Just about a week ago we heard the Supreme Court grant bail to acclaimed social activist Binayak Sen. The bail along with the proceedings of the lower court raises some very serious questions on the system and method of governance at the state level. Here I will only take into consideration the Binayak Sen case in the present day state of Chhattisgarh. Having parents who work in similar fields in Jharkhand and who know Binayak Sen and his wife Ilina Sen personally for the past 10 years I feel, I may have a slightly different perspective.
Binayak Sen was, while advocating nonviolent political engagement by the BJP ruled Chhattisgarh state, arrested in May 2007 on charges of sedation. He was subsequently kept in solitary confinement and has been in jail for around 2 years since then. He was charged under 124A of the IPC. Before we move on, a small discussion on the 124A. This law has been repetitively criticised by many people for a long time. Not only has it been termed old and colonial but has also been a hindrance to the liberal and democratic nature of our country from time to time. Gandhi in 1922 while pleading guilty of sedition declared –“I have no desire whatsoever to conceal from this court the fact that to preach disaffection towards the existing system of government has almost become a passion within me” He went on to say that “affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by the law” and described section 124A as, “the prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress liberty of the citizen.” The same law has, and is, being used even today. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, one of India’s most loved patriots was charged under this law, twice. Even Nehru criticised this law way back in 1951, calling it “highly objectionable and obnoxious” in parliament!
Anyway moving on, we come to the question, why, even after such seemingly lack of evidence and public outcry was Dr Sen sentenced to life by the high court? To answer that question we shall move back to the politics and state of affairs in Chhattisgarh. Chhattisgarh as a state is rich in minerals and natural resources and this has resulted in a lot of interest been shown by huge multinational mining and industrial projects. Now these companies not only get cheap labour and resources, they also see an easily manipulative and easy to bribe political and bureaucratic setup in Chhattisgarh. Social welfare is frankly the least of these companies’ motives and we don’t need a research to see that this also goes for the bureaucrats and politicians.
So now we have the money hungry politicians and bureaucrats and the profit driven companies. But in Chhattisgarh we have another factor coming into play. The Maoists are a strong organisation and have a three decade old established setup in Chhattisgarh. Now the companies of course cannot run any industry or mine with the maoists opposing it. And so, the state in order to drive the maoists out, devised the most undemocratic, violent and inhuman methods in the form of Salwa Judum. The method involved arming common villagers to fight the maoists. Not only did it result in hundreds of innocent civilians being tortured, raped, or killed but also in thousands of people being displaced from their native places. And for a tribal there is nothing that is more painful than being separated from his homeland, for that is what he is.
So then we have social activists like Dr Binayak Sen who have been working for the people dedicating their lives for the good of the society, voicing their dissent against the methods and activities of the state. Binayak Sen, who demanded proper rehabilitation for the tribals and stopping of the Salwa Judum, was instead locked up and charged with sedation.
We can debate on the solutions the state can implement, but if the state resorts to violence to carry out processes of consent, then communities that survive on natural resources cannot be expected to lie down and die. When the people at the helm of affairs are corrupt to the core there are really slim hopes of justice. There are people who think that Dr Sen has been rightly convicted for ‘hating’ India, and that justice has been delivered with a strong and iron hand. Millions of indigenous and rural people among whom Dr Sen worked are also those who ‘hate India’. That may be true because they belong to ‘Bharat’ and not the ‘India’ that you seem to represent which wants to run this vast country like a colony, similar to the British and Mughal empires. Open your eyes and find out who really is looting our country- is it doctors like Binayak who have dedicated their lives to the poor or the politicians and businessmen who hide behind pseudo-patriotic slogans every time someone challenges their exploitation?
The above written is largely personal opinion. The rest is fact.
Written by Kabir Sagar Ghosh on 24th April, 2011 5.17 PM
No comments:
Post a Comment