Political Diary
New Delhi, 21 January 2020
Culture of Protests
ITS ALL ABOUT
POLITICS!
By Poonam I Kaushish
In this silly political season clearly protests are the
flavor of the week.
The cause célèbre is immaterial. It
is all about registering ones dissent, the louder the better. Success is
measured in terms of causing maximum dislocation and discomfiture to people. Curse
all you want, but remember your freedom ends at the tip of the others
nose!
In a week when India
celebrates its 70th Republic Day drumbeating Unity in Diversity
witness the spree of violent protests, torching buses, pelting stones and
vandalizing property across cities against the Citizenship
Amendment Act. Underscoring the discourse is becoming increasingly
rabble rousing, abusive and devoid of any substance.
Union Capital Delhi a classic example. A
self centered city with its own eco system is experiencing protest over the CAA
for over a month and it is still too early and unclear when it will end. It is
immaterial that the ‘sit-in’ at Shaheen Bagh, an arterial road is causing
massive inconvenience to the public with traffic jams and shut local shops, even
as the Government accuses the Congress of fanning the dissent to serve its parochial
political ends.
Turn North, South, East or West the story is the same. In
fact, no day passes without a strike somewhere. Be it a mohalla, district or State. Wherein demonstrations or bandhs have not only become everyday
occurrences but also an integral part of our psyche that most people consider
it as a holiday! Despite innumerable court rulings banning them.
As protests become a rhythm of daily life
in India, it raises a moot point: What role do they play in our functioning
representative democracy? Are strikes actually
expression of freedom or are they means of suppressing fundamental rights in a
democracy? Why do
protestors resort to this measure? Is the cause valid? Is the State being unjust or unreasonable?
Importantly, will sit-ins on roads be the
new grammar
of Naya Bharat’s protests? Is it the
new political paradigm of dissent? To keep its flock together? Ignominy of
becoming irrelevant? Or political
considerations?
Gone are the days when it
took months or days to plan a protest. In today’s digital media world, it is
easy to organize dissent. Remember the outpourings in the Nirbhaya case started
with a SMS or the “people power" which came out in droves against the endemic
corruption during the UPA II regime.
Besides, it is easy to identify classic
protestors who believe in the cause but there are others
who join as they have nothing better to do and not a few who join the free ride
as it is ‘fashionable’. While not a few are interested in “épater la bourgeoisie" (shock the bourgeoisie) than in coming
up with viable solution for the cause they are protesting against.
Further, some simply shrug off protests as “sab chalta hai attitude, this is Mera Bharat Mahan at its rudest and
crassest best.” Many assert ki pharak painda hai. Indeed, India has
travelled a long way from Lokmanya Tilak’s “Swaraj is my birth right” to “proest
is my birth right.” Today, every other section of the society plans strikes as
a matter of routine to stall anything that spells change from the set
routine.
Interestingly, protests rose by
55% from 2009 to 2014, an average of 200 protests
every day nationwide with literate
States leading the charge. In all, there were 4,20,00 protests over these five
years. The sharpest rise came from student-led agitations
(148%) followed by communal 92%, Government employees grievances 71%, political
42% and labour 38% according to the Bureau of Police Research and Development.
Pertinently, Parties and their
affiliates accounted for 32% of protests and the percentage went up to 50% when
their student bodies and labour unions were added. Karnataka reported the most
12% and Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra together accounted
for more than 50% of all protests. Under-developed UP and Bihar totaling 25% of
India’s population collectively accounted for less than 1% of agitations during
2009-14. Assam reported the most protests in the
Northeast: 17,357.
Scandalously, the
Bharat Bandh to focus attention on labour reforms, cost taxpayers about Rs 18,000 crores, the Jats agitation cost over Rs 34,000
crore, and the Cauvery river row in Karnataka Rs 22,000-25,000 crore according
to ASSOCHAM.
As India marches ahead, are protests the right recourse? Certainly,
the Constitution guarantees one the right to protest, but it does not guarantee
one the right to infringe upon others rights. Unfortunately, our strikers fail
to realize that strikes negate the basic concept of democracy. These are just a
camouflage for non-performance, self-glorification, to flex their might and
muscle, to gain sympathy or wriggle out of working hard.
Remember, democracy is neither mobocracy nor a license to
create bedlam. It is a fine balance between rights and duties, liberties and
responsibilities. One’s freedom pre-supposes another’s responsibilities and
liberty. Importantly, protests
cannot set things right and at the
same time it cannot create any psychological impact or pressure on the minds of
those people who are sitting at the helm of affairs.
Unless protesters
have a viable alternative to offer, continuing a strike could lead to chaos and
tyranny of the mob. Alongside, losses in terms of human casualties and damage
to the economy and businesses. Paralysing the State, black-mailing corporates,
industries to get attention and policy reversals only exasperates the public
and inconveniences them, cuts off the money flow, shoos off investors and
endangers their own jobs.
Clearly, the time has come to take a leaf from out the US
law, wherein there is no Constitutional right to make a speech on a highway or
near about, so as to cause a crowd to gather and obstruct the highway. The
right to assembly is to be so exercised as not to conflict with other lawful
rights, interests and comfort of the individual or the public and public order.
In the UK, the Public Order Act, 1935 makes it an offence
for any person in uniform to attend any public meeting, signifying his
association with any political organization.
The Prevention of Crime Act, 1953, makes it an offence to carry any
weapon in any ‘public place’ without lawful authority. The Seditious Meetings Act, 1817 prohibits
meetings of more than 50 persons within a mile of Westminster Hall during the
sittings of Parliament.
Undeniably, there is no
harm in peaceful protests. Yet unending dissent without any credible political
goal in view, only threatens to undermine the legitimacy of Indian democracy:
For, it offers no viable alternative and only the chilling prospect of chaos and
oppression by angry hordes. The message has to go out clearly that no person or group
can threaten violence, and if they do, they lose their democratic right to be
heard.
The writing on the wall is clear. The need of the hour is to
stop giving into strong-arm tactics and change the dynamics of a protest and replace it with a new social contract. The right of the
citizen is paramount. The question we all need to ask is: Can we afford
protests at all, leave aside for what purpose it may have been called? At some
point we have to stand up and bellow, "Bandh
karo ye natak!"--- INFA
(Copyright,
India News & Feature Alliance)
|