Switching roles

BY A correspondent| IN Media Practice | 11/11/2009
MILITANT TO JOURNALIST Part II-- 'I am proud to be a good Indian. I am now waging a quiet revolution with my pen against the injustices of the society'.
Prannoy Roy, a former publicity secretary of ULFA, interviewed by A CORRESPONDENT.

Interview with  Prannoy Roy (38), once the District Publicity Secretary of Goalpara district of the ULFA (he 'resigned' in 1992) and now a journalist with the Assamese daily Aajir Dainik Batori.

 

 

What made you take up journalism?

 

PR: I wanted to keep the revolutionary spirit in my mind alive. I wanted to delve into the concerns of man and society. Since my school days I used to write poetry, stories and plays. I feel the pen is mightier than the sword.

 

Please tell us about your background? When did you join the ULFA?

 

PR:  I joined the outfit in 1984, when I was in class 10. I was very young, around 15 years old. The Assam agitation started in 1979 and had sparked off a fresh wave of emotional surcharge. I used to read the top writers of the period who inspired me to do something for my motherland.

 

There were times when top leaders of the ULFA -- like Anup Chetia and Ashanta Baghphukan  -- took refuge in my house, and I interacted with them. They felt that I had zeal and enthusiasm which would be an asset for the outfit, and encouraged me to join them.

 

Did you tell your parents that you were joining the outfit?

 

PR:  My father was a social worker, and was also the president of the village panchayat. He was a farmer. We were two brothers and six sisters. When I told my family, they tried to stop me initially. But I managed to convince them. I told them not to look for me, and I would get in touch whenever possible. Otherwise I was leaving for good. My mother cried. But then, many youth were joining the outfit at that time.

 

How was your stint in the outfit, and why did you leave?

 

PR:  When we joined the outfit, we were asked to fill a form and sign a bond never to leave it. Initially, I was in the organizing wing and later became the Publicity Secretary of Goalpara district. However, I soon got disillusioned with the workings of the outfit: there was no clear-cut policy about the indigenous population, or about what the common people wanted.

 

In July 1992, I 'resigned' from the outfit -- along with a few others -- over differences between the top leaders Arabinda Rajkhowa and Paresh Baruah. Rajkhowa wanted peace talks while Baruah did not want it. We wanted them to ask the common people of Assam what they wanted, and work accordingly. But that never happened.

 

But there is no provision for resigning from the outfit?

 

PR:  We did not face any problem when we left as I did not bring back anything from the outfit. I even left behind my pair of shoes, watch, and even the pen bought with ULFA's money.

 

 Did you face any problem after leaving the outfit?

 

PR:  When we came out, people started looked down on us as surrendered ULFAs (SULFA), who were notorious for their atrocities. I was uncomfortable. For one whole year, I stayed at home and read books. I started a news magazine called Bartaman in 1996. It attained popularity but we could not sustain it due to a financial crisis. I even got a job as a tourist guide in the tourism department, but I quit as I was not doing anything constructive. I did not like the work culture there.

 

Then, I started a local daily called the Simanta Prahari with two other youths (one of them a former member of the ULFA cadre) in which I was the news editor. It too closed down. Then I joined another vernacular daily called Natun Din as its correspondent. This paper also closed down. From 2005 onwards, I have been working as the Goalpara district correspondent of Aajir Dainik Batori.

 

How different is it working in the publicity wing of ULFA and as a journalist now?

 

PR:  Then we had to follow the guidelines and regulations of the outfit. At times, the democratic spirit was suppressed, and we had to do anti-people writings. Many a time our writings were censored. We were also made to write against our conscience at times. We also had a sense of power - the power of the gun. I worked diligently day and night.

 

But, you cannot work like a machine all the time. My conscience troubled me, especially after the Sanjoy Ghosh killing, and the culture of motorcycles and cars creeping into the ULFA. I felt it violated the basic ethos of why ULFA was set up in the first place.

 

Now, it is a liberating feeling working as an independent journalist. Initially, some people tried to tease me, calling me a SULFA journalist. I realized I cannot afford to make mistakes now. But I have earned my credibility as an honest, fearless and independent journalist. I can even criticize the ULFA now.

 

How important was the publicity wing of ULFA?

 

PR:  The backbone of any militant outfit is publicity. We had special training sessions, and eminent people gave us lessons on the ideological moorings of the outfit and how to maintain links with the public.

 

How do you see the media boom now?

 

PR:  Now we can send messages/information instantly. But I feel sad when the see many journalists compromising their ethics and taking part in financial transactions. I feel, in many cases, journalists have not been able to highlight the real issues of the people and depend on speculation which, in turn, misleads the public. The national media too has not been able to highlight our issues well.

 

Are you happy now?

 

PR:  I am very happy now. I am proud to be a good Indian. I am now waging a quiet revolution with my pen against the injustices of the society. I have no big ambitions, i.e., of owning a car or a big house. In fact, I have kept the surname 'Asomiya' (or Assamese) in both my son's names.

 

What would you have done had you not joined the ULFA?

 

PR:  I would have been a very good farmer. I believe in a good work culture. I am against easy money. I have a prolific farm which is my saving for my son's future. And yes, I would have continued writing.

 

Subscribe To The Newsletter
The new term for self censorship is voluntary censorship, as proposed by companies like Netflix and Hotstar. ET reports that streaming video service Amazon Prime is opposing a move by its peers to adopt a voluntary censorship code in anticipation of the Indian government coming up with its own rules. Amazon is resisting because it fears that it may alienate paying subscribers.                   

Clearly, the run to the 2019 elections is on. A journalist received a call from someone saying they were from Aajtak channel and were conducting a survey, asking whom she was going to vote for in 2019. On being told that her vote was secret, the caller assumed she wasn't going to vote for 'Modiji'. The caller, a woman, also didn't identify herself. A month or two earlier the same journalist received a call, this time from a man, asking if she was going to vote for the BSP.                 

View More