Akbaruddin Owaisi, an MLA of Andhra
Pradesh Legislative Assembly, who belongs to a Hyderabad-based political
party All India Majlis-e-Ittihad al-Muslimin, better known as MIM, and
its floor leader in the Assembly made an inflammatory speech against
Hindus on 24 December 2012 at a public meeting in Adilabad District. The
speech attracted widespread condemnation by Muslim activists, rightly
so, apart from left, liberal individuals and organizations. Dr. Zafarul
Islam Khan, President, All India Muslim Majlis e Mushawarat (AIMMM), an
umbrella body of prominent Indian Muslim organizations termed it ‘a hate
and rash speech’ arguing, ‘words that should never have been uttered by
a responsible person, let alone a political leader, were used’.
Shabnam Hashmi, a prominent social
activist and who has been relentlessly working on the issue of minority
rights registered an FIR in Delhi against Owaisi stating, ‘the whole
speech is highly objectionable, inflammatory and against the values of
our constitution, democracy and secular values’. Similarly, FIRs were
also registered in the State invoking section 295 A (for deliberate and
malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings) and 153 A
(promoting enmity between different groups) of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Owaisi was arrested finally arrested on Tuesday (8th January) and sent
to 14-day judicial custody.
However, there was a small section of
Muslims, mostly individuals, who held this as an illustration of the
‘double standards of civil society and state machinery’. The crux of
their argument was, that while governments take speedy actions and act
in a haste in the cases where Muslims are involved even in petty crimes,
criminals belonging to the majority community roam free despite being
involved in all sorts of serious crimes such as communal carnage, mass
murders, looting and rapes, let alone the cases of hate speech. While on
the surface, these allegations might appear as a desperate attempt to
defend communalists belonging to the Muslim community – and indeed some
of them may be—the fact is that these claims are not that far removed
from reality.
Sample this. Praveen Togadia, Vishwa
Hindu Parishad’s (VHP) international working President, during his
recent visit to Hyderabad in December last year, made an equally
inflammatory and communal speech while addressing a press conference in
the city. The VHP president at the press conference on the issue of
controversial Bhagya Lakshmi Mandir- Charminar threatened Muslims by
saying that ‘VHP will convert Hyderabad into Ayodhya if Hindus are not
allowed to perform Puja’. The simple fact is that Hindus have never been
stopped from performing Puja. He further thundered the VHP would teach
Muslims of Hyderabad a lesson that they would never forget. Following
this, a few cases have been registered against him but the government is
yet to act. It is well known of course that this is not the first time
when he has made such a speech. In fact, several such cases are pending
against Togadia, not only in Hyderabad but in different parts of the
country; and the police and the governments have never acted against
him.
And Togadia is not a solitary soldier:
there is a veritable contingent of Togadias whose prime work is hate
mongering and inciting violence, especially in situations where there
are higher chances of communal disturbance and violence. It has become
almost a routine for these forces to fuel violence in name of protecting
their religion, religious tenets and identity or interests of their
fellow religionists and people. Ashok Singhal, Adityanath Yogi, Uma
Bharti, Sadhvi Ritambhara and Raj/Udhav Thackeray to name a few. What is
strange, though often understood, that they draw their supports from
political parties of all hues. While certified communal political
parties like BJP and Shiv Sena lent them open support, self- appointed
secular parties like Congress and Samajwadi Party would never bother to
book them according to the law of the land despite ample evidence being
available. Hence, these cases of selective action only prove that our
governments utilize double standards for crimes of similar nature, for
criminals belonging to minority and majority communities. Varun Gandhi
is the sole exception, and there are indications already that the UP
government may go slow on him, after he submitted an application for
quashing of the case against him.
It was interesting also to see how the
Owaisi saga played out in the electronic media. Watching these
programmes, one would think that Owaisi was the originator of hate
speech in India, and not simply one among the many who blight public
discourse through their venom. TV anchors after anchor summoned ‘Muslim’
politicians from a range of political parties daring them to condemn
Owaisi. Would the Congress Party spokesperson be ever asked to condemn
Togadia – or Rithambara or Uma –as a Hindu or as someone opposed to
their politics or ideology? Why then this rush to seek declarations
from Muslim politicians as Muslims? Coming just months after all TV
channels were paying obeisance to Bal Thackeray, whose political career
was built on hate and its articulation, the self righteousness of the
various channel heads is only amusing.
So now that Owaisi is thankfully
arrested, the larger question is: what about Singhals, Yogis, Bhartis
and Thackerays? Will they ever be arrested and sent to jail like Owaisi
for their umpteen numbers of crimes? This must be answered; at least to
show that we as a constitutionally declared secular country – considered
to be the world’s largest democracy – do not practice two different
sets of rules for majority and minority. Remember, mere lip service like
in the past would not work this time as it would only further the
argument of the State practicing double standards.
Is anyone listening?
(Mahtab Alam is a Delhi based civil rights activist and freelance journalist. Email: activist dotjournalist at gmail dot com.)
