Monsoon session: Drawing harder political lines

Her elevation to the high office may or may not improve the lot of Adivasis. But it will signal that a member of a tribal group, who is also a woman, can occupy the highest position in the country.

It is the nomination of the NDA’s vice-presidential candidate which has, however, grabbed eyeballs. In a surprise move — though, by now, we should not be surprised by any move of the prime minister — the BJP announced that Jagdeep Dhankhar would be the NDA’s candidate for VP. The BJP’s choice may come to have a bearing on how the Rajya Sabha functions.

Dhankhar was an active MoS, parliamentary affairs, in the Chandra Shekhar government in 1990. He is from the Jat community, belongs to Rajasthan and came into prominence as governor of West Bengal for the confrontational bouts he had with Mamata Banerjee’s government. His three attributes — being a Jat, belonging to Rajasthan and acting “tough” as a governor — point to the BJP’s thinking, and the strategy it could adopt in the months to come.

That the BJP wants to get back into its fold the farming community of Jats who inhabit western UP, Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan, is obvious. Unhappy with the farm bills, the Jats were the mainstay of the year-long agitation the farmers mounted outside Delhi last year, compelling the central government to take back the laws. Rajasthan, where elections are due in 2023, is clearly on the party’s radar.

More importantly, Dhankhar, as the chairman of the Rajya Sabha, responsible for its proceedings, could be tougher on the Opposition. He is likely to win given the arithmetic of both the Houses which elect the VP. Going by his track record in West Bengal — he was not shy of run-ins with the state government — it could lead to greater contention with the Opposition in the Upper House.

Dhankhar’s nomination came within days of moves that have created a sense of disquiet amongst the Opposition and may have a bearing on MPs’ free speech and freedom to assemble. The Rajya Sabha put out an advisory that MPs will no longer be allowed to hold dharnas within the precincts of Parliament; earlier such “requests” used to be made to MPs to desist from protesting in Parliament. The Lok Sabha issued a new booklet adding more words that are to be deemed unparliamentary to the existing list, and they are words of common usage like “corrupt”, “ashamed”, “tanashah” (dictator), which the Opposition leaders use against those in power. If the word “tanashah” had been declared unparliamentary 50 years ago, Indira Gandhi might not have lost the 1977 elections. If the word “corrupt” had been banned in 1987, Rajiv Gandhi might not have been ousted in 1989, nor the UPA swamped in scams like 2-G, Coalgate, and attacked day after day in Parliament.

Om Birla, the Lok Sabha Speaker, tried to reassure MPs that they will have the freedom to speak and the expunction of words would be done by the Speaker depending on the context. What was the need, then, to publish a booklet? That power vests in the Speaker anyway. These moves show a growing toughness adopted by the BJP towards the Opposition.

But it is mystifying why the BJP, which is increasing its footprint in the country, winning election after election, should want to be seen to be stifling the free speech of parliamentarians, or be worried about a dharna or two in Parliament. Particularly as the prime minister loses no opportunity to emphasise India’s democratic credentials in world capitals. It is even more curious at a time when the Opposition is weakening.

As for the Opposition, the disarray in its ranks has been growing, evident even in the way it handled the presidential contest. Nobody expected Yashwant Sinha to win, only to present a dignified counter narrative. After all, in the past too, the Opposition fielded candidates who had no chance to win — Lakshmi Sahgal against APJ Abdul Kalam in 2002, or PA Sangma in 2012 against Pranab Mukherjee.

Having projected Sinha as the candidate of the Opposition, Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena and Hemant Soren’s JMM have decided to support Murmu. Mamata Banerjee, who had proposed Sinha’s name for rashtrapati, found herself in a difficult situation, and had to ask Sinha not to come to West Bengal to campaign. Given this state of affairs, few will want to stand as candidates of the unified Opposition against the BJP, for any post.

Undoubtedly, the BJP caught the Opposition on the wrong foot by fielding Murmu. It hopes to augment the support of tribals in states in the Hindi heartland and west India where there’s a concentration of these groups, and it may have to offset disaffection after being in power for 10 years. Its stakes are the highest in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Orissa and West Bengal in the run-up to 2024. It may also hope that Murmu, being a Santhal — the group has sizeable numbers in West Bengal, Orissa and Jharkhand — may help it breach the support base of its opponents in these states.

While the BJP knew what it was doing by projecting Murmu, the Opposition did not think through its political messaging with its candidate.

The Opposition will try to raise the issues agitating it to corner the government in the forthcoming session of Parliament — Agnipath, price rise, intrusions by China, the latest move to regulate digital media, among others —provided the din does not drown out debate.

Events of the last few days have shown that an already assertive BJP has decided to become even more aggressive in taking on the Opposition, which is anyway weakening — addressing an event in the Rajasthan assembly on Saturday, Chief Justice of India NV Ramana has also pointed to the “diminishing” space of the Opposition. That space may become smaller still, both within Parliament and outside it.

That is neither good for the ruling party, or for the Opposition, or the country.

The writer is a senior journalist.