It is almost impossible to argue with the well-known incorrigible opinions of Balbir Punj, but one is forced to join issue when a desperate attempt is made to distort obvious facts to serve his opinions. The article, Gandhi Versus Gandhi Versus Rohith (TNIE, February 9, 2016), by Punj consists of so many falsehoods and distortions that one wonders whether he cared to check his facts before writing. It seems Punj was in a hurry to shoot Rahul Gandhi and Congress by holding his guns on the shoulders of Rohith and in that hurry, truth was the casualty. Despite his highly acceptable right to shoot RaGa and Co, using Rohith for that and twisting the evident facts, is highly unwarranted and mischievous. It is nothing but mimicking RaGa and Co who are accused of using Rohith for their own political purposes.
One cannot hold brief for RaGa and Co and their machinations to appropriate Rohith and that’s why here we would not like to question Punj’s arguments against RaGa. But his condemnation and tarnishing the image of ASA in general and Rohith in particular, based on utter lies and twisted facts, demand correction. Punj’s audacious statement, “Ambedkar Students’ Association (ASA)… has nothing in common with either the philosophy or the values for which BR Ambedkar worked and lived. ASA is known for hosting beef parties and staging shows of strength in support of terrorists such as Yakub Memon, at the Hyderabad University campus” is simply laughable.
Being away from reality and fed with rumour and lies, Punj does not seem to know the facts. ASA was formed in 1993 and all through its history of 22 years, it stood and fought for the philosophy and values for which Babasaheb Ambedkar worked and lived. Since Punj wanted to focus on two out of ASA’s hundreds of acts to present them as anti-Ambedkar acts, it would be better if Punj read Ambedkar’s ‘Did the Hindus Never Eat Beef’ and his comment in the Constituent Assembly: “The proper thing for this country to do is to abolish the death sentence altogether.” Thus both the incidents Punj quoted are completely in tune with Dr Ambedkar’s values.
Another lie, the spice with which Punj wanted to cook up a justification for the expulsion of members of ASA is more preposterous. He says: “The straight question is ‘has student politics any legitimacy when it endorses terrorism?’ Amid so much talk after the suicide of Rohith Vemula and politicians’ usual posturing to hang their coat on it, nobody asked that question.” One need not even question what constitutes terrorism. Students in an institution of higher learning can and will study each and every issue on the globe and enter into debates. As part of that debate, if any student or a students’ organisation “endorses” terrorism, as Punj suspects, there are several laws in the county that prevent, prohibit and punish such endorsement. But fact of the matter is, the ASA students were not expelled for their “endorsement” of terrorism. It is a different matter that they did not “endorse” terrorism. They expressed their opposition to capital punishment like millions have done in this country. For that matter, many a time, higher courts quashed capital punishment ordered by lower courts, allowing that there can be an error of judgment in awarding capital punishment.
ASA organised a ‘Resistance Gathering against Capital Punishment in the wake of Death Sentence to Yakub Memon’ at 7.30 pm on July 29, 2015 at Shopping Complex as the poster pasted in all the departments states. In fact, this gathering went on peacefully and it has nothing to do with the expulsion. Three days later, on August 1 afternoon, some ABVP activists attacked and stopped the screening of Muzaffarnagar Baaqi Hai, a documentary on communal riots, at Kirorimal College, Delhi. The news reports on this appeared on August 2 and 3, ASA organised a protest on UoH campus against the “hooliganism of ABVP.”
That night at 9.18, Nandanam Susheel Kumar, president of ABVP, UoH, posted on his facebook wall: “ASA Goons are talking about hooliganism… “ with an emoticon “feeling funny”. The comment was not about Resistance Gathering against capital punishment. On the next day, August 4, ASA tried to contact him for getting his explanation on the comment and finally, they were able to meet him around midnight in his hostel room. ASA requested university security personnel to be present when they questioned him and even Susheel Kumar informed police, who also appeared.
The Security Officer in subsequent inquiry confirmed that there was no physical attack. Susheel Kumar wrote an apology for using the word “Goons” against ASA and added “I have written it when am in full conscious and without any force”. But later he changed the version and went to police. Till this time or even a couple of days later, the issue was confined to ABVP’s attack on the documentary screening, ASA’s protest against it, ABVP leader’s comment and ASA’s attempt to get the comment removed. Neither Yakub Memon nor “endorsing terrorism” was in the picture. But on August 10, a three-page letter was written by Nandanam Diwakar, vice-president, BJP, Ranga Reddy district, to Union Minister for Labour and Employment B Dattatreya. Besides many things, the letter planted the element of Yakub Memon and went to the extent of calling the ‘Resistance Gathering’ a “prayer meeting”!
The letter had its subject line “anti-national activities…” which was promptly and unquestioningly taken by Dattatreya in his letter on August 17 to the Union Minister for Human Resource Development Smriti Irani. The MHRD went on sending reminders to UoH – five letters in eight weeks as if the ministry has nothing else on its hand – and within a week after the final letter of November 19, sub-committee of UoH’s Executive Council acted and dug out the suspended and faulty decision of Proctorial Committee, adding Yakub Memon’s angle.
With that order, the five ASA members were “not permitted to participate in the Students’ Union Elections, enter the hostels, administration building and other common places in groups.” Punj’s invented reason for the expulsion of students differs from that given in the official order dated 16.12.2015. Thus Punj’s unabashed falsehood that “a clear punishment for pro-terrorist politics within a university complex” falls flat on the UoH’s own reasoning. Not only that, his argument that it “was turned into a case of prejudice of the upper caste against the under-privileged scholars” and “there is no evidence that action was taken against this group on caste basis” are utter lies as Rohith’s letter written on the day of expulsion shows.
On December 18, exactly a month before he committed suicide, he addressed the letter to the Vice-Chancellor, handed it over in the VC’s office, not forgetting to take an acknowledgement from the office. The letter cites subject as “solution to Dalit problem” showing that much before the politicians who are hanging their coats, the victims felt it was a caste question. The university authorities had precious four weeks to address the grievances raised, but they did not.
After writing a full excuse for caste discrimination and expulsion based on caste prejudice, shedding tears against caste discrimination and preaching sermons on positive discrimination is simply doublespeak and does not deserve comment.
The author is editor of Veekshanam, a Telugu monthly journal of political economy and society. email: venugopalraon@yahoo.com