The responses to the conviction and sentencing of the former CM range from tragic to the absurd. Tragic were the lives lost either due to suicide or due to heart attacks; absurd are the various protests, unrests and damage to public properties, fasts and now forced closure of schools.
A court has found an accused guilty of corruption and has awarded punishment that while eyebrow raising has its own merits with inflation among other things but instead of appealing against the verdict these senseless acts by a few are making a mockery of one of the pillars of our democracy that is the judiciary. I am still confused on the stance of these people are they claiming that their leader is not corrupt and the judge has made an error despite all the evidence to the contrary or are they feeling that corruption should not be punished selectively?
My personal take is that this punishment is little too much a little too late. The case was filed on the earlier version who in her arrogance and ostentatious display of wealth and power organized a sickeningly outrageous wedding that caused a lot of hardships to many. This wedding for a newly discovered and subsequently disowned foster son was probably the tipping point because it alienated the people from their now beloved leader. All these years later a more experienced and a better administrator is ruling over a welfare state and ensuring that dole has endeared her to the masses.
In this scenario the spectacle of people protesting and making idiots of themselves by not articulating what exactly is their protest aimed at is quite risky and can actually backfire on the ruling party. Do people believe that by closing schools and colleges on a day a court will change its ruling? By stoning a bus or burning few more a person convicted as corrupt becomes innocent? There appears to be a good chance of the goodwill earned by the leader eroding. The absence of a strong statement restraining the party men and others from violence and other senseless acts further dents the image of someone who respects the law.
Finally what then is the take of these protesters on corruption? Is corruption then acceptable? Can the corrupt with popular support walk free? Does popular mandate supersede the law of the land? I’m puzzled.