Modi also reassured that Jammu-Kashmir will be granted statehood again. He reiterated this promise in Parliament and mentioned that the state would regain its status. He criticized Congress and NC, stating that Pakistan has exposed these parties as their agendas align with Pakistan’s. The Prime Minister remarked that following the abrogation of Article 370, terrorism and separatism have weakened. He also referenced the recent attack on devotees and paid tribute to martyr Vijay Kumar. Modi emphasized that Jammu-Kashmir is progressing towards lasting peace and will be completely free of terrorism.

Addressing the people of Reasi and Udhampur, Modi accused Congress, NC, and PDP of stalling the file for the construction of the Chenab Bridge. He noted that this bridge, approved during Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government, has now become a significant facility and attraction. Attacking Congress further, Modi claimed the party is engaged in vote-bank politics and is undermining the Dogra heritage. He labeled the Congress royal family as corrupt and described it as the root of corruption in India. Modi also criticized a member of the Congress royal family for making derogatory remarks about deities abroad.

Modi praised BJP’s achievements, stating that the party has eliminated decades-old discrimination and has worked to honor Jammu-Kashmir’s faith and culture. He criticized Congress for continually jeopardizing faith and culture for electoral gains.

Kharge further stated, “If we want our democracy to remain vibrant and active, elections should be held as needed.” His argument is that conducting elections periodically is not only a way to hear the public’s voice but also keeps the political process dynamic. The Congress party believes that if all elections are held together, local issues and needs may be overlooked. This would make it easier for political parties to focus on national issues, while regional problems and concerns could be sidelined.

Previously, several states have also raised their voices against “One Nation, One Election.” Political analysts believe that this plan could pose a threat to the freedom and diversity of elections. It may reduce political competition and affect the variety of voter options. Despite Congress’s criticism, the Modi government asserts that “One Nation, One Election” will enhance political stability and make the electoral process more effective. The plan aims not only to reduce costs but also to streamline administrative operations.

Moving forward, it will be interesting to see the stance of political parties on this issue and whether the “One Nation, One Election” plan can be implemented or not. Despite opposition from Congress and other parties, the government is preparing to push it forward.

PM Modi asked the public if Congress’s sole objective was to put Modi and BJP leaders in jail. He condemned the statement, calling it unethical and undemocratic. This comment was in direct response to Kharge’s earlier remark, where he had claimed that if Congress had won 20 more seats, BJP leaders would have been imprisoned. PM Modi also took aim at the regional parties that have traditionally dominated politics in Jammu & Kashmir, such as the National Conference and the PDP. He accused the three families (Gandhi, Abdullah, and Mufti) of having wronged the people of Jammu & Kashmir. “They shattered the spirit of both the Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir and the Constitution of India, which was drafted by Baba Saheb. For years, two constitutions were being enforced here, an attempt to hide their misdeeds,” said Modi.

The Prime Minister also assured the public that only a BJP government would restore full statehood to Jammu & Kashmir. He urged the people to be wary of leaders who had long deprived them of their rights. Modi emphasized that this election would determine the future of Jammu & Kashmir, and urged the public to make a wise decision. Modi took sharp digs at Congress, recalling how bad things were during their rule, with the government’s Home Minister even fearing to visit Lal Chowk. “You all remember the time when an unofficial curfew would be imposed as soon as the sun set,” Modi remarked. He stated that the current situation had completely changed, crediting BJP’s governance and firm policies.

A few days earlier, Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, while addressing a public rally in Jammu & Kashmir, had stated that if Congress had won 20 more seats, all major BJP leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi, would have been jailed. He said, “BJP used to boast about winning over 400 seats, but this time, they were reduced to just 240. If we had 20 more seats, BJP leaders would have been in jail, which is where they belong.” Reacting to Kharge’s statement, PM Modi questioned, “Is this Congress’s main agenda? Are they just in politics to put us and BJP leaders in jail?” Modi criticized this as being against the spirit of democracy and urged people to think carefully before allowing parties like Congress to return to power.

The remarks, intended to underscore the Congress party’s commitment to secularism and religious freedom, have sparked controversy back home. The BJP, the ruling party in India, has accused Gandhi of making anti-national comments on foreign soil, especially in light of his current role as the Leader of the Opposition. The party has expressed concern that such statements harm India’s image globally, and could be seen as playing into the narrative of certain expat Sikh groups that have been critical of India, especially in regard to past grievances.

Among the leading voices criticizing Gandhi’s comments is Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri. Calling the remarks “sinister,” Puri accused the Congress leader of attempting to spread a “dangerous narrative” abroad. The minister took particular offense at the implications that Sikhs are currently under threat in India, arguing that these statements were far from reality. Referring to the anti-Sikh riots of 1984, which erupted after the assassination of then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards, Puri reminded the public that it was under Congress’s rule when Sikhs faced one of the darkest periods in their history. “If there has been one time in our history when as a community, we have felt anxiety, a sense of insecurity, and existential threat, it has been the times when Rahul Gandhi’s family has been in the seats of power,” he said.

The 1984 anti-Sikh riots remain a painful chapter in India’s history, with thousands of Sikhs killed in violence that erupted in Delhi and other parts of the country following the assassination. Congress has long been criticized for its alleged failure to control the violence, and some of its leaders were accused of inciting mobs during the riots. In contrast, BJP supporters argue that the current government has fostered a more secure environment for religious minorities, including Sikhs. Protestors at Sonia Gandhi’s residence emphasized that under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership, Sikhs have been able to freely practice their faith and enjoy greater safety and stability than under previous Congress governments.

The controversy surrounding Rahul Gandhi’s remarks comes at a politically sensitive time for Congress. While his comments align with the party’s secular stance, the timing has been problematic, especially given the growing international scrutiny over India’s human rights record. Expats, particularly in countries with large Sikh populations like Canada and the UK, have been vocal critics of the Indian government’s treatment of minorities, and some of these concerns have occasionally fed into separatist movements. The BJP has been quick to capitalize on Gandhi’s comments, portraying him as out of touch with India’s reality and dismissive of the progress made under Modi’s rule. For the BJP, the issue is not just about religion, but also national security, with the party frequently linking such criticisms to broader concerns about India’s sovereignty and unity.

Adding to the political turmoil, Vikramaditya Singh resigned from the council of ministers, deepening the existing rift between factions within the Himachal Pradesh Congress. The divide is evident between the supporters of Chief Minister Sukhu and those aligned with Pratibha Singh, the Lok Sabha member of parliament and Vikramaditya’s mother.

The situation took a drastic turn when six Congress MLAs from Himachal Pradesh were disqualified for cross-voting in favor of the BJP during the Rajya Sabha polls. The disqualified MLAs, namely Rajinder Rana, Sudhir Sharma, Inder Dutt Lakhanpal, Devinder Kumar Bhutoo, Ravi Thakur, and Chetanya Sharma, faced consequences for defying the party whip to vote in favor of the government on the Finance Bill.

The BJP, initially applauding the MLAs for their ‘bravery,’ had welcomed them after they stayed the previous night in BJP-ruled Haryana. However, the disqualified MLAs’ actions have now backfired, causing a setback for the BJP’s hopes of returning to power in Himachal Pradesh.

The disqualification of these MLAs has temporarily closed the chapter on the potential return of the BJP to power through a no-confidence vote. The assembly had also witnessed the suspension of 15 BJP MLAs after the passage of the state Budget. The disqualification adds another layer to the already complex political landscape in Himachal Pradesh, leaving the Congress government on shaky ground and the state in a state of uncertainty.

In Karnataka, the Congress managed to secure three out of the four seats up for grabs. Ajay Maken, Syed Naseer Hussain, and GC Chandrasekhar emerged victorious as Congress candidates. The BJP, on the other hand, secured one seat, with Narayana Bandage emerging victorious. The JD(S) nominee, unfortunately, lost in this round of elections.

Moving to Himachal Pradesh, the BJP’s Harsh Mahajan clinched the seat in Shimla, defeating the Congress’s Abhishek Manu Singhvi. This victory is significant for the BJP, as it comes amidst reports of six Congress MLAs and three Independent MLAs cross-voting in favor of the BJP. This development has led to the BJP claiming that the Congress government in the hill state is now in the minority.

In Uttar Pradesh, the BJP emerged as the clear winner, securing eight out of the ten Rajya Sabha seats. The Samajwadi Party (SP) managed to win two seats, but the loss of one of the three seats it had anticipated hints at possible cross-voting in favor of the BJP. This victory for the BJP is seen as a significant boost ahead of the Lok Sabha polls.

The BJP’s success in Uttar Pradesh is particularly noteworthy, as it marks a significant gain for the party in the politically crucial state. The victory of JP Nadda, Smriti Irani, and Arun Singh underscores the party’s ability to mobilize support and secure crucial seats in a competitive electoral landscape. Additionally, former Union minister RPN Singh, former MP Chaudhary Tejveer Singh, general secretary of the party’s Uttar Pradesh unit Amarpal Maurya, former state minister Sangeeta Balwant (Bind), party spokesperson Sudhanshu Trivedi, former MLA Sadhna Singh, former Agra mayor Naveen Jain, and industrialist Sanjay Seth have also emerged victorious. 

From the Samajwadi Party, actor-MP Jaya Bachchan and Dalit leader Ramji Lal Suman have been elected to the Upper House. Jaya Bachchan received the most votes, with 41 members voting in her favor.

In addition to the contested seats, candidates for the remaining 41 seats in other states were elected unopposed. This includes candidates from various parties who secured their positions without facing any opposition.

The results of the Rajya Sabha elections in Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, and Himachal Pradesh are likely to have far-reaching implications for the political landscape in these states. The Congress and the BJP will now have to navigate the aftermath of these elections, as they seek to consolidate their gains and build on their successes.

Overall, the Rajya Sabha elections in 2024 have once again highlighted the fluid and dynamic nature of Indian politics. The Congress and the BJP have both emerged as winners in these elections, but the real test lies ahead as they seek to translate their victories into tangible gains on the ground.

BY – KASHISH JAIN

The Electoral Bonds Scheme, introduced by the government in 2018, allowed for anonymous donations to political parties, raising concerns about transparency and accountability in political funding. The Supreme Court’s recent ruling declaring the scheme unconstitutional was seen as a significant step towards restoring transparency in electoral financing.

However, the Congress party’s claim of a frozen bank account adds a new dimension to the debate surrounding political funding and freedom of expression. The timing of this alleged action, coming shortly after the Supreme Court’s decision and right before parliamentary elections, raises suspicions of political vendetta and suppression of dissent.

Maken emphasized the severe impact of the frozen accounts, saying, “At present, we don’t have any funds to spend. We are unable to pay electricity bills or salaries to our employees. This freeze will affect not only the Nyay Yatra but all our political activities.” The Congress leader’s statements highlight the dire consequences of the alleged bank account freezes on the party’s functioning and its ability to engage in electoral activities.

The Congress party, in its statement, has vehemently condemned the freezing of its bank account, labeling it as a blatant attack on democratic principles. Party leaders have accused the government of resorting to authoritarian tactics to stifle opposition voices and undermine the democratic process.

The freezing of the Congress party’s bank account not only raises concerns about the misuse of state power but also underscores the need for robust safeguards to protect democratic institutions and processes.

The use of state machinery to target political opponents undermines the credibility of the democratic process and erodes public trust in democratic institutions. The Congress party’s allegation of a frozen bank account following the Supreme Court’s rejection of the Electoral Bonds Scheme is a cause for serious concern. The government must address these allegations transparently and uphold the principles of democracy and the rule of law.

BY KASHISH JAIN