Opinion: Himanta Should Have Held His Peace Until He Had Proof To Back Up Allegations Against Gaurav Gogoi

Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma’s allegations cover a range of concerns, from Elizabeth Gogoi retaining her British citizenship nearly 12 years into their marriage, to accusations of connections with Pakistan’s ISI.

Source : PTI and X/ElizabethGogoi

The recent attack launched by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi has ignited a political firestorm, raising serious questions about political ethics, national security, and the application of laws in India. Sarma’s claims have brought scrutiny to Gogoi’s wife Elizabeth Gogoi (nee Colburn), particularly over her British citizenship and alleged links to foreign entities. This controversy is emblematic of a broader political trend in India, where allegations — however unverified — are weaponised to discredit political adversaries.

The Allegations And Their Implications

Sarma’s allegations cover a range of concerns: from Elizabeth Gogoi retaining her British citizenship nearly 12 years into their marriage (they got married in October 2013), to accusations of connections with Pakistan’s ISI, involvement in conversion rackets, and receiving foreign funds from sources like George Soros. He has further questioned the perceived double standards in rules for lawmakers versus government officers, arguing that foreign spouses of Indian Foreign Service (IFS) officers are required to take Indian citizenship within six months, whereas no such rule applies to lawmakers.

If substantiated, Sarma’s allegations would constitute legitimate concerns about national security and legal loopholes. However, at this stage, they remain largely unproven, making it imperative to question the intent behind Sarma’s statements. Is this a genuine concern for national security, or is it an attempt to tarnish a political opponent’s image? The timing and intensity of the allegations suggest the latter.

The Question Of Citizenship And Double Standards

One of the main points raised by Sarma is why Elizabeth Gogoi has retained her British citizenship while being married to an Indian lawmaker. Legally, Indian citizenship laws do not mandate that a foreign spouse must acquire Indian nationality. Unlike government officers, elected representatives are not bound by service rules that impose such restrictions. Therefore, while Sarma’s comparison to IFS officers is interesting, it does not hold legal merit.

Moreover, there are several Indian politicians whose spouses hold foreign citizenship. If retaining foreign nationality is deemed a security concern, should this principle apply uniformly to all political figures, or is it being selectively used against Gaurav Gogoi? A uniform policy would be worth debating, but targeting an individual while ignoring similar cases elsewhere reeks of political opportunism.

The ‘ISI Connection’ And Radicalisation Allegations

The most explosive part of Sarma’s allegations is the claim that Elizabeth Gogoi has connections with ISI-linked individuals, and has led young Indians to the Pakistan embassy for radicalisation. These are grave accusations that, if true, would constitute a major breach of national security. However, no concrete evidence has been presented to support this claim, and it appears to be based on unverified social media speculation. The nature of such accusations demands a thorough, independent investigation rather than a political mudslinging match.

Foreign Funding And Farm2Food’s ‘Links To Deep-State Entities’

Sarma has also accused Gogoi’s NGO Farm2Food of violating Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) regulations by working with foreign organisations despite not being FCRA-registered. The NGO lists several international partners, including the Swiss Re Foundation, which provides grants. However, a mere association with foreign organisations does not constitute a violation unless there is proof of illegal funding.

Allegations of a link to George Soros, a financier often accused of influencing global politics, has added to the controversy. While it is true that Soros’s Open Society Foundation funds various organisations worldwide, including those with anti-establishment leanings, linking every Indian organisation associated with Soros’s network to anti-national activities is a stretch. Transparency in NGO funding is crucial, but a blanket assumption of wrongdoing without concrete proof is irresponsible.

The Political Undertones Of The Attack

The way Sarma has raised these issues suggests a larger political motive. The BJP has often positioned itself as the guardian of national security and Hindu values, frequently accusing its political opponents of being compromised to foreign influences. By targeting Gogoi and linking his wife to radical elements, Sarma is likely attempting to erode the MP’s credibility in Assam, a state where nationalist sentiments run high.

Moreover, Gaurav Gogoi has been a vocal critic of the Modi government, particularly on issues like the Manipur violence and the alleged misuse of investigative agencies against Opposition leaders. By dragging him into a controversy, the BJP may be trying to neutralise a rising leader in the Congress party.

The Need For Evidence And Accountability

While the Assam government has ordered a probe into a Pakistani individual Sarma and the BJP have sought to link to Elizabeth Gogoi, the decision was only taken Sunday, days after the attack on the Gogois began.

If Sarma’s allegations hold any merit, the government should have first launched an official probe, and gone public with the claims when it had something credible to back them up. National security is not a matter to be taken lightly, and if there is evidence of foreign interference, it must be addressed through legal means. If these claims are baseless, it would amount to a severe case of political defamation, further eroding the integrity of Indian politics.

Accountability should be a two-way street. If Gaurav Gogoi or his wife has engaged in any wrongdoing, they must face due process. At the same time, if Sarma’s claims are found to be unfounded, he should be held accountable for spreading misinformation. Political leaders must not be allowed to make incendiary statements without facing consequences.

Himanta Biswa Sarma’s attack on Gaurav Gogoi raises critical questions about the intersection of national security, law, and politics in India. While concerns about foreign influence and regulatory compliance are valid, they must be addressed through proper legal channels rather than through public allegations without evidence.

Unfortunately, the current political climate encourages such controversies, where accusations are often made with the primary intention of damaging an opponent’s credibility rather than genuinely addressing security concerns. If India is to maintain a robust democratic framework, political discourse must rise above personal attacks and focus on substantive governance issues.

As voters, we must remain critical of such political manoeuvring and demand evidence over rhetoric. National security is too serious a matter to be used as a tool for political point-scoring. The nation indeed deserves transparency and truth but from all sides, not just selectively.

The writer is a technocrat, political analyst, and author. 

[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.]