Curtailing freedom?

Sir, - The article `Effects of the Narmada verdict' (July 21): The petition to ban the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) is disturbing since it challenges the freedom of having alternative viewpoints and their expression in peaceful, non-violent ways. Does it in a subtle way also suggest that banning the NBA or any other people's movement is a way of keeping the voices of the people down, who would even otherwise continue to protest against atrocities and injustice with the same strength and momentum? The public attacks on the NBA and the recent petition seem to be a way of taking away the attention of the people from the issue being raised by the NBA.

Irrespective of whether we support the cause of the Narmada struggle or not, it is time we raised our voices against the petition, for tomorrow it may be another organisation/people's movement that could be under threat.

Anita Balasubramanian,

Redmond, U.S.

* * *

Sir, - I feel the fault lies with us when we expect too much from the judiciary. It might curtail the power of another hand of the State at times, but only with a view to ``maintain order'' within the system. The order of the day is to build a smooth pathway or infrastructure for the political-economic process going on within the country.

I think the problem lies with our understanding and our approaching the judiciary to wage our political fights like the NBA did. The misadventure of the NBA should be a lesson for anybody struggling for people's power.

Pratyush Chandra,

New Delhi

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Diverting attention