There has to be a limit to everything. Dissent and liberty included. Raising provocative slogans with violent overtones like, “Modi teri kabar khude gi, JNU ki dharti par” is not just unacceptable, it is criminal and must be dealt with as such. There is nothing “ideological” about such slogans. These just betray the pathological hatred for the person about whom these were said and spoken. Describing Hindutva ideology as ‘fascist’ and justifying violent provocation as just ideological and not personal is lame defence. It is ironic that the same people who cannot tolerate an ideology and would rather demonise it are seeking respect for their own dissent and even invoking violence.
Aditi Mishra, president of the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students Union (JNUSU), who led the provocative and violence inciting protests, belongs to the All India Students’ Association affiliated to Communist Party of India-Marxist-Leninist, an ultra-left group which, is closer to ideology to Naxalites than the traditional left parties. The affiliation and association of the students raising such slogans is important. Naxalism has survived on violence only. CPI-ML is an extremely radical left organisation, which also does not subscribe to the traditional ways and means as practiced by the mainstream left parties. For them, violence is a means to change the system.
Where is the scope for an “ideological battle” between the country’s duly elected Prime Minister and a bunch of, two dozen or so, students? That “battle” has already been settled and resolved by the people of the country, who have elected Narendra Modi as their Prime Minister of the country for the third term. You have a right to disagree with him at every stage even after he has been elected by the people, but you have no right to use language that has the potential to incite violence. That is why the bluff of those who raised those slogans must be called and they must be subjected to due process of law, whatever it may be.
The JNUSU office bearers wanted to register their dissent and protest over the denial of bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, by the Supreme Court of India. Both Khalid and Imam are being represented by a battery of eminent lawyers of the country. They are getting all the help and aid any accused should get and it is up to the courts to determine and decide about the bail of the accused.
Also read: Of sedition and seditious behaviour in India and US
This reminds of the past “protests” on the JNU campus in memory of Afzal Guru, who was hanged after being convicted for Parliament terror attack and Burhan Wani, a Kashmiri militant who was killed in an encounter with the security forces in Kashmir. Imagine the slogans raised on the “hanging anniversary” of Afzal Guru; “Afzal hum sharminda hain, tere qatil abhi abhi zinda hain”. It is during one such protest Umar Khalid said that Kashmir was under Indian occupation. Not just that, the protesters went ahead with slogans, “Bharat tere tukde honge, Insha Allah”. Which country would allow such sloganeering anywhere, and much less in one of the premier education institutions like the JNU?
These tendencies must be nipped in the bud. The JNU authorities have filed a police complaint against those who indulged in such provocatively violent sloganeering. The matter must be taken to its logical conclusion. Dissent is acceptable within reasonable limits but must not be allowed to spread hate and incite violence.
Coming to the slogan on PM Modi. There is nothing ideological or metaphorical about it. It is a clear expression of pathological hatred and incitement to violence. It is completely personal against Prime Minister Modi as a person and reveals pathological hatred against him.
It is certain that once action is initiated against all those who resorted to such pathologically hateful slogans, the “liberal ecosystem” will come together and its “collective conscience” will speak against their “victimhood and persecution”. A narrative will be built up that there is too much intolerance and that there is no space left for dissent in India.
What is the justification in glorifying people who have been convicted and sentenced for heinous crimes of terror and sedition, killing people and trying to divide the country? Glorifying people like Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhat, founder of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front and convicted for murder of three innocent people, must be treated as serious criminal and seditious offence and must be dealt with accordingly.
India has had enough of it. While there are no memorials set up and remembrance programmes organised for the victims of terrorism and violence, the culprits and perpetrators get remembered and glorified like great freedom fighters. This must stop. Dissent does not mean glorifying terrorism as “freedom struggle” and it also does not mean inciting violence against the Prime Minister of the country. India is a democracy where regimes do change, but by votes and not by violence.
Follow us
