There’s no doubt that the Patidars’ quota agitation in Gujarat was a violent one, that led to property destruction and the deaths of policemen and others. The worst was the stone-throwing attacks on policemen after the arrest of Andolan leader Hardik Patel. Of greater concern is this powerful community’s assault on banks, with crores of rupees being withdrawn, that led to a run on several banks in one area.
But despite all this chaos, one wonders if the Gujarat government ban on mobile Internet services, that ranged from 24 hours to one week in Rajkot’s case, was justified? A ban on mobile Internet services is a double-edge weapon. While it may help the government control the violence (but one still has to check if it did), on the other it badly hinders the operation of e-commerce sites. One needs to weigh the violence against the alleged loss of business.
The government reportedly withdrew the ban on Sunday afternoon as it had indicated but it would be worthwhile to consider for the future whether the ban served its objective and therefore outweighs the fears of the strong business community about the damage it would do to Gujarat’s image as an attractive investment destination.
These fears shouldn’t be dismissed outright: they raise questions on whether the government had considered all options in handling the situation, which had been allowed to escalate for several days. Could it not have declared prohibitory orders under Section 144 CrPC or even a curfew in the affected areas? It is of course for law and order agencies to ponder: the mobile Internet ban was certainly legal, but was it productive? Did it meet its objective?
