Emergency Represents Darkest Period In The History of Post-Independent Democratic India: SG Tushar Mehta

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta recently stated that the period of emergency between June 1975 and March 1977 was the “darkest period” in the history of independent democratic India.

Speaking at an event titled ‘A Talk on the Abuse of the Constitution During the Emergency,’ Mehta emphasized that in recent years, people have been exposed to “factually incorrect propaganda”, including phrases such as ‘a majoritarian regime,’ ‘arbitrariness in governance,’ and ‘government’s interference in the judiciary.’

Mehta highlighted the importance of lawyers countering these narratives with “legal logic” and reasoning. He expressed his belief that the current constitutional scenario is the “safest possible” for the people.

During the talk organized by Young Lawyers for Democracy, Mehta stated that the abuse of the Constitution did not begin solely during the Emergency but had its roots in earlier periods.

“The era of emergency from 1975 to 77 was the darkest period in the history of post-Independence democracy”, he said.  He drew attention to the fact that some of the information he shared was not commonly found in textbooks but rather in memoirs, autobiographies of judges and lawyers, and other literary works.

According to Mehta, the Supreme Court’s refusal to stay the Allahabad High Court’s order declaring Indira Gandhi’s election unconstitutional on June 24, 1975, was followed by the declaration of the Emergency the next day.

During the period of the Emergency, which began on June 25, 1975, Mehta noted that the Constitution was abused. He pointed out, “Ultimately Indira Gandhi succeeded and her election was upheld on other grounds but the 39th amendment act by which she gave immunity to the election of speaker and prime minister was declared unconstitutional. This is (an example of) blatant abuse of the Constitution during the Emergency”.

Mehta acknowledged the existence of many unsung heroes who became victims of the Emergency. He mentioned that over 30,000 arrests were made, and approximately 250 journalists were imprisoned.

In analyzing the material from the Emergency period, Mehta contended that “By and large if we study the material during the Emergency, we will find that it is the high courts of the country which stood by the citizens and by and large the Supreme Court let the citizens down.” He also mentioned a directive to “lock up the high courts,” which was fortunately prevented from being implemented.

Mehta highlighted that during the Emergency, approximately 65-70 judges were transferred, and the Chief Justice of India had no significant role other than signing the transfer papers as instructed by the government.

He expressed concern over the mass transfer of high court judges, “High court judges who are constitutional functionaries, and we are not talking about cashiers or bank clerks, being transferred en masse”.

Mehta cited an incident in Delhi where around 200 lawyers were arrested, and nearly 200 lawyers’ chambers in the Tis Hazari court were demolished simply because they were protesting against the Emergency.

He emphasized that freedom is often taken for granted when inherited, “When we inherit freedom, we take it for granted. Our generation has inherited the second freedom, which started from 1977.”

Mehta pointed out that during the Emergency, democracy and judicial independence were threatened. It was the collective efforts of lawyers, judges, judiciary, journalists, academicians, and the common man that steered the nation out of this dark period.