The United States is currently captivated by the revelations emerging from the Epstein and MLK files. In the case of Jeffrey Epstein, a notorious sex offender, the perceived lack of transparency in the US investigations has created a significant divide between President Donald Trump and his Republican base. Meanwhile, nearly six decades after the assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, the White House has released over 230,000 pages of previously classified documents pertaining to his murder. These records, sealed in 1977 after the FBI compiled them and handed them over to the National Archives and Records Administration, shed light on a pivotal moment in American history.
In India, the most significant declassification effort to date involved 225 files related to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, released online in stages during 2016. While these files provided historical context and some granular details, they did not unearth radically new information or evidence that could significantly alter the understanding of India’s independence movement stalwarts.
Declassification, in essence, is the process of making previously restricted government documents accessible to the public. Unlike the extensive declassification efforts seen in the US with the MLK and Epstein files, India does not have a uniformly structured declassification process. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) does declassify documents regularly, typically after 25 years, but these are primarily related to the activities of Indian ambassadors abroad.
A notable step towards a more structured approach was taken in 2021 with a revised policy framework by the Ministry of Defence (MoD). This policy sets clear timelines for the compilation, publication, archiving, and declassification of histories related to India’s wars and operations. It mandates that events be officially recorded within five years and stipulates that records should generally be declassified after 25 years. Older records are to be appraised by archival experts and transferred to the National Archives of India once war or operations histories are compiled.
Defense analyst Bharat Karnad views this as a positive development but emphasizes the need to see what is actually released into the public domain, questioning whether it will cover periods beyond the Nehru and Indira Gandhi eras, potentially including the Vajpayee years. Information related to defense matters remains tightly controlled in India, and the tradition of understanding history through firsthand accounts is still in its early stages.
The Henderson-Brooks-Bhagat report, a critical review of Indian Army operations during the 1962 Sino-Indian war, serves as a prime example of this controlled information environment. Officially classified as ‘confidential,’ vital portions of the report were leaked and widely circulated online by journalist Neville Maxwell, who had accessed it for his book “India’s China War.”
Furthermore, books by retired defense officers containing classified information are subject to government vetting. The process involves a review and recommendation by officials before the content is approved for archival.
A recent instance involves the memoir of former army chief, Gen. Manoj Mukund Naravane, which details a conversation with Defence Minister Rajnath Singh regarding the 2020 border clashes with China. Excerpts from his memoir, “Four Stars of Destiny,” are undergoing review by the Indian Army for potential national security concerns.
A. Surya Prakash, a noted author and former Prasar Bharati Chairman, stresses the importance of democracies opening up their public records to learn from historical successes and failures. He argues that while immediate transparency might not always be feasible, long-term access to public records is crucial for understanding how events unfolded.
The lack of a robust public discourse on political history, similar to the debates sparked by the Epstein Files in the US, is a rarity in India, often due to a lack of legal recourse for such transparency demands.
In stark contrast to the US, India faces its own set of challenges regarding transparency and accountability, particularly concerning public figures. Recent reports indicate a significant number of sitting MPs and MLAs have declared criminal cases related to crimes against women in their election affidavits. This, coupled with cases like that of former BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, who faced sexual harassment allegations, highlights systemic issues. While Singh was cleared in one case, he still faces charges in another, and his relatively smooth path after accusations is partly attributed to political parties continuing to field tainted candidates and the slow pace of the criminal justice system.
The Supreme Court has also deliberated on the potential harm of banning individuals charged with heinous crimes from contesting elections if they are later proven innocent, underscoring the complexities of legal and political accountability.
While India does not entirely lack classification for criminal records, the approach is fragmented. The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) collects data, but inconsistencies in methodology, such as a lack of detailed motive categorization and incomplete prison statistics, create significant gaps.
Jawahar Sircar, a former Rajya Sabha member and ex-IAS officer, aptly summarizes this by stating, “We are a country of thick-skinned people.” This perceived insensitivity, he suggests, differentiates nations that have achieved a high level of development from those still striving for it.