License To Kill

By:- R.K. Birjit Singh *

License, a permit granting permission to engage in an activity that would otherwise be illegal. The main purpose of a license is to protect the public interest. A license issued by a government agency is required in order to pursue certain occupations, run certain businesses, and enjoy certain privileges.

A person must have a license to practice medicine and law; brokerage firms and restaurants and one must have a driver's license to operate an automobile on public roads. Fees for licenses are a source of revenue for the government.

The term license is also applied in property law when a landowner permits another party to use his or her land. Such licenses are personal and revocable at will; they may not be assigned to or inherited by a third party. These are some of the words and ideas that we have in our mind while talking about the term "License".

During our school days, we heard a new term "License to Kill" in Ian Fleming's (1908-1964) popular suspense-fiction character movies of James Bond, the British secret service agent 007. The suave, thrill-seeking Commander James Bond is the protagonist of 12 best-selling espionage novels written by Ian Fleming, including Casino Royale (1953), From Russia with Love (1957), Dr. No (1958), Gold finger (1959), Thunder ball (1961), and The Man with the Golden Gun, published posthumously in 1965.

Scottish actor Sean Connery and English actor Roger Moore, among others, have played the role of James Bond in several successful motion pictures based on Fleming's novels. Another film of Bond series, "License to Kill" with Timothy Dalton, followed it. It was so strange and amazing that how an individual or organization can be given license to kill or to eliminate a person. After all, it was an exciting fictions movie serial. Interestingly, it is no more a strange and amazing thing in our land where killing, taking law in their hand is a passion and fashion.

Are we living under commando junta?

Governance does not mean a mere Government. It means the framework of rules, institutions and established practices that sets limit and give incentives for the behavior of individuals, organizations. Without strong governance, the danger of conflicts could be a reality and that reality is what we are facing today.

It is very hard to define who rule this land, the Govt., the police commandos, the Torchbearers, Student's organization, Civil Societies or the underground outfits. Everybody takes law in his or her land. Unfortunately, we have the self-serving government of O. Ibobi & CO, the league of their owns.

Apunba Lup by the name, whether they are united or fragmented at last seems to be succumbed under the pressure of watch and wait tactics of Mr. Ibobi. It is well known to the people of Manipur that the soft-spoken Chief Minister of Manipur is master in buying time and well verse in nerve-racking his opponents as shown already while trying to save his chair.

It is a simple logic that why Mr. Ibobi Singh is protecting those guilty wild police commandos responsible for the unfortunate incident in Khwairamband Bazar and the top brass police officers who mislead the house of the people. It is because under their cover he is plundering the people of Manipur in the name of controlling insurgency. Our honorable Chief Minister is now became an expert in fishing in trouble water and he truly deserve to be a fool king of a blind land, "Andhere Nagar Ka Chauphat Raja".

The present development of striking an agreement with the govt. has to be done long before jeopardizing the future of our younger generations if an agreement has to be reached there by backtracking the aspiration of the people. Of course, there should be always a healthy debate, discussion and dialogue without any premeditate or prejudice with any section of the society including the government in the true spirit for solving the present turmoil and for lifting the class embargo imposed by the Apunba Lup, AMSU, MSF and KSA.

However, the talk and the agreement should be in the larger interest of the people and not for vested and self-seeking interest. It will be better to keep in mind that the police commandos kill few people at a time but by banning education will incinerate the future generation.

It is not a matter of justifying the killings by those wild commandos' but for a logical end of the problems before it is too late. It is also a matter of fact that "Right to Live" has got higher status in the hierarchy of human rights norms but without education, "Right to Live" will be meaningless.

The ground reality is that the state and non-state arms people have their own license to terminate people and the student's organization to close and open class, to beat teachers and burning books. Interestingly, in this traumatic juncture of the people, some of the arm outfits are seems to be very busy in hurling hand grenades with the license to extort money from the public. Our "Meira Paibees" and civil organizations are not far behind in taking law in their hand with the license of dictating people and opening supreme court in their premises.

Only the innocent people and poor suffer from this kind of activities and licenses. Completely unrestricted freedom of action by a number of mushrooming students and civil organizations would make impossible to sustain and grow education. Some restraints on freedom of action are necessary and inevitable. Virtually all codes of action recognize that basic limitation.

Liberty is defined in such codes as the right of individuals to act without restraint as long as their actions do not interfere with the equivalent rights of others; acts that do violate the rights of others are rejected as license.

Prolonged deprivation of our pride students from right to education will boomerang the genuine movement for the cause of "Right to Live" of the people. It will be better all of for us to remember that if we are demanding our rights, we must learn to respect the rights of the fellow citizens. This is the only way out of the present boiling stand-off.

What is to be done ?

Equity: Less disparity within and between community, not more.
Ethics: Less violation of human rights, not more.
Inclusion: Less marginalization of people and community, not more.
Human security: Less instability of societies and less vulnerability of people not, more.
Development: Less poverty and deprivation not, more.
Sustainability: Less environmental destruction, not more.
More connectivity: Connecting people through roads and telecommunication and more interaction among peoples and communities.
More community: Focusing on group access, not just individual ownership.
More capacity: Building and skill for underprivileged group for a knowledge society.
More creativity: Adapting technology to local needs and opportunities.

Also suggested reading - "The Killing Fields" - a 1984 British film drama about the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia .