Nobody in their right mind wants to go to jail. Unless you are a VIP prisoner and the prison administration is willing to bend the rules for you, life can be tough. Adjusting to an Indian style toilet and living without an air conditioner — these thoughts are enough for most elite, well-to-do people to shudder at the idea of entering a prison.
There is no dearth of people in India who’d like to resist injustice but are afraid of spending a night in jail. Hence, they choose silence. It would be unfair to blame them. After all, no one should have their freedom curtailed unless they have committed a crime that deserves punishment to give the victims a sense of justice, and preserve social order.
If your crime is theft or murder, and you are given a chance to avoid jail by offering an apology, you will likely tender the apology. But when it is a thought crime — when your mere opinion is liable for jail — an apology can have damaging repercussions for society and democracy. If Prashant Bhushan had apologised — or if he does so in the ongoing saga — it will be hugely demoralising for the struggle for democracy in India.
Also read: Mistake must be realised, and it must come from the heart, SC tells Prashant Bhushan
A sacrifice for democracy
There are moments in history when it is critical to make the right choice, no matter how great the personal sacrifice. Six months in jail is no easy sacrifice. But history remembers those who make sacrifices for democracy and freedom. No matter what you think of Prashant Bhushan, his Gandhian refusal to tender an apology against his beliefs has already earned him a place in history books.
We remember those who went to jail in the freedom struggle, or those who went to jail during the Emergency. The world will never forget the sacrifices of people who had to spend years in jail for mere insistence of the freedom of speech and liberty of thought. It may seem ridiculous to some to compare Prashant Bhushan to Mahatma Gandhi or Nelson Mandela, but his principled submission to punishment is of similar nature.
Also read: India turned a blind eye to Justice Karnan, an ‘outsider’. Prashant Bhushan is different
Looking beyond the ‘two tweets’
The issue at hand is not just ‘two tweets’ or a contempt law well past its time. The issue is not even limited to the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression. It is much larger. Questioning all pillars of democracy, and their fairness and commitment to upholding the Constitution, have today become an urgent task. It is not just about Article 19 but about the entire sacred book of our republic. This is not about questioning one judge or four, because the questions are inextricably linked to the larger battle for the soul of India.
India would be a very different country if we didn’t have Gandhi. He’s not just the familiar face on the currency note. When even a Narendra Modi has to bend before Gandhi while giving Parliament seats to those who hail Gandhi’s assassin, it tells you that Gandhi remains the moral centre of the nation.
Gandhi went to jail six times in South Africa and seven times thereafter in India. On one such occasion in 1922, he told the British judge: “I do not ask for mercy. I do not plead any extenuating act. I am here, therefore, to invite and cheerfully submit to the highest penalty that can be inflicted upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what appears to me to be the highest duty of a citizen.”
In taking inspiration from Gandhi’s way of resistance by accepting a punishment he thought was unjust, Prashant Bhushan has made us realise the power of Satyagrah. Often mistaken as passive resistance, Gandhi’s non-violent means were actually an assertion of power.
Prashant Bhushan’s courageous assertion of his “bonafide beliefs” and the embrace of punishment explains to the India of 2020 what Gandhi meant when he said satyagrah was a weapon of the strong.
Also read: 280-character tweet is all it takes to destroy Indian democracy — if you believe Supreme Court
Inspiration for others
When the judge sentenced Gandhi to six years in prison in 1922, he said he would be happy if the British Indian government reduced his sentence. The Supreme Court gave Prashant Bhushan an opportunity to escape punishment despite having found him guilty of a crime. And the Modi government’s top lawyer, Attorney General K K Venugopal has changed his position to recommend that Bhushan not be punished.
Bhushan’s answer to the offer to apologise invoked Gandhi. Just as Gandhi has inspired Prashant Bhushan, Bhushan’s courage will inspire many others to stand up and give personal sacrifices for democracy.
Prashant Bhushan’s words will not be easily forgotten: “I can only humbly paraphrase what the Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi had said in his trial: I do not ask for mercy. I do not appeal to magnanimity. I am here, therefore, to cheerfully submit to any penalty that can lawfully be inflicted upon me for what the court has determined to be an offence, and what appears to me to be the highest duty of a citizen.”
Courage, they say, is contagious.
The author is contributing editor, ThePrint. Views are personal.
Indeed there have been many marked changes in the so called ‘democratic’ functioning of our honourable courts post UPA era of Indian governance. As witnessed during so many ‘firsts’ claimed judgements as well as national and state events, each of those judgements startled the conventional wisdom of our own people.
Needless to mention what this is alluring to, but to the uninitiated an overview – keeping in mind that while all these happened, the so claiming custodians of our supreme code of social contract, chose to turn their heads away and look in different side, which gives them an alibi of not subjectable to guilt of action, the common and the poor endured and continue to suffer for years in silence,
As we know, this unprecedented posture of mute observer looking away other direction by the justice system started not long after a new leadership took seat in our capittal, soon it started with redefining the notions around ‘who we are’ and thus recreating a craving need for IDENTITY and overnight marginalise those who couldnt comply or buy into its Aadhaar verdict. then it pushed through repainting the colour around MONEY ‘what we have got’ and thus reprinting the currency while throwing innocent people on road to seek out for. Having thus fixed people into Interrogative Custody Individually & Economically, the next target close to people it chose as RELIGION in that it invoked family fights in people homes with issues of Divorce, poly- gender biases, prayer manners, geo-names, what not. Next hit was into peoples LIVES how one goes by their aging days and thus developed a new illusion world of MEDICINE that promise to cure and immortalise it under the business acronym of Ayush. This list goes on what with blackmailing overSECURITY and possible wars with our neighbours, showing the people how to tide over the pain with its sponsored Drug addictions, letting the beople into imaginining the non existent PHINX to persuade them into desire for Rafales,
While ssuch live experiments n dramas were being played on with the lives of its hapless people struggling to come to terms with one every month, the law of the land is not conspicious by absence all along, rather what its guilty of is looking the other way, read the E-LITE way that is what the billionaire people aspirations were and how to meet them, whereas we the people kept hoping after hope that it will look their way, read the LAB-OUR way that is what the scapegoat people were enduring and how to save them from cannibals roaming in public places
Same league in Laude ke baal .?
Respects to sri prashant bhushan for his courage and integrity to stand up for freedom of speech in India . Before he is punished,let us investigate every issue he has raised before the courts and disprove them. Intimidating and Putting people in Jail for raising issues of national importance ,only go to show that all is not well st the top.
Very well said Mr/Ms UMA.
Clearly, in Modistan, it is wrong to patriotic to the country as patriotism is now defined as loyalty to the violent, fascist ideology called Hindutva. Not to the nation.
what a pathetic comparison. the writer has done the biggest disservice to the memory of Gandhi and Mandela, and Print is equally responsible to give such illiterate writers by giving them space to write such shit. PB is an selfish idiot who has done nothing for the benefit of the society that we should look upto him with any pride. even if he doesnt deserve this contempt punishment and is trying to hold a high moral ground , he remains a egoistic person who is good for nothing. and it appears the writer is also in the same league…..
Just quoting the Mahatma makes him on par? MG did it for our country. PB could be called crusader if he continues to fight against contempt law. Seriously, what othdr choicd did PB have? His high profile would be in thr drain had he apologized. Media comparing him to Mandela and MG is highly illogical and even comical. What has he done to the nation to be placed alongside such illustrious people? The article is an insult to them.
Hidden deep in this article, the author admits “it may seem ridiculous to some to compare Prashant Bhushan to Mahatma Gandhi or Nelson Mandela, but his principled submission to punishment is of similar nature.”.
Yes, this comparison is beyond ridiculous.
Hope Mr Bhushan enjoys his stay in jail.
ThePrint has redeemed itself by publishing this article. The original headline that it had published on this issue yesterday was awful. Good that they have done course correction.