Attack on Prashant Bhushan: The real shame is on us

For once the politicians had it right. Across the political spectrum. The attack on Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan on Wednesday was “reprehensible” and “barbaric”. But it isn’t just because of the hooligans of the Shri Ram Sene or the Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena or whatever they choose to call themselves. They are garden variety hooligans who think they can beat up anyone they disagree with – whether it’s a Supreme Court lawyer or women in a pub in Karnataka. What happened in Bhushan’s chambers is reprehensible for reasons that are bigger than  those goons. It is reprehensible because members of the media filmed the entire outrageous episode without trying to stop it. What were they thinking? Ratings? Scoop? Evidence? All three? As a colleague said, “This is not some wildlife documentary where you can’t interrupt the lion stalking the doe even if you feel for the doe.” Media reports don’t mention the reporters who were clearly on the scene or what action they might have tried to take. But the visuals aired on television, Bhushan’s own statements, and other eyewitness accounts only say his assistants and clerks and some junior lawyers came to his rescue. [caption id=“attachment_106656” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“It is reprehensible because members of the media filmed the entire outrageous episode without trying to stop it. What were they thinking? Ratings? Scoop? Evidence? All three? PTI”] [/caption] Media persons are always caught between their professional duty to record and document and the human duty to help and assist. Should Nick Ut have taken that famous photograph of the naked girl running down the streets of Hanoi ablaze from napalm or tried to douse the flames? (Actually Ut did take her to the hospital and ITN correspondent Chris Wain helped save her life .) But this incident – though it involved only punches and kicks — was far more egregious. This was not a stranger being beaten up on the street while the rest of us looked away, unsure about what was happening. Bhushan had just begun his interview in the closed confines of his office when his attacker walked in and slapped him. There is no visible intervention from the media persons – at least not on the clips that were aired. The effect is surreal: as though they were waiting politely for the attackers to be done. Somewhere along the line the pursuit of news and human decency came to a clash. And it seems the wrong side won. The cameras kept rolling. What happened to Bhushan is reprehensible because it occurred despite the full glare of the media. It happened because of the cameras. The assailants could have chosen to beat up Prashant Bhushan on his way home from work. Or as he walked into his house. But they chose to do it in front of the television cameras probably because they wanted to be on the evening news. They wanted to boast about it on their Facebook page and Twitter. The anti-socials wanted their 15 minutes of  social media fame. And that’s what’s really chilling about the assault.  It shows that some of us are itching to beat up this man, and then rush to claim credit for it and brag about it on social media. That violence has become a PR exercise. The attack was also “reprehensible” for another reason. Every time any of us says yes it’s “reprehensible” but then adds the caveat that politicians and civil society leaders should be careful when making statements about religion or nationalistic issues, we are in effect trying to excuse those “hot-heated deshbhakt youths.” It is reprehensible when political parties after a rare moment of unity and condemnation quickly tried to extract political mileage from it, trying to pass it off as “Congress dirty tricks” or the BJP Yuva Morcha’s hooliganism . But it’s even more puzzling when Anna Hazare says “(Bhushan) is our team member. I will ask him about the reason behind the incident. After getting the details, we will decide what to do.” Sorry, Anna_ji_, but this is one case where you don’t need to find the “reason behind the incident.” Nothing Bhushan said can merit being slapped in the face and kicked and punched in his office. The plebiscite in Kashmir might be an unpopular idea. It might even be infeasible and not supported by any political party. But it is not illegal or treasonous. (And even if it were, that is still not reason to come into someone’s office and thrash him in an act of illegal vigilantism.) In any case Bhushan is just being consistent as someone who has championed the idea of referendums on all hot-button national issues — whether it’s the Jan Lokpal or the US-India nuclear agreement. Reporters tried to press him on Kashmir at the end of his press conference and Bhushan said this was not the time to discuss that. He was right. The issue right now is not Kashmir and its hypothetical plebiscite. It’s the rapidly evaporating place for dissent where any contrary opinion must be shut up either with accusations of being a Congress-lackey or a BJP-stooge or, in this case, by actual kicks and blows. Bhushan has said the government should consider banning the Sri Ram Sene.  I am not sure that will achieve anything. The same people can give themselves another name and return to bash another lawyer another day. But more worryingly, a ban gives the rest of us a false sense of satisfaction that something has been done, that the bad apples have been thrown away. And it allows us to duck the more urgent questions raised by this shameful incident. What happened to common decency? Where is our tolerance of dissent and debate? Where is the moral shame?