Rahul Gandhi, a prominent leader of the Indian National Congress and India, was disqualified as a member of the Indian parliament. According to several sources including the BBC, Rahul Gandhi was removed from the post of MP after he was sentenced to two years in prison in a defamation case. He was convicted by a Surat court for his comments in 2019 about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s surname at an election rally. But his disqualification immediately led to criticisms and protests in India. The Congress party — the main opposition political party of India — and several other political parties claimed his disqualification was politically motivated, though the Bharatiya Janata Party claimed that his disqualification is based on the law.
It is pertinently notable that the disqualification of Rahul Gandhi from the Lok Sabha, the lower House of the Indian parliament, was made under the Representation of the People Act (according to which, an Indian lawmaker convicted of a crime and sentenced to two or more years in jail stands disqualified from parliament with immediate effect). But his two-year jail-based disqualification, which may also not allow him to participate in the Lok Sabha elections for six years, may harm Indian politics by establishing a culture of disqualification. The INC’s use of laws for making high-profile BJP leaders disqualified in the future may not be surprising. Also, it remains unclear whether and how much the BJP will be benefited by keeping Rahul outside the elections.
Definitely, it is not the intention of the Editor’s Letter to comment on the court’s verdict. There is a scope of appeal for Rahul Gandhi. The court will provide its verdict on the appeal based on arguments and counter-arguments. But it is to note that India — a South Asian country and one of the most powerful countries in Asia — is the largest democracy in the world and an excellent democracy in Asia. Oppositions have more scope for criticism against government activities in India than in many other Asian countries. The disqualification of such a high-profile political leader from the parliament based on a defamation case may also narrow down the scope of constructive criticism of the government activities in India too.
High-profile political leaders of one party criticize the high-profile leaders including the prime ministers of rival parties in many democratic countries mainly for the political cause rather than the personal cause. But such criticisms, even if they are defamatory, usually do not go to court. It is desired that the disqualification of Rahul Gandhi is given a reconsideration, given that his disqualification is driven by the political motivation of the ruling party, for the betterment of the politics of India. It is also desirable that the government provides the scope of peaceful protests to the leaders and activists of opposition parties in India without arbitrary arrests and torture.
Amir M Sayem
Chief Editor
Dhaka Opinion Magazine
