What will Pranabda do now?

Harish Khare

In a few days, Pranab Mukherjee will cease to be the President of India. His successor has already been elected and would get sworn in on July 25. He will no longer be entitled to be called Mahamahim. He will become the familiar and likeable Pranabda.

What will Pranabda do? Rather, what should he do? Unlike a prime minister, who is deemed to be a practising politician and, therefore, never goes out of business, a president, in the Indian context, is presumed to have detoxified himself/herself of all political affiliations. 

President Mukherjee’s predecessor, Mrs Pratibha Patil, was content to retire to a quiet and isolated spot in Pune. Her predecessor, Abdul J Kalam, continued to remain active in the public domain, pushing for ideas, igniting young minds, effortlessly returning to his role as the nation’s motivator. Earlier, KR Narayanan did not live long after leaving the Rashtrapati Bhavan. He was still in the process of sorting out his papers when assorted illnesses took their toll. R Venkataraman tried for a while to carve a public role for himself, but that did not add up to much.

Tradition and history do not encourage an activist role for former presidents.

In the United States, laws and political traditions encourage former presidents to set up their foundations and libraries, all intended to ensure that historians and scholars take a kind view of their presidency. 

We, in India, are extraordinarily cussed in providing for ex-presidents. For five years, a man or a woman is parked in one of the world’s most envious surroundings, a sprawling mansion, an army of underlings in attendance. The President of India gets to live in style and just as well — after all, the head of the republic personifies the pomp and splendour of the country. But the moment the president’s term comes to an end, we condemn him to dignified poverty. Maybe, we resent putting the president up for five years in such grandeur. 

It would be interesting to watch what Pranabda makes of himself outside the Rashtrapati Bhavan. He has opted to stay put in Delhi. Pranab babu is a hardcore politician. There was some loose talk of him being asked to lead the Congress. This is foolishness. There may be a leadership vacuum in the Congress, but there is no leadership vacancy.

When the NDA government was voted to office in May 2014, President Pranab wisely resisted the temptation to convert the Rashtrapati Bhavan into a rival centre of power and influence, even though he had often crossed political swords with Narendra Modi and his party. 

During these last three years, he was able to maintain a reasonably correct relationship with the Modi government. 

In fact, many purists were dismayed that he was seen enthusiastically enlisting himself in the government programmes, such as the Swachh Bharat or yoga events. The Head of the State was not obliged to lend presidential presence to the government’s every public relations exercise. 

Yet, from time to time, he stumbled upon the moral authority of his office. He spoke up, in measured tones and, rightly so, when things seemed to be getting out of hand.

It is fair to assume that these five years in the Rashtrapati Bhavan have made him into a kind of an ‘elder statesman.’ He can provide the much-needed gravitas in our public life and political discourse.

                                                                 ***************

If one were to subscribe to the quasi-official terms of abuse and denunciation, then Indira Gandhi could easily be hailed as the only “Hindu” ruler to have inflicted a decisive and comprehensive defeat over a Muslim ruler. Her marshalling of the national resources and national political energy in a systematic manner was one of the finest chapters of statecraft in the long history of this ancient land. 

Yet, it is ironic that while Pakistan continues to smart under that defeat and continues to feel that the 1971 humiliation has to be avenged, we in our own country have turned against her. 

In the post-May 2014 era, history is being re-written. Revisionists, pamphleteers and propagandists are tirelessly at work. Their brief is clear: belittle Indira Gandhi’s leadership and her contribution to the consolidation of the Indian State at a time when the Cold War was at its hottest and making fierce demands on our national space. When as an uncompromising nationalist, she persevered. 

In this context, the Indian National Congress has done itself — and the nation — a service by bringing out a book on Indira Gandhi to mark her centenary. India’s Indira — A Centennial Tribute is a handsomely produced book.

There are thoughtful essays by President Pranab Mukherjee, Vice-President Hamid Ansari, Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck of Bhutan, former Sri Lankan President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, and former Namibian President Sam Nujoma. These names affirm her stature and the respect she enjoyed in the neighbourhood.

But the best thing the book’s editor, Anand Sharma, has done is to put together 12 of her best speeches. Read together, these speeches give us a fairly good idea of her coherent and clear worldview. She was a leader for those times. And, those were trying and troubled times. 

A nation that seeks to forget, or worse, belittle, its leaders cannot possibly hope to get respect and recognition from others.

                                                                 *************** 

Honest journalism in India has always been a hazardous enterprise. Besides producing and processing news, journalism involves unearthing facts and patterns which may not be so easily observable. An honest journalist often runs the risk of annoying powerful interests and individuals. 

In the good old days, there was a simple way of dealing with an annoying journalist: get him physically harmed, even bumped off. As the democratic assertions and practices have become more entrenched, intimidation and threats have become rather nuanced. Since we officially began subscribing to the market, with a capital M, many values and ethical codes of yesteryear stand revised. The journalist is no longer an unafraid functionary. 

Yet, the pressure on the journalist remains unabated. In the last three years, the government has done a splendid job of not only taming the media but also converting it into its barking dog. The so-called national news channels, in particular, have suddenly stopped questioning the government. Instead, the accent is on going after the Opposition.

Still, stray voices of dissent persevere — but these are not to be tolerated. The latest and, probably, the most painful evidence of the new form of intimidation comes from the Economic and Political Weekly. This is a small weekly magazine, catering almost entirely to an academic-oriented readership. Despite its limited circulation, it is highly respected. Early this week, the EPW editor found himself constrained to put in his papers. What is painful about the EPW episode is that this liberal-left journal is overseen by a trust, consisting of some of the most respected and distinguished social scientists and historians. 

The editor, Pranjoy Guha Thakurta, had managed to annoy the very, very rich and very, very powerful Adani group. Pranjoy had written two longish articles, detailing how windfall profits came the Adani group’s way and suggested that, perhaps, the group’s proximity to Narendra Modi had something to do with the bonanza. The Adani group resorted to a very intimidating and very effective manoeuvre: it slapped a case of defamation. Lawsuits are expensive; the idea, possibly, was to threaten the EPW with a financially bleeding legal battle. 

Thakurta’s forced departure from the EPW is a definite warning, especially to all those who dare poke their nose into the corporate shenanigans. Sad and dismaying.

                                                                 *************** 

News reports suggest that those who manage the affairs at Harmandar Sahib have asked them to be exempted from the GST on the plea that langar is a free, charitable rite. 

The government cannot possibly make an exception in the case of one religious institution. Instead, it has been suggested: why not ask the devotees to donate an extra 17 per cent. Perhaps, there can be a separate ‘golak’ for GST?

That is an out-of-the-box idea and calls for coffee. Do join me.  

[email protected]