As Medha Patkar and other Narmada Bachao Andolan activists
continue their peaceful and non-violent protest by going on an indefinite fast,
for just rehabilitation (as mandated by the Supreme Court of India), to be
provided to the 40,000 families affected by the closing of sluice gates of the
Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) dam, the state administration has replied by using
violence against the activists and arresting and re-arresting them. The central
government has not deemed it fit to intervene in the matter and the mainstream
media finds it unworthy of coverage, other than small bits of references here
and there.
The alternate media, activists and some of the general
public are increasingly concerned though, as the duration of the fast is
gradually increasing and the state government rather than trying to engage in a
constructive dialogue with Medha Patkar and her colleagues, is, on the
contrary, using all kinds of repressive measures to drown out any voice of protest.
With concerns for Medha ji and her colleagues’ health
prevailing and the state government not looking inclined to relent, I got
thinking about the history of our tryst with fasts, and their responses by the
authorities in power.
Just as non-violence was popularized by Mahatma Gandhi as a
potent tool to fight injustice, similarly, fast unto death was a tool he used
quite often as a part of his satyagraha. Those were pre-independence times, and
almost always did Mahatma Gandhi succeed in drawing the attention of the
British authorities to his demands, leading to a dialogue and emergence of some
sort of a resolution to the situation which had forced him to undertake the
fast in the first place. (Dr. Sunilam makes the same observation in his
article, which can be found on the URL: https://sabrangindia.in/article/medhaji-govt-worse-british-please-break-your-fast).
One of the fasts he undertook was against the provision of
separate electorates for the Untouchables, whom he called Harijans, which led
to the signing of Poona Pact of 1932, between him and Dr. Ambedkar. Though,
this particular fast undertaken by him was not seen in favourable light by
many, as it was felt that he betrayed the cause of the untouchable community,
however, it could not be and was not ignored and some sort of a resolution was
resorted to.
Another fast, probably his last, was the one he undertook to
convince the independent Indian government to not withhold from the newly
independent nation of Pakistan its rightful material dues, after the Partition.
Though the Indian government was irritated and frustrated with his demand, yet
it acceded to it and gave Pakistan all its dues.
He similarly succeeded in establishing Hindu-Muslim unity,
howsoever precarious, in Noakhali in Bengal, by undertaking a fast unto death.
There may be various reasons for Mahatma Gandhi’s success
with this instrument of indefinite fasts. One may be his stature at the time,
such that no-one wanted to even imagine the consequences of his perishing as a
result of one of his fasts. Another reason may be the fear of the British of
losing their legitimacy if they dealt with such a situation in an excessively
stern manner. Or maybe the fear of the public backlash that would follow if
Mahatma Gandhi was allowed to succumb to one of his fasts was too big a fear
for the British, or anybody else, to not take his fasts seriously. A third
reason may be a genuine concern and love for the man and the impossibility of
losing him so. A fourth reason may be that a semblance of humanity was still
alive and a human being’s life was valued for what it was worth.
We shall now come to some incidents where people have
resorted to indefinite fasts in independent India, and the response by the
authorities in power to such fasts.
Akshay Brahmachari, an avowed Gandhian, and the Secretary of
the Faizabad District Congress Committee in 1949, undertook two fasts in order
to convince the government of the communal hatred being spread in Ayodhya by
Hindu fundamentalists. The first time when he undertook the fast, he was
persuaded to end it giving some reassurances which never, however,
materialized. The second time, the government though sounded concerned, yet it
did-not take any concrete steps and he was forced to end his fast by two fellow
Gandhians who feared for his health.
Potti Sreeramulu is another name which is inextricably
linked with fast unto deaths. He undertook the same for creation of an independent
Andhra state and lost his life in the process. Three days after his death, the
creation of an independent Andhra state was announced by the Central
government.
Talking of fasts, the name of Irom Sharmila is registered in
the annals of history. She went on a hunger strike for 16 long years against
the draconian AFSPA in Manipur. The state response was to keep her in
confinement and force-feed her through a nose-tube. AFSPA has remained in
effect in Manipur and the North-East all this while.
Anna Hazare undertook various fasts throughout his career,
most well-known and widely supported being for the passage of the Jan Lokpal
Bill. Although the Lokpal and Lokayukta’s Act was enacted in 2013, however,
according to Anna Hazare and its team, it is far from the draft proposed by
them. Though Anna Hazare’s version of the bill also received criticism,
however, his fast became very popular and the government was wary of using
extremely repressive tactics against the movement.
Analyzing all of these cases, apart from Gandhiji’s fasts,
it appears that the response to indefinite fasts has been varied.
The longest and yet the most delegitimized has been the
hunger strike undertaken by Irom Sharmila. Even after 16 long years of fighting
for the repeal of AFSPA, she could not achieve her objective. A possible reason
for this may be the unanimous stand of the Indian state, irrespective of the
political party in power, against the dilution of AFSPA in J&K and
North-Eastern states. This is an indication of the increasing domination of the
concept of mechanical nation-state over the concept of real humanity, something
that Rabindranath Tagore, so strongly, guarded against.
Coming to the ongoing fast by Medha Patkar and others, and
the response of the state government to the same, some peculiar observations
straightaway come to mind. Firstly, the blatant and brazen disregard of Supreme
Court strictures, and its continued inability to get them implemented, is
pretty unprecedented. Secondly, use of violence against peaceful protestors,
after failing to break their resolve by ignoring them for days altogether, is against
all norms of functioning of a democratic state where rule of law is supposed to
prevail. Thirdly, the silence of the central government on the entire issue is again
a tactic that has been increasingly used by the present dispensation,
indicating its tacit support to the state government. The saddest part is
however, the baffling silence of the so-called fourth pillar of our democratic
state, supposed to be independent from the other three –the mainstream media -
in unequivocally condemning the state on its response to this situation.
This is probably another warning signal making us aware of
the fledgling condition that our democratic state has been reduced to, and purposeful
destruction of institutions that is being resorted to, silently yet
unequivocally. It is high time we understand this grand design and be suitably
guarded against it.
PS: To read about the tryst of current Chief Minister of
Madhya Pradesh, Shivraj Singh Chouhan’s tryst with fasts (who is the key to
resolving the present impasse and is stubbornly refusing to do so), please
refer to this link - https://scroll.in/article/840357/mp-farmers-stir-how-shivraj-singh-chouhan-pulled-a-fast-one-and-not-for-the-first-time.
It is a very interesting read!
No comments:
Post a Comment