Row over an award

A statement issued by Tej Hazarika, the only offspring of the legendary Bhupen Hazarika, issued late Monday evening, in connection with the Bharat Ratna award being conferred on his father, has raked up an unwelcome controversy in Assam. Some people have tried to interpret the statement in such a manner as if Tej Hazarika has refused to accept the Bharat Ratna on behalf on his late father. Some people have also resorted to making ugly, uncivilized remarks about Tej Hazarika through various social media. Going minutely through the statement, one however finds that Tej Hazarika has made only two points – (i) that he has not received any invitation so far, and hence there is nothing to reject the Bharat Ratna, and (ii) that the Centre’s move to pass the Citizenship Bill far outweighs in importance the awarding a receiving of such national recognition. Tej Hazarika, who had only a little over two weeks ago had hailed the Centre’s decision to confer the country’s highest civilian award on the bard, has also made it clear in his statement that ‘numerous media/journalists’ were asking him whether or not he would accept the Bharat Ratna on his late father’s behalf. What is most important in Tej Hazarika’s statement is, he has said that passing the Citizenship Bill would be in direct opposition to what Bhupen Hazarika believed ‘in the heart of hearts.’ Very few have recalled that Bhupen Hazarika was conferred the Padmashri even when the country was under a state of Emergency, during which the right to freedom of expression was curtailed by the then Congress regime of Indira Gandhi. Very few probably also remember that Bhupen Hazarika had praised the ‘positive’ aspects of the Emergency, but had openly criticized the throttling of free speech. The government however didn’t dare to touch him, and he too gladly accepted the Padmashri. Likewise, Birendra Kumar Bhattacharyya was given the Jnanpith award in the middle of the Assam agitation, and that too when he and Bhupen Hazarika and Nirmalprabha Bordoloi and others were campaigning for the AASU-led agitation. The controversy around Tej Hazarika’s statement, and attempts to misinterpret it, are thus unnecessary and meaningless.