Muslims and other minority groups are routinely courted by politicians, sometimes even at the cost of the interests of the majority community, and yet they remain economically and socially backward, writes MK BHAT
It was highly amusing to read the Supreme Court directive of November 21, 2013, to the Uttar Pradesh Government regarding compensation to the victims of the Muzaffarnagar violence. This directive was issued after the notification of Uttar Pradesh Government, dated October 26, 2013, for providing Rs 90 crore as financial aid to the Muslim families affected by the riots. The State Government has failed to stop the recurrence of such events and added salt to the injury by taking a partisan approach with an eye on vote-bank.
This divisive approach has only further spread hatred. It also does not make for rational thinking because victims cannot be differentiated on the basis of religion, caste or economic status. A victim is a victim, so any differentiation goes against the concept of natural justice. If these are the credentials of secularists in India, then only God knows what is communalismIJ
The discussion on secularism will get hot by the day until the election because it serves the purpose of both protagonists and antagonists of secularism. Political parties are getting polarised in this context. The antagonists claim that secularism of this sort leads to minority appeasement and/or majority bashing. ‘Minorities’ has turned into a synonym for Muslims as they comprise a sizeable portion of the total population.
The protagonists project themselves as the saviours of the minority community which, otherwise, will be at the receiving end. The politicians try to take every step to gain the attention of minorities. Yet, the hard fact is that no major change has taken place in the living standard of minorities in the last 60 years, despite much hype by the secularists. It is foolish to take minorities for granted. The rebuff has also come from Muslim thinkers who have openly rejected the threat created by certain political parties. This kind of secularism for self interest is projected by way of reservations for Muslims, scholarships for Muslim students, iftar parties, opposition to Ram Mandir, denouncing majority and the like.
Secularism is a Western concept applied for political use by Charles Bradlaugh and George Jacob Holyoake in mid-19th century. It caters to two different interpretations: State is separate from religion, and, neutral stand towards religions. The first bars religion from the affairs of the state while the second treats all religions as equal in the eyes of the state. The Indian concept of secularism is based on equal status to all religions.
Secularism got prominence in India on two planks. First, it came from Partition of the country on religious considerations. This impacted the thinking of people on both sides of the border. Religion was the sole mark of identification. Safeguarding the interests of minorities might have been a priority for rulers at that time but later on it has been misused to get minority votes and its significance has been limited to that alone.
The second consideration was the migration of elite Muslims to Pakistan during Partition. The masses were left behind in the hands of conservative theologians who created a threat perception. The clergy became a bigger threat to the minorities than the majority because they mostly acted as the touts of political parties. The creation of the All India Muslim Personal law Board restricted the changes that could be made in Muslim personal law, thereby, cementing the fear psychosis. New ideas were restricted within the minority community.
The Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011, is another step towards pseudo-secularism. This becomes especially clear when one takes into account the fact that there are enough laws to protect the rights of minorities in India.
Article 25 holds that every person is guaranteed the freedom of conscience and freedom to profess, propagate his own religion. Article 26 maintains that every religious denomination has a right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes to manage their own affairs in matters of religion, to own and acquire movable and immovable property and to administer such property in accordance with law.
The Directive Principles of State Policy also provide equality for all. Article 15 holds that the state shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth etc. Article 16(2) states that no citizen shall on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence only be ineligible for holding any office under the state.
Yet, caste-based appeals to voters is not an uncommon practice in our democratic setup. People talk about reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes and the like but the fact is that 30,000 atrocities on Dalits takes place every year. The number of jobs is dwindling every year and there is no reservation in the private sector. The economic position of minorities has not changed much.