Bandh and the Politics behind it

Swaraj Thapa

January 5,2001: Trinamool Congress calls a 12 hour bandh in West Bengal to protest against terror unleashed on its supporters by Communists. TC supporters torch buses, block roads, stop train movement, vandalise government property and attack police personnel on duty.

August 5,2002: Trinamool Congress calls a 24 hour bandh against Eastern Railways bifurcation. Shops, markets, schools and other establishments shut down.

August 2,2004: Trinamool Congress calls 12 hour Bengal bandh to protest against introduction of West Bengal block level pre litigation conciliation board bill 2004.

Nov 30, 2006: Trinamool Congress calls 12 hour Bangla bandh to protest against illegal arrest and “assault” on party chief Mamata Banerjee.

April 21,2008: Trinamool Congress calls 12 hour bandh in West Bengal to protest against price rise. Long distance trains as well as EMU local trains cancelled. Business establishments shut down.

Last week when “rough and tough” chief minister of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee flashed a day old Calcutta High Court order against the indefinite bandh called by the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha in Darjeeling to menacingly declare that she would crush the Gorkhaland movement, I was struck by the sheer paradox visible in her actions.

Here was streetfighter Mamata, who has risen to her present position by repeatedly defying the law and calling bandhs and hartals at the drop of a hat, some on grounds that can hardly find justification, actually adopting a judicial edict against bandhs as her own.

It was not too long ago that Mamata Banerjee had justified the innumerable bandhs that she had called, some of them violent-- the ones cited above are just a few examples-- before becoming chief minister by saying she was raising people’s issues and that she was doing so only because she was left with no other alternative.

She was, quite naturally, offering earthy political logic because democracy can be meaningless without the freedom to choose any form of protest, even if it means a bandh or a strike or hartal to raise popular issues. How she has taken a 180 degree turn now, demonstrating acrobatic skills that even a circus performer will envy her.

Other political parties too have always endorsed bandhs, notwithstanding the fact that there have been several court judgments condemning them. There is not a single party of note that can claim not to have given a bandh call including the Congress and the BJP. Over time, bandhs have transformed into efficient ways of attracting public attention. Of course, in Bengal it’s been a habit, with the CPIM first and then TMC later, always calling bandhs.

On December 10, 2004, the late Jyoti Basu, CPIM stalwart and former chief minister, had vowed to fight against another high court order banning bandhs and strikes and even said he was willing to go to jail on the issue. He had then said the court ruling represented “blatant” interference of the judiciary in affairs of political parties. His party then had even said it would pressurize the then UPA government to introduce a bill in parliament to protect right of parties to call bandhs on political and popular issues.

In Tamil Nadu in 2007, the ruling DMK had gone to the extent of calling a statewide bandh demanding speedy implementation of the Sethusamudram project even when it was in power in the state and a coalition partner of the ruling Congress-led UPA at the Centre.

I am not trying to justify bandhs at any point but only seeking to explain the rationale behind it while illustrating the double standards employed by political parties, especially the Trinamool. Paralysis of normal life after all, is something that is never desirable, more so for a prolonged period of time. But it is worth giving a thought as to why the people of Darjeeling willingly agree to suffer and face hardships imposed by a bandh instead of opting for the easy way out. When they have voluntarily supported forty-day old bandhs and more in the past, what is ten to fifteen days in comparison. The support only underlines the sentiments that run deep in the hills on the issue of Gorkhaland.

Mamata actually needs to understand this. Her “rough and tough” approach has only helped in fanning the sparks of statehood instead of quelling it. Better service could have been done had she gone into the qualifying reasons behind the fresh bout of agitation in the hills and dealt with the issue in its entirety rather than conclude that the state is being taken to ransom.

The Gorkha Janmukti Morcha (GJM) has rightly bowed down to the Calcutta high court order even though it was never given an opportunity to place its views before the court. In compliance with the High court order, it has withdrawn the bandh call and instead given a call for a “Janta curfew” that obviously is an euphemism but with the added weight that it is a people’s movement.

------------------------