However, while the freedom to express concerns and discontentment is a fundamental right of every citizen in this great democratic nation, the twenty-fourth of February, 2014 saw an inexplicable act of protest in Guwahati the capital city of Assam that left people either numb or in deep turmoil. During a demonstration staged by the Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS) demanding land patta (ownership rights) for people residing in the hills, forests and wetlands, one of the agitators, Pranab Boro, set himself ablaze in front of the Assam Secretariat and eventually lost his life leading to a series of violent upheavals in the State. Following the incident, the KMSS President Akhil Gogoi and five of his comrades were remanded in four-day custody on charges of masterminding and instigating the act of self-immolation. Consequently, a large section of people have been vehemently opposing the arrest, claiming it to be an infringement of the democratic right to protest and to demonstrate. However, the question here is whether the act of self-immolation is a justifiable weapon in democracy.

Self-immolation supporters might draw the example of Mohamed Bouazizi whose act of self-immolation as a painful protest against the humiliating police-woman and municipality officials enkindled the first spark to the Tunisian Revolution

Let us, first of all, dig a bit more into the circumstances that led the poor carpenter from the Gorchuk area of Guwahati, Pranab Boro to give up his life. The land-starved State of Assam has always been infested with the problem of land settlement issues. The Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti has been spearheading the agitation, demanding land rights for the landless indigenous people who have been dwelling in the forests and wetlands for several years. One must note that this isn’t an unlawful claim as the ‘Schedule Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, clearly states that all the Scheduled Tribe families dwelling and cultivating forest land as on 13 December, 2005, as well as the non-tribal population residing in the forests for 75 years are entitled to land ownership rights. Following a series of seize-less protests and demonstrations, and what is looked upon by many as ‘a decision keeping in mind the Lok Sabha elections ahead’, the Government of Assam decided to distribute land ownership rights to 500 families dwelling in the forests (excluding reserved forests and wetlands) as on 2001 instead of 2005 as per the Recognition of Forest Rights Act. This decision has also been considered as a conscious strategy on the part of the Government to break the strength of the indigenous people fighting for land rights.

Meanwhile, the KMSS had been fighting to claim the tribal people’s land ownership rights over reserved forests and wetlands as well. However, for most of the innocent indigenous people, the Government’s faulty land allotment process poured cold water on all their hopes to finally have a piece of land of their own from where they won’t face the perpetual threat of eviction. And out of hurt, anger and a feeling of helplessness, Pranab Boro, one of the agitators in the KMSS demonstration, set himself on fire right in front of the Assam Secretariat. While Pranab Boro’s sacrifice has been hailed by many as ‘martyrdom’, is self-immolation really the answer to the multitude of resentments that exist in almost every pocket of this big nation?

Self-immolation supporters might draw the example of Mohamed Bouazizi whose act of self-immolation as a painful protest against the humiliating police-woman and municipality officials enkindled the first spark to the Tunisian Revolution (or the Jasmine Revolution), that eventually lead to the dethroning of the 23-year old autocratic rule of the Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, and a fresh democratization of the country. Bouazizi definitely became the national hero of Tunisia; but his action came at a point when the nation saw no other means to overcome adversity. Tunisia remained suppressed and helpless for 23 long years, raucously affected by unemployment, food inflation, corruption, poor living conditions, lack of freedom of speech and crippling of political freedom. The nation was in a state that made the people feel helpless and their lives worthless. Somewhat similar is the story of Tibet. Since Tibet’s invasion by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army in 1950 till the present day, the land of the Dalai Lama broke into several upsurges for emancipation from the Communist Chinese dictatorship. As the ultimate option, the Tibetans have been resorting to self-immolation. A wave that began in 2009 till date has claimed 123 lives, majority of who were monks and former monks. It’s a different thing that these so-called ‘sacrifices’ aren’t helping and instead the Tibetans are subjected to harsher crackdowns by the Chinese Government. However, in both the cases of Tunisia and Tibet, an utter state of vulnerability and impasse can be sensed whereas, in a democratic nation, irrespective of the rampant corruption and tyrannical attitude of the Government, the citizens enjoy the right to raise a voice, express resentment, discuss matters with the higher authorities or bring the Government down in the next elections.

As the ultimate option, the Tibetans have been resorting to self-immolation. A wave that began in 2009 till date has claimed 123 lives, majority of who were monks and former monks.

As citizens of a democratic country, we have our rightful claims to the fundamental rights. And the freedom ofspeech and expression forms one of those all-important rights. However, as responsible citizens of a democracy, we are also expected to be alert about our fundamental duties. If raising voices of antipathy and insisting upon the fulfillment of our demands is our right, then being prudent about our choice of words and actions that could possibly affect a larger section of the people is our duty. What deeper impact could an act of self-immolation have on the younger generation of a country that is highly susceptible to idolizing and emulation? There is one theory that claims self-immolation as a harmless tool because one does not harm anyone else but himself while fighting for a lofty cause. What one forgets, is that one impulsive act of self-immolation can in every possibility instigate ten others to follow suit. Also, if killing somebody else in order to force the fulfillment of demands is terrorism then what should we call the act of terrorizing the higher authorities through self-immolation in order to get those demands granted?

In a nation as large, as populous, and as diverse as India, widespread resentments, antipathy, and discontentment with the Government rules, policies, treatments, as well as with the Government machinery itself isn’t uncommon. But if every group, every pocket starts resorting to self-immolation for establishing their respective demands, how will this great democracy survive?

There are several other ways to bring changes or to see positive changes being made. Hunger strikes, picketing, discussions with the higher authorities and a myriad of peaceful and creative modes of demonstrations are the tested democratic measures to make the voices heard and the demands fulfilled. Seeking the help of the media has proven effective time and again in raising mass awareness about an issue and publicizing the same. Also, as a popular saying these days goes – ‘In order to change the system, you have to be a part of the system.’ Or else, simply wait to dethrone the present Government in the next elections. Of course, changes aren’t going to come overnight but setting sane, prudent and rational plans and strategies in place instead of making impulsive and emotional decisions for establishing the objectives is pivotal for sustainable results.

And finally, to quote a former journalist Meghalee Das Goswami, “No doubt self-immolation draws a lot of attention. But there are many other ways to draw attention too. This isn’t a positive or a sustainable way to deal with a matter and is too much of a price to pay without any guaranteed returns.” Pranab Boro’s sacrifice has been hailed as an act of ‘martyrdom’; but to what effect? Soon his sacrifice shall also be forgotten and the struggle of the Indians for their respective rights and claims shall continue… 

Satarupa Mishra