The tin gods of small things

Why Modi 3.0 is Modi 2.0 which was Modi 1.0

A brilliant cover for the most recent issue of Frontline magazine, by the cartoonist Satish Acharya, that is worth a thousand analytical columns

This is why the laws and regulations under which Indians are governed today are essentially the same as those we had as a subject people. This lack of imagination about what to do as a free nation is true not just of India but the wider subcontinent. That is why the laws in India are almost the same, more or less, as they are in Pakistan. This is true particularly of the criminal justice system. The Lahori or Karachiwallah is as familiar with the numbers 420, 302 and 144 as are the people in Kolkata or Chennai. These are numbers given to laws written by Thomas Macaulay more than a century-and-a-half ago, enacted just after the mutiny in which the Raj crushed the Indian freedom spirit. So if the laws were the same, and not just in India but the subcontinent, what is the difference between the Republic of India and the Raj? Surely, as a free people, we should have given ourselves more liberty than our foreign rulers did?

That passage is from Aakar Patel’s The Anarchist’s Cookbook. It is one I have had multiple occasions to recall, the latest being news that the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi VK Saxena, freshly freed from his campaign duties on behalf of the BJP, has sanctioned the prosecution of writer Arundhati Roy and former Central University of Kashmir law professor Sheikh Showkat Hussain. The charge is that they spoke in favour of self-determination for Kashmir, at an event in Delhi in 2010.

Based on a complaint by one Sushil Pandit, a media-proclaimed activist, the Metropolitan Magistrate Court in New Delhi had directed that the police register an FIR. This was on 27 November 2010.

Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde pointed to this judgment by a division bench of the Kerala High Court which, among other things, says (emphasis mine):

The bench held that the stipulation of time to grant sanction for prosecution under the UAPA is a mandatory and sacrosanct requirement and failure to adhere to it, will vitiate the sanction order. Besides, the bench ruled that though Section 45(2) of the UAPA makes it mandatory for the ‘Authority’ to make an independent review of the evidence gathered in the course of the investigation and make a recommendation within such time as prescribed, to the Government, it does not absolve the latter from applying its mind before passing a final order of according or refusing the sanction.

The case against Roy and Hussain dates back 14 years. What UAPA says is that the “Time limit for making a recommendation by the Authority .-The Authority shall, under sub-section (2) of section 45 of the Act, make its report containing the recommendations to the Central Government [or, as the case may be, the State Government] within seven working days of the receipt of the evidence gathered by the investigating officer under the Code.”

This is why the timeline of investigation is important. Did the police investigate? When? Was the investigation report submitted to the LG and if so, when? Again, as per the UAPA provisions, the time limit for sanction of prosecution has to be taken within seven working days after receipt of the investigation report.

I’m ambivalent about Roy, the writer. While The God of Small Things and Ministry of Utmost Happiness marked her out as a prose stylist, there was a simplistic nature, an occasionally dangerous naïveté, and a lack of complexity to the narrative that I was underwhelmed by. And then there is her non-fiction — the overlong essays I sometimes had to labour through, and which I more often that not disagree with, sometimes vehemently.

The quality of her writing is not the issue, though. Equally, what she said on that day 14 years ago, and whether or not it contravened the laws of our country, is not the issue either — had it been, and even assuming that the then Congress-led government had decided to give it a pass, the Modi-led government has been in power for ten years and had plenty of time to take whatever action it deemed appropriate.

It did nothing during two terms in office. So why now?

The week just ending saw four terrorist attacks in Jammu & Kashmir in four days (I’d referred to those in a previous post, so I’ll avoid repetition). The Pir Panjal region continues to be ground zero with the added winkle that terrorists appear to be extending their area of operations further afield.

As recently as January, then army chief General Manoj Pande had pointed out that rising terrorism in the region is an area of major concern. (Also read a more recent piece by Nirupama Subramanian on the attacks and their impact on the planned assembly elections in the state.)

Earlier this week, the army raised the alert level in the region on the basis of intelligence inputs that terrorists are planning major attacks on both security installations and civilians.

In contrast to the chest-thumping strongman pose adopted by the government in the run-up to the 2019 elections, the government’s reaction has been muted. On 13 June, shortly before leaving for Italy to make up one of the extras at the G-7 Summit, PM Modi “reviewed the situation” (ANI and other agencies have photos to prove it) and ordered the security forces to “deploy the full spectrum of India’s counter-terrorism capabilities”. Begs the question somewhat — does the security establishment in that hotbed of terrorism actually need the PM tell them to pull out all the stops? Did the recent attacks happen because security forces were twiddling their thumbs, in one of the most militarised sectors in the world?

Not to be left out, Home Minister Amit Shah also held a “high level meeting” to review the security situation, while Modi was in Italy. (That shouldn’t have taken long. ‘What is the security situation in Kashmir like?’ ‘Abysmal’. ‘Oh, ok then.’)

The media has reported on the recent terrorist strikes, but refrained from asking the tough questions, beginning with “If the abrogation of Article 370 was intended to restore peace in the Valley, what explains the ongoing incidents of terror and is it fair to say the abrogation has failed in its primary objective? If yes, what is Plan B?”

Instead, we get — Arundhati Roy. Sheikh Shaukat Hussain. Sedition. “Tukde-tukde gang”. Tell me this is pure coincidence.

If that weren’t enough, we have the distraction of G7. Media reports eulogised the 24-hour trip, saying it emphasised India’s growing prominence in the West’s plans to counter China. Okay, so what do the invitations to Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, Jordan, Kenya, Mauritania, Tunisia, Turkey, the UAE, Ukraine and the Pope on behalf of Vatican city emphasise?

Media reports make it appear as though Modi spent the day engaged in weighty discussions with the leaders of the seven big economies. Even a novice reporter on foreign affairs will tell you that months of preparation go into any substantive bilateral or multi-lateral meeting of significance — world leaders don’t go Oh hi, how’re you doing, good to bump into you here, so what do you think we should do about China?

(An Associated Press report of the G-7 Summit has precisely one mention of Modi — listed with three others as “also present”.)

And if these meaningless word salads weren’t enough, we have the additional distraction of Oo look, Georgia Meloni took a selfie with Modi. Hashtag Melodi FTW. I don’t know which is worse — two world leaders behaving like my nieces used to back in their mid-teens, or an entire ecosystem posting and reposting that cringe-worthy moment. (To really know what cringe looks like, though, check out this ANI report — netizens excited, we are told, at the imminence of a Modi-Meloni meeting.)

Modi 3.0 is (I know it is the NDA government, but the BJP clearly doesn’t think so), judging by early indications, Distraction 3.0 — and the hell with the cost.

Getting back to Roy, I’ll leave you with two pieces worth reading, in context: One, an editor’s note in Article 14 on recent events that indicate that the incoming NDA government is determined to continue where it left off, in its hunting down of independent voices. And two, a piece dating back to 2010 by Salil Tripathi that puts Roy’s utterances on Kashmir in historical context.

Deny, distract, deflect

The implications of the criminally botched NEET exam is too big a topic for me to get into just now. For a primer, watch this video report by Ravish Kumar, and another by Dhruv Rathee who, between them, sum up the key issues:

What concerns me is the official reaction — which, in hindsight, was predictable. Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, who was first Minister of Steel, then Minister of Skill Development, in Modi 2.0, said there was no paper leak, and that the protests were “motivated”.

He said this four days after a senior police official in Patna said the questions and answers were provided to several aspirants a day before the 5 May exam — and after the police had arrested 13 people in this connection. He said this despite a police official in Gujarat detailing how an entire testing centre was involved in the leaks, and what the modus operandi was. Print reports on the activities of an organised gang in Patna involved in the leaks. (Quint has a more detailed piece, behind a paywall. India Today reports on the money involved. Scroll has a report on the error-ridden record of the National Testing Agency).

As far as the minister for education is concerned though, nothing happened. Who are you going to believe — Pradhan, or your lying eyes and ears?

Then there is Union Minister for Steel and Heavy Industries HD Kumaraswamy, who appeared before the cameras and microphones of the media to question why the US-based semiconductor company Micron Technology was getting an astonishing Rs 3.2 crore for every job it was creating, in Gujarat. Despite the fact that he was speaking to video, within 24 hours he again appeared before the media to say he had been “misquoted”, to wonder why his words had been “picked up like this” (Umm.. perhaps because it was an important question to ask?) and to remind himself to be more careful in future (Translation: I am now with the government, I shouldn’t be telling tales out of school).

No such round-up is complete with a contribution from the Master. Thus, on 10 June, PIB put out a press statement that as the first act of his third term, Modi had signed a file releasing funds to the tune of Rs 20,000 crore to 9.5 crore farmers, and thus demonstrated his commitment to farmers. As I pointed out at the time, and as the PIB release says in small type, it is the seventeenth instalment in a scheme, and it gives farmers Rs 2000 every four months. The act, however, has been duly videographed for posterity, and widely disseminated.

And now the sequel: Media reports say that the PM will visit Varanasi on 18 June to thank the voters of his constituency for re-electing him (albeit with a dramatically reduced margin) and to, wait for it, release Rs 20,000 crore for farmers. No, not another Rs 20,000 crore, the same thing he had already released eight days prior.

Early days, but we already know one thing about Modi 3.0 — it is the same wine, in the same chipped and cracked bottle.

PostScript: It is Sunday, after all, and there is just so much nonsense anyone can stomach. So as antidote, here is a masterclass on cinematography by Santosh Sivan.

Santosh’s distinguishing characteristic is the passion he brings to his art. Memories abound; one is particularly indelible. This dates back to the late 2000s. I was working in Rediff at the time, and one day I got a call from Santosh, saying he wanted to discuss something.

Knowing him, I trotted down the steps of our first floor office, got myself a cutting chai, and called him back. “We must remake Macbeth,” he told me then. “You love Shakespeare — let’s work on this.”

Um, why Macbeth? Why now? What are we bringing to the table?

We are going to reimagine the whole thing, he said. “Imagine that opening sequence, where Macbeth and Macduff meet the witches. Why are witches ugly? Why is that landscape so bleak? Imagine the two protagonists riding, not through a desolate wilderness but the prettiest landscape we can find… we need to go scouting for the perfect location… and picture them coming out of a strand of trees… there is a pristine lake in front of them and in that lake, frolicking, three of the most beautiful girls anyone has ever seen… think of that visual… we shoot at dusk, during the golden hour… imagine the impact in context of what follows…”

There was much more — over an hour’s worth of thoughts being thrown around helter-skelter, the focus always on how visuals would be used, in subversive ways, to create a totally different ambience, and how visual beauty could enhance the horrors as they unfolded…

That is Santosh Sivan — brilliant, passionate, a man who operates at his best in the realm of sight. Listen:

PS: In the original version I inadvertently typed ‘Sangeet’, for ‘Santosh’. My best guess is that my mind was full of the movie Yodha, which the former had helmed, and for which a sequel was being planned when Sangeet passed away, much too early. My thanks to a good friend who wrote in to point out the error.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I am shortly off on some personal travel. Posts will likely be minimal to none from the 18th to the 26th, both days inclusive. Be well, all.

Update: Shortly after uploading this post, I came across an oped by the always excellent Mukul Kesavan, on the recent G-7 Summit. Sample graf:

Modi’s iteration of India’s democratic credentials (“biggest festival of democracy”, “mother of democracy”) was, as always, a preliminary to Indian democracy’s greatest achievement: its great good sense in electing Modi: “And I am fortunate that the people of India have given me the opportunity to serve them for the third consecutive time. This has happened for the first time in India in the last six decades. The blessings that the people of India have given in the form of this historic victory is a victory of democracy. It is a victory of the entire democratic world.” It’s probably even a victory for entire political science.

Modi’s inability to tell the difference between history and his political career is now Caesarian.