Goa's forgotten third force: Antonio A. Bruto da Costa (1902-1984) By Constantino Xavier
This was no usual freedom fighter. He got into a fistfight with the Governor General of the State of Portuguese India. He told off Salazar in person for having downgraded Goa from an autonomous overseas province to a colonial "object of possession". After 1961, he accused Nehru of having broken his promise to abstain from violence and thus usurped Goans' "natural right to a plebiscite" and "full sovereignty". As a lawyer, he took up cases that many dared to even speak about, whether it meant defending the alleged "terrorist" Srinivassa Dormu Achari who was tortured into confession by a Portuguese police agent (1956) or representing Fr. Chico Monteiro and his refusal to accept Indian citizenship, which went all the way to Delhi's Supreme Court (1962-1969). Antpnio Anastasio Bruto da Costa (1902-1984) dedicated his life to a cause forgotten by both Indian and Portuguese historiographies. A new volume, edited by his son Mario Bruto da Costa (Goa: a terceira corrente, 2013) now makes several of his writings public, albeit still in Portuguese. They bring to light a third force that, prior to 1961, refused both Portuguese colonialism and Indian nationalism by fighting for autonomy and possibly also independence. Together with Antonio Colaço and dozens of others, Bruto da Costa led a group also known as the 'Círculo de Margao'. He denounced Portuguese and Indian nationalisms for fighting over Goa as if it was a "golden leaf" trophy, which violated what he understood to be his homeland's ("patria") distinct cultural, political and legal personality since 1510. His "alternative solution" strived to maintain "the integrity of our state, as our little country seeks to preserve its structure formed through four centuries of deep and mutual penetration by two dynamic civilizations." His papers focus on his battle against Salazar's authoritarian Estado Novo regime and its infamous "Acto Colonial" (1930) through which Goan civil servants were systematically replaced by their metropolitan White colleagues in an attempt to "renationalize" Goa, and Goans downgraded from full citizens to the racial categories of "assimilated" or "indigenous". This abrogated the unprecedented civic liberties and local autonomy that Goans had enjoyed since the Republican Revolution of 1910. Bruto da Costa argued that more, not less autonomy was Lisbon's only option to quell local discontent and counter India's rising propaganda and attractiveness among Goans. His concrete proposals after 1946 included several draft statutes, or special constitutions for the Portuguese State of India, similar to the Government of India Act of 1935, which proposed universal voting rights for all adult citizens. The ultimate objective was to transform Goa into a self-governing polity by recovering and expanding the autonomous and elected nature of its Legislative Council. As a proud lawyer, he chose to oppose the regime from within, which earned him criticism from all sides. Pro-India activists denounced him as a Salazar ploy to divide the freedom struggle. Portugal loyalists accused him of being unpatriotic and feeding off Nehru’s hand. And the secret police blacklisted him as an "active element against the present Portuguese political regime" and denied him a visa to travel to Bombay for a surgery that could have saved his sight. His only response was that he stood for "a Goan Goa... for which we do not require Nehru's authorization, and which solely depends on unity among Goans". His last attempt, in 1959, came as a telegram to Portugal's President, requesting him to accept the United Kingdom's offer to mediate between Lisbon and Delhi, and calling for a possible referendum. But it was all too late. Many of his fellow partisans that had subscribed earlier petitions in 1952 and 1954 (listed in the book, a third of which Hindus) had by now been either intimidated into silence by the police, lost hope, or joined pro-India organizations. [See link at the end for full list of signatories] In early December 1961, a last-minute attempt by a few military officials to plan a coup and declare independence failed. A few weeks later, Goans became Indians by conquest and decree. The third force had been eliminated both by Salazar and Nehru, but for Bruto da Costa freedom now felt farther than ever. Despite seeing his third force blocked by Salazar's Estado Novo and the military action of 1961, Adv. António A Bruto da Costa stayed true to his cause, filing letters to Nehru, Mario Soares, and Indira Gandhi. His refusal to pragmatically move on to work within democratic India even lead to a split with his long-time companion, Dr. Antonio Colaco, among the territory's first two representative in the Lok Sabha. What drove Bruto da Costa with such tenacity? It was not an anti-India sentiment. In his 1962 letter to Nehru, he invokes Gandhi, Tagore, India's non-violent freedom struggle and support for UN resolutions on self-determination to denounce the military action of 1961 and seeking to touch the Prime Minister's pacifist and legal nerves. [This letter is available in English at http://www.supergoa.com/pt/read/news_recorte.asp?c_news=245 ] He had previously drawn Salazar"s attention to the "Great India next to us" as a "lively and thrilling example of spiritual and material renovation to which Portugal must react". And when fear of repercussion kept most Goans away from publically mourning Gandhi's death in 1948, he stepped up to carry his ashes to the Indian Ocean, at Colva, with a speech praising "glory to the Mahatma". Nor was Bruto da Costa moved by a deep anti-Portugal sentiment, but he was profoundly distressed at how dictatorial Lisbon had restricted Goa's hard-won liberties and autonomy, and subsequently also incensed by democratic Lisbon's decision, in December 1974, to "legalise a criminal act" by ceding Goa to another state “without heeding the opinion of the local population”. Finally, it is also inaccurate to describe the Candolim-born lawyer as driven strictly by his personal interests as an upper-caste, Catholic Brahmin landholder seeking to conserve privileges in a Goa that was undergoing unprecedented modernisation and a mining boom which threatened to change the traditional balance of social forces. An analysis of the people involved in this third force prior to the mid-1950s indicates a significant presence of Hindus and a professional diversity representing more than just South Goa's bhatkar bastion. In fact, his papers reflect a much wider, civic and liberal mission, notable in his efforts to combat press censorship (which had banned his 'O Ultramar' in 1937) and even defending pro-merger periodicals like "The Indian People" published from Bombay. The same applies to his parallel concern about colonial misgovernance, for example by exposing corruption in sugar imports in 1950. Most importantly, his writings refer to a Goan "nation" and "homeland" with a territorial identity "from Polem to Patardeu (Patradevi)". After 1961, Bruto da Costa's political ostracism did not translate into social marginalisation. In "Goa: a daughter's story", Maria Aurora Couto, who regrets never having met him, quotes Pandurang Mulgaonkar during his 1984 funeral speech, referring to the advocate as having earned "the single distinction of being called a fifth columnist by the Portuguese, and a pro-Portuguese by representatives who claimed to represent the Indian government". So why has this third force been ignored for so long by Goan and Indian historiographies? Reflecting more than just linguistic obstacles in accessing pre-1961 archives, the silence speaks volumes of the biased narratives that find comfortable refuge in the pro-Portugal vs. pro-India binary. It is therefore urgent to reclaim this third force from stereotypes that have homogenised Goa's anti-colonial struggle into a pro-India monolith: were all Goan freedom fighters also Indian nationalists? Did all who denounce Portuguese colonialism automatically favour full merger with India? Unless more research is done on the diverse causes, interests and strategies that animated the freedom struggle, movements and personalities as distinct as the 1583 Cuncolim revolt, the 1787 Pinto conspiracy, liberals Bernardo Peres da Silva and Francisco Luís Gomes, the 1890 September revolt, and the Rane rebellions will continue to be presented under the shiny gloss of pan-Indian nationalism. Beyond this negative inquiry, a more positive attempt may seek to locate this third force within a wider Goan autonomist tradition that spans several centuries, persistently seeking to move beyond the Portugal/India and West/Asia binaries. In this perspective, Goa's 1967 mobilisation against integration into Maharashtra, the movement for Statehood, and more recent demands for special status may indicate that this hybrid and interstitial current is dormant but alive. * * * This was first published in Goa in a two-part column on 22 February and 8 March 2014. The book 'A Terceira Corrente', edited by his son Mario Bruto da Costa, is in Portuguese and available for sale in Goa. For a copy of the book cover, table of contents, and pages referring to the list of signatories of Bruto da Costa’s third force demands of 1952 and 1954, download the file at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/213162126/Bruto-Da-Costa-A-Terceira-Corrente Constantino Xavier is a Ph.D. candidate in South Asian Studies at Johns Hopkins University, in Washington DC. A Portuguese of Goan origin, he was founder and editor of Supergoa.com and currently writes a fortnightly column too.