Ashok Gehlot ji, before lecturing others on democracy and protests, please present the complete historical facts.
On December 20, 2013, Narendra Modi stated at a rally in Varanasi that the people wanted to remove the government in Delhi and that the 2014 election would be fought by the people. This was a call for a change of government through the electoral process. "Source: India Today" (https://t.co/U4GegwCceb)
But let us ask a fundamental question: Is calling for a government to be voted out the same as justifying every method used during a protest? Absolutely not!
In a democracy, the opposition has every right to criticise the government, question the Election Commission and organise peaceful protests. Equally, the government has a responsibility to maintain law and order. Every protest must be judged on its demands, evidence, methods and compliance with the lawтАФnot merely on which political party is organising it.
If the BJP could call for a change of government while in opposition, today's opposition certainly has the right to question government policies and electoral processes. However, it must also substantiate its allegations with credible evidence. Asking questions is democracy; presenting unverified allegations as established facts is not accountability.
The facts regarding the Lokpal must also be clear. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act was passed in 2013 and came into force in 2014, while the central Lokpal institution became operational in March 2019. The enactment of a law and the actual commencement of an institution's functioning are two different things. "India Code" (https://t.co/X75I8nuAzj) | "PIB" (https://t.co/4gBVYa6st8)
Similarly, political allegations must be distinguished from judicial findings. In the 2G case, the special court acquitted the accused in 2017. That fact must be acknowledged. Being accused of wrongdoing and having the charges proven in court are two different matters.
So, Gehlot ji, if the opposition is questioning electoral irregularities or the impartiality of the Election Commission, answer those questions with facts and evidence. If a protest involves violations of the law, those allegations must also be investigated fairly and impartially.
Not every protest is anarchy, and not everything done in the name of protest is automatically justified.
In a democracy, the government is not above scrutiny, and the opposition is not above facts. The people deserve evidence, accountability and impartial actionтАФnot selective history and political rhetoric.
Every citizen of the country should listen to Sh. Narendra Modi's speech of June 6, 2011, in which he said that if his hands had not been tied, he would have launched a fight against the Union Government. This was the height of anarchy. Later, on December 20, 2013, Sh. Modi said that the people were turning aggressive about uprooting the Union Government. Today, Sh. Narendra Modi and his government, who made such provocative statements against the UPA government, are accusing the democratic movement of the Opposition and the youth of anarchy.
From the Opposition's questions over irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and its demand for Chief Election Commissioner Sh. Gyanesh Kumar's resignation, to the voices of the youth, the BJP is rattled by every issue. Instead of acknowledging its mistakes and clarifying the situation before the country, BJP leaders are busy attacking the Opposition and the youth. Calling for a change of government through democratic means is not a conspiracy; it is a constitutional right of the people.
Before 2014, protests were held on the streets over Anna Hazare's movement for a Lokpal, Baba Ramdev's campaign against black money, and issues such as 2G and Coalgate, drawing crowds of hundreds of thousands in Delhi. Today, there is no trace of Anna Hazare's Lokpal, and Ramdev is no longer speaking about black money. In the 2G case, the court acquitted all the accused.
In view of all this, were Sh. Narendra Modi and other BJP leaders not demanding change before 2014? Was it democracy then, but anarchy when the same demand is raised today? The youth of the country are asking questions about employment, their future and their rights. Calling their voice anarchy is an insult to their concerns. Perhaps the ideology that the BJP belongs to fails to understand that respecting dissent is the foundation of democracy.
The questions being raised by the Opposition are shared by millions of citizens across the country. When the impartiality of the Election Commission is questioned and public trust in democratic institutions is weakening, blaming those who raise questions instead of answering them reflects the BJP's nervousness.
Ashok Gehlot ji, before lecturing others on democracy and protests, please present the complete historical facts.
On December 20, 2013, Narendra Modi stated at a rally in Varanasi that the people wanted to remove the government in Delhi and that the 2014 election would be fought by the people. This was a call for a change of government through the electoral process. "Source: India Today" (https://t.co/U4GegwCceb)
But let us ask a fundamental question: Is calling for a government to be voted out the same as justifying every method used during a protest? Absolutely not!
In a democracy, the opposition has every right to criticise the government, question the Election Commission and organise peaceful protests. Equally, the government has a responsibility to maintain law and order. Every protest must be judged on its demands, evidence, methods and compliance with the lawтАФnot merely on which political party is organising it.
If the BJP could call for a change of government while in opposition, today's opposition certainly has the right to question government policies and electoral processes. However, it must also substantiate its allegations with credible evidence. Asking questions is democracy; presenting unverified allegations as established facts is not accountability.
The facts regarding the Lokpal must also be clear. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act was passed in 2013 and came into force in 2014, while the central Lokpal institution became operational in March 2019. The enactment of a law and the actual commencement of an institution's functioning are two different things. "India Code" (https://t.co/X75I8nuAzj) | "PIB" (https://t.co/4gBVYa6st8)
Similarly, political allegations must be distinguished from judicial findings. In the 2G case, the special court acquitted the accused in 2017. That fact must be acknowledged. Being accused of wrongdoing and having the charges proven in court are two different matters.
So, Gehlot ji, if the opposition is questioning electoral irregularities or the impartiality of the Election Commission, answer those questions with facts and evidence. If a protest involves violations of the law, those allegations must also be investigated fairly and impartially.
Not every protest is anarchy, and not everything done in the name of protest is automatically justified.
In a democracy, the government is not above scrutiny, and the opposition is not above facts. The people deserve evidence, accountability and impartial actionтАФnot selective history and political rhetoric.