The recently launched attack by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi has ignited a political firearm by raising serious questions about political morality, national security and application of laws in India. Sarma’s claims have investigated Gogoi’s wife Elizabeth Gogoi (Nee Collaburn), especially on his British citizenship and alleged relations for foreign institutions. The dispute is a symbol of a broad political tendency in India, where allegations – although unequally – are armed to discredit political opponents.
Also read A message for crime and love against women, Himanta: Respect your constitutional chair
Charges and their implications
Sarma’s allegations include several concerns: Elizabeth Gogoi for about 12 years (married in October 2013), for allegations of connection with ISI of Pakistan, for allegations of connections with ISI, in conversion racket Received from sources such as participation, and obtaining foreign funds from sources. George Soros. She has questioned the alleged double standards in the rules for MPs vs. Government officials, arguing that the foreign husband and wife of the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) officers need to take Indian citizenship within six months, while any such rules Does not apply to legalists.
If confirmed, Sarma’s allegations will form legitimate concerns about national security and legal flaws. However, at this stage, they remain largely unproven, making it mandatory to question the intentions behind Sarma’s statements. Is it a real concern for national security, or is it an attempt to tarnish the image of a political rival? The time and intensity of the allegations suggest the latter.
Question of citizenship and double standards
One of the main points raised by Sarma is that Elizabeth Gogoi has maintained his British citizenship while marrying an Indian MP. Legally, the Indian citizenship law does not suggest that a foreign husband or wife will have to acquire Indian nationality. Unlike government officials, elected representatives are not bound by the service rules implementing such restrictions. Therefore, compared to IFS officers compared to Sarma is interesting, it does not have legal qualifications.
In addition, there are many Indian politicians whose husbands have foreign citizenship. If maintaining foreign nationality is considered a matter of safety concern, should this theory be applied equally to all political data, or is it being selected against Gaurav Gogoi? A similar policy will be worth debating, but targeting a person while ignoring similar cases elsewhere of political opportunism.
‘ISI connection’ and radical allegations
The most explosive part of Sarma’s allegations claim that Elizabeth Gogoi has ties with ISI-Linked persons, and has inspired young Indians to the Pakistan Embassy for radicalism. These are serious allegations that if true, there will be a major violation of national security. However, no concrete evidence has been presented to support this claim, and it appears to be based on rejected social media speculation. The nature of such allegations demands a completely independent investigation rather than a political modeling match.
Foreign funding and ‘Link to deep-state institutions’ of Forem2Food
Sarma has also accused Gogoi’s NGO Form 2 Food of violating the Rules of Foreign Contribution Act (FCRA), which is working with foreign organizations despite not being FCRA-regulated. The NGO lists several international partners, including the Swiss Ray Foundation, who provides grants. However, the only relationship with foreign organizations does not form a violation until there is evidence of illegal money.
The allegations of a link by George Soros have been added to the controversy, a financer who was often accused of influencing global politics. However, it is true that Soros’s Open Society Foundation funds various organizations worldwide, in which it is a stretch to connect every Indian organization associated with Soros’s network to an Indian organization associated with anti-national activities. Transparency is important in NGO funding, but a blanket perception of wrongdoing without concrete evidence is irresponsible.
Political undertaking
The way Sarma has raised these issues, he explains a big political purpose. The BJP has often deployed itself as the patron of national security and Hindu values, often accused its political opponents of compromising foreign influences. By targeting Gogoi and connecting his wife to radical elements, Sarma’s possibility is trying to destroy the credibility of the MP in Assam, a state where nationalist feelings are high.
In addition, Gaurav Gogoi has been an outspoken critic of the Modi government, especially on issues such as Manipur violence and alleged misuse of investigative agencies against opposition leaders. Pulling him into a dispute, the BJP can try to neutralize an emerging leader in the Congress party.
Also read Himant’s peace agreement with ULFA can be a milestone for Assam, but …
Need evidence and accountability
While the Assam government has ordered an inquiry into a Pakistani person Sarma and the BJP has demanded to join Elizabeth Gogoi, the decision was taken only on Sunday, a few days after the attack on Gogo.
If Sarma’s allegations have any merit, the government should first initiate an official inquiry, and became public with the claims when something was reliable to return him. There is no case of taking national security lightly, and if there is evidence of foreign intervention, it should be addressed through legal means. If these claims are baseless, it will be a serious matter of political defamation, which further further the integrity of Indian politics.
Accountability should be a two-way road. If Gaurav Gogoi or his wife are engaged in any wrongdoing, then they will have to face the appropriate process. At the same time, if Sarma’s claims are found to be baseless, it should be held accountable to spread wrong information. Political leaders should not be allowed to make statements that set fire without facing results.
The attack of Himanta Biswa Sarma on Gaurav Gogoi raises important questions about the intersection of national security, law and politics in India. While concerns about foreign influence and regulatory compliance are valid, they should be addressed through appropriate legal channels rather than public allegations without evidence.
Unfortunately, the current political atmosphere encourages such disputes, where the allegations are often performed with the primary intentions to harm the reliability of an opponent rather than addressing security concerns. If India has to maintain a strong democratic structure, the political discourse should rise above personal attacks and focus on the issues of original rule.
As voters, we should be important for such political maneuvers and demand evidence on rhetoric. National security is very serious to be used as a tool for political point-scoring. The nation is really worthy of transparency and truth, but from all sides, not only selectively.
The author is a technocrat, political analyst and writer.
[Disclaimer: The opinions, beliefs, and views expressed by the various authors and forum participants on this website are personal and do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and views of ABP Network Pvt. Ltd.]
