Seriously Naguesht, Marshall is not absolving the Old Dame, he is pointing to a legal technicality. Ask him how it is that he says "It is incorrect to say that Indira Gandhi violated the constitution." So go for this point. He will either respond well or fall on his face. This is another way to approach things. Its as simple as that. And we must not forget the Supreme Court and what it did in upholding the Emergency and allowing for the layering, infusion and application of draconian powers.
It is true in all probability that Indira Gandhi was not being pressured by the West to relinquish power. The scholars would have been on this by now if she was being--but we shall see. But she did it for her own political reasons--in my opinion they (as in she--Congress) were willing to sit it out. People got to ridicule / many still scoff, but in the end does it matter to the Congress. Indian politicians do not like to be ridiculed but are also learning to work with that figurative reality. But at that point, it was a good way out for them. Give these things a thought. This is high strategy that we only occasionally see these days. I do not respect it at all, but who am I to say that. This does not absolve her at all in my reading. An analogy with business, no matter which political party the MEA bureaucracy at South Block is doing rather well and making sure that India will keep shining as they see fit. And at the end of the day, things are run by a whole other bunch of ghosts. venantius From: Naguesh Bhatcar Marshall, How can you absolve Indira Gandhi?Whatever your take on this, ultimately it was Indira Gandhi the Prime Minister, who was responsiblefor whatever that took place during the emergency --sterilisations or whatever else, that werethe excesses of the emergency era. If you now want to say that only Sanjay Gandhi was the troublemaker,he was then being hailed as the hero and Indira Gandhi never pulled him up.
