, the autonomous body that supervises Doordarshan (DD) and All India Radio (AIR), we may recall that even as its Act was passed by Parliament in 1990, its spirit of autonomy was vitiated by two sections, 32 and 33, which took away with the left hand what the right gave. They ensured that all its major decisions like manpower, recruitment, service conditions, salaries and critical issues would be decided only by the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (I&B).