Indian opposition leader Rahul Gandhi sentenced to two years in prison for defamation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s surname. The Congress MP plans to appeal the court’s decision and remains out on bail for 30 days. Gandhi’s party alleges that he is being targeted for exposing the government’s corruption, and vows that politicians will not be silenced. The ruling BJP party insists that due judicial process was followed in the case, which dates back to the campaign ahead of the last election.
Indian opposition leader Rahul Gandhi has been sentenced to two years in prison for criminal defamation. He made remarks about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s surname during an election rally in 2019, leading to the conviction in Gujarat state. Gandhi’s party, the Congress, said he was being targeted for exposing the government’s “dark deeds,” and vowed its politicians would not be silenced. Gandhi remains out on bail for 30 days and will appeal the ruling. Other opposition politicians and organisations deemed critical of India’s government have also faced legal action, including the Aam Admi Party (AAP), which rules Delhi, and has two senior members currently in jail on politically motivated charges. Legal scholars have questioned the court’s decision, with some stating that references to a generic class of persons, such as surnames in this case, are not actionable unless an individual can show a direct reference to themselves. Gandhi’s lawyer stated their defense was based on four points, including that there is no community named Modi, and no association of people with Modi as their surname.
Indian opposition leader Rahul Gandhi’s sentencing to two years in prison for criminal defamation has raised concerns over freedom of speech in the country. The Congress MP was convicted for remarks he made at an election rally in 2019 about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s surname. Mr. Gandhi had said: “Why do all these thieves have Modi as their surname? Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi, Narendra Modi.” The conviction has been criticized by his party and other opposition groups who claim that he was being targeted for exposing the government’s “dark deeds”. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is in power, argues that due judicial process has been followed in the case.
The case against Mr. Gandhi was filed on the basis of a complaint by a BJP lawmaker who said his comments had defamed the entire Modi community. However, legal experts have questioned the order handed down by the court in Surat. They claim that “references to a generic class of persons” – surnames in this case – are not “actionable unless an individual can show a direct reference to themselves”.
Critics have also raised concerns over India’s criminal defamation law, which is a British-era legislation under which there can be a maximum prison sentence of two years, a fine, or both. Free speech advocates argue that the law goes against the principles of freedom and that it is used by politicians to silence their critics.
In 2016, some top Indian politicians including Mr. Gandhi filed legal pleas arguing for defamation to be decriminalized. However, India’s Supreme Court upheld the validity of the law, saying that “the right to free speech cannot mean that a citizen can defame the other”.
There have also been questions raised over Mr. Gandhi’s status as a member of parliament after the conviction. While defamation cannot be a ground for disqualification in India, an MP can be disqualified from the office for offences ranging from promoting enmity to election-related fraud. They can also be disqualified if sentenced for two years or more for an offence. If Mr. Gandhi serves the two-year jail term, he will not be able to contest the 2024 general election. Some political commentators believe that Mr. Gandhi’s conviction raises concerns over the use of legal cases against leaders for all sorts of so-called crimes.