Natural Justice

ENOUGH ANGST HAS been expressed about the murder of Atiq Ahmed and his brother in Uttar Pradesh a fortnight ago, and what’s quite usual is the way people have taken a stand on the issue. From many woke liberals, hypocrites to boot, expressing their anguish at this extra-judicial killing to irresponsible Western media referring to this gangster as a politician: one has seen it all. And the playbook is always the same. Be on the side of the criminal and ignore the anguish he has caused to society at large, aided and abetted by some political dispensation or the other. And you can predict the reaction to these killings in a manner that is both consistent and sad. The oft-repeated argument is that our society is governed by a judicial system that cannot condone this kind of murder. Of course, we cannot and we should not.

But shouldn’t there be a more meaningful debate: a debate on the patronage the likes of Atiq receive; the free run they have even when in prison; the manner in which they enter India’s Parliament and cock a snook at the judicial system we have? Atiq played the system because the system allowed him to. And this system will encourage more Atiqs unless we make systemic changes both to our criminal justice system as also to our polity. Politicians need these criminals for their politics, but at whose cost? Ours. The common man and woman are their target as also their victim, and shouldn’t these pseudo-liberals express some level of remorse for their plight? In many ways, I am delighted with what happened to Atiq as also to his brother and his son. To say that his son was young is the most illogical thing one has heard. So, let his age be the reason for forgiving him for his dastardly crimes. Should we give that scoundrel a free pass because he was only 19 when he was killed in an encounter?

It may seem harsh but the truth of the matter is that in our country if you were to rely on the judicial system for justice, you’d spend a lifetime waiting. Indians have been unable to learn the difference between niti and nyaya. The process is not what should excite us: what should concern us is the fairness of the justice system and the swiftness with which that justice is dispensed. This is no longer the India where people can get away, and I am glad that Yogi Adityanath thinks differently. The states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar have been deprived of development precisely because these were banana states as far as law and order was concerned. Which industrialist would want to invest in a state where extortion was the order of the day? And as chief minister, Yogi is accountable to the people of the state and not someone who should be pandering to elements such as Atiq. I don’t know if his death will be a deterrent: we will need more Atiqs to be snuffed out and, hopefully, within the ambit of the law, but that is asking for the moon given how lethargic our justice system is.

We will need to treat Atiq’s death as a wake-up call for those very political parties who either supported him or harboured him. They, too, have the blood of innocents on their hands. They, too, need to be hauled over the coals of justice. They cannot walk away from this unscathed.

And for all the champions of liberalism, let there be a message: you can’t be selective about human rights—the rights of those that Atiq killed are even more important than those of this criminal and many like him. We can’t outrage over criminality by being on the wrong side of the law.

My belief is there comes a time in every societal evolution when this kind of cleansing is needed. And at times, the cleansing can’t be within the ambit of society-approved norms since the perpetrators of crimes, such as the ones that Atiq committed, were in any case not ordinary.

Brutality at times needs to be met with brutality.

Atiq AhmedcrimejudiciarykillingspoliticsUttar Pradesh