The controversial leader who is new Parliament's birthmate

It is unfortunate, and also a sad testimony to the polarised times that we live in, that the inauguration of the new Parliament building, on May 28, is marred with controversy and outrage. So far, 19 national and regional Opposition parties have indicated that they will be skipping the event, accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi for “completely sidelining President Murmu”, which they deem as “not only a grave insult but a direct assault on our democracy…” They also allege that “undemocratic acts are not new” to the PM and how the “soul of democracy has been sucked out from the Parliament”. medium100544654One can’t help but get a distinct sense of déjà vu. After all, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was PM, Opposition leaders too stayed away from the ceremony in February 2003 when Savarkar’s portrait in the Central Hall of the (old) Parliament was placed. Political leaders at the time not only objected to the decision of installing it, but also its placement — opposite Mahatma Gandhi. Unlike now, however, it was President APJ Abdul Kalam who unveiled the painting, and not Vajpayee. The other difference this time is that none of the parties, criticising the decision to have the PM inaugurate the building, mention the ‘real’ elephant in the room — the date of the inauguration coincides with the 140th birth anniversary of the controversial nationalist and Hindutva ideologue, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. There’s more; the event on May 28 also marks a key milestone in PM’s political career in advancing the legacy of Savarkar: 15 years ago, in 2008 — Savarkar’s 125th birth anniversary year — Modi, then Gujarat chief minister, inaugurated the website, www.savarkar.org, as a “humble effort to present Savarkar’s life, thought, work and relevance to a global audience”, as the Hindutva icon was “largely unknown to the masses because of the vicious propaganda against him”. In fact, even two days after taking oath as PM in 2014, he visited the Central Hall, on May 28, and paid an emotional homage to the codifier of Hindutva. medium100544931It is also not insignificant that Savarkar’s legacy has been now conjoined with the Parliament in the centenary year of the publication of his most significant writing — Essentials of Hindutva or Hindutva: Who is a Hindu? — which was published in 1923 when he was still in jail. As is widely known, this treatise inspired the formation of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in September 1925.Why Opposition is mum about Savarkar A part of it stems from the massive veneration with which the Hindutva theoretician is held among significant sections of Hindus. This is particular in the case of Maharashtra, more than any other state, where every episode of criticism of Savarkar usually draws flak from his admirers.Case in point — Rahul Gandhi’s anti-Savarkar remarks during the Bharat Jodo Yatra, last year, while he was in Maharashtra, which drew the ire of his alliance partner, Shiv Sena. More recently, in the wake of Rahul’s disqualification from Parliament after a Gujarat court sentenced him to two-year jail, Sharad Pawar too stepped in to convey that any criticism of Savarkar was best muted. Today it appears that the advice has been heeded not just by the former Wayanad member of Parliament (MP), but by almost the entire Opposition. medium100544853Why is Savarkar such a polarising figure? The first issue of contention is the prefix that has been given to Savarkar — ‘Veer’. It is curious because the first biography of Savarkar was published in 1926. By then, he had already been in prison since 1911, for about 15 years. When the book was going to press, Savarkar had the right to stay at home, move outside and meet people, but only within Ratnagiri district. He was also prohibited from engaging in anything that was remotely political. This biography appeared under a pseudonym, Chitragupta — the other name of Yama, the god of death, in Hindu mythology. Historian Vinayak Chaturvedi, who published last year the widely appreciated book, Hindutva and Violence: VD Savarkar and the Politics of History, writes that the biography “included personal and intimate details about Savarkar’s life, including aspects of his childhood that were known only to Savarkar and his family.” The book also provides detailed accounts of Savarkar’s tumultuous years in London, leading to his arrest in London in 1910, and conviction a year later to the Cellular Jail, Andaman Islands. This book, along with another in Marathi — Swatantraveer Vinayakrao Savarkar by Sadashiv Rajaram Ranade — has since been the principal source of Savarkar’s life. medium100548197Evidently, the pseudonym was either adopted by Savarkar himself, or someone known intimately to him. Either way, it would have surely presented the ‘truth’ and ‘events’ in his life, the way he would want to be seen by others — obviously as a hero. Political leaders of all hues who eulogise Savarkar swear by these accounts from the book, unwilling to look at other contemporary sources that do not view Savarkar’s years in London as sympathetically. What we know for certain is that he remained in restricted captivity till 1937. However, for the next decade following his prison release, and him taking over as Hindu Mahasabha president, Savarkar did not demonstrate enthusiasm in becoming part of the anti-colonial movement. In fact, on occasions like the British requesting for support during World War II, Savarkar made a case for Hindu youth enlisting for the British armed forces, in a bid to militarise the Hindu community.The second issue of contention among Savarkar’s admirers and critics concerns the letters he wrote from Cellular Jail, seeking pardon and early release from the colonial administration. Hindutva votaries claim that these letters were ‘tactical’ in nature and kept in tune with the nature of communication at that time. In these mercy petitions, Savarkar penned phrases like, “[I] am ready to serve the government in any capacity"; “[where else] can the prodigal son return but to the parental doors of the government"; “[seeking] a last chance” to submit his case “before it is too late”; and “[his] firm intention to abide by the Constitution and stand by it”. These portions are part of his letters between 1911-1920 seeking leniency from the British government. The third most contentious matter is over Savarkar’s (alleged) role in conspiring to assassinate Gandhi. For this, Savarkar was arrested in February 1948, but acquitted by the trial court a year later. He was freed primarily on the strength of Nathuram Godse’s statement that he read out in the court on November 8, 1948, in which he claimed that the entire plan was his. But the furore over Savarkar’s involvement was revived in 1964 when Gopal Godse, Vishnu Karkare and Madanlal Pahwa were released from prison in October 1964. Also, at a public function a month later, a claim was made that Nathuram Godse’s plans were known to even the chief minister of Bombay State, BG Kher, who had been provided the information. The Lal Bahadur Shastri government soon appointed an inquiry commission, headed by a leading advocate and MP Gopal Swarup Pathak, who eventually became India’s fourth Vice President. But before that, Indira Gandhi inducted Justice Pathak into the government as Union law minister. Consequently, the government chose Justice JL Kapur to preside over the commission and its final report was submitted in September 1969. In this, it made a startling assertion: “All these facts taken together were destructive of any theory other than the conspiracy to murder by Savarkar and his group.” But little was done to probe this further because Savarkar had died a largely unnoticed death. The legacyThe last 17 years of Savarkar’s life following his prison release in February 1949 were considered largely inconsequential in terms of public activism, although he continued to write voluminously. All his books and articles provide indication of further crystallisation of the Hindutva principles and reasoning. Undeniably, Savarkar’s influence on India’s political discourse and narratives has steadily increased, with every passing year over at least the past three decades. However, the amplification of Savarkar’s influence on the polity is not matched by enhancement in the understanding of the man, his works and thinking. By and large, both admirers and detractors — and this includes the political leadership at the highest levels, within the ruling regime and its adversaries too — continue locking horns on the basis of assumptions and the manner in which Savarkar’s legacy and memory can be appropriated for a political purpose. With the new Parliament building being inaugurated on Savarkar’s birth anniversary, his position has been elevated greatly, almost firmly alongside Gandhi. medium100545091Even earlier, much contentiously, PM Modi has placed Savarkar at par with some of the tallest national leaders. In his Independence Day speech in 2022 from the ramparts of the Red Fort, he stated: “All the countrymen are deeply indebted to Pujya Bapu, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, Babasaheb Ambedkar, Veer Savarkar, who devoted all their life on (Kartavya Path) the path of duty towards the nation.” (In the Hindi speech, he used the word both for the avenue that was previously Rajpath, as well as in its literal meaning — path of duty). Significantly, while statues of Gandhi and Ambedkar are installed in pre-existing prime locations within the Parliament complex, Bose’s statue was installed beneath the canopy at the other end of the renamed main avenue of Central Vista. And now, the Parliament, towards the opposite end of Kartavya Path, has been indelibly conjoined with Savarkar.Today India’s muscular nationalism that the present dispensation propagates — although adversaries would point that it is more in words than actual deeds — is drawn greatly from the intrinsic violence that was central to Savarkar’s thoughts. Moreover, this is being promoted even while lip-service is paid to the Gandhian principle of non-violence.Untitled Carousel 93428031