Myth of Clean Chit: Gujarat Carnage and Narendra Modi

Ram Puniyani

In a recently televised interview the Vice-President of Indian National Congress, Rahul Gandhi (Jan 2014) raised the storm when he said that some Congressmen might have been involved in 1984 Sikh Massacre and that Narendra Modi has a blame to take for the Gujarat carnage of 2002.

There were multiple responses to this interview. Already Arvind Kejriwal had promised to set up SIT into Anti Sikh violence of 1984 even before elections. Now his Government seems to be taking it up more seriously and it is likely that a SIT will be formed to investigate the Delhi tragedy. One can say that it may be too late by now as lot of valuable evidence might have been lost or destroyed. Still whatever of process of law can be retrieved, should be saved and justice should be done to victims of Delhi. It goes without saying that the justice should be done to the victims of communal violence irrespective of the fact as to which religious community they belong to. The Kashmiri Pundits also need to be given required justice and rehabilitation even today. The tendency to flaunt Kashmiri pundits or anti Sikh massacre, after every talk of justice to violence victims of Gujarat or any other place is an attempt to deflect the attention from issue on hand. 

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Violence against one religious community can’t give justice to another religious community which has been wronged. On the same level to turn a blind eye to the atrocities on Muslim minorities in India because Hindus are being persecuted in Pakistan or Bangla Desh is totally inhuman and vice versa. Justice should be demanded for all religious minorities, in all the countries, all the time. Tolerating injustice at one place is like tolerating injustice everywhere. 

In response to Rahul Gandhi’s comments on Gujarat, the BJP spokespersons lashed out that Modi has been given clean chit by SIT in Gujarat and also by the court of law, by legal process. This is a false propaganda. Right from the beginning of Gujarat violence, the comments of National Human rights commission indict Modi for his role in orchestrating Gujarat Violence. Though Special Investigation team (SIT) commented that there is no case against Modi, in the findings of SIT, there has been a strong element which indicts Modi for his acts of commission and omission. The apologists of Modi will point that in Delhi the military was not called for three days, while forgetting that in Delhi violence was contained in three days and in Gujarat process of violence went on unabated till May 2002, starting from 27th February. This stoppage of violence in Gujarat could happen only when the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee sent K.P.S. Gill as the special officer to overlook the control of violence in Gujarat. Modi personally got adverse comments all through, right from the beginning as his role was too glaring to be undermined at any stage of time. 

In the initial period the Hon’ble Supreme Court first pulled up the State government and observed “The Nero’s in Gujarat fiddled as Gujarat burned” (http://teestasetalvad.blogspot.in/2013/12/we-will-soldier-on-zakia-jafri-case.html). Even Atal Bihari Vajpayee had to reprimand Modi that Raj Dharma should be followed. The type of atmosphere created in Gujarat resulted in Supreme Court asking for shifting of the two major cases away from Gujarat, as an intimidating atmosphere was created in Gujarat due to Modi’s high handedness. Even after the latest judgment of the Magistrate’s Court, the human rights’ activists Mallika Sarabhai was forthright to comment, “Silly to have expected anything else but clean chit for Narendra Modi from a Gujarat court.” 

Even the interpretation of the report of SIT is fallacious. Supreme Court had appointed the SIT and also Amicus curiae, Raju Ramchandran. To say that SIT gave a clean chit to Modi is not true. The fact is that the SIT in its 2010 report clearly said: In spite of the fact that ghastly and violent attacks had taken place on Muslims at Gulberg Society and elsewhere, the reaction of the government was not the type that would have been expected by anyone. The chief minister had tried to water down the seriousness of the situation at Gulberg Society, Naroda Patiya and other places by saying that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Ramu Ramchandran based on same report pointed out that there is enough evidence in the SIT report to prosecute Modi. 

One recalls that NHRC much before all this had concluded its report 31.5. 2002 and said that “there was a comprehensive failure of the State to protect the Constitutional rights of the people of Gujarat” Amicus Curiae in his final report, recommended the prosecution of Narendra Modi under Sections 166 and 153a and 153b of the Indian Penal Code. So where is the clean chit? If we see three major factors, The National Human Rights commission has indicted Modi. Second, based on SIT observations Supreme Court appointed Amicus Curiae holds that Modi can be prosecuted. Third, the process of justice through Courts in Zakia Jafri has begun. After the Court verdict Ms Jafri said that she will appeal to the higher courts. Our process of justice begins with Magistrates Court, does not end with that. Proclaiming that Modi has been given a ‘clean chit’ for his role in Gujarat carnage is far from truth. It’s a clever propaganda, which has been dished out with a deliberate purpose. 

At another level, Modi acolytes, Babu Bajrangi and Maya Kodnani are in jails for their role in the carnage. The Tehelka sting shows the collusion between the Babu Bajrangi clan and the state led by Modi. The tribunal set up by Citizens for Justice and Peace with eminent jurists like P.B.Sawant also outlined Modi’s role in a very clear manner. There has been some justice in few cases of Gujarat. And that is due to yeomen struggle for justice launched by the victims and human rights defenders. The process of justice needs to be pursued. The state of Gujarat has created all possible obstacles in the justice being given to the victims. The claims of clean chit hold no water, we need to look beyond the propaganda and the truth will show the blood tainted hands of Modi.

Read More

Kandhamal Violence -5 Years Later

Ram Puniyani

This August 25, 2013, it will be five years, since the biggest anti Christian, violence, biggest communal violence in the Adivisi area, will complete five years. What has been the plight of the victims of the violence after this ghastly tragedy? What is the state of justice to the victim?

Kandhamal violence began in 2008, after the trailer of the same was seen a year earlier in 2007. The pretext was the murder of Swami Laxmananand, Lakkhanand, who was working in the area from last four decades. He was part of the RSS combine, VHP-Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram and was involved in the programs like Ghar Vapasi, the forcible conversion of Adivasis to Hinduism. RSS combine asserts that Adivasis are originally Hindus who had to flee to forests to avoid being converted to Islam in particular. This is a political construct and has nothing to do with the social history. The credit of his murder of Swami was taken by the Maoists, who said that this act was done to stop his activities related to spreading hatred in the area. Immediately after the murder, Pravin Togadia of VHP took out the procession with the body of Swami through a long circuitous route spanning 270 Kilometers. It was on this route that anti Christian violence and destruction of Churches and damage to the property of Christian community took place. It is reminiscent of the Gujarat pattern, where the bodies of Godhra tragedy were taken in a procession to Ahmadabad by the functionaries of VHP-BJP., and the violence followed.

The victims of Kandhmal were poor Christians, most of who were dalits and living below the poverty line. Nearly three hundred Churches were destroyed and four hundred Christians were done to death. With this thousands of them had to leave the areas and were forced to live in the poorly equipped refugee settlements. This violence was targeted against the minority Christian community, it violated the fundamental right to life, liberty and equality guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, and affirmed by many international covenants. The pattern of violence shows that the attacks were targeted, widespread, in the district of Kandhamal. Their execution was done with meticulous planning and preparation. The violence was preceded by various activities and the planning meetings were held by the perpetrators prior to the violence. Apart from this meticulous planning the financial and other forms of assistance were secured months prior to the violence. The violence meets the criteria of ‘Crimes against Humanity’ as defined in international law. The blatant brutality of the violence makes it fall within the definition of ‘torture’ under international laws.

Courtesy: Wikipedia

The winter following the carnage was very intense and the facilities to combat the nature’s fury were far from adequate. The relief came much later but not adequately from the Government sources. Church tried to step in as a stop gap measure. But initially the Government blocked this humanitarian relief on the ground that it will be given only to the Christians. On the intervention of the Court, Government was forced to permit the Church to offer the aid to all the victims. This also partly reminds one of Gujarat. Here also the state washed its hands soon enough and then the religious organizations tried to fill the gap!

The state of justice delivery system as such is abysmal. The communalized state apparatus blocks the justice at various levels. The story of this obstacle begins from the registration of cases, then to investigation and then to the court procedures, the role of public prosecutors and the willpower of state. The whole chain shows that justice is hard to get by especially the way our democracy is being eroded by the communal ideology under various garbs. At this stage the National Human Rights Commission, Human Rights Law Network came forward and brought out good reports showing us the mirror of the prevalent injustice in Kandhamal. A People’s Tribunal was also set up under the Chairmanship of retired Justice AP Shah. Most of these reports indicted the communal forces for their aggressive stance and held the state Government responsible for various acts of omission and commission. Unlike in Gujarat, the BJP, which was part of ruling coalition, was dumped by Biju Janata Dal after which Biju Pattnaik, the Chief Minister could frankly speak about the role of BJP and company in their involvement in instigating the violence against Christians. The role of Hindutva organizations in the carnage was officially acknowledged by the Chief Minister. In response to a question posed in the Legislative Assembly, the chief minister of Orissa, Naveen Patnaik, admitted, on the basis of state’s investigation that “members of the RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal” were involved in the violence. As per the Chief Minister, police arrested 85 people from the RSS, 321 members of the VHP and 118 Bajrang Dal members in the attacks. He said that only 27 members from these groups were still in jail.

Even till date the work of rehabilitation and justice to the victims is far from adequate. Nationally there are so many pressing issues of violations of the rights of minorities that Kandhmal issue has not been so much brought into focus by the human rights groups, which is a bit unfortunate. Despite other pressing demands on the time of social groups, one must appreciate the dogged and determined work of some of the activists who are pursuing the struggle for dignity and rights of the victims of Kandhamal violence.

John Dayal, President of All India Catholic Union and member of National Integration Council points out that “The Chief Minister Pattnaik appointed two judicial commissions… the commonality between the judges of these commissions is the haste in which they have expressed their high regard for the late VHP leader, Swami Laxmananand and their belief that the violence is not religiously motivated but a conflict over land issues between the Tribal Kondhs, mostly Hindu, and the Dalit Panos, many of whom have converted to Christianity, and who are demanding Scheduled Caste status.” Like most of the commissions of inquiry these commission are also working at a snail’s pace to prove once more that a delayed report usually becomes useless as for as delivery of justice is concerned.  The Christian community was so disgusted with the attitude of the commissions that initially they boycotted them but later seeing no other platform to express their pain and anguish have decided to be part of the same.

Today five years down the line the process of rehabilitation is far from satisfactory, a small number is yet to get the compensation. The compensation received is too inadequate to rebuild the life afresh.  As far as justice is concerned while the inquiry commission reports are too slow, the fast track courts which were set up have been suspended. The proceedings of the cases is going on in an atmosphere where the guilty are openly threatening the witnesses, and many of them are reluctant to give evidence out of fear of the accused, who are on bail despite several serious  charges against them.  Quite like Gujarat where many a witnesses turned hostile! In this scenario the state is backing off from rebuilding the Churches destroyed during carnage. The plea being offered is how a secular state can spend money on the places of religious worship. Again quite like Gujarat! When state is unable to protect a place of worship, why should it not come forward to build it?  

Kandhmal is yet another reflection of the impact of communal forces within our system, the difficulty in rehabilitation for them and the lack of adequate justice for riot victims. This is what is the major phenomenon eroding our democratic plural ethos. More and urgent efforts need to be put in for these hapless victims of the carnage.

Read More

Communal Violence: Who is to be blamed?

Ram Puniyani

A friend with dogged determination to show that the BJP is a lesser culprit of communal violence and that Congress is the major party to be blamed, listed the major communal riots in India and showed that most of the time when violence took place, it was Congress which has been the ruling party. He asks, so why get stuck with one episode of Gujarat violence and put it as a major point against Narendra Modi or BJP for that matter? Others also regularly point out that the role of Congress was no different in anti Sikh pogrom of 1984 in Delhi, when so many Congressmen were involved at various levels in anti Sikh pogrom. If Modi justified Gujarat by saying ‘every action has an opposite reaction’ Rajiv Gandhi also told us ‘when a big tree falls, the earth shakes’. So why single out Modi-BJP being worse than Congress on the scale of ‘who is more responsible for communal violence’.

Gujarat - 2002

The story so far has been that in India the communal violence began with the British implementing the policy of ‘divide and rule’ and for achieving that they did introduce communal historiography, looking at Kings through the prism of ‘Kings’ religion’, this vision of history being taken up by the declining classes of landlords and Raja-Nawabs. These declining sections of society laid the foundation of communalism, Muslim and Hindu both. Hindu communalists blamed Muslim kings for temple destruction and forcible conversions, while Muslim communalists claimed that they were the rulers of the country. This distorted version of the past created an atmosphere of mutual hate amongst Hindus and Muslims. The communal violence gradually went up as communal parties, Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha along with other communal formations created an atmosphere of mutual hate. Still they did not get success in the electoral arena.

During the British period while the blame can be put to the communal history introduced by British and their subtle moves to play one community against the other, the communal forces cannot be exonerated for their role in perpetuating violence. The police authorities that time played the role of a neutral observer. What is important here to see that there are multiple agencies that played different types of role in the tragedy of Hindu Muslim violence? The blame at this stage has to be apportioned to British policies (especially there introduction of communal historiography and the policy of ‘divide and rule’), to the communal forces in equal measures. At this stage the police-administration cannot be blamed for the role in violence.

Things gradually started changing. After independence the role of Administration-Police gradually started becoming partisan. The research of Dr. V.N.Rai, police officer of repute, showed that no violence can go on unless the administration, political forces included, wants it that way. The major blame has to go to the communal forces, who not only kept on spreading canards against minority community but some of their elements used communal violence to polarize the community along religious lines. The polarization along religious lines did help the communal forces to consolidate themselves in the social-political and electoral arena. Many a politicians from other parties also sometimes used the violence to either retain the power or to come to power. The inquiry commission reports during this time uniformly tell the role of communal forces. Jagmohan Reddy Commission on Ahmadabad riots of 1969 talks of the active participation of RSS-Jansangh leaders, Jan Sangh is the previous avatar of BJP. Major blame has to go to these forces, though they were not in power.

In Bhivandi Jalgaon riots of 1970 Justice D.P. Madon states that ‘section of Hindu elements particularly RSS and some PSP men were bent upon crating mischief, and they could succeed because of the passive police’. Justice Joseph Vithayathil on Tellicherry riots of 1971 points out that the anti Muslim propaganda was begun by RSS-Jan Sangh which changed the situation leading to communal polarization. In 1979 Jamshedpur riots, the report of commission of inquiry says that Samyukta Bajarangbalis Akhada Samiti, related to RSS was the one which deliberately created the dispute on the issue of route of procession and the members of Samiti raised anti Muslim slogans leading to violence. Justice Venugopal on Kanykumari 1982 riots makes the observation about the role of RSS in spreading rumors etc., the rumors acted as instigation to violence. Justice Srikrishna Commission also makes it clear that the BJP ally Shiv Sena’s role in Mumbai violence was very stark.

So the question is if there is some ruling party, should it be totally blamed? The violence is an outcome of divisive propaganda, communal instigation, role of police and the attitude of the ruling party. They all have separate blames to take. While the ruling party, which has been Congress most of the places has to be blamed for its soft handing of violence, sometimes overlooking the violence, and sometimes being the active instigator as in the example of Delhi in particular. The role of police is very central. The police which was neutral at the time of British rule today has gone to become the most partisan player in this tragic phenomenon as seen in the Dhule riots of 2012 in Maharashtra. Here the role of the Hindu mob was not needed as police did the firing on its own and killed the hapless minority victims.

So how do we compare BJP and Congress as far as communal violence is concerned? BJP is the political child of RSS. Communal propaganda, rumors, polarization, instigation and violence has been led by RSS combine from the front by this organization and its affiliates, the different progeny of RSS. Gujarat is the ‘total’ example, while in other episodes also it has played the crucial central role. Not being in power does not mean it has not played the central instigator role. This argument that Congress has been mostly in rule so it is to be blamed for violence has been cleverly constructed for propaganda purposes. While Congress cannot be exonerated for its role in the violence, its role cannot be compared with that of BJP in any sense. Barring one example of the tragedy of Anti Sikh violence, where the role of Congress was central, in other cases mostly its acts were that of omission, while BJP and company have central role in most acts of violence.

Anti-Sikh Riots - Delhi 1984
Courtesy: Wikipedia

Role of Congress in 1984 anti Sikh pogrom will be a permanent blot on its own inheritance of pluralism and secularism. It has tried to rectify it by apologizing for the same and its plural character is also reflected by its prime minister who is a Sikh, having the longest uninterrupted reign as PM after Nehru.  As such BJP cannot be compared with any other political party as it is a political child of RSS, which is working for Hindu nation. Some social scientists have very well given the contrasting nature of the politics of Congress and BJP. Aijaz Ahmed points out that BJP is programmatically communal while Congress is pragmatically-opportunistically communal. Mukul Kesvan in one of his recent article says that Congress is inherently plural and is opportunistically communal, while BJP is ideologically communal and opportunistically secular.

Notwithstanding the fact that communal violence is a multi-factorial phenomenon, two wrongs don’t make a right, Congress needs to tighten the total link from bottom to top, and rectify the factors which have been leading to communal violence. The communal propaganda, the laxity of laws, the impunity with which the guilty officers get away. It needs to bring in anti communal violence bill to see that this sub human phenomenon is put to rest. The propaganda emerging from RSS combine stable is totally misleading to say the least. 

Read More

Modi, Advani and Sangh’s Agenda

Ram Puniyani

The nomination of Narendra Modi as the chief of campaign committee of BJP for 2014 elections (June 2013) has created more than a storm in the tea cup. Incidentally it is the first time ever that such a nomination has created 24x7 news and controversy. It has a lot to do with the propaganda machinery, which Modi has created around him. The atmosphere being created is that this nomination is like being nominated as the Prime Ministerial candidate or a prelude to it, which may be true. The major opposition to this came from Modi’s own mentor Lal Krishna Advani, who for quite some time has been the one to promote and protect Modi. It is his politics due to which Modi has his present stature and power within BJP and in Gujarat. Advani was the one to suggest his name as the Chief Minister of Gujarat, when Gujarat’s political fortunes were declining, and Modi revived those electoral fortunes, the linkage between carnage 2002 and Modi’s rise to power is a matter of conjecture.
 

With the discernible role of Modi in Gujarat violence, the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee wanted Modi to be sacked but it was Advani, who saved Modi’s skin. Even earlier it was Advani who promoted Modi to the forefront. The reason was nothing personal; it was the matching political agenda of both these swayamsevaks, Modi and Advani, who were working in tandem to enhance the creeping communalism in the polity of the nation. They are swayamsevaks of RSS and have been major players in the RSS agenda of Hindu Rashtra. Advani, having brought BJP to the forefront from two seats in 1984 Lok Sabha elections to the later 161 in the post Babri demolition elections and to further peak of 182 in 1999, with the further polarization. Advani’s communal actions catapulted BJP and it became the major opposition party and then came to the seat of power in Center for close to six years. Advani, being a shrewd politician knew that though he is the one responsible for the BJP’s enhanced fortunes, he also realized that his divisive actions will prevent other political parties to enter in to an alliance with BJP. It is because of this that he pushed forward the name of a fellow swayamsevak, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who managed to keep a moderate image despite having the same agenda of Hindu rashtra.

After Vajpayees innings as PM, Advani’s Prime Ministerial ambitions forced him to adopt a moderate image. The demolisher-in-chief of Babri mosque started making moderate noises to the extent that he picked up Jinnah’s speech in Pakistan Constituent Assembly on 11^th August 1947, to call him a secular leader. This speech alone cannot be the base of evaluating Jinnah, as it is the same Jinnah, who was the Chief of Muslim League and he was the one who gave the muscles and teeth to the communal ideology of ‘Two Nation Theory, the ideology which was shared both by Hindu and Muslim communalists. Calling Jinnah secular was probably overkill as by that time RSS combine had consolidated the Hindus around ‘hate Muslims and hate Jinnah’. To swallow this statement from Advani was a bit too much for the patriarch, RSS, and so Advani was dumped. RSS as such also wanted a change of guard keeping the age factor in mind. For the lack of any credible face, Advani had to be resurrected again for 2009 general elections.

As such RSS had also some reservations about giving the command to Modi as RSS wants the primacy of organization over individuals. Modi overshadows the organization to which he belongs. But in case of Modi, RSS seems to have made an exception as Modi has cultivated his appeal through carefully constructed propaganda and through the communal polarization brought in by his role in the Gujarat carnage. RSS politics is an Indian version of supra authoritarian politics, couched in the identity of religion, it’s a sort of fascist politics. Fascist politics needs a charismatic mass leader, so in deference to the political contingency RSS has loosened its reservations about Modi and has to accept his uncontrollable rise.

In the whole drama, as it is unfolding, the divisive image of Modi is making other NDA allies to shift away from BJP. These allies have to nurture their own constituencies amongst minorities, so they cannot easily accept the leadership of Modi. So the already deflated NDA will be further deflated and barring the diehard Hindutva Shiv Sena and communal Akali Dal all others may desert the ship which is likely to be captained by Modi. In this case what is noteworthy is the role of RSS. While Advani raised the banner of revolt, it was only a phone call from RSS supremo that Advani did a climb down. For swayamsevaks trained by RSS, there is no question of defying the dictates from Nagpur. This is for number of reasons. One that these swaymasevaks are taught that their primary loyalty is to RSS and Hindu Rashtra. One recalls that when the previous avatar of BJP, Bhartiya Jansangh merged into Janata party after the lifting of emergency in 1977, the other constituents of Janata party asked the Jansangh members to severe their links with RSS. The Jansangh components broke away from Janata Party leading to split in Janata party and retained their umbilical cord and their ideology with RSS. Atal Bihari Vajpayee the supposedly moderate face of BJP, in Staten Island, in US, while talking in to the NRIs reaffirmed that he is primarily a swayamsevak and later a Prime Minister.

Apart from ideological factors there are electoral factors which are operative as well. The main strength of BJP at electoral level comes from the RSS volunteers, who sweat it out to make their nominees win. The organization of BJP is tightly controlled by RSS through the organizing secretaries of BJP, who are the nominees from RSS. RSS felt rewarded as Ram Temple issue picked up, Advani’s divisive Rath Yatra led to series of acts of violence and communal polarization went to higher levels, which were electorally profitable to the Hindutva politics. Today the stage has come where on one hand the BJP has been declining in the electoral arena and on the other the regional parties are coming up with big strength. These regional parties are more focused on their local issues, so one does not know which way they will turn after the election results.

The whole episode has demonstrated two major things. It has shown the polarizing impact of Narendra Modi. People also perceive that he is dictatorial in his attitude and when in power he is capable of usurping all the power to himself. This authoritarian character is being projected as his being ‘powerful’. The other leaders in Gujarat have perceived it and ex BJP leaders have either been marginalized to the full. One cannot be very hopeful about the attitude of the regional and other parties out for keeping power irrespective of values. One recalls that when BJP emerged as the largest single party in 1996 no other party was willing to ally with it. But just a couple of years later so many of these parties hovered around BJP to share some power as NDA. RSS-BJP-Modi may be banking on this historical experience to woo the other parties, still it seems a difficult task as at that time the sobering presence of Vajpayee was instrumental in making the other parties fall in to delusion and have the some part of the cake of power.

Today the challenge for secular movement remains quite mammoth. The ‘social common sense’ is heavily biased against religious minorities, their plight is becoming close to second class citizens. The threat of Modi coming to power does not seem imminent but one cannot say what role BJP-RSS combine will play to come to power. Earlier also one has seen that after every communal violence, the communal formations become stronger. Communalists know it too well. It is a dangerous portent for the country. The simmering acts of religious violence are strengthening the communal forces at grass root level. What about Federal front of regional parties? It will be like a sack of potatoes, with so many prime ministerial aspirants and diverse political agendas. What about third front? Can it come up as a coalition of all and sundry? The third front can be viable only on the ground of democratic, secular and pro poor programs. Who can take the lead for that is the million rupee question. While dumping Advani and selecting Modi, RSS has given a clear signal that it is going to orchestrate the aggressive Hinduta, authoritarian leader with fascist agenda and to try to impose Hindu rashtra on the secular democratic India. The creeping fascism hidden behind the persona of Modi and the organization called RSS needs to be engaged with in right earnest on democratic grounds.   

  

Read More

Whither Justice: Fabricated Cases and State

Ram Puniyani

Rihai Manch, a forum for getting justice to the falsely implicated youth in the cases of acts of terror has currently (June 2013), a protest Dharna (sit in) to demand the arrest of police and IB officials responsible for the death of Maulana Khalid Mujahid, to implement the R.D. Nimesh Commission report and to release the innocent Muslim youth implicated in acts of terror. This campaign is getting broader support from more human rights groups and affected community. This is the major effort by a civic society group to democratically protest against the insensitive and biased state machinery, to pressurize it to come to the path of justice.

The Samajvadi Party, Akhilesh Yadav Government in UP, had earlier claimed to be the major champion of the cause of Muslims, to the extent that the main leader of this party Mulayam Singh Yadav was derogatorily called Mulla Mulayam. But as he came to power last time also during his regime many a communal episodes, violence, took place under the very nose of the Government. Currently also Akhilesh Yadav‘s regime is marked by over 27 episodes of major riots. On the top of that this Government in its election promise had said that the innocents, implicated in the acts of terror will be released. On the contrary, the death of Maulana Khalid Mujahid in the police custody has raised sufficient doubts about the intentions of the Government. Even R.D. Nimesh Commission report was kept in the cold storage from last one year, and now when it has been released finally, the government is refraining from taking action, hiding behind the argument that it will be discussed in future Assembly session before action is taken on the report. As such Government has full prerogative to take action at Cabinet level. People fear that this commission report may also face the same fate as the other commission reports, which are generally put on the backburner or put in the cold storage.

Ashsish Khaitan, one of the journalists with dogged determination, sensitivity and honesty, has floated a portal, Gulail (Slingshot) (Facebook page here) to highlight the investigative reports related to the framing of innocents by authorities. Many an officers have falsely implicated innocents, despite knowing the truth, to enhance their own career prospects or to due to the biases which have gripped the large sections of the law enforcement agencies. These agencies regard that only youth from one religious community are responsible for the acts of terror. Khiatan also opines that putting forward the truth of such cases is also not of much use; as in such cases reports of honest investigations are overshadowed by the biased reporting and opinions in the print, T.V. and social media. He is pinning his hopes on judiciary and the people’s campaigns for getting justice. The ongoing dharna in UP is drawing the attention of the social groups and is being sustained for over two weeks by the social activists and the pained and anguished community, whose young ones’ are being incarcerated and have to suffer not only the future career prospects but have also to get the blame, which ostracize them from social life. In this direction various efforts have been undertaken in the past but after temporary response and restraint the investigation agencies lapse in to their usual prejudiced actions.

Not only can this be seen in the case of UP, but overall one sees the wide gulf between the promises and actual actions of the so called ‘secular parties’. While in Maharashtra the Congress coalition came to power with the promise of implementing Shrikrishna Commission report of 92-93 riots, after coming to power on this promise it put forward the usual excuses and the guilty police officers and political leadership continued to be in their positions of power despite sufficient proof of their involvement in instigating and participating in the riots., As for as justice to the victims and action against the guilty is concerned Samajvadi Party seems to be no different. The R.D. Nimesh Commission has given the full truth based on which it can proceed to punish the guilty police officers, but that’s what is being avoided. The credentials of so called secular parties are more are less similar, be it the Congress or be it the Samajvadi Party, they have very opportunistic attitude as far as the justice to minorities is concerned. While communal parties are out to do away with the rights of minorities and deny them justice through and through, these so called secular parties have dual character. They promise and are unable to deliver as their calculations are built around the vote bank politics.

This is due to multiple factors. One is that these supposedly secular parties are also being trapped by the considerations other than the values of secularism. So, controlling of communal violence, which is possible if there is adequate determination to do so, is not being done effectively. The second reason is the communalized state machinery, the investigating agencies, police and bureaucracy. How to investigate the cases, how to frame the innocents is an easy enough job, which the authorities do and their Khaki uniform empowers them to do it with ease. It is precisely due to this that the fate of inquiry commission reports has not been significant one. Starting from Madon Commission of inquiry into Bhiwandi riots, to Shrikrishna Commission and Liberhan Commission reports, the outcome, taking action based on the report, is close to zero as the implementing authorities, political leadership is opportunist and lacks the strength to stick to principles.

So where do we go from here. While the communal forces are out to proactively browbeat the religious minorities, the secular formations do not have the spine to ensure justice and equity. Its’ here, that the social activism which has prominently come up during last two decades in particular, needs to be strengthened. The activist groups have taken up these issues seriously and the initiatives by social activists is a major landmark in this direction. One wonders, why are the left parties, which should be principally secular to the core are shunning these efforts. Their joining these efforts to get equity and justice to minorities will put pressure on the parties like Congress and Samajvadi to try to become sincere in their efforts.

The intensification of efforts through judiciary and popular protests has to be intensified. The rot set in our democratic polity due to the infiltration of communalism through different mechanisms has been a very dangerous one to the values of our Constitution. It is time that we as a nation introspect and get over the biases and prejudiced behaviors towards weaker sections of our society. The path to social progress is paved through amity and justice. Professional attitude in investigation of acts of violence, communal amity and justice for all are the prerequisites of social progress, progress of society in the real sense.    

Read More

Ignore Those Who Love to Hate:Hate Speech and Communal Politics

Ram Puniyani

Mahatma Gandhi, who laid down his life for communal harmony, who was murdered because he was espousing the cause of building bridges of amity between different religious communities had a statuette with three monkeys. One of the monkeys in this puts his hand on his mouth, signifying that we should not speak evil. While those following the path of peace and amity talk of uniting the different religious communities, those who trade in the politics in the name of religion, base their politics on hatred for others and regularly spew poison against other communities. This hate speech of theirs’ incites violence and widens the gulf between the diverse religious communities. One concedes that the political parties and political groups need to be criticized for their policies; this is different from talking evil about other ‘religious community’. This ‘Hate Speech’ is the cannon fodder of the practitioners of communal politics. They know that in short term ‘Hate other’ politics can pay rich dividends on the electoral arena.

The most recent case of Varun Gandhi, no blood relation of the great Mahatma, but great grandson of another die hard messiah of communal peace Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, is very disturbing for many a reasons. Varun Gandhi indulged in Hate speech in the public meeting, in 2009. While speaking in Pilibhit he talked of cutting the hands of others, and many such abominable things. He was caught on camera and cases were lodged against him. Despite all the evidence in place he has been exonerated in the court as all the witnesses in the case have turned hostile, have changed their version. One is reminded of the Gujarat’s Best Bakery case, where also they were lured by money or frightened by the threats, most of the witness turned hostile. Tehelka sting operation later revealed as to how the BJP workers had managed to frighten or lure away the witnesses. India does not have the witness protection act, which is one of the demands of social activists, working for getting justice to the victims of violence. In Zahira Sheikh case again the culprits were released by the lower court.

The Varun Gandhi case draws our attention to the witnesses turning hostile once again. Again this time Tehelka has exposed how the witnesses were ‘managed’. At another level such an exoneration of the guilty Hate speakers will pave the path of such people spreading hatred in the society. There is another aspect also which has got attached to the issue. Recently Akabaruddin Owaisi of All India Majlis-eIttihad al-Muslimin was arrested and is facing the court case for his anti Hindu speech. Which is as it should be. The guilty must be punished to ensure that such acts are not repeated.  At the same time Praveen Togadia also delivered a ‘tit for tat’ Hate speech. Only a mere FIR, has been filed- no arrest-no further action so far. On one hand some action is taken and that too is not fully followed up. Just to recall Togadia is old player in this game but only once he was put behind the bar, so he continues to spew poison most of the times.

Akabaruddin Owaisi and Praveen Togadia

As such Indian Constitution is very clear about the matters of ‘Hate speech’. India prohibits hate speech as per several sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and by other laws which put limitations on the freedom of expression. Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives the government the right to declare certain publications “forfeited” if the “publication ... appears to the State Government to contain any matter the publication of which is punishable under Section 124A or Section 153A or Section 153B or Section 292 or Section 293 or Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code”. India is also signatory to the The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which states that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law" We must remember all communities have a diverse section of individuals. The Hate speech also presents the ‘other’ community’ as a uniform one, which is not true.  That apart when J.B. Desouza a retired civil servant and ardent follower of the values of Indian Constitution filed a case against Bal Thackeray for his inflammatory speeches in the wake of post demolition Mumbai violence, he also had to draw a blank, as the implementation of the law is mired with many a weaknesses.

As such while predominant culture of India has been that of amity and peace, the ‘Hate other’ speech, portraying religious communities as uniform monoliths, began more with British rule, who in pursuance of the policy of ‘divide and rule’ introduced the communal historiography and encouraged the communal elements to speak and propagate against the other community. They had chosen Hindu and Muslim as the major communities for their divisive politics. Some core points were picked about the practice of others religion and they were picked up to spread the divisive politics. Eating pork, eating beef, music in front of the mosque, spread of Islam, destruction of temples etc were those ‘themes’, which were communalized and around which ‘Hate speech’ was built up. With Advani’s Rath Yatra (Chariot procession, a political move with religious imagery) these points came up again in a big way, the temples destruction point was taken up to the maddening heights and during rath yatra the symbolic use of these issues spread the hatred, hatred led to violence and as the rath yatra proceeded the series of acts of violence followed the trail of yatra.

Today there are many who are subtly using this divisive propaganda. Many a web sites and emails, which circulate and have a long chain, are doing the same damage to amity of the society. Subramaniam Swamy is another politician who has been indulging in this hate speech on regular basis, but no action against him here in India. In response to one of his ‘hate articles’ which was full of venom for Muslims, while in India no action was taken his visiting professorship was withdrawn by the University in US. Even now many of his video clips are circulating which instigate hatred. Such things have by now become part of social common sense and we tend to ignore it. But surely, these videos and speeches are a big blow to our National Integration. The Varun Gandhi case also shows the vulnerability of our legal system, where the guilty are getting away, after having reaped the ‘benefits’ of their vile speech.  

At global level the propaganda by US media in the wake of 9/11 WTC attack, the hatred for Islam and Muslims has been constructed and many an instances are picked up to subtly jack up ‘hate other’ propaganda leading to ‘hate crimes’. In recent times UK has also been seeing a rise in Hate crimes, the latest pretext being the murder of drummer Lee Righby in Woolwich. These are harrowing times where the values of amity are being attacked and the divisive notions are increasing in intensity. 

Javed Akhtar in one of his lively poems writes. Bhul ke Nafrat Pyar ki koi baat karein (Lets Forget hate and talk of love). One wishes we take this vision seriously. While on one hand these negative things, the Hate speech by Varun Gandhis, Owaisis and Togadias are there, there are also many a friends in the society who have been taking out peace marches and singing the songs peace and spreading the message of harmony in different parts of the country. It is friends like these who will lay the foundation of national integration overcoming Hate, Hate speech. It is time that we as a society reject those who are harping on hatred for the ‘other community’.

Read More

Will The Biases About Terrorists Remain Permanent?

Ram Puniyani

We have witnessed number of acts of terror in India, during last two decades. While those involved in the acts of terror have been coming from individuals of different religions, the net outcome of the actions of investigation agencies and police has been to arrest Muslim youth, to put charges against them and in most cases to release them after the charges are not proved on any ground. This pattern had a ‘mini-break’ for sometime after the Malegaon blast of 2008. The professional, unbiased and meticulous investigation of the Malegaon blast by the then chief of Maharashtra ATS, Hemant Karkare came as a big step in getting to the terrorists. Due to this; starting from Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, Swami Dayanand Pandey, Swami Aseemanand and many others belonging to the ideology of Hindutva nationalism are currently cooling their heels in the jails. Investigations into Malegaon and many other blasts are showing the imprint of these Hindutva groups and people. One thought that this major breakthrough into acts of investigation will change the mind set of police authorities and they will overcome their biases and do a more professional job in investigation into the acts of terror.

Alas that was not to be and guided by Pavlovian reflex, in a knee jerk fashion, police continues to repeat its pattern of giving statements immediately after the acts of terror in which the organizations like Indian Mujahedeen. Lashkar and others continue to be being named without a thorough probe. This is followed by the usual arrests and framing them. Recently first in the case of Hyderabad twin blasts on 21 February 2013 in which 17 people died and over hindered were injured. These bombs were kept on a bicycle and Indian Mujahideen were blamed for this dastardly act. Later in Bangalore on 17th April a bomb exploded 300 meters from the BJP office. For this blast a motorcycle was used. In this blast around 16 people were injured. It was propagated that the blast took place near BJP office! As usual Indian Mujahedeen were blamed. In this blast again there was an additional factor about propaganda that blast took place near BJP office, when in reality the blast was 300 meters away from the spot. Congress spokesperson Shakil Ahmad said that this blast and the propaganda of its being near BJP office will benefit BJP in the forthcoming elections, while another Congress spokesperson and BJP countered the statement of Shakil Ahmad.

In Bangalore blast, the preceding incidents are very disturbing and revealing. Just ten days before the Bangalore blast, on sixth April in Kannur (Kerala) a blast took place from the motorcycle and RSS swayamsevak A. V. Dileep Kumar who was carrying four kilograms of explosives died. One recalls that the RSS associates also got killed in blasts in Nanded, Kanpur and many other places. This Kannur incident was underplayed and not much is known about the investigation so far as such. It is interesting that police authorities who immediately named Indian Mujahidin have been totally silent on the Hindutva connection of probable terrorists, as by now the nation knows the involvement of Hindutva groups in many acts of terror. The real loser of these biases held by authorities and common people is the country as a whole. The real reason being that if we don’t nab the real culprits and remain trapped in the usual prejudices and biases, the real culprits will continue to carry on their nefarious work over and over again.

As such apart from other things on this trend of Muslim youth being arrested a good amount of documentation and people’s investigation has been done by various human rights groups. ANHAD held a people’s tribunal and published it report, ‘Scapegoats and Holy Cows’. Lately a significant report by Jamia Teachers Solidarity Association led by Manisha Sethi has published 'Framed, Damned, and Acquitted’. This report in a analytic way tells us the stereotypical manner of police investigation and actions and the plight of those who were arrested particularly by the Delhi Police Special Cell on charges of these youth being part of terrorist outfits. In most of these cases they were acquitted by courts. This report as such should have created awareness about the police methods and a pressure on police to mend its ways. The report also points that the biased atmosphere has been created as media is publishing the police version uncritically. This is in contrast to the journalistic ethics where the official versions have to be checked, cross checked and examined critically before publishing them. The human rights groups also have been struggling for getting compensation to these victims in good measure but to no avail so far. And then the question comes up as to what about the police officers who are guilty of these acts of wrongful investigation and implicating innocent youth, ruining their life in a serious way? Should they not be punished?

The pattern of police reporting is also very stereotypical and needs to be seriously criticized. The question is what the senior leadership is doing in the face of findings of these reports. Is it not important for the policy makers to take cognizance of such important reports and respond to them in the form of policy change for the investigation authorities? Amongst others another human rights group, Rihai Manch from Uttar Pradesh is also campaigning on this issue and trying to get the innocent youth released. UP Government had appointed a Nimesh Commission to investigate these cases, but for reasons known to itself the government is not releasing the report and is doing some patch work here and there.

While UP Government is dodging over the issue of implicating the Muslim youth, one of its ministers is having the taste of these biases in United States, where he was detained at Boston. While he is blaming Indian External Affairs Minister for this, he is forgetting that these biases against Muslims are equally widespread and before him, people of the stature of ex President Abdul Kalam and the celebrity like Shah Rukh Khan have faced similar situations. Is it not an indication enough for the UP minister to set his own house in order as for as the implication of Muslim youth in acts of terror are concerned. The real worrying point of all these incidents is the way biases against Muslims are becoming rooted more and more. What efforts are needed to counter this stereotypical nature of understanding security agencies and perceptions at popular level needs a serious course correction on urgent basis.

Read More

Myanmar Communal Violence- a Set back to Democratic Process

Ram Puniyani

Most of the countries of South Asia have faced the barbaric problem of violence targeted against religious minorities. The form of this may have been different, but the outcome has been similar, the brutality against religious minorities, violence against innocent human beings. The current times (Mid 2013) may be one of the worst when in the spate of short span of we are witness to violence in Pakistan, Bangla Desh, India and Myanmar, more or less running parallel. Many a times when talk about violence involving Muslims has been under discussion, some propagandists have tried to associate Islam with violence and so the strife. Similarly some others may say that Hinduism permits violence as in Gita or so and so is the problem. In popular perception Buddhism is the religion of peace. The truth is that while the religious precepts are for morality, the part of religion invoked for violence has more to do with contemporary political issues, which are given the garb of religion. While Lord Gautama Buddha is surely the major apostle of peace, one has seen violence by Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka, Thailand and now overtly in Myanmar (March 2013).

Troops are keeping a vigil, martial law has been declared to stop the communal rage which has lasted for three days in Meikhatila in Myanmar. This violence has involved the Buddhists and Muslims.  Here the official toll stands at 31 dead, while the unofficial figures are higher.  A state of emergency has been declared in this state. As usual a trivial incident involving the argument between the Buddhist couple and a Muslim owner of gold shop resulted in the triggering of simmering dislikes and discord between these two communities resulting in violence. While one Buddhist monk has also been killed the major victims of the violence are Muslims. This bring to our memory the communal clash of June -July (2012) in Rakhine State in western Myanmar. In that violence officially 110 people were killed and it left 120,000 people homeless. Those killed and left homeless were mostly stateless Rohingya Muslims.

Interestingly the communal strife was under the wraps during the preceding dictatorial regime. With the efforts to bring in democracy in some form these strife’s are coming to surface due to the diverse and plural nature of Myanmar society, which is majority Buddhist but has substantial number of Muslim minorities. Rohingiya Muslims are probably the most persecuted minority in the world. Being a substantial number in Myanmar, they are from Indo-Aryan group, who settled in this part over a period of last couple of centuries, during the British rule, primarily. While the majority Buddhists are of Sino-Tibetan stock.  Muslims live in the Western state of Rakhine state on country’s Western border.  They have been adversely affected by the 1982 citizenship law, which has deprived them of the citizenship; there is a total violation of their human rights due to this unjust law. They are subjected to forced labour and have to work for the Government without any pay.  The UNHCR has noted that since 1991 their freedom of movement is restricted. They are treated like second class citizens. Facing this adverse situation of gross violation of their rights many of them are trying to flee to Thailand, Malaysia and other places amongst others.

In 2012, June-July the violence between Rakhine Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims was triggered by the rumour of rape of a Buddhist girl. As such it was a case of Muslim boy and Buddhist girl falling in love and eloping to get married. The boy was murdered and two of his friends who helped him to elope are facing death sentence.

Overall this reflects the unsolved problem of secularization and democracy in the region. The common factor in whole of South Asia is the migration of people for economic reasons, and with independence coming many of the dominating communities wanted to associate citizenship rights based on religion. Due to this some communities got deprived of citizenship formally or informally. Some were relegated to second class citizenship in practice. In Sri Lanka, the large number of Tamils who had gone there as plantation labour was denied equal rights and denied equality leading the extreme reaction in the form of formation of Liberation Tiger of Tamil Elam (LTTE).

In Myanmar 5% of the people are Muslims. Many of them had been the residents of this region from centuries. Denying them full citizenship defies all the logic of a modern democratic state. During the regime of military junta, which ruled the country for decades, a wrong precedent has been set, that of linking citizenship with religion. It requires deeper investigation as to why many a monks have an anti Islamic attitude. One knows similarly many a monks had played anti-Tamil role in Sri Lanka. There must be deeper societal processes which are at work and are usurping the democratic norms of equality of religions. One knows that democracy is coming up in Myanmar after long decades after long battles, but still the remnants of the communal divide are dogging this nascent democracy. In a way this is also the colonial legacy which subtly promoted the divisiveness in the society.

With this violence in Myanmar coming to the fore the whole South Asia has to wake up and come to the grips of the legacy of the colonial past, a legacy perpetuated due to economic and political policies of rulers, rulers who have in a short-sighted manner resorted to abuse of religious identity for their political goals. Some political tendencies have thrived on the identity of religions and spread the ‘Hate’ about ‘other’ community. It is retarding the process of development in each of South Asian countries and also putting strong brakes on the same. South Asia should have been striving towards the process of formation of South Asian Federation, which can expedite the processes leading to peace in the sub continent. Regional peace in turn is a prerequisite for development of the regions. We need to look beyond the narrow religious identities and promote the freedom of religion, equality of religions and dignity and honour for people of all the faiths for a better environment in those countries and a more congenial atmosphere for enhancement of human rights of weaker sections of society.

Read More

Mr. Modi, You Are Not Welcome: Wharton Debate

Ram Puniyani

The withdrawal of invitation for Narendra Modi to speak at Wharton Business School of Pennsylvania (March 2013) has been looked at in different ways by different commentators. Those who are opposing the invitation withdrawal, point out that it is a violation of the norms of freedom of speech. They say that Modi is an elected person in Indian system and his views on development of Gujarat under his leadership need to be heard by the people from business circles.  Those opposing his invitation argue that inviting him is like giving legitimacy to his total record. His role in Gujarat violence, his failure to prevent the carnage and give justice to the violence victims cannot be delinked from his so called development. They point out that as far as debating and engaging with Modi is concerned it cannot be achieved by inviting him as a key note speaker; this invitation already gives a high pedestal and recognition to him. He should be interrogated, engaged and debated with on different forums which give equal ground to those wanting to debate with him.

They also point that Gujarat’s development is a lopsided one, it is projected more than what the reality is. In Gujarat the levels of malnutrition, child and maternal mortality is higher, Gujarat is comparatively low on human growth index. The anti SC/ST atrocity cases are one index of human rights record of the state. In taking these cases of atrocities against SC/ST Gujarat is lowest on the rung, with only 25% convictions. According to analysts the growth of Gujarat is more of propaganda as many other states have done much better during this period. The lowest in the scale of development in Gujarat are minorities and SC/STs.

Modi was invited by the students of Wharton to speak on Gujarat’ development. After this a few Professors circulated a petition asking for withdrawal of the invitation. Within just few hours the petition got a massive response and was signed not only by the professors, many others: alumni, the students, doctor’s lawyers and other stake holders also supported the petition. The large number of signatures and the logic which the petition put forward clinched the issue and students, who are the ones to decide, withdrew the invitation.

The United States has denied VISA to Narendra Modi since 2005, despite his being an elected Chief Minister of the state. The Commonwealth countries so far have been keeping him at arm’s length, but after his third victory, these countries want to mend the relationship with him, as his projection as the Prime Ministerial candidate are floating around in a strong manner. US had denied him VISA for his role in the carnage of 2002, and the denial continues.  Similarly due to popular pressure after sustained campaigns; the activists groups succeeded in stopping the huge dollar funding from US to the RSS affiliate ‘India Development Relief Fund’ was collecting huge amounts and supporting the political work of RSS combine in the garb of cultural work. This RSS combine’s work is essentially to build up Hatred against minorities, through its various organizations.

While one is aware about the role of America in the promotion of politics of terror, in the formation of Al Qaeda in particular, while it is also known that US is out to attack other countries to promote its political-economic interests, at the same time there are various norms which different wings of American state follow. There are various civic norms which are stringent and are aimed to sustain and promote democratic values. The Civil society has also been campaigning to use this space, democratic-liberal one provided by these provisions of US system and try to stop the violation of human rights and retrograde activities in different places. This is a contradictory situation. The state by and large in its foreign affairs is like a Big Brother, violating all the laws of international behavior and laws and intimidating the smaller powers. There is no doubt about its role in international affairs, as a super power; it is undermining the global democracy; it has mauled the emerging global democracy amongst nations, which was getting expressed through rising clout of United Nations, has been sabotaged by US in particular. As a state it has promoted dictators and has been thick as thief with different dictators and autocrats.

At another level, the civic society has come up steeped in civility with respect for the norms of modern democracies, to some extent. So we see the dichotomous processes going on here. It is due to this pressure of prevailing norms and civil society campaigns that US is denying Visa to Modi. Is this denial of Visa to Modi an insult to our country? No way. It just shows us the mirror of the state of affairs in our country. Many a US bodies do keep monitoring phenomenon like, Religious freedom in other countries. Many of them keep making a list of terrorist organizations. All this monitoring is showing the diversities of our societies. In the same set up we are seeing two contradictory phenomenons.

Coming back to Modi, Wharton student’s body has gone more by the norms of civil society; has recognized that Modi may be claiming and many others may be buying his story of development, but the truth lies somewhere else. The petitioners opposing the Modi invite correctly point out that Human rights issues and development cannot be separated.  As far as Modi being a democratically elected person is concerned, the analysts can point out that his victory has been based on his politics of polarization, not on the inclusive politics. He has successfully scared the majority community about the threat of minority community. This goes on and on to make the foundations of his victory and there by his followers claiming that he has been elected, so all is well. Only thing they ignore at this point is that even Hitler had come to power through democratic means.

As far as his development is concerned it is de facto the development of industrial houses. One such industrialist, Adani, was the sponsor of Wharton meet. He withdrew his sponsorship the moment invitation to Modi was withdrawn. Modi’s mode of ‘development’ means giving all freebees to Tata, Adanai, Ambani and company while the poor one’s are getting more marginalized. This invitation being taken back just reflects that Modi’s propaganda has been punctured and a reminder that the violation of human rights violation of the weak cannot be exonerated at any cost.

Read More

Bangladesh: Resurgence of Communalism

Ram Puniyani

The acts of violence led by the Islamists, Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) are tormenting our neighboring Bangla Desh, more than 50 dead, injuries and destruction of Hindu, Budhha temples amongst other losses. Its spill over is also being felt in Kolkata to some extent (Feb-March 2013). In Kolkata a strong crowd owing allegiance to Muslim communalism, different organizations like Minority Youth Federation, and others went on rampage. All this in response to the death sentence given to Delawar Hossian Sayedee, the Vice President of JI by a war crimes tribunal after he was found guilty for mass killing, rape and atrocities during the nine month war against Pakistan.

He is the third office bearers of JI to have been convicted of the crimes during Muktijuddha (liberation war) of 1971 of the then East Pakistan people’s resistance against the atrocities of Pakistan army.  Sheikh Hasina Government has set up the tribunal from last three years and now the verdicts of the tribunal are being handed down. Currently in Bangla Desh a large number of youth, believing in democracy are demanding stricter action through protest at Shahbagh against those who were hands in glove with Pakistan army while Jamaat wings are out on streets opposing the sentence to the guilty of 71 liberation war. In India also the Jamaat-Islami has opposed the Shahbag movement and is opposed to punishing the JI elements that are guilty of 1971 war crimes. JI was opposed to the 1971 liberation war led by Mukti Bahini under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and supported by most of the people from Bangla Desh. The attack by Pakistan army led to the killing of nearly three million people, rape of nearly 200000 women, by rough estimates. During this period the East Pakistan’s intellectuals and many political workers were done to death.

The tragedy of partition has a long and painful tale, which is refusing to die down even now more than six decades after the painful event. India was partitioned on the strange ground, Pakistan in the name of Islam and India as a secular democracy, apparently to solve the communal problem. British have left a long and painful legacy of politics in the name of religion, violence in the name of religion, which is continuing to dog the sub-continent. The twin pillars of success of British policy of ‘divide and rule’ were the persistence of feudal classes, in the face of rising industrialization and the deliberate British ploy to recognize Muslim League as the representatives of Indian Muslims right since its formation in 1906. Muslim League was initially formed by the declining sections of Muslim Nawabas, Landlords and later was joined by the section of Muslim educated classes and elite. In no way it represented Indian Muslims. Similarly the Hindu Mahasabha, the body parallel to Muslim League, came up from amongst the Hindu Rajas, Jamindars and later joined in by the section of educated classes and elite castes. Their agenda was totally opposed to the one of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, which was the foundation of freedom movement of the country.

There are lot of parallels between both these communal streams (Muslim and Hindu), they could join hands in forming coalition ministries in Sindh and Bengal just before the partition, they kept aloof from freedom movement and opposed the social transformation of caste and gender relations of the society. Their lip service to some social reforms notwithstanding, they stuck to the status quo in matters pertaining to social norms and political relations.

After partition the Pakistan (East and West) came to be dominated by the West Pakistan economic and political elite who occupied important positions in the army, bureaucracy, economy and polity. In the elections held in 1970 the Awami League (East Pakistan) led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman swept the polls, and emerged as the majority party in Pakistan. Still, army backed by Zulfiqar Bhutto did not permit the formation of Awami League Government. Here one can see the difference between religion and politics. While Islam calls for ‘all men are bothers’ the politics in the name of Islam coming from Pakistani regime, discriminated not only against people of other religions, Hindus in particular, but also against the others Muslims. Muslims of East Pakistan were being dominated and suppressed by the dominant ‘Muslims’ of West Pakistan.

With Awami League being denied the formation of Government and in the absence of democratic channels of protest, alienation grew in East Pakistan and Mujibur Rahman launched civil disobedience movement. Massive protest erupted all over in East Pakistan and Pakistani army, cracked down on its own citizens. In East Pakistan, army unleashed a reign of terror; murders and rapes. Hindus and Muslims both were targeted. The citizens from East Pakistan were regarded as enemies and rampage went on till the Mukti Bahini, with the help of Indian Army succeeded in defeating Pakistani army to declare the formation of People’s Republic of Bangla desh.

The formation of Bangla Desh decisively and irrefutable proved the futility of the theory that Nations are synonymous with religions, that religion can be the basis of nationalism. The ‘Two Nation theory’ that Hindus and Muslims are two separate nations met its graveyard in the formation of Bangla Desh. Still the communal elements were not wiped out from the country and they do keep coming up now and then. We had also noticed the response of Muslim Communalists from Bangla Desh when they wanted to march to India, in response to the demolition of Babri mosque. The plight of minorities in Bangla Desh is pathetic. Many of the Hindus and Muslims became refugees and came to different parts of the country. Part of this contributed to the Hindu communalist’s propaganda and creation of scare about Bangla Deshi immigrants. The issue of sub continental politics has been presented on communal lines.

Sixty years down the line the seeds of communal politics which came up from the declining sections of landlords, were given ideological veneer by section of elite-upper castes, and were cleverly nurtured by the British. As such actually it was these communal elements that fed in to the British policy of ‘divide and rule’ and led to partition of the country. In the three countries which emerged in the subcontinent, the degree of communal poison today; is of course very different in intensity. Pakistan suffered maximum at the hands of colonial-imperialist powers, the minorities there, Hindus and Christians are having intimidating time. In Pakistan the army has become the ally of communal forces and keeps opposing the democratic aspirations of large sections of society. In Bangla Desh, the democratically rooted parties have to face opposition from the communal elements.

India, not to be left behind is being gradually weekend by the Hindu communalists, who have been harping on the identity issue like Ram Temple. They have given communal hue to the ‘left over’ problems of colonial rule. Bangla Desh is seen as the source of infiltrators, despite the fact that the poor Hindus and Muslims who fled the country in 1971 had to leave to escape the brutality of Pakistan army. Kashmir, which again partly is a leftover colonial parting kick supplemented by the ultra nationalism of Pakistan-India on one side and communalism on the other. Tragically this issue is also seen through the prism of Hindu and Muslim alone.

Thus all the three countries in the subcontinent have to grapple with this communal demon. To obfuscate the difference between religion and politics has been the biggest ‘success’ of communalists, cutting across the religious divides. Criticizing these communalists can easily give you a label of being against that religion. Does it need a rethink on the part of the democratic people of these countries to collaborate with each other to bury the demon of communalism, politics in the name of religion? Will communalists, who are dominating the scene in India, or Pakistan or Bangla Desh let it happen? Communalists are adept at creating the tempest of hysteria in the name of their religions, and can do the intense breast beating that the secular democratic efforts are a threat to their ‘religion. The task to save or promote democracy in the subcontinent is a mammoth one. Can those elements yearning for a freedom and democracy in the sub continent come together on this agenda?  

Read More