Every Movement Takes Its Own Path

Anindya Bhattacharya

It was observed that immediately after the meeting with the Chief Minister, when the junior doctors withdrew their hunger strike at the request of Abhaya’s parents, several political parties and personalities were visibly annoyed and disappointed. It’s difficult to ascertain exactly what they wanted from this united movement of junior doctors. However, some found in it the potential for a radical revolution, even if such hopes were unfounded, and this wasn’t entirely unclear. Some were even daydreaming that the Chief Minister would escape by helicopter from Nabanna’s rooftop, in a scene reminiscent of Bangladesh. Such immature and juvenile behaviour was overshadowing the core demands of Tilottama’s justice, gender equality, and the somewhat understated call for restructuring the healthcare system to serve public health better, which was raised by the junior doctors’ movement.

However, the events following August 9 sharpened three main directions across the state like a spearhead:

1. A spontaneous outburst of public anger triggered by the horrific murder of Abhaya, which had a profound impact on the public consciousness.

2. A broad and well-organised expression of the long-standing and intense dissatisfaction among medical students and junior doctors against the rampant corruption and malpractice in RG Kar and other government healthcare facilities.

3.   In the backdrop of these two public protests, the active involvement of citizens and various political parties.

It’s undeniable that in a government institution, where the highest level of security is expected, such an atrocious assault and murder of a working doctor places moral and political responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the government and its administration. In that sense, any expression of anger is initially directed against the ruling and governing parties. Additionally, it’s hard to ignore the reputation of the ruling party in the state for corruption, especially concerning this issue. Thus, when the midnight of August 14, the intense anger of at least a hundred thousand ordinary people, especially women, erupted in more than 350 locations across the state, the government and ruling party had no choice but to witness it helplessly. They had already read the writing on the wall and quickly realised it did not bode well for them. Meanwhile, the junior doctors of RG Kar had also organised and taken to the field, gradually being joined by junior doctors from other hospitals. The parents of the murdered doctor filed for a CBI investigation in the Calcutta High Court and were approved, and amidst all this, to attract the attention of the IMA, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court took the entire matter into suomotu cognisance.

At that time, discussions about RG Kar were heating up everywhere. Mainstream and social media were filling up with a mix of truths, half-truths and exaggerations, along with some sheer madness. People were somewhat agitated and confused. The ruling party, in an attempt to downplay its responsibility, started taking various administrative steps and party-level initiatives. However, once the investigation was handed over to the CBI, the ruling party began to withdraw, with the Chief Minister announcing that only she would speak on behalf of the government regarding RG Kar. Meanwhile, following the unprecedented success of the “Reclaim The Night” on August 14, a few other “Reclaim The Night” marches were organised here and there under the banner of “civil society” and various social and cultural organisations. However, gradually, attendance and public participation in these gatherings began to wane. Nonetheless, a few stubborn opposition political forces, with the help of certain YouTubers on social media, quickly created a so-called “student community” and called for a “Nabanna Occupation” on August 27 with the slogan “One Demand, One Goal / Resignation of the Chief Minister.” However, this fizzled out as a minor event, with a few hundred people skirmishing here and there in Kolkata, quelled by tear gas and water cannons from the police. Meanwhile, the junior doctor protesters clarified that they had no connection with the “Nabanna Occupation” initiative.

In the meantime, the junior doctors had managed to organise themselves well over these days, and following the rampage by outside miscreants at RG Kar on midnight of August 14, they launched a full-scale movement with five main demands, initiating an indefinite strike. This put the public healthcare system under a significant challenge. Doctors from all levels of society stood by their movement. Corporate and private hospitals were encouraged by this, and with public medical services in short supply due to the strike, their business grew by nearly 40% within just a few days. It is fair to acknowledge that public healthcare services in this state had seen some improvement in recent years, with various free services established. As a result, those profiting in the healthcare world had a vested interest in weakening these public systems. The junior doctors’ movement and their strike presented them with an unexpected opportunity. Consequently, corporate hospitals, the pharma lobby, and health insurance companies spared no effort to make the most of this chance. Shortages and patient harassment in government hospitals only continued to increase, with even reports emerging of patients dying due to lack of treatment.

Even in such a tense situation, despite the Supreme Court’s directive that, if junior doctors did not end their strike, the state government could impose punitive measures, the government chose the path of dialogue. After two or three failed attempts, the first round of talks was held at the Chief Minister’s residence, where almost all of the five main demands were agreed upon, except for the removal of the Health Secretary. The junior doctors ended their strike. However, they soon returned with a ten-point demand and began a hunger strike at the heart of Kolkata’s Dharmatala. This continued for a few days. Eventually, as people know, nearly all of their demands (barring one or two) were accepted, and the junior doctors ended their hunger strike and resumed work.

But the question is, after all this, did the general public (or patients) and healthcare workers gain anything from both sides? Certainly, they did. Although not all their demands were fully met, there were several significant gains worth noting. :

1) Due to the sustained movement by civil society and junior doctors, the CBI became more proactive and submitted an initial charge sheet in the Sealdah Court after 58 days.

2) Following the Supreme Court’s suomoto intervention, special task forces were formed at both the national and state levels to address the safety and security of healthcare workers. During the meeting between the Chief Minister and junior doctors on October 21, it was ensured (at the insistence of the junior doctors) that doctors would be represented in the state task force. The government has already issued guidelines regarding this.

3)  Perhaps the most important achievement, which was part of the junior doctors’ ten-point demand, was the introduction of the central referral and digital bed vacancy systems. These dual systems will not only ensure better treatment from the doctors’ side but also prevent unnecessary harassment of patients and curb admission-related corruption. The government has announced that these systems are already in pilot testing and will be implemented statewide starting November 1.

1. Another vital issue raised by the junior doctors to curb corruption in the healthcare sector was the establishment of democratic practices within colleges, meaning the election of representatives to all democratic bodies, including student unions. Both sides have reached a consensus on this, and the government has committed to completing the election process by March 2025.

2. Filling all vacant positions in healthcare services was another major demand, which the government has agreed to in principle. However, an existing legal complication regarding an OBC-related court order and a case in higher court has temporarily stalled this. Both sides are hopeful that positive action will be taken once the legal entanglement is resolved.

These achievements are by no means insignificant. For those sections of the affluent and middle classes who never set foot in public hospitals and proudly purchase healthcare services with their wealth, these demands may mean nothing. But for the common people who regularly depend on public services, these gains are invaluable. These changes (especially the third point mentioned above) are expected to further improve the public healthcare system.

However, two problems remain:

1. Regarding the “threat culture,” the Chief Minister raised questions in the October 21 meeting about the ethics and authority of the college academic council’s policy of expelling dozens of students or junior doctors. The next day, the Calcutta High Court also revoked the penalties for 51 punished students and junior doctors from RG Kar, questioning this policy and directing the state government to review and decide on it.

2. During the junior doctors’ strike, the Chief Minister accused 563 junior doctors of working in private hospitals to earn money—a claim for which a response is still awaited from the junior doctors.

Aside from these, the public’s vocal demand for justice for Abhaya, the junior doctors’ unified and strong movement for safety at work, democratisation, and quality care for patients, along with the government’s patience and flexible response (implicitly accepting its own shortcomings and choosing not to suppress the movement) have collectively helped to progress toward a partial solution to the issues.

But this does not mean everything is resolved. Movements often have their beginnings, pauses, and as well as ups and downs, and the authorities, in turn, have various ways of handling them. The question is whether the processes led by both the ruling and the ruled sides are becoming increasingly unbearable or if there is room for understanding. Those who fail to grasp this dialectical rule become true promoters of the “threat culture,” often resorting to trolling and bullying, isolating themselves socially, as they are unable to gain acceptance for their agenda and frustration, rely on hate and violence.

[Originally published in Bengali On-Line Magazine EkakMatra. Translated by Sagnik Roy]]