STAND UP, DON'T BOW! STAND UP, DON'T BOW!

  Ever since I started the Observer in 1986 I maintained a safe distance from politicians and even with Chamling this approach remained unchanged. I never wanted to be a politician; I always wanted to be a journalist ever since I took up this profession in 1983. I always loved and enjoyed being a journalist and this helped me and others around me know who I was and where I was heading. The Press – at best – can only give a helping hand in shaping society; it is the politicians and public figures who have to take the lead.

   The support and criticism that I have given to prominent politicians in the State, including Bhandari and Chamling, ever since my joining the Fourth Estate, are on record for public scrutiny. While I was soft on the Chamling Government and the Chief Minister, particularly during the first tenure, it is on record that the Observer and my other publications, Himalayan Guardian, Bhoomiputra and Hill People, took on the government on issues ranging from corruption, protection of locals, political rights of bonafide Sikkimese, controversial hydel projects, transparency, accountability in public life etc. We were also hard on the government on issues relating to scaling of the summit of Kanchenjunga, defilement of Gurudongma lake and irregularities at the world-renowned Namgyal Institute of Tibetology.  These issues, which focused on preservation of the natural and cultural heritage of the State, greatly concerned the minority Bhutia-Lepcha tribals in particular. 

   By the end of Chamling’s first tenure there was a growing disillusionment and resentment among the minority Bhutia-Lepchas, who were almost convinced that Chamling was no better than Bhandari.  Instead of taking the lead and catering to the innermost aspirations of the people the government acted only when pressure was exerted on it to make the right moves. Both the Rathongchu and Gurudongmar issues dragged on for far too long as the government – for  obvious reasons - remained unresponsive for a long time until it was forced to yield to the demands of the people.

   Activists who opposed the Rathongchu hydel project in 1995 displayed tremendous zeal, determination and skill in dealing with diverse situations till its objective of forcing the government to scrap the project was realized. The anti-project movement also made the people realize how hollow Chamling’s claim of restoration of freedom and democracy in the State sounded. Fear may have been partially lifted but what is the use of such kind of freedom if governments and their elected representatives remain unresponsive and at times suppressive of the democratic urges and aspirations of the people.

   And so after two and half years of watching and waiting I made my tryst with destiny. I chose to move out from my narrow confines in the Fourth Estate and aspired to do something beyond the limitations imposed by my profession. The main reason for this was that I had lost faith in Chamling – not necessarily in his integrity but on his ability to perform. There is, however, a thin line between integrity and ability and in the case of Chamling at that point of time it was a fine blend of the two.

   “I do not want to be confined to the limitations imposed on me within the media circle. I need a wider space to live and breathe free,” I wrote under the caption, “Farewell, Fourth Estate” in On My Own column in the Observer on November 9, 1996, two years after the formation of the SDF Government.

   In the article I said: “The Press is not just newspapers, machines and journalists. The Fourth Estate is one of the major pillars of democracy. Those who genuinely accept this view will give due respect to the Press in a democracy; those who do not share this view will either pay lip-services to Press freedom or make attempts to suppress it.  Despite unfavourable circumstances in the past one and half decades I have always tried to make sincere attempts towards ensuring that the democratic process is respected in the State. No one in their right senses can deny this. It is all a part of history now. I now feel the need to step out once more and reach out to the people in my own way.”

 There were chiefly two reasons for quitting the Press: firstly, the government failed to cater to the genuine needs of mediapersons in the State; secondly, it would be futile for me to stay in the Press and hope for the best when I had great doubts on the capability and credibility of those who claim to champion Press Freedom. The local media had made tremendous contributions to enable pro-democracy leaders and activists to create a better and more congenial atmosphere for freedom and democracy to thrive in the State. However, their contribution was not acknowledged and appreciated in the true spirit. “Merely stating that the Press is free will not suffice if conditions that enable the media to move freely and speedily do not exist,” I wrote in the column.

   “As a journalist I had kept the flag of the Fourth Estate flying high in the State for nearly a decade and half despite trying circumstances. This indeed was a tremendous achievement and I was proud of it. And now I have to move on and redefine my place in society with a view to making my own contribution in the political and social life of the people of Sikkim,” I added.

   The switchover from Press to politics was to be a gradual process but I had to make my stand clear to myself and to the people. Though I continued to edit the Observer, which was owned by me, I resigned from the UNI (United News of India) and the Statesman as their correspondent in the State. I also quit from the post of General Secretary of the Federation of North East Journalists (FNEJ), which was formed by some of my media colleagues and myself in December 1995.

   Quitting the profession that I loved dearly and worked hard for so long was not an easy thing but I had to do what I had to do. I felt that it was not right for me to be associated with the national media after I had decided to call it quits. Professionally, it was the right decision. However, it was indeed very difficult to say goodbye to the national media with whom I had nearly a decade and half’s close association.

   My early retirement from active journalism enabled me to revive the Inner Circle of Sikkim (ICS) and the Organisation of Sikkimese Unity (OSU). The decision to make the ICS as the think-tank of the OSU was made public in December 1996. The OSU wasn’t exactly a political party, whose chief objective is to contest elections. Its main objective was political and economic empowerment of the people through restoration of the political rights of the Sikkimese people as enshrined in Article 371F of the Constitution. On the issue of contesting elections the OSU’s stand was very clear.  Unless Assembly seats were restored to the three ethnic communities in Sikkim the OSU would not participate in the electoral process.

   The fact that I temporarily returned to the media for a brief while later on is another story which will be dealt later. But as I look back the turning point of my decision to quit the Press was taken in mid-1996. From this period onwards my goal as well as my heart were elsewhere.