Indira Gandhi’s decision to impose Emergency in June 26, 1975 is a glaring stain on the canvas of India’s democratic history. This imposition was a brazen assault on the democratic foundations of India. The Emergency period, marked by a suspension of civil liberties, censorship, and a ruthless crackdown on political dissent which represents a betrayal of the very principles that our democracy is built upon.
Emergency in India was a 21-month period from 1975 to 1977 when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi declared state of emergency across the country. One of the most egregious aspects of the Emergency was the systematic erosion of fundamental rights. The suspension of habeas corpus allowed for arbitrary arrests and detentions, stripped citizens of their basic right to personal liberty. The chilling effect of censorship on the media further curtailed the free exchange of ideas which turned the press into a mere mouthpiece for the government’s narrative.
Indira Gandhi’s decision to suspend fundamental rights and curtail civil liberties during Emergency undermined the very essence of democracy. The arrest of political opponents, suppression of dissent, and muzzling of the press created an environment where voices critical of the government were stifled. The Emergency was declared without warning on the midnight of 25 June and the country woke up to the death of democracy. A national emergency was being declared in India for the third time, the first two times were during the wars with China and Pakistan in 1962 and 1971 respectively.
The verdict by the Allahabad High Court, which declared Indira Gandhi guilty of electoral malpractices during the 1971 Lok Sabha elections, serves as a poignant reminder of the subversion of democratic norms during the Emergency period. This decision unveils a chapter in Indian history where the highest echelons of power were willing to manipulate the democratic process to serve their political interests.
The long-term consequences of the Emergency are deeply ingrained in the collective memory of the nation. It created a culture of fear and self-censorship, where citizens were hesitant to voice their opinions for fear of reprisals. The scars of this authoritarian episode continue to impact India’s democratic fabric, which reminds us of the fragility of our institutions when faced with unchecked power.
When things were heating up for the government, Gandhi declared emergency and immediately arrested all major opposition leaders including JP, Morarji Desai, Charan Singh, Acharya Kripalani, etc. Even Congress leaders who were opposed to the emergency were arrested. During the emergency, civil liberties were severely restrained. The freedom of the press was strictly curtailed and anything published had to pass the Information and Broadcasting ministry. Indira Gandhi’s son Sanjay Gandhi wielded extra-constitutional powers. He conducted forceful mass sterilization of people in a bid to control the population of the country. Non-Congress state governments were sacked. Many slums in Delhi were destroyed. There were many instances of human rights violations in India. Curfews were imposed and the police detained people without trial.
The abuse of power during Emergency is a glaring example of the concentration of authority in the hands of the executive. The Prime Minister’s move to suppress political opposition through the misuse of legal provisions and state machinery raises questions about the checks and balances in the democratic system. However, Emergency was a calculated move by Indira Gandhi to protect her own power and position.
The imposition of Emergency witnessed widespread human rights violations, including arbitrary arrests, torture, and censorship. The suspension of habeas corpus allowed for prolonged detentions without trial, reflects a disregard for the principles of justice and fairness. The Emergency was a period of terror and repression for the people of India, who had to endure the atrocities of the state machinery and the whims of the ruling party.
According to various estimates, more than 100,000 people were arrested during the Emergency, many of them without any charges or evidence. The detainees were subjected to torture, humiliation, and coercion by the police and the intelligence agencies. Many of them were forced to sign false confessions or implicate others. Some of them died in custody or committed suicide. The most prominent among the detainees were the leaders and activists of the opposition parties, the student movements, the trade unions, the civil rights groups, and the journalists. Some of the notable figures who were arrested during the Emergency were Atal Bihari Vajpayee, L. K. Advani, George Fernandes, Nanaji Deshmukh, Ramnath Goenka, Kuldip Nayar, Arun Shourie, etc.
The Emergency also saw a massive campaign of forced sterilization, which was aimed at controlling the population growth and reducing poverty. The campaign was spearheaded by Sanjay Gandhi, who had no official position in the government but wielded enormous power and influence. He set unrealistic targets and incentives for the officials and the workers involved in the sterilization drive. He also used coercion and intimidation to force people, especially the poor and the marginalized, to undergo sterilization. Many people were lured, bribed, threatened, or kidnapped to the sterilization camps, where they were operated upon without proper medical care or consent. Some of them suffered from infections, complications, or death. The campaign also violated the religious and cultural sensibilities of many communities, who saw sterilization as a sin or a taboo. The campaign sparked widespread resentment and anger among the people, who resisted and protested against the forced sterilization.
The Emergency also imposed severe restrictions on the freedom of expression and information. The press was censored and anything published had to pass the scrutiny of the Information and Broadcasting ministry. The government issued a series of guidelines and directives to the media, which prohibited any criticism of the government or the prime minister, any report of the opposition activities or the public discontent, any mention of the arrests or the human rights violations, and any discussion of the controversial issues such as the sterilization campaign or the constitutional amendments. The government also banned or confiscated many newspapers, magazines, and books that did not comply with the censorship rules. Many journalists and writers were arrested, harassed, or blacklisted. The government also controlled the radio and the television, which broadcast only the official propaganda and the praises of the prime minister and her son. The censorship and the propaganda created a climate of fear and misinformation, where the people were deprived of their right to know and express the truth.
The government also appointed its loyalists and cronies to the key positions in the media organizations, such as the Press Trust of India (PTI), the United News of India (UNI), the All India Radio (AIR), and the Doordarshan (DD). The government also manipulated the advertisements and the subsidies to reward or punish the media outlets and also infiltrated the media with its agents and informers, who monitored and reported the activities and the views of the journalists and the editors.
The media became a mouthpiece of the government and a tool of the propaganda and lost its independence , integrity and failed to perform its role as a watchdog and a public educator.
Indira Gandhi’s strategy of suppressing political opposition by invoking Emergency powers raises questions about the democratic principles she purportedly championed. The use of emergency provisions to eliminate rivals rather than addressing legitimate concerns through democratic dialogue is a blot on India’s democratic legacy. This whole period was a period of political repression and authoritarianism, where the opposition parties and the movements were crushed and the dissenting voices were silenced.
The suppression of opposition during Emergency was systematic and ruthless. The government also banned or dissolved many opposition parties and organizations, such as the Janata Party, the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the Akali Dal, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, etc. The government disrupted and disbanded many opposition rallies and also denied the opposition any access to the media or the public opinion.
Imposing Emergency, however, was not the only option available to Indira Gandhi in the face of political challenges. Instead of resorting to such extreme measures, she could have pursued constructive dialogue and reconciliation with opposition parties. Engaging in a transparent and open political discourse would have allowed for the resolution of differences through democratic means.
In hindsight, the imposition of Emergency was not only an unnecessary and disproportionate response but a betrayal of the trust placed in a democratic leader. The scars left by this authoritarian episode compel us to remain vigilant, ensure that such undemocratic actions find no place in the future of India’s vibrant democratic landscape.
Author is Professor and the Chairman, Centre for Narendra Modi Studies, Bharat. He can be mailed at profjasimmd@gmail.com
Discussion about this post