As long as there is more than one human being in a scenario, there will always be difference of opinion - whether it is a family, company or society.
Here there is a difference of opinion on whether land can be acquired for industry. There are 1.2 billion indians and there is critical mass on either side of the debate. But the law, as it stands today, allows the democratically elected govt., to make the acquisition decision.
Until now, no one protested. Every lawyer knew that this law was in the books. Every "activist" is familiar with it. But, as soon as something happens, the LAw is thrown to the winds and "Hum emotional Ho gaye hain".
So my question: Why even have a law? You are going to debate every action from step 0 anyways. Its like a constituent assembly for each and every topic. Wonder why Ambedkar even bothered to write the constition.
Having a law is meaningless unless people follow it. Sometimes it will go in your favor (i support SEZ) and other times, it will make you want to hurt someone (i could have killed manmohan when i heard he was ordering a census of my beloved indian army on muslim-non-muslim basis). But both are legal decisions taken by democratic govts.
When I can put up with the second, why can't you all put up with the first? Or is the law only for other people?
