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)
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Crime and No Punishment
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
Bahuguna Josh 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?
--
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Liberhan Report: Painful Wait for Justice
Liberhan Commission; Painful wait for Justice
Ram Puniyani
Liberhan commission submitted its four volume report to the Government on 30 of June 2009. It might have been one of the longest times taken by any commission. Liberhan’s claim that the report got delayed due to non cooperation of leaders involved may have some truth as one knows Kalyan Singh avoided appearing before the commission for long time, and so was the attitude of many of those alleged for demolition. Still all the hearings were complete by 2004. Did it take 5 long years to write the report? Such a long delay in the report coming out, defeats half the purpose of the same. One of the minor reasons of delay has also been the differences in the approach of Justice Liberhan and its chief counsel Anupam Gupta. Gupta after he interrogated Advani, Justice Liberhan apparently told him to apologize to Advani for being harsh. While Gupta maintains that Justice Liberhan had been soft on Advani, despite his role of the chief mobilizer for demolition. Any way most of the facts of the demolition were seen by the country, read in papers and it is difficult to hide the truth of the role of chief players.
One awaits the report to be tabled and see what the commission has to say about things which have been reported in the media and seen on the TV by most. One also waits to see the attitude of this Government towards this commission, is it going to be forthright objectivity or dictated by political exigencies. That apart, since the report was submitted some of the accused have been hiding for cover, and some others are saying that since already 17 years have lapsed how the report can be meaningful, if at all? Some of them have questioned the timing of the report.
To expect that those involved in demolition will own up the crime and honestly confess to that is something not to be expected. Still Uma Bharati was honest enough to say that “I definitely wanted Ram temple to come up (in Ayodhya) and I definitely wanted that building (Babri Mosque) to come down but not in that manner. But I am not going to apologize. I am ready to be hanged for it.” It was the same Uma Bharti, who along with Sadhvi Ritambhra was exhorting the Kar Sevaks by saying, Ek Dhakka Aur Do: Babri Masjid Tod do”. (Give one more push, break the Babri mosque) To her credit Uma Bharati has stated that the BJP leaders have tasted the cream of power due to this demolition so now they shouls also be ready to go to jail. She had expressed her joy after the demolition by hugging another accused, Murli Manohar Joshi who was sharing dais with her. Amongst others who shared the dais, when the demolition work was in progress, were Lal Krishna Advani, Ashok Singhal and ex- RSS chief K. Sudarshan himself.
How do people respond to the crime after executing it, is a matter of great variance. Same Murli Manohar Joshi, who before the demolition had said told his followers "…demolish the masjid, nature of Kar Seva will be determined by Sants and not by courts/demolition is prerequisite for temple building", in the hearing of the commission he said that “With all humility, I say that the incident was never remotely conceived by us”. This is despite the fact that Vinay Katiyar, the then Bajrang Dal chief had asserted that "Masjid will be demolished and debris will be thrown in river Sarayu". During the deposition he distracted form the main issue and doubted the need of commission and said that Ram Lalla is the owner of the place. While Lal Krishna Advani had stated the Kar Seva will done with Bricks and shovels, kar sevaks are not going to Ayodhya to sing Bhajan and Kirtans, later he declared that the day of demolition was the saddest day of his life. Which is the real Advani is difficult to say.
K. Sudarshan, who later became RSS Sarsnghchalak, stated that he heard Nirmala Deshpande saying that Mosque fell due to the explosion inside. Nirmala Deshpande disowned the statement. Kalyan Singh takes the cake as for as turn-arounds are concerned. Before the demolition he committed to National Integration Council and through a sworn affidavit to Supreme Court, that he will protect the mosque. When demolition began he did not deploy 20000 central forces stationed barely 10 minutes from the place. Later he was imprisoned for a day and he proudly justified his inaction in the path of Ram Temple. He filed a 300 page affidavit, taking a line, which was in accordance with his the then Party’s line, stating that it was a spontaneous act by uncontrollable Kar Sevaks. With his problems beginning with BJP, he hit out at A.B.Vajpayee, Advani and Joshi saying Babri was destroyed on the instructions of senior BJP leaders.
The then Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao was famously having the afternoon siesta when the Babri was being demolished and he covered his inaction by putting the blame on Kalyan Singh. Immediately he promised that Babri will be restored at the same spot.
It all raises the question of political morality. How the actors in the tragic act have been taking stances according the political calculations. How they regard that public memory is short and they can wriggle out of their crimes by mere play of words.
And now with report on the table of the Congress Government can one expect justice? The experience so far is far from optimistic. Congress weighs the issues on the scale of political advantages or otherwise. On one hand it tries to put a show that it will do justice and when the crunch time comes one finds it wanting in resolve to stand firmly for secularism and justice. Political calculations have been its guiding load stones. So even now one is not sure about the real justice coming through after 17 long years of wait.
BJP on its part is a divided house. It has used the Ram Temple agitation and the consequent demolition and the violence for politically strengthening itself. It is around this agitation, demolition and violence that it came to occupy the major position on the political scene in India. Now having been in power and having seen that Lord Ram cannot eternally help it to keep coming to power, some of its major leaders have been rethinking the political line to be adopted. What one sees around is the total opportunism for the sake of power. They realize the necessities of such issues to be in power, they also see that beyond a point it can be counter productive. Now it’s up to them to keep adopting double standards or to come to adopt democratic issues as their political base. Can BJP shift away from such issues and take up the issues of the poor and downtrodden? This is a million-vote question. This is also a question related to the goals of its political father, the RSS. How does RSS evaluate its future role in Indian political chessboard? Indications are RSS will stick to Hindutva and Ram temple type of issues, come what may. One only hopes in despair that people concerned have honesty to own up their acts and face the legal consequences for their commitments!
--
I
Ram Puniyani
Liberhan commission submitted its four volume report to the Government on 30 of June 2009. It might have been one of the longest times taken by any commission. Liberhan’s claim that the report got delayed due to non cooperation of leaders involved may have some truth as one knows Kalyan Singh avoided appearing before the commission for long time, and so was the attitude of many of those alleged for demolition. Still all the hearings were complete by 2004. Did it take 5 long years to write the report? Such a long delay in the report coming out, defeats half the purpose of the same. One of the minor reasons of delay has also been the differences in the approach of Justice Liberhan and its chief counsel Anupam Gupta. Gupta after he interrogated Advani, Justice Liberhan apparently told him to apologize to Advani for being harsh. While Gupta maintains that Justice Liberhan had been soft on Advani, despite his role of the chief mobilizer for demolition. Any way most of the facts of the demolition were seen by the country, read in papers and it is difficult to hide the truth of the role of chief players.
One awaits the report to be tabled and see what the commission has to say about things which have been reported in the media and seen on the TV by most. One also waits to see the attitude of this Government towards this commission, is it going to be forthright objectivity or dictated by political exigencies. That apart, since the report was submitted some of the accused have been hiding for cover, and some others are saying that since already 17 years have lapsed how the report can be meaningful, if at all? Some of them have questioned the timing of the report.
To expect that those involved in demolition will own up the crime and honestly confess to that is something not to be expected. Still Uma Bharati was honest enough to say that “I definitely wanted Ram temple to come up (in Ayodhya) and I definitely wanted that building (Babri Mosque) to come down but not in that manner. But I am not going to apologize. I am ready to be hanged for it.” It was the same Uma Bharti, who along with Sadhvi Ritambhra was exhorting the Kar Sevaks by saying, Ek Dhakka Aur Do: Babri Masjid Tod do”. (Give one more push, break the Babri mosque) To her credit Uma Bharati has stated that the BJP leaders have tasted the cream of power due to this demolition so now they shouls also be ready to go to jail. She had expressed her joy after the demolition by hugging another accused, Murli Manohar Joshi who was sharing dais with her. Amongst others who shared the dais, when the demolition work was in progress, were Lal Krishna Advani, Ashok Singhal and ex- RSS chief K. Sudarshan himself.
How do people respond to the crime after executing it, is a matter of great variance. Same Murli Manohar Joshi, who before the demolition had said told his followers "…demolish the masjid, nature of Kar Seva will be determined by Sants and not by courts/demolition is prerequisite for temple building", in the hearing of the commission he said that “With all humility, I say that the incident was never remotely conceived by us”. This is despite the fact that Vinay Katiyar, the then Bajrang Dal chief had asserted that "Masjid will be demolished and debris will be thrown in river Sarayu". During the deposition he distracted form the main issue and doubted the need of commission and said that Ram Lalla is the owner of the place. While Lal Krishna Advani had stated the Kar Seva will done with Bricks and shovels, kar sevaks are not going to Ayodhya to sing Bhajan and Kirtans, later he declared that the day of demolition was the saddest day of his life. Which is the real Advani is difficult to say.
K. Sudarshan, who later became RSS Sarsnghchalak, stated that he heard Nirmala Deshpande saying that Mosque fell due to the explosion inside. Nirmala Deshpande disowned the statement. Kalyan Singh takes the cake as for as turn-arounds are concerned. Before the demolition he committed to National Integration Council and through a sworn affidavit to Supreme Court, that he will protect the mosque. When demolition began he did not deploy 20000 central forces stationed barely 10 minutes from the place. Later he was imprisoned for a day and he proudly justified his inaction in the path of Ram Temple. He filed a 300 page affidavit, taking a line, which was in accordance with his the then Party’s line, stating that it was a spontaneous act by uncontrollable Kar Sevaks. With his problems beginning with BJP, he hit out at A.B.Vajpayee, Advani and Joshi saying Babri was destroyed on the instructions of senior BJP leaders.
The then Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao was famously having the afternoon siesta when the Babri was being demolished and he covered his inaction by putting the blame on Kalyan Singh. Immediately he promised that Babri will be restored at the same spot.
It all raises the question of political morality. How the actors in the tragic act have been taking stances according the political calculations. How they regard that public memory is short and they can wriggle out of their crimes by mere play of words.
And now with report on the table of the Congress Government can one expect justice? The experience so far is far from optimistic. Congress weighs the issues on the scale of political advantages or otherwise. On one hand it tries to put a show that it will do justice and when the crunch time comes one finds it wanting in resolve to stand firmly for secularism and justice. Political calculations have been its guiding load stones. So even now one is not sure about the real justice coming through after 17 long years of wait.
BJP on its part is a divided house. It has used the Ram Temple agitation and the consequent demolition and the violence for politically strengthening itself. It is around this agitation, demolition and violence that it came to occupy the major position on the political scene in India. Now having been in power and having seen that Lord Ram cannot eternally help it to keep coming to power, some of its major leaders have been rethinking the political line to be adopted. What one sees around is the total opportunism for the sake of power. They realize the necessities of such issues to be in power, they also see that beyond a point it can be counter productive. Now it’s up to them to keep adopting double standards or to come to adopt democratic issues as their political base. Can BJP shift away from such issues and take up the issues of the poor and downtrodden? This is a million-vote question. This is also a question related to the goals of its political father, the RSS. How does RSS evaluate its future role in Indian political chessboard? Indications are RSS will stick to Hindutva and Ram temple type of issues, come what may. One only hopes in despair that people concerned have honesty to own up their acts and face the legal consequences for their commitments!
--
I
Friday, July 3, 2009
Lifting the veil
Lifting the Veil
Ram Puniyani
The statement of Nicholas Sarcozy that Burqa is not welcome in France, that it is a symbol of oppression and not of religion has raised serious debate all over. It is France again where five years ago the display of religious markers, head scarf, Sikh turban, and Jewish skull cap in schools was banned. Public servants cannot use the same in place of work.
France as a secular state has adopted a particular version of this policy. France has been setting example for some of the countries in this imposing type of secularism, like Turkey. It has another dimension and that is large number of poor Muslims coming here are from its old colonies who live in very abysmal conditions. One recalls a large section of these immigrant Muslim population lives in suburbs, poor localities in economic deprivation. A couple of years ago right here some Muslim youth began a series of violent acts out of frustration due to unemployment and poverty. The cultural economic differences between these sections are very wide and urban affluent ones’ are very gross.
How is secularism to be implemented? One way is that social situations are transformed and the hold of feudal elements is done away with and state encourages the society to adopt the norms of social and gender equality. And with this, the symbols of gender inequalities start receding in the face of changing social situation. There is no uniform pattern in this. Even after the democratic regimes come to being formally, many an old norms take time to vanish. Surely there are some of these which have to be done away by strong legislation. In India during freedom movement forcible prevention of Sati, burning of wife after husbands’ death, had to be resorted through legislation.
Burqa has not been the mandatory part of Koranic teachings. Here the emphasis is on dressing modestly. In earlier societies and other societies also, different dress codes have imposed on and also adopted by women, some as honor and more of them to impose controls on them. Dr. Zeenat Shaukat Ali, a noted Islamic scholar points out that long before the advent of Islam, veiling and seclusion appear to have existed in Hellinitic-Byzantine era, and also amongst Sassanians of Persia. In ancient Mesopotamia veil of women was regarded as sign of respectability and status.
During feudal times, the patriarchal norms were operated in the society through the institution of religion. With persistence of patriarchy the women were made to wear the identity markers in different cultures and societies. Stronger the patriarchal norms, stronger the social presence of clergy, stronger is the imposition of identity markers. These may be Ghunghat, (India) head scarf in different cultures and burqa amongst Muslims. From the beginning of twentieth century, the status of women started improving slightly and women started coming to social space. By 1980s in many a Muslim majority countries also women came to their own and prevalence of burqa came down, and at places totally done away with. The situation started worsening with the Global War on terror at world level and with communal violence in India intensifying.
With so called ‘war on terror’ the intimidation of Muslim communities’ world over started worsening. With this orthodox and conservative sects in Islam came to fore. Fundamentalist tendencies like Taliban propped up at places and worsened the situation by giving sense-less fatwa’s and dictates. Taliban imposed the norms in most inhuman way. The sense of insecurity in the wake of war, invasion of Afghanistan and then Iraq increased the sense of insecurity and the consequent hold of conservative sections, who generally impose such restrictive norms on women increased. Still in many a countries, where the women enjoyed a safe and secure social condition, the use of burqa came down. If we have a look at global scene we will find great amount of diversity in this matter. Broadly one can say, more the insecurity, more the hold of orthodoxy more the burqa.
In India one can see a great diversity in the use of the same. In Kerala it was not much in use and in Kashmir it was practically absent. In Kerala its use started going up with the rising communal violence of the decade of 1980s and with the rising influence of Wahabi Islam through those taking up jobs in Gulf region. In Kashmir the rise of militancy after 1990, the communalization of the Kashmir issue, led to rise of conservative sections who wanted to impose the veil, but Kashmiri women held there ground and resisted the same.
Also lot of misconceptions have been constructed around Islam, Burqa and local traditions. Recently India’s President, Mrs. Pratibha Patil stated that the Ghunghat in Rajasthan has been introduced due to the fear of Muslim kings, to protect women from their atrocities. One can ask those arguing on these lines, how did Sati come into being? Can hiding the face protect women or make them more vulnerable to atrocities? Sati, Ghunghat etc, have been more a mark of patriarchal values than due to the impact of Muslim Kings. Even today Ghunghat persists not because of the fear of Muslims but the strong hold of patriarchal values. The occasional cases of Sati also fall in that category. Bal Thackeray of Shiv Sena came for a strong praise of Sarcozy for his stand on Burqa. The same Shiv Sena has been intimidating girls on Valentine day off and on and giving the fatwa that girls should not wear Jeans. What a case of crass double standards!
The social and political situation leads to the social psychology and individual psychology of women is shaped around that. Men have held the sway in dictating such norms, and social situation is created where women internalize these norms. The Sufi tradition of Islam was not for the use of burqa. There are two essential points which the rulers have to keep in mind. One is that the very basis of democracy is freedom and liberal space. The countries like Saudi Arabia impose burqa. The countries like France want to do away with the same through a dictat. What is the difference? Secondly the point today is to see that globally and within the nation states the minorities are given the feeling of security, they are provided with situations leading to equity. These will ensure that the identity issues will take the back seat. Today the communities where security is the issue, equity is eluding the community, identity becomes the major rallying point. Just the statement about identity markers, without changing the social situation leading to such phenomenon is a hollow move.
--
Ram Puniyani
The statement of Nicholas Sarcozy that Burqa is not welcome in France, that it is a symbol of oppression and not of religion has raised serious debate all over. It is France again where five years ago the display of religious markers, head scarf, Sikh turban, and Jewish skull cap in schools was banned. Public servants cannot use the same in place of work.
France as a secular state has adopted a particular version of this policy. France has been setting example for some of the countries in this imposing type of secularism, like Turkey. It has another dimension and that is large number of poor Muslims coming here are from its old colonies who live in very abysmal conditions. One recalls a large section of these immigrant Muslim population lives in suburbs, poor localities in economic deprivation. A couple of years ago right here some Muslim youth began a series of violent acts out of frustration due to unemployment and poverty. The cultural economic differences between these sections are very wide and urban affluent ones’ are very gross.
How is secularism to be implemented? One way is that social situations are transformed and the hold of feudal elements is done away with and state encourages the society to adopt the norms of social and gender equality. And with this, the symbols of gender inequalities start receding in the face of changing social situation. There is no uniform pattern in this. Even after the democratic regimes come to being formally, many an old norms take time to vanish. Surely there are some of these which have to be done away by strong legislation. In India during freedom movement forcible prevention of Sati, burning of wife after husbands’ death, had to be resorted through legislation.
Burqa has not been the mandatory part of Koranic teachings. Here the emphasis is on dressing modestly. In earlier societies and other societies also, different dress codes have imposed on and also adopted by women, some as honor and more of them to impose controls on them. Dr. Zeenat Shaukat Ali, a noted Islamic scholar points out that long before the advent of Islam, veiling and seclusion appear to have existed in Hellinitic-Byzantine era, and also amongst Sassanians of Persia. In ancient Mesopotamia veil of women was regarded as sign of respectability and status.
During feudal times, the patriarchal norms were operated in the society through the institution of religion. With persistence of patriarchy the women were made to wear the identity markers in different cultures and societies. Stronger the patriarchal norms, stronger the social presence of clergy, stronger is the imposition of identity markers. These may be Ghunghat, (India) head scarf in different cultures and burqa amongst Muslims. From the beginning of twentieth century, the status of women started improving slightly and women started coming to social space. By 1980s in many a Muslim majority countries also women came to their own and prevalence of burqa came down, and at places totally done away with. The situation started worsening with the Global War on terror at world level and with communal violence in India intensifying.
With so called ‘war on terror’ the intimidation of Muslim communities’ world over started worsening. With this orthodox and conservative sects in Islam came to fore. Fundamentalist tendencies like Taliban propped up at places and worsened the situation by giving sense-less fatwa’s and dictates. Taliban imposed the norms in most inhuman way. The sense of insecurity in the wake of war, invasion of Afghanistan and then Iraq increased the sense of insecurity and the consequent hold of conservative sections, who generally impose such restrictive norms on women increased. Still in many a countries, where the women enjoyed a safe and secure social condition, the use of burqa came down. If we have a look at global scene we will find great amount of diversity in this matter. Broadly one can say, more the insecurity, more the hold of orthodoxy more the burqa.
In India one can see a great diversity in the use of the same. In Kerala it was not much in use and in Kashmir it was practically absent. In Kerala its use started going up with the rising communal violence of the decade of 1980s and with the rising influence of Wahabi Islam through those taking up jobs in Gulf region. In Kashmir the rise of militancy after 1990, the communalization of the Kashmir issue, led to rise of conservative sections who wanted to impose the veil, but Kashmiri women held there ground and resisted the same.
Also lot of misconceptions have been constructed around Islam, Burqa and local traditions. Recently India’s President, Mrs. Pratibha Patil stated that the Ghunghat in Rajasthan has been introduced due to the fear of Muslim kings, to protect women from their atrocities. One can ask those arguing on these lines, how did Sati come into being? Can hiding the face protect women or make them more vulnerable to atrocities? Sati, Ghunghat etc, have been more a mark of patriarchal values than due to the impact of Muslim Kings. Even today Ghunghat persists not because of the fear of Muslims but the strong hold of patriarchal values. The occasional cases of Sati also fall in that category. Bal Thackeray of Shiv Sena came for a strong praise of Sarcozy for his stand on Burqa. The same Shiv Sena has been intimidating girls on Valentine day off and on and giving the fatwa that girls should not wear Jeans. What a case of crass double standards!
The social and political situation leads to the social psychology and individual psychology of women is shaped around that. Men have held the sway in dictating such norms, and social situation is created where women internalize these norms. The Sufi tradition of Islam was not for the use of burqa. There are two essential points which the rulers have to keep in mind. One is that the very basis of democracy is freedom and liberal space. The countries like Saudi Arabia impose burqa. The countries like France want to do away with the same through a dictat. What is the difference? Secondly the point today is to see that globally and within the nation states the minorities are given the feeling of security, they are provided with situations leading to equity. These will ensure that the identity issues will take the back seat. Today the communities where security is the issue, equity is eluding the community, identity becomes the major rallying point. Just the statement about identity markers, without changing the social situation leading to such phenomenon is a hollow move.
--
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)