Apart from all the other ills which are set in the grand old party including the desperation to place dynasty before democracy, is the strange structure of the party. The party, in its very inner and the most powerful parts, is too lawyer-heavy. The problem seems much similar to AAP which is too media heavy. Journalists who found a powerful retirement job option with the lateral movement into politics under the stormy weathers of Anti-corruption movement, seemingly keep advising Arvind Kejriwal that the answer to all his democratic and administrative failures is media management.
In almost a similar manner, all the political moves of Congress seem to be driven by the advice of the lawyers who are part of their topmost decision-making body, almost like the Consigliere in the famous Italian mafias. From Deepavali cracker ban pushed by Abhishek Manu Singhvi to Hadiya and Rohingya cases represented by Kapil Sibal to the most brazen case of failed attempt of trying to impeach the Chief Justice of India on not getting a favourable judgment in Justice Loya case.
Any party which loses the favour of the electorate after elections ought to go to the grassroots, work grounds up with sincere efforts and come back as a better option than the party in power. Congress, however, is so used to being in power that it is unable to bear the distance at which it is currently sitting from the power.
The family consuls keep on advising the family and Rahul Gandhi, anointed president of the Government, that they can somehow get the grand old party back in power without having to work the long haul, via the Judiciary. This not only explains the manoeuvres of the Congress, it also explains their desperation to interfere in the functioning of the Judiciary at the advice of the Lawyer-leaders of the Congress. Ever since Congress has been out of power, rather while they were in power itself, they discovered the magic of judicial adventurism, as PILs were filed against them on corruption cases, and then the family lawyers went about defending them.
There seem to have been strange design which has been working through the set of family lawyers, who went about representing PFI sponsored cases, fight for illegal Rohingya migrants, fight against Ram Temple which is the raw nerve to the majority population of India, and most recently the Justice Loya case, which has been thrown out. Whether or not they had a position to take on the matter as a political party, whether or not they had a chance to win the case as in Justice Loya case or the case of Impeachment, they would approach the courts merely because for a while people would believe that when one goes to the court, one must have some truth on their side.
With a free bunch of ever-enthusiast party lawyers, the objective of Congress reaching the courts from Kanhaiya Kumar to Junaid had less to do with the truth, and more to do with the possibility of propaganda. The more than helpful media was of much help there. The media fell in line, amplifying and providing a sense of some sort of rationality to the reckless judicial politics of the Congress, as Congress coming back to the power gave them some hope of returning to their own good old days as power brokers in the national political structures.
Media played its role in this attempt of Congress to somehow usurp the power, through some apolitical mechanization. When was last we saw media running a campaign in the name of an unfortunate murder of Junaid, positioning it as a murder on account of Beef, irrespective of the fact that the whole story was later junked by the courts? This fell in line with the carefully crafted narrative of BJP being a Hindu party and cow protection (under the directive principle of Constitution of India). They amplify and provide background meeting of Save democracy and Save Constitution, raised by the party responsible for the darkest days of our democracy the Emergency.
Of late, we find that every political debacle of the Congress being responded by one legal case or another. The lawyer-heavy party has forgotten that in democracy, power is derived from the people. If you go against the people’s mandate, even with the backing of Courts or media, you are circumventing the democracy.
Rahul Gandhi’s problem is extreme derision with which he views the democracy. This was visible when he declared himself to be ready to be the Prime Minister of the country, and even brazenly justifying it on the basis of his dynastic rights. He is not able to handle defeat. A good leader should be able to create victories and handle defeat. He is not able to do either.
It is also shameful that he thinks it is acceptable to lie blatantly. When the president of the opposing party has been exonerated by the courts, he continues to refer to him in electoral campaigns as a murderer. He talks about politics of love, but never hesitates in using the worst of the words for his political adversaries.
He has some absolute fantastical faith in his right to rule this nation and is not able to bear not being able to win the trust of the people. He is confounded by the fact that people do not trust him, while he does nothing to win their trust. BJP too has been out of power but never did this kind of nonsense like threatening riots, filing court cases, etc.
We find this again in the case of Karnataka where even after huge media hype hailing Siddaramaih as some sort of unbeatable satrap, Congress faced their humiliating defeat. Both of Congress soldiers came out all guns blazing, calling the Governor, a constitutional post, in worst possible manner. I won’t be surprised, if he someday, at the advice of his learned Consigliere even approach the courts seeking punishment for the people who refuse to believe in his lies and vote him to power.
A technology worker, writer and poet, and a concerned Indian. Saket writes in Hindi and English. He writes on socio-political matters and routinely writes Hindi satire in print as well in leading newspaper like Jagaran. His recently published Hindi satire collection “Ganjhon Ki Goshthi” is on amazon and getting excellent reception and readership.