Law vs Ethics & Govt. vs Anna

Its very encouraging to see the kind of momentum that Anna Hazare has gathered for his fight against corruption in India. He does not have a big political base, but his voice resonates with millions of Indians (especially young Indians; I am proud of you!) . Government has tried to suppress him but popular support and his will were too strong to yield. Some people in the government have argued that Anna's approach is unconstitutional. Although technically correct, their argument is lame. Laws change with time as the society evolves. In old times (and even now in some societies) it was fine to stone people to death, but with time as the society evolved the laws (and constitutions) changed. Similarly during the British Raj it was ok (by law) to ban newspapers which encouraged people to demand for independence. People were arrested for peacefully protesting against the illegal and unethical government. It was justified by law! So laws are not written in stone, they change with time, with changes in society and popular aspirations (at least this is how it should be in a functional democracy). Thus, although it is technically unconstitutional to introduce/modify/question bills outside the parliament, it is very reasonable to have an open and broad discussion with the citizenry at large on such a critical issues as corruption. I hope the government does not go into the technicalities, but understands the significance of this issue to the common man. If it doesn't, I am pretty positive, it will later regret its decision. Common citizens' participation on this is even more important because a large fraction of the members of the parliament (MPs) are tainted in one way or another; we, the common people, are afraid that the cartel of MPs, irrespective of their affiliations, will not write a strong law that will rein them in. Anna we are with you!