CENTRAL AGENCIES, POLITICS AND CONSTITUTIONAL DIGNITY: DEVANAND SINGH

CENTRAL AGENCIES, POLITICS AND CONSTITUTIONAL DIGNITY: DEVANAND SINGH

24-JAN-ENG 25

RAJIV NAYAN AGRAWAL

ARA------------------------------The confrontation between West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has once again brought the role of central investigative agencies in national politics to the forefront of debate. Incidents such as Mamata Banerjee's personal presence at the Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC) office during the ED raid, allegations of interference in the agency's work, and the seizure of files and mobile phones have now reached the Supreme Court. The court's initial observations indicate that it views this entire incident as a violation of institutional decorum, rather than a simple political protest.

Mamata Banerjee argues that the Narendra Modi government at the center is using agencies like the ED and CBI to suppress opposition parties. This allegation is not new and has been consistently echoed in many non-BJP-ruled states across the country. On the other hand, the central government and the investigating agencies claim that the actions are strictly within the ambit of the law and that political position or status does not shield anyone from corruption cases. This conflict becomes the ultimate test of the balance between power and institutions in a democracy.

History shows that direct confrontation with central agencies has often proved politically costly. When Lalu Prasad Yadav, as Chief Minister of Bihar, called the CBI investigation a political conspiracy, the legal process remained unstoppable, ultimately resulting in his arrest and conviction. Arvind Kejriwal, as Chief Minister of Delhi, ignored ED notices, resulting in his arrest and prolonged imprisonment. Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren also dismissed the agency's summons, hoping for relief from the courts, but ultimately faced arrest. The common thread in all three instances is that political confrontation did not mitigate the legal difficulties, but rather exacerbated them.

Mamata Banerjee's position is crucial because she has been the most influential figure in Bengal politics for the past decade and a half. After demolishing the Left bastion in 2011, returning to power for the third time in 2021 is a testament to her political strength. Now, ahead of the 2026 assembly elections, the BJP has exerted its full force. The frequent visits of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah, and the top BJP leadership have intensified the election atmosphere. At such a time, confrontation with central agencies may generate political sympathy for Mamata Banerjee, but if the court's stance is unfavorable, this very confrontation could become her biggest weakness.

In a democracy, as important as the right to criticize and oppose elected governments is, equally important is the adherence to constitutional decorum in the actions of investigative agencies. Direct confrontation on the streets or during raids undermines the dignity of institutions and, while the political message may be strong, weakens the legal position. Ultimately, decisions are made in the courts, not on political platforms.

The essence of this entire development is that Mamata Banerjee now faces a test of constitutional restraint rather than political struggle. History bears witness that the consequences of "messing" with central agencies have often been dire for leaders in power. The future of Bengal's politics will be decided by the people, but patience and distance have proven to be the safest path in conflict with the law.