Electoral scene

https://thewire.in/law/why-delhi-hcs-dismissal-of-petition-seeking-action-on-pm-modis-hate-speech-is-dangerous 

The court, in its order, noted, “…any such pre-supposition is misconceived in as much as it is for the Election Commission of India to take an independent view in this regard.” The high court, thus, admonished the petitioners for assuming that the Prime Minister’s words were illegal and thus a breach of the law.

But in saying so it gave no explanation regarding how it concluded that it was not a case of hate speech prima facie. The court’s order was bereft of any reasoning in how it sees the Prime Minister as not violating the law.

Furthermore, the court also failed to delve into the contents of the speech that was presented before it. What becomes pertinent here is to ask what ‘pre-supposition’ really meant in its order in particular and in a court proceeding in general. It is well noted that in court, the aggrieved party presupposes a breach of law and comes to court to test their case.

The role of the constitutional court, which has been bestowed with extraordinary jurisdiction, is to prima facie examine the merits of such a case. The court, which should have examined the impugned speech, did not make any such attempts. One also fails to understand how calling the Muslim community “infiltrators” required some thorough analysis by the Election Commission, which no ordinary citizen could presuppose in the beginning.

by Kawalpreet Kaur

29/05/2024

The BJP president, in turn, appealed to the Election Commission to act against Congress and its allies, accusing them of anti-Hindu. He said Modi's speeches are based on facts and that he was only trying to apprise voters of Congress's 'real intentions'. https://thewire.in/politics/jp-nadda-responds-to-ec-notice-defends-modis-hate-speeches 

Nadda also doubled down, accusing Congress of employing tactics of the Muslim League to bring about a divide between the north and south of the country through economic non-cooperation and linguistic differences. Basically, Nadda was referring to Modi’s statement where the latter had said Congress’s manifesto bears the imprint of the Muslim League.

Calling Hinduism as India’s “foundational religion”, Nadda said the Congress party together with its allies by way of opposing the Prime Minister has been opposing India’s “ancient culture”, the Indian Express reported.

15/05/2024

The economist turned psephologist Surjit Bhalla, who has been in the business of statistically analysing voting behaviour since the 1980s, has long held that economic interests and concerns matter for more than caste loyalties in Indian elections. Bhalla repeats this argument, mobilising data, in his recently published book How We Vote: Factors That Influence Voters (2024). His argument, as a Modi supporter, is that economic factors in fact favour the BJP in the ongoing elections. Most Modi critics do not agree. They believe that unemployment, middle class distress and rising inequality have made Modi less popular.

https://thewire.in/politics/caste-class-and-a-suit-boot-ki-sarkar 

Modi may have suddenly discovered that while he continues to mobilise Hindu votes deploying anti-Muslim sentiment, Rahul has deployed a two-pronged attack using caste and class. This may well have revived the discomforting memory of Rahul’s ‘suit boot ki sarkar’ jibe. Could this have prompted Modi to distance himself from big business?

The charge of ‘suit boot ki sarkar’ has come to stick. The slogan ‘Adani-Ambani ki sarkar’ mimics a communist slogan of the Nehru-Indira years, when their governments were dubbed by the communists as ‘Tata-Birla ki sarkar’. Indira Gandhi ended that with her turn to the political left in the late 1960s and the wave of nationalisations she authorised. Modi will find it difficult to make such a turn to the left, given the class and caste basis of his support.

by Sanjaya Baru

13/05/2024