The lathi charge on Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) aspirants towards the end of the year has sparked widespread outrage and highlighted a disturbing pattern in how public institutions respond to dissent and grievances. This incident, emblematic of systemic lapses, speaks volumes about the collective failure to understand the aspirations, frustrations, and legitimate concerns of the youth. It not only exposes administrative inefficiencies but also marks a bruised beginning for both the aspirants and the larger democratic fabric of the nation. For many, these examinations represent the culmination of years of hard work, dedication, and hope for a secure future. When the fairness and transparency of such a critical process are called into question, the resultant frustration is not only understandable but justified. Unfortunately, rather than engaging with the protestors and addressing their concerns through dialogue, the state machinery resorted to force, further deepening the chasm between the youth and the administration.
This incident underscores a lack of empathy and foresight among decision-makers. Protests by aspirants are not new to India. The competitive nature of examinations, coupled with limited opportunities and increasing unemployment, often turns these protests into emotional outbursts. However, the response to these demonstrations should be rooted in sensitivity and a genuine willingness to understand the plight of the aspirants. Lathi charges, while temporarily dispersing crowds, do little to address the underlying issues. Instead, they breed resentment and distrust, alienating the very demographic that forms the backbone of the country’s future.
The BPSC aspirants are not just individuals seeking employment; they represent a generation that believes in the transformative power of education and merit. Their protests reflect not only personal grievances but also broader concerns about systemic inefficiencies, corruption, and the erosion of meritocracy. By resorting to violence, the state risks sending a dangerous message – that dissent will not be tolerated and that the voices of the youth can be silenced with brute force. The ramifications of this incident extend beyond the immediate physical injuries inflicted upon the protestors. The psychological impact of state-sponsored violence can be long-lasting, fostering a sense of disillusionment and cynicism. It undermines the aspirants’ faith in the institutions meant to uplift and empower them. Moreover, such actions can deter future participation in democratic processes, as youth may begin to perceive protests and advocacy as futile endeavors.
A closer examination of the incident reveals multiple layers of administrative failure. Firstly, the delay in the examination process and the lack of transparent communication regarding the reasons behind it created a breeding ground for mistrust. In an era where information is readily accessible, aspirants expect real-time updates and clarity. The absence of such communication fuels speculation and exacerbates discontent. Secondly, the lack of a structured grievance redressal mechanism forces aspirants to take to the streets as a last resort. Had there been a robust system in place to address their concerns, the situation might not have escalated to the point where a lathi charge became the chosen course of action.
The responsibility for this collective failure does not lie solely with the police or the administrative officers who authorized the use of force. It is indicative of a broader cultural and institutional mindset that prioritizes suppression over engagement. This mindset must change if we are to foster a more inclusive and responsive governance framework. Policymakers must recognize that youth-driven protests are a vital part of any thriving democracy. Rather than viewing them as threats, these protests should be seen as opportunities to introspect, recalibrate policies, and build stronger, more resilient institutions.
To move forward, it is imperative to initiate structural reforms that address the root causes of such incidents. The first step involves creating transparent, accountable, and time-bound examination processes. This includes leveraging technology to streamline procedures, minimize delays, and provide aspirants with real-time updates. Additionally, establishing dedicated channels for aspirants to voice their concerns and seek redressal can prevent grievances from escalating into full-blown protests. Furthermore, the culture of policing must undergo a paradigm shift. Law enforcement personnel should be trained to handle protests with restraint and empathy. Non-violent crowd control measures, negotiation tactics, and community engagement should be prioritized over force. Involving civil society organizations, educators, and student leaders in conflict resolution can also bridge the communication gap between the administration and the aspirants. Political leadership has a crucial role to play in reshaping this narrative. Leaders must demonstrate a commitment to listening to the youth and addressing their concerns in a transparent manner. Public apologies, where warranted, can go a long way in healing wounds and restoring trust. Moreover, political parties must resist the temptation to politicize such incidents for short-term gains, as this only serves to deepen divisions and perpetuate cycles of violence. The media, too, bears a responsibility in shaping public perception. Rather than sensationalizing protests or reducing them to mere law-and-order issues, media outlets should delve deeper into the systemic issues that drive such movements. Highlighting the aspirations, struggles, and legitimate demands of the youth can foster greater public empathy and pressure the administration to adopt more humane approaches.
Ultimately, the lathi charge on BPSC aspirants serves as a stark reminder of the fragile relationship between the state and its citizens. It is a call to action for all stakeholders to reassess their roles and responsibilities in nurturing a more just, equitable, and compassionate society. The youth are not adversaries; they are partners in the nation-building process. Their energy, passion, and resilience must be harnessed, not quelled.
As we reflect on this incident, it is essential to recognize that a bruised beginning can also serve as a catalyst for meaningful change. If lessons are learned and corrective measures implemented, this unfortunate episode can pave the way for a future where dissent is not met with lathis, but with open arms and listening ears. In doing so, we can honour the spirit of democracy and reaffirm our collective commitment to justice, fairness, and the aspirations of our youth.
About the Writer:
Altamash Khan is a contributing journalist who completed his journalism studies at the prestigious Aligarh Muslim University. He has over half a decade of experience writing on a wide range of topics, from politics and social issues to technology and Brands. In addition to his journalism work, he works as a Public Relations and Brand Strategist, helping communicate Brand messages to the World. He would love to hear your thoughts on this issue. Leave a comment below or reach out via the social media handles.