Silencing of
dissenting voices
Gauri Lankesh
Syed Nooruzzaman
The gunning down of
B a n g a l u r u - b a s e d
journalist Gauri
Lankesh, who edited
Kannada weekly Gauri
Lankesh Patrike, on
September 5 led to the
expression of mainly two kinds of
views. Those opposed to the
suppression of dissent looked at
it the way they viewed the killing
of rationalists like former Hampi
University Vice-Chancellor MM
Kalburgi in 2015, Narendra Dabholkar in 2013, Govind
Pansare in 2015 and Sirsa-based
newsman Ram Chandra
Chhatrapati in 2002. Those on the
side of the rationalists stand for
protecting liberal values and
allowing anyone the right to differ
as reflected in India's age-old
socio-cultural ethos.
Contrary to this, those who
believe that inconvenient voices
or dissenters must be silenced
whatever the means refused to
shed tears on the cold-blooded
murder of Gauri. People holding
such views do not hesitate to
describe their opponents as antinational
elements who, in their
opinion, deserve no mercy and,
therefore, must be consigned to
the dustbin of history.
Such people have not been as
vocal as those who stand for tolerating dissenting voices under
all circumstances. But they have
made their presence felt through
social media.
However, the point that is
intended to be discussed here is a
little different, having little to do
with these two sets of viewpoints.
The killing of crusaders engaged
in a humanitarian cause can
The identification of
Gauri's killers is essential
to expose these elements
as also to prove that such
people are the real
enemies of the nation. The
activities of the elements
behind the journalist's
murder must be curbed to
prevent them from
promoting a culture no
different from that of the
Kalashnikov culture that
prospered in Pakistan as a
result of its own shortsighted
policies and
damaged its reputation
considerably in the global
community.
never be condoned as some
people, unfortunately, tried to do
through social media after Gauri
was done to death in front of her
own house.
Even otherwise, taking the law
into one's own hands, directly or
through hired goons, must be
condemned by one and all. Those
who believe in such methods
should remember that physically
eliminating an individual can
never hurt the cause dear to that
person.
The ideals Gauri stood for as a
journalist and social activist are
unlikely to be forgotten even if
she is no more in our midst. More
Gauris may be born to espouse her ideals, remembering her as a
symbol of resistance against the
forces which try to mislead
people that anyone who refuses
to accept their idea of nationalism
is a traitor and must be dealt with
accordingly.
A liberal to the core, she
fiercely fought for the
emancipation of Dalits and
protecting the rights of farmers,
spoke openly against the rising
clout of the Hindutva forces and
for bringing Naxalites to the
social mainstream.
She had been getting
threatening messages off and on,
yet she did not get scared. She
was, perhaps, ready to make any
kind of sacrifice to continue her
drive to promote her ideals.
That she was considered a
source of trouble for some of her
family members is not surprising.
Gauri and Chhatrapati
are among 16 journalists
who lost their lives
during the past seven
years in the process of
exercising their
constitutional right of
freedom of expression,
according to the
Committee to Protect
Journalists.
People like Gauri, generally, do
not bother about the interests of
their family members if there is a
clash between the interests of the
two sides. So, any idea about who
killed Gauri can be had only after
a thorough enquiry into the
circumstances leading to her
physical elimination. The truth, in
any case, must be laid bare so
that the forces behind the
gruesome act are made to realise
that they cannot escape the long
arm of law, irrespective of how
powerful they are.
Ram Chander Chhatrapati was killed for
allegedly exposing rape cases against then
Dera chief Ram Rahim
The identification of Gauri's killers is essential to expose these
elements as also to prove that
such people are the real enemies
of the nation. The activities of the
elements behind the journalist's
murder must be curbed to
prevent them from promoting a culture no different from that of
the Kalashnikov culture that
prospered in Pakistan as a result
of its own short-sighted policies
and damaged its reputation
considerably in the global
community.
India has never been known for
a culture of killing people having
their own opinion on issues and
events in sharp contrast to those
who hold the levers of power.
There is need to ensure that a
Kalashnikov culture never grows
roots in this country.
The way Gauri has been done
to death for holding liberal views
on various issues cannot scare
journalists to succumb to any kind
of pressure brought to bear on
them. Rather they will now get
more emboldened to exercise
their constitutional right of
freedom to express their opinion
freely and fearlessly.
There are similarities between the case of Gauri and that of
Sirsa-based journalist Ram
Chandra Chhatrapati, who paid
with his life in 2002 for the cause
of exposing the dark deeds of
jailed Baba Gurmeet Ram Rahim
Singh, then head of the powerful
Dera Sacha Sauda
movement. How the socalled
godman
reportedly indulged in
the sexual exploitation
of his women disciples
would not have come
into the open had
Chhatrapati not carried
write-ups in his Hindi
paper, Poora Sach, in
this regard.
It was Chhatrapati's
drive against the
questionable goings-on
in the Dera that led to
the registration of two
cases of rape of his
followers by Gurmeet
Ram Rahim, resulting
in his getting
sentenced for 20
years in jail by a special CBI court
in Panchkula. The so-called Baba
may never be able to come out of
jail as he faces a murder case too;
Chhatrapati was alleged to have
been gunned down at the behest
of the controversial godman.
Gauri and Chhatrapati are
among 16 journalists who lost
their lives during the past seven
years in the process of exercising
their constitutional right of
freedom of expression, according
to the Committee to Protect
Journalists.
Since these media persons
were in most cases based in
mofussil towns, their
contribution to society did not get
the attention it deserved. The
good work of these heroes needs
to be documented to help
understand media persons'
contribution to the cause of
fighting for the wellbeing of
people belonging to different
sections of society.