The death of Sanjoy Ghose
Who is to blame?
Joshomyee Devi

To begin with, we humbly seek forgiveness from Sanjoy, Sumita and mankind at large.
And yet, while we as a nation hang our heads in shame —— a shame that is even deeper than this stifling sense of anguish and sorrow eating into us —— we express our gratitude and thanks to you, Sanjoy. For, through your supreme sacrifice, you helped us to realise the depth of our degeneration.

I have not yet condoled Sanjoy's reported death. It is still difficult to reconcile with the fact that we not just lost, but eliminated a person like Sanjoy. The entire circumstances of this loss, and the shamelessly unethical and callous drama that followed, for one whole month, lays bare before us the degree of our own degeneration. As an Assamese, as one who has always identified with Assam and the North-East, advocating its cause in any and every platform that one happens across; and further, as one who, despite all her differences of opinion and opposition to the path of violence, has remained empathetically and humanely concerned for the ULFA, argued for a scientific and human approach to understanding the whole ULFA question, and always stood by its cause on the matter of human rights and State terrorism, I now feel responsible, in a sense.

“You know, I have always wanted to come and work in the North-East....., and my whole schooling and work experience of the past has been like as if I am training myself for my work in the North-East” ——— “why so?” ———

“This region seems to have suffered so much pain.... a lot needs to be done.... .” This is part of a conversation between Sanjoy and myself one day in late 1994, when he had decided to move over to the North-East for doing social work, and in this two-month long trip, he was visiting the states of the North-East jostling around in blueline buses and public transport through the interior hills and the plains and held informal as well as round-table consultations with a cross section of society so as to gain an insight into the basic concerns and arrive at a broad consensus. While the consultative 'issue paper' he was to prepare on the basis of this entire experience was expected to identify the immediate areas/approach of social engineering interventions, his other objectives were to consult people prior to his shifting to the North-East and tentatively select some areas for starting his work.

Soon after his visit to the North-East, when I first came to know Sanjoy, I met him again in a national level consultation of the UNDP concerning the World Summit for Social Development (WSSD) at Delhi in February 1995. I was arguing some points focusing on some of the lapses and government excesses in the North-East. A clear firm voice had briefly but very effectively intervened to say how he was in Imphal on January 26 that year when there was a bandh, and “not a blade of grass had moved, but the evening news telecast on the national TV went about declaring how wholeheartedly the people of Imphal celebrated the occasion.” Secretly, I was grateful for this expression of solidarity, and was glad to find a spokesperson from outside our region (who are very few) who would effectively advocate our cause on a wider platform.

One had heard about this person because of his outstanding work through the URMUL trust in the desert areas of northern Rajasthan, and meeting him in person was an interesting experience. His determination, hard work, systematic approach, and sensitive comprehension of some of the basic problems and issues of our region had impressed me; and I was naturally glad to see a person of his calibre work here. The reasons for this were as follows.

I am one of those who have ample faith in the NGO movement and the people's sector, and believe this to be a powerful option that can bring sustained change in favour of the marginalised and oppressed. All over the world, the NGOs/voluntary sector has made outstanding achievements. The people's sector and civil society at large are at present a formidable force nationally as well as at the international levels, with a pivotal role in the policy planning as well as at the implementation level, and the coming decades are likely to see revolutionary changes in bringing in NGOs and the gender movement more and more into the centre-stage of all developmental initiatives and policy issues. Several Indian and other third world experiments in the NGOs/people's sectors have already set up world models and these are being replicated. However, in respect of our North-East, although we have many NGOs/voluntary organisations (VOs) doing very good work in their respective areas, not many are able to comprehend and cope up with the macro issues of today's fast changing global and national scenario, nor do we have many professional NGOs/VO activist bringing the benefits of the recent national and global changes to this movement. We hoped that Sanjoy Ghose's coming to our midst and working here, while helping the areas/people where he was to work, would facilitate the emergence and growth of an entirely new brand of social activism in this region. The fact that, with his wide experience and connections, he would be able to bring in a whole national and international network of organisational funding, media and allied support to the North-East seemed to be the added lucratives.

That Sanjoy's intention in coming to work in Majuli had come under serious suspicion was unfortunate. However, considering, among other things, the scale, speed, systematically planned and strategised way of operation, and the overwhelming attention of international/national funding and organisational support that he could muster all of a sudden, it was perhaps not very surprising if eyebrows were raised and doubts emerged. The doubts were further fuelled by the fact that neither the establishment nor many of the national/international philanthropic organisations were known to be so generously concerned about Assam and North-East here before. But then, when doubts are legitimate there are democratic ways of ascertaining facts and securing justice.

On the other hand, the kidnapping of Sanjoy and the gory treatment reportedly meted out to him render the allegations against him absolutely doubtful; and the subsequent events bring utter shame to everyone, not to speak of the ones who uphold and advocate human rights. We have also heard questions being raised, such as, “so many social workers are working for so long; if there is no reason (such as the allegation of Sanjoy being a RAW agent), then why is it that AVARD, NE Sanjoy had been singled out like this?” While acknowledging the simple rationality of such a question, we shall not attempt to have a discussion on this issue because this is not the place or time to do so. Briefly, while most NGOs/VOs engage in rehabilitative and social relief-like activities, the kind of social work Sanjoy was leading is generally known as 'direct action' that target structures, and through a process of confidence and capacity building, empowers people to break out of oppressive political, economic and social structures and march towards self-reliance in its total sense.

All over the world, NGOs/VOs face strong opposition and even violence at times from various interests that are jeopardised when NGO's engage in capacity building. But such opposition to 'direct activism' tends to be much stronger and organised precisely because its inherent threats to the established systems (of exploitation/corruption) are so much more potent.

The entire episode of Sanjoy's reported demise, while earning us absolute shame and discredit as a nation, and here I am leaving aside the vast loss it has brought to the cause of humanity at large, raises serious questions regarding the course we are headed for, as a nation. For the fact that Sanjoy could be kidnapped so early and reportedly killed, the Government of Assam as well as the local administration must be held largely responsible, and the government must own up to its failures and responsibility