Despite deteriorating health and appeals from multiple quarters, Sonam Wangchuk has refused to end his hunger strike. Amid legal pleas that seek to hospitalise and force-feed him, the activist has maintained that ending the agitation without a response from the Union government would undermine the purpose of the protest. He has urged people to participate in the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)’s proposed Chalo Sansad march to Parliament on July 20, and called on educational institutions to dedicate that day for experiential education. Wangchuk’s fast signifies more than an act of defiance; it is more than an attempt to exert pressure on Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan to resign over the mismanagement of examinations and paper leaks. It strikes one as an assertion of moral resolve, seeking accountability and integrity in public life and office.

Wangchuk’s fast has drawn nationwide attention because of the moral authority he enjoys and his reputation as a non-partisan figure above political affiliations. The government has consistently attempted to project him as an Opposition proxy whenever he has voiced his opinion on social or developmental issues. However, these accusations have failed to diminish his credibility. In a broader sense, every moral or social act is political. Wangchuk’s agitation has revived a form of politics that has been losing ground in the recent past. It is the first major strike with a national resonance since the demonstrations against the Citizenship [Amendment] Act (CAA). It has also invited comparisons with Anna Hazare’s 2011 fast. However, given the massive shifts in the country’s socio-political landscape over the past decade, comparisons in terms of outcomes can be unwieldy.

While the reasons to protest have not come down, the space for expressing such dissent has been steadily shrinking. This shift can be traced to a government that has been insensitive, and even hostile, to assertions of free, democratic expression. This raises a crucial question: is satyagraha still a viable tool of protest against an indifferent dispensation? Wangchuk may be providing the answer here. An act of satyagraha that transcends the individual to address a broader social or moral failing can never be futile. Fasting was also a self-cleansing act for Mahatma Gandhi, who remained unconcerned if a protest failed to meet its immediate objective. Every principled action that moves minds and hearts has a social utility. Even in the face of a hostile, unresponsive system, such action can serve as proof that society retains an alive and resilient conscience. (Source: DH)