Modern-day bandhs: Holding common citizens to ransom

One often wonders after a dawn-to-dusk bandh, who actually benefitted. Did those who called for the bandh with a particular objective in mind, move forward in any meaningful way towards achieving their stated goals? Can any group of people hold an entire city/state to ransom by calling for a shutdown, and often using violence to achieve this end? Even after repeated court judgements banning bandhs, why are those in power unable to ensure that life in a city/state cannot be disrupted on the whims and fancies of a segment of society?
When speaking to people on the streets of Bengaluru on the day of the bandh last Thursday, one did not hear a single voice that endorsed the bandh. Do not get me wrong, as a proud

Kannadiga

I too strongly believe that the interests of the state and its people must be vigorously protected. I also equally strongly believe in the rule of law. A segment of society has no right to take law into its own hands and dictate steps for collective action to everyone else.


Each time we face a bandh the media carries reports on the crores that are lost on account of the forced shutdown. Three questions merit immediate attention in this context. First, for a large segment of society for whom every day of work counts, a bandh that is forced on them means either the loss of a day’s wage or the need to work on another holiday to compensate. For most people, this is a choice that is often patently unjustified but is grudgingly accepted out of fear of adverse consequences.

Second, when organizations and political parties call for a bandh, why does the government not act with firmness? The democratic system allows for a range of legal means to address legitimate grievances. A call for a ‘closure of all public activities’— should it be an option at all — must be the last resort. In our society, it has more often than not become the first resort. This is because those who call for this shutdown know that the government will do precious little to ensure that the life of common people is not disrupted.

Third, let’s touch our hearts and ask ourselves — has any bandh helped the cause for which it was called or has it only given a free run to those who sponsored it? One fails to understand how forcing people to disrupt their regular schedules and stay within their homes can be seen as a sign of protest in a democratic society.

So, in this season of bandhs, how does one prevent this wanton disruption to public life? Three steps may prove useful. First, political parties should arrive at and implement a consensus that none of them will resort to a bandh to fight for a cause. Organizations that call for a bandh need to be de-recognized and their legitimacy challenged in a fast track court of law. Second, the court should hold the government to account for not taking stringent action against groups seeking to disrupt public life. Finally, collective citizens’ action can be the best counter-point to blunt the call for bandhs.

Last Thursday, many conscientious citizens went about their normal tasks, braving hardships and refusing to be cowed down by the fear of violence or retribution. A combination of the three steps is the only way to counter groups that frequently hold the city/ state to ransom.



Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India. Don't miss daily games like Crossword, Sudoku, and Mini Crossword.