 |
|
The sudden resignation of Jagdeep Dhankhar from the position of Vice-President of India and Chairman of the Rajya Sabha has sent ripples through the Indian political landscape. The article delves into the events leading up to this surprising decision, hinting at a complex interplay of factors beyond the officially cited reason of health concerns. The departure, occurring abruptly on July 21, 2025, amidst the monsoon session of Parliament, has triggered intense speculation and scrutiny of Dhankhar’s actions and the government's response. Key to understanding this unexpected development is dissecting the proceedings of that day, paying close attention to the subtle yet significant hints dropped by opposition leaders and analyzing the sequence of events that ultimately culminated in Dhankhar’s resignation. The article points to a potential disagreement, specifically concerning the judiciary and Dhankhar's perceived overreach in initiating action against Justice Yashwant Varma. The swiftness with which Dhankhar acted, seemingly without explicit consultation with the government, may have created a fissure, leading to an untenable situation. This essay will explore the details presented in the article, analyzing the context, highlighting key moments, and offering a reasoned interpretation of the motivations behind this significant political event. Furthermore, it will examine the potential implications of Dhankhar’s departure on the dynamics between the executive and the judiciary, and the broader political environment in India.
The article meticulously reconstructs the events of July 21st, highlighting that the day initially unfolded as a typical parliamentary session. Prime Minister Modi addressed the media, urging unity on matters of national interest, and the usual political skirmishes ensued. Rahul Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, voiced concerns about being 'gagged,' while ministers were given ample time to speak. Key issues like the impeachment of Justice Yashwant Varma and discussions around Operation Sindoor occupied the attention of both ruling and opposition parties. However, the normalcy of the day was shattered by Dhankhar's late-evening resignation. The contrast between the seemingly routine activities of the day and the unexpected resignation underscores the significance of the events that transpired in the hours leading up to the announcement. The article emphasizes the skepticism expressed by opposition leaders regarding the stated reason of ill health. They pointed out that Dhankhar had actively participated in meetings, including those of the Business Advisory Committee, and had shown no signs of any health issues or plans to step down. This skepticism fuels the narrative that there are deeper, unstated reasons behind the resignation, possibly related to disagreements or pressures that arose during the day. Jairam Ramesh, a Congress MP, publicly expressed his shock and disbelief, hinting at the existence of factors far more complex than a simple health concern. He highlighted the upcoming meeting of the Business Advisory Committee scheduled by Dhankhar and his plans to make major announcements related to the judiciary, further emphasizing the unexpected nature of the resignation.
The pivotal point of contention appears to be Dhankhar's handling of the motion seeking the removal of Justice Yashwant Varma. Before the Rajya Sabha adjourned, Dhankhar confirmed receiving the motion, signed by over 50 members, and initiated the process under the Judges Inquiry Act. When informed about a similar motion in the Lok Sabha, he directed the Secretary General to verify its existence and take necessary steps. The article highlights a crucial distinction: while the Lok Sabha motion was bipartisan, the Rajya Sabha motion was solely supported by opposition members. This difference suggests that Dhankhar's acceptance of the opposition-led motion might have been a source of friction, potentially leading to the government's displeasure. The article further emphasizes Dhankhar's reputation as an expert on the Constitution and his vocal advocacy for judicial reforms. The Justice Deshmukh case, involving allegations of cash-at-home, presented an opportunity for him to advance his agenda. However, the article posits that Dhankhar's eagerness to act against Justice Varma might have clashed with the government's desire to avoid a confrontation with the judiciary. The Supreme Court's refusal to grant an urgent hearing on a petition related to the case, coupled with its criticism of a lawyer for disrespecting Justice Varma, underscores the sensitivity of the issue and the potential for a backlash from the judiciary.
The article also draws attention to specific instances that might have contributed to Dhankhar's decision. It mentions a forceful intervention by JP Nadda, BJP's leader in the Rajya Sabha, during a debate on Operation Sindoor. Nadda's statement, implying that only his words would be officially recorded, was perceived by the Congress as an 'insult' to the Chairman, although Nadda claimed the remarks were directed at Opposition MPs. This incident, while seemingly minor, highlights the underlying tensions and the potential for perceived disrespect to have played a role in Dhankhar's decision. Furthermore, the article points out the absence of JP Nadda and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju from the second meeting of the Business Advisory Committee on July 21st. Their absence, particularly after attending the first meeting, suggests a deliberate snub or a sign of disapproval. Congress MP Vivek Tankha suggested that something occurred in the afternoon that upset Dhankhar and potentially the government. The absence of key ministers from the meeting, combined with the earlier incident involving Nadda, paints a picture of growing discord and a possible breakdown in communication between Dhankhar and the government.
Government sources, as quoted by media outlets, claimed that Dhankhar admitted the motion against Justice Varma without consulting the government. This reinforces the idea that Dhankhar's independent action was a crucial factor in the events leading to his resignation. The article also highlights the timing of the Vice-President's Secretariat's announcement of Dhankhar's travel plans for July 23rd, which was made just hours before the resignation was announced. This seemingly contradictory information suggests that the resignation was not a pre-planned event and that Dhankhar's decision was made abruptly and unexpectedly. In conclusion, the article presents a compelling case for Dhankhar's resignation being driven by a complex interplay of factors beyond stated health concerns. The key elements contributing to this conclusion include Dhankhar's handling of the motion against Justice Varma, the perceived overreach in initiating action without government consultation, the subtle signs of discord between Dhankhar and the government, and the timing of the resignation announcement. While the full truth behind Dhankhar's departure may remain shrouded in speculation, the article provides a valuable analysis of the events and circumstances that likely led to this significant political development. The implications of Dhankhar's resignation on the relationship between the executive and the judiciary, as well as the broader political landscape, remain to be seen.
Source: Dhankhar exit: What happened between 1 pm and 4.30 pm broke the camel's back