Last week, and after more than two months, I got a chance to have an extended face-to-face natter with an active politician from West Bengal. Yes, I have been in regular touch with all sorts of people involved in politics over WhatsApp, Face Time and Zoom. Thanks to technology, the 80th day of lockdown doesn’t appear like solitary confinement. I am in Delhi but am fully aware of what is going on in different parts of West Bengal.
Still, it’s not the same. There is a profound difference between a phone call or video conference and a direct, face-to-face interaction. The long-distance call is very useful. However, I have noticed that we tend to exercise an inordinate amount of brevity in our conversations. We invariably trim the fat and get to the point. In the process, something of the local colour, the smell of the surroundings and the little details that make for the complete picture, are lost.
This is what made two days of a real adda extra special. It made my understanding of events a thousand miles away a shade more rounded — although still incomplete.
There was a question I was repeatedly asked. In West Bengal, the lockdown, although still applicable to the containment zones — although the definition of zones is shrinking to containment houses, has been considerably relaxed. The bazars were already working normally and even the mithai were exempted from closure. Now, the doors of all religious places — irrespective of denomination — have been thrown open. True, the temples, mosques, churches and gurdwaras are supposed to adhere to social distancing rules and not permit more than 10 people at any given moment. But like the rules that are allegedly in vogue for public transport, these are not going to be adhered to. I am certain that the Officer-in-charge of the local police station isn’t going to intervene if the congregations far exceed the permitted numbers. The rules exist because they can be used selectively — if necessary. So, if worship in public shrines had been resumed, why should the government not lift restrictions on political gatherings? Of course, nominally the social distancing norms would be in place, but real life would be governed by pragmatic flexibility.
I was asked the question when these restrictions would be lifted for a very specific reason in the context of West Bengal. Although political activity has been prohibited in public places, the reality is far more mixed. Members of the ruling party in the state and their MLAs and MPs are seen going around the localities as if it was business as usual. The restrictions, it would seem, are selectively applied to the opposition parties. The police, which appears to be under instructions to play a partisan role, seem to invariably prevent others from meeting people in the streets and in residential clusters. Some MPs have been physically prevented from proceeding to their constituencies while others have had quarantine notices slapped on them. Last week, Sabyasachi Dutta, a prominent BJP leader and former Mayor of Bidhan Nagar, was attacked by members of the ruling party because he had the temerity to try and visit some people in his constituency. The incident happened in front of the police station and the custodians of law and order chose to remain silent observers.
The situation has not eased even in the case of those who have sought to distribute relief material after the Amphan cyclone that has devastated the coastal areas of North and South 24 Parganas. Some opposition parties have managed to circumvent these norms by subterfuge but such cases are rare. In general, political activity is being confined to one party.
I don’t know what the situation is in other states but everyone recognises the flaws of a system that allows either a ruling party or the police to use its discretionary powers. It would be far more judicious if the restrictions on political activity are removed altogether, with the rider that social distancing has to be maintained and the gathering cannot exceed 50 persons.
Not that the removal of restrictions will trigger an automatic spurt in political activities. The opposition may be itching to expose the shortcomings of the state government in West Bengal, but this is not the case in each state. In Bihar, for example, the opposition RJD led by Tejaswi Yadav, a son of Lalu Yadav, has preferred a wait-and-see approach to jumping into activism. In Uttar Pradesh, one of the big success stories of COVID-19 management, the space for frontal opposition politics has shrunk considerably. This again isn’t the case in Gujarat and at least a few non-BJP states such as Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Delhi where the management of the pandemic has been found wanting. In Maharashtra, Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray faces a double problem: managing the pandemic which is getting out of hand and getting the Shiv Sena to digest an unlikely coalition.
Each state has its unique set of problems that are bottled up and seeking avenues of expression. This is a problem that can’t be avoided for too long because suppression can lead to undesirable expressions of both anxiety, fear and anger. A controlled return to some political activity is the need of the hour.
The writer is a senior journalist and Member of Parliament, being a presidential nominee to the Rajya Sabha.
