Events
& Issues
New Delhi, 1
February, 2017
Protests for Jallikattu
OUTBURST OF PEOPLE’S Power
By Dr S Saraswathi
(Former Director,
ICSSR, New Delhi)
The
nation has never witnessed such huge and spontaneous gathering of people from
different walks of life peacefully demanding restoration of several centuries-old
rural sport of Tamil Nadu – Jallikattu - which has been banned by the Supreme
Court. This sport is part of the Pongal festival in villages celebrating the
onset of the harvest season. How and why it turned violent on the 6th
day is a separate matter for investigation – perhaps unconnected with the
previous five days of peaceful protest.
The
quick response of the both the Central and State governments in promulgating an
Ordinance and passing a State law facilitating the conduct of Jallikattu is
surely a reward for a peaceful movement. It displayed the power of public
opinion and the driving force of populist feelings to move established
authorities.
The success of the event is surely
due to the peaceful nature of the protest and extensive participation much
larger than expectations. By chance or by design, the protest was an inclusive
movement stressing issues beyond the sport that are likely to catch attention
and move youngsters. Thus, Jallikattu – a rural sport - is presented as a
tradition and cultural value, Tamil identity, and symbol of valour, and so on.
Even the economics of bull rearing took a secondary place in participants’
motivation.
Most of the participants in Chennai
and other big cities in the peaceful protest may have never watched the sport
or even heard about it except through some scenes in films. Yet, if they were
in protest venues that remained lively day and night, it deserves a search into
the causes of this massive outburst of people’s power.
Protest is an effective form of
direct action and essentially a means
communication. In non-violent form, and without disrupting normal life,
it is accepted as a democratic instrument. When normal avenues of grievance
redressal are closed or unavailable and when appeals get no favourable
response, the aggrieved are tempted to resort to protests.
When Anna Hazare launched the
Anti-Corruption Movement in 2011, and received wide support and quick response
from the Government there was fear that it portended a crisis in Indian
democracy. For, it signified the
emergence of individual leaders without electoral mandate to sway people and to
dictate to Parliament.
Indeed, the year 2011 was a year of
protests in many countries in all continents when people came out on the
streets to express their anger against economic inequality and sleaze though
the specific reason differed from country to country. The movements were seeking change.
Makkal Movement (People’s Movement)
for Jallikattu went a step ahead in displaying people’s power in the sense that
it had no acknowledged leaders or organisational support. It was apolitical,
and did not create chaos or raise serious law and order problem for full five
days. Is it devotion to the cause, or conviction of the participants in
peaceful protest?
In any case, the fight for the revival of a
banned sport was conducted as a sport in which the young and the old, and male
and female, the affected and the unaffected took part. Student and non-student
youth formed the biggest group to earn for the protest recognition as a youth
movement.
Jallikattu, like a typical
spontaneous protest, seems to be a quest for self-assertion and change. The
driving force seems to be a strong feeling of deprivation of the rights of the
State which started long back in language agitation. Flagrant violation of the
Supreme Court’s order by Karnataka to release Cauvery water and Kerala’s
refusal in the matter of Mullaiperiyar Dam, and the never ending sufferings of
Tamil fishermen in the hands of Sri Lankan authorities are not matters to be
brushed aside by Tamil Nadu as inconsequential. They provide fodder to pent up
feelings of the common people and issues for political leaders to play
politics.
Under these circumstances, we have
to guard against the appearance and escalation of ethnic sentiments and
sub-national interests blocking national progress in thoughts, words, and
deeds, however peaceful the strategy may be.
Protests are generally carried out
by dissident minority groups against the majority or the mainstream mostly to
stop a policy decision or practice. This image is falsified in the Jallikattu
protest which was openly and secretly supported by rival political parties and
people from various social, economic, and professional groups, students, and
masses from different strata making up the predominant majority. Even sections
of people who believe in humanizing sports in conformity with progressive ideas
of animal rights cannot openly take a stand against Jallikattu. United voice of
the people on the streets compels them to agree to resume the game that has
been classified in a Supreme Court judgement as “inherent cruelty” under humane
conditions.
The object of the Jallikattu protest
is such that it put some political parties and leaders in embarrassing
positions. The ruling AIADMK, supports the conduct of Jallikattu and therefore
in sympathy with the cause of the protestors, but has the onerous job of
dealing firmly with the protestors to ensure maintenance of normal life.
The position of the DMK making a
“360 degree turn” in this issue is a typical case of political opportunism. It
was part of the UPA Government at the Centre in 2011 which added “bull” in the
20 years old notification banning training and exhibition of certain animals.
The addition ended Jallikattu, but did not evoke protests against the party.
The notification was challenged in the Supreme Court in 2014, but the court
upheld it. Review petition filed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in the Supreme
Court was also dismissed.
The same DMK today is taking active
part in protests though separately in calling rail roko and sitting on fast.
Many a times, political parties, particularly in coalition governments, without
any thought on full implications and long-term consequences mechanically become
part of decisions with which they do not agree.
The regulations for conducting the
sport prescribed by the DMK under which Jallikattu was going on despite ban
were evidently not followed during the regime of the AIADMK that succeeded
leading to Supreme Court’s firm stand against the game.
Thus, both parties that matter in
Tamil Nadu seem to have erred in gauging the pulse of the people and assess its
power. Makkal Movement is an eye-opener to Governments and people to the power
of the people – the 5th pillar of democracy which was regarded as
the “political sovereign” and an active and responsible medium in democracy by
great thinkers.
The unique feature of the Jallikattu
people’s movement is the manifestation of a common purpose by political rivals
silencing dissenting and disinterested voices perhaps with fear and awe.
It will be unrealistic to expect
that this peaceful movement for six days would usher in the dawn of people’s
democracy. The movement only shows that the Government has a limited role in
effecting social change and that the State alone cannot guarantee people’s
welfare, much less animal welfare.
Jallikattu is not a case of animal
welfare only. Its association with Indian agriculture and cattle wealth besides
traditional rural life has elevated it to the status of a Makkal Movement.---
INFA
(Copyright,
India News & Feature Alliance)
|