2025 marks the fiftieth anniversary of India’s infamous Emergency. It is only fitting that a collection of essays be produced to commemorate the occasion, not least because groups from across the political spectrum are actively trying to rekindle interest in the event. The ruling BJP invokes it to vilify the Congress and its legacy. The Opposition does so to claim similarities with draconian legal and administrative measures adopted by the ruling disposition. Which makes it all the more necessary to understand what occurred, and what relevance it bears for us today. It is appreciable that these concerns find ample reflection in this collection. It is short for an edited volume, about 331 pages not including the twenty-six-page Introduction. Within these some fifteen separate chapters have been squeezed, making each chapter about twenty-two pages long including references and bibliography.
The Introduction contextualizes (pp. xii-xvi) the Emergency in terms of four dimensions, viz. India in 1975 being a young democracy, a poor country, with intensified politics of demand, and intense ideological struggles common to most postcolonial countries. It also proposes (pp. xvi-xxiii) five ‘frameworks to explain’ the Emergency, ranging from Huntingdon’s emphasis on the necessity of political order; the Marxist construction of the Emergency as a subversion of democracy by the ruling classes eager to protect their interests; to looking into the ‘inner world of leaders’.
Ujjwal Kumar Singh and Anupama Roy focus on the Emergency laws of the era. They trace back the emergence of such laws right from the Law Commission report that led to the enactment of the Indian Penal Code, all the way through colonial and postcolonial laws, till MISA and how it was implemented during the Emergency. Parallels with contemporary laws such as the UAPA, and how it facilitated the cruel treatment of Professor GN Saibaba and Father Stan Swamy, are not ignored. R Sudarshan’s contribution also addresses legal issues. It discusses a range of cases beginning from the Delhi High Court’s quashing of Kuldip Nayar’s detention order (unfortunately it does not properly cite the case) and culminates with the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in ADM Jabalpur vs. Shivakant Shukla (All India Reporter [AIR] 1975 Supreme Court [SC] 1207). It is notable for recounting how the Centre treated, and in many cases destroyed the careers of, judges who thought independently. Following its treatment of ADM Jabalpur, it engages with subsequent developments such as the Forty-Second and other Amendments to the Constitution; the Court’s ratification of the Basic Structure Doctrine in Minerva Mills (AIR 1980 SC 1789); and present-day statutes conferring sweeping powers on the executive.
Kalpana Kannabiran’s contribution draws heavily from the work of her father, the illustrious lawyer and activist KG Kannabiran (she acknowledges as much at p. 59), and his experiences defending civil liberties in an increasingly authoritarian atmosphere of illegal detentions, extra-judicial killings, and even controversial death sentences. Deepak Sanan writes about the Report of the Shah Commission of Inquiry appointed to look into excesses committed during the Emergency, and what constitutes its fundamental inquiry: ‘Why did various persons give out orders that were ethically, morally or legally wrong, and why did others carry out orders that were beyond their call of duty? What was their motivation?’ (pp. 84-85). Anand Kumar identifies three controversial aspects of the Emergency, which in his view ‘continue to remain significant in any endeavour to understand the drift and deviation from the democratic path’ (p. 98). The first concerns the reason for declaring the Emergency, namely, Indira Gandhi’s claim that the armed forces were being incited to mutiny and the police forces to rebel (p. 99). His second enquiry is about resistance against the Emergency organized by political and civil society organizations. He recounts the many protests in India and even abroad and points out reasons why they were at times hampered (not least being some senior leaders’ desire to compromise and make peace with the regime). The third pertains to the role of Socialists. Errol D’Souza discusses what he terms the ‘economic roots’ of the Emergency. His chapter covers economic problems in the Nehruvian era; Indira Gandhi’s initial years as Prime Minister marked by problems including inflation, devaluation, droughts, war with Pakistan, and her populist measures; and the performance of the economy during the Emergency. Varun Sahni looks at claims of interference by a ‘foreign hand’ frequently invoked by Indira Gandhi to validate the Emergency. He posits the question whether these fears were ‘factual, fanciful, or fabricated’ (p. 150) concluding that the issue is too complex to yield a ‘single answer’ (p. 164).
Pamela Philopose presents an account of ‘resistance journalism’ emerging as a response to the censorship measures and other press curbs imposed during the Emergency. Given the condition of the press today, the account is most instructive and insightful. Just as relevant is Ravi Arvind Palat’s recounting of the role Jawaharlal Nehru University played during the Emergency. Interestingly, it extends beyond the Emergency to how the University’s intellectual climate became vitiated by various factors: UPSC aspirants enrolling to secure cheap accommodation; communalism; hooliganized student politics; and the neoliberal agenda. Rukmini Bhaya Nair discusses how resistance found expression in literature, particularly the poetry of the era. Gyan Prakash’s chapter explores literature of a different kind, viz. the exchange of letters between Socialist leaders Madhu Dandavate jailed in Pune, and his wife Pramila imprisoned in Bangalore.
The contributions of Mahmood Farooqui and Tridip Suhrud bear only a tangential connection with the Emergency. Farooqui for the most part tells of his own experiences in Tihar Jail. It is insightful in its own terms, and he does on occasion intersperse his own narrative with what detenus like Kuldip Nayar faced during the Emergency. Suhrud discusses the political philosophy of Acharya Vinoba Bhave. Gopal Guru’s contribution begins from the question, ‘Why debate freedom?’ His exegesis draws heavily from the Emergency and the resistance it inspired, particularly from the Dalit perspective. Peter Ronald deSouza’s essay deals with subjective factors influencing Indira Gandhi’s ‘decision frame’ in first imposing and then revoking the Emergency. He draws upon diverse considerations, including personalities involved, their influences on other players, personal relationships, and so forth.
To conclude, if one can make an attempt at identifying a single takeaway from fifteen very different essays in this volume, it is that curbs on freedom are endemic across nations, including entrenched democracies. Which is why events like the Emergency retain relevance today. Singh and Roy, Sudarshan, Sanan, Philipose and other contributors point to similarities with today’s authoritarian regime, draconian laws like UAPA, NSA, and PMLA, and so forth. deSouza draws parallels with Netanyahu and the ongoing Gaza genocide instantiating the ‘authoritarian proclivity of the head of government, to transform a liberal state into a tyrannical one’ (p. 323). This enduring reality of authoritarian proclivities, and ensuing attacks on democracy and the rule of law, is one reason among several why this volume commemorating events of some fifty years ago constitutes a valuable—and relevant—contribution.
Abhik Majumdar teaches law at the India International University of Legal Education and Research (IIULER), Goa.