Jamia must know Article 356: The Law and Order Jeopardy

In the midst of increasing student agitations at Jamia Millia Islamia, recent criticisms have been aimed at the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government in Kerala on its perceived anti-minority approach, bringing up the 2024 Waqf Amendment Bill and ambiguous stands on the Palestinian cause. Charges of hypocrisy, especially on CM Pinarayi Vijayan's dealings with Israeli officials, have set off debates among student activists. But the article contends that such criticism tends to overlook the intricacies of governance and Kerala's constitutional constraints, particularly with regard to Article 356. It brings to light the past abuse of the provision to oust non-Congress governments and calls on students to balance criticism with contextual awareness and ideological sensitivity.

Lately, Jamia Millia Islamia student WhatsApp groups have been buzzing with denunciations leveled against the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government in Kerala. Led by anti-left and specifically anti-CPIM student activists, the denunciation blamed the government for having an anti-minority orientation, pointing to such matters as the 2024 Waqf Amendment Bill and Kerala's supposed lack of enthusiasm over the Palestinian cause.

One of the messages being circulated mentions Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan's 2022 meeting with Israeli officials in relation to a Food Index Research exchange programme. This engagement has been termed hypocritical by critics, calling for pro-CPIM student activists to clarify. Diplomatic interactions—even at the state level—tend to follow constitutional procedures, though. What’s frequently overlooked in these discussions is the principled stand taken by Kerala’s Food and Civil Supplies Minister, G.R. Anil of the CPI, who refused to be part of the delegation, citing solidarity with Palestine and opposition to Israeli injustices.

Greater fury broke out in the recent past over the arrest of Jamaat-e-Islami and allied mass organisations' protesters at Calicut International Airport. They had been protesting against the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024, terming it a "genocidal project" of the Hindu nationalist regime. The arrests triggered a new tide of campus-based social media outrage, with some students claiming the LDF was hypocritical—fighting the bill in Parliament while supposedly stifling protest in their own state.

This leads us to the larger constitutional scheme—specifically Article 356. This article authorises the Union government to remove a state government and impose President's Rule if it finds that the state government has collapsed. Yet the article is not explicit on the standards for such a collapse, particularly with regard to law and order. Historically, this imprecision has been used to feed into widespread abuse—ironically, by the Indian National Congress, which is a party usually regarded as the symbol of secular-democratic ideals.

Taking the case of Kerala itself, they were the first victims of Article 356: the first non-Congress government in India, headed by the Communist Party of India (CPI) in 1957, was dissolved by applying Article 356. Although its promise of radical land and educational reforms for workers and peasants was not fulfilled, the government was toppled after agitations by sections of society against such policies. Then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru invoked a breakdown of law and order as the reason. Comparable incidents occurred in Punjab during the Khalistani movement, and in Tamil Nadu, where the DMK government was removed on charges of sympathy with the LTTE.

Having established this precedent, it's little wonder that any state government, particularly a left one, would be careful not to provide the BJP-led union government with an excuse to apply Article 356. But even the Left's actions need to be subjected to the scrutiny of ideological consistency. When a government that professes to be among the marginalized employs tactics of shutting down democratic protest, questions about its ideological commitment are legitimate.

The critics of the arrests should also see the complexity of governance. Running a state is not a ‘9-to-5’ job–it entails dealing with the needs of millions, from enforcing welfare schemes to promoting education and employment among marginalized communities. In Left-ruled states, the gains typically trickle down among working-class people, peasants, and minorities by means of focused social schemes. Blunders need to be examined, but the will and the limitations of governance also need to be appreciated.

The abuse of Article 356 continues to be an issue of concern. Students, particularly those in institutions such as Jamia that have traditionally been involved in socio-political discussion, need to be cognizant of its implications. Holding governments accountable is important, but we also need to act responsibly and not be swayed by reactionary narratives devoid of contextual insight.

The guest author, Amir Hyder Khan is a 4th year student pursuing B.Arch from Jamia Millia Islamia

Edited by: Aamna

Disclaimer: The views expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of TJR.