Honaito Chisho
Purana Bazaar, Dimapur
“We must abandon the methods of civil disobedience, non-cooperation, hunger strike and satyagraha. When there were no constitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives, this was a great deal of justification for unconstitutional methods. But where constitutional methods are open, there can be no justification of these unconstitutional methods. These methods are nothing but Grammar of Anarchy and the sooner they are abandoned, the better for us.”
The most famous critique of public fasting and hunger strikes was given by Dr. B.R Ambedkar in his final address to constituent assembly on November 25, 1949 because he saw that this mechanism can be used as a political instrument which creates enormous pressure on governments, communities and democracies. Ambedkar states that, when someone who’s respected so much starts to fast unto death and puts their life at risk, opposing their political demands becomes politically very difficult which can lead to rioting, civil strife, destabilized public order and loss of lives and property.
Hence from that perspective Bhimrao criticized that fasting unto death was not merely sacrificing your body but it also created disruptive public pressure over government to force negotiations because of the possibility of being held responsible for any unforeseen events.
As a keen observer, I am writing simply as a conscientious and concerned individual from a small state Northeast India, it is impossible to remain silent on the plight of the protesters and aggressive handling of citizens, specifically those demanding accountability from the education ministry. Though the remarks given by Dr. B.R Ambedkar was true to some extent, but what if the cause for such an act is to demand accountability from the government or deliverance of social justice? This form of hunger strike was popularised by Mahatma Gandhi to raise the consciousness of people of India and raise the awareness of what he was fighting for. But as stated by American civil activist K.Ture, ‘In order for non-violence method of strike to work, your opponent must have conscience’ and I believe the current government has lost its credibility. It has lost its vibrancy and has become numb to most of the negative aspects that are happening around them. In every democratic society it is the responsibility of the government to listen to the appeal of the public demands and hold accountability and credibility. However, a critical dilemma arises when concerned authorities consider being a sensitive government as weakness and being insensitive government is misunderstood as strength. The country is facing the issue of National examination paper leaks, institutional overreach of investigating agencies targeting particular political parties or individuals, economic disconnect which the critics have remarked ‘Make in India’ as ‘Fake in India’, increasing unemployment, prolong security and governance collapse in Manipur, the E20 ethanol controversy, inflation trap, GDP rank paradox from 4th to 6th Rank and currently India ranked 157th out of 180 countries in World Press Freedom Index which falls under most alarming category.
In accordance to the idea of Dr. B.R Ambedkar he does not approve of hunger strike as a means of protest in a full democratic country because he believes in constitutional mechanism however, the critical question arises when the government does not held accountability for such crisis, where the democratic government does not listen to the demands of the public, the parliament does not allow to debate, the judiciary system are compromised, the co-opting electoral machinery, ignoring public grievances, and transforming the media into an instrument of state propaganda. The moral and philosophical foundations of Bhimrao’s original stance which laid the foundations of the democratic country’s constitution drafted under his chairmanship are severely tested. Consequently, a compelling argument can be made that if Dr. Ambedkar was witness to a current scenario of issues in constitutional machinery, he might well have repurposed the hunger strike, not as an act of anarchy, but as a legitimate, last-resort democratic intervention to shock the conscience of a compromised state. Sonam Wangchuk is using non-violence medium, requesting the government to bring reform in the education sector, appealing for transparency and accountability. A man of principles, strong moral ethics, nationalist, humanist, environmentalist, social reformer who has spent his whole life trying to bring positive impact in his society and for future generations and despite the government detained him for 3 months in complete isolation. His strong morality and sheer commitment have resonated with the general public. His words and deeds signify the principles of Gandhism and Buddhism. Sonam Wangchuk symbolized ‘The Best of India’ and I believe his 21 days of hunger strike have awoken the conscious mind of the Indian people, Sonam acted just as a vital messenger, he has done his job and the message has been delivered. His struggle was fundamentally fought on behalf of the youth and the future of the nation and in response, the minimum duty expected of a responsible citizenry is to peacefully protest, show up and voice out against the government, keep pressing and asking the question for accountability and responsibility from the concerned authority. Far from being a political tool for lawlessness, this hunger strike is not a Tool of Anarchy but a “Weapon of the Resolute”.
Jai hind. Jai samvidhan.
