Rahul Gandhi, one of the leaders of the political coalition opposed to the BJP government of Indian prime minister Narendra Modi, had his conviction for defamation stayed by the Supreme Court of India on Friday. Gandhi was convicted earlier this year by a lower court for defamation against people with the surname “Modi” for remarks he made at a 2019 campaign event. That conviction, which came with a two-year jail sentence, resulted in his disqualification from the Lok Sabha, the lower house of the Indian parliament. Now that his conviction has been stayed, he will be allowed to return to parliament and contest the upcoming general election, which will be held in April and May.
The supreme court’s order said that the lower court provided insufficient reasoning to give Gandhi a two-year sentence, which is the maximum allowed by the defamation statute under which Gandhi was charged. Two years is also the minimum requirement to disqualify a member of parliament. “Had the sentence been even a day lesser,” the court said, Gandhi would not have been automatically disqualified under the law. The court also said his conviction should be stayed because the case not only affects Gandhi’s rights, but also “the right of the electorate, who have elected him, to represent their constituency.”
The supreme court nonetheless chastised Gandhi, saying that “the alleged utterances by the appellant are not in good taste.” The court said, “A person in public life is expected to exercise a degree of restraint while making public speeches.” Gandhi has appealed his conviction, and that appeal is still pending.
Reacting to the supreme court order, Gandhi tweeted, “Come what may, my duty remains the same. Protect the idea of India.” The Indian National Congress, the political party of which Gandhi is a part, praised the order. INC national president Mallikarjun Kharge said, “Democracy has won. The Constitution has won. Satyamev Jayate [“truth alone triumphs,” a line from Hindu scripture] has won. We are happy. We welcome the Supreme Court verdict. The Constitution is still alive. Nyay mil sakta hai (Justice can be done).”
Narendra Modi will be seeking a third five-year term as prime minister at the next general election in April and May. His BJP currently has a majority on its own in the Lok Sabha. In July, 26 opposition parties led by the INC formed the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance as a coalition to defeat the BJP.
In the 2019 campaign event, Gandhi said, “Why do all thieves have Modi in their names, whether it is Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi, or Narendra Modi? We don’t know how many more such Modis will come out.” Nirav and Lalit Modi are corrupt Indian businessmen, and they are not related to the prime minister. Purnesh Modi, a BJP state legislator who is also not related to the prime minister, brought the defamation case against Gandhi, alleging that Gandhi had defamed all people with the surname “Modi.” India’s constitutional protections for free speech are weaker than in the U.S., and its defamation laws are more open-ended.
“Modi” is a relatively common surname in India. Gandhi’s defense argued that it was unprecedented to view people with the same surname as being part of an identifiable class under the law. “They are amorphous, non-homogenous . . . communities, castes, and groups with appellation ‘Modi’ are totally different,” said attorney Abhishek Manu Singhvi. He went on to note that Purnesh Modi has said he had changed his surname earlier in life. “The only people suing are BJP office-holders. Very strange,” Singhvi said. Purnesh Modi said he respects the supreme court’s order but will continue the legal battle.
This case should make Americans grateful for the Constitution’s free-speech protections. Gandhi’s remarks would clearly be protected by the U.S. First Amendment, and his politically motivated prosecution is bad for India. The development of stronger protections for political speech is crucial to India’s success as a growing democracy.