THE Modi government is going about making appointments in key positions of the government and the state which are controversial and liable to inflict damage on the institutions concerned. Lt. General Bipin Rawat has been appointed as the chief of Army Staff. The government has selected him by superseding the most senior general, Lt. General Praveen Bakshi.  The next in line in seniority was Lt. General P M Hariz. Normally, the new chief of staff is announced at least sixty days before the date of retirement of the outgoing chief.  This time, with the retirement of General Dalbir Singh Suhag due, the government has announced the name of the new chief barely two weeks before.  It was widely expected that in terms of seniority, Lt. General Bakshi, who is the head of the Eastern Command and had an exceptional record, would be appointed as the chief. Instead, the government has appointed Lt. General Bipin Rawat who was third in the list of seniority.  This has caused misgivings within the army circles and outside.  It is the prerogative of the government to select the army chief. But the manner in which it has been done bypassing the well-established convention raises questions about the intention behind the move. 

This is because the prime minister and the BJP government have displayed a pattern of circumventing established procedures and appointing persons of their choice in key positions.  With the retirement of the director of the CBI, Anil Sinha, a new director has to be appointed. But two days before Sinha was to retire, the senior most officer, R K Datta was shifted out from the CBI. A few days later, a Gujarat-cadre IPS officer Rakesh Asthana was made acting director of the CBI.

The director of the CBI is appointed by a selection committee consisting of the prime minister, chief justice of India and the leader of the single largest opposition group in the Lok Sabha. That meeting has not been held in December even after the post fell vacant. There is a suspicion that the meeting will be held only after the current chief justice of India retires in the first week of January. All these maneouvres seem designed to ensure that the favoured choice of the prime minister is made the CBI director.

In an earlier instance, the appointment of the chief vigilance commissioner also became controversial and the matter went up to the Supreme Court. 

The selective appointments began in the sphere of higher educational institutions and cultural bodies. Hindutva minded persons have become heads of research and apex educational agencies including vice-chancellors of central universities .This has been followed up by appointments to constitutional and legal bodies. The appointment of two members with RSS links to the Law Commission is an instance.

The current tussle between the government and the Supreme Court collegium over the appointment of judges in High Courts is also due to the insistence of the Modi government to have a say on who should be considered for judgeship by the collegium and also to exercise a veto power on the grounds of national security.  The Modi government would like to see judges of its choice appointed. 

All these threaten the integrity of the key and vital institutions of the State – whether it be the judiciary, the bureaucracy or the armed forces.  What is being attempted is an authoritarian-Hindutva takeover of the Indian State. This must be exposed and resisted.

(December 21, 2016)