There is a thin line between participatory and confrontationist politics for a party in power. If confrontation crosses its limits even by a thin margin, it is likely to invite criticism. The party which has just opened its innings has to be cautious in words and actions because when expectation is so high even small mistake is more than enough to hamper the kinetic effect created among the masses.
The debate for and against is very much in the public domain following recent dharna organised by the party and many believe it was a combination of participatory and confrontationist polities, while some said it was an anarchist polity, some others praised, while yet others said that there was a method in the madness. Many believed that it was obvious for a party to face hurdles because AAP has in a way challenged the age-old system of governance and polity. But, even though the call for a dharna by the AAP government to get the erring police officers suspended, they believed dereliction of duty was a minor issue to begin with and the demand for complete statehood could have been the best bet ignoring suspension of the police at the onset.
Arvind Kejriwal, in his letter to Congress Chief Sonia Gandhi and BJP President Rajnath Singh before taking oath and staking claim to form the government, had demanded that the people should have the choice and right to decide as to what should be done in their respective areas. It was also mentioned in the letter that Delhi should be given full statehood status and the control of police and DDA should be under the purview of the state government.
Face-off between police and the Kejriwal administration began when the Delhi police refused to carry out raids as demanded by Law Minister Somnath Bharati in the absence of search warrant which followed a vigilante-like raid conducted by the law minister in which Ugandan and Nigerian women were detained on charges of prostitution and drug trafficking.
When the police officials were not suspended, Kejriwal and his entire cabinet staged a dharna at the Rail Bhawan when they were not allowed to do so in front of Union Home Minister’s office. Chief Minister Kejriwal along with his ministers and supporters after the whole day protest slept on the pavement during the night in severe cold which in itself is a unique protest. Kejriwal and his team staged the protest to demand suspension of four policemen for not raiding in Khirki Extension, transfer of errant policemen pending inquiry, control of Delhi police and full statehood of Delhi. The dharna was called off when the two policemen were sent on leave and while calling off dharna Delhi government claimed it as the first step taken towards full statehood for Delhi.
In order to justify its dharna against the Delhi police, the Delhi government released a video on its Facebook page to reveal how men in uniform attacked a man. The three policemen figured in that video have been suspended. The Delhi government has uploaded a number of videos on their website to prove their claim of prostitution and drug trafficking and to justify their raid and demand suspension of police officials who refused to carry out raid in Khirki Extension.
This is not the first time that a chief minister protested or sat on dharna against Central Government to press for demands. In 1983, M.G. Ramachandaram observed a day long fast against Central Government for rice allotment. In 2012, Mamata Banerjee sat on a hunger strike for three days. In 2014, Shivraj Singh Chouhan observed a day long fast. In 2003, A.K Antony observed 8-hour fast. In 1993, Jayalalitha observed fast from July 18 to July 22. In Gujarat, Chief Minister Narendra Modi did it many times. In 1988, N.T Rama Rao observed dharna for four hours and R Rosiah staged protest in 2010. So when so many chief ministers have staged protest or observed dharna why was such a hue and cry against the dharna by the Delhi chief minister.
But the manner in which the dharna was observed in Delhi when all ministers including Chief Minister slept right on the streets throughout the night in chilling cold was exemplary. But many of them have also termed the dharna as chaotic. As per a survey conducted by NDTV at least 51 per cent in Delhi, 51 per cent in Bangalore and 55 per cent in Mumbai have said it was good to hold dharna. And 58 per cent people in Delhi, 59 per cent people in Bangalore and 73 per cent people in Mumbai have rated Kejriwal as a good chief minister.
Gurpreet Mahajan, in her article, “Dissent in Democracy” in The Indian Express (23 Jan) has opined that AAP protest was not anarchist. But leaders must know how to choose the moment to launch a strike and the moment to withdraw. She has also written that when reason fails to deliver and the quest for power and interests come to dominate, maintaining stability for even a just constitution may require protests. The method the party has chosen may be unusual, but common wisdom and traditional modes of action hardly find favour with the liberal disposition.
The demand for complete statehood to Delhi is in the pipeline for many years and during the dharna the demand has got further intensified. In 1990, the Union Cabinet had decided to amend the Constitution to grant complete statehood to Delhi and in this regard a Bill was introduced in Parliament on May 31, 1990. As per the Cabinet note of December 9, 1991, signed by then Union Home Secretary Madhav Godbole, the decision to keep Delhi’s status as a Union Territory but with a legislature of its own was taken on the recommendations made by S Balakrishnan Committee. This panel had suggested three options as full statehood, partial statehood but with an Assembly or UT status with special Constitutional status. Presently law and order and land related issues are not under the control of the Delhi government. During crisis these issues were raised by successive governments but none of them took up the matter as seriously as it requires to be pursued. Will the new government take this issue to its logical conclusion?
Whenever there is a talk of police brutality or dereliction of duty, the debate on police reforms takes up the centre stage but only to be forgotten soon. The Delhi Police is said to be worst defaulters when talked in terms of implementation of the SC judgment on police reforms in 2006. The State Security Commission which is supposed to monitor the functioning of police has surprisingly met only five times since 2012. Notably, the present Lt. Governor, Najeeb Jung was also on that Commission. The police bill which was required to be replaced from the old Delhi police bill of 1978 is still pending in the Ministry of Home Affairs and that is why the dharna was planned to be held there to press for the demand of control of police by the Delhi government.