akrishnarao

INDIA GATE

  • The Uncontainable Anger of India’s Disillusioned Youth

    “A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history,” said Mahatma Gandhi. India now seems to be moving toward an indefinable change. The siege of Parliament on the first day of the Monsoon Session in the national capital on Monday by activists of the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP)—who have been protesting for a month demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, holding him responsible for the NEET question paper leak—must be called a monumental development in recent times. Despite setting up four-tier barricades, deploying large-scale forces of the Rapid Action Force, CRPF, Delhi, and Tripura Police, closing metro stations, and shutting down the internet, the Cockroach army, thousands strong, charged up to the gates of Parliament. Even as the police beat them severely, the young men and women displayed sheer daring. The young people lying with injuries at Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital are direct witnesses to Monday’s brutality.

    It is clear that the Modi government, which remained unmoved despite a decade of attacks and criticism from the opposition, has been put on the defensive by this incident of the cockroach rebellion. A BJP MP said that it is not important how many people participated in the movement launched by the Cockroach Party, but how much impact it had. “My father is a very important leader in the BJP. However, the unfolding developments are not very healthy…” said a youth who participated in the Jantar Mantar protest. “Where politicians fail, children will question,” said a student.

    In reality, the Cockroach Janata Party is not an organization. It is a crowd of directionless young men and women in the country’s contemporary history. Those who came to the protest at Jantar Mantar or participated in the procession did not come because someone paid them. No one arranged buses or trains for their arrival. The discussion happening merely on social media made them set out for Delhi. They did not come raging only over the NEET question paper leak. The young men and women who came were simply fed up with the problems faced by youth—especially unemployment, meager salaries, systemic flaws, and the machinations of political parties. Those who came to the Jantar Mantar protest site did not have a specific goal. Youth aged between 14–28 cannot be fitted into the mold of Left or Right ideologies. The Emergency is not part of their experience. They do not know about Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan, who once united the opposition. They lack even the experience of the Mandal and Kamandal movements. They have no memories of events that happened three decades ago. Struggling with contemporary issues, unable to decide what to do, with an uncertain future, and arriving with various questions… they are not bound by any traditional rules. Over the past four weeks, this protest platform served as a space where they asked their own questions and provided their own answers. That protest was widely publicized on social media. Examining alternative media sources makes one understand how concerned the youth were about the health condition of environmental activist Sonam Wangchuk, who has been on a hunger strike for more than three weeks.

    Believing that the opposition lacked credibility, that there was no alternative to them, and that whatever they did would pass, the Modi government seems to have underestimated the emergence of the Cockroach Janata Party. The Modi government was easily able to deal with the long-drawn protests by farmers over farm laws and Muslims over the Citizenship Amendment Act. It did not listen even to the cries of female wrestlers who questioned the assaults committed against them. Whichever movement occurred in the country, it adopted various means to damage its credibility. It berated the protesters with various names. The Modi government thought it would be enough to treat the surge of youth protest as a law-and-order issue and suppress it. As the Cockroach Party protest was reaching its peak, Delhi Police Commissioner Satish Golcha was removed and replaced by Anurag Kumar, who until then served as Special Director (Intelligence). As the in-charge of the Jammu & Kashmir desk, he played a key role in dismantling terrorist activities in Kashmir. There is no surprise in such a person attempting to suppress the youth protest with the same mindset.

    During the UPA government’s tenure as well, young men and women flooded the streets against the Nirbhaya rape incident. However, back then, social media was not as influential as it is now. There is no doubt that social media today has become an alternative media for the public. In fact, when Modi came to power, the BJP IT Cell carried out various campaigns to mobilize people, especially to inflame the emotions of Hindus. In particular, it made extensive use of WhatsApp groups. Today, those IT Cell campaigns seem to fade before the social media in the hands of the Gen Z generation. This development proves that if any campaign is not aligned with the sentiments of the people, it will not last long.

    The current generation has not failed to notice that the promises with which Modi came before the people have vanished into the background, and emotional issues have become the main agenda. Leave aside the failure to create jobs; they are closely observing the inability to conduct even exams properly, the failure to provide quality education, and the resorting to numerous machinations and unrighteous wars solely for the sake of power. Nevertheless, there is no evidence to say that the current generation is placing the opposition, especially the Congress, on a pedestal. It is an undeniable fact that for a decade, the Congress and other parties have failed to ignite public anger against Modi. However, no one expected that youth would step up where the opposition failed. If the Congress party had acted as a strong opposition and reflected the aspirations of the youth, the Cockroach Janata Party would not have emerged. It is an interesting point that many forces that failed to confront Modi are now visible in the Cockroach army.

    Strangely, on the first day of Parliament’s Monsoon Session, people did not care about the bills the government intended to introduce or the issues the opposition wanted to raise. The ‘Chalo Sansad’ call given by the Cockroach Janata Party received immense publicity. In a way, this development questioned not only the existence of the government but also the existence of the opposition. Congress leaders, who had been silent all this while on the Cockroach Janata Party protest, making a hue and cry about the lathi charge on the youth, or Rahul Gandhi protesting in front of the Prime Minister’s residence, are all part of Congress trying to prove its own existence. Time alone will tell whether Congress will resurrect itself as a strong opposition learning from the experience of the Cockroach Janata Party. Even for Modi, it is fortunate for the opposition to exist at least to some extent. Otherwise, there are chances of more entities like the Cockroach Janata Party being born.

    Moral responsibility has become an unacceptable taboo in present times. Today, there are no leaders like NTR, who made the entire cabinet resign because the budget was leaked, nor are there ministers who take responsibility and resign for train and plane accidents. When Dharmendra Pradhan is constantly utilized to win elections for the party, how can he focus on his ministerial responsibilities? It is true that Dharmendra Pradhan, who efficiently strategized for the BJP’s victories in Bihar, Haryana, and Bengal, did not manage his ministry efficiently. However, that mistake is not entirely his. Treating their party’s victory in elections as a matter of life and death and diverting all energy and skill in that direction is the cause of the failure of leaders like Dharmendra Pradhan. Will the Modi government act with sincerity at least now to take responsibility for the mistakes committed and build public trust in system institutions?

  • Is India’s Judiciary Losing Its Autonomy?

    Supreme Court of India building with dome and scales of justice statue
    The Supreme Court of India building with a prominent scales of justice statue in front

    A boy died when a tanker hit him from behind while a father was taking his five-year-old son to school. That road had neither a footpath nor crossing markings to cross the road. Such incidents keep happening in large numbers in the country, but the apex court responded to this tragic incident in a rare manner. Supreme Court Judge Justice P.S. Narasimha issued directions that walking should be recognized as a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(d) and Article 21. He said that roads should be constructed not just for vehicles but in a manner suitable for pedestrians. He also reminded that walking has cultural, religious, political, and social value in India. Justice Narasimha cited historical events like the Dandi March and the Bhoodan Movement.

    A study has revealed that in this country, where walking itself has turned into a conflict, an average of 36,500 pedestrians die every year due to the lack of proper footpaths and crossings. These incidents are occurring because 80 percent of urban roads lack safe and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure. In metro cities, 44 percent of roads do not have footpaths at all. Most of the existing footpaths do not comply with the regulations laid down by the Indian Roads Congress. To what extent are the government leaders—who talk about Viksit Bharat, a trillion-dollar economy, and global cities—aware of the plight of pedestrians in the country?

    On this occasion, Justice Narasimha questioned the failure to make laws in accordance with the fundamental rights of the people. He clarified that when the Motor Vehicles Act was made, the fundamental right of walking people was not recognized, and it appears as if this Act was made solely for vehicles. After Justice P.S. Narasimha, the second Telugu person who is set to become the Chief Justice next year, gave a judgment to recognize walking as a fundamental right, there has been an overwhelming response from the public. Reports are emerging about the lack of footpaths in many cities. The Supreme Court Bar Association responded positively to another judgment given by Justice Narasimha, stating that advocates should first know about the Rule of Law, independent stance, and standards, and build credibility. As suggested by Justice Narasimha, it has come forward to establish a National Legal Academy for advocates. Many also welcomed the judgment given by Justice Narasimha stating that merely chanting shlokas like ‘Guru Brahma, Guru Vishnu, Guru Devo Maheshwara’ is not primary, proper salaries must be given to those teachers, and ordered that the minimum wage scale be applied to teachers in Gujarat educational institutions. In the name of the Green Energy Corridor, he prevented any threat to the Great Indian Bustard birds in Rajasthan and Gujarat.

    Like pleasant raindrops in the scorching summer, we cannot ignore some good judgments given occasionally not only by Justice Narasimha, but also by Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Nagarathna, Justice Viswanathan, and others. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Surya Kant, stayed a judgment that allowed the demolition of the Aravalli hills if they exceeded a height of one hundred meters, following concerns raised by environmentalists. Although several notable judgments are coming from the Supreme Court on and off, the debate on whether the judiciary is functioning independently continues unabated.

    The fact that the role of the apex court in the country is becoming controversial day by day is becoming a topic of discussion. Even former judges and senior advocates are commenting that the Supreme Court is losing its identity, acting as if it is under someone’s control, and ignoring fundamental rights. Before the country could forget the incident where a shoe was hurled at the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, a petitioner made obscene remarks against the CJI in full court last week. There are those who describe such incidents as signs of growing frustration and despair toward the apex court. On the other hand, in light of the incident where a huge amount of cash was found at the residence of Delhi High Court Judge Justice Yashwant Varma, Parliament is preparing to introduce an impeachment motion against him. Why would the government let go of an opportunity to put the judiciary on the defensive?

    Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Justice Surya Kant himself expressed the view at a conference held in Stockholm that the independence of the judiciary is essential to preserve constitutional values and prevent the abuse of power. He cited cases such as Kesavananda Bharati, which protected fundamental rights, and S.R. Bommai, which protected the federal spirit. These judgments have entered the pages of history. In the past, the Supreme Court intervened multiple times to ensure that investigative agencies like the CBI and ED function freely, smoothly, and without any external pressure. So, how many such wonderful judgments have come from the Supreme Court in the last few years?

    There is no dearth of instances where good judgments have come from some High Courts as well in recent times. Justice Madhav J. Jamdar of the Bombay High Court questioned whether externment (exile from the city) can be imposed for raising slogans against the government. He declared that people are not slaves to the government, and it is their right to protest and raise slogans opposing government decisions. Justice Madhav clarified that the police are servants to the people, not to the government. Questioning the blocking of the ‘Cockroach Janata Party’ X account, the Delhi High Court ordered that the ban on that account be lifted. The Madras High Court commented, “Judges are not holy cows, there are corrupt people among them too.” It responded in this manner to a petition filed seeking a ban on a movie that depicted a judge engaging in corruption. Ironically, because it was mentioned in the NCERT textbook that corruption exists in the judiciary, the Supreme Court opened its third eye and had that paragraph changed. The details previously mentioned regarding thousands of cases pending in courts were also removed in the new chapter. The textbook stated that the judiciary functions independently, beyond the executive and the legislature. Is that really happening?

    According to the World Justice Project report, India ranks 86th in terms of the Rule of Law. According to that report, prepared by an independent organization based in the US, the Rule of Law is not that great even in the US, finding that it ranks 36th in that regard. A report by the V-Dem Institute in Sweden stated that one-fourth of the countries in the world are sliding into autocracy, and America and India are also among them. The report noted that America lost its recognition as a liberal democratic country for the first time after fifty years. It revealed that systems are systematically collapsing in India. It goes without saying that if governments become autocratic, its impact will be directly felt on the systems.

    Sitting judges like Justice Narasimha, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, Justice Nagarathna, Justice Dipankar Datta, and others have been repeatedly warning about the independent status of the judiciary and the pressures coming from external forces. Present judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said that the biggest threat to the independence of the courts comes from the courts themselves… Justice Dipankar Datta said that it is not enough to say the Election Commission is independent, it must appear to be operating independently. Among former judges as well, there are those who are expressing grief over the current situation. Justice Kurian expressed concern that the federal system is in danger. While Justice Madan Lokur said that thousands of people are languishing in jails without trial, Justice Deepak Gupta criticized that the Supreme Court is acting slowly in the matter of protecting fundamental rights.

    Senior advocates are also expressing similar opinions. Former President of the Supreme Court Bar Association Dushyant Dave said that the judiciary is unable to protect the people from the excesses of the government. He alleged that the leadership of the Supreme Court has failed the country and the judiciary over the last few years. Kapil Sibal, Prashant Bhushan, Indira Jaising, Sanjay Hegde, and others also frequently highlight the plight of the judicial system. In this country, it appears that governments are suffering from more insecurity and experiencing more intolerance than the people. There is no exaggeration in saying that disastrous consequences occur precisely when governments, which ought to focus on governance, project their intolerance and sense of insecurity onto the people and systems.

  • India at a Political Crossroads

    “Be extremely cautious while speaking about the theft of money from the donation boxes (hundis) at the Ram Temple in Ayodhya. This incident has hurt the entire Hindu community and the BJP. It happened because of a few wrong individuals. The government will not spare the culprits,” BJP National President Nitin Nabin said two days ago at a meeting of key party leaders in Uttar Pradesh. His remarks themselves reveal how deeply the incident has shaken the BJP.

    In fact, the thefts in Ayodhya came to light just as Prime Minister Narendra Modi was preparing for a major reshuffle in both the BJP organization and the Union government, including appointments of office-bearers and changes in the Cabinet. Before the upcoming Parliament session, Modi had intended to give both the party and the government a fresh shape. Several rounds of high-level discussions had already taken place.

    The very fact that the Prime Minister was planning a large-scale Cabinet reshuffle suggests that he was not fully satisfied with the performance of several ministries. He held lengthy review meetings with Cabinet ministers and Ministers of State, both individually and collectively, signaling that changes were inevitable. Reports suggesting that key ministers—including the Finance Minister and the Education Minister—might be shifted indicate dissatisfaction with the functioning of their departments.

    It is also noteworthy that Morning Consult, which has consistently reported rising approval ratings for the Prime Minister, has now indicated a decline from around 75–78% to 68–70%. It is therefore understandable that Modi would want to proceed cautiously. However, whether because he felt the timing was not right or due to internal challenges, the proposed reshuffle now appears to have been postponed. According to official sources, several ministers who feared removal have, for the time being, breathed a sigh of relief.

    Ayodhya is not the only issue. One controversy after another continues to emerge across the country.

    A dispute has arisen over the University Grants Commission’s equity regulations. The prestigious NEET-UG medical entrance examination has been rocked by allegations of irregularities and repeated paper leaks. Supporting protesting students, a prominent educationist and environmental activist from Ladakh has been on a hunger strike at Jantar Mantar for the past eight days.

    The government’s E20 ethanol blending policy has also come under severe criticism. Opponents argue that the policy threatens food security and allege that certain ministers have vested interests influencing policy decisions.

    Meanwhile, the ₹90,000-crore Great Nicobar Mega Infrastructure Project in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands has become the subject of intense controversy between the Centre, environmentalists, and opposition parties. Critics claim that the project would require cutting down nearly 15 million rare rainforest trees, damage fragile coral reefs and marine ecosystems, and threaten the survival of indigenous tribal communities. Against this backdrop, the recent removal of several officials from the Union Environment Ministry has also attracted considerable attention.

    The opposition is likely to use all these issues to create disruptions during the upcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament. But the question is: where is the opposition?

    Major constituents of the INDIA alliance—including the Trinamool Congress, Shiv Sena, and Aam Aadmi Party—have been weakened by large-scale defections, raising concerns about their political survival. In Tamil Nadu, after Congress aligned with TVK, the DMK has reportedly distanced itself from Congress. Sharad Pawar’s NCP is also facing an internal crisis. The Jharkhand Mukti Morcha’s position has become uncertain after it supported the BJP-backed independent candidate in recent Rajya Sabha elections. The Aam Aadmi Party has already declared that it is no longer part of the INDIA alliance.

    In these circumstances, even if Congress and a few other parties manage to disrupt Parliament for a day or two, the BJP may face little resistance in advancing its legislative agenda afterward.

    Against this backdrop, the weakening of the opposition ahead of the Monsoon Session and the changing composition of Parliament represent significant developments in Indian politics.

    Even more important is the government’s reported intention to reintroduce the 130th and 131st Constitutional Amendment Bills. The opposition had successfully blocked these bills in April and again during a subsequent special session. But the situation is different now.

    If these two bills are passed, they are expected to bring significant changes to India’s political and constitutional framework. Alongside the Constitutional Amendment Bill providing women’s reservation, the government is also preparing to secure the required two-thirds majority for a delimitation bill.

    If passed, the delimitation exercise would proceed based on the previous Census rather than waiting for the ongoing Census. The bill may also specify the exact increase in the number of parliamentary seats. Furthermore, many observers believe that the Delimitation Commission constituted by the government could redraw constituency boundaries in ways that benefit the ruling BJP.

    The proposed 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill is equally significant. It would reportedly provide for the immediate removal of a Prime Minister, Chief Minister, Union Minister, or State Minister from office if they are arrested in a serious criminal case and remain in jail for 30 days. Many believe this provision is primarily aimed at opposition chief ministers and ministers.

    If the government succeeds in establishing dominance in Parliament and securing passage of these constitutional amendment bills during the Monsoon Session, there may be few obstacles left to passing other major legislation. Most notably, it would pave the way for legislation enabling simultaneous elections under the “One Nation, One Election” proposal.

    BJP chief ministers across the country have already declared their readiness for simultaneous elections. Party strategists reportedly believe that implementing women’s reservation alongside simultaneous elections would significantly strengthen the BJP’s prospects of returning to power once again.

    If that happens, it would mark a major transformation in Indian democracy. BJP circles also reportedly view this as an opportunity to postpone the Assembly elections due in Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, and Rajasthan in 2028 until the next general election.

    This raises an important question: what will elections look like by 2029?

    The Congress does not appear to be taking seriously the possibility that the BJP could further consolidate its dominance in Parliament as several regional parties split or decline. Congress leaders seem to believe that if regional parties disappear, Congress itself will fill the vacuum.

    If that were to happen, India could gradually evolve into a two-party system. Whether the BJP or Congress, other parties could steadily weaken. Is such a development healthy for democracy? Would regional aspirations lose their place in Indian politics? These are questions that deserve discussion.

    The decline of Odia, Bengali, and Dravidian regional identity politics in electoral politics has contributed to these concerns. At the same time, another question must also be asked: have regional parties genuinely safeguarded regional aspirations? Or have parties willing to compromise anything for the survival of their leaders lost their credibility in the eyes of the people?

    It should not be forgotten that India has always functioned as a pluralistic democracy. Even when the Congress was the dominant political force, it was never the only one. During Jawaharlal Nehru’s tenure as Prime Minister, Congress won 364 seats with about 46% of the vote, but opposition parties together secured 54% of the vote and won 125 seats. They represented a wide variety of social groups.

    From the second general election onward, the number of regional parties steadily increased. Even Congress recognizes that this happened largely because of its own arrogance and overconfidence during its years of dominance. As a result, Dravidian parties, socialist parties, and various regional and identity-based political movements emerged, becoming symbols of India’s diversity.

    At one stage, coalition governments at the national level appeared to be the country’s permanent political reality. Leaders like Atal Bihari Vajpayee viewed regional aspirations as an essential expression of India’s pluralism and federal spirit.

    Today, however, history appears to be moving in the opposite direction.

    Whether this trend is dangerous or healthy is not the central question. More troubling is the fact that the number of voices willing to ask difficult questions is steadily diminishing.

  • Betraying Ram’s Path

    On the night before the demolition of the Babri Masjid structure on December 6, 1992, I met Rama Shankar Agnihotri in Ayodhya, a senior RSS member, journalist, and someone who oversaw media affairs during the Ram Janmabhoomi movement. Sitting right next to him, Vinay Katiyar, the MP of Faizabad (Ayodhya), gave me information about the Karseva. As the founding president of the Bajrang Dal, he was one of those who intensified the Ram Janmabhoomi movement. Without leaders like Ashok Singhal, Vinay Katiyar, Kalyan Singh, Mahant Vaidyanath—the guru of UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath—Uma Bharti, and Sadhvi Rithambhara, there would be no Ram Janmabhoomi movement at all. Advani, who went among the people in the name of the Ram Rath Yatra, gave a political shape to this movement, but the forces that actually organized the movement, like the VHP and Bajrang Dal, were different. Vinay Katiyar, who won three times from Ayodhya, gained popularity with slogans like ‘Mandir Wahi Banayenge’.

    Such a Vinay Katiyar is taking the developments happening in Ayodhya today very seriously. He expressed deep anguish over the large-scale looting of cash and valuables from the donation boxes (Hundis) in the temple. The severity of the situation can be understood by the very fact that he said, “Everyone who is currently there is a thief.” Not only Vinay Katiyar, but many saints also condemned this plunder. “Those who looted the funds are Ravanas,” said Dhirendra Krishna Shastri, the head of Bageshwar Dham. Swami Avimukteshvarananda Saraswati, preacher Devakinandan Thakur, and Mahant Kamal Nayan Das like many other saints alleged that powerful people are behind this plunder. Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust member Mahant Dinendra Das Maharaj on Sunday backed the administration’s action in the alleged Ram Mandir donation embezzlement case, saying the steps taken were appropriate and demanding strict punishment for those found guilty. Speaking to news agency ANI, he said the ongoing investigation and arrests were justified and credited the state leadership for swift action. “If I tell the truth in this matter, I will get into trouble,” said a former BJP MP.

    Mahipal Singh, the former CEO of the trust, alleged that these funds have been plundered ever since the Centre formed the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust in 2020 to manage the temple construction, properties, and public donations, and that no one properly accounted for the gold, silver, and jewelry offered by the devotees. Instead of conducting an investigation after he pointed out the mismatch between vouchers, cash, and jewelry, he was removed from his job. The matter leaked out only after Akhilesh Yadav, the leader of the Samajwadi Party, raised this issue on June 7, 2026 and demanded a judicial inquiry. BJP leader Rajnish Singh wrote a letter directly to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, demanding that bank accounts and trust accounts be shown to the public and disclosed transparently. Finally, on June 13, the Yogi government appointed a Special Investigation Team (SIT).

    There is no count of how large an amount of donations, ornaments, gold, and silver bricks the devotees offered for the Ram Janmabhoomi in Ayodhya. One can gauge the extent of the issue across religious institutions as The Indian Express reported that the Shri Badrinath Kedarnath Temple Committee on Friday ordered an inquiry into allegations of misappropriation of donations at the Badrinath shrine in Uttarakhand. All employees and officials involved in counting donations have been issued show-cause notices, ANI quoted the temple committee chairperson, Hemant Dwivedi, as saying.

    Meanwhile, in Ayodhya, many devotees responded with deep devotion to the programs conducted in the name of distributing Akshatalu (sacred rice) and the ‘Ram Ram Gram Abhiyan’. Visuals of cash being taken away and bags being carried were exposed at least 70 times on CCTV cameras. The SIT concluded that some staff members intentionally stood in front of the cameras to prevent the scenes of stealing cash from the donation boxes from being recorded. Information was also obtained that large-scale lands were purchased with the looted money. Among those arrested by the SIT are some officials who count notes, the General Secretary of the Trust and International Vice President of the VHP, Champat Rai Bansal, and his personal driver Rama Shankar Yadav alias Tinnu Yadav, among others. But Champat Rai Bansal and Trustee Anil Mishra, who should have taken responsibility, merely resigned. Reports emerged that Anil Mishra built a magnificent three-story bungalow with ultra-modern amenities in Ayodhya. In fact, Alok Bansal, his wife Shivani Bansal, Chandan Rai Bansal, Manish Bansal, and others who ran real estate businesses worth crores of rupees in Ayodhya, are relatives of Champat Rai. Several land purchase documents seized by the SIT reached the media. Gopal Rao, a Pracharak of the Karnataka region belonging to Maharashtra and the Central Joint Secretary of the VHP, was appointed as the administrative officer. It is also reported that Gopal Rao, who is the most powerful person after Champat Rai, is the creator of many Udupi hotels in Ayodhya.

    It is not entirely far from the truth to say that if there were no Ram Mandir movement, there would be no Bharatiya Janata Party. Lal Krishna Advani himself explained in his autobiography that the Ram Janmabhoomi had a role in the rise of the BJP. He described the Ram Janmabhoomi movement as the largest mass movement in the history of independent India. Only after he conducted the Rath Yatra from Somnath did the BJP win 120 seats in the 1991 elections. After promising about the Ram Mandir in the BJP’s election manifesto in 1998, the first non-Congress coalition government led by the BJP under the leadership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee was formed at the Centre in the subsequent elections. He declared that they proved that if the people’s identification with religion is directed in a positive path, it can be shaped into an wonderful force, and that the collective expression of the people resonated in unison with the expression of a nation’s soul. Advani, who wished to awaken the dormant Hindutva through his movement, described Rama as a distinctive symbol of India’s national personality, unity, and integrity. Many people lost their lives due to this movement. Thousands of people died in the firing ordered by the then UP Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav’s government in Ayodhya in October and November 1990, and in the riots that took place across the country after the demolition of the Babri Masjid structure. Many people were jailed. Today, it appears that the ultimate purpose of the many sacrifices made for the Ram Janmabhoomi has been lost.

    People like Advani believed that the Ramayana has influenced the high moral value system in this country for several decades. Pamidighantam Kodandaramaiah, a former High Court judge who established the Arsha Vijnana Trust, wrote that the Ramayana transcends religion and religious systems. He stated in his book ‘Ramayana Prabha’ that the Ramayana has endured forever in India because Rama is dharma personified, as in ‘Ramo Vigrahavan Dharmah’. Scholars like Ilapavuluri Panduranga Rao said that Valmiki’s Ramayana mentions Sri Rama’s truthfulness at every step, and that very adherence to the spoken truth has sustained Indian society through the ages. Valmiki made Maricha describe Rama as the personification of the Deity of Dharma. Valmiki praised Rama as a saintly person, one of true valor, devoted to truth and righteousness, true to his word, of truthful character, and one whose soul is truth itself. “Truth is the only God; truth is the foundation of devotion in the world. The root of everything lies in truth alone. There is no higher goal beyond truth,” Valmiki said. He formulated that “Dharma is born out of strength (Balo pratishtaho dharmah dharanyamiva jangamam). If righteousness and strength are coupled with truth, they can protect against any great calamity.” He said that even the world can be conquered through truth. Valmiki makes Rama himself say, “I have no infatuation for wealth, gold, objects, or vehicles; what I want is not the kingdom, but the nation (Na hahamartha paro devi lokamavastu mutsahe).”

    But what is happening now? Ramayana means the path walked by Rama. Are we walking in that path? Are the strong standing by truth and righteousness today? Do they think the nation is more important than the kingdom? Is it enough to construct a Ram temple and install the idol of Rama? The ongoing developments prove that there is absolutely no value for truth and righteousness anywhere in the country, and that self-interest, wealth accumulation, desire for power, and tyrannical rule have become the sole goals. Leaders of the BJP, along with other parties, are proving the maxim: “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” It has turned out that some within the Sangh Parivar are also not exceptions to this. Today, one has to search for virtuous people in the BJP and the Sangh like Nanaji Deshmukh, Kushabhau Thakre, J.P. Mathur, Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, and Lakshmanrao Inamdar. There is also a rumor going around that the plunder in Ayodhya took place either to take the management of the temple away from the Sangh into the control of the government, or to put Yogi Adityanath in a tight spot. At a time when the BJP’s grip on national politics was thought to be tightening completely, the occurrence of plunder in Ayodhya—the very place responsible for the party’s progress—is a bad development. This development is causing distress among the people. Today, even lawyers in Ayodhya are collectively refusing to argue on behalf of the plunderers. This is not a stain that has come upon just a political party or an organization like the RSS, which claims to be committed to Hindu Dharma. It is a wound inflicted on the minds of the people who worship Sri Rama and the Ramayana in the country. The responsibility lies on the leaders of that party to ensure that the very arrow of Rama that caused the rise of the BJP does not become the cause of the BJP’s downfall.

  • As Regional Parties Fade, a BJP–Congress Contest Looms

    A few days ago, Prime Minister Narendra Modi remarked that “the Congress is a parasite; it survives by depending on other parties and abandons them once its needs are fulfilled.” He may have made this comment keeping in mind the Congress party’s decision in Tamil Nadu to distance itself from the DMK and join hands with actor Vijay’s TVK. However, judging by the developments of the past few days, it has become impossible to predict how many parties will remain in the INDIA alliance or how many parties will remain in the National Democratic Alliance led by Modi by the time of the 2029 elections. Several regional parties are facing an existential test and must decide their future course, though they do not have much time to do so.

    In this context, the question arises: will the next general election witness a direct contest between the BJP and the Congress? The Congress does not appear particularly worried about regional parties splitting or aligning with the BJP. In fact, many regional parties have occupied the political space that once belonged to the Congress. The Congress also does not seem to be taking very seriously the BJP’s war-footing strategies to increase its strength in both Houses of Parliament. It appears that the Congress is moving with the objective of confronting the BJP directly by 2029. In particular, the party seems to be focusing on how to mobilize the youth.

    The Congress rarely appears to work according to a clear and consistent agenda. Until recently, it focused on caste census, social justice, and reservations. Now, observing growing unrest among the youth, it has begun efforts to attract them. It organized a massive rally titled “Chhatron Ki Goonj” in Kota, Rajasthan, where Rahul Gandhi addressed thousands of young men and women. The growing influence of the “Cockroach Janata Party” may also have strengthened Rahul Gandhi’s resolve to appeal to young voters. Several studies after the 2024 Lok Sabha elections indicated that in many states, women, youth, and especially first-time voters favored the BJP. Will this situation change by 2029? Can the Congress regain its lost support among youth and women? This question is crucial to the party’s future.

    At the same time, the BJP’s intensive efforts to increase its strength in both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha and to bring many parties to its side cannot be dismissed lightly. According to an RSS leader, the Hindutva agenda remains the BJP’s highest priority. Only by remaining in power not just in 2029 but for several more decades can that agenda be fully implemented. As part of this objective, the BJP has focused on many regional parties across the country. It is rapidly moving to absorb parties such as JD(U), Trinamool Congress, Shiv Sena, and NCP. In Tamil Nadu, the DMK; in Jharkhand, the JMM; in Telangana, the BRS; and in Delhi, the AAP are now facing a difficult test of deciding their future direction. The BJP’s strategy is to bring various parties to its side through persuasion or pressure in order to fulfill its broader agenda.

    To ensure that the 2024 election results are not repeated in 2029 and that it does not again face the risk of losing its majority, the BJP is taking rapid measures. Delimitation and women’s reservation are among the most important of these. It hardly needs to be said that the Modi government’s approach to constituency delimitation would be favorable to the BJP. The party appears determined to ensure that neither the Congress nor regional parties outside the NDA gain significant advantage from the exercise. The BJP is attempting to secure more seats in Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, and West Bengal, where it fell short of expectations in the last elections, and to gain additional seats in Bihar, Jharkhand, Haryana, Rajasthan, and other states through changes in geographical and demographic arrangements.

    The consequences of delimitation in Assam and Jammu and Kashmir are already known. In Assam, Muslim-majority constituencies in Lower Assam and the Barak Valley were divided, and the fragmented areas were merged with constituencies dominated by local populations. This caused severe damage to the Congress and the AIUDF. The increase in seats reserved for Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes benefited the BJP’s regional allies. Similarly, in Jammu and Kashmir, the number of Hindu-majority seats in Jammu increased relative to Muslim-majority seats in the Kashmir Valley. Furthermore, increasing the number of seats helps counter anti-incumbency against sitting legislators. By allocating newly created seats to youth, women, and newcomers, the BJP aims to maximize its majority.

    It is difficult to determine to what extent the Congress understands the BJP’s comprehensive strategies. The Congress campaign against the BJP remains largely centered on Narendra Modi. Instead of preparing itself ideologically to confront the growing influence of the RSS across the country, it raises unproductive debates such as whether the organization possesses formal registration. This creates doubts about whether the Congress truly understands the BJP’s strategies.

    Out of India’s 4,123 Assembly seats, the Congress holds only 662. The party failed to win even a single Assembly seat in five states. In states such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, and Odisha, it won less than ten percent of the seats. In the 2024 general elections, the BJP and the Congress directly contested 286 constituencies; the BJP won 180 and the Congress 83. Gaurav Gogoi, who serves as Deputy Leader in the Lok Sabha and PCC president, recently suffered a crushing defeat in the Assam Assembly elections. Another Lok Sabha member and two-time Chief Minister, V. Vaithilingam, the Puducherry PCC president, even lost his deposit in the previous Assembly elections.

    Why is the Congress unable to convert anti-incumbency sentiment into political gains? Until it answers this question, no number of rallies or dramatic displays will strengthen the party. Regional parties face the same problem, and many of them are also splitting. Rather than merely blaming the BJP, the leaders of these parties must honestly examine why these divisions are occurring and why people are turning against them. What is the present condition of the Left parties, which were once strong ideological forces?

    The reality is that regional strongholds based solely on a single leader’s charisma or caste equations are collapsing rapidly. It is becoming clear that political ambitions unsupported by ideology cannot succeed indefinitely. This explains why the futures of Mamata Banerjee, Sharad Pawar, Uddhav Thackeray, Arvind Kejriwal, K. Chandrashekar Rao, Naveen Patnaik, and Jagan Mohan Reddy appear uncertain. None of the regional giants currently enjoys overwhelming influence. The conduct of successors in some parties also appears unpromising. As one analyst observed, these are not ordinary developments but indications of deep structural changes taking place within India’s political system.

    Although the BJP revolves around Modi, it is not a Modi-dependent party. Numerous powerful forces behind the BJP ensure that its strategies, expansion, and actions align with long-term objectives. Both the RSS and the BJP understand that Modi is merely an important instrument in achieving these goals.

    The same cannot be said about the Congress. Under its dynastic leadership, there is little evidence that Rahul Gandhi is attempting to build a strong organizational and ideological structure that extends to every village and transforms the Congress into an overwhelmingly popular mass party. It has been demonstrated repeatedly that power cannot be attained merely through the opponent’s weaknesses, mistakes, or anti-incumbency.

    There is little reason to fear that India’s political system is collapsing. In reality, it is undergoing a phase of reorganization. As regional voices weaken, it is increasingly evident that future elections may witness a principal contest between two national poles. Regional forces struggling for survival may inevitably gravitate toward one of these poles. Delimitation and the absorption of regional forces may naturally increase the Congress’s seat tally to some extent. However, if it wishes to create a political wave and capture power, politics must once again be shaped by influential national ideologies rather than individual leaders.

  • Winning Without Contest: The New Politics of Power

    In the 2017 Legislative Council elections, some leaders from Rayalaseema exerted intense pressure on the Returning Officer, Satyanarayana Rao, who was then serving as the Assembly Secretary, to reject the nomination of a candidate. They also tried to influence him with inducements. Frightened and disturbed, that Returning Officer reportedly approached Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu. It is said that he told the officer, “Do not yield to any pressures. Act fearlessly according to the rules.”

    In 2009, during the YSR era, Telugu Desam Party candidate Kadiri Baburao, who contested for the Legislative Assembly from Kanigiri, forgot to sign in one place in his affidavit. The Returning Officer, who maintained strategic silence without saying anything until 5 p.m., later rejected Baburao’s nomination papers on the grounds that the signature was missing. Baburao was known to be a close associate of the prominent film actor Nandamuri Balakrishna. These are merely examples to illustrate how crucial a role Returning Officers play in determining the fate of candidates. Just as Jayadratha in the Mahabharata possessed the power to prevent the Pandavas from entering the battlefield even for a single day, Returning Officers too occasionally play the role of Jayadratha in the electoral battle. Their power is that formidable.

    Recently, in Madhya Pradesh, Returning Officer Arvind Sharma played a key role in rejecting the nomination papers of Congress candidate and party General Secretary Meenakshi Natarajan. Arvind Sharma, who is a Principal Secretary in the Madhya Pradesh government, had previously served as a Director in the Lok Sabha. The very fact that he came to Madhya Pradesh with the assistance of Narendra Singh Tomar, who was the Agriculture Minister during the period when farmers were protesting against the farm laws, indicates the strength of his connections with the BJP. Tomar is now the Speaker of the Madhya Pradesh Assembly.

    Perhaps BJP circles were aware of the complaint filed in Hyderabad against Meenakshi Natarajan even before they received official notification of it. Otherwise, they would not have fielded a third candidate despite lacking the necessary strength. Meenakshi filing her nomination, the BJP immediately reminding the Returning Officer about the case against her, the officer promptly rejecting her nomination, and then announcing the BJP candidate as elected unopposed—all of this happened in rapid succession. It appears that whatever the BJP does is executed with meticulous planning and considerable advance preparation.

    Although the Modi government convened special sessions of Parliament for three days last April, it failed to secure passage of the Delimitation and Women’s Reservation Bills, which it had introduced with great prestige. This was the first time since Modi came to power that the opposition succeeded in preventing the passage of such bills. Following the BJP’s first-ever sweeping victory with an overwhelming majority in West Bengal, the party’s confidence increased. It sought to employ all possible methods to increase its strength in both Houses of Parliament.

    As part of that effort, twenty Lok Sabha members belonging to the Trinamool Congress reportedly broke away from the party, joined an obscure party called the Nationalist Citizens Party, and declared support for the NDA. Three Rajya Sabha members belonging to that party resigned. Negotiations are reportedly underway with others as well. Leaders who until recently criticized Modi during the Bengal elections are now said to regard him as their leader. In Jharkhand, efforts are underway to field Parimal Nathwani, considered Ambani’s right-hand man, as an independent candidate and thereby attract legislators from the ruling party to their side. By strategically ensuring the rejection of Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination, three BJP candidates from Madhya Pradesh were elected unopposed. Not only that, across the country nineteen BJP MPs won without any contest. These developments make it clear that the Modi government is preparing the ground to ensure that it faces no obstacles in either House and can pass the bills it desires. Although the NDA has not yet reached a two-thirds majority in both Houses, discussions are taking place in the national capital about how many more people the BJP might bring into its fold by the time the monsoon session begins in July.

    After the rejection of Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination and the surrender of Trinamool Congress members to the NDA, a sense of anxiety regarding political survival has reportedly emerged in every party across the country. Reports suggest that even the Shiv Sena led by Uddhav Thackeray and the NCP led by Pawar are facing an existential test. In this context, it is becoming clear that the Modi government has prepared the ground to secure passage during the monsoon session of several important bills, including the Delimitation and Women’s Reservation Bills.

    The surprising thing is that although Returning Officers have behaved controversially in the past, no one has received as much sympathy as Meenakshi Natarajan. That may be because she is a Gandhian who leads a very simple life, making her a rare kind of political leader. There is little point in criticizing the Returning Officer here. “What can we do if orders come from above?” said one official from Madhya Pradesh.

    Rejecting her nomination on the basis of a case filed on the basis of a private complaint entirely unrelated to her appears completely unreasonable. Many individuals who have served as Returning Officers in legislative bodies say that under Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act, only cases in which a charge sheet has been filed, charges have been framed, and which are punishable with imprisonment of more than two years need to be disclosed. Even if the Returning Officer believed that the affidavit had not been fully completed, they say that a nomination should not be rejected solely for that reason and that the candidate should be given another opportunity to correct the error.

    On the very day Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination was rejected in Madhya Pradesh, a BJP candidate in Jharkhand was given 24 hours to correct an error in his affidavit. There have been many such instances across the country where Returning Officers have acted fairly. Officials should facilitate a candidate’s democratic election, not create obstacles preventing that candidate from being elected. When officials act in accordance with the political interests of the ruling party, it becomes clear that democracy in our country is not in a healthy condition.

    Another surprising aspect is that courts also do not make efforts to dispose of election petitions quickly and thereby give wronged candidates an opportunity to be re-elected. Recently, even the Madras High Court criticized the Supreme Court on this issue. In a petition filed by a candidate who lost by just 49 votes in a constituency during the 2016 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, it took the Supreme Court six years to deliver a verdict. What benefit is there in the court declaring that the defeated candidate had actually won? By then, the term of the Assembly had already ended. The Madras High Court criticized even the Supreme Court, saying that justice had become a mockery.

    A similar situation occurred in the case of Ponguleti Sudhakar Reddy versus Tummala Nageswara Rao. Although the case was filed in 1999 and Tummala had won, it took the High Court seven years to decide the matter.

    When Meenakshi Natarajan approached the Supreme Court claiming that her nomination had been unfairly rejected, it refused to intervene. The Supreme Court held that under Article 329(b), elections to legislative bodies cannot be challenged. The Court clarified that she could, if she wished, file an election petition in the High Court. The Supreme Court is also aware of the deplorable condition of election petitions in the country’s judicial system. A former Supreme Court judge said that, based on past experience, no one knows how many years it will take for Meenakshi Natarajan’s petition to be decided.

    In a speech in 2019, then Vice President Venkaiah Naidu also said that courts should establish special benches for election petitions and deliver decisions within six months. If the Supreme Court does not decide the matter and election petitions do not receive speedy judgments, who will protect the democracy that is being crushed in between?

    Moreover, under the current circumstances in the country, the attitude adopted by the courts appears peculiar. A situation is arising in which the courts themselves characterize those filing cases on public issues as cockroaches, idle people, or obstacles to development. “The Centre is spending money to build roads. Who are you to question the progress of roads under the Right to Information Act? This is yellow journalism,” the Supreme Court reportedly told an RTI activist on Tuesday before dismissing the case.

    Some say that it is politics for the ruling party to try to secure majorities in legislative bodies and achieve its desired objectives. Others call it Machiavellian politics. Whatever one may call it, it is not wrong to question the methods being adopted and the institutions that are failing.

  • Modi’s Ascendancy and the Opposition’s Search for Direction

    On Monday, at the INDIA alliance meeting held in Delhi, Trinamool Congress supremo Mamata Banerjee, who appeared with a faded face, was tightly embraced by former Congress president Sonia Gandhi. Who other than one woman can understand another woman’s heart? “Some scenes cannot be expressed in words,” remarked a senior leader.

    These two were once described by international organizations as the most powerful leaders in the country. While Sonia ruled the country’s politics for more than ten years, Mamata Banerjee ruled Bengal politics for 15 years. But they are not unaware that the present circumstances are different.

    After the results of the five state elections announced last month, anti-BJP forces met again in Delhi. Mamata Banerjee and the Left parties, forgetting that until yesterday they were also fighting Congress, have become ready to join hands with Congress at the national level. Mamata Banerjee also appears to have forgotten that Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, had only recently criticized her harshly over her anarchic and corrupt rule. She also may not now remember that in 2021 she dreamed of the Prime Minister’s post and declared, “Congress has become ineffective in the country. I alone will play the key role at the national level.”

    The tigress-like Mamata Banerjee, who rebelled against Congress in 1998 and launched her party by holding a rally in Kolkata while the AICC plenary session was taking place, now appears to have had her claws removed. Public representatives belonging to her party in both the Lok Sabha and the Assembly have declared rebellion against her. Her right-hand man Abhishek Banerjee, MP Kalyan Banerjee, and other party leaders are facing attacks on the streets. The same methods Mamata Banerjee once employed against her opponents are now being used against her by her rivals. While Mamata Banerjee and her followers are now crying in the wilderness on the streets of Kolkata, Congress leaders have become the ones standing by her. In this context, it appears that Mamata Banerjee has realized that Congress alone is her refuge if she is to face a mighty force like the BJP both in the state and in Delhi. Though Congress and the Left did not win many seats in the Bengal Assembly elections, they were able to damage the Trinamool considerably. In minority-dominated areas such as Murshidabad, Malda, and Uttar Dinajpur, the Congress–Left alliance ensured that Trinamool did not receive its traditional support. In 32 Assembly constituencies where Muslims constitute more than 50 percent of the population, Trinamool did not win even a single seat. In the Jangipur constituency, the Congress candidate secured 31,000 votes while the Trinamool candidate received only 10,542 votes. Likewise, in the Karandighi constituency, CPI(M) secured 39,000 votes, while the BJP candidate won with 20,000 votes. Perhaps the manner in which these results came has taught Mamata Banerjee lessons about her arrogance, authoritarian approach, and disregard for allies. That is why she is now seen on the streets of Delhi.

    Likewise, for the Left parties, whose ground is slipping from beneath their feet in the country, the streets of Delhi have also become a refuge. In the 140-member Kerala Assembly, the Congress-led UDF winning more than 100 seats, the BJP winning three seats, and the defeat of most ministers in Pinarayi Vijayan’s cabinet cannot be ignored. Analysts described the Left alliance’s defeat there as the result of Pinarayi Vijayan’s centralized and arrogant governance, severe disappointment among farmers, youth, and ASHA workers, dissatisfaction among party cadres, and public resentment against ten years of rule. Congress leaders such as Rahul Gandhi and Revanth Reddy criticized Pinarayi Vijayan, alleging that he was colluding with the BJP and encouraging corrupt elements. They questioned why central agencies had not investigated Vijayan. Be that as it may, the Left parties, which have reached a situation where they are not in power anywhere in the country for the first time in five decades, have realized that they have no option except to work together with other anti-BJP forces. Left leaders D. Raja and John Brittas, who attended the INDIA alliance meeting, have that clarity.

    The late CPI(M) General Secretary Sitaram Yechury, who passed away two years ago, understood the present situation in the country very well. When Congress inducted Prasenjit Bose, who had been expelled by CPI(M), Rahul Gandhi joked with Yechury, saying, “We have taken your comrade into our party.” Laughing, Yechury replied, “What is yours and ours? In this struggle, both of us are travelling in the same boat.” He had long ago understood the need for all anti-BJP forces to shed their narrow-mindedness and work together to confront the BJP, which was advancing unchecked across the country. Today, none of the parties in the NDA are fighting among themselves. But the parties in the INDIA alliance do not possess that level of unity. How much sincerity of purpose do the 23 parties that met at Delhi’s Constitution Club after nearly two years really have? What is the significance of the DMK and Aam Aadmi Party not attending? After the Emergency, in 1977, opposition parties contested against Congress under a single election symbol in the name of the Janata Party. How many parties today possess that same sincerity and fighting spirit? Can Congress provide leadership to other parties in the same way that the BJP has been able to guide even its allies along its ideological path?

    Two days after the INDIA alliance meeting, Prime Minister Narendra Modi organized a meeting of NDA allies on the occasion of completing 12 years in power. Though nominally an NDA meeting, it is in reality a BJP meeting. Leaving aside small states like Nagaland, Meghalaya, and Puducherry, Andhra Pradesh is the largest state where NDA rule is currently in effect. Until recently, Janata Dal (United) chief Nitish Kumar was the Chief Minister in Bihar. Now, even there, a BJP leader is Chief Minister. With his entry into the Rajya Sabha, the 12 JD(U) MPs in the Lok Sabha will have to regard Modi as their leader. While Trinamool has 28 MPs in the Lok Sabha, 20 MPs under the leadership of party chief whip Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar have decided to write to Speaker Om Birla seeking recognition as a separate group after rebelling against Mamata Banerjee. At some auspicious moment, they too may have no option but to join the BJP and wear the saffron scarf as BJP MPs. That means the BJP effectively already has a full majority in the Lok Sabha even without the support of the Telugu Desam Party. Moreover, seven MPs from Shiv Sena, five from Lok Janshakti Party, two from Janata Dal (Secular), two from Rashtriya Lok Dal, one from the NCP Pawar group, two from Apna Dal and Hindustani Awam Morcha, along with six MPs from northeastern states, are already supporting the BJP. Since Modi came to power, the Bharatiya Janata Party has earned the distinction of splitting several regional parties such as Shiv Sena, NCP, Lok Janshakti Party, Rashtriya Lok Samata Party, Aam Aadmi Party, and Trinamool, and also attracting many leaders from other parties into its fold. Not only that, during Modi’s tenure, parties such as BSP, BJD, DMK, and AIADMK have faced tests of survival, making their future uncertain. A situation has arisen in the country where many regional parties feel that their survival will be difficult unless they surrender to Modi.

    In this context, as Modi enters his 13th year in power today, no one can deny that his political strength is increasing day by day, despite social media commentary about how intense his politics may become, developments such as the “cockroach party,” the weakening of democratic institutions, allegations that the judiciary has surrendered, and the flood of criticism over the failure of institutions such as NEET and CBSE to conduct examinations properly. Without eliminating their internal contradictions and creating an equally compelling alternative vision, what change can opposition parties or other non-BJP forces achieve, no matter how many meetings they conduct?

  • Modi’s Political Dominance and the Challenges of Governance

    “You win only when you play. If you don’t play, how can victory come?” Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently said while speaking to young children. Since joining the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in 1987, Narendra Modi has been continuously playing in politics. Completing four decades in this political game next year, he has had no notable defeat so far. In 1987, when he was handed over the responsibility of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation as the BJP Gujarat General Secretary, he secured this victory for his party for the first time. Since then, he has never looked back.

    His journey of victory, which began in Gujarat with the corporation win, brought the party to power in the state, and later led to him personally taking over power as Chief Minister, delivering an unchallenged governance for 12 years. Without stopping there, even after taking over the responsibilities as the Prime Minister of the country in 2014, Modi has been continuously continuing in office for 12 years so far.

    By 1987, when Modi entered active politics, the Congress was in power at the Centre and in 15 states. With the recent victory in West Bengal, the BJP and its allies under Modi’s leadership have achieved power in 21 states. In a way, Modi is now in the ascendant phase of his political life. While on one hand preparing for the celebratory milestones of his 12 years of governance, on the other hand, he is getting ready for massive changes in both the party and the government. He is setting the stage for his next political game.

    “Victory is not just a game, it is also like riding a tiger,” political scientists often describe. Once you get down from it, it will swallow you. Baba Saheb Ambedkar said long ago that democracy is not just about victory in elections. Although Modi’s government is unchallenged in politics, India’s economic situation remains worrisome. Economists say that GDP growth is gradually declining, average inflation is doubling, and the pace of development is moving sluggishly. The monthly review prepared in May by the Ministry of Finance under the leadership of Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman made it clear that international developments are severely impacting India’s economic conditions. The value of the rupee is falling day by day. Crude oil import bills are rising. Reports are coming that petrol and diesel prices have increased four times since May 15 after the assembly election results, and there are chances of them rising again. For the second consecutive week, the decline in India’s foreign exchange reserves is clearly visible. Economists like former Economic Advisor Arvind Subramanian and representatives of the National Institute of Public Finance and Policy are warning that private investments in the country are also declining.

    In May last year, NITI Aayog CEO B.V.R. Subrahmanyam announced that India had overtaken Japan to become the fourth largest economy, but according to the World Economic Outlook recently released by the International Monetary Fund, India has dropped to the sixth largest economy. Regardless of this matter, irrespective of statistical details, everyone knows that the per capita income in the country is at a very low level. Economists state that since 1991, while per capita income in China has increased 38 times, it has increased only 8 times in India.

    The fact that Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself is appealing to the people to practice austerity measures indicates the severity of the situation. Economists say that the government is taking short-term measures from time to time but is not undertaking long-term measures. What are long-term measures? Discussions are ongoing whether it means further accelerating reforms or allowing foreign investments to enter more freely. No one has clarity on what steps Modi is taking in this direction. Organizations like NITI Aayog are also not transparently publishing reports on the country’s economic situation. It has been a long time since such organizations stopped trying to tell the government the actual situation, as they are instead eager to exaggerate minor developments into mountains. Will the situation improve merely by changing the heads of ministers as part of a cabinet reshuffle?

    Secondly, even though the opposition parties in this country have failed to win elections, they seem to have succeeded in creating an impression among the people that institutions are being weakened. They are giving scope to raise doubts not only on the functioning of institutions like the Election Commission, CBI, ED, IT, CVC, and National Testing Agency, but also on the judgments given by the Supreme Court. The strange thing is, even when elections are conducted properly, the credibility of the Election Commission is being questioned. Due to the indiscriminate deployment of agencies like the CBI, ED, and IT against political rivals, trust in them is lost even when they work genuinely. Judges are acting in a manner that raises suspicion whether the boundaries that should exist between the Supreme Court and the government are blurring.

    Ultimately, the fact that a miserable state exists in this country where even exams cannot be properly conducted for students was proven once again with the leak of NEET question papers. More recently, the controversy surrounding the CBSE’s On-Screen Marking (OSM) system has further deepened concerns about institutional competence. What began as isolated complaints soon turned into one of the biggest credibility crises faced by the country’s premier school education board. Remarkably, it was not political parties or government agencies that exposed the issue, but three young students. Vedant Shrivastava brought attention to the problem after allegedly receiving another student’s answer sheet during the verification process. Nisarga Adhikary, a young cybersecurity researcher, claimed to have uncovered serious vulnerabilities in the digital evaluation portal that could expose sensitive student data and examination records. Sarthak Sidhant raised questions regarding the tendering and procurement process behind the system’s implementation. Together, these three students forced a national debate on transparency, accountability, digital security, and administrative responsibility in the education system. Even CBSE was eventually compelled to acknowledge vulnerabilities in parts of the system after initially rejecting the allegations. The episode demonstrated how public institutions can lose credibility when legitimate concerns raised by students are not addressed promptly and transparently.

    The way the youth of this country responded in an unprecedented manner to the call given on social media under the name of ‘Cockroach Janata Party’ creates a feeling that a fire is smouldering somewhere. It is naive to think that those who ask questions will decrease just by suspending social media accounts. Therefore, it must be considered that the Modi government succeeds only when it tries not just to win elections, but to increase the credibility of institutions and to solve the problems of the youth of this country.

    Moreover, the political victories of the Modi government are not completed with the victory in Bengal. From next year onwards, they have to win again in BJP-ruled states. This includes the Prime Minister’s home state of Gujarat, as well as the largest state Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and other states. The BJP’s situation in the four southern states is not very grand. In Karnataka, the BJP has no independent identity of its own outside of Yediyurappa. Even though several top RSS leaders like Dattatreya Hosabale, Santhosh, and Mukund hail from Karnataka, the BJP is unable to establish itself firmly there. As for Telangana, no party seems better than the BJP at cutting the very branch it is sitting on. In Tamil Nadu, Annamalai, who was once the party president, announced that the BJP has no future and is preparing to look out for his own path. BJP leaders do not seem to have realized that gaining acceptability in the South is more important than in Bengal.

    However, whatever Modi’s weaknesses may be, how far Congress is trying to utilize them remains a matter of debate. No one can say what Congress is doing to confront the BJP head-on in UP, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan. After Congress won in Kerala, the Congress high command took 11 days to decide the Chief Minister. It took Rahul Gandhi these many days to realize that the people, senior party leaders, and the cadre there completely admire Satheesan. He could not restrain his right-hand man KC Venugopal, even though the latter made intense efforts to become the Chief Minister himself.

    Similarly, without even enjoying the happiness of winning in Kerala, the Karnataka headache started for Delhi. The Delhi elders are dragging both Siddaramaiah and DK Shivakumar along, in a helpless state where they cannot bring about a compromise between the two. Siddaramaiah, who represents the AHINDA group consisting of minorities, backward classes, and Dalits on one side, and DK, who is extremely loyal to the party and has stood by the high command in every crisis on the other side, have left the high command at a total loss. In fact, DK, who once had to move Gujarat MLAs to Bengaluru to ensure Ahmed Patel’s victory, had to get entangled in several cases. Ultimately, he even had to go to Tihar Jail. While it is justifiable to give the Chief Minister post to such a person as DK, nothing can be said right now about the future course of action of Siddaramaiah, who made it clear that he will remain active in politics and will not come to the Rajya Sabha.

    A situation arose where Shivakumar had no choice but to include everyone suggested by Siddaramaiah in his cabinet. For the past 20 days, Delhi hotels and the AICC have been overcrowded, initially with Kerala leaders and now with Karnataka leaders. Although infighting exists in Congress in every state, Delhi is in a situation where it can do nothing.

    That situation has never existed in the BJP. Even though there are BJP Chief Ministers in 17 states, there is no record of even a single one coming to Delhi for cabinet expansion or other changes. The BJP top brass has the grip to dictate who should be appointed without them needing to visit. That is the difference between the BJP and the Congress. That is also the secret behind their victories and defeats.

  • In the Light of Bashir Badr’s Memories…

    In the Light of Bashir Badr’s Memories…

    We spend our entire lives in the light of certain memories. Every time we wonder whether they are just memories or the fluttering echoes of our own life force, the poet Bashir Badr comes to mind. Yes, we must keep the light of memories with us. Otherwise, who knows in which dark alley the evening of life will come to an end? As he once said: “Ujala apni yaadon ka hamare saath rehne do” (Let the light of your memories remain with me).

    On Thursday, the evening of Bashir Badr’s life also came to a close. Passing away at the age of 91, he was one of those poets who served as a bridge between the social evolution of pre- and post-independence India—a true representative of the country’s composite culture. With his demise, it must be said that an entire generation has almost gone extinct. For the past few years, it was known that he lived like a living corpse, having lost his thoughts and memories, in a state where he did not know who he was or what his poems were. True to his own lines: “Jeevan ke safar mein mujhe koi bhi na mila, hamraah to milte hain safar yaad nahi rehta” (I found no one to stand by me in life’s journey; many walk along the path, but once the journey ends, no one remembers those memories), he vanished along with his memories. And just as he had written: “Umr bhar jagne wala pada sota raha…” (The one who stayed awake all his life now lies fast asleep), he has entered an eternal sleep.

    In a way, he was fortunate. He had once lamented that sometimes, it is better not to know what is happening around us: “Koi haath bhi na milayega jo gale miloge” (No one will even shake your hand if you go to embrace them). He had written long ago:

    “If you go with deep affection to embrace someone, no one here will even shake your hand. This is the city of a new generation of people; keep a little distance here even when you meet.”

    Today, it is not just mechanical living, but the destruction of life itself that reigns supreme. How fortunate he was not to know that the very communal hatred he fled from in Meerut to find peace in Bhopal has now spread across the entire country? He had prayed to God to grant him the strength to forget those who had completely forgotten him: “Tumhe jisne dil se bhula diya, use bhoolne ki dua karo” (Pray to forget the one who forgot you from the heart). Perhaps the Almighty took pity on him and blessed him with Alzheimer’s until his death.

    The Scars of Meerut

    Indeed, the mention of Bashir Badr’s name brings back memories of the Meerut communal riots. During the 1987 Meerut riots, miscreants destroyed his house and his writings. Those were the days when Bashir Badr, born in Ayodhya—the birthplace of Lord Rama—was working as a lecturer in Meerut. He had never realized that the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute would erupt in his birthplace of Ayodhya, and that very conflict would engulf Meerut, where he lived, like a wildfire. Many Hindus and Muslims lost their lives in these riots that took place in May and June of 1987. However, reports emerged that the PAC (Provincial Armed Constabulary) forces, tasked with maintaining law and order, gunned down many Muslims in the villages of Maliyana and Hashimpura in Meerut and threw them into canals. Human rights leader Balagopal was among those who submitted reports on these atrocities at the time. Nearly three decades later, in October 2018, the Delhi High Court sentenced 16 PAC personnel to life imprisonment for killing 42 people.

    It was about these Meerut riots that Bashir Badr wrote:

    Log toot jaate hain ek ghar banane mein Tum taras nahi khate bastiyan jalane mein (People pour their entire lives into building a single home, but you show no mercy when you burn down entire neighborhoods.)

    Bashir noticed back then that if anyone spoke the truth, they were branded as rebels or anti-social elements. He depicted this reality in his ghazal, “Main bolta hoon to ilzaam hai baghavat ka.” He wrote:

    “If I speak, they accuse me of rebellion; if I remain silent, a deep sense of helplessness and agony gnaws at my conscience, watching injustice happen before my eyes and being unable to do anything.”

    He beautifully captured the plight of an intellectual torn between speaking the truth and enduring it silently in just two lines. He wrote that even the flow of one’s tears finds its own path, just like flowing water.

    A Unique Voice in Urdu Literature

    At the tender age of 12, the horrors and riots of the 1947 Partition left an indelible mark on Bashir’s mind. Writing poetry since the age of seven, Bashir’s ghazals mirrored the changing political, social, and cultural landscape. Transforming from Syed Muhammad Bashir to Bashir Badr (Bashir the Moon), he demonstrated extraordinary talent in mushairas (poetic symposiums) and poetry competitions as a student, winning numerous awards. While he was still a student at Aligarh Muslim University, some of his poems were included in the M.A. (Urdu) syllabus.

    By setting aside the heavy Persian influence on ghazals and choosing a simple language easily understood by the common reader, he earned immense popularity. By introducing Hindi, Braj, and Awadhi dialects, he carved a unique niche for his ghazals among modern Urdu poets. He introduced metaphors that no one had created before. He boldly declared: “My turn is unique in the history of Urdu ghazal. My style itself is the style of the ghazal.” Fluent in Persian, Hindi, Urdu, and English, he was honored with the Sahitya Akademi Award, the Padma Shri, and hundreds of other accolades. His poetry was published in seven volumes.

    Transcending traditional boundaries and refusing to be trapped in the frameworks of ideologies like progressivism or modernism, he beautifully and poetically expressed the daily experiences of the common man. He carried forward the trend in India that Faiz Ahmed Faiz had created in Pakistan. He deserves the credit for making poetry a part of the common vocabulary after Ghalib. Bashir Badr’s poems highlight the humane dimension, sensitivity, and love for freedom inherent in humans. He searched for humanity all his life. There were many occasions when he lamented that the paths they once walked together were asking, “Where is your companion (Humsafar)?” He grieved, “I searched for a human being all my life. I asked God to show me a human being in this vast universe, but I could not find one.”

    In another poem, he expresses his anguish:

    “There are names on houses, and big titles (designations) next to those names. But I searched extensively… and nowhere could I find a ‘human’.”

    The Romantic and the Humanist

    We often long to look at our loved ones to our heart’s content. We want to talk openly, and the desire to meet haunts us. He yearned: “Na jee bhar ke dekha na kuch baat ki, badi aarzoo thi mulaqaat ki” (Neither did I see you to my heart’s content, nor did we talk; I had a great desire to meet). He anxious sighed: “There are many close friends of mine in the city, but they have no news of me, and I do not know their addresses.” He grieved that despite living among hundreds of people, man is becoming lonely.

    Saying “Musafir hain hum bhi musafir ho tum bhi”, Bashir reminded us that we are all travelers and will meet somewhere. He warned those chasing fame: “The peaks of fame are but momentary sights. The branch we have climbed can break at any moment.” He advised finding history in nature: “If you find free time, try to read the writings on water, because every river keeps writing a history (story) of thousands of years through its flow.”

    In his poem “Udne do parindon ko abhi shokh hawa mein”, he wrote for elders who worry unnecessarily about children: “Let the birds (children) fly in this playful wind for a while, because the days of childhood, once gone, never return.”

    There was also a magnificent romantic poet within Bashir Badr. Beautiful lines resonate through his ghazals:

    • “You burn my heart so much, yet you look so beautiful.”
    • “Place your lips upon my eyes when I sleep… only then will I believe that the heart beats even behind closed eyelids.”
    • “Even when buried in a book, a lover sees nothing but the beloved’s face. That book-like face remained right before my eyes, and so, my studies went beautifully.” (Wo chehra kitabi raha saamne. Badi khoobsurat padhayi hui)
    • “Love is like a fragrance (Khushboo) that always walks with us; therefore, no person is ever left truly alone, even in solitude.”
    • “If you are angry, do not hide it. Only then will I get a chance to persuade you.”

    A Vision of Peace and the Game of Politics

    Despite being born amid communal hatred and being deeply affected by it, Bashir Badr desired nothing but friendship between people throughout his life. He said: “The journey of enmity lasts only a step or two, after that (fighting and fighting) you will get tired, and I will get tired too.” He wrote: “Pack hatred (Nafrat) into seven boxes and bury it deep in the earth; today, man desperately needs love (Mohabbat).” He counselled: “Guard the lamps (hopes) carefully in your eyes, because ahead, for a long distance, there will be nothing but darkness.”

    His verses frequently find a place on the lips of politicians.

    Dushmani jam kar karo lekin ye gunjaish rahe, Jab kabhi hum dost hojayen to sharminda na hona (Carry out your enmity with all your might, but leave this much room—if we ever become friends again, we should not feel ashamed to face each other.)

    It is said that when the Simla Agreement was signed between India and Pakistan in 1972, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto reminded Indira Gandhi of this very couplet.

    The same poem was read out in Parliament by Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge on September 6, 2018. The very next day, Prime Minister Narendra Modi also replied to Kharge using Bashir Badr’s poetry, taking a satirical jibe: “Jee bahut chahta hai sach bolne, kya karein hausla nahi hota” (The heart desperately wants to speak the truth, but what to do, the courage falls short).

    After poets pass away, politicians never hesitate to shamelessly use their poetry for political gains. But when poets are alive, these very leaders trample upon their hearts. Bashir Badr did not write these lines without reason:

    “Truth is heavily occupied, from politics to the judiciary. Speak lies; there is still immense love in lies!” (Sach, siyasat se adalat tak bahot masroof hai, jhooth bolo, jhooth mein ab bhi mohabbat hai bahot!)

  • The Cockroach Crisis: Is India’s Judiciary Losing Public Trust?

    “If the judiciary loses its credibility, nothing else will remain. An independent judiciary is the lifeblood of the Constitution. Without it, judges will exist, courts will exist, and judgments will exist—but their heart and soul will disappear,” said Supreme Court Judge Ujjal Bhuyan in a recent memorial lecture in Pune.

    He referred to a stark reality: the collegium itself recorded in its minutes that a High Court judge was being transferred in accordance with the wishes of the Central Government. This serves as a clear example of how a judiciary constitutionally expected to function independently can find itself working under government pressure.

    “The judiciary must remain distant from party politics and function firmly. Changes in government should have absolutely no connection with the judiciary. It should act with goodwill and sympathy towards everyone, but should not side with anyone,” said the first Chief Justice of India, H. J. Kania, at the inaugural sitting of the Supreme Court. Yet, reviewing the situation more than 75 years after the Constitution came into force, deep doubts arise as to whether standards in the higher judiciary have improved or deteriorated.

    The Historical Shield and the Ultimate Downfall

    For nearly twenty-five years after the Constitution came into force, the judiciary largely fulfilled its responsibility of preserving its own existence, protecting the fundamental rights of citizens, and defining the limits of government authority. The Supreme Court progressively interpreted Articles 14, 15, 19, and 31. In the 1967 Golaknath case, it clarified that fundamental rights could not be diluted, and in the landmark 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case, it solidified that Parliament had no authority to alter the basic structure of the Constitution.

    However, after coming to power with an overwhelming majority in 1971, Indira Gandhi’s administration began to toy with judicial independence. The absolute peak of the judiciary’s downfall in capitulating to executive overreach was the infamous ADM Jabalpur case during the Emergency.

    When thousands of political opponents and journalists were jailed without trial, and citizens sought the intervention of the courts to protect their fundamental liberties, a five-judge Constitution Bench delivered one of the most disgraceful judgments in Indian history. By a 4:1 majority, the bench ruled that during an Emergency, citizens do not even possess the right to life under Article 21.

    The majority consisted of Chief Justice A. N. Ray, Justice P. N. Bhagwati, Justice M. H. Beg, and Justice Y. V. Chandrachud (father of former Chief Justice D. Y. Chandrachud). When Justice H. R. Khanna—the sole courageous dissenter—asked during the hearings, “Does that mean people cannot question even if they are shot dead in the name of Emergency?”, the then-Attorney General chillingly replied, “My Lord, that is what the law says.”

    A Era of Introspection and Activism

    Following the Emergency—one of the darkest chapters in judicial history—the Supreme Court undertook deep introspection and initiated significant corrective measures. Moving past its catastrophic failure, the court aggressively declared that the Constitution, not the executive, was supreme.

    It opened its doors to the masses through Public Interest Litigations (PILs), ordered the release of thousands of undertrial prisoners languishing in jails, liberated bonded laborers, and eventually introduced the collegium system to insulate judicial appointments from political interference.

    Most importantly, it expanded the scope of personal liberties, protected the environment, championed the interests of working women, and curbed the arbitrary dismissal of state governments by ruling that political majorities must be proven on the floor of the legislature. At that stage, judicial activism was a remarkable shield for the vulnerable.

    Modern Shadows and Internal Fractures

    If the Supreme Court denied protection to human life twenty-five years after Independence, today, five decades after that judgment, the core functioning of the institution faces renewed skepticism. We may not be living in a formal Emergency, but public faith in the judiciary is noticeably shrinking.

    The fact that sitting judges themselves feel compelled to speak out demands serious reflection:

    • Justice Ujjal Bhuyan publicly emphasized that no external forces should be allowed to intrude upon judicial independence, asserting that personal political or ideological views must not influence decisions on the bench.
    • Justice B. V. Nagarathna warned that judges must not succumb to external pressures, noting that those who cannot live contentedly on their legitimate income should be eliminated from the system entirely. “A tainted judge is a stain on the entire system,” she remarked.
    • Justice S. Muralidhar, former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, once noted: “Impartiality is the soul of the judiciary, and independence is the blood flowing through its veins.” Notably, during his tenure at the Delhi High Court, he was transferred overnight after questioning police inaction during civil unrest in the capital.

    In her book Constitution Is My Home, senior advocate Indira Jaising recalled a harrowing 2022 case involving sexual harassment allegations made by a female Additional District Judge against a Madhya Pradesh High Court judge. Not only did the victim fail to find immediate recourse, but she was also swiftly transferred and forced to resign.

    Through Jaising’s persistent legal battles, a Supreme Court bench headed by Justice L. Nageswara Rao eventually restored her position and questioned why the then-Chief Justice of the High Court had refused to even grant her an interview. Disturbingly, just days later, that very Chief Justice was elevated to the Supreme Court.

    Growing Questions and the “Cockroach” Backlash

    Why has it become necessary for judges to comment so defensively on their own institution? Critics increasingly argue that the higher judiciary—originally designed to protect the common citizen—is becoming overwhelmingly responsive to the wealthy, the state, and political elites.

    Calculated bench allocations and predictable judgments in politically sensitive cases have sparked intense debate. Former Supreme Court Bar Association President Dushyant Dave openly criticized the court for failing to check the erosion of vital institutions like the Election Commission, pointing out that judges routinely scramble for lucrative post-retirement positions.

    Simultaneously, ethical questions have mounted. Organizations like the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) heavily criticized several judges and their families for utilizing private aircraft provided by state governments, arguing it severely compromises judicial ethics. Furthermore, instances like the discovery of massive cash bundles at the residence of a former Delhi High Court judge—followed by an apparent lack of accountability—have deepened public cynicism.

    Perhaps because the public, especially the younger demographic, is closely watching these lapses, an explosive reaction occurred following recent remarks made by Supreme Court Judge Surya Kant.

    During a judicial hearing, Justice Surya Kant criticized unemployed youth, comparing them to “cockroaches” who populate social media, media outlets, and RTI activism to attack institutions. Though he later clarified that the comment was contextualized within a specific petition regarding a lawyer’s designation and was not aimed at the youth at large, the damage was done.

    Justice Surya Kant has faced widening backlash for a series of oral remarks. On May 11, 2026, during a hearing on the Pipavav Port expansion project in Gujarat, his comments drew sharp rebukes from environmentalists and legal experts. Former civil servants under the Constitutional Conduct Group warned that these remarks showed a disturbing pro-corporate bias from the bench, creating an atmosphere of fear that silences dissent. Over 70 lawyers noted that treating citizens who enforce environmental laws as “obstructionists” marks a dangerous jurisprudential shift.

    Similarly, on January 29, 2026, during a PIL hearing on domestic workers’ rights, Justice Surya Kant blamed trade unions for stifling industrial growth and shutting down traditional industries. Labor bodies, including the AITUC, strongly condemned the court for misreading economic realities, arguing that industrial stagnation is driven by corporate monopoly and pro-corporate state policies, not by workers asserting their legal rights.

    The Danger of Erased Boundaries

    Following the “cockroach” commentary, a young citizen created a social media movement under the banner of the “Cockroach Janata Party.” Millions responded. Instead of merely deflecting the insult, the youth weaponized it, using the platform to furiously criticize the government over unemployment, inflation, corruption, and systemic scams, proclaiming: “Yes, we are cockroaches.”

    This reaction highlights a profound systemic crisis. The derogatory comments were made by a member of the judiciary, yet the public directed its anger squarely at the executive government.

    This reveals a terrifying reality: the public no longer views the government and the judiciary as separate entities.

    In a constitutional democracy, nothing is more dangerous than the total erasure of the boundary between the ruling executive and the independent judiciary. The judiciary must aggressively reform and rescue itself from this crisis. If it fails, the day may soon arrive when the “cockroaches” themselves feel forced to become the arbiters of justice.