Weigh Kannada activism and business concerns
A sudden flare-up over the lack of Kannada on name boards of commercial establishments took a violent turn in Bengaluru last week. Protesting Karnataka Rakshana Vedike (KRV) activists went on the rampage, vandalising signage in English and demanding that owners of businesses change their name boards immediately.
The police swiftly arrested KRV leaders and activists, signalling that the government would not tolerate violence. Such vandalism was uncalled for as the government has given businesses time till February 28 to adhere to the law—the Shops and Establishments Act mandates that Kannada should cover at least 60 percent of a name board. Failure to do so can attract a fine of ₹10,000 for the first violation and ₹20,000 for a second violation, and finally lead to the cancellation of the trade licence.
Ensuring that businesses follow the law is the job of civic authorities, not language activists. Such vandalism hurts the image of the city, especially as Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar has taken up the ‘Brand Bengaluru’ initiative.
Yet, it must be admitted that the language issue cannot be silenced. It has become a volatile faultline in the region with an influx of cheap labour from North and East India making up the bulk of employees in retail establishments and working for low wages, free food and crowded accommodation.
There is a vast swathe of Bengaluru occupied by IT employees, again from North India. Both classes of workers are perceived as ‘outsiders’ who are taking away jobs of locals, and imposing their language and culture on the local populace. The job factor had sparked off the sudden flexing of muscles by the KRV, whose activists had questioned the owner of a mall about the lack of a Kannada signboard and the high share of workers from northern states. In return, the mall owner had sent the KRV leaders a legal notice, leading to the recent fracas.
Instead of allowing the issue to fester and incite more violence, the authorities should strike a fine balance between the language activists and business owners. The Congress knows that these self-appointed protectors of the language are political support, and the party cannot afford to antagonise them. Efforts should also be made to popularise the local language among migrants—but not by force, as it might have a contrary effect.