(The Asian Age
August 29, 2007)
Our tryst with secularism
Between The Lines / Kuldip Nayar
One feels stumped when one finds that Muslim fundamentalists are taking a leaf out of the BJP book of hatred and hostility. Their number is small. But when they are able to issue fatwas (cheaper by the dozen these days) in favour of their wrong actions, they cause serious concern. The recent instance is that of the attack on Bangladeshi novelist Taslima Nasreen in Hyderabad. Members of the Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM) who came to her book launch attacked her. The organisers protected her at the risk of their own life. Then the MIM issued a fatwa in no time at all, as if it was ready beforehand.
The best of works are those that challenge religion and its holistic attitude. What the MIM members did — physically attacking Taslima — smacks of fascism. One need not agree with the author, but she must have her right to say what she wants to say. This is what differentiates a democratic set-up from a theocratic or dictatorial state. What the MIM members exhibited was deep-rooted religious prejudice. I hope this virus does not spread. Liberals from both communities need to work on such elements and check them.
Still, criticising any religion is not in order, because its followers feel hurt. But one cannot stop writers from exercising their freedom of expression. So I was sorry to watch on television Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Ghulam Nabi Azad and Uttar Pradesh Congress chief Salman Khurshid advocating that authors should avoid writing on religion. This amounts to defending the MIM. Both are top leaders. They should have joined issue with the fundamentalists.
Extremists among Hindus and Muslims have failed to realise that our tryst with destiny is to build a secular state. This is not dependent on whether Pakistan is Islamic or not. The goal of the freedom struggle was to build a secular state. And that was what Jawaharlal Nehru did. So I feel disappointed that even after 60 years of independence we have not sorted out the Hindu-Muslim question. I thought that, after independence, the pluralism which the British had meticulously destroyed would reassert itself. It is clear that this has not taken place. The nation must introspect to find out why.
One reason is that the guilty get away without any punishment. Leaders like L.K. Advani do not help when they say that the case against the rioters in Mumbai should not be reopened. If the accused in the Mumbai blasts could be tried and punished even after 15 years, why not those who killed scores of Muslims in the wake of the Babri Masjid demolition in December 1992? The Mumbai bomb blasts of 1993, as the Justice B.N. Srikrishna Inquiry Commission put it, were a "cause and effect" occurrence.
The Shiv Sena has threatened to organise a "Hindu backlash" if the government reopens the rioting cases. The then chief minister, Manohar Joshi has warned that communal amity in Maharashtra will be destroyed if the past is revived. But what does one do when out of 13,000 cases, only 800-odd are taken up? Obviously, the others were not pursued because of communal considerations. But if things are left as they are, the government will be seen coddling the communal elements.
The Sena’s hysterical outcry is an admission of guilt, because the Srikrishna Commission has held it guilty. The report, now nine years old, has said, "There is no doubt the Shiv Sena and Shiv Sainiks took the lead in organising (the) attack on Muslims and their properties under the guidance of several bodies of the Shiv Sena." Justice Srikrishna has specifically mentioned Sena chief Bal Thackeray "who, like a veteran general, commanded the loyal Shiv Sainiks to retaliate by organising attacks against Muslims."
When the report was published, the Sena-BJP combine was ruling Maharashtra and Atal Behari Vajpayee was leading the BJP coalition at the Centre. Both governments rejected the report, with the Sena characterising it as "pro-Muslim." Today, the Congress rules Maharashtra as also the Centre. Both have been in power for three odd years. The question is, why didn’t they, in spite of knowing about BJP inaction, move against the politicians and police officials indicted in the report?
Even now, the action taken is cursory in nature because of the Sena’s threats. The Mumbai police has established a cell to re-examine the cases that have been closed. But when the police itself is involved, how can a fair probe be possible? By dragging their feet, the Maharashtra and the Central governments have proved that there is no rule of law, no Constitutional right of equal citizenship.
The guilty, whatever be their religion, have to be punished. However wayward India’s democratic system, there has to be justice. Instances like the non-implementation of the Srikrishna report give the impression that when it comes to taking action against Muslims, the government is firm, but when it has to act against Hindus, it is lax.
Unfortunately, this reading is confirmed when one sees that the recommendations made by various commissions since independence have seldom been implemented. Action is still awaited on the reports on riots at Jabalpur (1961), Ranchi (1967), Bhiwandi (1970), Jamshedpur (1979), Meerut (1982) and Bhagalpur (1989). These were major riots where the inquiry commissions said that politicians and police officials were involved. In these reports, Hindu extremists were found to be the instigators. The police were blamed in every riot for their connivance. Muslim fundamentalists, too, were involved in some cases. But politicians of both communities remained behind the scenes. None of them got any punishment. The action against the police and other officials was a simple departmental inquiry which ended with a warning, censure or demotion. Politicians and criminals have got so intertwined that when it comes to prosecution or punishment, it depends on political convenience, not legal advice. Invariably, those who get scot-free are Hindus.
Take Gujarat. It is a standing shame. No action has been taken against chief minister Narendra Modi keeping in mind the political considerations. Around 20,000 Muslims are still refugees, with no means of livelihood and with practically no future. Even the belated action being taken against those who are responsible for the massacre is not really moving forward. The government is doing its best to shield the politicians and officials who were party to the pogrom. This seems to have become a prestige issue for the BJP. Or is Gujarat a dress rehearsal for the party’s hidden agenda?
When organisations like the Shiv Sena, feeding on hatred, continue to pick on Muslims and when the MIM MLAs at Hyderabad are not willing to apologise, it is clear that the muck of religion has thickly coated our society. It cannot be cleaned easily. The minimum that the government can do is to see that the political parties do not append the name of religion to their outfits.
|
