2022-09-11
What happened on 9 May was a tragedy; a tragedy that the entire nation should genuinely mourn. Such genuine mourning has the capacity to generate reflections that could transform the thinking and practices of all those concerned about how to avoid such tragedies in the future.
Such genuine forms of mourning are very different to manipulations of a tragedy or a part of a tragedy in order to achieve petty ends, whether these ends are political or otherwise.
It is quite natural for MPs to commemorate the brutal murder of one of their colleagues. This murder is a tragedy that should not have happened, and should not have been allowed to happen. That was the very reason why the reflections conveyed through the speeches in the Parliament should have been of a somber and sober nature with the aim of trying to lead the thinking within the nation about the situation that has arisen in the country with the view to bring about a certain understanding about the ways by which such tragedies should be dealt with in a manner so that such situations could be avoided in the future.
However, instead of such sober observations, what happened by way of the speeches of most of the participants in that debate was an attempt to unleash further violence, and also to encourage greater repression within the country. The target of most of these speeches was not the particular incident, but the protest that is taking place throughout the country for many reasons. Making use of a tragedy in order to unleash further violence could in no way be called mourning. It is another political event used for limited political purposes which will further add to the tragedy rather than resolving the underlying issues.