Emergency: A Stigma on Indian Republic

June 25, 2021 marks the 46 anniversary of the Emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi. It is still remembered as the stigma on Indian republic, when the constitution and basic rights of individuals were considered as null and void, when power thrust of a political family turned into madness. Every democratic voice of the country was put behind the bars with physical and emotional atrocities put on them while all those who dared to challenge this draconian decision of a totalitarian government and a dictator prime minister faced similar cruel treatment.

Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, President of India at that time was convinced by the then Prime Minister about the ongoing tussle between Judiciary and Union government. The authority to rule by decree, giving power to the prime minister for canceling the elections and basic liberties to be paralyzed. Most of the leaders of opposition political parties were imprisoned and the press was censored. The order bestowed upon the Prime Minister to authorize the rule of totalitarianism, allowing elections to be canceled and civil liberties to be suspended. For much of the Emergency, most of Indira Gandhi’s political opponents were imprisoned, press was censored and media houses were shut down in the name internal and external disturbances.

The Emergency is one of the most controversial periods of independent India’s history. Several other human rights violations were reported from the time, including a mass level forced sterilization campaign spearheaded by Sanjay Gandhi, the Prime Minister’s son. Under the umbrella of Article 352 of the Constitution powers were exercised by giving the reason of prevailing “internal disturbance”, the Emergency was in effect from 25 June 1975 until its withdrawal on 21 March 1977. Never ever in the history of independent republic of India have faced such a constitutional crisis as during the 21 months of 1975-1977, when a state of emergency and anarchy was declared and imposed across the country by a democratically elected prime minister.

Coomi Kapoor in her book, The Emergency: A Personal History talks about the terror that prevailed among the common and political masses of the country. As she stated, “Indira Gandhi suffered from a deep sense of insecurity. In sharp contrast to her father, Jawaharlal Nehru, she saw politics as primarily a struggle for power that had nothing to do with ideals or ideology.”

The decision to force emergency was taken without any interaction with the other political parties and not even from Indira’s cabinet. Around midnight, the President signed the document and the Emergency officially came into effect in India. The orders to arrest selected leaders of the opposition were sent to the Chief Ministers of different states. Senior leaders like Jayaprakash Narayan, Morarji Desai, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Advani and George Farnandes were arrested with the charges of citing violence and disturbance between the masses. Social institutions and civil societies were banned, protests of any kind was prohibited.

“Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA) was imposed and misused in various incidents for personal and political vendetta. Due to number of arrests outnumbering capacity of jails, many were tied with chains and ropes on public places.

Today, when social media platforms are championing the freedom of expression as their main source for spreading the business around the globe and Indian government is in thorns with all such business houses it’s important to understand the value of civil liberties. Modernization and digitalization put forward a new debate about the cyber security and personal liberty in front of us. It become primarily important for every individual to understand the cost that one have to pay for this basic fundamental right of human being. The dark era of emergency and its anniversary reminds us about the cost and benefits of democracy and democratic will, which we as a nation has paid during the time of emergency. So it’s time to understand the various perspectives of debates and laws about the constitutional human right of expression and liberty so a social media oriented and historically challenged discloser of democracy can be understood and globalized universal citizenry with full civil liberties can be imagined by every individual.