Skip to main content

A consensus orthodox politician of old Congress type who 'helped' status quoists

RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat, 'citizen' Pranab Mukherjee
By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*
Former president Pranab Mukherjees death is the passing away of a leader who adhered to parliamentary procedures and constitutional norms. Perhaps, Mukherjee was among the last of that generation that believed consensus as the only way to run the country, though without realizing that, sometimes, such consensus could help status-quoists. 
After his death, lots of tributes have poured in, including from the RSS, the Prime minister, who posted some of the photographs with “Pranab Da”. TV anchors called him a doyen to whom the 'sarkaar' bowed for his 'achievements'. Ironically, the same ‘sarkaar’ vilified Jawaharlal Nehru, his ideological mentor, yet glorified Mukherjee. Even then he could not do much to defend Nehru.
While I respect Mukherjee's administrative acumen, yet, somehow, I never became fond of his politics or personality. All through these years of his public life, if scrutinized, we will only find him an 'expert' in drawing room manoeuvres. He was considered as the main 'brain' of UPA I and II, but if we go through the two phases, we can see the gross failure of UPA in handling the Anna Hazare movement, allowing his own party's fortune to be doomed in 2014.
He was at the helm of affairs since 2004, but never did he advise strong action against the Gujarat government for its absolute failure in the 2002 anti-Muslim riots. What stopped UPA from even legally fighting cases and bringing accountability?
Today, every secular and liberal 'expert' is joining chorus with his or her Sanghi ‘jaat-waalahs’ to point towards the 'greatness' of Mukherjee. Some suggest that he would have been the 'greatest' Prime Minister India, others blamed the Rajiv Gandhi 'gang' in denying him his place in the Rajiv Cabinet.
Those who are writing today about the Rajiv 'gang' were actually 'fans' of the Gandhi family, but perhaps, in order to sound more 'secular' or independent, they are trying to distance themselves from the ‘family’, which is being vilified.
Mukherjee was Finance Minister during Indira Gandhi's period from 1980 to 1984. Then Manmohan Singh made him Minister for External Affairs as well as Defence Minister. In the UPA II he was also made the Finance Minister, when P Chidambaram was transferred to the Home Ministry in the aftermath of the Mumbai attack in November 2009.
I don't remember anything very specific that Mukherjee did at the Ministry of Finance except the one very well known fact -- that he was very close to the biggest 'industrial house', and this closeness got reflected in he attending the wedding ceremony of the family that owns the business house.
A whole lot of issues required a strong viewpoint, including CAA and NRC, yet we did not hear much from the citizen Mukherjee
As Finance Minister, Mukherjee imposed tax in retrospection on a company which was opposed by the then powers-that-be. Indeed, one can say that he was the political face of the 'apolitical' Manmohan Singh ministry. It happens when a prime minister is unable to deal with political friends or opponents.
That is where the Congress damaged itself then. Corruption rose to new levels, especially in the context of the 'narrative' of the privatisation mantra. 'Consensus' became the 'compulsion' of the Congress, and being familiar with all political leaders, Mukherjee became the most-favoured choice, including for the post of President of India.  
Mukherjee was a typical orthodox politician of old Congress type who would go by the rule books. He loved Parliament and can be said to be the master of parliamentary procedures. This happens, because Parliament does not have a Madhu Dandawate, an Indrajeet Gupta, a Somnath Chaterjee, a Chandra Shekhar, or the likes.
Surely, in terms of basics, he was perhaps the last of the stalwarts who appeared to stand above the type members of Parliament we lately have had. It is not difficult to understand as to why Mukherjee was remembered glowingly together by 'liberals' as well as Sanghi journalists.
As President of India, Mukherjee followed everything that the government advised him to do. He could not return a single bill and was doing everything to 'please' Prime Minister Narendra Modi for a possible second term.
There were reports that the business house in Mumbai was more than keen to bring him back to Rashtrapati Bhavan, but somehow internal political dynamics inside BJP and RSS could not come to a unanimity regarding him.
Yet, after retirement, Mukherjee continued to flirt with Sangh Parivar. He addressed an RSS gathering at Nagpur. There were a whole lot of issues which were important, including the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), but we did not hear much from the 'citizen Mukherjee'.
Unlike many political leaders and his contemporaries who did not compromise with power to live permanently in the heart of the capital, Mukherjee ensured he ‘remained’ with political power.
I don't see any of his actions or decisions where he can be hailed as champion of 'secularism' and 'social justice'. In fact, in a typical Brahmanical fashion, he would quote extensively great icons, yet ignore issues related to caste atrocities and caste discrimination, as if they never happened.
Mukherjee was a Bhadralok politician, and his religious Brahmanical values always reflected during the Puja ceremony, which he would always go to see at his native place, wanting to be seen performing all those rituals. He appeared to ignore: Religious rituals and intellectualism don't go together.
Ultimately, it is your religious thoughts -- whether you consider them as a personal matter or a matter of public display -- that decide your personality and outcome. It gives us an idea of people like Mukherjee, who is considered an intellectual, yet never cared to speak against superstitions and discrimination prevalent in our society. He seemed to enjoy Brahmanical privileges.
Mukherjee had a lot to do in Delhi. After all, he was part of political structure for so long, and decided our destiny. Yet, the fact is, he was never a common man's leader. He seemed to enjoy what he was.
Till 2004, he never contested Lok Sabha election, yet he was in the top circles of the ruling party in all decision-making bodies. He contested Lok Sabha election in 2004 from Jangipur in West Bengal for the first time and won. He represented the constituency twice.
There is no doubt that he was a political president who brought political wisdom to the Rashtrapati Bhavan, unlike those who pretended to be apolitical. His presence in the Rashtrapati Bhavan could have actually benefited governance, but all through he was just balancing things out.
Coronavirus is the worst period for anyone, particularly forthose who are in public life. It does not give an opportunity to near dear and ones to come and express their condolences. It is sad that Pranab Mukherjee passed away during this period. Be that as it may, he was the former President of India, hence got all the protocol that he deserved.
---
*Human rights defender

Comments

TRENDING

Countrywide protest by gig workers puts spotlight on algorithmic exploitation

By A Representative   A nationwide protest led largely by women gig and platform workers was held across several states on February 3, with the Gig & Platform Service Workers Union (GIPSWU) claiming the mobilisation as a success and a strong assertion of workers’ rights against what it described as widespread exploitation by digital platform companies. Demonstrations took place in Delhi, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Maharashtra and other states, covering major cities including New Delhi, Jaipur, Bengaluru and Mumbai, along with multiple districts across the country.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

Paper guarantees, real hardship: How budget 2026–27 abandons rural India

By Vikas Meshram   In the history of Indian democracy, the Union government’s annual budget has always carried great significance. However, the 2026–27 budget raises several alarming concerns for rural India. In particular, the vague provisions of the VBG–Ram Ji scheme and major changes to the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGA) have put the future of rural workers at risk. A deeper reading of the budget reveals that these changes are not merely administrative but are closely tied to political and economic priorities that will have far-reaching consequences for millions of rural households.

Penpa Tsering’s leadership and record under scrutiny amidst Tibetan exile elections

By Tseten Lhundup*  Within the Tibetan exile community, Penpa Tsering is often described as having risen through grassroots engagement. Born in 1967, he comes from an ordinary Tibetan family, pursued higher education at Delhi University in India, and went on to serve as Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile from 2008 to 2016. In 2021, he was elected Sikyong of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), becoming the second democratically elected political leader of the administration after Lobsang Sangay. 

'Gandhi Talks': Cinema that dares to be quiet, where music, image and silence speak

By Vikas Meshram   In today’s digital age, where reels and short videos dominate attention spans, watching a silent film for over two hours feels almost like an act of resistance. Directed by Kishor Pandurang Belekar, “Gandhi Talks” is a bold cinematic experiment that turns silence into language and wordlessness into a powerful storytelling device. The film is not mere entertainment; it is an experience that pushes the viewer inward, compelling reflection on life, values, and society.

From Puri to the State: How Odisha turned the dream of drinkable tap water into policy

By Hans Harelimana Hirwa, Mansee Bal Bhargava   Drinking water directly from the tap is generally associated with developed countries where it is considered safe and potable. Only about 50 countries around the world offer drinkable tap water, with the majority located in Europe and North America, and a few in Asia and Oceania. Iceland, Switzerland, Finland, Germany, and Singapore have the highest-quality tap water, followed by Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the USA, Australia, the UK, Costa Rica, and Chile.

Frugal funds, fading promises: Budget 2026 exposes shrinking space for minority welfare

By Syed Ali Mujtaba*  The Ministry of Minority Affairs was established in 2006 during the tenure of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, following the findings of the Sachar Committee, which documented that Muslims were among the most educationally and economically disadvantaged communities in India. The ministry was conceived as a corrective institutional response to deep structural inequalities faced by religious minorities, particularly Muslims, through focused policy interventions.