Jaswant, Jinnah and Ghost of India’s Partition
Ram Puniyani
Jaswant Singh’s latest book on Jinnah (August 2009) has rekindled the debate ‘who did it’ of partition. The storm created by this work can be gauzed from the fact that BJP, the party of which Jaswant Singh has been the founder member and for which he has been working from last three decades, was expelled him from the party. The basic point Singh is making is that Jinnah was a secular person, he has been wrongfully demonized in India, that Nehru and Patel rather than Jinnah were responsible for partition of India because of which there was gory violence and that Muslims are being treated as aliens in India.
To take the last point first. One concedes that Muslims have and are being treated as aliens in India. One of the major political parties which has targeted Muslims and, whose aggressive anti Muslim campaigns have resulted in their present plight, their exclusion from social and economic space is BJP, itself. The question is what has Mr. Jaswant Singh been doing when BJP has been asserting the concept of Hindu nation, has been part of processes which have relegated Muslims to the status of second class citizens? One is not arguing that the maltreatment of Muslims is only due to BJP. The major factor has been the subtle penetration of RSS ideology in the social and political arena of Indian life. While Jaswant Singh does not come from the RSS shakhas, he has been part of the party, which is the political vehicle of RSS. In this case his cry of ‘alienation of Muslims’ looks like shedding crocodile tears!
As far as Jinnah being secular is concerned, it is ironical that a party, which Jinnah headed with ‘brilliance’, had the name Muslim League! If that does not clarify the communal evaluation of a person what else will. Jinnah despite his exposure to the Western culture, despite his being part of the Indian National Congress for initial part of his life, did become the ‘sole spokesman’ of interests of Muslims, i.e. Muslim elite, in due course of time. One agrees that the individual attributes of the Qaed-e-Azam of Pakistan were remarkable, but that does not make him secular. Secularism essentially stands for relegating religious identity to private realm to one’s life, while Jinnah chose to lead Muslim League, where the religious identity was the base of the national identity.
There were people like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, Rafi Ahmad Kidwai and others who chose to be part of National movement for composite Indian nation. Majority of poor Muslims continued to support and follow Mahatma Gandhi and national movement. There were even Muslim religious leaders, and seminaries like those of Barelvi and Deoband, which stood for composite Indian Nationalism. On the other hand Muslim League, initially a product of the politics of Muslim Landlords and Nawabs and later joined in by section of educated and affluent Muslims, kept talking of interests of ‘Muslims’ and kept labeling Congress as Hindu party, despite its secular policy of Indian Nationalism.
The language of Interests of Muslims, leading to the notion of ‘Muslims are a separate nation’ was quiet akin and parallel to the concept of Hindu nation propagated by Savarkar-RSS, of India being a Hindu Rashtra, Hindu Nation. Do all Muslims have similar interests as asserted by Jinnah? What was the similarity between the interests of Ashraf and Arjal Muslims? What was the similarity of interests between the interests of rich landlord, businessmen Muslims and the poor artisan Muslims? Savarkar and RSS talked of the interests of Hindus, which layers of Hindus were these? Essentially the same layers which as Muslims were the beneficiaries of Muslim Leagues’ articulation, i.e. landlords, clergy and a section of middle classes.
Jinnah’s enticing 12th August 1947 ‘secular speech’ notwithstanding, the whole Muslim League predominantly consisted of those communal elements, who did want to convert Pakistan into a Muslims Nation, which they did in due course. And it was the same Muslim League under Jinnah’s leadership, which called for a separate state for Muslims, Pakistan, in 1940 Lahore resolution. Just because Jinnah was a non-practicing Muslim and a Westernized person does not make him secular. One’s association in politics should determine one’s characterization.
As far as role in the partition of the country is concerned, most of the debate is generally focused at superficial level, Muslim League, Congress, Nehru-Patel. Most of the debate is in the language of Heroes and villains, the deeper processes which gave rise to the political streams, which believed in religion based nation state, the role of British in creating such a situation is missing in the debate. While in Pakistan a large section will blame the intransigence of ‘Hindu Congress’ for partition, in India, Muslim League, Jinnah are blamed for the same. The source of ‘Hate politics’ in India, the RSS ideology, holds Gandhi also as a major culprit. According to the RSS-Hindu Mahasabha thinking expressed in so many ways, most clearly in the speech and action of Nathuram Godse, Gandhi is to blame for partition as he followed the policy of Muslim appeasement leading to their becoming assertive and going on to demand Pakistan. In most of the communal discourse, a large part of which has become part of social common sense in both the countries, the role of British in leading to the divisive path, and class character of communal organizations, which believed in the Religion based nation state, is missing altogether.
After the coming into being of Indian National Congress in 1885, from amongst the rising classes of Industrialist-Businessmen, educated sections and workers, the old declining classes of Landlords and Kings came together (1888) to form United India Patriotic Association. It is in this organization in which the future founders of Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha were working shoulder to shoulder, e.g. Raja of Kashi and Nawab of Dhaka. British played their cards very well and in pursuance with the imperial policy of divide et empera (divide and rule) recognized Muslim League as the representative of Muslims in 1906. That time it was predominantly formed by Muslim elite, who themselves were contemptuous of low caste Muslims; Arzals and Azlafs. Similarly Hindu Mahasabha, which was founded in 1915 had Hindu elite who were for Hindu Nation and average Hindus and low castes had no place in their scheme of things.
There is a lot of deeper parallelism in the agenda and language of both these communal streams. These were not only predominantly male dominated organizations, they also talked exclusively of identity issues. At that time the process of social transformation of caste and gender was going on but these streams totally kept aloof from those social processes. These communal streams emphasized on Muslim (elite) Hindu (elite) interests. That’s why they kept aloof from the national movement which aimed to bring in people of all religions, regions, castes and gender into a single stream of Indian ness. Jinnah’s focus on Constitutional methods and deep opposition to participation of masses in national movement was quite similar to Hindu Mahasbah and RSS policy of keeping aloof from freedom movement. It is from the Hindu stream, Savarakar, that the concept of Hindu nation and its politics, Hindutva, emerged. This Hindutva was later picked up by RSS. There was not much difference in many a formulation, which came from these two stables. As a matter of fact Savarkar goes on to quote approvingly, Jinnah’s statement that there are two Nations in India, Hindus and Muslims. And then says that since this is predominantly a Hindu nation, Muslim nation has to remain subordinate to the same. The deeper agenda of communal streams was same, the only difference was Muslim League called for parity and Hindu Mahasabha-RSS wanted subordination of Muslim nation.
While Hindu Communalism got fragmented between Hindu Mahasabha, RSS and some part of it entered Congress, Muslim communalism came up as a major force and later on a section of the Muslim educated classes came to support the same.
It is in this background that the logistics of partition has to be seen. For Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha-RSS it was a control over nation. National movement and Congress targeted for getting freedom, to come out of the shackles of feudal system and to lay the foundation of Industrial society on democratic basis. It is because of this that Nehru refused to accommodate Muslim League demand of take them in UP ministry in 1937, despite the defeat of Muslim League. Nehru’s argument was that since Congress wants to go for land reforms etc., how they can have a landlord representative sitting in the cabinet. Also Nehru refused to believe that Muslim League is a representative of all Muslims, the same way he opposed the formulation that Hindu Mahasabha-RSS are representatives of Hindus. Cabinet Mission plan, to which Congress and Muslim League both had assented, suggested a federal structure with all powers to provinces and have only defense, communication, currency and external affairs with the Central Government. During the course Nehru and Patel both realized that such a weak center will not be able to undertake the programs for country, programs for centralized planning for industrialization and related progress.
Superficially Nehru and Patel can be held responsible for what happened, but that’s like looking at the tip of iceberg. The deeper seed of divisiveness, the protection to interests of landlord elements was the British policy. It is in pursuance with that the Muslim League and Hindu Mahsabha was never the subject of British wrath, while the leaders of national movement had to make the British jails as their second home.
For Advani and Jaswant Singh the deeper fascination for Jinnah has some logic. Jinnah pursued two nation theory and succeeded in forming a Muslim nation. They have the wish to have a Hindu nation, so a subtle admiration as to how Jinnah could achieve his goal and so is a great hero for those pursuing religion based politics. At ideological level they are on the same wave-length, religion based nation state, as was Jinnah. They also visualize that by exonerating Jinnah from the blame of partition they are cornering Nehru and Congress, which at one level serves the BJP agenda. And here lies the problem. Since Nehru and Patel are inalienable as for as the trajectory of practical politics is concerned, Patel also comes in to the gambit of blame game which cannot be tolerated by large section of BJP followers. Another reason is that in RSS shakhas’ indoctrination module, the blame of partition is put on Jinnah’s head and the on the follies of Gandhi and Nehru. So how can Jinnah be resurrected without annoying the RSS module of indoctrination? Here lies the dilemma of RSS controlled Rajnath Singhs, and so the expulsion of Jaswant Singh for writing all this. Advani could save his skin earlier despite his ‘secular Jinnah speech’ because of electoral exigencies, as with sickness of Vajpayee, it was difficult to fill the gap by anybody else.
History has strange lessons to teach. Today lot of powerful opinions are being voiced, but most of them are based on one or the other superficial observation e.g. Jinnah’s earlier period when he was part of Congress or his 12th August 1947 speech in the Parliament. Similar type of historiography is also used for the communal historiography where kings are glorified or demonized according their religion. The deeper issues related to the workers, peasants and other average people are missing in this discourse. Same is the problem with the presentation of recent history, where the roots of communal streams (Muslim League, Hindu Mahsabha, and RSS) from the feudal lords and feudal values (Birth based hierarchy of caste and gender) is undermined and deliberately overlooked. This attitude also revels in creating heroes and villains; one streams’ hero being another streams villain. No wonder Bollywood is so successful in using this formula. And as major section of Bollywood is not bothered about the deeper issues of broad layers of society so are many of the worthy commentators for whom this wavelength is something easily understood and deliberated upon!
--
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Emperor's Islamophobia
Emperor’s Islamophobia
Shah Rukh Khan Detained at US airport
Ram Puniyani
Shah Rukh Khan, one of the best known actors from Bollywood was detained for questioning in Newark airport in US (15th August). The actor who is a global icon of sorts was grilled by the US official as his name is a Muslim one, and the legendary actor felt humiliated with the treatment meted out to him. While the star actor was being questioned in this manner the Jet Airways staff vouched for him and many of his international fans were seeking his autographs, but the US official, drunk on the Imperial arrogance and infected by anti Muslim sentiments refused to recognize Khan. That any Google search on his name would have yielded infinite entries to establish his identity, is an elementary knowledge by now.
Just a few weeks ago, India’s ex-President, the scientist of repute, APJ Abdul Kalam was treated like a commoner by the US based Airlines staff. Irfan Khan was also meted with similar treatment. Other actors, with non Muslim names, have also been given such humiliating treatment by US officials but the logic in these cases is different, Neil Nitin Mukesh for having a skin color fairer then his Hindu name and John Abram for having Afghanistan on his passport. In addition the senior ministers from India George Fernandez and Pranab Mukherjee have also been strip searched in the past.
Most of the channels and many eminent columnists criticized Shahrukh Khan and those voicing their protest on the grounds that it is these security checks which have saved US from another terrorist attack post 9/11 2001. The desirability or other wise of these checks apart, there are two basic questions. One is that can those having diplomatic passports and those listed in India’s list of people exempt from such checks be subjected to these ordeals? Secondly why secondary checks are more for those with Muslim names? These commentators realization of the tasks of US security officials notwithstanding the questions remain the double standards of the security check system.
While the major phenomenon visible here is that of US officials have imbibed the anti Islam and anti Muslim propaganda, post 9/11 2001, the additional factor is the inherent arrogance and superiority complex of this Imperial power since US emerged as the sole super power, after the decline of Soviet block in international political arena. The treatment which US officials are giving to Indian dignitaries and celebrities is in stark contrast to the treatment which Indian administration and people are giving to the US dignitaries. The visit of Hillary Clinton just a month ago demonstrates the reality. The US Secretary of State was not only given a red carpet welcome, Indian media also went gaga about her, starting from describing her smart dresses to the details of her smile at different occasions.
The twin phenomenon of US arrogance as a superpower dictating terms to the whole World and its targeting of Islam and Muslims for political goals have got mixed up here. The global democracy which was trying to come up during the middle of twentieth century has really got a set back during last three decades, and despite the humane instincts of Barack Hussein Obama, American system remains as high handed as before. One appreciates the steps of new American President in closing down Guantonamo bay and the subsequent stoppage of the intense torture and insult of accused of 9/11, especially Muslim youth. Despite that it seems the ground level reality of US has not changed much and Islamophobia is still ruling the policies, mindset and attitude of the US system as a whole.
It is after 9/11 2001, the collapse of WTC, and the accompanying statements of Osama bin Laden, which gave the pretext of launching a propaganda against Islam and Muslims. It was at that time that the word Islamic Terrorism was coined and the distorted version of core words, Jihad and Kafir were strongly popularized in the popular thinking. In a way it manufactured a hatred for Muslims and Islam. While Jihad stands for fighting against injustice, it was presented as killing of non Muslims. While Kafir is a concept totally invalid in current times, it was put across as denigrating non Muslims. The net result was that in the global thinking it came to be regarded that all Muslims are not terrorists, while all terrorists are Muslims. The US officials in general and immigration officials in particular stiffened their attitude towards Muslim immigrants to US. Globally also, particularly in our country the trend began where after every blast here and there scores of Muslim youth were apprehended and tortured, and at most of the times their careers were ruined.
The Pakistani film ‘Khuda Ke Liye’ depicted the life of an average Muslims whom US officials suspect to be a terrorist and the outcome of this can be well predicted. Indian film ‘New York’ also puts forward the cruelty of the attitude of US officials. In Indian context films like ‘Black and White’ and ‘Mumbai Meri Jaan’ depicted this sad reality of our society. Many a good articles and literature has also been produced by scholars, which gives us the real story, but despite all this the propaganda by section of US media and the vested organizations in India against Islam and Muslims continues.
The phenomenon of terrorism is very complex. One core point is to understand the genesis of Al Qaeda type organizations, which were the product of indoctrination in the Madrassas, set up in Pakistan. The syllabus and financial support of these came through CIA; the aim was to instigate indoctrinated Muslim youth to fight against the Russian armies who had occupied Afghanistan. Lately this truth is being said by Pakistani leader’s time and over again. In India the rising communal violence and acts of terrorism because of diverse factors, have been used to present the minorities in a negative light.
We in India can feel hurt, insulted and angry to what is being meted out to Indian celebrities and leaders. It is in a way the attitude of US to humiliate ‘others’, to assert its superiority and hegemony. The commentators criticizing the protest against treatment being meted out to the likes of Shah Rukh Khan and Indian dignitaries have to realize that it is not just to uphold the differential status but to protest against the highhanded attitude of United States. The time has come to revive the global democratic equations where the hegemony of one country is not acceptable and people of all countries and religions are treated with equal respect.
Shah Rukh Khan Detained at US airport
Ram Puniyani
Shah Rukh Khan, one of the best known actors from Bollywood was detained for questioning in Newark airport in US (15th August). The actor who is a global icon of sorts was grilled by the US official as his name is a Muslim one, and the legendary actor felt humiliated with the treatment meted out to him. While the star actor was being questioned in this manner the Jet Airways staff vouched for him and many of his international fans were seeking his autographs, but the US official, drunk on the Imperial arrogance and infected by anti Muslim sentiments refused to recognize Khan. That any Google search on his name would have yielded infinite entries to establish his identity, is an elementary knowledge by now.
Just a few weeks ago, India’s ex-President, the scientist of repute, APJ Abdul Kalam was treated like a commoner by the US based Airlines staff. Irfan Khan was also meted with similar treatment. Other actors, with non Muslim names, have also been given such humiliating treatment by US officials but the logic in these cases is different, Neil Nitin Mukesh for having a skin color fairer then his Hindu name and John Abram for having Afghanistan on his passport. In addition the senior ministers from India George Fernandez and Pranab Mukherjee have also been strip searched in the past.
Most of the channels and many eminent columnists criticized Shahrukh Khan and those voicing their protest on the grounds that it is these security checks which have saved US from another terrorist attack post 9/11 2001. The desirability or other wise of these checks apart, there are two basic questions. One is that can those having diplomatic passports and those listed in India’s list of people exempt from such checks be subjected to these ordeals? Secondly why secondary checks are more for those with Muslim names? These commentators realization of the tasks of US security officials notwithstanding the questions remain the double standards of the security check system.
While the major phenomenon visible here is that of US officials have imbibed the anti Islam and anti Muslim propaganda, post 9/11 2001, the additional factor is the inherent arrogance and superiority complex of this Imperial power since US emerged as the sole super power, after the decline of Soviet block in international political arena. The treatment which US officials are giving to Indian dignitaries and celebrities is in stark contrast to the treatment which Indian administration and people are giving to the US dignitaries. The visit of Hillary Clinton just a month ago demonstrates the reality. The US Secretary of State was not only given a red carpet welcome, Indian media also went gaga about her, starting from describing her smart dresses to the details of her smile at different occasions.
The twin phenomenon of US arrogance as a superpower dictating terms to the whole World and its targeting of Islam and Muslims for political goals have got mixed up here. The global democracy which was trying to come up during the middle of twentieth century has really got a set back during last three decades, and despite the humane instincts of Barack Hussein Obama, American system remains as high handed as before. One appreciates the steps of new American President in closing down Guantonamo bay and the subsequent stoppage of the intense torture and insult of accused of 9/11, especially Muslim youth. Despite that it seems the ground level reality of US has not changed much and Islamophobia is still ruling the policies, mindset and attitude of the US system as a whole.
It is after 9/11 2001, the collapse of WTC, and the accompanying statements of Osama bin Laden, which gave the pretext of launching a propaganda against Islam and Muslims. It was at that time that the word Islamic Terrorism was coined and the distorted version of core words, Jihad and Kafir were strongly popularized in the popular thinking. In a way it manufactured a hatred for Muslims and Islam. While Jihad stands for fighting against injustice, it was presented as killing of non Muslims. While Kafir is a concept totally invalid in current times, it was put across as denigrating non Muslims. The net result was that in the global thinking it came to be regarded that all Muslims are not terrorists, while all terrorists are Muslims. The US officials in general and immigration officials in particular stiffened their attitude towards Muslim immigrants to US. Globally also, particularly in our country the trend began where after every blast here and there scores of Muslim youth were apprehended and tortured, and at most of the times their careers were ruined.
The Pakistani film ‘Khuda Ke Liye’ depicted the life of an average Muslims whom US officials suspect to be a terrorist and the outcome of this can be well predicted. Indian film ‘New York’ also puts forward the cruelty of the attitude of US officials. In Indian context films like ‘Black and White’ and ‘Mumbai Meri Jaan’ depicted this sad reality of our society. Many a good articles and literature has also been produced by scholars, which gives us the real story, but despite all this the propaganda by section of US media and the vested organizations in India against Islam and Muslims continues.
The phenomenon of terrorism is very complex. One core point is to understand the genesis of Al Qaeda type organizations, which were the product of indoctrination in the Madrassas, set up in Pakistan. The syllabus and financial support of these came through CIA; the aim was to instigate indoctrinated Muslim youth to fight against the Russian armies who had occupied Afghanistan. Lately this truth is being said by Pakistani leader’s time and over again. In India the rising communal violence and acts of terrorism because of diverse factors, have been used to present the minorities in a negative light.
We in India can feel hurt, insulted and angry to what is being meted out to Indian celebrities and leaders. It is in a way the attitude of US to humiliate ‘others’, to assert its superiority and hegemony. The commentators criticizing the protest against treatment being meted out to the likes of Shah Rukh Khan and Indian dignitaries have to realize that it is not just to uphold the differential status but to protest against the highhanded attitude of United States. The time has come to revive the global democratic equations where the hegemony of one country is not acceptable and people of all countries and religions are treated with equal respect.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Victim as Culprit: Emraan Hashmi's House Hunt
Victim as the Culprit
Ram Puniyani
One BJP activist from Mumbai has filed a complaint (August 3rd 2009) against actor Emraan Hashmi accusing him of promoting communal enmity. Mahesh Bhatt who gave statement in support of Emran Hashmi also figures in the complaint. Emraan Hashmi had earlier approached state minorities commission that he has been discriminated against by the housing society, Nibhana in posh Pali hill locality of Mumbai. His complaint has been that he had already paid the advance of a lakh of rupees to the seller of the flat, but the housing society refused to give the no objection certificate on the ground that Hashmi is a Muslim. Many others have challenged this version; the society secretary said that they do not discriminate against people on the ground of religion, etc. A week later the compromise was struck between the actor and the society.
One does not know from newspaper reports, as to which version is true, why should Emraan state what he has stated? One also knows that similar trend of Muslims being denied houses in mixed localities have been there earlier as well. No society or builder will officially state that a people from particular religion are not permitted in their complex, these things operate in a very subtle way. Last year Shabana Azmi also was denied her choice to buy the house in a particular area. To that also many people just disbelieved it and many others ridiculed the actor, doubting the authenticity of the fact. It sometimes really sounds surreal that an actor is being denied a flat in a particular housing complex.
The peak of the reaction is seen in the form of a BJP activist filing a case against the actor for promoting communal enmity! Earlier Shabana Azmi and now Emraan Hashmi have faced this situation. There are many other such cases which might have been there but not known to us. For those who interact with large section of the community it is no secret that this type of denial persists more so in Mumbai and also in other places. The religion-caste based societies are there and they are a big set back to the process of national integration, which began during freedom movement. This process has been going on with lots of hiccups due to the rising communal violence, the outcome of communal politics, which aims at communal polarization.
The exclusions of ‘others’ is of various types. There are Parsi, Jain societies which have excluded those not belonging to their religion. In the aftermath of carnage many a Muslims after taking the beating decide to migrate away from the mixed localities to migrate to safer pastures, which later on come to be dubbed as Mini Pakistan’s. The latest observation has been the members of minority community have not been permitted to return to their original abodes. This was observed in Gujarat and later in Kandhmal. Similarly in areas where Muslims are in majority Hindus have been leaving that area voluntarily. The seeds of suspicion, which make them leave, are sown due to prevailing social common sense which demonizes the minorities. This process of exclusion by choice or by force of circumstances, both is very harmful for the national integration; to the concept of fraternity in particular gets a big beating due to this. Some of Mumbai’s suburbs, Mumbra, Bhendi Bazar, Jogeshwari have come up as areas with heavy concentration of Muslims. This concentration went up in the aftermath of the Mumbai violence of 1992-93. In Gujarat also in most cities Muslims got further isolated in the wake of 2002 carnage.
Due to this pattern of violence the general perceptions in society have worsened and now the whole Muslim community is painted as the homogenous uniform body painted in a color, which has nothing to do with truth. Further this physical isolation intensifies the negativity of perceptions about the ‘other’ community and this is mutually reciprocated by different religious communities. This lack of trust in fellow Indians is extremely dangerous.
So far, those complaining against the discrimination in allotment of housing were at least heard but now they are been alleged to be creating enmity! We cannot gloss over societal problems and expect that they are not there. Ostrich like, we can not hide our heads in the sands of make believe, and deny the realities. It is only after properly understanding the social problems that we can solve it. Emran Hashmi in a way has mustered courage to bring forward the phenomenon which is very much there. To treat such a person as culprit is like accusing the girl who has been raped, as saying that she has invited it! In a way this is also the pattern of society, to accuse the victims as having brought the misery onto themselves because of their own fallacies. There is a perception that Muslims start the riots and invite the trouble for themselves. This of course is far from true as a research by a police officer shows (V.N.Rai, Combating Communal Conflicts) and by the inquiry Commission reports including the latest one of Srikrishna Commission report which studies Mumbai riots.
Technicalities apart we need to address this serious social issue. We have examples in small countries like Singapore, where in the Government housing scheme there are reservations for different ethnic groups. This ensures that people from different ethnic-religious communities are neighbors and have an inbuilt situation where they interact socially. We are far from that. The biased builders and subtle operation of biases in the housing complexes needs to be done away by measures which are multilayered. Legal protection, affirmative action and debunking the misconceptions about minorities are the need of the hour. The compromise struck between the actor and society is welcome and kindles the hope that these exclusionary trends get wiped out in due course, one also hopes we are able to overcome these biases against our own citizens and create a more amicable atmosphere for all of us to live together.
(www.pluralindia.com, ram.puniyani@gmail.com)
Ram Puniyani
One BJP activist from Mumbai has filed a complaint (August 3rd 2009) against actor Emraan Hashmi accusing him of promoting communal enmity. Mahesh Bhatt who gave statement in support of Emran Hashmi also figures in the complaint. Emraan Hashmi had earlier approached state minorities commission that he has been discriminated against by the housing society, Nibhana in posh Pali hill locality of Mumbai. His complaint has been that he had already paid the advance of a lakh of rupees to the seller of the flat, but the housing society refused to give the no objection certificate on the ground that Hashmi is a Muslim. Many others have challenged this version; the society secretary said that they do not discriminate against people on the ground of religion, etc. A week later the compromise was struck between the actor and the society.
One does not know from newspaper reports, as to which version is true, why should Emraan state what he has stated? One also knows that similar trend of Muslims being denied houses in mixed localities have been there earlier as well. No society or builder will officially state that a people from particular religion are not permitted in their complex, these things operate in a very subtle way. Last year Shabana Azmi also was denied her choice to buy the house in a particular area. To that also many people just disbelieved it and many others ridiculed the actor, doubting the authenticity of the fact. It sometimes really sounds surreal that an actor is being denied a flat in a particular housing complex.
The peak of the reaction is seen in the form of a BJP activist filing a case against the actor for promoting communal enmity! Earlier Shabana Azmi and now Emraan Hashmi have faced this situation. There are many other such cases which might have been there but not known to us. For those who interact with large section of the community it is no secret that this type of denial persists more so in Mumbai and also in other places. The religion-caste based societies are there and they are a big set back to the process of national integration, which began during freedom movement. This process has been going on with lots of hiccups due to the rising communal violence, the outcome of communal politics, which aims at communal polarization.
The exclusions of ‘others’ is of various types. There are Parsi, Jain societies which have excluded those not belonging to their religion. In the aftermath of carnage many a Muslims after taking the beating decide to migrate away from the mixed localities to migrate to safer pastures, which later on come to be dubbed as Mini Pakistan’s. The latest observation has been the members of minority community have not been permitted to return to their original abodes. This was observed in Gujarat and later in Kandhmal. Similarly in areas where Muslims are in majority Hindus have been leaving that area voluntarily. The seeds of suspicion, which make them leave, are sown due to prevailing social common sense which demonizes the minorities. This process of exclusion by choice or by force of circumstances, both is very harmful for the national integration; to the concept of fraternity in particular gets a big beating due to this. Some of Mumbai’s suburbs, Mumbra, Bhendi Bazar, Jogeshwari have come up as areas with heavy concentration of Muslims. This concentration went up in the aftermath of the Mumbai violence of 1992-93. In Gujarat also in most cities Muslims got further isolated in the wake of 2002 carnage.
Due to this pattern of violence the general perceptions in society have worsened and now the whole Muslim community is painted as the homogenous uniform body painted in a color, which has nothing to do with truth. Further this physical isolation intensifies the negativity of perceptions about the ‘other’ community and this is mutually reciprocated by different religious communities. This lack of trust in fellow Indians is extremely dangerous.
So far, those complaining against the discrimination in allotment of housing were at least heard but now they are been alleged to be creating enmity! We cannot gloss over societal problems and expect that they are not there. Ostrich like, we can not hide our heads in the sands of make believe, and deny the realities. It is only after properly understanding the social problems that we can solve it. Emran Hashmi in a way has mustered courage to bring forward the phenomenon which is very much there. To treat such a person as culprit is like accusing the girl who has been raped, as saying that she has invited it! In a way this is also the pattern of society, to accuse the victims as having brought the misery onto themselves because of their own fallacies. There is a perception that Muslims start the riots and invite the trouble for themselves. This of course is far from true as a research by a police officer shows (V.N.Rai, Combating Communal Conflicts) and by the inquiry Commission reports including the latest one of Srikrishna Commission report which studies Mumbai riots.
Technicalities apart we need to address this serious social issue. We have examples in small countries like Singapore, where in the Government housing scheme there are reservations for different ethnic groups. This ensures that people from different ethnic-religious communities are neighbors and have an inbuilt situation where they interact socially. We are far from that. The biased builders and subtle operation of biases in the housing complexes needs to be done away by measures which are multilayered. Legal protection, affirmative action and debunking the misconceptions about minorities are the need of the hour. The compromise struck between the actor and society is welcome and kindles the hope that these exclusionary trends get wiped out in due course, one also hopes we are able to overcome these biases against our own citizens and create a more amicable atmosphere for all of us to live together.
(www.pluralindia.com, ram.puniyani@gmail.com)
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Malegaon Blast Accused get respite
Crime and No Punishment
Malegaon Blast Accused Get a Respite
Ram Puniyani
Eleven suspects of Malegaon blast, September 9, 2008, got a breather (August 01, 2009) when the special court dropped the charges under MCCOA against 11 suspects of the crime. Prosecution failed to show that all accused were member of a single organized crime syndicate. This MCOCA act also requires that there should be two previous charge sheets against one of them. Since the case prepared by police could not prove these the charges have been dropped. The ATS and Maharashtra Chief Minister have stated that they will ensure that they will go to the higher courts, against the order of this court decision. In past Congress has not undertaken any serious efforts to punish the guilty, so this statement of the authorities has to be taken with a pinch of salt.
MCCOA apart, the overall scenario and line of investigation followed by police has left lot of ground uncovered which can come handy for the culprits getting away lightly if the police does not do its home work well. There may also be deeper political dimensions to the issue as well. The first point which struck the observers so far was that for a long time police line of investigation in the blast cases was based on the premise that some Muslim group is involved in the crime. This created two problems. One was that the innocents kept getting arrested and tortured and second that the real culprits could hide under the cover provided by the popular perception about terrorism. The vicious cycle was broken by Hemant Karakre with the impeccable evidence in the form of the Motor cycle of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur from the crowded lane of Malegaon. Her link led to several people and many organizations. The people involved were Swami Dayanand Pandey, Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Puroit, Ajay Rahirar, retired Major Ramesh Upadhayay, Rakesh Dhavade and many others. The connections with Abhinva Bharat, Hindu Jagran Samiti, Army units, Bhonsala Military School (Nagpur and Nashik), Akanksha Resort Sinhgad all emerged and the picture of a broad conspiracy became clear.
The investigating officer, Hemant Karkare, about whose death in 26/11 terror attack, Antulay raised certain questions, faced immense pressure due to criticism from Hindu right wingers, Thackeray’s paper Saamana went on to say that they spit on the face of such a anti-national person like Karkare, and some others also called him as Deshdrohi. One does not know what direct/indirect impact all this had on the future drafting of the charge sheet. Human Rights activist Teesta Setalvad in her articles in Communalism Combat Feb 2009 raised several questions about the charge sheet, which remain unanswered.
One recalls that the Nanded blast (April 2006) case investigation itself was very much muted and it was only the pressure of campaign form Rights activists that the investigation was pursued. Rakesh Dhawade, one of the accused in the Malegaon charge sheet had confessed to his involvement in the training of few youth, for the preparation and detonation of bombs. The training was done near the Sinhgad Fort, Pune, in July-August 2003. Despite this he was allowed to be discharged from the Purbea masjid blast case on July 27, 2009! ATS says it was because the local police did not file a strong enough charge sheet! One does not know whether it is a lack of coordination or there is something deeper to this?
It is beyond one’s comprehension as to why section 125, waging war against the Indian Nation, has not been applied to these accused. In this case the involvement of the serving military officers and the retired ones has not been probed. It has ramifications far deeper then can be seen from the surface. These military officers had the background of Bhonsla Military School, which is practically controlled by RSS. The RSS has its wing for retired military personnel and has a lot of emphasis on cultivating connections with men in uniform. The theft of 60 Kilograms of RDX by Purohit is a pointer of what the serving and military officers can do once they are ideologically indoctrinated by the notions other than that of secular democratic India. Purohit in his narco analysis on 9th November 2008 had revealed about his role in Samjhauta Express blast and a possible role Mecca Masjid blast.
There are multiple aspects of the case involved. One does not support MCCOA at all, it is not only arbitrary and draconian; it also is a refuge for police not to undertake the trouble for deeper investigation and doing its home work properly. Even if one does not trust the narco analysis, there are enough other evidences to link up all these accused indoctrinated by RSS ideology. The point is why so many links which are there for all to see are not followed? Why resort to the short cut of MCOCA, or Narco analysis.
The core point is the biases of the state apparatus, political, bureaucratic and that of police in particular which has resulted in evolution of two sets of justice delivery systems. One is for the affluent and privileged that can get away with whatever they want and the second is for the weaker sections, including minorities. Here right from the police investigation to the charge sheeting, the political influence and biases which influence the process of justice delivery (or the lack of it) and the final verdict all are having a tinge of bias.
The political polices do determine the whole process. It is such outcomes which make a section of population feel that they are used merely as vote banks and when the time of justice comes they are not considered at all. If the culprits of Malegaon are treated with kid gloves under the theory that violence from Hindu fold is retaliatory that will be the travesty of justice of the worst order.
Malegaon Blast Accused Get a Respite
Ram Puniyani
Eleven suspects of Malegaon blast, September 9, 2008, got a breather (August 01, 2009) when the special court dropped the charges under MCCOA against 11 suspects of the crime. Prosecution failed to show that all accused were member of a single organized crime syndicate. This MCOCA act also requires that there should be two previous charge sheets against one of them. Since the case prepared by police could not prove these the charges have been dropped. The ATS and Maharashtra Chief Minister have stated that they will ensure that they will go to the higher courts, against the order of this court decision. In past Congress has not undertaken any serious efforts to punish the guilty, so this statement of the authorities has to be taken with a pinch of salt.
MCCOA apart, the overall scenario and line of investigation followed by police has left lot of ground uncovered which can come handy for the culprits getting away lightly if the police does not do its home work well. There may also be deeper political dimensions to the issue as well. The first point which struck the observers so far was that for a long time police line of investigation in the blast cases was based on the premise that some Muslim group is involved in the crime. This created two problems. One was that the innocents kept getting arrested and tortured and second that the real culprits could hide under the cover provided by the popular perception about terrorism. The vicious cycle was broken by Hemant Karakre with the impeccable evidence in the form of the Motor cycle of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur from the crowded lane of Malegaon. Her link led to several people and many organizations. The people involved were Swami Dayanand Pandey, Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Puroit, Ajay Rahirar, retired Major Ramesh Upadhayay, Rakesh Dhavade and many others. The connections with Abhinva Bharat, Hindu Jagran Samiti, Army units, Bhonsala Military School (Nagpur and Nashik), Akanksha Resort Sinhgad all emerged and the picture of a broad conspiracy became clear.
The investigating officer, Hemant Karkare, about whose death in 26/11 terror attack, Antulay raised certain questions, faced immense pressure due to criticism from Hindu right wingers, Thackeray’s paper Saamana went on to say that they spit on the face of such a anti-national person like Karkare, and some others also called him as Deshdrohi. One does not know what direct/indirect impact all this had on the future drafting of the charge sheet. Human Rights activist Teesta Setalvad in her articles in Communalism Combat Feb 2009 raised several questions about the charge sheet, which remain unanswered.
One recalls that the Nanded blast (April 2006) case investigation itself was very much muted and it was only the pressure of campaign form Rights activists that the investigation was pursued. Rakesh Dhawade, one of the accused in the Malegaon charge sheet had confessed to his involvement in the training of few youth, for the preparation and detonation of bombs. The training was done near the Sinhgad Fort, Pune, in July-August 2003. Despite this he was allowed to be discharged from the Purbea masjid blast case on July 27, 2009! ATS says it was because the local police did not file a strong enough charge sheet! One does not know whether it is a lack of coordination or there is something deeper to this?
It is beyond one’s comprehension as to why section 125, waging war against the Indian Nation, has not been applied to these accused. In this case the involvement of the serving military officers and the retired ones has not been probed. It has ramifications far deeper then can be seen from the surface. These military officers had the background of Bhonsla Military School, which is practically controlled by RSS. The RSS has its wing for retired military personnel and has a lot of emphasis on cultivating connections with men in uniform. The theft of 60 Kilograms of RDX by Purohit is a pointer of what the serving and military officers can do once they are ideologically indoctrinated by the notions other than that of secular democratic India. Purohit in his narco analysis on 9th November 2008 had revealed about his role in Samjhauta Express blast and a possible role Mecca Masjid blast.
There are multiple aspects of the case involved. One does not support MCCOA at all, it is not only arbitrary and draconian; it also is a refuge for police not to undertake the trouble for deeper investigation and doing its home work properly. Even if one does not trust the narco analysis, there are enough other evidences to link up all these accused indoctrinated by RSS ideology. The point is why so many links which are there for all to see are not followed? Why resort to the short cut of MCOCA, or Narco analysis.
The core point is the biases of the state apparatus, political, bureaucratic and that of police in particular which has resulted in evolution of two sets of justice delivery systems. One is for the affluent and privileged that can get away with whatever they want and the second is for the weaker sections, including minorities. Here right from the police investigation to the charge sheeting, the political influence and biases which influence the process of justice delivery (or the lack of it) and the final verdict all are having a tinge of bias.
The political polices do determine the whole process. It is such outcomes which make a section of population feel that they are used merely as vote banks and when the time of justice comes they are not considered at all. If the culprits of Malegaon are treated with kid gloves under the theory that violence from Hindu fold is retaliatory that will be the travesty of justice of the worst order.
Friday, July 31, 2009
In the name of SIMI
In the Name of SIMI
Ram Puniyani
In third week of July (2009) Maharashtra police arrested several Muslims in Pusad, Akola and neighboring regions on the charge that they are reviving SIMI under a new name. It is after a fairly long time that one has heard of arrests in the name of SIMI. The earlier cycle of arrest of Muslim youth which was a matter of routine after every blast, Malegaon, Mecca Masjid in Hyderabad, Jaipur and other places was broken with the impeccable proof of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur’s motor cycle being found in Malegaon. The trace of motorcycle link led to Swami Dayanand Pandey, Lt Col Shrikant Purohit and many others associated with Hindu right wing organizations, offshoots of or inspired by RSS ideology.
Society witnessed that after most of the blasts so far, Muslim youth were arrested on the charge of being behind the blasts, were harassed for months and then released for the lack of evidence. This was more or less a routine pattern and it frightened the whole Muslim community to no end. Many a Muslim youths’ careers were crushed due to these reckless and baseless arrests. Many a minority families under went severe problems, were ostracized from their own community once they were dragged into the net on the charges which were guided more by the prevalent biases or stereotypes than any substance. SIMI came to be regarded as the core organization responsible for fomenting trouble through youth. Despite the ban on SIMI in 2001, the Muslim youth kept on being labeled as SIMI activists and were put behind the bar.
It’s not to say that SIMI was holding ideology which was talking of democracy and secularism. One knows that SIMI, which began as a student front of Jamat-e-Islami Hind gradually, came out of its control and became radical in the decade of 1990s in particular. Yoginder Sikand, an Islamic scholar of repute gives a very crisp history of this organization (/www.countercurrents.org/comm-sikand150706.htm). SIMI was founded on the ideology propounded by Maulana Maududi, according to whom all non Muslims are kafirs and man made systems like democracy are false and Shariah is the only way. It kept the goal of spreading Islamic consciousness amongst Muslim students and peaceful missionary work amongst non Muslims. Some events in the decade of 1990 were to shape its ideology in a radical and militant direction. These events were Soviet Russia’s invasion of Afghanistan and Islamization of Pakistan in particular.
Meanwhile Jamat- e- Islami came to accept democracy and Secularism as its guiding ideology. SIMI came out from the control of its parent organization to talk in a different language. The demolition of Babri Mosque and the post demolition violence gave it a fillip in the negative direction. It said that Democracy has failed to protect Muslims so there is a need for some one like Mohammed Gazni, the destroyer of Somanth. This was also the theme of the poster released by them in the aftermath of Babri demolition. It was alleged that SIMI has links with Sikh and Kashmiri militants. It was alleged that they have links with Osama and ISI. At the same time SIMI claimed that it wants to work through peaceful methods, while the worsening communal situation made it to say that Muslims are a belabored community. Under these circumstances SIMI was banned in 2001.
The ban on SIMI was challenged, so a tribunal had to be appointed to review the ban. Ajit Sahi of Tehelka in his painstaking investigation, followed the tribunal’s sitting all through (Tehelka, SIMI Fictions, 12th August 2008), the tribunal did not find any evidence of the charges put against the organization for banning it. The ban could not be upheld. About this investigation Ajit Sahi said, “… his investigation is no dry story rising from lifeless court documents. It has been an emotional rollercoaster to sit across young boys barely into manhood, their foreheads creased by sleepless nights worried stiff over the jailing of a father, a brother, wondering endlessly, “Will this end? Is this for real? What do I do now? Where do I go now? Will I survive this?” He further says “as I interviewed countless Muslims, so weathered, I couldn’t but ask myself, What if this was me? What if it was my brother, my father in jail?”
With the World scenario tilting against the Islam and Muslims, courtesy the radical Islamists trained in the Madrassas set up in Pakistan with US aid, the popular psyche perceived an average Muslim as a terrorist and police machinery operated on this understanding. Even when scores of lives were shattered and the community came under the intimidation of highest order, the Government did not put any corrective to this pattern of investigation with which police was pursuing its work.
Disturbed by this situation two people’s tribunal were set up by the Human Rights groups. The report and recommendations of both the tribunal are similar and overlapping. The first one was headed by Justices (Retd) Bhargava and Sardar Ali Khan, with prominent social activists like Asghar Ali Engineer and Prashant Bhushan as the jury. The testimonies showed that a large number of innocent young Muslims have been and are being victimized by the police on the charge of being involved in various terrorist acts across the country. This is particularly so in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Rajasthan, though not limited to these States. This victimization and demonisation of Muslims in the guise of investigation of terror offences, is having a very serious psychological impact on the minds of not only the families of the victims but also other members of the community. It is leading to a very strong sense of insecurity and alienation which may lead to frightful consequences for the nation.
The second tribunal set up by different set of organization s of Rajasthan worked under the leadership of Justice (Retd) Bhargava. One of it pertinent observation was that the police authorities investigating the terror offences appear to be violating all the laws of the land and directions of the Supreme Court during the conduct of the investigations. In particular, many persons have been detained for days or weeks, without showing them to be arrested and without producing them before any Magistrate. They have been sometimes tortured and humiliated by the police officers. They have not been allowed to meet their relatives and lawyers, who have often not even been informed of their detention. The investigation of the blasts by the police also appears to be communally motivated and only persons belonging to the Muslim community have been the target of the investigations.
The names of HUJI and SIMI have been bandied about by the police as the perpetrators of the blasts without any evidence. A number of former members of SIMI have been arrested and detained without any basis or evidence against them. The media has also been uncritically repeating and amplifying the baseless allegations and innuendoes of the police mentioning persons and organizations belonging to the Muslim community, thus resulting in ethnic profiling and feeding into the Islamophobia being sought to be created and reinforced in the minds of the Hindu community by the Hindutva organizations. In Jaipur this has resulted in the vilification of the entire Bengali Muslim community who has been victimized by the Hindutva organizations in complicity with the police.
Thousands of them have been picked up after the blasts and forcibly transported to New Jalpaiguri and then Bangladesh without any due process of law and without giving them an opportunity to show their Indian Citizenship. This has resulted in the ethnic cleansing of Jaipur.
One does not know with what seriousness the administration looks at these people’s tribunal, the fact is they have put forward profound realities of the society. It is imperative that the Government takes a serious look at these reports and instructs the investigation authorities to be more professional in their approach and sheds its biases while dealing with minority community.
Ram Puniyani
In third week of July (2009) Maharashtra police arrested several Muslims in Pusad, Akola and neighboring regions on the charge that they are reviving SIMI under a new name. It is after a fairly long time that one has heard of arrests in the name of SIMI. The earlier cycle of arrest of Muslim youth which was a matter of routine after every blast, Malegaon, Mecca Masjid in Hyderabad, Jaipur and other places was broken with the impeccable proof of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur’s motor cycle being found in Malegaon. The trace of motorcycle link led to Swami Dayanand Pandey, Lt Col Shrikant Purohit and many others associated with Hindu right wing organizations, offshoots of or inspired by RSS ideology.
Society witnessed that after most of the blasts so far, Muslim youth were arrested on the charge of being behind the blasts, were harassed for months and then released for the lack of evidence. This was more or less a routine pattern and it frightened the whole Muslim community to no end. Many a Muslim youths’ careers were crushed due to these reckless and baseless arrests. Many a minority families under went severe problems, were ostracized from their own community once they were dragged into the net on the charges which were guided more by the prevalent biases or stereotypes than any substance. SIMI came to be regarded as the core organization responsible for fomenting trouble through youth. Despite the ban on SIMI in 2001, the Muslim youth kept on being labeled as SIMI activists and were put behind the bar.
It’s not to say that SIMI was holding ideology which was talking of democracy and secularism. One knows that SIMI, which began as a student front of Jamat-e-Islami Hind gradually, came out of its control and became radical in the decade of 1990s in particular. Yoginder Sikand, an Islamic scholar of repute gives a very crisp history of this organization (/www.countercurrents.org/comm-sikand150706.htm). SIMI was founded on the ideology propounded by Maulana Maududi, according to whom all non Muslims are kafirs and man made systems like democracy are false and Shariah is the only way. It kept the goal of spreading Islamic consciousness amongst Muslim students and peaceful missionary work amongst non Muslims. Some events in the decade of 1990 were to shape its ideology in a radical and militant direction. These events were Soviet Russia’s invasion of Afghanistan and Islamization of Pakistan in particular.
Meanwhile Jamat- e- Islami came to accept democracy and Secularism as its guiding ideology. SIMI came out from the control of its parent organization to talk in a different language. The demolition of Babri Mosque and the post demolition violence gave it a fillip in the negative direction. It said that Democracy has failed to protect Muslims so there is a need for some one like Mohammed Gazni, the destroyer of Somanth. This was also the theme of the poster released by them in the aftermath of Babri demolition. It was alleged that SIMI has links with Sikh and Kashmiri militants. It was alleged that they have links with Osama and ISI. At the same time SIMI claimed that it wants to work through peaceful methods, while the worsening communal situation made it to say that Muslims are a belabored community. Under these circumstances SIMI was banned in 2001.
The ban on SIMI was challenged, so a tribunal had to be appointed to review the ban. Ajit Sahi of Tehelka in his painstaking investigation, followed the tribunal’s sitting all through (Tehelka, SIMI Fictions, 12th August 2008), the tribunal did not find any evidence of the charges put against the organization for banning it. The ban could not be upheld. About this investigation Ajit Sahi said, “… his investigation is no dry story rising from lifeless court documents. It has been an emotional rollercoaster to sit across young boys barely into manhood, their foreheads creased by sleepless nights worried stiff over the jailing of a father, a brother, wondering endlessly, “Will this end? Is this for real? What do I do now? Where do I go now? Will I survive this?” He further says “as I interviewed countless Muslims, so weathered, I couldn’t but ask myself, What if this was me? What if it was my brother, my father in jail?”
With the World scenario tilting against the Islam and Muslims, courtesy the radical Islamists trained in the Madrassas set up in Pakistan with US aid, the popular psyche perceived an average Muslim as a terrorist and police machinery operated on this understanding. Even when scores of lives were shattered and the community came under the intimidation of highest order, the Government did not put any corrective to this pattern of investigation with which police was pursuing its work.
Disturbed by this situation two people’s tribunal were set up by the Human Rights groups. The report and recommendations of both the tribunal are similar and overlapping. The first one was headed by Justices (Retd) Bhargava and Sardar Ali Khan, with prominent social activists like Asghar Ali Engineer and Prashant Bhushan as the jury. The testimonies showed that a large number of innocent young Muslims have been and are being victimized by the police on the charge of being involved in various terrorist acts across the country. This is particularly so in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Rajasthan, though not limited to these States. This victimization and demonisation of Muslims in the guise of investigation of terror offences, is having a very serious psychological impact on the minds of not only the families of the victims but also other members of the community. It is leading to a very strong sense of insecurity and alienation which may lead to frightful consequences for the nation.
The second tribunal set up by different set of organization s of Rajasthan worked under the leadership of Justice (Retd) Bhargava. One of it pertinent observation was that the police authorities investigating the terror offences appear to be violating all the laws of the land and directions of the Supreme Court during the conduct of the investigations. In particular, many persons have been detained for days or weeks, without showing them to be arrested and without producing them before any Magistrate. They have been sometimes tortured and humiliated by the police officers. They have not been allowed to meet their relatives and lawyers, who have often not even been informed of their detention. The investigation of the blasts by the police also appears to be communally motivated and only persons belonging to the Muslim community have been the target of the investigations.
The names of HUJI and SIMI have been bandied about by the police as the perpetrators of the blasts without any evidence. A number of former members of SIMI have been arrested and detained without any basis or evidence against them. The media has also been uncritically repeating and amplifying the baseless allegations and innuendoes of the police mentioning persons and organizations belonging to the Muslim community, thus resulting in ethnic profiling and feeding into the Islamophobia being sought to be created and reinforced in the minds of the Hindu community by the Hindutva organizations. In Jaipur this has resulted in the vilification of the entire Bengali Muslim community who has been victimized by the Hindutva organizations in complicity with the police.
Thousands of them have been picked up after the blasts and forcibly transported to New Jalpaiguri and then Bangladesh without any due process of law and without giving them an opportunity to show their Indian Citizenship. This has resulted in the ethnic cleansing of Jaipur.
One does not know with what seriousness the administration looks at these people’s tribunal, the fact is they have put forward profound realities of the society. It is imperative that the Government takes a serious look at these reports and instructs the investigation authorities to be more professional in their approach and sheds its biases while dealing with minority community.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Mind your Language- Bahuguna Joshi: Mayawati Spat
Mind your language
Bahuguna Joshi-Mayawati Ugly Spat
Ram Puniyani
After the 2009 General Elections UP is seeing the struggle for Dalit votes. While Rahul Gandhi could make substantial inroads into UP, Mayawati was humbled quite a bit due to the election results. Before the elections there was a popular impression that BSP will romp home with bigger electoral percentage, after the elections this image stood shattered as Rahul Gandhi’s efforts to establish a rapport with dalits in particular looked to be working to the advantage of Congress. Infuriated by this Mayawati intensified her vitriol against Congress by saying that Rahul’s steps to identify with dalits at social level is all Natakbaji (drama) just for political purpose. She also dragged Mahatma Gandhi’s name and his work to connect up with dalits in the same category, a drama bereft of any substance or for real benefit of dalits.
Then came the unfortunate and condemnable statement from the state Congress Chief, Rita Bahuguna Joshi (July 2009) about the deteriorating law and order situation in UP, where the rampant atrocities, rape in particular, against dalit women are compensated by giving 25-50 thousands. She questioned if money is all what matters in such cases, then women have to ask Mayawati how she herself would feel if she was given a crore of rupees as a compensation of rape. The utter insensitivity, crudity and anti women nature of the remark deserves a severe reprimand coming from any body, more so from a woman, and that too holding such a high position in the hierarchy of the ruling party.
What followed was also equally condemnable, she was arrested under the charges related to anti Dalit atrocities and her house was burnt. Mayawati asserted that it is an insult of dalits. Quite an opportunist twist to a highly condemnable remark! The remark is against the gender sensitivities, and Mayawati gave it an anti dalit twist to gain sympathy and to ensure that the dalit vote bank is retained-won back, from the inroads made by Congress.
One recalls that similar comments were made by Mayawati herself about the Mulayam Singh’s Government to pay compensation to rape victims. She had directed similar comments to female kin’s of Mulayam Singh. Unfortunately her comments did not come under the scanner of critical media and people’s gaze.
Rape has been an ugly and dangerous weapon of the male dominated society against the women, in forcing them to subjugation, to enforce the patriarchal aggression against women. Times and over again it has been used, in history and currently also it is being used with that purpose. Different social commentators have looked at it from their political angles. One recalls the incident when Kalyan Subedar’s daughter-in-law was brought to Shivaji as a gift. Shivaji returned her with full honors, something which is worth appreciating. To this incident Hindu Mahasabha leader and Hindutva ideologue Savarkar criticizes Shivaji, as to why he forgot that many Hindu women were molested by Muslim, rulers, why he did not follow the policy of retaliation in this case. Savarkar adopted similar attitude to the women victims of partition tragedy and said Pakistani women should be subjected to similar treatment, a policy of tit-for-tat should be adopted.
Communal ideology is the most concentrated expression of patriarchal norms of society. One is puzzled as to how come women themselves are indulging in such a language totally seeped in the male dominated language, patriarchal psychology?
At one level it is surprising, the insensitivity of some women to use such a language. One has to remember the transformation process of gender relations is not a linear one. During this phase of transition the political forces working for status quo, working for restoring the caste and gender hierarchy of feudal times, communalize the social space due to which such a language becomes the dominant language. The result is a section of women themselves become the victim of this mindset or such a language.
During the initial period of the rise of women’s movement, it had to break a popular myth that women themselves are the enemy of women. This was based on the observation of active participation of women relatives in the matters of dowry or bride burning. The dominant role of mother in law or sister in law in subjugating the position of daughter in law. There have been painful instances during communal violence in Mumbai 92-93 and Gujarat carnage when a section of women helped ‘their’ men in violating the modesty of women from other community! Especially Gujarat carnage is full of these tragic incidents when some Hindu women played this ugly role. Gujarat carnage will also be remembered for the absurd remark of BJP associate George Fernandes’ comment as to what is the big deal if rape is taking place in Gujarat; it is an old phenomenon anyway!
One can understand this from the point that the male dominated discourse is the dominant language of society and that’s how Rita Bahuguna Joshi and Mayawati despite being women themselves resort to such expressions in pursuance of their political agenda of coming to power or retaining the power. This also shows the state of affairs of law and order in UP, this also shows the communalized mind set of women themselves. Communal issue is not just an issue related to diverse religious communities. At core it is an attempt to suppress the rights of equality of women and dalits in society. Interestingly in case of Mayawati, both these hierarchies have mixed up and she is shifting form one to the other suppressed identity to pay back Bahuguna Joshi and is resorting to caste instead of gender, which is the issue in this case.
The issue of gender equality is the core issue, along with the annihilation of caste, which needs to be addressed by the social movements. The awareness of these issues needs to be broadened to different layers of society, including women themselves of course, to make the transition to a just society and to avoid such ugly repetitions of such a dirty language.
Bahuguna Joshi-Mayawati Ugly Spat
Ram Puniyani
After the 2009 General Elections UP is seeing the struggle for Dalit votes. While Rahul Gandhi could make substantial inroads into UP, Mayawati was humbled quite a bit due to the election results. Before the elections there was a popular impression that BSP will romp home with bigger electoral percentage, after the elections this image stood shattered as Rahul Gandhi’s efforts to establish a rapport with dalits in particular looked to be working to the advantage of Congress. Infuriated by this Mayawati intensified her vitriol against Congress by saying that Rahul’s steps to identify with dalits at social level is all Natakbaji (drama) just for political purpose. She also dragged Mahatma Gandhi’s name and his work to connect up with dalits in the same category, a drama bereft of any substance or for real benefit of dalits.
Then came the unfortunate and condemnable statement from the state Congress Chief, Rita Bahuguna Joshi (July 2009) about the deteriorating law and order situation in UP, where the rampant atrocities, rape in particular, against dalit women are compensated by giving 25-50 thousands. She questioned if money is all what matters in such cases, then women have to ask Mayawati how she herself would feel if she was given a crore of rupees as a compensation of rape. The utter insensitivity, crudity and anti women nature of the remark deserves a severe reprimand coming from any body, more so from a woman, and that too holding such a high position in the hierarchy of the ruling party.
What followed was also equally condemnable, she was arrested under the charges related to anti Dalit atrocities and her house was burnt. Mayawati asserted that it is an insult of dalits. Quite an opportunist twist to a highly condemnable remark! The remark is against the gender sensitivities, and Mayawati gave it an anti dalit twist to gain sympathy and to ensure that the dalit vote bank is retained-won back, from the inroads made by Congress.
One recalls that similar comments were made by Mayawati herself about the Mulayam Singh’s Government to pay compensation to rape victims. She had directed similar comments to female kin’s of Mulayam Singh. Unfortunately her comments did not come under the scanner of critical media and people’s gaze.
Rape has been an ugly and dangerous weapon of the male dominated society against the women, in forcing them to subjugation, to enforce the patriarchal aggression against women. Times and over again it has been used, in history and currently also it is being used with that purpose. Different social commentators have looked at it from their political angles. One recalls the incident when Kalyan Subedar’s daughter-in-law was brought to Shivaji as a gift. Shivaji returned her with full honors, something which is worth appreciating. To this incident Hindu Mahasabha leader and Hindutva ideologue Savarkar criticizes Shivaji, as to why he forgot that many Hindu women were molested by Muslim, rulers, why he did not follow the policy of retaliation in this case. Savarkar adopted similar attitude to the women victims of partition tragedy and said Pakistani women should be subjected to similar treatment, a policy of tit-for-tat should be adopted.
Communal ideology is the most concentrated expression of patriarchal norms of society. One is puzzled as to how come women themselves are indulging in such a language totally seeped in the male dominated language, patriarchal psychology?
At one level it is surprising, the insensitivity of some women to use such a language. One has to remember the transformation process of gender relations is not a linear one. During this phase of transition the political forces working for status quo, working for restoring the caste and gender hierarchy of feudal times, communalize the social space due to which such a language becomes the dominant language. The result is a section of women themselves become the victim of this mindset or such a language.
During the initial period of the rise of women’s movement, it had to break a popular myth that women themselves are the enemy of women. This was based on the observation of active participation of women relatives in the matters of dowry or bride burning. The dominant role of mother in law or sister in law in subjugating the position of daughter in law. There have been painful instances during communal violence in Mumbai 92-93 and Gujarat carnage when a section of women helped ‘their’ men in violating the modesty of women from other community! Especially Gujarat carnage is full of these tragic incidents when some Hindu women played this ugly role. Gujarat carnage will also be remembered for the absurd remark of BJP associate George Fernandes’ comment as to what is the big deal if rape is taking place in Gujarat; it is an old phenomenon anyway!
One can understand this from the point that the male dominated discourse is the dominant language of society and that’s how Rita Bahuguna Joshi and Mayawati despite being women themselves resort to such expressions in pursuance of their political agenda of coming to power or retaining the power. This also shows the state of affairs of law and order in UP, this also shows the communalized mind set of women themselves. Communal issue is not just an issue related to diverse religious communities. At core it is an attempt to suppress the rights of equality of women and dalits in society. Interestingly in case of Mayawati, both these hierarchies have mixed up and she is shifting form one to the other suppressed identity to pay back Bahuguna Joshi and is resorting to caste instead of gender, which is the issue in this case.
The issue of gender equality is the core issue, along with the annihilation of caste, which needs to be addressed by the social movements. The awareness of these issues needs to be broadened to different layers of society, including women themselves of course, to make the transition to a just society and to avoid such ugly repetitions of such a dirty language.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Deresrving Past; reserving Future
Reserved Past: De-reserving Future
Ram Puniyani
Reservation has been a big bone of contention in our society. Since last two decades the issue has been expressed in subtle, direct and indirect, forms. In popular psyche while some reservations are desirable and good others are the one which are regarded as an obstacle to social progress and some others are regarded as an obstacle to national integration. Currently the one’s related to Women’s reservation is regarded as being highly desirable, the one relating to Dalit-OBC is thought of as cause of stagnation, obstacle to progress and depriving the more meritorious upper castes from the portals of opportunity, while the mere talk of reservation for minorities is presented as dividing the nation.
Despite India coming out of colonial yoke, despite the democracy and modern constitution being in place, the process of transformation of caste and gender has remained half way through. The foundations of these twin transformations were laid during the freedom movement, but since forms of landlordism and hold of clergy continued in society, the caste-gender transformation has not been completed. Nehru expressed this to a French journalist, Andre Marloux, that a secular constitution is there but country is gripped by deep religiosity. Our Constitution makers took up the step of affirmative action for dalits-adivasis, reserving seats for a stipulated period of time. Since the implementation of these policies was in the hands of upper caste, the proper implementation could not take place and the problem lingered on, resulting in every succeeding government extending the period of reservations, part of it was also motivated by electoral compulsions. To add to this came the issue that reservations for these groups were used by a few in the community, leading to creamy sections fattening themselves and a larger sections remaining deprived of the basic amenities and consequent dignity.
The process of urbanization resulted in the affluent middle classes coming up and by 1980 they became assertive, and dead against the reservations for dalit-OBC. They crystallized around RSS affiliates and the result was the first major anti dalit violence in Ahmedabad in 1981, this was backed up by the one in 1986 against OBCs in Gujarat. By this time women’s movement was picking up. From last more than a decade women have been demanding their due in the social and political sphere. The RSS support base saw the Mandal, reservation for OBCs, as a big threat to their social status and rallied around Advani’s Rath yatra. Mandal was to be countered by Kamamdal (politics in the name of religion) as Atal Bihari Vajpayee put it. Kamandal spilled the blood on the streets and the issue of reservation went to the back drop and major assault now was directed against, minorities, First the Muslims and the Christians, Pehle Kasai-Phir Isai, as their popular battle cry put it.
With the severe security problems of minorities, the question of equity remained in the background. The Muslim community as a matter of fact went down on the social indices as pointed out by the Sachar Committee. With declining economic indices the talk of reservation for Muslims in education and jobs started coming up. But RSS affiliates, working for a Hindu nation, essentially the one with hegemony of upper caste males, struck hard by saying that any reservation for Muslims will mean formation of another Pakistan. One can’t understand the logic of the same, but one can surely understand the threat concealed in this formulation. So now the compromised talk of Equal Opportunity Commission, affirmative action for minorities and the formulation that all steps short of reservation are to be thought-of, is going on. How far Equal Opportunity Commission will achieve the purpose, if the societal thinking is so hostile to the minority welfare, remains to be seen?
During this time the Women, another major and deprived section, were given reservation in Panchayats. This effort had all the merits but some deeper flaws prevailed. One was that in most or many Panchayats, where women were Sarpanchs (chief), their Husband or other male relative practically controlled the scene. Despite this, women did make some headway in the direction of empowerment. With this came the demand of reservation for women in Parliament, the highest law making body. Most of the political parties, including BJP, the one controlled by RSS, so inherently believing in the birth based hierarchy of caste and gender, supported it. The only opposition came from the OBC dominated parties, for whom the caste inequality has been the central concern of their politics.
Their argument is that at present mainly upper caste and affluent women are in the social space so this move will tilt the caste balance in favor of upper castes. So they say that there should be inbuilt sub quota based on the basis of caste and minority. To say that women are women, no inner differences are to close the eyes to reality. The poor dalit, adivasi, Muslim women have little in common with the affluent elite women. The Bill for women’s reservation has been struggling to be passed since 1996. So far as there was no clear majority of any party in Lok Sabha, the bill kept hanging fire. Now with UPA, in comfortable position the expectation is that the bill should be passed.
Is there any merit in what Sharad Yadavs, Mulayams and Lalus have been saying? It has been presented in the media that they are against the reservation for women as such. Their demand that the bill be presented after modification has been underplayed and rejected out of hand. One whole-heartedly supports the reservations when necessary, to bring in gender and social justice. At the same time there has to be a safety clause that the reservation should be suitably implemented to avoid the adverse effects. While some political voices that are very vociferous for ‘merit’, are against the concept of reservation more so for SC-ST-OBC-minority reservation, are also strong proponents of reservation for women! Why these double standards? Why the bill has not been amended to include the sub quota for caste and minorities not added is a mystery, or is it that, it shows the real agenda of those who are for the bill in present form?
--Reserved Past: De-reserving Future
Ram Puniyani
Reservation has been a big bone of contention in our society. Since last two decades the issue has been expressed in subtle, direct and indirect, forms. In popular psyche while some reservations are desirable and good others are the one which are regarded as an obstacle to social progress and some others are regarded as an obstacle to national integration. Currently the one’s related to Women’s reservation is regarded as being highly desirable, the one relating to Dalit-OBC is thought of as cause of stagnation, obstacle to progress and depriving the more meritorious upper castes from the portals of opportunity, while the mere talk of reservation for minorities is presented as dividing the nation.
Despite India coming out of colonial yoke, despite the democracy and modern constitution being in place, the process of transformation of caste and gender has remained half way through. The foundations of these twin transformations were laid during the freedom movement, but since forms of landlordism and hold of clergy continued in society, the caste-gender transformation has not been completed. Nehru expressed this to a French journalist, Andre Marloux, that a secular constitution is there but country is gripped by deep religiosity. Our Constitution makers took up the step of affirmative action for dalits-adivasis, reserving seats for a stipulated period of time. Since the implementation of these policies was in the hands of upper caste, the proper implementation could not take place and the problem lingered on, resulting in every succeeding government extending the period of reservations, part of it was also motivated by electoral compulsions. To add to this came the issue that reservations for these groups were used by a few in the community, leading to creamy sections fattening themselves and a larger sections remaining deprived of the basic amenities and consequent dignity.
The process of urbanization resulted in the affluent middle classes coming up and by 1980 they became assertive, and dead against the reservations for dalit-OBC. They crystallized around RSS affiliates and the result was the first major anti dalit violence in Ahmedabad in 1981, this was backed up by the one in 1986 against OBCs in Gujarat. By this time women’s movement was picking up. From last more than a decade women have been demanding their due in the social and political sphere. The RSS support base saw the Mandal, reservation for OBCs, as a big threat to their social status and rallied around Advani’s Rath yatra. Mandal was to be countered by Kamamdal (politics in the name of religion) as Atal Bihari Vajpayee put it. Kamandal spilled the blood on the streets and the issue of reservation went to the back drop and major assault now was directed against, minorities, First the Muslims and the Christians, Pehle Kasai-Phir Isai, as their popular battle cry put it.
With the severe security problems of minorities, the question of equity remained in the background. The Muslim community as a matter of fact went down on the social indices as pointed out by the Sachar Committee. With declining economic indices the talk of reservation for Muslims in education and jobs started coming up. But RSS affiliates, working for a Hindu nation, essentially the one with hegemony of upper caste males, struck hard by saying that any reservation for Muslims will mean formation of another Pakistan. One can’t understand the logic of the same, but one can surely understand the threat concealed in this formulation. So now the compromised talk of Equal Opportunity Commission, affirmative action for minorities and the formulation that all steps short of reservation are to be thought-of, is going on. How far Equal Opportunity Commission will achieve the purpose, if the societal thinking is so hostile to the minority welfare, remains to be seen?
During this time the Women, another major and deprived section, were given reservation in Panchayats. This effort had all the merits but some deeper flaws prevailed. One was that in most or many Panchayats, where women were Sarpanchs (chief), their Husband or other male relative practically controlled the scene. Despite this, women did make some headway in the direction of empowerment. With this came the demand of reservation for women in Parliament, the highest law making body. Most of the political parties, including BJP, the one controlled by RSS, so inherently believing in the birth based hierarchy of caste and gender, supported it. The only opposition came from the OBC dominated parties, for whom the caste inequality has been the central concern of their politics.
Their argument is that at present mainly upper caste and affluent women are in the social space so this move will tilt the caste balance in favor of upper castes. So they say that there should be inbuilt sub quota based on the basis of caste and minority. To say that women are women, no inner differences are to close the eyes to reality. The poor dalit, adivasi, Muslim women have little in common with the affluent elite women. The Bill for women’s reservation has been struggling to be passed since 1996. So far as there was no clear majority of any party in Lok Sabha, the bill kept hanging fire. Now with UPA, in comfortable position the expectation is that the bill should be passed.
Is there any merit in what Sharad Yadavs, Mulayams and Lalus have been saying? It has been presented in the media that they are against the reservation for women as such. Their demand that the bill be presented after modification has been underplayed and rejected out of hand. One whole-heartedly supports the reservations when necessary, to bring in gender and social justice. At the same time there has to be a safety clause that the reservation should be suitably implemented to avoid the adverse effects. While some political voices that are very vociferous for ‘merit’, are against the concept of reservation more so for SC-ST-OBC-minority reservation, are also strong proponents of reservation for women! Why these double standards? Why the bill has not been amended to include the sub quota for caste and minorities not added is a mystery, or is it that, it shows the real agenda of those who are for the bill in present form?
--
Ram Puniyani
Reservation has been a big bone of contention in our society. Since last two decades the issue has been expressed in subtle, direct and indirect, forms. In popular psyche while some reservations are desirable and good others are the one which are regarded as an obstacle to social progress and some others are regarded as an obstacle to national integration. Currently the one’s related to Women’s reservation is regarded as being highly desirable, the one relating to Dalit-OBC is thought of as cause of stagnation, obstacle to progress and depriving the more meritorious upper castes from the portals of opportunity, while the mere talk of reservation for minorities is presented as dividing the nation.
Despite India coming out of colonial yoke, despite the democracy and modern constitution being in place, the process of transformation of caste and gender has remained half way through. The foundations of these twin transformations were laid during the freedom movement, but since forms of landlordism and hold of clergy continued in society, the caste-gender transformation has not been completed. Nehru expressed this to a French journalist, Andre Marloux, that a secular constitution is there but country is gripped by deep religiosity. Our Constitution makers took up the step of affirmative action for dalits-adivasis, reserving seats for a stipulated period of time. Since the implementation of these policies was in the hands of upper caste, the proper implementation could not take place and the problem lingered on, resulting in every succeeding government extending the period of reservations, part of it was also motivated by electoral compulsions. To add to this came the issue that reservations for these groups were used by a few in the community, leading to creamy sections fattening themselves and a larger sections remaining deprived of the basic amenities and consequent dignity.
The process of urbanization resulted in the affluent middle classes coming up and by 1980 they became assertive, and dead against the reservations for dalit-OBC. They crystallized around RSS affiliates and the result was the first major anti dalit violence in Ahmedabad in 1981, this was backed up by the one in 1986 against OBCs in Gujarat. By this time women’s movement was picking up. From last more than a decade women have been demanding their due in the social and political sphere. The RSS support base saw the Mandal, reservation for OBCs, as a big threat to their social status and rallied around Advani’s Rath yatra. Mandal was to be countered by Kamamdal (politics in the name of religion) as Atal Bihari Vajpayee put it. Kamandal spilled the blood on the streets and the issue of reservation went to the back drop and major assault now was directed against, minorities, First the Muslims and the Christians, Pehle Kasai-Phir Isai, as their popular battle cry put it.
With the severe security problems of minorities, the question of equity remained in the background. The Muslim community as a matter of fact went down on the social indices as pointed out by the Sachar Committee. With declining economic indices the talk of reservation for Muslims in education and jobs started coming up. But RSS affiliates, working for a Hindu nation, essentially the one with hegemony of upper caste males, struck hard by saying that any reservation for Muslims will mean formation of another Pakistan. One can’t understand the logic of the same, but one can surely understand the threat concealed in this formulation. So now the compromised talk of Equal Opportunity Commission, affirmative action for minorities and the formulation that all steps short of reservation are to be thought-of, is going on. How far Equal Opportunity Commission will achieve the purpose, if the societal thinking is so hostile to the minority welfare, remains to be seen?
During this time the Women, another major and deprived section, were given reservation in Panchayats. This effort had all the merits but some deeper flaws prevailed. One was that in most or many Panchayats, where women were Sarpanchs (chief), their Husband or other male relative practically controlled the scene. Despite this, women did make some headway in the direction of empowerment. With this came the demand of reservation for women in Parliament, the highest law making body. Most of the political parties, including BJP, the one controlled by RSS, so inherently believing in the birth based hierarchy of caste and gender, supported it. The only opposition came from the OBC dominated parties, for whom the caste inequality has been the central concern of their politics.
Their argument is that at present mainly upper caste and affluent women are in the social space so this move will tilt the caste balance in favor of upper castes. So they say that there should be inbuilt sub quota based on the basis of caste and minority. To say that women are women, no inner differences are to close the eyes to reality. The poor dalit, adivasi, Muslim women have little in common with the affluent elite women. The Bill for women’s reservation has been struggling to be passed since 1996. So far as there was no clear majority of any party in Lok Sabha, the bill kept hanging fire. Now with UPA, in comfortable position the expectation is that the bill should be passed.
Is there any merit in what Sharad Yadavs, Mulayams and Lalus have been saying? It has been presented in the media that they are against the reservation for women as such. Their demand that the bill be presented after modification has been underplayed and rejected out of hand. One whole-heartedly supports the reservations when necessary, to bring in gender and social justice. At the same time there has to be a safety clause that the reservation should be suitably implemented to avoid the adverse effects. While some political voices that are very vociferous for ‘merit’, are against the concept of reservation more so for SC-ST-OBC-minority reservation, are also strong proponents of reservation for women! Why these double standards? Why the bill has not been amended to include the sub quota for caste and minorities not added is a mystery, or is it that, it shows the real agenda of those who are for the bill in present form?
--Reserved Past: De-reserving Future
Ram Puniyani
Reservation has been a big bone of contention in our society. Since last two decades the issue has been expressed in subtle, direct and indirect, forms. In popular psyche while some reservations are desirable and good others are the one which are regarded as an obstacle to social progress and some others are regarded as an obstacle to national integration. Currently the one’s related to Women’s reservation is regarded as being highly desirable, the one relating to Dalit-OBC is thought of as cause of stagnation, obstacle to progress and depriving the more meritorious upper castes from the portals of opportunity, while the mere talk of reservation for minorities is presented as dividing the nation.
Despite India coming out of colonial yoke, despite the democracy and modern constitution being in place, the process of transformation of caste and gender has remained half way through. The foundations of these twin transformations were laid during the freedom movement, but since forms of landlordism and hold of clergy continued in society, the caste-gender transformation has not been completed. Nehru expressed this to a French journalist, Andre Marloux, that a secular constitution is there but country is gripped by deep religiosity. Our Constitution makers took up the step of affirmative action for dalits-adivasis, reserving seats for a stipulated period of time. Since the implementation of these policies was in the hands of upper caste, the proper implementation could not take place and the problem lingered on, resulting in every succeeding government extending the period of reservations, part of it was also motivated by electoral compulsions. To add to this came the issue that reservations for these groups were used by a few in the community, leading to creamy sections fattening themselves and a larger sections remaining deprived of the basic amenities and consequent dignity.
The process of urbanization resulted in the affluent middle classes coming up and by 1980 they became assertive, and dead against the reservations for dalit-OBC. They crystallized around RSS affiliates and the result was the first major anti dalit violence in Ahmedabad in 1981, this was backed up by the one in 1986 against OBCs in Gujarat. By this time women’s movement was picking up. From last more than a decade women have been demanding their due in the social and political sphere. The RSS support base saw the Mandal, reservation for OBCs, as a big threat to their social status and rallied around Advani’s Rath yatra. Mandal was to be countered by Kamamdal (politics in the name of religion) as Atal Bihari Vajpayee put it. Kamandal spilled the blood on the streets and the issue of reservation went to the back drop and major assault now was directed against, minorities, First the Muslims and the Christians, Pehle Kasai-Phir Isai, as their popular battle cry put it.
With the severe security problems of minorities, the question of equity remained in the background. The Muslim community as a matter of fact went down on the social indices as pointed out by the Sachar Committee. With declining economic indices the talk of reservation for Muslims in education and jobs started coming up. But RSS affiliates, working for a Hindu nation, essentially the one with hegemony of upper caste males, struck hard by saying that any reservation for Muslims will mean formation of another Pakistan. One can’t understand the logic of the same, but one can surely understand the threat concealed in this formulation. So now the compromised talk of Equal Opportunity Commission, affirmative action for minorities and the formulation that all steps short of reservation are to be thought-of, is going on. How far Equal Opportunity Commission will achieve the purpose, if the societal thinking is so hostile to the minority welfare, remains to be seen?
During this time the Women, another major and deprived section, were given reservation in Panchayats. This effort had all the merits but some deeper flaws prevailed. One was that in most or many Panchayats, where women were Sarpanchs (chief), their Husband or other male relative practically controlled the scene. Despite this, women did make some headway in the direction of empowerment. With this came the demand of reservation for women in Parliament, the highest law making body. Most of the political parties, including BJP, the one controlled by RSS, so inherently believing in the birth based hierarchy of caste and gender, supported it. The only opposition came from the OBC dominated parties, for whom the caste inequality has been the central concern of their politics.
Their argument is that at present mainly upper caste and affluent women are in the social space so this move will tilt the caste balance in favor of upper castes. So they say that there should be inbuilt sub quota based on the basis of caste and minority. To say that women are women, no inner differences are to close the eyes to reality. The poor dalit, adivasi, Muslim women have little in common with the affluent elite women. The Bill for women’s reservation has been struggling to be passed since 1996. So far as there was no clear majority of any party in Lok Sabha, the bill kept hanging fire. Now with UPA, in comfortable position the expectation is that the bill should be passed.
Is there any merit in what Sharad Yadavs, Mulayams and Lalus have been saying? It has been presented in the media that they are against the reservation for women as such. Their demand that the bill be presented after modification has been underplayed and rejected out of hand. One whole-heartedly supports the reservations when necessary, to bring in gender and social justice. At the same time there has to be a safety clause that the reservation should be suitably implemented to avoid the adverse effects. While some political voices that are very vociferous for ‘merit’, are against the concept of reservation more so for SC-ST-OBC-minority reservation, are also strong proponents of reservation for women! Why these double standards? Why the bill has not been amended to include the sub quota for caste and minorities not added is a mystery, or is it that, it shows the real agenda of those who are for the bill in present form?
--
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)