Of killings and the aftermath

Romeo Naorem *

The daylight murder of Professor Md. Islamuddin in the premise of the highest seat of learning in the state is the latest in the senseless spree of awarding death sentence to high profile targets, with judgments passed in their kangaroo courts away from the public domain and out of the media glare, unlike certain occasions in the past when they invite the media to witness the trial of the convicts.

The immediate aftermaths were evidently imagined. With a sense of déjà vu, the JAC formed in connection to the killing had given out a communiqué that they won't accept any allegations or accusations to malign the professor, as the dead can't defend.

On expected lines, the group that carried out the murder, came out with strong allegations and unforgivable charges for which capital punishment was meted out to the professor. The drama played out in the hereafter closely resembled that of the murder of Ukhrul councilor J Khathing on the night of March 30.

The same script was enacted after the brutal murder of Dr. Kishan and his colleagues too. And well, the actors are not very different. Though in the latter case, it wasn't an organization, but rather a black sheep of the proscribed organization. They all preached the same sermon.

For the present, the onus lies with the group that carried out the act. They would have to come up with concrete evidences to substantiate their claims and allegations of the professor to the public, for better or worse (though murder can never be justified). The public is in a state of animated suspension or to use the Freudian slip, in suspended animation. The faster the truth comes out of the bag, the better.

As with every incident of this nature, this time round too, a JAC has been formed, condemnations have come in from every quarter, the war of words have begun with allegations and counter-allegations flying thick and fast, protest rallies have been organized, bandhs have been called, arrests have been made, ex-gratia has been announced, politicians, the whole lot of them, have personally consoled the bereaved family and well, the wheel will start turning again till the next episode when another poor soul meets the same fate.

But the similarity ends there. The killings similar; the post-mortems, definitely not. When the inhuman incident of Dr Kishan and his colleagues came into light, there were myriad voices of discontent, anger, fury and rage everywhere. The air rang with cries for justice.

The cyber world was abuzz with activities, decrying and denouncing the macabre deed. Angry emails were exchanged SMSes for protest rallies were passed around. Candles were lit. Donations were made for conducting demonstrations, and printing protest T-Shirts. Media houses were bombarded with emails, lambasting them for their indifference and skewed attitude in not giving due coverage and recognition to a young and bright officer who stood for honesty and integrity, and who ultimately paid with his life for the very ideals he stood for; a promising officer and a wonderful human being who gave up his life in the line of duty.

We asked them why Manjunath Shanmugam an IIML alumni and a PSU employee who was killed by the oil mafia in UP (2005) made headlines and initiated debates on national television and not our dear Dr. Kishan. We lamented that the national media embraced Manjunath as one of their own, and side-stepped us. We say that the mainstream (media) is biased.

But closer home, the way things are turning out, we need a little retrospection and introspection. We don't know what Professor Islamuddin's faults were, other than the allegations and accusations made by those who carried out the act. The allegations may be true; he may be the mastermind, ruling a fiefdom that is MU, with his coterie of the so called clique.

But as people who believe in the idea of democracy, he definitely should be given the benefit of the doubt. Now that he is no more, and no more in our midst to defend himself, it becomes all the more important for us to debate and deliberate on what his faults were and whether his faults befitted a capital punishment, which is still a much contested issue in a democracy.

But there seems to be a deliberate collective silence, other than statements and press releases made by a few select organizations. The very active yahoo forum (Manipur-Diaspora) is conspicuous by its silence on such a matter of prime importance. There are no heated arguments and debates on the topic as is the case when it involves matters concerning the interests of the members belonging to the biggest community.

The very pro-active members who propagate and breathe fire for the unity and integrity of Sanaleibak Manipur are still mum. People who have been firing salvos seem to have suddenly run out of ammunition, surprisingly. So far no candles have been lit at India Gate, or for that matter, no sit-in protests or demonstrations have been organized at the Jantar Mantar, in the protest capital of Delhi, and still no there are no signs that it will be carried out in the immediate future.

Why the loud silence? The fact of the matter is that it seems as if facts don't matter to us.

Is it because he is a pangal? Is it because he's not from greater Imphal? We asked why the three Tangkhuls kidnapped along with Dr. Kishan were released (or rescued).

Well, if the same rule applies, we need to ask why Prof. Islamuddin alone? What about the others? Will they be awarded the same punishment? Tough question, but valid nonetheless.

It's high time we start measuring perspectives and issues with the same yardstick, if we are to live in an integrated society sans divisive politics and fractured identities. At times, it's good to put ourselves in the other's shoes.

Knowing their side of the story may contribute handsomely in building bridges in times of crises. When an outfit of another community takes some actions or makes allegations against one of our kind, we immediately contest them; we take them with a pinch of salt.

In fact it's a step in the right direction. There is nothing wrong in questioning, as we are entitled to know the truth in a society that is democratic. But that must apply to everyone, keeping aside, the narrow Machiavellian attitude of Them and Us that will only breed contempt.

As the majority community, it's our obligation to initiate debates and dialogues at so trying a time as this.