Modi's marital status isn't our business - or Rahul's or Sibal's

The feeding frenzy over Narendra Modi’s acknowledgement of his marriage to Jashodaben more than four-and-a-half decades ago is truly pathetic. From foot-in-mouth Digvijaya Singh to the seemingly saintly Rahul Gandhi and now to Kapil Sibal, whose has filed a complaint with the Election Commission, the Congress party has latched on to a non-issue as though this is going to save it the blushes on 16 May. “He has not informed the country about this fact,” said the hero of 2G “Zero-loss” Sibal. Nor has Sonia Gandhi informed the country about her foreign travels or what is the illness she is suffering from. In the US, these are matters of intense scrutiny, but for Sibal only Modi is worth scrutinising — and that too about something that is none of his business. [caption id=“attachment_1476629” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Narendra Modi. AFP[/caption] When you descend to such low-level attacks on your main rival, it is an admission of defeat. It is also an invitation to take the election fight to a personal level. Only innocents can get hurt in this mud-slinging. Already twitter is abuzz with talk of Nehru’s tryst with Edwina Mountbatten, Rahul Gandhi’s alleged love life, Shashi Tharoor’s third wife’s mysterious death in a Delhi, Manmohan Singh’s alleged failure to declare his marital status while seeking a Rajya Sabha seat from Assam,  Azam Khan’s wives, et al. It can’t get any worse than this. But it is also worth looking at the issues raised by Modi’s late declaration of his marital status to see whether it actually warrants any kind of scrutiny at all. First, Modi only appears to have left his marital status blank in earlier election affidavits in Gujarat. This does not amount to any intention to lie at all. Just a refusal to talk about it. A candidate’s marital status is not an essential qualification for voting for him or her. It ought to be an optional item of information to be provided by a candidate. The only reason why it even ought to be there in the nomination form is if some wealth is held jointly by husband and wife – which has to be declared. Age is relevant, since there is a minimum age qualification of candidates. But not gender or marital status or sexual orientation. Does it matter if you are a transgender or a hermaphrodite? Sure, there may be some legal issue about not declaring something — but it is a technocality, not something for us to get apoplectic about. Second, in this day and age, marital status is less important than actual relationships. When a French President can qualify for the highest job in his country with just a companion – who anyway is now out of favour with him – whether or not you have a spouse is irrelevant. What matters is what close relationships you are in that are similar to spousal relationships. In India, there is no lack of powerful political personalities who not only have two spouses, but also several girlfriends and paramours. If we start getting into these issues, we will sink to new lows. And it will make no difference to the quality of our governance. Third, one can raise legitimate questions about how Modi handled his relationship with his wife who he has never lived with. But it is no more relevant that asking how Nehru may have treated his wife Kamala, Gandhi his Kasturba, etc. If we go further back into history, one of the noblest sons of India, the Buddha, had deserted his wife and family in his search for enlightenment. This is not to compare Modi with the Buddha, but to point out that the decisions human being take in their lives are to be judged in their own moral context. It is not something for modern-day feminists or political trouble-mongers to work up a lather over. The truth behind Modi’s separation from Jashodaben is their business. If they have chosen not to discuss it or bitch about it in public, it is none of our business – not even the women’s groups. Fourth, this relationship is completely irrelevant to the electoral issues at hand – just as Atal Behari Vajpayee’s relationship with his alleged woman friend or M Karunanidhi’s two wives, or what Rahul Gandhi does in his spare time. Private lives have to remain private – unless they have a relevance to the public in some way. It is for those raising the Jasodhaben issue to justify their decision to stoop so low. Fifth, the media too does not need to have an opinion on a politician’s private life. If the media was willing to let Shashi Tharoor’s relationship with Sunanda and her death in a Delhi hotel remain a private affair, one wonders how Modi’s mere declaration of his marital status is suddenly such a big issue. There are things we must leave alone — and this is one of them. Are you listening, Rahul?