Dr Vincent Alva, Principal, Milagres College, Kallianpur
Do we have the right to protest? Yes. The Constitution of India in its Article 19, which is called key article, embodies ‘Seven Freedoms’. The first two freedoms mentioned give the citizen the right to protest. They are;
1. To freedom of speech and expression.
2. To assemble peacefully and without arms.
It is very clear that every citizen of this country has the right to protest against the injustice caused to him, to his community or to his fellow citizen provided he does this act peacefully, without disturbing others, without maligning the name of others and without causing a threat to law and order.
The constitution also states that “the right to join with fellow citizens in protest or peaceful assembly is critical to a functioning democracy.” Here the word peaceful assembly should be underlined. No one has the right to create raucous during a protest thus posing danger to the fellow citizen.
Should we seek prior permission from the legal authority for protest?
Yes. One needs to avail the prior permission to protest. A protest permit or parade permit is permission granted by a governmental agency for a demonstration to be held in a particular venue at a particular time. Failing to obtain a permit may lead to charges of parading without a permit. If one stages a protest without obtaining a prior permit, the legal authority has every right to book the person under law for not complying with the constitutional rights.
Should the person or the group targeted by protest be informed in advance regarding the protest?
Yes. It is the responsibility of the protester to inform the targeted person in writing through legal authorities. It is simply because when one is protesting against someone it doesn’t mean that the targeted person is at fault. As protesting is the protester’s right, protecting himself is the right of the targeted. It is illegal to protest against someone without prior information because every individual citizen has his own space for freedom and right for protection. It also might cause a threat to law and order.
Should there be a leader for protest?
Yes. It is mandatory for someone to lead the protest and get identified as a leader. It is because someone has to own the responsibility and accountability. A protest without a leader is equal to the flock of sheep without a Shepard.
Having said this, since a lot of discussion is going on in the media regarding the protest held at Shirva Church premises demanding justice for the untimely death of Fr Mahesh, I feel it is my duty to voice my opinion on the protest held since the protest was from the community I belong to, mainly against the Church of which I am a member. And also, most importantly it is my responsibility too to educate hundreds of ignorant people who were to a larger extent emotionally pulled towards the protest than drawn by conviction.
The protest held at the premises of Shirva Church shows that the crowd, or we can call it a mob since the protest was directionless, was keen in fighting for justice. As a responsible citizen, I too join in voicing my demand for justice over the tragedy that occurred.
Fr Mahesh D’Souza, no doubt, toiled selflessly for the institution he headed. He is dead and no more with us and it is equally painful for all those who admired his craftsmanship to digest the fact and to come to terms with the reality. Some go a step further by suspecting the death of Fr Mahesh as a foul play. It is in the nature of the human beings to doubt. But doubting also has two angles, i.e., 1. Doubt something with rationale. 2. Doubt something for the sake of doubting. I have nothing to say about it since I respect the freedom of individuals.
But the turn the protest took subsequently shows that it is easy to call for a protest but it is not that easy to stick to the principles for which the protest was called for. My serious concern is in the question – whether anybody- so called leaders seriously contemplated over the protest and its consequences or took the leadership enthused by the maddening litheness of the crowd gathered? If it is the second one true to a great extent, it is the failure of the leadership that caused the chaos, which could have been suavely avoided otherwise.
I appreciate the energy behind the protest but depreciate the taste behind it. I appreciate the unity of the crowd, but I question their integrity.
In the Church, we have beautiful leadership setup wherein even the laity is given the authority to lead the congregation. But as I see it is the failure of lay leadership that created raucous in front of the church on the evening of All Souls Day. We can always demand for justice and it is our right which no one can question. But the protocol demands that the democratically chosen leaders to approach the authority and demand for a justification. If the authority fails to give a sound justification, the leaders have every right to call for a protest after informing the concerned through proper channel. One against whom the mob protests he/she can exercise his/her freedom of speech to speak or not to speak to the crowd. Because one person can discuss the matter with the delegation and not with the mob. Needless to repeat that the protest cannot be spontaneous. It has to be diligently organised with prior permission.
Can the church premises be a place for the public protest? Technically speaking a public protest cannot be held at a private place. The leaders will have to take the permission not only for the protest but also for the place. Church premises, we presume, is a public property. But our presumption is wrong. There is an individual owner for that property. Still the laity protest by the parishioners inside the church premises can be justified to a certain extent. But a parishioner belonging to a different parish or a person belonging to a different place, though he is in unison with the cause, ceases the right to enter the property belonging to a different church. If he/she does it is considered as gross violation of law and one can be booked for entering the private property without permission. In the protest that took place at Shirva, there were outsiders in large numbers. The legal authority would have made the leaders, if any, accountable if any untoward incident had taken place. There was every possibility of the occurrence of such incident because it was the mob which gathered. To understand what I am trying to say, one should know the distinction between a crowd and a mob. Crowd means a group of people gathered with a purpose. Mob is a large crowd of people especially one that may become violent or cause trouble.
It is the right of those persons against whom the protest is called for to take the legal protection because the person against whom the protest is staged has the duty to inform the legal authority regarding this. There will be a demand by the protesters and the authority has the duty to give statements and not judgements to the public. One can, including the legal authority, give clarification and not justice. Law has its own course to validate the matter before pronouncing the judgement.
When one allows emotions to overpower the common-sense there is every possibility for the emergence of anarchy. The same thing happened during the protest at Shirva. The mob was not in any mood to listen to the statements made by the church authority or the police authority. When one demands for justice, one also has the duty to listen to what the authorities say. It did not happen just because it was an unorganised protest. Mob went on shouting slogans against the church authority and the police authority. Again, if one thinks that he/she can shout slogans impromptu, it is a gross aberration on one’s part. Even the slogans shouted are accountable and leader should own the accountability. That day mob went on shouting unparliamentary slogans towards the church authority humiliating both, the person and the entire church. One may have the anger boiling within, but he/she does not have the right to humiliate a person. This is the best example of an unorganised protest. The adults used the children to shout such slogans and endorsed the action publicly. Shame on this act and those who shouted such slogans. They have not only defamed the protesters but the entire community they belonged to.
There is a limit for everything. The moment one crosses the limit, it becomes a cause for lawlessness. The cowardice act of the protesters was so visible that they went to the extent of deflating the tyre of the car belonging to the bishop of Udupi diocese. Further the mob went on deviating from the main issue. The suicide issue was pushed to the periphery for some time at least and some among the mob started slapping allegations on the church authority in front of the media blaming that their attitude towards the deceased is the reason for the death. In a protest, an individual does not have the right to make this statement publicly. instead they will have to record it in the memorandum to be handed over to the appropriate authority. This act deserves condemnation.
Here the mob completely rejected the statement given by the Superintendent of Police. It is nothing but a direct allegation on the police system and their duties. If one does not know what all are the guidelines to be followed by the police department in the suicide case before lowering the body from the noose and after sending the body for post mortem, the course of investigation, one should read the ‘Karnataka State Police Manuel’ Chapter 35, rule no 1374 to 1396 and also section 174 in CRPC – The Code of Criminal procedure, 1973. Along with it one also needs to read the Doctor’s Manuel –Department of Forensic Medicine and ToxicologyJawaharlal Institute of Post-Graduate Medical Education and ResearchInstitute of National Importance, Govt.of IndiaPuducherry, India, Chapters 6 and 7, pg no – 13-21. This will clear all the doubts we have in mind before calling something foul. But who will have the patience to read such stuff? Many only have the time to listen to the gossip and act insane.
Innocence has a justification but ignorance does not. it is said “ignorance has no excuse.” It also does not mean that every person in the mob will have the wisdom. It is the duty of the leaders to educate the people gathered there and speak the truth to them. If the leaders fail in their duty the mob fails which will give way to all sorts of chaos. Whom shall we blame – mob or the leaders? In my opinion it is the leaders.
Let the truth prevail and may the God-fearing Catholic community not become a prey to the wolves in the garb of sheep. Catholic Church has experienced many ups and downs in the past. The spirit of Catholicism is so strong that the Church has bounced back more vibrantly. Justice is what everyone demands. Only law can give justice. We need to have faith in the law because only because of law we live happily. The course of justice buys time. The statement by Benjamin Franklin still holds good. “It is better 100 guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer”.
Lastly, fight for justice but let the fight not be malicious. Be sincere in your fight “for as thou urgest justice, be assured thou shalt have justice, more than you desir’st” – William Shakespeare.