The political import of Rahul Gandhi’s two-year conviction in a defamation case is not merely for Rahul himself. The story of his disqualification from Parliament is about the further shrinking of the the Opposition space — and, ironically, under “due process” of law. In the run-up to the 2019 elections, Rahul had said, “Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi, Narendra Modi…how come they all have Modi as common surname. How come all the thieves have Modi as a common surname?” The BJP says Rahul needs to be punished for his tendency to get carried away and that the law must follow its course. Rahul has gone over the top in his political formulations on more than one occasion rather than make nuanced observations. Yet, the fact is that a lot is said in poll heat. A maximum punishment of two years that disqualifies an MP has huge political consequences in a democratic set-up. Especially in a cacophonous democracy like ours, where politicians get carried away during an election campaign. And if individuals and parties take legal recourse in every instance, there will be no end to those who get disqualified from the legislature to which they were elected by the people of India. The disqualification is a setback to Rahul and the Congress party but, even more important, it is a message to all Opposition leaders to carefully vet their words before speaking – or some judge in some part of India can take note and can end their membership of Parliament or Assembly. As it is, worryingly, FIRs have recently been lodged against two printers in Delhi for printing anti-Modi posters with the tagline, “Modi hatao, desh bachao”. Could the Surat verdict now send its own message to printers in small town, and big town, India: “Opposition ka poster mat chhapo” or else there will be trouble. It is unclear what political advantage accrues to the BJP from Rahul’s disqualification in the last year before general elections. Even though his Bharat Jodo Yatra had traction, it’s not as if he was set to dethrone Narendra Modi in 2024, who, as things stand, seems set to come back. Rahul is no VP Singh who dethroned his father Rajiv Gandhi in 1989 to replace him as PM. The disqualification of Rahul — unless the Surat verdict and the sentence get stayed or reduced —could paradoxically make it easier for the Opposition parties to make common cause. Some, who are not dependent on the Congress to run their governments in the states, like Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress, Arvind Kejriwal’s AAP, or K Chandrashekhar Rao’s BRS, have chafed against working under the leadership of the Gandhis. It used to be said that the only way the impasse within the Opposition to dissolve was for Rahul to take a back seat. This has now happened. Within hours of Rahul’s conviction, Arvind Kejriwal was the first to lend his support to a beleaguered Rahul. This signals a break from the past; for there has been no love lost between the Congress and AAP which has grown at the Congress’s expense in both Delhi and Punjab. The Congress had not come to Manish Sisodia’s rescue when he was arrested in the excise scam and is in jail. Other Opposition leaders have followed Kejriwal in supporting Rahul. Among them is Akhilesh Yadav who had only the other day threatened that this time in 2024 the Samajawadi party would field candidates against the Congress in Amethi and Rae Bareilly, two Nehru-Gandhi family fiefdoms. How does Opposition politics pan out in the absence of Rahul in the lead role, will evolve in the weeks to come. Besides being targeted by the ED and the CBI, Opposition leaders are now a worried lot for another reason. They are asking if they are being jailed and disqualified in BJP’s second term, what will happen to them in its third term in office? Can the Surat judgement create a sense of sympathy for Rahul? His disqualification comes on the heels of a relentless demand by BJP leaders that he be disqualified—unless he apologises for his UK remarks about the undoing of democracy in India. Though it is early days, the more relevant question is this: even if sympathy is generated for Rahul, does the Congress have the will and the wherewithal to take advantage of it? Indira Gandhi, Rahul’s grandmother had also been disqualified from Parliament in December 1978 for breach of privilege. Her MPship was undone within a month of her being elected to the Lok Sabha from Chikamagalur in a bypoll. Her six-day jail term marked her political turnaround, and she said later that when the sentries in Tihar jail started to salute her, she realised the mood in the country was undergoing a change. Can Rahul do a 1978 in 2023? That's a very tall order. In 1978, within hours of Indira’s arrest, lakhs had come out on the streets and courted arrest. A pan-Indian party like the Congress should have been able to mobilise protests against the Surat judgement against Rahul. “But,” as a Congress leader lamented, “it has become a party on Twitter.” Congressmen are also questioning why the party did not approach the Supreme Court the moment Rahul’s conviction came. After all, within two hours, Pawan Khera got relief from the Supreme Court. In 1978, the Government, led by Morarji Desai was a weak and a faction-ridden entity; in 2023 the Modi government is a monolith. Nor is the Congress the same as it was in 1978. Nor is the rest of the Opposition the united entity it had become in 1977 sinking their differences to oust Indira Gandhi of the Emergency years. Nor for that matter is the Indian voter what she was. And yet political parties should not forget that history shows the worm can turn — and what bestirs it is arrogance of power. (Neerja Chowdhury, Contributing Editor, The Indian Express, has covered the last 10 Lok Sabha elections)
