WHY IT'S CRUCIAL TO REVISIT THE 1975 EMERGENCY

India's third Emergency curtailed human rights in a massive way. What has happened in the recent past is not comparable for a variety of reasons

- KALEESWARAM RAJ

ACCORDING to the Union government, June 25, the day on which the third national Emergency was proclaimed, will be observed as Samvidhan Hatya Diwas. The new parliament session also revived thoughts on India's 1975 Emergency that lasted for about 21 months. Sugata Srinivasaraju has reflected on the topic in a recent article in this newspaper. The discourse requires to be taken forward.

India's first two proclamations—in 1962 and 1971―were justified by the exigencies of the Indo-China and Indo-Pak wars, respectively. The third one, however, was clearly a political decision taken by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi alleging internal disturbance. The text of the Constitution, coupled with the context of the political and economic challenges in the country during that time, enabled the regime to take the extreme step. As per Article 352 of the Constitution as it stood then, a perception of 'internal disturbance' was enough for the executive to undo democracy and to suspend the fundamental rights of the people. Dissent became an offence and thousands were incarcerated during these dark days, often without trial.

Emergency powers are essentially constitutional safeguards to maintain the sovereignty of the nation. The purpose is to protect the nation, and not the government or the rulers of the day. Yet, across the world those in power have invoked such provisions, which are either statutory or constitutional, to remain in power. In India, though it was "constitutional", it resulted in patently unconstitutional results. It was an instance of ‘constitutional dictatorship', as Christophe Jaffrelot and Pratinav Anil put it.