Inspire Positivity

Introduction

In the realm of social justice and law enforcement, the debate between aggressive crackdowns and nonviolent approaches is ever persistent. This discussion becomes particularly relevant when considering the activities of mafias, gundas, and terrorists. We keep reading in the newspapers that many of the parking lots in Delhi are managed by the mafias with no revenue going to the Municipal Corporation. My generation has seen times when we could simply walk into airports without any security—but terrorists changed this, putting restrictions on the freedom of common citizens. I remember, as a child, the first Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, traveling in public fully exposed, pausing and accepting greetings from the people. However, terrorism changed the status of direct connections between leaders and the public. These elaborate arrangements are also a drain on national resources. One reason cited for the inability of the police force to minimize crime and gang wars in Delhi-NCR is that they remain busy catering to the security needs of politicians and VIPs. Mafias, gundas, and terrorists have therefore altered our lives and curtailed our freedom. But how do we curb them? The question remains: should we wield the metaphorical bulldozer to crush these elements, or should we embrace Gandhi’s principles of nonviolence to bring about lasting change? In this blog, we shall delve into the genesis of antisocial elements and approaches to check them.

Social Injustice and Antisocial Elements

Social injustice, arising from rigidly enforced and mis-implemented caste hierarchies by upper castes to maintain their supremacy, has been a traditional breeding ground for antisocial elements. The story of Phoolan Devi known as the Bandit Queen, exemplifies this. Additionally, the frustration stemming from a painfully slow, lethargic, and highly corrupt administrative and legal system generates unjustified disparities in wealth, access to education, and employment opportunities. These factors have historically contributed to the creation of dacoit gangs in the Chambal ravines and an environment where disenfranchised individuals turn to crime as a means of survival or protest.

Examples include:

• Man Singh: Revered for his opposition to oppressive landlords and the British, his activities continued post-independence due to persistent social injustices.
• Phoolan Devi: Became a symbol of resistance against sexual exploitation and caste-based oppression.
• Pan Singh Tomar: An athlete turned rebel, highlighting the failures of the system in addressing the needs of neglected sports personalities.

The acquisition of forest resources during the British era, which continued with minimal reform post-independence, has been a source of discontent among tribals. Their anguish manifests in support for violent insurgent groups like the Maoists and ULFA.

Personal Encounters with Injustice

One colleague from an upper-class family in Northeast India recounted how insurgents kidnapped his father, a government official, to fulfil their demands. During captivity, his father was lectured on the ineffectiveness of the current system and enticed with promises of a better position in a new regime.

In 1992, while traveling from Ranchi to Barajamda for a study on local water resources, my team and I were stopped by tribals wielding traditional weapons. They blocked the road to demand that the police file an FIR for a murder in their village. After a two-hour wait, a heavily drunk police team arrived and agreed to write the FIR. This incident made me question how we can claim to be the world’s largest democracy with such law-and-order implementation on the ground.

This societal neglect, corruption, and the government’s slow, unresponsive, and corrupt legal and administrative system often lead to the rise of dacoit groups, mafias, and terrorists who exploit these vulnerabilities to gain local support and legitimacy.

Criminal-Political Nexus: A New Class

Post-independence, local powerful landlords and politicians manipulated their way to power primarily to amass wealth rather than promote social welfare. They garnered followings through emergency loans to poor villagers and instilling fear. To retain power, they employed local musclemen, transforming into a politician-criminal nexus and giving rise to a new class of politico-criminals indulging in land grabbing, extortion, and smuggling. This trend emerged in the 1990s when characters like Vikas Dubey, Atiq Ahmed, Mukhtar Ansari, and recently Shahjahan Sheikh from West Bengal came into prominence. These figures started their crime careers with activities like land grabbing, extortion, and providing muscle power to local leaders to intimidate voters. The local mafia seemed so powerful that during one of my visits to Patna, I noticed a brand-new jeep carrying a sign of ‘…boss’ instead of the registration number of the vehicle. During an informal interaction with a State Government Minister, he frankly admitted that about one hundred or more of his supporters (or musclemen) feast at his residence every day, and he would not obviously incur this expense from his own pocket.

The musclemen, whose support was taken by politicians to garner votes by intimidating voters, became prominent enough to fight elections and share political power. According to the study by the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), among the Indian lawmakers, 251 out of the 543 newly elected Lok Sabha members have criminal cases registered against them, and 27 of them have been convicted for serious crimes. This marks a significant increase compared to previous years, with 46% of the newly elected MPs facing criminal charges. Additionally, 31% of these candidates face serious charges, including offenses such as murder, rape, and crimes against women. It would be utopian to expect such lawmakers to take credible actions to decriminalize politics. It will have to be a joint effort with judicial activism, civil society, and citizens to change this situation.

Reasons for the Politico-Criminal Nexus

Several factors have prominently contributed to the increased use of muscle power in democratic politics of India:

1. Expensive Electoral System: The adoption of a costly electoral system from the West has made elections prohibitively expensive, leading politicians to seek financial support from criminal elements.
2. Non-transparency in Election Funding and Spending: The lack of transparency in election funding and spending has allowed illicit funds to flow into political campaigns, creating a dependence on criminals who can provide these resources.
3. Retention of Power: To maintain power, politicians often rely on the muscle power of local strongmen who can intimidate voters and suppress opposition.
4. Corruption and Ineffectiveness: The general corruption and inefficacy of the legal and administrative system have created an environment where criminals can operate with impunity, further emboldening them.

The Bulldozer Approach

Recent actions by governments, such as Yogi Adityanath’s administration in Uttar Pradesh, have seen a more aggressive stance against organized crime. Bulldozing illegal properties of mafia dons and enforcing strict punishments are measures taken to dismantle these networks. The rationale is that a show of strength will deter potential criminals and reassure law-abiding citizens.

The Nonviolent Approach

Conversely, Gandhi’s philosophy of nonviolence offers a starkly different path. It advocates for addressing the root causes of crime through social reforms, education, and community engagement. The nonviolent approach seeks to rehabilitate rather than punish, aiming for a transformation of the individual and society.

Vinoba Bhave’s Voluntary Surrender Program

Vinoba Bhave’s Bhoodan Movement, although primarily focused on land reform, also extended to social reform. Bhave’s program of voluntary surrender by dialogue aimed to persuade dacoits to give up their arms and reintegrate into society. This approach emphasized dialogue, empathy, and the power of personal transformation, offering a stark contrast to coercive methods.

Nonviolent Approach for Purely Greedy Criminals?

For figures like Ansari, Ahmed, and Dubey, whose criminal activities appear more connected to greed and political support rather than social injustice, the nonviolent approach poses challenges. Their actions, driven by wealth accumulation and power, are less likely to be influenced by empathetic dialogue or social reforms.

A Credible Start: How to Break the Political-Criminal Nexus

To break the political-criminal nexus, several concrete steps must be taken:

1. Government-Funded Elections: The government should fund elections for all parties based on their area of influence and the number of candidates fielded. Political parties should be forbidden from spending beyond this funding. Any spending detected beyond this, or misinformation campaigns by unscrupulous means like AI, should lead to automatic disqualification of the candidate.
2. Transparency in Election Funding and Spending: All political contributions and expenditures should be transparent and subject to public scrutiny. Establishing strict auditing mechanisms and independent oversight can help ensure compliance.
3. Strict Campaign Conduct Rules: Candidates and their supporters should focus only on discussing policies and proposed changes rather than promising freebies. This would encourage a more level playing field and reduce the influence of money in elections.
4. Electoral Reforms: Introducing reforms to make the electoral process less expensive and more accessible can reduce the dependence on illicit funds. This could include measures like public debates, simplified campaigning rules, and equitable media access.
5. Strengthening Legal Framework: Implementing stringent laws to penalize political corruption and criminal activities, with fast-track courts to handle such cases, can deter politicians from engaging in corrupt practices.
6. Public Awareness Campaigns: Educating the public about the importance of transparent and fair elections, and the long-term harm caused by electing candidates with criminal backgrounds, can help shift voter behavior.

Conclusion

The dilemma between bulldozers and nonviolence isn’t easily resolved. Both approaches have their merits and drawbacks:

• Aggressive Measures: Effective in immediate crime reduction but risk alienating communities and perpetuating cycles of violence.
• Nonviolent Methods: Aim for long-term change but require patience, resources, and systemic reforms.
• Breaking Political Nexus: Essential to ensure that efforts to curb crime are not undermined by political corruption.

A balanced approach may be the most pragmatic solution. Immediate threats necessitate strong action, but sustainable peace requires addressing the underlying causes of crime. Combining the strength of the bulldozer with the compassion of nonviolence, and breaking the political-criminal nexus, could pave the way for a just and equitable society.

By reflecting on historical figures, contemporary measures, and the insights from programs like Vinoba Bhave’s, we can better understand the complexities of combating crime and envision a future where justice and compassion coexist.