Right to dissent

It took Binayak Sen, doctor and civil rights activist two years to get bail after he was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in Chhatisgarh, for his alleged pro-Naxalite activities.

There were two issues at hand. One, whether Sen was arrested under this very strict law because he spoke out openly against Salwa Judum, the private militia set up to fight Naxal violence with some government involvement and the other, whether his “crime” — alleged links with Maoist guerrillas — justified a denial of bail.

Ultimately it was the Supreme Court which released him, but not before a sustained and high-profile international campaign to get him bail. Sen, a paediatrician, is also a member of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties and is a recipient of the prestigious Jonathan Mann prize for his humanitarian work among the tribals of Chhatisgarh.

The question again arises about the right to dissent and the official reaction to it. Salwa Judum has been condemned by several human rights organisations as well as by the Planning Commission. There is little doubt that Naxal or Maoist violence is unacceptable and Sen himself has condemned it. It is truly a menace and the State needs to take action at two levels — immediate reclaiming of land under Naxal control and then, development and humanitarian programmes to improve, effectively, the conditions of the people living in those areas. Salwa Judum was an experiment which has not worked — the State cannot abdicate its law and order responsibilities to civil groups.

As for the question of dissent, Sen is not the first so-called “Naxalite” to be arrested for alleged sympathies or for supporting a “cause”. Maharashtra also has a few people in jail for allegedly owning Maoist literature and so on.  The difference between political prisoners and those accused of throwing bombs or killing people has to be established here. It cannot be against the law to hold a political viewpoint or to be a dissident in a democracy. How far you act out on that, and if you break the law in the process, is when the justice system enters the equation.

Therefore, if there is a case against Sen or any of the others, it must be pursued under the law. But conversely, the law must not be misused to suit a narrow political end. This case is not just about freedom for one man and his ill-health. It is about how we deal with the uncomfortable questions which the Binayak Sens of this world ask.