Not the solution

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has shown itself up in pretty heinous communal colours by releasing a compact disc full of communal propaganda of the worst kind. It does little credit to either the good sense or the intelligence of a national party that has ruled at the Centre for six years, to descend to such depths. Nor does it help the BJP position itself as a responsible, centrist force that can lay claim to being in government, if it persists in playing the communal card. Having been caught out, it is trying to do damage control by distancing itself from the actions of its state-level leadership in Uttar Pradesh, and simultaneously seeking to claim some moral high ground through the offer of party leaders for arrest by the police.

Having said all this, it is far from clear that the threatened penalty, namely de-recognition of the party, is a solution. In simple practical terms, it makes no sense at all to de-recognise a party that is one of the only two all-India parties that can lay claim to a national following. Besides which, there is the matter of what the law allows by way of penalty for this offence, and de-recognition does not appear to be on the list. Even if it were, it should be obvious that legalistic solutions to broader political issues will not work. Among many possibilities, there would be little difficulty in the same people getting together under another banner and seeking recognition all over again. Hence the demand for de-recognition is probably part of the pre-election dance being conducted by the different forces in the fray in UP, in a bid to try and secure Muslim votes.

Under the existing law, a party can be punished only by withdrawing its election symbol. De-recognition depends on the percentage of votes polled and seats won""which is a quite different matter. The question therefore boils down to whether the Election Commission can and should withdraw the BJP's election symbol. The answer to the first question is, yes, it can. But should it? The answer is that it should not""for the same reason that de-recognition (were it allowed) should be ruled out.

The law does provide for punishing individuals under the Representation of the People Act. Section 125 deals with electoral offences and says that promoting enmity between people in connection with elections can be punished in different ways. But this applies to individuals, not to an entire political party. It is also worth noting what it says in respect of promoting enmity along caste lines. "Any person who ... promotes or attempts to promote on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language, feelings of enmity or hatred..." is liable for punitive action. This can be a jail term for three years and/or a fine. If the caste criterion for promoting enmity is applied, many other political parties would become liable for suitable punishment.

However, it is also worth asking if the law on the subject is adequate. If Indian politics is going to continue along the lines of caste and community, shouldn't there be stronger laws against promoting enmity between different people? Should the law be content to punish individuals and not their organisations? If the answer is yes, de-recognition is hardly the answer. A hefty fine, say Rs 100 crore, would be a more practical deterrent than taking away the symbol of a party, and more meaningful than individual-level retribution. The problem, of course, is that those who have to change the law are the chief beneficiaries of promoting such enmity.