Why India is not a free & democratic country!

If there is one person who would definitely remain etched in the memories of most Indians, even in those born post liberalization into the era of multitasking & internet, it has to be Mahatma Gandhi; and it can be safely assumed that he has a strong foothold, too prominent & significant to be dethroned anytime in near future. The simple bespectacled ageing man, typically clad in a knee length dhoti, often working on the spinning wheel caught the attention of many for his ideologies on non-violence, truth, democracy, vegetarianism, celibacy and much more. If we as a country admire him so much, so as to call him the father of our nation, it is safe to conclude that we admire, adore, respect and wish to implement if not all, but most of his ideologies.

Let us now dig deep into one of his principles, the one that we are most proud of – democracy. What does this democracy mean at a very basic level?  It stands for empowering people, much more than being given the right to queue up in booths to vote & elect one of the multitude political parties. Dictionaries define the term as ‘power to the people’; and the basic form of power that can be given to anyone is the ‘freedom of speech & expression’ which in well in-built only theoretically in our constitution.

Now, going back to the humble man, who left behind immortal quotes such as “If you are slapped, kindly show them the other cheek!” On a fateful day, on his way to a prayer meeting, three gun shots were fired at him by the man named Vinayak Godse who was called “Nathuaram”. Godse was no terrorist; he was as much a patriot involved in the freedom struggle as Gandhi was. He was not an extremist too; he was a Hindu fanatic, though there was nothing wrong in being one, definitely not at that point in time when the country wasn’t even secular. Tensions were high on account of partition. It is important here to shed some light on why Gandhi drew enmity, to the levels of being assassinated. After the eventful midnight in the month of August 1947, when Pakistan was torn out of India, it was agreed mutually that India would pay Rs. 75 crores to Pakistan under the terms of division of assets & liabilities. The second installment of the same Rs. 55 crores was due when invasion of Kashmir by self styled liberators with covert support of Pakistani army took place leading the Government of India to withhold the due. Gandhi fasted unto death and this among many other reasons such as his bias towards the muslims, the support for khilafat movement, denunciation of the Arya Samaj, his placation of Jinnah & the Muslim league, opposition to singing Vande Mataram amongst many others aggravated Nathuram’s and many others hatred towards him. His life & peace was then mercilessly stolen.  

Nathuram is no martyr; he had to be punished and was so rightfully too, except for the fact that he managed to move into tears the audience that witnessed his trial. He affected one and all deeply as he spoke for several hours the facts of the case, the motive & reasons that prompted him to do the dreadful. He visibly and audibly moved the court so much that the justice Koshla commented “I have however, no doubt that the audience of that day been constituted into a jury and entrusted with the task of deciding Godse’s appeal; they would have brought in a verdict of ‘not guilty’ by an over-whelming majority.” Godse was sentenced to death and was executed amidst questions looming in the mind of Gandhi’s sons; for they felt that executing their father’s killer would dishonor the Mahatma’s legacy which included a staunch opposition to death penalty. With that ended two lives that fought for the freedom struggle.

School texts, books, songs, plays, movies and every other form of art & communication have screamed the odes to the Gandhi; his principles & ideologies. Nathuram gets mentioned only once & only in the last paragraph of these same odes, as the Hindu fanatic who assassinated the Mahatma. He was an ordinary man who had his own philosophies, but that those were a minority & was not shared by the influential leaders of the then congress is another story.  He shouldn’t be glorified, definitely not, because he venomously killed another man, when completely aware, forget the fact that he killed the Gandhi. But he should definitely be given a voice; at least Gandhi who fought for equality would have wanted that.  The Indian government that claims to be a secular one giving the freedom of speech & expressions to all fails to justify when it bans all books & plays & movies written from the point of view of Nathuram. Nathuram was heard in the court before he was prosecuted. In the similar manner, it is for the people of India to read about him & form perspectives about him before banishing him as only an assassin. There are always two sides to coin & it is fair only if both are heard, even if it is with respect to the assassin of Father who constructed the nation.

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all ! 

This only makes me ponder, if the country is hypocritical, allowing the majority to be heard & giving them all freedom that they deserve while curtailing the voice of minority, burying the shrill thrown by the few & covering it up neatly. The country wants to present what it thinks is best for the society. I agree, it has a huge responsibility because it cannot encourage riots & rebellion. It need not publish or include in text books a chapter on Nathuram presented from his perspective but at least it need not come in the way of an author who does so after eons of research. In doing so, I begin to believe that the country does not trust its citizens to be mature enough to cautiously absorb content on such an important matter. Double Entendre has become a way of life in Independent India & this is not a pleasant beginning.