Politics

Rahul Vs RSS: Why The Defamation Case Is Likely To Yield A Mouse

R Jagannathan

Jul 19, 2016, 05:11 PM | Updated 05:10 PM IST


Photo: SAJJAD HUSSAIN/AFP/Getty Images
Photo: SAJJAD HUSSAIN/AFP/Getty Images
  • Claiming victimhood is a paying national pastime for our politicians
  • The chances are Rahul Gandhi, who allegedly accused the RSS of “killing” Mahatma Gandhi, is safe from any possibility of conviction in a defamation case for at least the next ten years, if not more
  • The Supreme Court today (19 July) read out the law to Rahul Gandhi for allegedly accusing the RSS of “killing” Mahatma Gandhi. “You can’t make collective denunciations,” NDTV quoted the court as saying. It asked the Gandhi dynast to either apologise or face trial.

    The apology won’t be coming, for no trial is going to happen in a hurry. Trials, even if they are begun, take years to conclude, and when they conclude, they can be appealed. The chances are Rahul Gandhi is safe from any possibility of conviction in a defamation case for at least the next ten years, if not more.

    The case pertains to a statement made by Rahul in 2014 about the RSS being responsible for “killing Gandhi”. An RSS activist then sued Rahul for defamation, and it is the applicability of the defamation law in this case that the Supreme Court is deciding.

    The interesting point is not whether the case of defamation will ultimately stand or not, but that even the Supreme Court prefers Rahul to say sorry and forget about it when it has not decided whether there has been defamation or not. It seems to imply that apologising is better than facing a long trial with indeterminate results.

    It was only two months ago that the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the defamation law. A bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and PC Pant upheld sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code which deal with criminal defamation. The bench said that every individual had a fundamental right to live with dignity and reputation, and this “cannot be sullied solely because another individual can have his freedom.”

    The plea to scrap sections 499 and 500 came in separate petitions filed by otherwise implacable foes: Rahul Gandhi, who was sued by the RSS, Arvind Kejriwal, who is being sued by Nitin Gadkari, and Subramanian Swamy, the BJP’s maverick Rajya Sabha MP.

    Now that the law remains on the statute book, Rahul Gandhi will have to face a trial at some point, assuming the court decides there is a prima facie case of defamation. It could decide this aspect at its next hearing on 27 July.

    Media editors have in one voice opposed the defamation law as unduly restrictive of freedom of speech, but the court has rejected this. It observed today (19 April): “We have upheld the defamation law. Freedom is not crippled or cut. Every day a writer, politician will speak something. The purpose of the law is not to turn people into litigants.”

    However, it is highly unlikely that Rahul will apologise for two reasons:

    Firstly, as stated earlier, such cases drag on endlessly, costing the litigants more time and energy than the accused, who often get excused from attending hearings.

    Secondly, any case in court enables opposition politicians to quickly claim that they are being victimised by the powers-that-be, and it is the accusers who have to prove their bonafides.

    In the National Herald case, where Sonia Gandhi and Rahul are facing a trial for quietly using Congress party funds to transfer property worth thousands of crores to a private non-profit company held by them, the mother-and-son have already alleged that this is part of the Modi government’s political vendetta. The original disclosure about the Herald caper was made in November 2012, but till mid-2016, the case hasn’t even got off the ground.

    Claiming victimhood is a paying national pastime for our politicians.

    Jagannathan is former Editorial Director, Swarajya. He tweets at @TheJaggi.


    Get Swarajya in your inbox.


    Magazine


    image
    States