Is the Bell Tolling for the Republic?

The brazen ham-handedness with which the midnight coup was executed in the CBI headquarters, has now almost become a style of high functionaries of the government. That should not, therefore, come as a surprise. The impropriety and illegality of the action have been ably exposed by political commentators and legal and constitutional experts. The latter aspects will soon be held to scrutiny by the highest level of the judiciary.

What is far more serious is the uniqueness of the action in a fundamentally political sense. And its unprecedentedly toxic potential for the fate of the Republic.

Also Watch: Spy vs. Spy: Institutional Collapse of CBI

Even the heavy hammer with which the press was silenced on June 25, 1975 (when the Emergency was declared) appears a pale shadow in retrospect.

For the first time, we are witnessing a change of regime within a crucial wing of the armed establishment of the government – the CBI – through an uninhibited show of force, the legal and constitutional validity of which is obviously open to question. What makes the matter far more serious is the fact that the armed wing in question has, over the years, acquired an increasingly greater role as an instrument for exercise of force by the extant civilian authority in predominantly civilian affairs.

Bias, politicisation and venality, supposedly conspicuous by their absence in this premier investigating agency, were suspected to be infecting this agency too in the recent years. While this was disturbing enough, it was hoped that legal, administrative and constitutional safeguards being introduced, combined with a degree of robustness, integrity and professionalism present in the organisation at all levels, would steer it through turbulent times and help it ensure a pride of place in the governance of our Republic.

Also Read:CBI Director Alok Verma’s Ouster: Modi Government’s Action is of Dubious Legality

But the midnight coup directed and executed by no less than the top brass of national security raises deep apprehension.

Rivalries and feuds are not uncommon in any administrative set-up, including the wing which is in uniform and is armed. Such dissonance at the top levels is expected to be sorted out by the high-level political authority which is supposed to have maturity and wisdom and is expected to command respect such that all organs of the administration could be yoked harmoniously in the interest of the Republic and the values it proclaims and defends. This is political practice of the highest order. It cannot be minimised or degraded to be substituted by a security operation, albeit designed and executed by the top brass of national security. The former is the core of democratic practice. The latter has the seed of a sombre challenge to the essence of the Republic.

The challenge assumes serious proportions when such security operation prima facie seems to have been undertaken to defang one section of the armed wing of administration. Imagine the consequences if factional loyalties in the uniformed and armed wings of the administration are exacerbated by such action to a level where the unity and integrity of such a force comes under a question mark.

All actions of a similar nature in the past, including those during the notorious Emergency of 1975, stopped short of such toxic potential. They were bad enough in muzzling the press, in promoting personality cult and in emasculating constitutional rights and freedoms. But they were sought to be covered by the fig-leaf of the proclamation of internal Emergency and were ultimately allowed to be tested by a virtual referendum-type general election. And the Republic survived.

The qualitative difference in the tendency exhibited by the extraordinary episode in question, raises doubts and questions that have a bearing on the fundamentals of the Republic. Emasculation and politicisation of institutions are bad enough for debilitating democracy. But seeking to suppress a feud in an armed wing of administration almost in a cavalier fashion, and with a show of force inherent in a security operation, rings an alarm, loud and clear, to the entire civil society. And in particular, it sends a menacing message to Civil Constitutional Authorities. If an armed wing can be handled by means of a security operation and divested of its constitutional capability, what chance will other civilian state organs have, howsoever high they may be in the Constitutional Scheme, to cherish, preserve and practice the role expected of them under the Constitution of the Republic?