A bitter little tale that did the rounds of Calcutta’s buses and trams during the Emergency had it that India would have been spared a great deal of anguish if only Raja Rammohun Roy hadn’t helped to outlaw the practice of sati. No one was ever punished for that vicious jibe as the Aam Aadmi Party’s Kumar Vishwas may be for a far milder crack. People in politics must cultivate thick skins, as Indira Gandhi advised Kunwar Natwar Singh when he was choosing a new wardrobe to move from the Indian Foreign Service to the Congress Party. They must also learn not to nurse grievances.
The most important condition in any society that respects the rule of law is to refrain from using institutions of state to pay off private grudges. There may be poetic justice in cutting off electricity to Bangladesh’s Opposition leader, Khaleda Zia, after she called a countrywide 72-hour strike. But that is not how nations that take pride in calling themselves parliamentary democracies should fight leadership battles.
Bangladesh isn’t the only offender. The way some Bharatiya Janata Party politicians speak, one would imagine the Central Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement Directorate are at their beck and call. By all means let the CBI interrogate Mamata Banerjee over the Saradha chit-fund scam if it thinks it necessary. But let it not be ordered to do so by a BJP national secretary. In fact, the CBI and ED should tell politicians that their espousal of a cause makes the normal process of enforcing justice look like partisan witch-hunting.
Perhaps, the distinction is too subtle for the coarsened feelings of many political practitioners. Most are like the senior minister who was asked why he was pushing his son. “Then whose son should I push?” the exalted functionary is believed to have retorted. “Yours?” Another version has him replying, “If I don’t push my son, who will?” Both answers place self-interest above principle.
True, this is inherent in human nature. But it was converted into blatant political practice by Morarji Desai’s Janata Party government. The transfers of state governors and senior civil servants perceived to be Indira Gandhi loyalists made an already supine administration even more conscious of the need for patronage. At the same time, the travesty of justice that was the Shah Commission warned politicians that they, too, had to be always on the winning side.
It is no reflection on the undoubtedly dynamic new foreign secretary, who has won his spurs in Singapore, Beijing and Washington, to suggest that the manner of his predecessor’s removal recalls A.P. Venkateswaran’s 1987 resignation after a graceless public remark by Rajiv Gandhi. Avinash Chander’s sacking as Defence Research and Development Organisation chief sent shock waves through the country. A Doordarshan assistant director was peremptorily transferred from Ahmedabad to the Andamans. Mizoram is the punishment post for unwanted governors. There may be sound reasons for such moves, but they don’t generate confidence in the system.
The reported likelihood of a reinvestigation of the 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom must be bracketed with instances of personal vendetta. Justice needs to be done, victims must be compensated, and criminals punished. But whereas the Nanavati Commission recommended reopening four out of 241 cases the police had closed, the Mathur report apparently wants 237 cases re-examined. Another judge may have wanted all 241 reopened. Someone else could have demanded more prosecutions. The BJP’s demand for a thorough probe into all incidents of violence during that horrible massacre signalled dissatisfaction with the official inquiry; it also suggested a political angle.
The Sikh pogrom was 20 years ago. Sheikh Hasina’s government in Bangladesh is busy punishing aged people who opposed liberation 44 years ago. Israel’s thirst for revenge against race enemies will probably never be slaked. If this continues, the grim cycle of cause and effect will always vitiate public life. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission impressively helped to restore peace. But bitterness continues to sizzle in Sri Lanka despite the so-called Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission.
Those who seek a political career to serve the people and not only to line their pockets or enjoy power should also learn to rise above their base selves. The opposite of supposed victims demanding an apology for every wrong, real or imagined, committed throughout history serves little purpose either. That also keeps wounds festering forever. There can be no harmony until people are encouraged to forget, until a veil is drawn over the many unhappy incidents with which the story of man is studded. Life must go on.
To return where I started, Mr Vishwas is believed to have announced at an AAP rally, “BJP has two problems with Kejriwal. One is that he wears a muffler… Has he snatched it from you? The BJP people also say he coughs a lot… What is your problem? Do you have to sleep with him in his bedroom?” The Election Commission will only invite ridicule if it treats the second remark as an aspersion on Kiran Bedi.
The feisty former police officer is too formidable (and also too wise) a person to take umbrage at that feeble attempt at humour by a mushaira singer playing politics. Second, it would be naïve of the EC in this age of sexual freewheeling to interpret the comment as directed at the only woman in the fray. We’ve all heard of Kautilya’s oft-quoted remark that it is impossible not to taste the sweetness of honey a man has on his tongue. The more apt modern version should be about a politician in office resisting using the official instruments at his/her disposal to settle personal or political scores.
The writer is a senior journalist, columnist and author
