As the month-long election schedule unfolds in West Bengal, it is marked by what appears to be a disturbing nexus between central armed forces, the Election Commission and the BJP.
The EC announced that central forces would have a right to fire in “self-defence” – a statement that was bound to embolden violence by central forces and offer them a ready-made pretext for such violence. Sure enough, the CISF firing at Sitalkuchi followed in Cooch Behar, killing four migrant workers who had returned t West Bengal to cast their votes. The CISF pleaded “self-defence”, and the EC rushed to absolve the CISF of any blame. Meanwhile, several BJP leaders threatened West Bengal voters with “more Sitalkuchis”, and communalised any demand for justice for the victims of the firing by branding it as “appeasement of Muslims”.
The special police officer submitted a report to the EC endorsing the CISF claims without even visiting the firing site and meeting the injured persons and eyewitnesses. There is a wealth of evidence which is at odds with the CISF claims. Every ground report by journalists indicates that those killed and injured in the firing are not violent “strongmen” but ordinary unarmed voters. There is no evidence of any provocation by the voters that would justify the use of lethal force by the CISF. Yet the EC has shown no concern about ensuring justice for four voters killed while waiting to cast their vote.
The Election Commission has been displaying a pronounced selectivity and bias in its treatment of poll code violations. The EC debarred the West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee from campaigning for 24 hours for her speech asking women voters to ensure that central forces do not prevent voting. But the EC has taken scant notice of rampant hate-speech by BJP leaders. The EC debarred BJP leader Rahul Sinha for 48 hours for his comment that the central forces should have killed eight instead of four people in Sitalkuchi. But it did not take any action against BJP leaders Dilip Ghosh and Sayantan Basu for celebrating the Sitalkuchi massacre and threatening more massacres of the same kind. It did not take any action against Home Minister Amit Shah for insinuating that the Chief Minister’s grief for the four Sitalkuchi firing victims was an instance of “appeasement of Muslims”.
The EC also merely issued a mild “warning” to BJP’s Nandigram candidate Suvendu Adhikari for his venomous hate-speech against the minority community. It failed to invoke relevant sections of the Representation of People Act and the Model Code of Conduct, relating to inciting hatred between communities.
Democratic forces in West Bengal are having to contend not only with the BJP, but with partisan central forces and EC as well. The EC’s conduct – its lack of concern for voter safety, and its willingness to ignore or condone hate speech and intimidation by the BJP, compounded by its dubious record on EVMs - is a disgrace to the democratic process, and gives weight to the assessment by the V-Dem study that India is an “electoral autocracy” rather than a full-fledged democracy.EC Fails To Act Against Hate-Speech and Threats By BJP Leaders in West Bengal
As the month-long election schedule unfolds in West Bengal, it is marked by what appears to be a disturbing nexus between central armed forces, the Election Commission and the BJP.
The EC announced that central forces would have a right to fire in “self-defence” – a statement that was bound to embolden violence by central forces and offer them a ready-made pretext for such violence. Sure enough, the CISF firing at Sitalkuchi followed in Cooch Behar, killing four migrant workers who had returned t West Bengal to cast their votes. The CISF pleaded “self-defence”, and the EC rushed to absolve the CISF of any blame. Meanwhile, several BJP leaders threatened West Bengal voters with “more Sitalkuchis”, and communalised any demand for justice for the victims of the firing by branding it as “appeasement of Muslims”.
The special police officer submitted a report to the EC endorsing the CISF claims without even visiting the firing site and meeting the injured persons and eyewitnesses. There is a wealth of evidence which is at odds with the CISF claims. Every ground report by journalists indicates that those killed and injured in the firing are not violent “strongmen” but ordinary unarmed voters. There is no evidence of any provocation by the voters that would justify the use of lethal force by the CISF. Yet the EC has shown no concern about ensuring justice for four voters killed while waiting to cast their vote.
The Election Commission has been displaying a pronounced selectivity and bias in its treatment of poll code violations. The EC debarred the West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee from campaigning for 24 hours for her speech asking women voters to ensure that central forces do not prevent voting. But the EC has taken scant notice of rampant hate-speech by BJP leaders. The EC debarred BJP leader Rahul Sinha for 48 hours for his comment that the central forces should have killed eight instead of four people in Sitalkuchi. But it did not take any action against BJP leaders Dilip Ghosh and Sayantan Basu for celebrating the Sitalkuchi massacre and threatening more massacres of the same kind. It did not take any action against Home Minister Amit Shah for insinuating that the Chief Minister’s grief for the four Sitalkuchi firing victims was an instance of “appeasement of Muslims”.
The EC also merely issued a mild “warning” to BJP’s Nandigram candidate Suvendu Adhikari for his venomous hate-speech against the minority community. It failed to invoke relevant sections of the Representation of People Act and the Model Code of Conduct, relating to inciting hatred between communities.
Democratic forces in West Bengal are having to contend not only with the BJP, but with partisan central forces and EC as well. The EC’s conduct – its lack of concern for voter safety, and its willingness to ignore or condone hate speech and intimidation by the BJP, compounded by its dubious record on EVMs - is a disgrace to the democratic process, and gives weight to the assessment by the V-Dem study that India is an “electoral autocracy” rather than a full-fledged democracy.
