Editor,
The recent events in Shillong have left many citizens deeply disturbed—not merely because of the violence and destruction witnessed on the streets, but because of what such incidents increasingly suggest about our collective tolerance towards lawlessness. The violence during the black-flag motorcycle rally on August 19, reportedly accompanied by attacks on vehicles and vandalism, culminated in the desecration of statues of two of India’s most revered personalities—Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and Swami Vivekananda—at RR Colony, Rynjah.
The vandalisation of these memorials cannot be dismissed as an ordinary act of youthful excess or mob behaviour. Netaji represents sacrifice, courage and India’s struggle for freedom, while Swami Vivekananda symbolises intellectual awakening, self-respect and the empowerment of youth. Neither belongs to a particular community, region or linguistic group. Their humiliation is, therefore, an assault on symbols belonging to the collective consciousness of India.
The fundamental question is how such an incident could take place in a city under the watch of a functioning administration and law-enforcement machinery. A large motorcycle rally does not materialise out of thin air. Reports of participants wearing masks and moving around on motorcycles with obscured registration numbers should have been sufficient cause for heightened vigilance. The right to protest is unquestionably democratic and constitutionally protected. But vandalism, intimidation and violence are not. A protest forfeits its moral legitimacy the moment it leaves behind damaged property, frightened citizens and desecrated national symbols.
What is equally worrying is the recurring perception that violent street mobilisation in Meghalaya often fails to invite the kind of deterrent action necessary to prevent repetition. Governments may change, but the ordinary citizen continues to ask the same question: why do those who take the law into their own hands appear to possess such confidence that consequences will either be delayed, diluted or forgotten altogether? No organisation, irrespective of its social influence or political standing, can be allowed to believe that its popularity places it above the Constitution.
Shillong has historically been a cosmopolitan city built by generations of Khasi, Jaintia, Garo, Bengali, Nepali, Assamese, Punjabi, Bihari, Marwari and other communities. This pluralistic character is one of the city’s greatest strengths. Yet, incidents of intimidation and violence create a psychological climate far more damaging than the immediate destruction of property. They create fear, particularly among vulnerable communities, and gradually erode confidence in the State’s ability to guarantee equal protection to every lawful resident.
The subsequent intervention of the Chief Minister and the sanctioning of funds for restoration of the damaged memorials are welcome steps. But restoration cannot be confused with justice. Money can repair a damaged statue; it cannot repair public confidence unless those responsible are identified and brought before the law. The investigation must answer uncomfortable questions—not merely identify a few individuals who may have physically committed the vandalism, but examine the entire chain of events, including planning, policing, supervision and any possible instigation or facilitation.
There must also be no temptation towards retaliation. The destruction of one community’s revered symbols cannot justify attacks on personalities or icons revered by another. That would only push society into a dangerous and endless cycle of hatred. The answer to vandalism must never be counter-vandalism. It must be the impartial and uncompromising enforcement of the law.
Shillong deserves better than periodic eruptions of street violence followed by condemnation, temporary outrage and eventual silence. Meghalaya’s indigenous communities deserve security and respect, just as every other lawful resident deserves equal constitutional protection. The future of the State cannot be built upon intimidation or the selective display of power on the streets. It must rest upon democratic dialogue, mutual respect and the supremacy of the rule of law.
The events of August 19 must not become another forgotten chapter in Shillong’s troubled law-and-order history. They should become a turning point. The message must be loud and unmistakable: peaceful protest is a democratic right, but violence is a crime; influence does not confer immunity; and no individual or organisation is above the Constitution of India.
Ranjit Bose
Bivar Road
Shillong
