There is an ongoing case at the Bombay High Court which should serve as an exemplar for political protests across the nation. In January 2009, a group apparently led by Shiv Sena MLA Sitaram Dalvi caused some damage to a hotel in Mumbai after a labour dispute went wrong. Dalvi was fined about Rs8 lakh. The police identified Dalvi because he wrote a letter to the police asking permission to use a loudspeaker. Dalvi is now contesting the fine, claiming that the courts should approach his party leader Bal Thackeray to pay the fine as he has paid Rs2 lakh and cannot pay any more.
The question of damage to property by political workers has now started to bother the judiciary in India. For a long time, it was seen as a legitimate form of protest and most parties just expected either the government of the day or the private citizen to put up with the damage. In some way, this was a legacy of our colonial past where freedom fighters were ranged against a foreign alien power.
However, that argument has not been viable for the past 60 odd years. The government belongs to all of us — so in some sense, political vandals expect us to pay for their irresponsible behaviour. And private citizens also have rights in a free and independent India. Both these facts have dawned on us only in recent times and the courts and the local administration have both refused to turn a blind eye to damage caused by political protestors.
The Mumbai case once again underlines the need for political maturity in India. We need to find ways to have disagreements which do not descend into violence. The recent disturbances in Karnataka where some members of the Muslim community objected to an alleged article by exiled Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen — which she has denied writing — sadly led to deaths and to damage. The violent reaction after allegations of sexual misconduct by godman Nithyananda Swami in Tamil Nadu is another example of quickly things can get out of hand.
This court case against the Shiv Sena leader in Mumbai serves as a salutary lesson to political parties accustomed to using destruction and turmoil as bullying tactics. The people, the judiciary and the administration have seen through their bluff. By hitting back where it hurts people the most — in their pocket — the courts may well have found the way to instil some discipline into the formally irrepressible.
Comments