Adistinction must be drawn between an “announcement” at a press conference and the carrying-out of any action or threat made public to be media. The police in Lucknow clearly jumped the gun recently when invoking the legal provision of “apprehending a breach of the peace” to detain members of a Dalit group even before they spoke to reporters. What next? A ban on reporting non-governmental views? For if “potentially provocative” is a legitimate yardstick, most political persons would have to keep their lips zipped, and the curtains brought down on the daily cross-fire on television. And to stretch a point of principle, what about the “warnings” issued by ministers, officials, police ~ now the military too: are they not also provocative? The larger point is that it has now become fashionable to try and silence voices of dissent or protest ~ the easier way out ~ rather than try and address the cause of what triggered the angst. Regardless of what the government may say, every protest is not politically motivated. The stifling of protest can be counter-productive: talking “tough” at a press conference, or shouting slogans in public actually serves to “let off steam” rather than allow a sore to fester, possibly erupt in violence. Press conferences often assist intelligence agencies in learning the plans of agitated groups ~ reporters will confirm that personnel of the Special Branch hang around press conferences to collect information. (An interesting “aside” is how the police waited outside a restaurant in Connaught Place, New Delhi, that was highly favoured by Opposition parties when the Emergency was winding down. One “leader” invited them to his session. “Get your information first hand, have a cup of tea too”, he quipped ~ to the embarrassment of the cops.) The “shooting the messenger” is a reflection of the same attitude that now has the police shutting down Internet services, and preventing the media and Opposition leaders from visiting trouble spots. The aim is to “put a lid” on the trouble in the hope that it will dissipate. An extreme expression of the same theme is the dubbing of anyone who thinks independently an “antinational”, or slapping sedition charges on him.

This shrinking of the space for dissent is what should cause grave concern to educated society; it breeds arrogant authoritarianism, negates democratic functioning. Alas, even the judiciary can fall prey to intolerance ~ note a seven-judge bench of the apex court directing the media not to report/broadcast the reaction from CS Karnan to the order convicting and sending him to jail for “contempt”. In their detailed order issued a few days back their Lordships did not spell out the provision of the law under which that gag order was issued.