Analysis
by Dr. Jaipal Singh
Caste Census & Financial Survey
By the time of writing these lines, the general elections for the next (18th) Lok Sabha in Bharat (India) are on and would be on last leg, therefore, the political parties and their selected candidates has been aggressively trying to reach and romance with the electorate to garner their franchise. Six phases of poll have already been held out of a total of seven phases scheduled till 1st June 2024 across the length and breadth of the country. The country has a multi-party system with six political parties recognized as the national parties besides a host of regional/state level parties. However, the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) and the Congress are two national parties with their presence in almost all parts of the country with a sizeable electoral base; of the two, the latter has a long history of governance after the independence of country in August 1947 while the former emerged as popular choice of the Indian masses only during the last two decades. With the advent of the nationalist BJP, the Congress has constantly shown decline, particularly in the large Hindi-speaking belt of the North India.
Both the parties released their election manifestos few days prior to the first phase elections scheduled on 19 April 2024. The Congress named their manifesto as the ‘Nyay Patra', which is full of promises to the electorate with scathing attack on the ruling BJP and a resolve to reverse many popular BJP/NDA decisions, programs and schemes implemented during the last ten years, increase reservation to certain community/social categories inconsonance with their appeasement policy towards minorities (actually Muslims), and freebies to the people on various counts – the Mahalaxmi scheme with Rs one lakh cash transfer to each poor family being the most significant one. On the other hand, the BJP has named it the ‘Sankalp Patra', which revisits and recounts significant and popular decisions, schemes and programs implemented by their government in the last 10 years along with their vision and mission for the inclusive growth and development of the country in the ensuing years. Contrary to the Congress's preoccupations, or obsession, with the BJP, the former does not find a single reference in latter's manifesto (by name).
The estimated population of Muslims in India is about twenty crores, (some Muslim leaders and clerics put it around twenty-five crores), which is only next to Indonesia with the highest Muslim population in the world as an Islamic country. The next communities smaller in size are the Christians and Sikhs which constitute about 2.30% and 1.72% of the total population respectively. Although the official census figures after 2011 is not yet available but the real minorities in the country are Buddhists (0.70%), Jains (0.37%) and Parsis (0.02%), who neither ever complain or seek special privileges nor the Congress party has ever really cared for them. The aforesaid is relevant in the context that two promises in the manifesto of the Congress seem progressive on face but, actually on ground, they may prove to be divisive and disastrous for the security, integrity and oneness of India: First, the freedom of the choice of dress, food, language and personal law of minorities for the sake of equity; and the second, addressal of the growing inequality of wealth and income through suitable changes in policies through caste census, financial and institutional surveys.
Equity: Religious & Linguistic Minorities
Among other things, the Nyaya Patra, Page 8 on ‘equity of the religious and linguistic minorities' provides that the Congress will ensure that, like every citizen, minorities have the freedom of choice of dress, food, language and personal laws; that the reforms of personal laws will be encouraged but this must be taken with the participation and consent of the communities concerned. Ordinarily, there should be no need for such promise or provision because the Constitution already provides necessary freedom to all citizens along with certain fundamental duties and directive principles of state policies. None of the real minorities such as the Buddhists, Jains or Parsis have ever complained about any violation of rights or discrimination by the State (Indian government) or the majority community (Hindus). Some political parties, including the Congress, and fundamentalists among the Muslims constantly raise such issues for their political or personal interests, which so often leads to avoidable communal conflicts as also serious law and order problems on account of the choice of food, dress or language from time to time.
Here for everyone's clarity, the author would briefly deal with issues such as food and dress which are the potential source of not only perennial and recurring irritants but also frequent conflicts and law & order problems in states. A large number of Indians, including the Hindus and followers of other Indian religions/culture consciously opt for vegetarianism at any point of time. Besides, many of them though take non-vegetarian meal but avoid killing or even cooking meat at home. Traditionally, they domesticate and protect cattle, more particularly cows, for various uses. Many ancient Indian texts too refer to a voluntary stop to cow slaughter and the pursuit of vegetarianism as a part of a general abstention from violence against others and killing of animals. On the other hand, Islam came to India much later from the Arab world and the followers of Islam generally believe that Allah (God) has created resources (cattle) for the consumption of Mumin (faithful Muslim). The animal slaughter (sheep, goat, cattle, camel) has remained as a religiously approved practice among the Muslims and they sacrifice animals particularly on festive occasions of the Id-ul-Zuha (Bakrid), and usually settle for goat slaughter as an alternative. Many of them consider the cattle protection and ban on cow slaughter as an encroachment in their religious right.
The cow veneration in Hinduism started in the Vedic era and several religious texts recommend non-violence against man and animals, and some even equate the killing of a cow to that of a human, particularly akin to a Brahmin. The Hindu opposition of the slaughter of animals, particularly cow, has roots in the ancient Indian history which took the form of the socio-religious and political opposition during the British Raj. Even followers of other Indian religions like Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism have strong reservations against the killing of cows due to pious reasons. Some well-known personalities from past associated with the cow protection are Swami Dayanand Saraswati, the founder of Arya Samaj, and Mahatma Gandhi, now remembered as the father of the nation. Several communal riots occurred on the cow killings towards the end of the nineteenth century; consequently, cow slaughter was banned in several parts of India during the British period. Post-independence, the Article 48 of the Constitution inter alia specifically enjoins upon the state to take steps for prohibiting the slaughter of cows and calves, and other milch and draught cattle. Consequently, the majority of the Indian states have various regulations prohibiting slaughter of cows, apparently only West Bengal, Kerala and north-eastern states remaining without such regulations.
The Supreme Court of India too in a landmark judgement on 26 October 2005 had upheld the constitutional validity of anti-cow slaughter laws enacted by the states in India. The export of beef (i.e. cow, oxen and calf) is also prohibited in India. Apart from the religious sentiments of the majority populace, it is also a crucial issue of prevention of cruelty towards animals in a large number of illegally run slaughter houses. In a country, where many options are already available for the meat-eating people in terms of buffalo, goat, sheep, pork, poultry, eggs, a variety of fresh and marine water fishes and prawns, there seems to be no rationale in pressing for illegal cow slaughter or trade by a section of interested people of one community. But some of them indeed resort to it that leads to occasional conflict and violence with some cow vigilante groups (usually Hindus) under the heightened passion. When supposedly a responsible national party includes an unqualified promise about granting the choice of food to the minorities in their manifesto, this cannot just be a liberal measure without a motive; instead, people are more likely to interpret it as a major policy shift even in the context of the existing ban on cow slaughter.
Let's illustrate the point with yet another example of the choice of dress by the specific minority community. In January 2022, six 2nd year pre-university Muslim female students insisted over wearing of the hijab in the classroom at a government-run school for Girls at Udupi, Karnataka. According to the school policy, all students were required to wear only prescribed uniform in the school, in fact, a practice common in most of the schools in India. When the management did not allow them to wear hijab, the issue was hijacked by the Campus Front of India (CFI), the student wing of the now banned radical Islamic organization Popular Front of India (PFI); the political wing of PFI namely the Social Democratic Party (SDP) also threatened a stir on this issue. Soon, it became a burning national issue with protests by the Muslim parents and students in other states as well in support of the Udupi girls as also some Hindu organizations too joining the protest in retaliation. Some western countries, Pakistan and so-called human rights watch organizations too joined the controversy making statements in support citing hijab as the religious right of Muslim girls.
As the controversy and agitation spread in the state, the Karnataka State BJP Government issued an order in the 1st week of February 2020 stating that the uniforms mandated by the government, the school management or college development committees must be compulsorily worn. Consequently, the agitation further intensified and all educational institutions were closed for certain days. The Muslim girls backed by the said Islamic organizations filed a petition in the Karnataka High Court, which after detailed hearing on the subject upheld the restriction on hijab by the educational institutions on 15 March 2022, ruling that hijab was not an essential religious practice under Islam and, hence, it is not protected by the Article 25 of the Constitution setting out the fundamental rights to practice one's religion. The verdict was challenged in the Supreme Court, where the two-judges bench remained divided over the Karnataka High Court ruling; accordingly, the judges requested the Chief Justice to refer the matter to a larger bench. In the meantime, state assembly elections were held in 2023 leading to the formation of the Congress government in Karnataka and the incumbent Congress chief minister passed an order to withdraw the hijab ban w.e.f. 23 December 2023 – a vivid case of a retrograde order and Muslim appeasement in the name of socio-religious equity and justice.
By implication, both the aforesaid illustrations clearly reflect the appeasement of one particular community by the Congress Party in India. These are not isolated instances, this appeasement of Muslims in the country for the electoral gain on various counts have continued since the independence from the British Raj in 1947. Initially, it was the Congress under the first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and, later on, other political parties too picked up the same thread for own selfish interests. Part IV, Article 44 of the Constitution states that “The State shall endeavor to secure the citizen a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India”. Part IV deals with the Directive Principles to the state and Article 37 of it provides that provisions contained in this part shall not be enforceable by any court although it also adds that the principles laid down therein are fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws. So, by implication, Article 44 became a goal and not a right. Subsequently, Prime Minister Nehru introduced and got passed Hindu Code Bills in early 1950s collectively known as the Hindu Civil Code, which is applicable to Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains. The Sharia based personal laws of Muslims were left untouched for the reasons best known to Mr. Nehru led the Congress government. Ever since, this appeasement saga continued by the successive Congress and governments supported by it at the Centre. (Courtesy: Boloji.com) (To be continued…)
(The Author is a retired civil servant and has core areas of specialization in public administration, finance, information technology, human resource development, budget and planning, and legal matters)
