Chapter 6 The Crisis Of Democratic Order

This chapter explores a critical period in India's democratic history, roughly between 1973 and 1975, which led to significant challenges to the established democratic order and institutional balance. These events culminated in the imposition of the 'Emergency' in June 1975, a state of exception typically associated with external war or natural disaster, but in this case, declared due to a perceived threat of internal disturbance. The Emergency, which lasted until 1977, ended as abruptly as it began, resulting in a significant political shift with the defeat of the Congress party.

The chapter delves into the reasons behind the Emergency, its necessity, its practical implementation and consequences, its impact on party politics, and the lasting lessons it holds for Indian democracy.

Background To Emergency

Since the late 1960s, Indian politics had been undergoing significant changes. **Indira Gandhi** had emerged as a highly popular and dominant leader after the 1971 elections. However, this period also saw increasingly **bitter and polarized party competition**. Furthermore, tensions grew in the relationship between the government and the judiciary.

The Supreme Court had ruled against several government initiatives, deeming them unconstitutional. The Congress party countered that the Court's stance undermined democracy and parliamentary supremacy and argued that the Court was a conservative institution obstructing progressive, pro-poor welfare programs. Opposition parties, on the other hand, felt that politics was becoming excessively personalized under Indira Gandhi, transforming governmental authority into personal power. The split in the Congress party in 1969 had further sharpened the divisions between Indira Gandhi's faction and her opponents.

This cartoon likely depicts the ongoing friction between the legislative branch (Parliament) and the judicial branch (Supreme Court) during this period, illustrating the institutional power struggle.

Economic Context

Although the Congress party had campaigned on the slogan of 'garibi hatao' (remove poverty) in the 1971 elections, the social and economic conditions in India did not improve significantly after 1971-72. Several factors contributed to a worsening economic climate:

• The **Bangladesh crisis** and the subsequent war with Pakistan placed a heavy burden on the Indian economy, partly due to the influx of about 8 million refugees.
• The **US government stopped all aid** to India after the 1971 war.
• Global **oil prices increased dramatically** in the international market, leading to sharp inflation. Prices rose by 23% in 1973 and 30% in 1974, causing considerable hardship for the public.
• Industrial growth was sluggish, and **unemployment, particularly in rural areas, was very high**.
• To reduce expenditure, the government **froze the salaries of its employees**, leading to further dissatisfaction.
• **Monsoon failures in 1972-73** caused an 8% decline in agricultural production, exacerbating food shortages.

This general atmosphere of economic dissatisfaction provided fertile ground for popular protests organized effectively by non-Congress opposition parties. Student unrest, which had been present since the late 1960s, became more widespread. The period also saw increased activity from radical Marxist groups (Naxalites) who rejected parliamentary politics and pursued armed insurgency, particularly strong in West Bengal.

Gujarat And Bihar Movements

Two significant student-led agitations in Gujarat and Bihar, both states ruled by the Congress party, had far-reaching impacts on state and national politics.

• Gujarat Movement (January 1974): Students in Gujarat began protests against rising prices of food grains, cooking oil, and other essential items, and against corruption. Major opposition parties joined the agitation, which became widespread. This led to the imposition of President's Rule. Opposition parties demanded fresh assembly elections. Morarji Desai (a prominent leader of Congress-O and rival of Indira Gandhi) announced an indefinite fast demanding new elections. Under intense pressure, assembly elections were held in June 1975, in which the Congress party was defeated.
• Bihar Movement (March 1974): Students in Bihar protested against similar issues – rising prices, food scarcity, unemployment, and corruption. They invited **Jayaprakash Narayan (JP)**, who had withdrawn from active politics, to lead the movement. JP agreed on condition that the movement would remain non-violent and expand beyond Bihar. The movement quickly gained a political character and national appeal, drawing support from various sections of society.

JP demanded the dismissal of the Congress government in Bihar and called for **'Total Revolution'** – comprehensive change in social, economic, and political spheres to establish what he considered true democracy. Protests, including bandhs, gheraos, and strikes, were organized, but the Bihar government refused to resign. The movement began influencing national politics as JP sought to spread it nationwide.

The slogan "Sampoorna Kranti Ab Hamara Nara Hai..." (Total Revolution is our slogan now) from the Bihar movement led by Jayaprakash Narayan reflects its ambitious goal of fundamental societal transformation beyond just political change, highlighting the deep discontent and aspiration for comprehensive reform among the participants.

Information about Jayaprakash Narayan (JP):

Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan (JP) (1902-1979) was a prominent socialist leader, freedom fighter, and key figure in the Quit India movement. He was a founder of the Congress Socialist Party. After 1955, he left active politics, becoming a Gandhian and engaging in social work (Bhoodan movement, peace initiatives). He led the Bihar movement, becoming a symbol of opposition to the Emergency and playing a central role in forming the Janata Party.

The Naxalite Movement

The Naxalite movement represents another form of internal unrest during this period. It originated from a peasant uprising in the Naxalbari police station area of Darjeeling in West Bengal in 1967, led by local CPI(M) cadres. This armed agrarian struggle spread to other parts of India, becoming known as the **Naxalite movement**. In 1969, Naxalite leaders broke from the CPI(M) and formed a new party, the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) (CPI-ML), under the leadership of Charu Majumdar. They rejected Indian democracy as superficial and advocated for a strategy of protracted guerrilla warfare to achieve revolution.

Naxalites employed violence to seize land from wealthy landowners and redistribute it to the poor and landless. They advocated violent means for political change. Despite stringent measures by the West Bengal government (run by Congress), including preventive detention, the movement persisted and spread to other states. It has since splintered into various factions, though some participate in mainstream democratic politics.

Information about Charu Majumdar:

Charu Majumdar (1918-1972) was a communist revolutionary and leader of the Naxalbari uprising. A participant in earlier peasant movements, he founded the CPI(ML) and was a strong proponent of the Maoist path of peasant rebellion and revolutionary violence. He died in police custody.

Information about the Naxalite movement's causes and impact:

Currently affecting numerous districts across several states, primarily in backward, Adivasi-inhabited areas, Naxalite violence is often linked to the denial of basic rights to sharecroppers and small cultivators regarding land tenure security, share in produce, and fair wages. Issues like forced labor, exploitation of resources by outsiders, and usury by moneylenders also fuel the movement's growth. Governments have used stern measures, facing criticism from human rights activists for constitutional violations. The conflict has resulted in thousands of deaths from both Naxalite and anti-Naxalite violence.

Railway Strike Of 1974

Adding to the atmosphere of unrest was a nationwide **railway strike** in May 1974. Led by George Fernandes of the National Coordination Committee for Railwaymen's Struggle, the strike demanded better bonus and service conditions for railway employees, who formed the largest public sector undertaking. The strike threatened to paralyze the country's economy, which heavily relied on rail transport for goods movement.

The government declared the strike illegal and refused the demands, leading to the arrest of many leaders and the deployment of the territorial army. The strike lasted for twenty days but was eventually called off without settlement. This event highlighted issues of workers' rights, especially for essential services, and added to the growing labor unrest and public dissatisfaction with the government.

Conflict With Judiciary

The period also saw increasing tensions and direct conflict between the government (Executive and Legislature) and the Judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court. This conflict centered on three key constitutional issues:

1. Can Parliament limit **Fundamental Rights**? The Supreme Court had ruled it cannot.
2. Can Parliament curtail the **right to property** through constitutional amendment? The Court had stated that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in a way that curtails rights.
3. Can Parliament amend the Constitution to prioritize **Directive Principles** over Fundamental Rights? The government attempted this, but the Supreme Court rejected the provision.

This crisis culminated in the landmark **Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973)**, where the Supreme Court delivered the crucial judgment that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its **'basic features'**. This established a limit on Parliament's amending power.

Two further developments heightened the tension:

• In 1973, immediately after the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, the government **superseded the seniority of three senior judges** who had ruled against the government's stance and appointed Justice A. N. Ray as the Chief Justice of India. This controversial appointment mixed constitutional interpretations with political ideologies.
• The idea of a 'committed judiciary' and bureaucracy loyal to the executive's vision began to be promoted by those close to the Prime Minister.

The confrontation reached its peak with a High Court ruling that directly affected the Prime Minister herself.

This R. K. Laxman cartoon from 1974, showing Indira Gandhi and perhaps D.K. Barooah (Congress President) facing judicial pressure (represented by a wig), captures the intensifying conflict between the Executive/Legislature and the Judiciary leading up to the declaration of Emergency.

Declaration Of Emergency

The immediate trigger for the declaration of Emergency was the judgment of the Allahabad High Court on **12 June 1975**. Justice Jagmohan Lal Sinha declared **Indira Gandhi's election to the Lok Sabha invalid** based on an election petition filed by Raj Narain, who had contested against her in 1971. The petition alleged that she had used the services of government servants during her campaign, which was deemed an electoral offense.

The High Court's verdict meant Indira Gandhi legally ceased to be an MP and therefore could not continue as Prime Minister unless re-elected within six months. On 24 June, the Supreme Court granted her a conditional stay, allowing her to remain an MP and PM while her appeal was pending, but prohibiting her from participating in Lok Sabha proceedings.

Crisis And Response

The High Court judgment and the Supreme Court's partial stay set the stage for a major political confrontation. Opposition parties, led by Jayaprakash Narayan, demanded Indira Gandhi's resignation. On 25 June 1975, they organized a massive demonstration at Delhi's Ramlila grounds. Jayaprakash Narayan called for a nationwide satyagraha for her resignation and, controversially, appealed to the army, police, and government employees not to obey "illegal and immoral orders." This action was perceived by the government as a threat to paralyze its functioning and bring its activities to a halt. The political atmosphere was increasingly turning against the Congress.

This R. K. Laxman cartoon from June 1975, just before the Emergency, captures the sense of a mounting political crisis threatening to engulf the government, with D.K. Barooah (Congress President) behind the chair, perhaps illustrating the internal party support for Indira Gandhi amidst the external challenges.

The government's response was the declaration of a state of emergency. On the night of 25 June 1975, the government declared that a threat of **internal disturbances** existed and invoked **Article 352** of the Constitution. This article allows the government to proclaim Emergency based on external threat or internal disturbance. The government deemed the prevailing crisis grave enough to warrant this proclamation. Technically, this was within the constitutional powers of the government, as the Constitution grants special powers during an Emergency.

During an Emergency proclaimed under Article 352, the federal structure is effectively suspended, with all powers concentrating in the Union government. Additionally, the government gains the authority to suspend or restrict Fundamental Rights. The constitutional provisions for Emergency are designed for extraordinary situations where normal democratic processes cannot function, thus granting enhanced powers to the government.

President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed issued the proclamation immediately based on the Prime Minister's recommendation on the night of 25 June. Electricity to major newspaper offices was cut after midnight. Early on 26 June, numerous opposition leaders and activists were arrested. The Union Cabinet was informed of the proclamation at a special meeting at 6 a.m. on 26 June, after these actions had already taken place.

The blank editorial space in the newspaper 'Nai Dunia' on 27 June 1975 is a powerful symbol of the imposition of press censorship during the Emergency, representing the silencing of dissent and the suspension of freedom of expression.

This cartoon likely depicts President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed issuing the Emergency proclamation, potentially commenting on the process or the circumstances under which the declaration was made.

Consequences

The declaration of Emergency abruptly halted the agitations. Strikes were banned, and many opposition leaders were jailed, creating a quiet but tense political situation. The government used its special Emergency powers to suspend the freedom of the Press through **press censorship**, requiring prior approval for all publications. Organizations like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Jamait-e-Islami were banned. Protests and public agitations were disallowed. Crucially, various **Fundamental Rights** of citizens were suspended, including the right to approach courts for their restoration.

The government made extensive use of **preventive detention**, arresting and detaining individuals based on the apprehension that they might commit an offense, without charging them with any crime. Large-scale arrests of political workers occurred under these laws. Detained individuals could not challenge their arrests through **habeas corpus** petitions (legal recourse challenging unlawful detention). While some High Courts initially ruled that they could entertain such petitions even during Emergency, the Supreme Court, in April 1976, overturned these judgments, accepting the government's plea that the right to life and liberty could be suspended during Emergency. This controversial judgment effectively closed the judiciary's doors for citizens seeking protection of their basic rights.

This cartoon likely depicts the Supreme Court's controversial April 1976 judgment, suggesting that the judiciary yielded to government pressure or accepted the suspension of fundamental rights, symbolizing a setback for judicial independence and citizen liberties during the Emergency.

Information about Custodial Death of Rajan:

The custodial death of P. Rajan, a student in Kerala, in 1976, is a tragic example of the excesses committed during the Emergency. Arrested under preventive detention, he was tortured in police custody and died. His father's efforts to trace him were initially hampered by the suspension of rights. After the Emergency, a habeas corpus petition led to an inquiry that revealed the torture and death in custody. The Kerala High Court's ruling that the then Home Minister had lied led to his resignation, highlighting accountability for abuses after the Emergency was lifted.

Information about Demolitions in Turkman Gate Area, Delhi:

The demolitions and forced displacements in Delhi's poor localities, like the Turkman Gate area, during the Emergency are notorious examples of government excesses. Jhuggis were forcibly removed, and thousands were subjected to compulsory sterilization, sometimes indirectly coerced or even imposed on others for personal gain. This illustrates how government actions directly and severely impacted the lives of common people when democratic processes and legal safeguards were suspended.

There were acts of dissent. Political workers who evaded arrest went 'underground' to organize protests. Newspapers like 'Indian Express' and 'The Statesman' left blank spaces to protest censorship. Magazines chose to shut down rather than comply. Many journalists were arrested. Underground publications circulated. Some writers returned national awards (Shivarama Karanth, Fanishwarnath Renu) to protest the suspension of democracy. However, widespread open defiance was rare.

Parliament also enacted changes. An amendment barred challenging the elections of the Prime Minister, President, and Vice-President in court, aimed at countering the Allahabad HC verdict. The **Forty-second Amendment**, a comprehensive change, significantly altered the Constitution, including extending the duration of legislatures from five to six years, intended as a permanent change. Elections could also be postponed by one year during Emergency, effectively delaying the 1976 elections to 1978.

Controversy Regarding Emergency

The Emergency remains one of the most controversial events in Indian politics due to differing viewpoints on its necessity, the alleged excesses, and its lessons for democracy. The **Shah Commission of Inquiry**, appointed by the Janata Party government in 1977, investigated abuses during the Emergency, gathering evidence and witness testimonies (though Indira Gandhi refused to testify). Its reports detailed many 'excesses' committed.

Was The Emergency Necessary?

Arguments for declaring Emergency (presented by the government and supporters):

• The Constitution allowed Emergency based on 'internal disturbances'.
• Opposition parties were disrupting governance through continuous agitations and extra-parliamentary politics, leading to instability and hindering development work by diverting administration's focus to law and order.
• Subversive forces were trying to derail progressive programs and dislodge the PM through extra-constitutional means (Indira Gandhi's view).
• An international conspiracy threatened India's unity (CPI's view, who supported Emergency).

Arguments against declaring Emergency (presented by critics):

• Indian politics had a history of popular struggles; public protest is a democratic right.
• The Gujarat and Bihar agitations were largely peaceful and non-violent; no charges were filed against most detainees.
• The Home Ministry had not flagged any significant law and order crisis.
• The government had routine powers to handle agitations; suspending democratic functioning was unnecessary and draconian.
• The threat was not to the nation's unity but to the ruling party and the Prime Minister's personal power.
• Indira Gandhi misused a constitutional provision meant for national crisis to protect her own position.

Information about Indira Gandhi's justification for Emergency quote:

In this quote, Indira Gandhi justifies the declaration of Emergency by arguing that subversive forces were obstructing her government's progressive work and trying to remove her through unconstitutional means, suggesting that the actions were necessary to protect the stability and direction of the country.

Information about D. K. Barooah's quote:

D. K. Barooah, the Congress President, famously coined the slogan "Indira is India, India is Indira," which reflects the intense personality cult around Indira Gandhi and the view within her faction that her leadership was synonymous with the nation itself, a sentiment that opposition parties heavily criticized during the Emergency.

What Happened During Emergency?

The actual implementation of the Emergency involved significant controversy and allegations of excesses. The government stated its intention to use the Emergency to restore law and order, improve efficiency, and implement pro-poor welfare programs, announcing a **Twenty-Point Programme** (including land reforms, review of agricultural wages, bonded labor eradication). Initially, some sections (urban middle class, poor, rural people) had positive expectations of improved discipline and welfare implementation.

However, critics argue that many promises remained unfulfilled and served mainly to distract from the excesses. They point to:

• Large-scale use of **preventive detention** (Shah Commission estimated over 111,000 arrests), often without proper grounds or informing detainees of reasons.
• Severe and sometimes illegal **restrictions on the press** (e.g., cutting electricity to newspaper presses).
• Exercise of governmental power by individuals holding no official position (like **Sanjay Gandhi**, who allegedly interfered in administration and was involved in controversial actions like demolitions and forced sterilization).
• Direct impact on common people's lives through **torture, custodial deaths**, arbitrary relocations, and **compulsory sterilisation**.

These instances demonstrate the potential for abuse when democratic processes and safeguards are suspended.

Lessons Of The Emergency

The Emergency exposed both the vulnerabilities and the strengths of India's democracy. While some felt democracy ceased to exist during this period, the swift resumption of normal democratic functioning proved otherwise. One major lesson is that **democracy is deeply rooted in India** and extremely difficult to dismantle completely.

Secondly, the Emergency highlighted ambiguities in the constitutional provisions, particularly concerning 'internal disturbance'. These have since been rectified by requiring 'armed rebellion' as the ground for internal Emergency and mandating written advice from the Union Cabinet to the President. Thirdly, the experience raised public awareness of the **value of civil liberties**. Courts subsequently adopted a more active role in protecting these liberties, and civil liberties organizations emerged in response to the judiciary's perceived failure during the Emergency.

However, the Emergency also brought forward unresolved issues. There is a tension between routine government functioning and continuous political protests. Finding the correct balance and defining the limits of protest remains a challenge. The Emergency also revealed the vulnerability of institutions like the police and administration to political pressure, highlighting the need for their independent functioning. This problem did not disappear after 1977.

Information about 'death of D.E.M.O.' advertising:

This anonymous advertisement, appearing soon after the Emergency declaration, cryptically refers to the 'death' of democracy ('D.E.M.O.Cracy') symbolized by the loss of fundamental democratic principles and rights, using elements like 'Truth' (T. R$t!), 'Liberty' (L. I. B„r‡i€), and 'Justice' (J$‚‡ c€) as family members, highlighting the severity of the perceived loss of democratic freedoms.

Information about 'India's Independence Day' advertisement:

This advertisement from 'Free JP Campaign' published in a London newspaper on India's Independence Day in 1975, juxtaposes India's independence from British rule with the perceived suppression of democracy under the Emergency, urging that the 'lights' of Indian democracy should not be extinguished.

Politics After Emergency

The most enduring lesson of the Emergency was learned immediately after it ended. When the government announced Lok Sabha elections in January 1977, the election became a referendum on the Emergency, particularly in North India where its impact was most felt. The opposition campaigned on the slogan **'save democracy'**, and the public verdict was overwhelmingly against the Emergency. This demonstrated that voters would punish governments perceived as anti-democratic, strengthening the foundations of Indian democracy.

Lok Sabha Elections, 1977

After 18 months of Emergency, elections were held in March 1977, leaving little preparation time for the opposition. However, major opposition parties had been converging before the Emergency and now united on the eve of the elections, forming a new party: the **Janata Party**. They accepted Jayaprakash Narayan's leadership. Some Congress leaders who opposed the Emergency also joined, while others formed a separate party, Congress for Democracy (led by Jagjivan Ram), which later merged with the Janata Party.

The Janata Party framed the election as a choice between democracy and dictatorship, highlighting the non-democratic nature and excesses of the Emergency. Public opinion, influenced by widespread arrests and press censorship, was against the Congress. JP became the symbol of democratic restoration. The formation of the Janata Party prevented the division of non-Congress votes, making the contest tough for Congress.

The results were unprecedented: for the first time since independence, the **Congress party was defeated** in a Lok Sabha election, winning only 154 seats (less than 35% vote share). The Janata Party and its allies won 330 seats, with Janata Party alone securing 295, giving it a clear majority. North India saw a massive anti-Congress wave; Congress lost every seat in Bihar, UP, Delhi, Haryana, and Punjab, winning only one seat each in Rajasthan and MP. Indira Gandhi and her son Sanjay Gandhi were also defeated in their constituencies.

This map showing the 1977 Lok Sabha election results visually represents the historic defeat of the Congress party, particularly highlighting the 'wave' of opposition victories across North India, contrasting with the areas where Congress still held seats.

However, Congress did not lose everywhere. It retained seats in Maharashtra, Gujarat, and Orissa, and swept the southern states. Reasons for this regional difference include the uneven impact of the Emergency (forced measures concentrated in North India) and long-term political shifts in North India, including the rise of backward castes moving away from Congress, with the Janata Party becoming a platform for these sections.

This R. K. Laxman cartoon on the 1977 election results likely portrays the common man standing empowered with opposition leaders (Jagjivan Ram, Morarji Desai, Charan Singh, Vajpayee), symbolizing the public verdict against the Emergency and the victory of democracy over authoritarianism.

Janata Government

The Janata Party government formed after the 1977 elections was internally fragmented. There was competition for the Prime Minister post among Morarji Desai (eventually chosen), Charan Singh, and Jagjivan Ram. The power struggle within the party continued even after Desai became PM.

This photograph shows the oath-taking ceremony of the Janata Party government in 1977, marking a historic moment as the first non-Congress government came to power at the Centre after independence, symbolizing the restoration of democratic choice after the Emergency.

The unity forged by opposition to the Emergency lasted only briefly. Critics argued the Janata Party lacked clear direction, leadership, and a common program, and failed to bring about fundamental policy changes. The party split, and Morarji Desai's government lost its majority in less than 18 months. A subsequent government led by Charan Singh, formed with the promise of Congress support, lasted only about four months when Congress withdrew support.

These R. K. Laxman and Atanu Roy cartoons from 1979 satirize the intense infighting and factional struggles within the Janata Party, illustrating its lack of cohesion and stability that ultimately led to the collapse of the government.

Legacy

Fresh Lok Sabha elections were held in January 1980. The Janata Party suffered a comprehensive defeat, particularly in North India. The Congress party, led by Indira Gandhi, won a landslide victory, securing 353 seats, nearly repeating its 1971 success and returning to power. The experience of 1977-79 demonstrated that voters punish unstable and quarrelsome governments.

Information about Morarji Desai:

Morarji Desai (1896-1995) was a Gandhian freedom fighter and prominent Congress leader. He served as Chief Minister of Bombay State and Deputy Prime Minister. After the 1969 split, he joined Congress (O). He became the first non-Congress Prime Minister of India, leading the Janata Party government from 1977 to 1979.

Information about Chaudhary Charan Singh:

Chaudhary Charan Singh (1902-1987) was a freedom fighter and politician active in Uttar Pradesh, known as a proponent of rural and agricultural development. He left Congress to form Bharatiya Kranti Dal, served as UP Chief Minister, and was a founder of the Janata Party. He served as Deputy PM and Home Minister before becoming Prime Minister for a short period (1979-1980) with Congress support. He founded Lok Dal.

Information about Jagjivan Ram:

Jagjivan Ram (1908-1986) was a freedom fighter and senior Congress leader from Bihar. A member of the Constituent Assembly and a Member of Parliament from 1952 until his death, he held various ministerial portfolios. A scholar and administrator, he was Deputy Prime Minister (1977-79) in the Janata government and led the Congress for Democracy, which merged with the Janata Party.

The period between 1977 and 1980 saw dramatic changes in the party system. Since the 1969 split, the Congress party had moved away from being an 'umbrella party' accommodating diverse views, instead becoming more identified with a specific ideology (claiming to be the sole socialist, pro-poor party) and relying on the appeal of a single leader, Indira Gandhi. This shift influenced other parties to increasingly rely on 'non-Congressism' and consolidate non-Congress votes, a strategy that played a major role in the 1977 elections.

The issue of backward castes also gained prominence after 1977, partly contributing to the Janata Party's success in North India. The appointment of the Mandal Commission by the Janata Party government to examine reservations for 'Other Backward Classes' became a significant development in Indian politics, further shaping the party system in the post-Emergency era. The Emergency period and its aftermath, marked by a constitutional battle and political crisis, ultimately led to these significant and lasting changes in India's party system.

This R. K. Laxman cartoon from 1980 depicts Indira Gandhi's decisive return to power, symbolizing the failure of the Janata government and the public's choice to bring back the Congress under her leadership after the instability of the 1977-79 period.