Are Bandhs Really Democratic?

The Supreme court has turned over it's own decision regarding Bandhs on it's head. The surprising thing in this case is that it is not only an establishment overturning it's opinion, it is a case where the same individual Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan, has reverted his own opinion. Yes, KG Balakrishnan was part of the Kerala High Court bench which had termed Bandhs as illegal, back in 1997. At that time the judgement was upheld by the Supreme court. Eleven years later the same man as the Chief Justice of India has overturned the very decision that he had taken and the Supreme Court had upheld. To me it says only one of two things, First Justice KG Balakrishnan is fickle minded and should not be relied upon to be rational anymore. Second, the Chief Justice has succumbed to political pressure and can no longer stand up to his convictions. Either way it is bad for the Indian judiciary.

"What (will) this court do. It is their right to express their feelings," are the words that the Supreme Court bench used. There are many ways of expressing feelings, or does the SC bench not know that. Or are they just translating their behaviour at home to express their feelings. Angry with wife, stop doing anything till such time she comes to her senses. Whatever happened to tools like communication, discussions, brain storming, media interviews. The statement only shows the helplessness of the courts, and the Supreme court, mind you. What is worse is that all the present bench has to do is only cite the precedence and the earlier judgement of the supreme court which termed Bandhs as illegal and unconstitutional, like it did in Oct 2007 for the DMK Bandh in Tamil Nadu. What has changed in the last few months since then. So, obviously some vested interests or external political pressures are at work here.

The decision taken back in 1997-98 was based on the upholding the interests of the public and correctly so, that Bandhs were getting too frequent and were disrupting everyday life. People were suffering, businesses loosing money, public amenities like hospitals, transportation etc shutting down and at worse people were being coerced into being part of the Bandh against their will. The state and the country loosing money is in any case the last thing on anyone's mind.

The Bandhs are generally called by the political parties which, as any electoral polls will show do not represent even 50 % of the population of the state or country. How can they be then a form of protest to just "express their feelings"? A Bandh does not express the solidarity of the entire state behind the cause since more often than not the public is terrorised to stay inside their homes and shops threatened with dire consequences if they open. It is just a case of political vandalism. Destroying property, causing loss to the economy and terrorising people just to project some vested interest to the masses and also to gain cheap popularity or shall I say, show of power.

In 1997 the HC had said, "No political party or organisation can claim that it is entitled to paralyse industry and commerce in the entire state or nation and is entitled to prevent the citizens not in sympathy with its viewpoint from exercising their fundamental right or from performing their duties for their own benefits or for the benefit of the state or the nation." The Supreme Court had upheld the decision at that time. Is the Supreme Court now saying that it is alright to paralyse industry and commerce? Is the Supreme Court now saying that it is okay for some individuals or political parties to hold the citizens, state or country to ransom? Is it okay to snatch the fundamental right of citizens to move around freely, even so, for a few hours, using sheer terror tactics?

India has finally started showing some growth and development, a consitent and strong economy and has just started to be counted as a nation of power amidst the International community. Why would the Supreme Court want to send us back to the days of misery, unemployment, poverty and hooliganism? We are still grappling with external terrorism, why does the Supreme Court want to encourage Internal terrorism? A society can be free and offer the freedom to citizens only when it has the wherewithal and the inclination to control abuse or misuse of that very freedom. We don't As is the misfortune of our society, some unscruplous elements will again misuse the freedom to express their feeling and take us back into the dark days of fear and terror.

I hope better sense prevails on Feb 16 and the Supreme Court and the honorable bench do not turn their current thoughts into a decision which will undo whatever little was achieved in the last eleven years.

What Exactly Is Indian Morality? Do we really need moral policing?

Since the terror attacks happened in Mumbai in November last year, there has been a lot of hue and cry and mass hysteria of different shades in the political circles of India.

It all started with politicians of all parties trying to score a brownie point with the voters in their respective constituencies making the appropriate (and some not so appropriate) noises. But slowly and surely the focus of the political parties has shifted from the "patriotic" fervor to more local agendas. Of course, the elections are near and so the race to keep their seats and or make new alliances have grabbed the attention of all the politicians.

The last few months saw some great big "issues" breaking out on the news channels, with equally scandalous value. Staring with the corporate IT company Satyam fraud coming to light and the possibility of political parties having a hand in it, followed by other issues like the Mangalore incident where some women were molested by "self proclaimed" keepers of Indian morality - The Sri Ram Sena. In the meantime, the MNS workers also continued with their hooliganism in Mumbai by attacking a five star hotel and damaging their property, and the Rajasthan chief minister Mr. Gehlot making bold statements about "pub culture" and "mall culture" which according to him is not Indian culture.

The news channels somehow managed to get an interview with the president of the Sri Ram Sena Mr. Muthalik who at first denied all involvement of his men in the incident and then just minutes later said that it was an action taken to teach the women a lesson? Later on the news channels even managed to bring out an old tape of his speech that he apparently gave soon after the Malegaon blasts in which he is seen to be praising Sadhvi Pragya, the other accused in the crime. SHOCKING! Now politicians are openly giving speeches about what they have done or make bold statements that are detrimental to the interest of the country and even getting away with it. Is this what "democracy"is all about?

Now, seeing all these developments is a big disappointment and also is scary to the future of India. Do we really need moral policing in India? Who are these self proclaimed groups to decide what constitutes Indian culture and what doesn't? Their main contention is that women are visiting pubs in the company of male friends and taking liquor and drugs, and roaming around in malls holding hands! I mean, hey, wake up guys which era do you live in? Women have come a long way in India through a long struggle to achieve the kind of independence that they now enjoy. So, is this just a way of trying to suppress the women and pushing them right back to their homes all over again?

What exactly is Indian culture? Nobody objected to these pubs or liquor shops as long as men were their only patrons, and it is these very men who were creating and being a nuisance to the society and a threat to their women. Is it OK for the men to ill treat their women, rape, molest and abuse them as they wish? If you see the Bollywood movies of the last decade or so, the roles of the women have been deteriorated to just "ïtem girls" with them having to wear revealing clothes and dance to tunes of "item songs"that are nothing but modernized version of the earlier "cabarets". Is this Indian Culture?

Nowadays, all the women who aspire to enter the film industry have to first become "item girls". Hey, who wants to see them "acting"? It is the men who are at present dominating the Indian film industry, not that they are all very good "actors" themselves. The politicians are going overboard with everything this year and breaking all boundaries of what is acceptable.

Today I saw an advertisement in the newspaper by the ruling Congress party which urges everyone to join hands to stop child labor in India, specially in Dhabas and other such places where they are employed. Now, I am not advocating that it is OK for a child to work. No, ideally, NO child should be in such a situation where he/she is forced to work and lose out on their childhood. But, is it fair to stop those very poor children from working who REALLY need the money to sustain themselves and their families? Not that they are earning enough. But, every penny counts. What is the government doing to make sure that every child is fed and clothed and educated properly? On the other hand, the kids (rich background or middle class) are allowed to work in TV, Films, advertisemsnts and earn much more than these other poor children who are probably being exploited. If there is a law that stops kids from working, then stop ALL the kids, rich or poor!

India cannot progress with such moral policing going on. Women need to be encouraged to stand on their own feet and not suppressed again. Instead the government should ban all these (Saas Bahu) soap operas that are being shown on TV on all channels that are deteriorating to women and their status.

I am afraid that the politicians are trying to get the "Taliban" regime into India in the pretext of religion, Hindu and Muslim! It is shocking and NOT ACCEPTABLE to the women of India. Women of India need to unite and raise their voice against this injustice and not let the politicians get an upper hand....

JAI HIND!