Those who break the mirror for catching the bribe
text_fields
In a departure from previous Legislative Assembly elections, the conclusion of the polls in Kerala has witnessed a surge in hate campaigns orchestrated by followers of various political fronts and leaders, targeting certain media houses and journalists. In the first place, this onslaught, spanning both online and offline platforms, is profoundly inconsistent with the democratic maturity that Kerala has long prided itself on upholding.
The purchase of votes is nothing less than a subversion of the very ideals of democracy. Across various corners of the nation, we witness this sabotage unfolding, whether through the buying of votes or the horse-trading of MLAs to manufacture a majority in the houses. Kerala has long believed with all pride that they are a people who say “no” to such tendencies. Indeed, Kerala's citizenry once demonstrated commendable vigilance by ousting an apolitical party, backed by a commercial conglomerate, from local governance after it attempted to swindle votes with the lure of supermarket discount cards. Yet, amidst such a legacy, certain individuals have emerged in this election, donning the mantle of candidates, driven by the delusion that votes can be harvested through cold cash. Perhaps acting upon the counsel of ‘grand’ leaders at the Centre, who advocate victory by any unholy means, these figures have taken to the streets; having followed a trail of blatant communal polarisation, they now seek out voters with food kits and bundles of currency in hand.
Had the Election Commission been graced with individuals mindful of the dignity of their office and the sanctity of constitutional values, several candidates would have faced disqualification on the grounds of communal campaigning alone. It appears that the state commission merely emulated the passiveness of the central body, which exhibited a reluctance to restrain those peddling rank communalism. Even when kits designed to solicit votes were seized, those orchestrating the scheme remained untouched; such impunity probably emboldened candidates to distribute cash and other gratifications with redoubled audacity. In any case, the BJP candidate in the Palakkad constituency was caught explicitly on camera while distributing money. The task that ought to have been performed by the Election Commission, which patrolled the state in camera-mounted vehicles to detect breaches of the Model Code of Conduct, was instead carried out by others, and the footage was duly made available to the press. Consequently, the media, acting in their capacity as the sentinels of democracy, reported the matter with one voice.
Incensed by these revelations, the candidate and her entourage have unleashed severe threats against Sajid Ajmal, the MediaOne reporter who first broke the story. They seem intent on shattering the very “mirror”—the journalist—that reflected their bribery episode in Kannadi village. This appears to be a calculated endeavour to replicate the North Indian Sangh Parivar model in Kerala, a style defined by the fabrication of cases and physical intimidation of those who dare to report unpalatable truths. Such a manoeuvre must be resisted by the collective might of civil society and the institutions of law and justice. In another instance, the coordinated cyber-attacks directed at journalist Smrithi Paruthickad, following her critique of the ruling front’s conduct during a televised debate, have transgressed all bounds of decency. It is an irony that those who spend the daylight hours of the election disseminating posts and slogans regarding the safety of women should, by nightfall, resort to hurling slanders against a woman.
Voices will continue rising from the floors of news studios, and reports will fill the columns of newspapers, some in favour of government policies, others in staunch opposition. Freedom of expression is no one’s largesse; it is a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of democratic India. The leaders of the ruling front must impress upon their rank and file that they ought not to become a localised version of the Sangh Parivar’s obsession: the dogmatic insistence that only encomiums of the establishment be broadcast. Nor are activists of the opposition front or religious organisations exempt from this reproach. During this very election season, we witnessed a candidate, having defected to the UDF camp, respond with a total lack of civility to a journalist who posed an unsettling question. The media is neither infallible nor beyond criticism. However, the practice of ganging up to assault media houses and journalists not liked by them is a trend that cannot be tolerated, regardless of its source.