Douglas Mendes
Whatever you might think of the justification for Wayne Kublalsingh's decision to starve himself to near death, it is impossible not to take note of the depth of his conviction that his cause is right and just.It will take some time for him to expire as his body turns in on itself and extracts much-needed energy from his muscles and vital organs. From what we know of his history, he has led a fairly successful and fulfilling existence and has not been subjected to any particular state oppression or injustice.
Nor has he been made to endure personal suffering or indignity by state officials.He can surely therefore only sustain his resolve not to give in to the all-too-human instinct to save his own life because he believes deeply that his cause is more important that life itself.Aside from immediate family and siblings, I am hard-pressed to envisage any circumstance under which I would be prepared to give my own life, far less to starve myself to death.
Would any of us have been prepared to stage a hunger strike over the Section 34 debacle, even as much as we were moved to march in great numbers up and down the streets of Port-of-Spain?There is no doubting the power and significance of a hunger strike. Quite apart from drawing rapt attention to the issues over which the strike is staged, its significance as a tool of protest and a catalyst for change lies in its ability to transform the body of the hunger striker into the embodiment of state oppression.
When Mahatma Gandhi threatened to starve himself to death in opposition to British rule, British colonial oppression became personified, as it were, in the slow death which the revered Gandhi was experiencing. British oppression was mirrored in his emaciated face. His death, even though at his own hands, would have been seen to have occurred at the hands of the British by their continued insistence on colonial rule. It would have been as if the British had carried out his execution themselves.
It seems to me, though, that the hunger strike can only have that symbolic effect and power where it is clear that it is in response to some undoubted act of state oppression. The death by voluntary starvation of a prisoner of conscience, for example, can be easily attributed to the state's continued incarceration of people because of their political views.
The state's persistence in the act of injustice which the hunger striker is prepared to give his life to redress becomes the instrument of the hunger striker's demise, even though it is his own refusal to eat which is putting his body in immediate danger.
But where a hunger strike is staged against state activity which is an example of the normal delivery of services expected of a government, and which is carried out within the confines of the law, it is difficult to attribute responsibility to the state for the death of the hunger striker.
The highway which Wayne would have re-directed will disrupt communities and cause environmental damage to a lagoon which appears to have some special environmental significance. These are no doubt consequences of importance and are worthy of sustained protest. They may even justify the loss of votes at an election.
But the disruption of communities and environmental degradation is one of the normal, if regrettable, by-products of progress. Reasonable people can differ reasonably on whether the building of a highway is more important than the disruption to people's lives or the damage to the environment which it will cause.
A hunger strike is an act of desperation. It is embarked upon in the face of an injustice for which there is no apparent redress. People give their lives for a cause when there appears not to be any other viable alternative.Should the highway be built, the communities standing in its way will be relocated, nature will correct itself, and life will go on. Should Wayne give his life for this cause, it would be difficult to say that it is the Government that killed him.
It is this disconnect which the Government is banking on.If Wayne dies, the protest will come to an end on his death. That is the nature of a hunger strike. The Government's calculation is that the issue will soon be forgotten and the communities which will benefit from the extension of the highway will support it in the next election.
But this does not mean that Wayne's hunger strike has so far been a waste of time. For one, it has managed to smoke out the inhumanity of whoever drafted that insensitive letter which the Chief State Solicitor felt moved to disown. It has focused our attention on environmental issues and the price we must pay for progress.
It has brought to the fore the need for constant consultation with communities in the effecting of change. Wayne has brought together a number of well-wishers and activists in a collective expression of community appreciation and regard. He has already achieved quite a bit.
For my part, then, I would much prefer if Wayne chooses to live to fight another day. His obvious humanity and passion will otherwise be missed. There are other pressing causes which stand to benefit from his unique blend of determination and vision.