BaKhabar, Otober 2013, Page-6 [Democracy of Riots + STATE-SPONSORED APARTHEID]

Democracy of Riots

.... By Mohammad Allam, Minto circle, A.M.U.Aligarh

The souls of Spartan would not be in peace by seeing the dance of destruction and death of democracy in India-the largest democracy of world. This death and destruction are due to communal riots which became a part of Indian democracy since its inception in the year 1950-the year of the proclamation of republic based on the principle of adult suffrage. From the very beginning the Indian democracy was high jacked by the people of vested interest who did not want to put Indian society on the path of equality. They accepted the equality in principle but not in practical. The dream of leaders of Indian national movement, the fabric of Indian society based mutual respect and the promise of Indian constitution to the citizen of India; all are trumpeted under the feet of communal riots.
With every election in the country from the inception of democracy, a particular community has been targeted in the name of politics of votes. All blames are put on the political system of country. But the question is unanswered; why for a political interest, religion is used to destroy a religious community? While all the parties who are benefitted from the votes of this religious minority remain silent? Doesnot it seem that all political parties have the same goal of destroying a particular community in the name of the politics of vote?

Indian democracy without any doubt brought some of the positive result in the country in term of social transformation, political empowerment and economic development. But if we analyze then one thing is sure that Indian Muslims are marginalized for fruits of democracy. The report of Sachar Committee is a story of one such marginalization of Indian Muslims. The result of analysis of development of Indian democracy shows that many communities like Scheduled Caste, Schedules Tribe and OBC of particular community were benefitted from the political empowerment, economic development and transformation of Indian society. Many seats of central and states legislative assemblies are reserved for a particular community in the name of “Positive Discrimination”; government plans are benefiting to certain communities while social transformation has been brought to change the social hierarchy of the country. But what is about of the Indian Muslims? It seems that they are driven by hidden hands towards a desired direction plan wise. And no doubt this desired direction was not for their upliftment of them but to destroy them bit by bit in long term. They are in minority and cannot win the effective power in political system of the country by norms of democracy. But there is no reservation for them in the state and central legislative bodies. They are economically weak but cannot get “Positive Discrimination” .They need security but cannot get due to political set up based on politics of votes. The thing they can have under democratic set up is the democratization of riots. With every election of central and states legislative bodies, they have been given gift of riots. For which they have to pay the price. How much and how many times they have to remember the price of votes, particularly after Ayodhya Movement of a particular thought of the country?
The Ayodhaya movement approved the democratization of riots in the country. In post-Ayodhya era with every general election of the nation, Muslims became the scapegoat for the political polarization of votes. The Gujrat program of 2002 to present day communal violence of Muzaffernagar and coming of a particular group into power in Gujarat and Congress at centre showed the power of democratization of riots. One thing is common in this process of democratization of the riots is the equal opportunity to all political parties to fright the Muslim voters. One party frights the majority from the name of appeasement policy of one party while other party frights the Muslims from communal approach of others. In between the lines of these two, the people and media complete the process of democratization of riots, which has become now an essential part of General election of the country.

In the light of numerous communal riots of small and large levels one can say that democracy in the country became a ban for Indian Muslims for few decades. For every General Election they have to pay the price of right to votes without any positive results in the forms of death and destruction of lives and properties. The Indian democracy which could be a boon for political and economic empowerment of them has been turned into ban for them. This is the classic case of democracy in the world. Everywhere around the world democracy has empowered the minority and even some cases made them master like Jews in America but in India it has failed due to undue interference from the side of communalists. The need of time is to understand the functioning of the democratization of riots in Indian democracy and have to adopt a strategy to neutralize the functioning of democratization of riots.
What should be done?

In the light of the present condition, Indian Muslims should adopt the following strategy to neutralize the democratization of riots. These are five points to be considered by Indian Muslims.

1. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan made the Government of British India to play vital role in empowerment of Indian Muslims in spite of the destructive role played by the British Government in 1857 by neutralizing Indian Muslims from any political faction of his time. So the present Indian Muslims should neutralize themselves from any political faction of the country. They should analysis every political party on the basis of pros and cons. They should not make any party to their darling. Indian Muslims need a professional thought in political term. Till now they have adopted emotional approach towards politics based on numerous issues like shahbano, Ayodhya, RSS, Civil Code etc.

2. The political policy should be different for the national and state politics. In every state, the Indian Muslims should see their local demands and conditions. While for national level they should consider both their local and national political conditions. If local condition demands the mingling of aspiration with others for national politics then they should adopt that approach, otherwise in case of state, they should prefer local condition and for national the demands of the country and community.

3. Indian Muslims should come out from the syndrome of Muslim Leadership. In democracy, the important is the fulfillment of the interest of the community. What is beneficial to have Muslim leadership if they failed to protect the interest of the community? As in many cases these have been found that Muslim leaders are more adhere to agenda of their political parties than to the interest of their community, to which they represent by getting votes in the name of the leader of community.
4. Indian Muslims should come out from the traditional centers of politics which are present in the form of old loyalist families, religious groups and so many pseudo interest groups. These are working for their vested interest and act as democratic broker at the time of election. These groups are neither farsighted nor profession, as a result unable to advance the cause of the community as whole. In present time there is trend of caste based politics in the name of backwardness. Indian Muslims should now that only their united stand could make them to fulfill their interest and serve the nation. Otherwise they have to fall after every general election without meeting their interest.
5. Indian Muslims have to change their criteria of leadership. They have to develop their political consciousness. No leader is powerful until and unless he has staunch followers. The histories of many nations and movements have been changed by staunch followers under leaders. The politics of division of leadership in the name of region, sects, caste and schools should be demolished and a united stand on any issue should be taken. The criteria of good leader should not be rumor of immorality but the works that he has done or doing. The personal vices should not be given advantage over community interest if he is serving the community well.

The democratization of riots is no doubt emerge a powerful tool to demoralize and limit the power of Indian Muslims to play an important role in the development of the nation .A thriving community always put herself on the scale of accountability and looks for new strategy to put on the path of development. Look i whether Indian Muslims come out from the democratization of riots or succumb to this? All depends upon their approach.

STATE-SPONSORED APARTHEID

... By Abdul Khaliq for BeyondHeadlines

A scheduled caste (SC) Christian associate- a convert from the Parayan Dalit community of Tamilnadu- is distraught that his country views him as a native alien, a second-class citizen. Being a Dalit in a society that still treats caste as indelible, he suffers all forms of socio-economic discrimination, and as a Christian he is denied the benefit of reservation and other concessions granted to SCs of the Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist religions. His anguish encapsulates the unconscionable injustice meted out to SC Christians and SC Muslims by the State.
Centuries ago Aristotle, recognising the unevenness of social structures, moderated the universal egalitarian ideal of equal treatment of human beings with his observation that justice implied the equal treatment of similar persons. Article 15 of the Constitution embodies this concern by qualifying the dictum of non-discrimination among citizens on grounds of religion, race, caste and sex with the proviso that the State is empowered to make special arrangements for the advancement of socially and economically backward citizens, and specifically for SCs and STs. However, the State’s stance on the issue of Dalit converts from Hinduism blatantly violates this sacred canon of equal treatment of equals. The endorsement of SC status for SC Sikhs and SC Buddhists but denial of this status to the SC Christians and SC Muslims is tantamount to licensing and sanctioning discrimination on the basis of religion.

The pledge to be a Secular Republic is founded on the principle that the State will neither establish a religion of its own nor confer any special patronage upon any particular religion. Unfortunately, the Constitutional (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950 circumscribed the scope of the wide-ranging colonial term “depressed classes” now defined as “scheduled castes” by excluding from the list any person who professed a religion different from Hinduism, thereby reflecting a clear bias in favour of the majority religion. However, this Order and allied notifications were at sharp variance with what our first President, Dr Rajendra Prasad and PM Jawaharlal Nehru perceived to be the Constitutional provisions. The President, in a letter to H.C.Mukherjee in December 1950, clarified that “so far as educational and economic facilities to the backward classes are concerned, it is not the intention of the Government that there should be any differentiation on grounds of religion or castes. The only differentiation between the backward classes and other backward groups who are called Scheduled Castes can be in regard to certain political rights such as separate representation.”
The grant of SC status to SC Sikhs in 1956 and SC Buddhists in 1990 is actually the culmination of a pattern of thought that has even been enshrined in the Constitution, which clearly distinguishes between Indic religions and those originating elsewhere. The explanatory note under Article 25 unambiguously states that “the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jain and Buddhist religions.” The purport of Article 25 is that a Sikh, a Buddhist or a Jain can lawfully enter a temple but not a Christian or a Muslim. The counter argument that the Constitution has separate provisions for minorities including Christians and Muslims is specious justification for this discrimination, as the minority provisions apply equally to Sikhs and Buddhists as religious minorities.
Although the Constitution has sanctified the freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion, the Constitutional order 1950, as amended from time to time, has penalised Dalit converts to Islam and Christianity for their religious beliefs. The true intent of the directive becomes self-evident when read in conjunction with the Circular issued by the Home Ministry in May, 1975 which states that “where a scheduled Caste person gets converted to a religion other than Hinduism or Sikhism and then reconverts himself back to Hinduism or Sikhism, he will be declared to have reconverted to his original scheduled caste.” The hegemony of the dominant religion is sought to be protected by penalising SCs who convert to Christianity or Islam but restoring their privileges if they return to the fold. In effect, the State has legitimised discrimination against Dalits who convert to Christianity or Islam.
The philosophy underlying the Constitutional Order of 1950 and its amendments bears an uncanny resemblance to the thinking of our right-wing fundamentalists. The leading ideologue of Hindutva, Veer Savarkar has explicitly distinguished between the indigenous, Indic religions and those that originated elsewhere. A key concept is that Bharatvarsha has, in addition to Hinduism also given birth to the religion of the Jains, Sikhs and Buddhists who are all in this sense Hindus. Conversely, Muslims and Christians are foreigners in this country which rightly belongs to Hindus. Tragically, a similar quasi-racial bias is evident in the denial of SC status to SC Muslims and Christians while granting this concession to SC Sikhs and Buddhists.
The ostensible reasons for denial of SC status to Dalit Christians and Muslims are built around the myth that SCs who convert to these religions no longer face any social stigma or prejudice. Nothing is more untrue. Caste consciousness is a part of our everyday lives; its universality renders it normal. However hard we may delude ourselves, we are all scarred by it. A plainly irrational, wicked belief in Dalit inferiority is embedded in our culture. Dalits, irrespective of their religious beliefs, have similar narratives of oppression- victims of historical prejudice, of illogical hate, of violence. We need to face up to the brute fact that caste still influences the way social and economic privileges are enjoyed and determines the nature of human interaction. Being at the bottom of the hierarchy, the Dalits reap the whirlwind of an iniquitous system.
Mahatma Gandhi, who knew this country and its people better than anyone else, had this to say on the subject; “whether the harijan is nominally a Christian, Muslim, Hindu or Sikh, he is still a harijan...He may change his garb and call himself a Catholic harijan or a Muslim harijan or a neo-Sikh, his untouchability will haunt him during his lifetime.” Dr B. R Ambedkar asked the rhetorical question: “what good is Christianity for a Hindu if it does not do away with his caste?” India’s most distinguished sociologist and social anthropologist, M. N. Srinivas, who had underlined the persistence of caste in modern India, noted that “conversion to Christianity only changed the faith but not the customs, the general culture, or the standing of the converts in society.” Significantly, the Supreme Court in various judgements has emphatically underlined the obdurate hold of caste in our society. In its judgement in the S. Ambalagan vs Devarajan AIR 1984 case, the Supreme Court has inter alia observed: “he never lost his caste when he embraced another religion... this appears particularly so in the case of Scheduled Castes who embraced other religions in their quest for liberation but return to their old religion on finding that their disabilities have clung to them with great tenacity.” You can change your religion but caste is part of your DNA, immutable and eternal.
The intellectual elite and the media have steered clear of this issue because acknowledging injustice would morally bind them to do something about it. Their reluctance to engage with this subject possibly stems from the belief that this unprepossessing group- Dalit and minority- does not count for much in the larger canvas of minority politics or in the mart of economic strife and gain. They also clearly wish to avoid confronting the communalists for a marginal group of Dalits. The issue captured the headlines only once, when Mother Theresa sat on dharna at Rajghat in 1996 in support of this desolate group, but the media interest was clearly not in the cause she espoused but in her celebrity persona. Otherwise, the numerous dharnas and protest marches by these disaffected, powerless citizens barely get a mention in a media culture that expends reams of newsprint and hundreds of hours of prime time salivating over the sexual escapades of a deviant Baba.
Significantly, in 1996 the Narasimha Rao government had approved an amendment to the Constitutional(Scheduled Castes) Order 1950 to include SC converts to Christianity and Islam as Scheduled Castes, but due to alleged procedural lapses the proposed Bill was not introduced in Parliament on the appointed date. Following the adjournment of Parliament, an Ordinance was proposed to the President but was not promulgated as, in the mean time Parliament Elections were announced. The shoddy handling of the proposal raised legitimate suspicions that it was aborted on purpose by the Rao government.
The aggrieved Dalits approached the Supreme Court in 2004 for redress of this palpable injustice. Almost 10 years on, the case hangs fire with little hope of an early resolution. Since the filing of the writ petition, the case has been listed innumerable times but almost invariably, the Government counsel has sought adjournment. The last listing was on 9th September, 2013, and predictably the case was again adjourned without a hearing. The unspoken understanding seems to be to postpone indefinitely a verdict in the matter.
The most disingenuous of all- a classic example of political artifice and subterfuge- is the decision of the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs in Feb. 2011 on the pending writ petition. Couched in graceless bureaucratese, the minutes recorded state that the Committee “ decided that based on data that will be collected in the 2011 Census, Government will institute further studies and thereafter consult with State governments and other stake holders.” It is clear to the meanest intelligence that the government’s intent is to keep this issue in limbo forever.
The Supreme Court has all along maintained that reservation and other benefits in the form of affirmative action for a group should be based on their social and educational backwardness, their social degradation and inadequacy of representation but not on religious considerations. The Court in the case of Soosai vs Union of India,1985 observed that in order to establish that the Constitutional (SC) Order 1950 discriminates against members of a particular caste “ it must be shown that they suffer from a comparable depth of social and economic disabilities and cultural and educational backwardness and similar levels of degradation within the community necessitating intervention by the State under the provisions of the Constitution.” Data compiled by the NSSO shows that educationally, Muslim Dalits are behind Dalits of all other communities with the largest percentage of illiterates at 48.08% in the rural areas and 31.7% in urban areas. The Buddhists have the lowest percentage of illiterates among the different Dalit communities. Similarly, Muslim Dalits constitute the highest percentage below the poverty line with 39.6% in rural areas and 46.8% in urban areas compared with 7.6% Dalit Sikhs in rural areas and 24.8% Sikhs in urban areas below the poverty line. An in-depth study conducted by the National Commission for Minorities in 2008 concluded that SC Christians and SC Muslims “ were invariably regarded as inferior by their co-religionists....discrimination includes social and cultural segregation expressed in various forms of refusal to have any social interaction; endogamy expressed through the universal prohibition on Dalit- non-Dalit marriages and through severe social sanctions on both Dalits and non-Dalits who break this taboo...social segregation extends to the sphere of worship, with separate churches being almost the norm among Dalit Christians and not uncommon among Dalit Muslims.”

On the basis of cold facts, it would be impossible to deny SC status to SC Muslims and SC Christians on grounds of social, cultural, educational backwardness and social segregation. To set aside their petition on the argument that the caste system is not recognized in these religions is to blind oneself to the realities of this country. Moreover, it is then contradictory to justify granting SC status to SC followers of Sikhism and Buddhism which also doctrinally abjure caste.
In the ultimate analysis, this issue is the acid test of our nation’s commitment to a secular polity.
(The author, a former civil servant, is Secretary General of Lok Janshakti Party.The views are personal.akhaliq2007@gmail.com
Source: http://beyondheadlines.in/?p=18787