 Hello and welcome to this joint production of NewsClick and The Citizen. Forty-three years ago, on this day, emergency was imposed. But what we are witnessing today is undeclared emergency. Mobs have taken over the streets. The government has been continuously using the ordinance route to bring different bills. And the governors are being used to form the government. To discuss these issues, we are joined by Prabir Purkasta, who is editor-in-chief of NewsClick and was also Indra Gandhi's guest for one year during emergency. And Seema Mustafa, editor-in-chief of The Citizen. Welcome to NewsClick, both of you. So, let's start with what was happening in 1975 because you were arrested and you were there in jail for almost one year, Prabir. So, what basically led to the emergency and what were the basic changes that you witnessed during those one years in jail? Well, one year in jail and the three months before because I was arrested and three months after the emergency was declared because all the raids and other things had gone on in that period. I think it's important to recognize that the cause for declaring the emergency has not been clear to most people. If you think of that times, we had similar times before or after. So, it seemed that Mrs. Gandhi being unseated in the rivalry case was perhaps the igniting last straw, as it were. And she was in a certain state of perhaps paranoia, uncertainty. It's very difficult to make out because politically, I don't think the Indian state was in such a crisis to require this. Don't forget, the 71 war had given her a huge mandate in the elections and whatever dissent was there on the ground which was building up, it didn't seem to warrant the kind of crisis she introduced to the emergency. So, that's one part of it. But it's also very clear that it taught the Indian people the value of having the right to vote and the right of free speech. However limited it might be, the fact that the big press controls the media, that the government controls various other things. But the simple fact that you had the right to vote, you could overturn a particular government, you could do various things, you could say various things, you could build protests, you could have demonstrations, those things became much more valuable. I did not for a long time after the emergency here that you know the value of dictatorship, which is something which to keep on hearing before that India needs a benevolent dictator, which was the argument which in a lot of the third world countries had gained ground in that. So, I think that is the value that Mrs. Gandhi taught us, though completely in unwittingly so to say, that the value of the simple democratic liberties, I will not call that full-fledged democracy in that sense, but the simple value of the votes right to free speech, right to protest, how much they meant to us is something that we did not understand, till we found they were taken away and the lowly police constable or the lowly police clerk had more power than say a Sarpanch or a village Pradhan or anybody in society who was outside the government, however much his political popularity or spread might be. I think that is an important issue that I think the emergency taught us. Right, so I mean you mentioned an important point there when you're talking about the free speech. So it also becomes important to understand what role did media play during the emergency because as LK Advani pointed out, that when media was asked to bend it started crawling. So I mean what was media's role during the entire emergency period? Well, I think it was the time before television, right? So you had print media basically before the internet and most of the big newspapers were craven and Advani was right that they crawled and I think the Indian Express protested a little bit. I know the Patriot which was run by the Tirunarayanan protested and paid a price and the financial backbone of that paper was almost finished. The statesmen, there was some protest but Times of India, Hindustan Times named them. They were all there wagging their tails thinking what the government wanted them to do. But here I want to make a point is that while people who were there during the emergency completely succumbed, I was amongst that generation of journalists who came post-emergency and I came into what was suddenly a golden age of journalism because suddenly the media had got very, very, very aware as you said about becoming aware of your rights and become completely aware of our rights of the importance of independence, of freedom and the 80s was a period, was really the golden age of journalism. It was just before television. There was corporate control but the corporates were not able to control. The professional editors had come back into the business and were completely calling the shots and the younger reporters like us who joined were impassioned by what was happening. There were protests all the time. We were walking down Rajshpat. I've never seen journalists march in protest in the way they did during the 80s. The Bihar Bill, the Karnataka Bill, Gündur Rao tried to muzzle the press. It was dropped because of protests in Delhi. Similarly in Bihar, Jagannath Mishra was bringing a bill again to do something to the media after Indira Gandhi came back to power. Again, that was cuttle. So it was a very good period and then it did last. That's where I was coming to basically because if you look at the current context, the current situation, corporates have taken over the media completely now. If you look at the media channels, especially the television, they're toying the line of the government basically and they're creating a mob which goes on the roads and lynches people and they're speaking as mouthpiece of the government. So would it be wrong to say or would it be right to say that what we are witnessing today is some sort of undeclared emergency? I think so. I think where the media is concerned, while we learned for a period of how to defend ourselves, the governments and all the political parties that were in power, which was also in the opposition, which includes the BJP, realized that the way to control the media was not through direct censorship, but through indirect censorship, which is more powerful and more effective without bringing the government into direct conflict with us. So the corporates come in, always there because their business interests have to be controlled and protected by governments. And now when television came, it needed big money and the more money you need, the more the corporate role. And that's how the control has been completely and totally established. Now the government just has to pick up a phone call and pick up a phone and make a call to the television channel. And this was under the last government also, by the way. It was under the Congress. There was Mr. Chidambram then and there was Mr. Jaitley now and there's everybody else now. You just have to call the newspaper or the television channel and close the story. Yeah. I mean, one example of that is... No, let me pick up the issue that you're raising for the issue of undeclared emergency. I think that we have to say yes and no. Yes, because there are certain parts of it which are not only, I will say, what it was during the emergency or possibly even worse because you have now essentially what you were talking about mob rule. Or I will not even talk as mob rule, but the organized goons taking law in their own hands or not even law, their hate and prejudice quote-unquote in their own hands and quite knowledgeable about the fact, clear about the fact that state is not going to intervene, is going to protect them. If you take all these attacks, the lynchings we are talking about, most of the time the cases have been closed, we have a whole list of them that news click is also covered, citizen is also covered. So these are far beyond what we have seen early. This is not what we saw during the emergency because there was no, in that sense, there were youth congress hoots which were mobilized at different points. The scale was nothing on this, on this, at this level. So you have this mob violence combining with loss of democratic rights. That is the main threat that you see. At the moment, yes, we have, because it's a federal government, still there is a federal structure, there are states, they have certain powers. So it's not that easy in India today to have a completely unitary, shall we say, undemocratic government. It's not that easy, it can be done, but not that easy. But the threat that we see is the combination of state power with mob violence, if you will, mob rule, if you will. That proposes the threat. And the fact that you are increasingly politicizing different organs of the state, including now the army, I think those are the long-term threats that we see. So the democratic structure is being essentially weakened from inside. So it's not one blow, but multiple, or shall we say, thousand cuts that we are now... Also when it comes to constitution, this government has seen many firsts. For example, budget is presented, and there's no discussion takes place on it. Four senior moves, judges or the Supreme Court come out and say there's something wrong with the judiciary, and nobody intervenes. Ordnance rule is always taken, and then you have governors asking the party with no majority, or even not having single largest majority, to come and form the government. So constitution basically is under threat, right? No, I just want to say that like you said, there are some things that have happened before, and some things that are really a first for even us. And the misuse of governors, it's been fairly established. And obviously if it goes on unchecked, and different governments come and start taking control, then it's going to get worse, as we have seen it happening. But constitutionally elected governments of Andhra Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, were overthrown earlier, and they're being overthrown today. Governors are being used in a completely more blatant and brazen manner perhaps than they were earlier. But these are sort of things with the precedents. But what the real problem is mob rule. It is the creation of a parallel state, which is protected by the state. So the non-state being protected by the state machinery. And then that non-state, emerging as armies, and actually trying to strike fear by targeting specific castes, specific communities, specific individuals, all in the name of a certain ideology. That's where the real problem is. Also there's this entire propaganda of, I mean this hyper nationalism, which has been growing since last past few months, especially in past one month we have seen they're talking about Kashmir extensively taking that issue outside in other parts of the country and pitching that nationalism issue, which is creating a binary between Jammu and Kashmir and rest of India, and also creating sort of a communal divide when it comes. Binary between Jammu and Kashmir as well. But when you talk of hyper nationalism, let's be very clear. Hyper nationalism with Hindu, Hindutva ideology, which Savarkar said is nothing to do with Hinduism. Let's be very clear on it. It's Hindu identity. Now that has always been the position of the RSS. So right from the 50s onwards, they have been trying to say our nationalism should be based on Hindu identity and they have always been hyper nationalists. That's also the reason. I'll tell you very much being called Mrs. Gandhi, Durga. After the 71 war, which she later on tried to retract. But the point is that that hyper nationalism and Hindu identity have been the two planks of the BJP RSS combined. So that's one common part that is there. It must be understood that this is also the attack on the constitution. Because all the constitutional values are essentially threatened. If you try to introduce as you're doing it from the classroom to every institution in the country, you're introducing this. So that is where the constitutional attack is the sharpest. It's not only through what you're talking about in terms of abrogating X, Y or Z or the putting ordinances. As Seema said, all those things have happened in the past. Yes, more so today than before. Sure. But the door on this was cracked open by the Congress really long back. What is new is the complete nominalization of the state and its machinery along with the rule of the private armies, as she was saying. And essentially mob violence being unleashed now using social media and also the troll TV channels like Republic TV. And apart from just that, Republic and Times now, whatever that kind of television actually shows up as terrible and it makes us then accept the already bad is good. The problem is and that is again we lose sight and the viewers lose sight of the real picture is that all television is bought. Some is more troll-ish and more propagandist and completely sold out but the rest have also been sold out. There is nothing of the poor on any television channel. There is nothing of the farmers on any television channel. There is nothing that doesn't draw that kind of you know viewership that's there. So basically one point you were saying when you were talking about RSS and the constitution it's the same organization which said that the founder said that one who is Smithy should be the constitution not what Ambedkar basis of the constitution not what Ambedkar has written right. So I mean you pointed out an important thing which is social media. Recently now their own ministers and members are facing the same heat. Sushma Saroj is being trolled continuously since last three days because she sacked the passport officer in Lucknow who refused to give passport to an inter fate couple. So and let's go back a bit. 2014 when Modi was campaigning he was talking about how congress has ruined the country and emergency was one among the focus that how Indra Gandhi implemented it. When we keep this in mind in 2019 in mind would he not be questioned on the same lines. Let's again take a little tack on this. I think that we should be very clear that what they are creating is what I would call the new normal. The new normal is hatred is normal. Discrimination against minorities is normal. Assumption that caste indicates a certain innate ability is normal. This is the new normal that is being sought to be introduced or sought to be made denormal. This new normal is what we are seeing emerge and I think that's the threat to all of us that this creeping abnormalities if you will the creeping distortions which slowly you know leech away the basis of your democracy or your civil liberties this then tends to be overlooked because it's happening bit by bit every day. Now I think the Indian people are not that stupid I think in most occasions assert good common sense how much and how long can you fool them is the question and I think 2019 for all of us is going to be big question on So on the concluding note I mean keeping 2019 in mind once again when emergency was there was there any massive resistance do you see something like that happening well let's be very honest during emergency the resistance had to be taken out and it is only when the emergency started being relaxed people then you could see it coming out in large numbers the mood of the country changing this was actually something which we have not seen so sharply take place ever quiet during a bunch they were silent shall we say they were angry but there was the resistance the official the actual physical resistance was very relatively had which is why you had this cobbled up opposition government that finally came you know the first coalition which didn't last and it actually the they they initially were even hesitant to contest the elections they didn't know that whether you know the election would be completely rigged and they got Indira Gandhi back business later but within a year and a half what I'm saying is that that whole period of 2-2.5 months the would that is something which is very remarkable and it's the other point that I would like to make is that actually Mrs. Gandhi did not remove or weaken emergency and allow the elections because of the strength the resistance it was her belief that she would win and therefore she could put the stamp of approval of the people of India that really led to her wanting or declaring elections so we must be clear about that I do feel that today the ground cell of opinion that I see is something that I would think can be of a similar order that we saw in those 3 months when the elections were declared and finally elections took place and I think there's a big difference also one you know which suddenly struck me is that when Indira Gandhi brought an emergency she brought it out of her own personal like paranoia insecurity the influence of Sanjay Gandhi but not because of ideology and that is why she went back on the election mode trying to you know thinking that she had overcome her paranoia and her insecurities today and get legitimacy and today it is ideological and that is the main big difference one is really long term one had come in for a short term measure that's all the time we have for today thanks a lot Seema thank you for watching this program