“The Babu Jaan orations starting in March 2011 and continuing up to March 2019 were the most egregious examples of ‘verbal violence’ uttered by any head of state in this country’s history,” said former President David Granger.
The annual rants satisfy the United Nations’ definition of ‘verbal violence’ as language about others which is “discriminatory”, that is biased, bigoted or intolerant or “pejorative”, that is, contemptuous, demeaning or prejudiced. Former President David Granger expressed this opinion during his weekly programme, the Public Interest.
He pointed out that the language used in the ‘Babu Jaan’ diatribes was so disgusting and disturbing that they became the grounds for private legal action, police investigation and public revulsion.
Those events, Mr. Granger opined, set the pattern for offensive language by a High Commissioner; a Minister of Health; a Minister of Legal Affairs; a Minister of Local Government, and a Chairman of a Neighbourhood Democratic Council among other ‘feral blasts’. In the span of 12 years, he observed, vitriolic ‘verbal violence’ contaminated the public utterances of officials from Central to Local Government.
The speakers were never found guilty of a criminal offence and a few did apologise for their language. ‘Verbal violence’, nevertheless, can damage political democracy and social stability, he advised. Granger warned words can be weapons that can harm social cohesion and can ignite criminal, cultural and physical violence, as we have witnessed.
The dissemination of disinformation or fake news in the social media enables digital communication and presents unprecedented problems for society. “Hostile language can be distributed anonymously, cheaply, easily, quickly and widely with the potential of reaching a diverse audience in real-time,” the former president stated.
Granger reminded that verbal violence can fester amid allegations and actions that alienate communities, erode cooperation and create inequalities. He recommended, that on the other hand, measures aimed at the prevention of ‘verbal violence’ and the promotion of cohesion could be adopted. These include embracing inclusivity at the political and social levels; emphasising national identity; enforcing laws to reflect the complexity of the criminality of verbal violence; educating children and eradicating inequality in its worst forms everywhere.
