'Decline seen in Indian Democracy Post-Emergency'

New Delhi, June 27: India's democratic institution have rather weakened in the Post-Emergency era leaving little space for political dissent, several eminent personalities observed at 'Anti-Emergency Day' function here.

Participating in the seminar on the 32nd anniverary of the Emergency, observed here last evening, eenowned journalist Kuldip Nayar, Justice Rajinder Sachar and several other personalities observed that the ''curious combine of crony (monopoly) capitalism, a feudalistic polity, a subservient bureacracy and brutal security forces has propped up a ruling clique of various political parties, including the Left, which invariably sanctioned the suppression of dissidents, dubbing them 'terrorists, separatists and enemy of 'so-called' development.'' Recalling imposition of Emergency on June 26, 1975, Mr Nayar said the media, at that time, failed to stand up and as many as 103 senior journalists, including editors, had signed a document favouring official censorship of the day-to-day news coverage.

''Even the Press Council of India succumbed to the Indira Gandhi government's pressure and consciously avoided saying anything against the official fiat,'' he said addressing meeting, jointly organised by Janhastakshep and People Union for Civil Liberties(PUCL).

He said the 'submissive attitude' of the Indian media, which now includes TV channels too, has 'rather become more pronounced now with blatant rejection of political dissent,' adding that none of the mainstream newspapers had carried any critical write-up on the eve of the 1975 Emergency, which completely snuffed out freedom of the press, the fourth estate of the democracy.

''The media establishments are being run on pattern of the industry, reducing the journalists to mere wage workers and are given marching order whenever their reporting do not match the proprietors' views,'' another senior mediaperson said. The participants in the meeting endorsed Mr Nayar's view that a Commission should be set up to know how and why ruralites and wide spectrum of dispossessed people had competely lost their voice in the media.

Eminent educationist and former Vice-Chancellor Dr Amrik Singh said the media had rather become more 'conformist and commercial' like what it had been during the Emergency era and like that period, the police had been enjoying enormous powers to torture, harass and book any innocent person in a false case.

In this context, Janhastakshep convenor Dr Anoop Saraya said that various draconian laws like AFSPA, CSPSA, National Security Act, Disturbed Area Act are being promulaged in the name of protecting democracy, but actually being used crush political dissent.

''The new economic policies, which are the dictates of World Bank and IMF, and being followed by successive governments, have led to widespread unrest and displacement of tribals and villages... the archival Land Acquisition Act is being used to forcibly acquire farmers' land for Special Economic Zones (SEZs)'', he said.

Speaking in the same vein, Dr N.K Bhattacharya said ''the Indian State is relying on extra-constitutional methods of bringing peace by supporting vigilante groups like Salwa Judam, Ikhwan, SULFA, and the Black cats in Punjab to terrorise and eliminate political opponents.'' ''And the post-Emergency period has witnessed worse state repression targeting mass movements against new economic order, nationality struggles, minoriites, Dalits and Human Rights activists,'' he said.

Justice Sachar said judiciary which did not stand up against the Emergency regime, was now developing a ''curious tendency of denying or delaying the justice to the poor and unprivileged sections of the Indian society.'' ''Rather, the judiciary has donned a political mantle by taking up 'activism' in the areas meant for govermental action,'' he added.

Several other speakers including Darshan Khatkal, a CPI(ML-New Democary) leader from Punjab, were in agreement with the observation that the democratic space for a commonman had shrunk to a level lower that during the Emergency regime, which targeted mainly leaders in opposition to the then Congress, while the judiciary imbibed the ideology of the ruling classes in giving no protection against the infringement of civil liberties and fundamental rights as enshrined in the Constitution.

UNI