22 July 2014
Light Bulb Climate Action (India: 2007) © Greenpeace
“What you do matters, but why you do it matters so much more.”
I am a volunteer with Greenpeace India. My friends ask me, “Why? Why did you decide to be a part of this organisation when you know that they are so controversial?” My simple answer to them is, “That is exactly why.” Greenpeace India is often targeted by the government as they believe in action instead of false propaganda. They represent a bunch of people who work tirelessly, passionately and fearlessly to achieve the objectives of the organisation: save the earth, save the living beings which inhabit the earth. They have some of the most dynamic volunteers who are not scared of repercussions. This fiery spirit drives the organisation forward often to the dismay of the government. The goals of the organisation and the government are not necessarily diverse as sustainability is the need of the hour. However, the persistent labelling of Greenpeace India as ‘anti-national’ or ‘anti-development’ by the government reflects its utter disregard for the right to dissent.
In a democracy, the right to dissent is very crucial as it helps to keep a check on the government which has been so elected by the people. This right is highly valued in the broader constitutional scheme. The Bombay High Court, in F.A. Picture International v. Central Board Of Film, AIR 2005 Bom 145, observed the following:
“Dissent is the quintessence of democracy. Hence, those who express views which are critical of prevailing social reality have a valued position in the constitutional order. History tells us that dissent in all walks of life contributes to the evolution of society. Those who question unquestioned assumptions contribute to the alteration of social norms. Democracy is founded upon respect for their courage. Any attempt by the State to clamp down on the free expression of opinion must hence be frowned upon.”
The so-called ‘confidential’ IB report was leaked into the public domain. Greenpeace India was one of the targets in this smear campaign. This report on the “concerted efforts of select foreign funded NGOs to ‘take down’ Indian development projects” casts serious aspersions on one of the most active NGOs in India. These non-governmental organisations provide a platform to the civil society to voice dissent in a reasoned and civilized manner. The report proceeds to allege that such NGOs would have a negative impact on GDP growth by 2-3 per cent by stalling, through agitation, development projects such as nuclear power plants, uranium mines, coal-fired power plants, GMOs, projects by POSCO and Vedanta, hydel projects, and “extractive industries” in the north-east.
Through the recent clamp down on the foreign and domestic accounts of the organisation, the Ministry of Home Affairs [MHA] probably wishes to shut the campaigns and operations of Greenpeace India entirely. The Delhi High Court in January had held that the MHA action to stop funds from Greenpeace International was ‘untenable’. It had ordered that Greenpeace India be allowed to access funds sent by Greenpeace International. However, despite this order, the MHA’s vehement propaganda to smear Greenpeace India continues.
Greenpeace has allegedly violated certain provisions of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 [FCRA] and its associated rules by funding the legal costs of its activists and by paying its employees, specifically, the salary of one foreign Greenpeace activist, Greg Muttitt, among others. Recently, one of the Greenpeace activists, Priya Pillai, was stopped at the Delhi airport on her way to London. She was supposed to speak on the alleged violation of forest right of tribals in the Mahan coal block area of Madhya Pradesh. During the hearing in court, the other side argued that she was stopped because her speech before a UK parliamentarian group would have created a “negative image” of India abroad and “whittled down foreign direct investments”. The government also claimed that she was involved in “anti-national activities”.
However, the Delhi High Court observed that the right of free speech and expression “necessarily includes the right to criticise and dissent”. “Criticism, by an individual, may not be palatable; even so, it cannot be muzzled. Many civil right activists believe that they have the right, as citizens, to bring to the notice of the state the incongruity in the developmental policies of the state. The state may not accept the views of the civil right activists, but that by itself, cannot be a good enough reason to do away with dissent.” The right to dissent, therefore, plays an integral role in our constitutional order. It is high time that the government realizes that its attempts to muzzle this freedom would not be successful. I am proud to be a sailor in this intrepid organisation’s ship and I hope that Greenpeace India continues to sail through the storm only to emerge victorious in the end.
Ishita Das is a volunteer with Greenpeace India