Adani issue: Is Modi evading questions?

The recent confrontation between the government and the opposition over alleged financial irregularities by the Adani Group is heading toward a big political fight. The communication gap between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the opposition is too deep to be easily bridged. There is also hardly any possibility of Modi’s changing his stance on not conceding the demand for constituting a Joint Parliamentary Committee or a Supreme Court-headed inquiry. His style of functioning does not permit any reconciliation. He does not recognize any significant role for opposition parties and wants them diminished. He has had no meaningful dialogue with the opposition during his eight-year reign. This is not the first time the Prime Minister of India has felt uncomfortable with the opposition. He has consistently denied the opposition any opportunity to take part in governing the country. He never accepts any demand and portrays the legitimate activities of opposition parties as anti-national. Nothing was wrong with asking questions related to national security or foreign policy. In every democracy, it is normal to have doubts about the policies adopted by the ruling government. But in India, the discourse has completely been distorted. We've seen how the government portrayed the opposition when it came to Chinese incursions into Indian territory. The government did not accept the demand to investigate the purchase of Rafael aircraft, nor did it reveal anything about the enigmatic Pegasus. In both cases, serious doubts were raised about the conduct of the political authorities. The government just ignored the allegations.

The Adani issue is going in the same direction. The questions that are being asked in this case are the same old ones. What the Hindenburg Report has alleged is that regulatory institutions kept a blind eye to the activities of the Adani Group. The majority of regulatory bodies, including the SEBI and the RBI, have been blamed. The questions raised in its report must be answered in order to restore the credibility of the country's financial institutions. How can you invite foreign investments if your regulators do not carry a robust image? What is wrong with asking the Modi government to come clean? Is it not necessary that the allegations of cronyism be investigated? This is quite legitimate on the part of the opposition to ask that Prime Minister Modi come clean on whether he has favored the group. The opposition is also rightly questioning investments by the public sector banks and the Life Insurance Corporation of India in Adani companies. This is their obligation to the common people.

What has happened in Parliament is also a matter of worry for those who want a vibrant democracy in India. The government is not only rejecting any discussion on the issue but also questioning its legitimacy. When the opposition parties tried to raise the issue during the Thanks Giving Motion on Presidential Address, the chair expunged the remarks of Rahul Gandhi in Lok Sabha and Mallikarjun Kharge in the Rajya Sabha. The Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha, Mallikarjun Kharge, rightly alleges, "Questions will be asked both inside and outside Parliament. The Modi government is conspiring to suppress the truth by exerting pressure on the presiding officers of both Houses of Parliament." Kharge’s allegation speaks about the trust deficit between the government and the opposition. Khaerge is correctly saying that under the Constitution, lawmakers have the right to speak freely in the House. The response of the PM is really disappointing. Instead of answering the questions raised by leaders like Rahul Gandhi, Kharge, and others, he chose to counter-attack Congress. He reminded us of the corruption and misuse of institutions during the long rule of Congress and wanted to prove that the party does not have any moral right to ask questions. He also tried to reiterate the old narrative of the BJP that the Congress is led by a dynasty that has poorly governed the country. This is part of his effort to demonstrate that the Nehru-Gandh family did nothing but harm to the country. Who would buy his arguments that the family was working against the nation? Many failures could be attributed to members of the Nehru-Gandhi family, but no one can deny their contributions.

The most tragic part of parliamentary proceedings was the assertions made by Prime Minister Modi. Was it right on the part of the Prime Minister to question the Gandhi family for not using a Nehru surname? The family has certainly chosen its surname in accordance with the prevalent tradition of the country. No one should question their wisdom in choosing a particular surname. Does it conform to the stature of the Prime Minister to indulge in such debates?

His other remark was also not in accordance with parliamentary traditions. Is it relevant for a Parliament to hear from the Prime Minister that he is too much for many (ek akela sab par bhari)?

His assertion that this is because of his conviction - he lives for the country, he is out to do something for the country. His allegations that those who play political games do not have the courage and are looking for a way to save themselves are also not in tune with the democratic spirit. These are the kinds of arguments that should be reserved for political rallies. The government should honour the opposition and consider it an equal partner in governing the nation. It reflects poorly on the part of the government if he tries to evade by saying that the opposition does not deserve to get replies.

What the Prime Minister says reveals only that he will not recognize any role of opposition in running the country. Should we, as citizens of the world's largest democracy, not be concerned?

(The author is a senior journalist. He has experience of working with leading newspapers and electronic media including Deccan Herald, Sunday Guardian, Navbharat Times and Dainik Bhaskar. He writes on politics, society, environment and economy)