The strange case of Ali Mahmudabad is the latest instance of the not-so-hidden hazards that imperil our lives in these dark times. Calling the present ‘dark times’ may itself be enough for the self-styled vigilante custodians of sovereignty, integrity, national interest, core civilisational values of India to orchestrate dog whistling and registering FIRs in far flung places for police in different states to swing in action to arrest the traitor-threat to the nation.
The jurisprudence of bail has changed drastically for the worse in recent years and the burden of the proof of innocence is shifted to the accused. The orders of the highest court in the land have been sending confusing signals to the trial and special courts. Not surprisingly the High Courts have preferred to decide ‘sensitive’ cases with caution lest they be overruled and risk admonitions.
The conditions set for bail in this controversial case are nothing short of a gag order drastically curtailing the constitutional right to free speech and liberty. The most honourable and learned judges of the Apex Court have asked the question, “Is this the time to talk like this?” This to our mind is the crucial question. Who decides when is it the right time to speak one’s mind freely, criticise the policies of government or register dissent? It is for the executive and the legislature to impose reasonable restriction on citizens’ fundamental rights. The judiciary is mandated to examine whether these restrictions are reasonable under the specific circumstances.
Before we proceed, it is absolutely necessary to clarify that this isn’t intended as a defense of Ali Mahmudabad, but it is intriguing when the accused on bail is gratuitously advised that he could have used simple words that couldn’t be misunderstood by an audience not as learned as him. Is this an invitation or encouraging prompt to dumb down all public discourse? The post on social media that got Mahmudabad in trouble was written in English. Would the crime have been more grievous or less if he had chosen to express his feelings in Urdu, Hindi or any other language? As it is, we are witnessing a war of words over Hindi or a regional language like Tamil or Kannada being forced on residents in a linguistically reorganised state of the Indian Union. Parochial pride and cultural chauvinism are no less a threat to our unity and integrity than deliberately misunderstood English.
What sends a chill down the spine is that an innocent citizen isn’t safe even if he zips his lips all the time. There have been Orwellian cases where a stand-up comedian has been apprehended by the moral/cultural police on the suspicion that once on stage he was intending to utter something seditious and subversive. This isn’t just a problem for the suave and sophisticated academics that the foot soldiers of every political party detest, or we as a nation lacking a sense of humour. The really distressing part of the unravelling events is the rampant double standards. A number of BJP MPs and some ministers in states have used more venomous language and despite condemnation by the Supreme Court have not been bothered or hindered by law enforcement agencies. Those patronised by protectors in power, are worse than loose canons causing collateral damage with their inflammatory hate speeches that are shriller than dog whistles. In fact, these are undisguised siren call to arms against ‘the enemies within’.
The complaints filed lack substance and range from ‘personal feelings being hurt’ to ‘creating enmity between communities’. Any reference to caste, community and the valiant armed forces can be misconstrued to frame and harass anyone. Academics on both sides of the ideological battle lines immediately jump into the fray. Hundreds sign statements and petitions condemning or exonerating the person in the dock. The process becomes the punishment. Sadly, the Supreme Court has time and again refused to exercise its considerable power to grant relief to the tormented victim. From comedians, and cartoonists to ordinary men and women—who dare to open their mouths—have paid painful personal price for not realising that the times have changed. So has the judicial temper.
The state has decided to wage an unrelenting war against all who dare to disagree or dissent. Let’s remember that the state isn’t an abstraction. There are faces that decide on issues of war and peace, freedom and servitude. Life would be simpler if it was clear whether an Emergency has been declared or the nation is at war.
What concerns us isn’t the individual but the erosion of institutions entrusted with the protection of ordinary citizens rights. The totally supine and partisan media (except rarest of the rare specimen) baying for blood on working up war hysteria has made matters worse. Phrases like ‘Urban Naxals’, ‘Libtards’, ‘Lutyens-Khan Market Gang’, ‘Foreign agents operating imported tool kits’ to destabilise the country create a haze that makes it easy to stigmatise any one through guilt by remotest—real or imaginary—association.
The writing on the wall is clear—confirm and crawl or perish!