From secular to muscular

 What is being witnessed across India in the post-2014 period is undeniably a determined pursuit to effect drastic changes by firstly dismantling the democratic tradition of a liberal and secular constitution which has, for 70 years, despite many shortcomings, provided a sense of belonging and security among the culturally, historically and religiously diverse people speaking over 100 main languages and over 1000 other regional languages. These changes are being done either through constitutional amendments or simply by brushing aside opposition with brute majority.With absolute majority in 2014 and then a huge and brute majority in 2019, the lower house resonates with the power of political muscle. True, in democracy,numbers count in government formation or house votes but as per tradition, even the voice of the smallest should be heard in the sanctum sanctorum of the people. In recent times, demands from opposition members for discussions on crucial matters are eitherdismissed outright or disallowed under whatever reasons. Recently, both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha witnessed the opposition parties raising slogans in frustration as their demands for discussion on the recent Delhi riots was rejected. The Delhi violence took place during US president Donald Trump’s official visit (February 24-25,2020) to India. Many countries condemned the violence. Nearly 50 were killed and over 200 injured besides unaccountable numbers of properties destroyed. Parliament reconvened on March 2 after being in recess. From day one, the opposition demanded discussion on the Delhi riots but Lok Sabha speaker Om Birla refused and set the date for discussion on March 11 after Holi festival. Without further ado, the house then took up the government bill ‘Vivaad Se Vishwas’. The opposition was livid as the ruling members bypassed them and began discussions about the bill. In the Rajya Sabha, House Chairman M. Venkaiah Naidu also refused to take up the issue of Delhi riots. “Let total peace be restored… Let us wait and see that the system works effectively and then normalcy is brought in, particularly in Delhi, in view of what has happened,” he told members. Ignoring protests, Naidu then began to give a detailed account of the performance of legislators in various Parliamentary committees. The government’s response in parliament was nothing short of derailing a constitutional obligation and was viewed suspicionthat the violence unleashed against anti-CAA protestors was orchestrated or planned. What also added to the suspicion was the refusal of the Delhi Police to file FIRs against three BJP leaders for hate speeches that were incitement of hatred and violence. In the Delhi High court, Justice S. Murlidhara slammed Delhi Police and asked why it did not file FIRs and ordered it to do so that the next day. The union government’s Solicitor General Tushar Mehta gave a bizarre response by telling the court that Delhi Police has so far not lodged any FIR against BJP leaders, as such would not help in restoring peace and normalcy. However legal experts have challenged this hypothesis by reminding that according to the law, there is no ‘right time’ to file an FIR. However most tragically for India,these arenot isolated incidents but a mockery on democracy and an aberrationon the principles of justice and human rights which are symptoms of an India undergoing a process of change from secular to muscular democracy.