Prashant Kishor, the founder of Jan Suraj, has been a prominent figure in Indian politics, known for his electoral strategies and reformist stance. His hunger strike, now entering its twelfth day, has become a focal point of political discourse in Bihar. Kishor’s demand to cancel the BPSC 70th PT exam has been met with silence from the Nitish Kumar-led Bihar government. Amidst growing concerns over his deteriorating health and the lack of resolution, Bihar’s Governor, Arif Mohammad Khan, has stepped in, initiating a dialogue to end the impasse. This move has ignited debates over the Governor’s role and its implications for state politics.
The Hunger Strike: Origins and Demands
Prashant Kishor’s hunger strike began with his call to cancel the BPSC 70th PT exam, citing irregularities and alleged corruption. Kishor argued that the exam’s credibility had been severely compromised, affecting the aspirations of thousands of candidates. His protest is not just a demand for examination reforms but a larger call for accountability and transparency in Bihar’s governance.
On January 7, Kishor’s health took a critical turn, necessitating his admission to Medanta Hospital. He spent several days in the ICU and an isolation ward, underscoring the physical toll of his protest. After being discharged, Kishor planned to resume his hunger strike near Marine Drive in Patna. However, the district administration denied him permission, forcing him to continue his protest under constrained conditions.
Governor Arif Mohammad Khan’s Intervention
Governor Arif Mohammad Khan’s decision to engage with Kishor’s team marks a significant development in this political saga. Khan, known for his proactive and sometimes controversial approach during his tenure in Kerala, sent a message from Raj Bhavan inviting representatives from Kishor’s team for discussions. This intervention, while aimed at resolving the stalemate, has raised questions about the Governor’s role in state politics.
Observers note that the Governor’s involvement could be perceived as an overreach, especially given the presence of an elected government led by Chief Minister Nitish Kumar. The parallels drawn to Khan’s tenure in Kerala, where he often clashed with the Pinarayi Vijayan-led government, have added fuel to the fire.
A Glance at Governor Khan’s Track Record
During his time as Governor of Kerala, Arif Mohammad Khan’s activism often brought him into conflict with the state government. His unilateral decisions, such as reinstating officials and demanding the resignation of 11 university Vice Chancellors, led to severe confrontations. The Kerala government accused Khan of undermining the state’s autonomy and aligning with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
One of the most contentious episodes was Khan’s refusal to sign several bills passed by the Kerala Assembly, including those aimed at curbing the Governor’s powers in university appointments. These actions highlighted a growing rift between the Raj Bhavan and the state government, creating a precedent that now looms over Bihar.
Implications for Bihar’s Political Landscape
In Bihar, the Nitish Kumar government’s initial harmony with Raj Bhavan has been tested by this recent intervention. The Governor’s decision to engage directly with Kishor’s team could be viewed as a challenge to the state’s autonomy. Critics argue that such activism may disrupt the balance of power and set the stage for potential conflicts between Raj Bhavan and the Bihar government.
Nitish Kumar’s government has thus far refrained from addressing Kishor’s demands or the Governor’s involvement. This silence has created a vacuum, allowing speculations to grow about the Chief Minister’s stance and his strategy to navigate this politically sensitive situation.
Parallels with Kerala
The parallels between Bihar and Kerala are striking. In both states, Governor Khan’s activism has sparked debates about the constitutional role of the Governor and its limits. In Kerala, Khan’s vocal support for contentious national policies, such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), and his clashes with the state government created a highly polarized environment. The Bihar scenario, while distinct, carries the risk of similar tensions, particularly if the Governor’s involvement escalates.
Kishor’s Protest: A Symbol of Political Discontent
Prashant Kishor’s hunger strike has become more than a demand for examination reforms. It symbolizes the broader discontent with governance in Bihar. Kishor’s choice of protest reflects his strategic acumen, positioning himself as a champion of the people’s cause. This narrative has resonated with many in Bihar, particularly the youth, who see Kishor’s struggle as a fight against systemic corruption.
However, Kishor’s protest has also drawn criticism. Detractors argue that his hunger strike is a political maneuver aimed at gaining public sympathy and expanding his political base. The lack of tangible results so far has raised questions about the effectiveness of his approach and the feasibility of his demands.
The Role of Civil Society and Public Opinion
Civil society’s response to Kishor’s hunger strike has been mixed. While some groups have expressed solidarity, others have remained cautious, wary of the political undercurrents. Public opinion, however, appears to be shifting, with growing support for Kishor’s cause, particularly on social media platforms.
The role of public opinion cannot be underestimated in this context. As the hunger strike gains traction, the Nitish Kumar government faces mounting pressure to address Kishor’s demands and prevent the situation from spiraling further.
Potential Ripple Effects
The standoff has the potential to create ripple effects beyond Bihar. National parties and regional players could seize the moment to bolster their narratives around governance and corruption. Additionally, Kishor’s actions may inspire similar protests in other states, particularly where public dissatisfaction with governance is high.
The involvement of Raj Bhavan also places the spotlight on the role of Governors across India. This could lead to renewed debates on the constitutional boundaries of gubernatorial powers and their implications for federalism.
Broader Implications for Governance in Bihar
The hunger strike highlights critical issues in Bihar’s governance, including the transparency of public examinations, accountability in administration, and the responsiveness of the state government to public grievances. The way this crisis unfolds could significantly influence public trust in the state’s institutions and leadership.
The case also underscores the challenges faced by reformists like Kishor in navigating entrenched political structures. It raises questions about the viability of grassroots movements in effecting systemic change in a state known for its complex political dynamics and power struggles.
