 |
|
Congress leader Shashi Tharoor has launched a scathing critique of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government at the Centre, accusing it of employing the Emergency as a tactic to deflect attention from critical issues such as NEET paper leaks, the dire situation in Manipur, and the persistent problem of unemployment.
Tharoor, a four-term Congress Member of Parliament (MP) representing Thiruvananthapuram, questioned the relevance of dredging up an event that transpired 49 years ago, emphasizing the government's focus should be on addressing contemporary concerns.
The former Union Minister acknowledged the undemocratic nature of the Emergency imposed in 1975 by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, but asserted that it remained within the bounds of the Constitution.
He emphasized that the Emergency, while a departure from democratic principles, was not a violation of the Constitution. Tharoor pointed to a provision within the Constitution that authorized the imposition of an internal emergency, a provision that has since been repealed.
Tharoor's remarks stem from the recent resolution read out by the newly elected Speaker Om Birla in the Lok Sabha, condemning the imposition of Emergency in 1975. Birla went further, characterizing it as a direct attack on the Constitution by Indira Gandhi, a statement that drew sharp criticism from the Opposition Congress.
President Droupadi Murmu, during her address to Parliament, also referred to the Emergency as the “biggest and darkest chapter of direct attack on the Constitution,” further inflaming tensions with the Congress party.
Tharoor, however, challenged the legal accuracy of labeling the Emergency as unconstitutional, arguing that the government's actions in 1975 were strictly within the boundaries of the Constitution.
He emphasized that the Constitution was not suspended during the Emergency period, underscoring the legal basis for the government's actions. Tharoor's remarks underscore the ongoing debate surrounding the Emergency and its place in India's political history. His assertion that the Emergency was constitutional, while undemocratic, adds another layer to the complex discussions surrounding the event and its historical significance.