Dissent allows citizens and representatives to question authority, expose mistakes, defend minority rights and push institutions to course correct
We first heard of it, via cyberspace, which reported a protest happened in the legislative assembly. In the breathless, breaking news style that news gets released on the Internet, we were left wondering: who had protested and why?
Later, reports in the newspapers (some) explained what had happened. The protests were by Mirabag residents. If you missed reading it, Mirabag is about protests by villagers and activists in the Mirabag–Sanvordem area over a proposed bandhara (barrage) project across the Zuari river. Some locals fault the plan for being pushed without proper public consultation. They fear it will harm sacred sites, livelihoods and nearby homes.
Dissatisfied with government assurances, they've held sit-ins and protests at the Lohia Maidan and, last week, even inside the Goa Legislative Assembly. Some protesters were briefly detained, as they demand written government assurances.
This led to an angry response from the ruling benches, and a continuing trading of charges over who said and did what.
Not all areas of Goa are familiar with the concept of bandharas (small check dams or barrages). In May 2024, The Goan reported that Goa had a total of 384 existing bandharas built across rivers and streams. Plans were underfoot for a hundred more, bringing the total to 484 by end 2025. (Was this attained?) The Water Resources Department sees this as an attempt to increase water storage for irrigation, drinking supply and groundwater recharge in Goa.
The goal is also to prevent saline ingress from the sea and recharge groundwater. More so in the dry season when the river flow drops. These are more common on inland stretches of rivers such as the Mandovi, Zuari and tributaries feeding agricultural belts and khazan lands. By slowing tidal inflow and retaining monsoon runoff, bandharas are seen to help protect paddy cultivation, horticulture and village water sources in low-lying estuarine zones.
But the public reception to bandharas has been mixed. Farming communities welcome bandharas for improving water security and crop reliability. Newer projects have sometimes faced resistance over concerns about ecological disruption (fish movement, sediment flow, mangroves), impacts on traditional livelihoods like fishing, submergence of land or sacred sites, and inadequate public consultation.
Bandharas, widely used and sometimes valued, also lead to protests in sensitive or densely inhabited areas.
But to shift to the wider point: were protests at the legislative assembly justified?
Guess the answer would depend whom you're asking. The authorities in charge of the functioning of the House, presiding officers and the ruling party (never mind what they do while in the Opposition), would see this as disorderly conduct. It disrupts procedure, violates rules of the House and obstructs law-making. Decorum goes for a toss.
Supporters of such a protest, even Opposition figures, and some voters, however, could see such protests as a legit last-resort tactic. More so if they feel their voices are being ignored. Such "symbolic protests" could draw public attention. Maybe these could be defended as tools of expression within a democratic culture, especially when used sparingly and tied to substantive issues.
Whatever the case, an interesting discussion caught one's eye. It came up on Facebook, and was initiated by journalist Joseph Marques. He wrote that contrary to what was being said now, there had been other such incidents in the past.
"The first pamphlet-throwing protest in the Goa Legislative Assembly took place during the Konkani language agitation on 29 July 1985. Student leaders of PSU (Progressive Students Union) and others lead by Bernadette Gomes (Bernie, now Dr Bernie), João Fernandes, and Mahendra Prabhudesai entered the visitors’ gallery and threw leaflets into the House demanding official language status for Konkani."
Shailendra Mehta, another student activist of the times, added: "That was the second instance. The first instance was much earlier in 1983 when Rodney Pereira and Prashant Naik of PSU threw leaflets in the assembly demanding declaration of the Bhatta [Commission] report that investigated the marks scandal of Francisco Sardinha. What you mentioned was in 1987. Dr Bernadette Gomes, Mahendra Prabhudesai and late Sanjay Shirodkar were part of it."
But, if you need any proof that public (and personal) memory can be weak, this too was soon contested.
Mahendra Prabhudesai, who was himself there, contested who was present. He wrote: "We entered the visitors' gallery and waited [for] the zero hour to end and then shouting slogans threw leaflets into the House demanding official status for Konkani. The delegation was not led by anyone as we entered as individuals."
The discussion continued: over protests on the Bhatta Commission Report (marks scandal), and the 1987 language protests. Vaman Borkar mentioned the anti-Vodithala capitation fee college agitation, or the protests over the Narvekar molestation scam.
In those days, the dominant Congress party in Goa saw its different factions take on one another, with Pratapsing Rane pitched against the dissidents.
Bhushan Bhave, Namshekar, Sameer Bandodkar, Narendra Sawaikar, Vishwas Satardekar, Mahesh Sonak, Vishnu Wagh ... a few of these student leaders of the yesteryears have passed away. Others have graduated into politics, or become professionals.
At the end of the day, the bottomline is this: what role does dissent play in a society? Dissent allows citizens and representatives to question authority, expose mistakes, defend minority rights and push institutions to course correct.
Allowing space for disagreement lets a society avoid the dangers of unchecked power and groupthink. This way, public policy can be made more accountable and better informed.
Peaceful dissent (through debate, protest, journalism, scholarship and civic action) also shows that loyalty to democratic values includes the freedom to challenge leaders and laws. If protected by law and exercised responsibly, dissent strengthens legitimacy, encourages transparency and keeps democratic systems responsive. Rather than complacent.
