Democracy and Consensus

 लोकतन्त्र में व्यापक सर्वसम्मति की अनिवार्यता

 

Adversarial politics is an unfortunate but essential part of electoral democracy. But, in functioning democracies, this adversarial contention takes place on a substratum of consensus across parties about most issues of serious national concern. Unfortunately, during the last ten years in India, that solid ground of consensus on which the game of adversarial politics is played seems to have disappeared. The political contenders today treat each other as enemies rather than mere adversaries. This does not bode well for a democracy. In this article in Hindi, we discuss the issue and place it in the perspective of the several decades of the functioning of democratic polity in India. We draw attention to this growing deficit of consensus on the occasion of Diwali, the festival of homecoming, harmony and reconciliation.

लोकतन्त्र का आधार सर्वसम्मति में है। प्रभावी सक्षम लोकतन्त्र में अधिकतर विषयों पर, राष्ट्र की अधिकतर समस्याओं पर और उनके समाधान पर व्यापक राष्ट्रीय एकमत होता है। पक्ष-विपक्ष में असहमति का क्षेत्र सीमित होता है। राष्ट्रजीवन के गिने-चुने ही आयाम होते हैं जिनपर सभी एकमत नहीं होते। विचार-विमर्श से उन आयामों पर भी सहमति बनाने के प्रयास किये जाते हैं। जहाँ सहमति नहीं बन पाती, वहाँ भी पक्ष-विपक्ष में इतनी समझदारी तो बनती है कि बहुमत जो प्रस्ताव रख रहा है वह राष्ट्रविरोधी तो नहीं ही है। जब-जब सहमति का क्षेत्र संकुचित होता है और पक्ष-विपक्ष में यह भावना बन जाती है अथवा बना दी जाती है कि दूसरा पक्ष राष्ट्रविरोधी है, विघटनकारी है अथवा निपट मूर्ख है, जब-जब पक्ष-विपक्ष में संवादहीनता की स्थिति आ खड़ी होती है, तब-तब स्वस्थ लोकतन्त्र का चलना कठिन हो जाता है। 

 

प्रायः तीन दशक पूर्व मा. लालकृष्ण आडवाणी जी ने लोकतन्त्र में सर्वसम्मति का अनिवार्यता का विषय हमारी एक संगोष्ठी में उठाया था। यह सर्वपक्षीय संगोष्ठी ऑबसर्वर रिसर्च फाउंडेशन के श्री ऋषिकुमार मिश्र और सेंटर फॉर पॉलिसी स्टडीज़ के संयुक्त तत्वावधान में १९९७ में आयोजित की गयी थी। सेंटर ने उस समय भारत में अन्न के गहन अभाव और अन्नबाहुल्य के सनातन भारतीय अनुशासन का वर्णन करते हुए अन्नं बहु कुर्वीत नामक एक पुस्तक प्रकाशित की थी। उसी संदर्भ में यह गोष्ठी थी। गोष्ठी में समस्त राजनीतिक पक्षों के उस समय के उच्चतम नेता उपस्थित थे। भाकपा के नेता चतुरानन मिश्र उस समय केन्द्रीय कृषि मन्त्रि थे। उन्होंने संगोष्ठी का उद्घाटन संबोधन प्रस्तुत किया। भाजपा के श्री अटलबिहारी वाजपेयी उद्घाटन सत्र के अध्यक्ष थे। कांग्रेस के श्री मूपनार इस सत्र के मुख्य अतिथि थे। अन्य सत्रों में श्री मुरली मनोहर जोशी, श्री अजित सिंह, श्री डी. राजा, श्री नितीश कुमार, श्री गोवन्दाचार्य आदि विभिन्न दलों का प्रतिनिधित्व कर रहे थे। समापन सत्र की अध्यक्षता श्री आडवाणी जी ने की और उनके साथ श्री चन्द्रशेखर और श्री प्रणव मुखर्जी उस सत्र में उपस्थित थे।

 

संगोष्ठी में दिन-भर पक्ष-प्रतिपक्ष के समस्त राजनेताओं की उपस्थिति को और भूख-निवारण की समस्या पर उस दिन की सर्वसम्मति को रेखांकित करते हुए श्री आडवाणी ने अपने समापन भाषण में प्रभावी लोकतन्त्र में सर्वसम्मति की अनिवार्यता का विषय उठाया। उन्होंने कहा—

 

“इस संगोष्ठी में भाग लेते हुए मेरे मन में भारत के सार्वजनिक जीवन का एक और आयाम आ रहा है। हम जानते हैं कि स्वतन्त्रताप्राप्ति पर हमने लोकतान्त्रिक व्यवस्था को अपनाया था। इसका एक अर्थ यह था कि विभिन्न विचारधाराओं को मानने वाले पक्ष विभिन्न विषयों पर विरोधात्मक विचार रखेंगे, वे अपनी-अपनी विचारधारा के अनुरूप वाद-विवाद करेंगे और विभिन्न पक्षों के इस विरोधात्मक व्यवहार के मध्य देश अपने लोकतान्त्रिक मार्ग पर आगे बढ़ता जायेगा। पचास वर्षों से इस परस्पर विरोधात्मक मार्ग पर चलते हुए हम आज की स्थिति में पहुँचे हैं। परन्तु इस परस्पर विरोधात्मक व्यवहार को लोकतन्त्र का अभिन्न अंग मानते हुए भी हमें यह जानना चाहिये के भारत की समस्याएँ विकट हैं और जब तक हम कुछ महत्त्वपूर्ण विषयों पर सर्वसम्मति नहीं बना लेते तब तक हम कहीं नहीं पहुँच पायेंगे। जब तक सब पक्षों के राजनेता भारत की मूलभूत समस्याओं और उनके समाधान के मार्ग के प्रति एकमत नहीं हो पाते तब तक हम इस देश का कुछ भला नहीं कर पायेंगे। …”

(इस संगोष्ठी की संपूर्ण कार्यवाही अंग्रेजी में यहाँ उपलब्ध है।)

आडवाणीजी उस दिन एकत्रित सभी पक्षों के राजनेताओं के मध्य लोकतन्त्र में राष्ट्र की मौलिक समस्याओं पर सर्वसम्मति की अनिवार्यता का जो विषय उठा रहे थे, वह केवल भारत के परिप्रेक्ष्य में ही नहीं अपितु सब लोकतान्त्रिक व्यवस्थाओं में मूलभूत माना जाता है। पिछले कुछ वर्षों से अमरीका में अनेक मौलिक विषयों पर वहाँ के दो प्रमुख राजनीतिक पक्षों में बड़ी खाई पैदा हुई है। सर्वसम्मति के इस अभाव पर वहाँ के प्रबुद्ध लोग सतत चिन्ता व्यक्त करते रहते हैं। दोनों पक्षों के अनेक सीनेटर मूल समस्याओं पर एकमत बनाने का प्रयास भी करते रहते हैं। अनेक ऐसे अवसर आये हैं जब विरोधात्मक राजनीति के चलते लोकतान्त्रिक व्यवस्था में गत्यावरोध-सा उपस्थित होने लगता है, और फिर दोनों पक्षों के कुछ सांसद मिलकर द्विपक्षीय समाधान निकाल लेते हैं। विचारधाराओं में अत्यन्त गहन विरोध होते हुए भी राष्ट्रीय समस्याओं का सर्वसम्मत समाधान होता रहता है। 

 

एशिया के अनेक देशों ने तो आधुनिक पश्चिमी पद्धति का लोकतन्त्र अपनाते हुए अपने-अपने राष्ट्र की परिस्थिति के अनुरूप ऐसी औपचारिक व्यवस्थाएँ बनायी हैं जिनसे विरोधात्मक राजनीति के ऊपर राष्ट्रीय सर्वसम्मति का कोई आधार बना रहे, कोई एक सर्वसम्मानित छत्र बना रहे। उन्नीसवीं सदी के अन्त में जब जापान ने पश्चिमी पद्धति का लोकतान्त्रिक संविधान बनाया तो उससे पहले प्रायः दो दशकों तक सार्वजनिक स्तर पर यह चिन्ता होती रही कि विरोधात्मक पक्ष-विपक्ष वाली नीति वहाँ आयेगी तो समाज में व्याप्त सर्वसम्मति बिखर जायेगी। इस प्रक्रिया में उन्होंने अपने सम्राट को पक्ष-विपक्ष की राजनीति से बहुत ऊपर, सब के सम्मानित, राष्ट्र की गरिमा के प्रतीक एवं सर्वसम्मति की धुरी के रूप में स्थापित कर लिया। ऐसा करने के पश्चात् ही जापान ने पश्चिमी पद्धति के लोकतन्त्र को स्वीकार किया था। 

 

भारत में हम जापान के सम्राट के समकक्ष राष्ट्रीय सर्वसम्मति की किसी धुरी को तो स्थापित नहीं कर पाये थे। पर संविधान-निर्माताओं ने राष्ट्रपति के पद को वैसी गरिमा प्रदान करने का प्रयास किया था। कुछ सीमा तक हमारे राष्ट्रपति पक्ष-विपक्ष की राजनीति से ऊपर और दोनों के सम्मान का पात्र बने भी रहे हैं। पर हमारे संविधान में राष्ट्रपति की शक्तियाँ सीमित हैं। मूलभूत समस्याओं पर जिस प्रकार की सर्वसम्मति की अपेक्षा आडवाणीजी कर रहे थे उसका संपादन करवाने का प्रयास करना भी राष्ट्रपति के कार्यक्षेत्र में नहीं आता। इसलिये राष्ट्र में वाञ्छनीय सर्वसम्मति बनाये रखने का उत्तरदायित्व पक्ष-विपक्ष के और विशेषतः सत्तापक्ष के उच्च राजनेताओं पर ही आता है। 

 

यह सौभाग्य का विषय है कि भारतीय लोकतन्त्र के ७७ वर्षों में हमारे राजनेताओं ने अपने इस उत्तरदायित्व का पालन करते हुए कुछ स्तर तक सर्वसम्मति बनायी रखी है। यह सर्वसम्मति वैसी तो नहीं रही जिसकी अपेक्षा आडवाणीजी ने व्यक्त की थी, जिसके आधार पर कोई भी सत्तापक्ष अन्य सब पक्षों को साथ लेकर निश्चिन्तता से राष्ट्रनिर्माण के कार्य को आगे बढ़ाता चला जा सके। पर एक न्यूनतम सहमति और पक्ष-विपक्ष के मध्य परस्पर सम्मान, संवाद एवं सहकार की भी स्थिति तो अधिकतर बनी ही रही है। इसीलिये हम इस दीर्घकाल तक लोकतन्त्र को निभा पाये हैं। इस काल में हम देश को समर्थ-विकसित देशों की श्रेणी में चाहे न ला पाये हों पर सामाजिक, सामरिक एवं आर्थिक क्षेत्रों में पर्याप्त आगे बढ़े हैं। सामाजिक क्षेत्र में, विभिन्न समुदायों को सत्ता एवं समाज में समुचित प्रतिनिधित्व देने के विषय में तो हम लोकतान्त्रिक ढंग से ऐसे बड़े परिवर्तन कर पाये हैं जिन्हें करने के लिये अन्य देशों को रक्तरञ्जित क्रान्तियों से निकलना पड़ा है। यह हमारी राजनीति में बनी एक न्यूनतम सर्वसम्मति, पक्ष-विपक्ष के राजनेताओं का एक-दूसरे के प्रति सम्मान का भाव रखने और परस्पर संवाद बनाये रखने के कारण ही हो पाया है।

 

इन ७७ वर्षों में कुछेक काल ऐसे भी आये हैं जब सामान्य सर्वसम्मति, परस्पर सम्मान एवं संवाद की इस मूलभूत लोकतान्त्रिक अनिवार्यता का उल्लंघन हुआ है। उन कालों में लोकतन्त्र बिखरने की स्थिति में पहुँचा है। इनमें से एक काल तब आया था जब १९६२ में चीन से मिली सामरिक पराजय के कारण देश के एक बड़े वर्ग में उस समय के प्रधानमन्त्री श्री जवाहरलाल नेहरु के प्रति मोहभंग की स्थित बन गयी थी। उनकी नेतृत्व क्षमता पर विश्वास नहीं रहा था। उच्च राजनेताओं में परस्पर सम्मान एवं संवाद की कड़ी टूट गयी थी। परन्तु शीघ्र ही देश उस स्थिति से उबर आया था। उस उबरने में नेहरुजी के उत्तराधिकारी श्री लालबहादुर शास्त्री के सौम्य-सहज व्यक्तित्व और सबको साथ लेकर चलने की वृत्ति का बड़ा योगदान था।

 

राजनीति में न्यूनतम सर्वसम्मति एवं परस्पर सम्मान-संवाद की लोकतान्त्रिक अनिवार्यता का उल्लंघन फिर १९७३ से १९७७ के मध्य हुआ। उस बार तो भारतीय लोकतन्त्र एकदा बिखर ही गया था। १९७५ में आन्तरिक आपातकाल की घोषणा हुई, दो वर्ष तक सामान्य लोकतान्त्रिक व्यस्थाएँ स्थगित रहीं और विपक्ष के अनेक नेता और कार्यकर्ता काराबद्ध रहे। उस आपदा से हम भारत के सामान्य जनों की लोकतन्त्र के प्रति गहन आस्था एवं प्रतिबद्धता के कारण ही उबर पाये। १९७७ में स्वतन्त्र एवं निष्पक्ष चुनाव हुए। श्रीमति इंदिरा गांधी हारीं। फिर मात्र ३ वर्ष पश्चात् उन्हीं इंदिरा गांधी को भारत के लोगों ने विशाल बहुमत से जितवा दिया। यह घटनाक्रम भारत के लोगों की लोकतन्त्र की सर्वसम्मति वाली समझ का उदाहरण है। राजनैतिक पक्ष-विपक्ष का जब आपस में संवाद टूट भी जाता है, तब भी हमारे लोगो दोनों के मध्य संतुलन बनाये रखते हैं और दोनों का सम्यक आकलन करने की क्षमता बनाये रखते हैं।

 

लगता है कि १९७७ के पश्चात् राजनीति में न्यूनतम आवश्यक सर्वसम्मति के टूटने और पक्ष-विपक्ष में परस्पर सम्मान एवं संवाद के अभाव की स्थिति आज पुनः देश के सामने उपस्थित है। ऐसी स्थिति बनने का क्रम दस वर्ष पहले भाजपा एवं राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ की हिन्दुत्ववादी एवं साग्रह राष्ट्रवादी विचारधारा के सत्ता में आने के साथ ही चल पड़ा था। इस सत्ता में प्रारम्भ से ही लोकतन्त्र में न्यूनतम सर्वसम्मति एवं संवाद स्थापित का प्रयास करते रहने की अनिवार्यता की उपेक्षा की गयी। ऐसी स्थापनाएँ की गयी कि इस सत्ता से पूर्व के सात दशकों में राष्ट्रनिर्माण की दिशा में कुछ नहीं हुआ। पूर्व के राजनेताओं की राष्ट्र के प्रति कोई आस्था नहीं थी, उनमें से कुछ तो राष्ट्र के प्रति विद्वेष रखते थे। उनकी विचारधारा तो भ्रामक थी ही, उन्हें प्रभावी शासन-प्रशासन चलाना भी नहीं आता। इन सब स्थापनाओं का पारंपरिक एवं नये प्रचार साधनों के माध्यम से व्यापक प्रसार किया गया।

 

पूर्व के राजनेताओं को भ्रमित, अक्षम एवं राष्ट्रविरोधी स्थापित करने का यह प्रयास केवल स्वाधीनता के पश्चात् के काल तक सीमित नहीं रहा। उससे पहले के स्वतन्त्रतासंग्राम के उच्चतम राजनेताओं पर, यहाँ तक कि स्वयं महात्मा गांधी पर भी इसी प्रकार के आक्षेप किये गये। किसी समाज में न्यूनतम सर्वसम्मति बनाये रखने का प्रमुख स्रोत सर्वमान्य महापुरुषों के प्रति सम्मान होता है। इस काल में हमारे महापुरुषों की सर्वमान्यता को खण्डित करने के समन्वित प्रयास हुए। इससे लोकतन्त्र के लिये अनिवार्य न्यूनतम सर्वसम्मति का आधार ही समाप्त होने लगा।

 

इतना ही नहीं, व्यापक स्तर पर प्रयास हुए कि सार्वजनिक सेवाओं में भर्ती में सत्ता से जुड़ी विचारधारा एवं विचारपरिवार के लोगों को वरीयता मिल पाये। शिक्षा के क्षेत्र में तो समन्वित प्रयास कर इसी एक विचारधारा एवं विचारपरिवार से इतर के लोगों को प्रायः बहिष्कृत ही कर दिया गया।

 

ये सब व्यवहार लोकतन्त्र के लिये न्यूनतम सर्वसम्मति को खण्डित करने वाले थे। परन्तु फिर भी दस वर्षों तक लोकतन्त्र अबाध चलता रहा, व्यापक स्तर पर टूटती हुई सर्वसम्मति का कोई आपातकाल जैसा प्रभाव नहीं दिखा। इसका एक कारण तो यही था कि संसद और अनेक राज्यों की विधायिकाओं में विपक्ष की उपस्थिति नगण्य हो गयी थी। भारत के लोगों को ऐसा लगा था कि इस एकपक्षीय सत्ता के उत्थान से देश शीघ्र ही आत्मनिर्भर सक्षम एवं विकसित देशों की श्रेणी में आ खड़ा होगा। देश के हिन्दुओं को भी लगा था कि राष्ट्र एवं समाज में अपने धर्म को अभिव्यक्ति दे पायेंगे, पूर्व के राजनेताओं के धर्मनिरपेक्षता पर अति-आग्रह के चलते यह उनके लिये प्रतिबन्धित सा हो गया था। इसलिये १० वर्षों तक उन्होंने इस विचारधारा को प्रायः एकछत्र सत्ता में बनाये रखा।

 

परन्तु यह निश्चित है कि न्यूनतम सर्वसम्मति के बिना और पक्ष-विपक्ष में परस्पर सम्मान एवं संवाद के बिना कोई लोकतान्त्रिक व्यवस्था बहुत देर तक चल नहीं सकती। पिछले चुनाव में विपक्ष कुछ सक्षम होकर उभरा है। इसलिये अब पिछले दस वर्षों की एकपक्षीय राजनीति एवं समाजनीति को निरन्तर चलाना सम्भव नहीं होगा। इस परिस्थिति में लोकतन्त्र को अक्षुण्ण बनाये रखना है तो पक्ष-विपक्ष में संवाद स्थापित करने के प्रयास करने पड़ेंगे। एक दूसरे को प्रति कुछ सम्मान का भाव पुनः स्थापित करने के प्रयास करने पड़ेंगे। किसी एक विचारधारा-विचारपरिवार के लोगों को सार्वजनिक जीवन एवं सार्वजनिक शिक्षा में एकाधिकार देने की प्रवृत्ति को रोकना पड़ेगा।  केवल राजनीति में ही नहीं, समस्त लोकजीवन में एक न्यूनतम सर्वसम्मति, सहमति, समन्वय स्थापित करने का प्रयास करना होगा। सर्वसम्मति, सहमति, समन्वय लोकतन्त्र के अभिन्न अंग है। इनके बिना लोकतन्त्र चला नहीं करता। इस समय हमारे लोकतन्त्र में इनका अभाव है।

 

भारतीय लोकतन्त्र के समक्ष आज यही सबसे बड़ी चुनौती है।

डॉ. जतिन्दर कुमार बजाज

सेंटर फॉर पॉलिसी स्टडीज़, चेन्ने एवं दिल्ली

policy.cpsindia@gmail.com, www.cpsindia.org, blog.cpsindia.org

अगस्त २४, २०२४

 

डॉ. जतिन्दर कुमार बजाज सेंटर फॉर पॉलिसी स्टडीज़ के संस्थापक-निदेशक हैं। वे भारतीय समाजविज्ञान परिषद् के अध्यक्ष और अन्य पिछड़ा जातियों के उपवर्गीकरण हेतु आयोग के सदस्य रहे हैं। २०२२ में उन्हें पद्मश्री से सम्मानित किया गया। 

यह लेख सामाजिक आर्थिक एवं संसदीय अध्ययन केन्द्र राँची की संसदीय लोकतंत्र: चुनौतियां एवं समाधान विषय पर प्रकाशित स्मारिका २०२४-२५ के लिये लिखा गया है और स्मारिका के पृष्ठ ३२-३६ पर छपा है।

Documents of Our Times-I

 

Canada has been publicly alleging, since September 2023, that the GOI is running a campaign of targeted killings of Canadian citizens of Indian origin. India has repeatedly held these allegations to be completely unfounded. It has also been castigating the Government of Canada, and Prime Minister Trudeau personally, for indulging in these “laughable” aspersions merely to gain domestic political advantage. In this context, The Washington Post has published a report directly naming the Home Minister of India for having authorised the operations. This report is, in all likelihood, vicious anti-India disinformation spread at the behest of Canada. But, the mere fact of such an allegation having been made in a reputed international newspaper makes this report a significant historical document of our times. Below, we reproduce the complete text of the report from:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/10/14/canada-modi-sikhs-violence-india/

Canada alleges much wider campaign 

by Modi government against Sikhs

By Greg Miller, Gerry Shih

 

 

The killing of a Sikh separatist in Canada last year was part of a broader campaign of violence against Indian dissidents directed by a senior official in the Indian government and an operative in the country’s spy agency, according to Canadian officials who cited intercepted Indian communications and other newly acquired information.

 

Canadian authorities have also identified at least six Indian diplomats serving in Canada who were directly involved in gathering detailed intelligence on Sikh separatists who were then killed, attacked or threatened by India’s criminal proxies, Canadian officials said.

 

Canada ordered all six of those diplomats to leave the country in notices that were sent early Monday, the officials said. Among them were India’s top diplomat in the Sanjay Kumar Verma, and its top consular official in Toronto, the officials said. 

 

India issued a conflicting statement saying it had withdrawn the diplomats over concerns for their safety. India later announced that it had expelled six Canadian diplomats, including Canada’s top diplomat in New Delhi.

 

The previously undisclosed details about India’s alleged involvement in the 2023 death of Hardeep Singh Nijjar and other attacks stem from an ongoing investigation that Canadian authorities said has uncovered extensive evidence linking a larger outbreak of violence in Canada to the administration of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. 

 

“We know they are involved in the Nijjar killing, in other murders and in ongoing violence — actual violence — in Canada,” said a senior Canadian official. The official said that since Nijjar’s death, the pace of threats has escalated to such an extent that authorities have warned a dozen individuals of Indian descent that there was credible information they could be targeted. The official and others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the investigation, citing the sensitivity of allegations that have caused a rupture in relations between Delhi and Ottawa. 

 

India has vehemently denied the accusations. A statement issued by the country’s Ministry of External Affairs on Monday said that Modi’s government “strongly rejects these preposterous imputations and ascribes them to the political agenda” of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. 

 

Trudeau said Monday that “the response of the Indian government has been to deny, to obfuscate, to attack me personally and the integrity of the government of Canada and its officials and its police agencies.” 

 

Even so, the new allegations add to mounting concerns among Western security officials and human rights organizations that Modi’s government has become one of the world’s most aggressive practitioners of “transnational repression,” or the use of violence and other means to neutralize perceived homegrown adversaries who have sought refuge in other countries. 

 

The Biden administration, which has cultivated closer ties with India, last year confronted Modi administration officials with intelligence that an officer in India’s Research and Analysis Wing, a spy service known as RAW, was behind an attempt to assassinate a Sikh separatist in New York — a failed plot with parallels to the Nijjar case in Canada. The Post identified the RAW officer as Vikram Yadav, though he was not named in a U.S. indictment accusing an alleged Indian drug trafficker of seeking to hire a hit man to carry out the killing. 

 

Nijjar and Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, the target of the New York plot, were leaders of a movement that for decades has campaigned to carve out an independent Sikh state in northern India. The movement was marked by violent clashes in the 1980s, but has been relatively dormant since a crackdown led to a mass exodus of Sikhs to other countries. 

 

Modi, who came to power as a champion of Hindu nationalism, has revived concerns about the supposed threat posed by Sikhs living abroad. Modi and other officials have frequently accused Canada, which has the world’s largest population of Sikhs outside India, of harboring terrorists. 

 

Canadian officials said they only recently began to grasp the magnitude of the covert campaign of violence India has waged against Sikhs as new evidence emerged from an ongoing investigation of Nijjar’s killing that is led by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police but has involved other agencies, as well as intelligence provided by the United States and other allies. 

 

Officials said the investigation has uncovered evidence of Indian government involvement in home invasions, drive-by shootings, arson and at least one additional killing. 

 

Officials cited the death of Sukhdool Singh, who was shot in Winnipeg on Sept. 20, 2023, less than a day after he was featured in a wanted list of gangsters posted on X by India’s National Investigation Agency. The killing came two days after Trudeau publicly accused India of killing Nijjar. 

 

Officials described an operational “chain” in which Indian diplomats in Canada collect intelligence on alleged Sikh separatists that is then used by RAW to identify targets for attacks carried out by a criminal syndicate led by Lawrence Bishnoi, whose organization, the officials said, has an extensive presence in Canada. Bishnoi is imprisoned in India and could not be reached for comment. His organization has previously asserted responsibility for violent attacks in Canada, officials said. 

 

Officials said Indian diplomats have used violence as well as threatened to deny needed immigration documents to coerce Indians living in Canada to serve as informants against Sikh activists. Canadian officials said this scheme involves Indian officials at the country’s consulates in Vancouver and Toronto as well as its High Commission — the embassy equivalent — in Ottawa. Canadian officials said the collection operation was overseen by Verma, India’s high commissioner in Ottawa. 

 

“The coercion goes far beyond threatening to deny visas, to include physical threats to them and their families in India,” said a senior Canadian official, who added that “the information is being sent to India at almost the highest level.”

 

Conversations and texts among Indian diplomats include references to “a senior official in India and a senior official in RAW” who have authorized the intelligence-gathering missions and attacks on Sikh separatists, the Canadian official said. 

 

Canadian officials identified the senior official in India as Amit Shah, a member of Modi’s inner circle who serves as home affairs minister. Spokespeople in India’s Ministry for External Affairs and its Home Ministry, which oversees national security matters, did not respond to requests for comment about Shah’s alleged role. 

 

Canadian officials shared details about the references to Shah and other evidence with India’s national security adviser, Ajit Doval, at a secret meeting in Singapore on Saturday. Canadians who took part in the meeting included Trudeau’s national security adviser, Nathalie Drouin, and Deputy Foreign Minister David Morrison, as well as a top RCMP official. 

 

Canada had sought the meeting in an attempt to persuade Modi’s government to end an escalating campaign of violence in Canada, but also to warn that details exposing Indian involvement in attacks were likely to become public as prosecutors move forward next month with a planned trial of four suspects in Nijjar’s killing. 

 

Instead, officials said Doval made clear that India “would deny any link to the Nijjar murder and any link to any other violence in Canada no matter what the evidence was,” a senior Canadian official said.

 

Officials provided other details about the five-hour encounter with Doval, 79, a former spymaster who is seen as one of Modi’s closest confidants and has served as national security adviser for a decade. 

 

Doval “did admit that India did use its diplomats to follow people, take pictures, et cetera, but denied any links to threats or violence,” an official said. 

 

When Canadian officials outlined evidence that India had enlisted Bishnoi’s gang networks in Canada to carry out the Nijjar killing and other attacks, Doval initially “pretended not to have any idea who the guy was,” a Canadian official said. Later, however, Doval began rattling off “facts, figures and anecdotes” about Bishnoi, acknowledging that he “was capable of orchestrating violence from wherever he is incarcerated” and “was known to be up to no good from his jail cell.” 

 

Bishnoi, 31, is one of India’s most notorious mob bosses, officials said, but has also been accused on social media of collaborating with the government while in prison. Bishnoi’s gang asserted responsibility for Singh’s killing in September last year after Trudeau’s public statement linking India to Nijjar’s death. 

 

In a news conference Monday — Canada’s Thanksgiving holiday — RCMP officials said that violence orchestrated by India had become a “significant threat to public safety,” and that at least eight people have been arrested and charged in connection with homicide cases and nearly two dozen in connection with extortion investigations. 

 

Canadian requests to interview Indian diplomats implicated in attacks were rebuffed by Modi’s government, officials said. 

 

Doval ended the Saturday meeting by asking his counterparts to treat the discussion as if it “never took place” — meaning they should refrain from issuing any public statement or acknowledgment of the gathering. 

 

By the time Drouin and Morrison had made it back to Ottawa, however, pro-Modi media reports had surfaced in India describing how Indian officials had taken a “strong stance” and lectured Canada that “it cannot make unsubstantiated charges.” 

 

Amanda Coletta in Toronto contributed to this report.

 

The Washington Post

Updated October 14, 2024 at 2:16 p.m. EDT|Published October 14, 2024 at 11:01 a.m. EDT

Ullavur and Kundratthur I (English)

 

Two Beautiful, Affluent and Self-Governing Localities of India

Ullavur and Kundratthur

We in the Centre for Policy Studies, in collaboration with the IGNCA, have recently published a couple of monographs on the geography, history, economy and polity of two localities of Tamil Nadu: Ullavur and Kundratthur. The books are compiled and edited by J. K. Bajaj and M. D. Srinivas. We have earlier posted the notice of the release function. In the note below, we describe in brief these books and what they teach us about the pre-British Indian polity of India.

More than three decades ago, when we founded the Centre for Policy Studies at Chennai, one of the main objectives before us was to learn how the polity of India functioned and what was the relationship between the State and the Society before the arrival of the British.

 

The classical civilizational literature of India is one of the sources where we may find answers to these questions. We did carry out some studies along that direction. The first few books of the Centre, especially Annam Bahu Kurvita: Recollecting the Indian Discipline of Growing and Sharing Food in Plenty, were based on our study of our civilizational literature including the Vedas, Upanishads, Itihasas, Puranas and Kavyas.

 

It was our good fortune that we had access to another source of information on the pre-British Indian polity. Sri Dharampal, the pioneering historian of eighteenth century India, had, during his extensive archival explorations, come across the records of a survey that the British carried out in about 2,000 Tamil localities from 1767 to 1774. These localities constituted the so-called Chengalpattu Jaghire which the British had obtained from the then Nawab of Arcot. The Jaghire is located around the city of Chennai. In this survey, the British, it seems, were looking for an answer to the same questions that we were interested in: How were these localities being governed till then and also what could be the value of these? They needed answers to these questions before setting up their own administration in the Jaghire.

 

This survey was carried out by Engineer Thomas Barnard. The summary records of the survey in English are available in the Tamil Nadu State Archives. These were copied from more detailed accounts inscribed in older Tamil on palm-leaves by the traditional account-keepers of these localities, the Kanakkappillais. Such accounts had been traditionally maintained and Mr. Barnard got the Kankkappillais to draw up the details he needed in a similar fashion.

 

The accounts collected in these palm-leaves are very detailed. These give the name of the head of every household, his jati and occupation and the extent of his house and the backyard. These also record the details of every temple and every lake, pond, pool and well. The accounts also record the location and extent of every piece of cultivated and barren land. And, for the years 1762 to 1767, the accounts give the extent of crops that were grown in the fields during different seasons and their produce. Further, these accounts give us the process of deduction and allocation of nearly a third of the produce for varied institutions, functions and functionaries of the locality.

 

We have copied, compiled and analysed the entire archival records of the Barnard Survey. We have deciphered, copied and translated into modern Tamil the palm-leaf manuscript accounts for about 600 localities. We have also translated the accounts of a few localities into English.

 

The two books that we have published recently give the story of the land and people of Kundratthur and Ullavur based on the information we have gathered from the archival and palm-leaf manuscript materials of the Barnard Survey. In addition, we have used the large number of inscriptions that have been recorded from Kundratthur and from the near vicinity of Ullavur. We have also used the details given in the famed Kasakkudi copperplate of the Pallava period, which pertains to a village whose coordinates, as described in the epigraph, coincide with that of Ullavur.

 

While collecting, studying and analysing all this data and compiling the two monographs, we have identified some major aspects of a locality or grama of the pre-British Indian polity. Below we share the salient aspects of an Indian locality:

 

 

1. An Indian Grama has an Identity of its own. It is not a mere collection of Houses.

 

Everything that we have learnt about the Chengalpattu localities and especially the two that we describe in these books tells us that the locality or the grama is a well-defined, long-established, self-governing unit of the polity. Every locality has a long history of its own. It has its own demarcated boundaries and a system for keeping those boundaries inviolate. 

 

The boundaries of an Indian locality were considered so sacrosanct and inviolate that Thomas Munro in his testimony to the House of Commons in the course of discussion on the East India Company Charter of 1813, said:

 

“A village in India does not apply to what is commonly called a village in this country [United Kingdom], a collection of houses; a village is certainly a portion of country, generally from two to four square miles, the boundaries of which are unalterable; whatever cessions or transfers of country are made in the course of war from one power to another, the boundaries of the village remain permanent; …”

 

In the two monographs on Ullavur and Kundratthur, we have given several maps depicting different aspects of the localities within their sacrosanct boundaries.

 

 

2. Every Indian Grama has a long history of its own.

 

The localities of India are mentioned in epigraphs inscribed on stone and copper. The localities have been talked about in epics, stories and legends. Many of the localities have their own sthala-puranas, the founding-legends. The two localities described in these monographs seem to have an especially long and well-described history.

 

As many as 55 inscriptions have been recorded from the locality of Kundratthur. These run from 1153 to 1726, from the peak of Chola period to nearly the end of the Mughals. The transactions and events recorded in these relate mainly to the locality itself, the king is mentioned in the inscriptions often only as a marker of date and time.

 

The history of Kundratthur is witnessed also by the great Sekkizhar. He was born here, compiled the life-histories and work of the 63 Naynmars, saint-poets, of the Tamil Saiva tradition, in his Periya Puranam and was raised to the semi-divine status of the 64th Nayanmar. Several places in Kundratthur remind you of Sekkizhar. There is a temple at the place of his birth. The imposing Nageshvarar temple is known to have been built by him and there is a separate shrine dedicated to him in that temple. The vast Balaravayar Tank in the centre of the town is named after his brother. There is also an impressive new memorial built for him.

 

The name of the locality comes from the Subrahmanyar Temple on top of the hill that overlooks the town from its southern end. The history of this temple is timeless, though the earliest inscriptions on its walls are from only the Chola times.

 

The temple on the hill (kundram in Tamil), commonly known as the Kundratthur Murugan, has a special place in the life of Kundratthur even today. The stream of pilgrims that visit the temple and many who hold their birth and marriage ceremonies in the presence of the Murugan make a considerable contribution to the economy and transport system of the locality.

 

The region around Ullavur has been mentioned in the Kasakkudi copperplate of the times of Nandivarman Pallavamalla. In fact, the coordinates of the village, the grant of which the copperplate records, correspond to the immediate vicinity of Ullavur, if not Ullavur itself. There are a number of inscriptions from the early Chola period in the temples of Thenneri, the vast lake in the north of Ullavur that also irrigates its fields. The channels bringing water from that lake are specifically mentioned in the Kasakkudi copperplate. In the south of Ullavur, there is the Appan Venkatesa Perumal Temple lying on the heartachingly beautiful and sacred confluence of Palar, Cheyyar and Vegavathi. Inscriptions in this temple run all across almost every wall. All these are witness to the ancientness of Ullavur. 

 

 

3. Indian Locality was Affluent and Prosperous

 

According to our estimates, on the basis of the data recorded in the Barnard Survey, average annual production of foodgrains in the whole of the Jaghire amounted to as much as 1 ton per capita. This is comparable to the most advanced nations of today. The Indian average today is only about one-fifth of that.

 

Ullavur is situated in a particularly fertile part of the land and is an intensely agricultural locality. Production of Ullavur in the eighteenth century amounts to 2.5 ton per capita. This is two and half times the average of the Jaghire.

The affluence of the localities is also seen in the extremely beautiful and rich landscape of their habitations, which we discuss below.

 

 

 

4. Indian Grama was not exclusively agricultural

 

Notwithstanding the abundant production of foodgrains in the Jaghire as a whole and in particular localities, these localities were not exclusively agricultural. According to the data of the Survey only about half of the households in an average locality could be said to be predominantly agricultural. Besides them, there were the households of the weavers, carpenters, iron smiths, gold smiths, traders, teachers, scholars, medicine-men, temple priests, dancers, etc., as also the militia, the accounts-keepers, the corn-measurers and the caretakers of irrigation and keepers of the village boundaries, etc.

 

In Kundratthur, agriculture seems to have been secondary. This was mainly a center of religion, culture and scholarship. Among the total of 471 households counted here in the eighteenth century, 116 belonged to the weavers and their associated specialists.

Ullavur was indeed an intensely agricultural locality. It produced six different paddy crops in the three seasons. Among the six crops, some were of highly specialized fragrant paddies. Even so, the locality had a complement of 30 households of cultural, administrative, artisanal economic and other service providers.

 

 

5. Indian Locality was Beautiful

 

From the older accounts and descriptions and from even the current state of some of the localities, it can be confidently said that the localities of India and the houses within them were laid on a well-ordered plan. There were a large number of temples, ponds, pools and tanks, groves and gardens in and around every locality. 

All of this created a beautiful and comforting ambience. Ullavur, a locality of just 83 households, had 14 temples, 22 ponds and pools, 4 large water-bodies for irrigation, 6 groves and 2 flower-gardens. Many of these temples and ponds, pools and other waterbodies survive to this day. Many of the temples and the water-bodies are large, beautiful and very impressive.

 

Kundratthur is of course a town of temples. There is the Kundratthur Murugan on the hill and below it you see the Kandaleesvarar, Thiruvaleesvarar and Thiruoorgaperumal standing almost in a row leading up to the hill. Then there is the Thirunagesvarar at the entrance of the town in the north. Besides these great and ancient temples, there are many smaller temples. The town also has several large waterbodies. The largest and most impressive of these is the Balaravayar Kulam, named after the brother of the venerable Sekkizhar. There are several memorials to Sekkizhar himself in the town.

 

In our monographs on the two localities of this region, we have tried to convey some of this grandeur and beauty of the landscape in the large number of pictures that we have presented there. We have posted some of the more striking pictures along with this article.

 

 

6. Indian Locality was Self-Governing

 

According to the data of the eighteenth century that we have compiled, around one-third of the produce of the locality was allocated for different public functions, functionaries and institutions.

 

There was an elaborate arrangement, sanctified in tradition, for making deductions from the produce. There were two distinct kinds of deductions. The first was called Suthanthiram, Swatantram in Sanskrit, and the second was called Merai. Suthanthiram deductions were made in two steps. First, a defined deduction for a long list of beneficiaries was made before the crop was threshed or measured. The second Suthanthiram deduction was made after threshing but before measuring. From the measured produce two kinds of Merai deductions were made. One of these Merais was taken out half from the Cultivators’ share and half from the Revenue share of the produce. The other Merai was taken out entirely from the Revenue share. These four deductions together constituted around one-third of the produce.

 

The list of functions, functionaries and institutions for whom these deductions were made was indeed long. It included the Palaiyakkarar and Tukkirikkarar who looked after the security of the locality, the Kanakkappillais who kept the accounts, Vettis who looked after the irrigation, Alavukkarans who measured the produce. It also included the temples and the associated priests, scholars, dancers and musicians. It included the teachers of the locality schools and the higher scholars. It included the carpenters, iron smiths, gold smiths, barbers, washermen and medicine men associated with the locality. There were also deductions for the founding inhabitants, the Mirasudarars and the so-called Cultivators’ Servants, the Paraiyar. The locality thus budgeted and provided for all of the essential public functions of the locality that have been taken over by the State today.

 

Besides these specified deductions from the produce, most of the beneficiaries mentioned above also held certain parts of the cultivated land as Maniyam, whose revenue accrued to the Maniyam-holder. According to our calculations, around one-fourth of the cultivated land of the entire Jaghire was assigned as Maniyam. In Kundratthur, Maniyams formed around 20 percent of the cultivation. In Ullavur, where the land was highly fertile, the Maniyams formed a relatively smaller part at around one-eighth of the cultivation.

 

The long list of beneficiaries who held the right to the revenue of a part of the land essentially became formal sharers in sovereignty. The locality ran all its public affairs through these beneficiaries who were maintained by allocations made to them in the form of Suthintaram and Merai and the revenue from their Maniyams. This made the locality sovereign in its own affairs. This made the locality sovereign in its own affairs. 

 

The self-governing locality formed the primary unit of the Indian polity. Among the beneficiaries of the deductions and Maniyams, the locality also included institutions and functionaries at the regional level and thus created the larger circle of polity beyond itself. 

 

A few months before Independence, Mahatma Gandhi presented a conception of the polity of oceanic circles and commended it for the future Independent India. In that conception the locality formed the centre of the polity and it constituted larger and larger polity in the form of expanding oceanic circles, all of which were at the same level, none above or below the other. Together they constituted the nation. The localities of Chengalpattu and especially the localities of Ullavur and Kundratthur that we have described in detail in these two monographs offer functioning examples of the oceanic polity of Gandhiji’s conception.

 

 

The task before us

 

Nowadays, there is much talk about decolonising our polity, out institutions and our discourse. We shall be able to transcend the colonial system that the British have left behind when we restore the sovereignty of the localities and return to them their traditional function of governing themselves through their own resources and people. That would probably take some more time. But for us to keep moving in that direction, it is important to retain the memory of the sovereign self-governing localities of not-too-distant a past. To keep the memory alive, we have to keep doing at least the following—

 

Intensively study the beautiful, affluent, prosperous and self-governing localities of the pre-British India from every part of the country;

 

Preserve, compile and study the inscriptions, copperplates, palm-leaf accounts and archival documents of different periods and from different parts of India;

 

Revive and restore to their pristine grandeur, some of the localities like Ullavur and Kundratthur, to serve as exemplars of what a decolonized India shall look like.

 

This is the process that shall lead to an authentic history of timeless India. This is also the process through which India shall rise again from the deep slumber into which she lapsed during the colonial rule. 

Pictures of the two localities of Ullavur and Kundratthur.

Hindi version of this article.

Bibliographic and other information about the two monographs:

The Land, People and History of Ullavur, 

A locality that reaps the bounty of Palar 

by Jatinder K Bajaj and M. D, Srinivas 

 

Centre for Policy Studies, Chennai and 

Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts, Delhi, 2024 

ISBN 978-81-19380-57-2  Price: 1566/-

 

The Land, People and History of Kundratthur 

The Abode of Murugan and the Birthplace of Sekkizhar 

by Jatinder K Bajaj and M. D, Srinivas 

 

Centre for Policy Studies, Chennai and 

Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts, Delhi, 2024 

ISBN 978-81-19380-78-7  Price: 1652/-

The books are available at:

Ullavur: https://amzn.in/d/dY5Nta0 

Kundratthur: https://amzn.in/d/hy6ROqw

You may also please send your orders to igncapub@gmail.com and copy it to policy.cpsindia@gmail.com