The ongoing wave of protests in Panaji against Section 39(A) of the Town and Country Planning Act has brought to the fore a critical debate about the right to dissent versus the boundaries of lawful demonstration. On Monday, thousands of people from various parts of Goa and Opposition leaders walked to Azad Maidan, Panaji, to demand a repeal of the contentious section. A large section of the crowd later marched to TCP Minister Vishwajit’s residence at Dona Paula and engaged in sloganeering against the minister.
At around 9 pm, Chief Minister Pramod Sawant addressed the media, but refused to call a truce. Rather, against all expectations, the CM sidestepped the core issue, and his response highlighted more on respecting privacy by not carrying out a morcha at the residence. “No one has been prevented from exercising the democratic right to protest, but it must be with decorum and without intruding on individual privacy; there are proper forums to raise grievances; concerns should be addressed through formal representations rather than such actions”, said Sawant.
We do agree that the personal space of an individual, especially a minister, must be respected, but the government of the day should have already factored in that people have been protesting for the past 3 days, seeking to draw attention of those at the helm. The right to assemble and protest is a fundamental right in a democracy, but why were people not allowed to exercise this fundamental right freely? Why were buses from Salcete stopped?
Chief Minister Pramod Sawant’s response was measured, but it does not even remotely touch the core issue. People have been driven to such extremes because they have not been engaged in any forum. Yes, lawful channels are available to the protestors, and to all aggrieved, but protests happen when these lawful channels fail. We recall, on Sunday, Cumbharjua MLA Rajesh Phaldessai was protesting over the Aarti Ghat project at Naroa in Bicholim, and former Power Minister Nilesh Cabral joined protesters on Monday against a proposed cargo jetty at Odar in Quepem.
When diplomacy and soft approaches fail, people resort to mass protests, and this takes Goa to a dangerous crossroads of peaceful versus violent. While the protestors have refrained from taking the law into their hands, there were moments of tension as police pushed back the surging crowd along the Dona Paula route. By not intervening, the government allowed the situation to fester, risking further unrest. The rising tide of public anger could have triggered a law-and-order situation.
This failure of leadership to diffuse the crisis, at least momentarily, means the government is steadfast in not addressing the concerns raised by agitators. There is neither a political will nor empathy towards the situation. What was needed for the moment was decisive action, and perhaps the government has only invited further wrath of the people. The developments of Monday will garner sympathy and further support from more citizens, widening the divide between people and the government and escalating the situation further.
This issue encapsulates the challenges faced by modern democracies. Goa has been facing a churn with people marching in protests over issues. “Enough is enough” seems to be the chorus across all protests in Goa. The reluctance to intervene in the vexed 39(A) issue or speak about any resolution is as clear as daylight. Thomas Jefferson, an influential American statesman, once said, “When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty”. This highlights the people's ability to hold their government accountable and answerable. It’s time the government responds.
