The emergency in our lives

More accurate figures did emerge. A total of 34,630 people were estimated to have been detained without trial throughout the emergency years under the provisions of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act and another 72,000 were arrested under the Defence of India Regulations.

In a few days8217; time, we will be commemorating 25 years of that event through political speeches that stir the air and spirit, editorials, possibly, and other urban sermons. There is a neat irony in the fact that many who experienced incarceration at that stage are now guiding the destiny of the nation. The onerous 8220;responsibility8221; of being in power means that it is now they who are the warders, it is they who construct the right responses and design the right manacles to rein in dissent and silence the 8220;enemies8221; of the nation. It is they who are now seeking to present to the people the Prevention of Terrorism Bill, as a worthy replacement of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act, that went by the short, musical acronym of 8220;TADA8221; and which had lapsed in 1995.

Under the proposed law, terrorism is defined so broadly that many who are innocent could fall into its pit.

Therefore, at this point of time when political leaders are clearing their throats and preparing to sing paeans to freedom and human rig-hts, it may be useful to contemplate the country8217;s more recent record on this score. The emergency years led to such popular disgust that the Indira Gandhi regime was rightly thrown to the wolves at the first opportunity that presented itself the General Election of 1977. But the mass revulsion over the unacceptable obliteration of civil rights that the Emergency had provoked should have led to a mass institutionalisation of the values of civil liberty; a national acknowledgment that democracy cannot exist without every Indian recognising the values of equality, of the right to life and liberty.

Unfortunately, this did not happen. People, by and large, continued to remain untouched by and indifferent to the grossest forms of violence perpetrated by the State.

Just three recent instances suffice to illustrate this. The joint operation led by the local police on March 25 in an attempt to address popular revulsion over the massacre of 35 Sikhs at Chittisinghpora village earlier that month led to five people being killed. Another six were eliminated by the Army on March 29 and, shortly thereafter, when a protest was organised against these arbitrary and unjustified killings in Anantnag, the police opened fire and shot dead seven civilians. The Home ministry termed the first incident 8220;an over-reaction8221; and then looked away.

The next port of call in this grotesque journey is Umbergaon, in southern Gujarat. Captain Pratap Surve, who was leading a struggle against a mega-port project in the area, was picked up by thepolice on the night of April 7. Within two weeks he was dead. The local police and the state8217;s Home department insist that Save died because of his poor health. His family and friends angrily denied this and accused the police of murderous brutality.

Finally, there is the case involving Sahayog, an NGO working in Almora. On May 4, four members of this organisation were taken around in manacles through Almora8217;s streets and five days later they found themselves in prison after the National Security Act was invoked against them. So who were these hardened criminals who needed to be handcuffed for fear that they would escape? Were they acknowledged mass murderers or terrorists? What was their crime that required the invoking of such extraordinary provisions? What were the charges against them that led to the Almora Bar Association announcing that no one in their fraternity would represent the accused? The facts are well known.

Sahayog8217;s pamphlet on AIDS was perceived as bringing dishonour to Uttarakhand. But surely there were other civilised ways by which this grievance could have been redressed?

Incidents like these indicate a disturbing trend, highlighted by a recent Amnesty International report on India. The organisation noted that human rights defenders and agents of social change in the country are themselves becoming targets of the grossest human rights abuse, with peaceful protests being met by excessive force and labelled as 8220;anti-national8221;. This process of defamation, the Report believes, plays a key role in generating and condoning such attacks 8220;as the perpetrators feel immune from prosecution and free to abuse their power8221;. Yet, according to both national and international law, every law enforcement agency should be representative of and responsive and accountable to the community as a whole.

It is a mindset that operates at every level, whether it concerns the treatment of prisoners, police firing or the use of draconian and arbitrary laws like the Armed Forces Special Powers Act 1958. The latest National Human Rights Commission Report reports a 77 per cent increase from 1996-8217;97 to 1997-8217;98 in the number of complaints it received, including those of custodial deaths. According to NHRC figures, Uttar Pradesh records human rights violations at the rate of 73 cases a day.

What we have here is a mass abuse of human rights which has led, not to widespread public dismay and anger, but an unprecedented lethargy, a si-lent and disturbing acquiescence. The Emergency may have ended 23 years ago, but ugly reminders of that six-hundred-and-thirty-five-day-long midnight continue to mark every day of our lives.