Author : Vinamra Bharadwaj
Famous Bollywood filmstar Sanjay Dutt did a Kamal Hassan and shed tears before the media when he said that he won’t seek pardon over the punishment awarded to him by the Supreme Court of India. Being a rich star and a person with powerful political connections (Dutt’s sister is a sitting Congress MP and his late father was a powerful Congress leader. Dutt himself is believed to have strong connections with Samajwadi party). So was Sanjay Dutt really repentant or was the tears just a sympathy gimmick as has been the trend in India where public sympathy goes even for the bigger crooks. Whatever it was that made Sanjay Dutt cry, 20 years back he was found guilty of possessing dozens of hand grenades and assault weapons (AK 56). And upon this discovery, he had infamously told his father. The reason he gave for keeping such weapons capable enough to carry out carnage of the magnitude of Mumbai 26/11 was not personal security. In Sanjay’s own words “Because I have Muslim blood in my veins. I could not bear what was happening in the city.” Sanjay’s reaction is to the Mumbai riots of which was discussed in Part 1. His claim that Muslim blood reacts strongly to things based on religion was also not surprising given the analysis shown in Part 2. While the 1st 2 parts showed various theories, principles and incidents as to why many Muslims behaved in a communal way, this edition will cover various incidents where Muslims kept the ideals of nation at bay just for the sake of religion.
Before I jump into citing those incidents, it would be better to focus on the Civil laws in the country. Although we all know that it took almost 3 years to the Constitution of India, many of the laws were directly taken from pre independence British Rule making the legal system more complex. The complexity further is driven by the fact that each community is governed by separate set of personal laws in India except for the state of Goa where Uniform Civil Code is in force. For starters A Uniform Civil Code administers same set of SECULAR civil laws to govern all the citizens irrespective of their religion, caste and creed. Most of the major democracies of the world excluding India have enforced the Uniform Civil Code. It is needless to say that an organization should have Uniform Civil Code as its top priority to claim secular credentials. As per the British law Hindu and Muslim personal laws were separate. During the formation of constitution, Indian leaders wanted to have a Secular constitution; however what they ended up with was not Secularism in true sense. Much of this was because as per Nehru, he wanted a constitution which would safeguard the interests of minority. However, minorities such as Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Parsis were included in the same set of Laws as Hindus, thereby making it clear that whatever Nehru did in the name of Minority safeguarding was nothing but Muslim appeasement.
Last editions have shown, how intolerant muslims who follow Quran, become and resort to mass murders, vandalism, genocides, rioting and wreck havoc on those civilizations which remotely chooses to deviate from Islam. That however is a different thing that, when those other civilizations retaliate in an Islamic fashion, these communal goons cry victimhood. That however is unknown whether Nehru decided to leave Muslim personal laws untouched was on fears or rioting and uncontrolled genocides by intolerant Islamic groups or to appease them and form a large votebank. But the end result was that Article 44 which states “The State shall endeavor to secure for citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India” has never got implemented and Muslims have their own laws which is governed by the Arabic Sharia law, has special judges for the same. Very often the demands from radical Islamic groups is to implement the Sharia law in civil as well as Criminal proceedings and should be implemented in the whole country and not just muslims. In short, many powerful muslims who are religious fanatics want the Sharia Law to replace the Constitution of India. Why that may not be a very good thing for the liberal Hindus deserves a separate cover up and would be discussed later. So even though when the Fundamental Right to Equality says that an individual cannot be discriminated on the basis of Religion, Caste or sex, the parallel running Sharia Laws give special status to Muslim men such as keeping 4 wives simultaneously, giving divorce. These privileges are not available to Muslim women or Non muslims in India, a clear violation of Right to Freedom of Equality. Polygamy shouldn’t be endorsed. Equality suggests, there should be same rule for everyone and each individual should have one spouse at a time.
It would be fair to say, despite living in India, muslims live in a different world altogether, because they have their own laws. The country has parallel legal systems running in the name of safeguarding minorities interests, when there is only 1 religion which gets the unfair as well as inefficient benefit at the cost of Constitutional and moral values. So is it fair to blame only the muslims and their intolerance of accepting anything slightly different from Quran. Will it be justified to just blame them for keeping Religion above the country? The policymakers of this country are to be blamed equally, if not more, for letting radical Islam spread its tentacles in India. For the sake of votebank politics, they never allowed the feeling of this communal divide to get over. Rather than enforcing uniform laws by persuasion and oppression, the lawmakers decided to play muslim appeasement. As a result many of the muslims today keep their religion above the law of this country. This is not to say that all muslims are unpatriotic to India. However there are reasons for an Indian to believe that muslims’ loyalty does not lie with India and lies somewhere else. So what are they?
- India’s number 1 enemy is Pakistan which is an Islamic nation. Those muslims who follow Quran have to owe allegiance to Umma (Supernation to muslims) and not any man made nation
- India is a diverse country with multi culture and multi religious identity. It is a democratic country with Cultural Rights to the citizens. Majority of the population is Hindus wherein people are to worship any God. Muslims who follow Quran are said to believe in just 1 God Allah and no one else, hence they are not very comfortable with accepting worship of any other Gods in their surroundings
- There are many terrorist organizations active in India which carry out terrorist activities and they do have massive support from ordinary Muslim citizens, again in the name of religion
- Going against Holy Quran is blasphemy and an offender can be executed by violent intolerant muslim mob. So even if certain acts may not be justified (polygamy, child marriage etc), muslims try to justify it with blood, sweat and money
It is time to present those examples where Muslims vociferously and assertively ditched the laws of the Nation and considered it lowly and chose to follow what their religion says even if it was morally wrong.
- Shah Bano Divorce Case – Most of us were not even born when Rajeev Gandhi led Congress government (which enjoyed a 4/5th majority in Parliament then) in 1986 passed a resolution in Parliament in 1986 which aimed to deny rightful alimony to destitute muslim women from their former husbands. Shah Bano, a 62 year old muslim woman was denied alimony by her husband in 1978. She approached the courts and the case reached Supreme Court 7 years later which ruled in favour of Ms. Bano. The communal muslims felt this was an invasion of Islam and they protested vehemently as they normally known to. Parliament diluted the judgement by passing a new Law to appease his well known votebank.
- Imrana Rape case – In June 2006, a 28 year old Muslim lady and a mother of five was raped by her father in law. As per the National laws, the rapist should have been punished and left to rot in prison. However Darul Uloom Deoband, the premier Islamic fatwa issuing body in India ruled that “And marry not women whom your fathers married”, which meant that even if this was a rape and not a case of consensual sex, Imrana’s own husband would not be treated as her own son. So by this ruling Imrana become the real culprit by staying with her husband who was now her son and not her rapist father in law. As per the law she had to spend the rest of her life with her father in law and treat him as her husband. At a later stage however, upon pressure of National Women’s Commission and the national Media, the UP government changed its stand and arrested the rapist and he was punished later. But this entire incident exposed the intolerance of Muslim bodies.
- Exemption from singing the National Song – ‘VANDE MATRAM’ is believed to be the National Song of India. It is a poem in Sanskrit written by Bankim Chandra Chatterjjee in 1906 A.D during the Freedom Struggle against the British. The motive of the song should be enough to create a spark and Goosebumps in those who love the country of India. The poem does nothing but describe the wondrous virtues possessed by the land of India. The words ‘Vande Matram’ mean ‘Hail You mother’ and the mother referred here is country. The song has nothing to do with any religion, In 2006 various State governments decided to make the singing of ‘Vande Matram’ compulsory on a function organized to mark the centenary of the song on Sep 7, 2006. However there were loud protests from muslims and many ‘Fatwas’ were issued by Muslim bodies asking muslim students to defy the State’s order. Muslims held the singing of Vande Matram unislamic, because as per Quran there was only one God, the Allah and they should not revere/respect any other figure/object/person
- Freed but not fair – In Uttar Pradesh, pro Muslim Government decided to release 24 youths who were arrested on Charges of terrorism. Three muslim youths were already released by the government and it was planning on more releases. Whether those who were caught were guilty or not is for the courts to decide. In India, once someone is arrested with charges as serious as indulging in terrorism, he/she is to be charge sheeted by police and then presented before a court of law. Only when the courts exonerate the accused, they can be set free, but the UP government in its appeasement politics didn’t even bother to present these youth to courts. It might have been possible that these youths were wrongfully framed and in that case it questions the motives of UP Police department which is controlled by UP government. Hence if the youths were innocent, why were they arrested in the 1st place and if they were arrested, why weren’t they tried in a court of Law? These incidents go on to tell the kind of privileges muslims are enjoying in India. Taking another example of another terror accused Sadhvi Pragya who was accused of indulging in terrorism by the government. Sadhvi is rotting in prison for the past several years. She is suffering from Cancer and denied a Bail. She may or may not be guilty. Again that is for the courts to decide. But the government has not even charge sheeted her and is yet to move to an court of law to seek a fair trial which she is being denied for years. Despite her serious illness most of the political parties are silent on the issue while they went berserk on the former issue just because it was linked to muslims.
- Hailing the Terrorists – In June 2004, Ishrat Jahan an Islamic suicide bomber was killed in a fake encounter. Her aim was assassination of Gujrat Chief Minister Narendra Modi. Jahan was on a mission and was supported by LeT (one of the world’s deadliest terrorist organization) operatives based out of India. As per the Mumbai 26/11 convict David Headly’s confessions has clearly stated that Jahan was a Fidayeen (suicide bomber). However the Central government in a move to woe muslim voters hatched a new theory that the encounter may have been fake. Whether the encounter was fake or not cannot be determined because the investigations were carried out by Government controlled agencies who have often been accused of bias. However one thing is clear that Jahan was a deadly terrorist. So it gets immaterial whether the encounter was fake or genuine. Large sections of Media and powerful politicians sympathized with Jahan, a terrorist just because she was a muslim and were more concerned about her human rights to live and then die as a suicide bomber by exploding several innocents than about the safety and security of citizens. Even the accomplice of 2001 Parliament terror attacks, Afzal guru was hailed as a Hero and considered to be innocent by many.
- When Terror had a new Colour – India has been jolted by a plethora of terrorist attacks since 1947. One doesn’t have to be a CIA Director to know that these attacks are mostly carried out by radical Islamic Organizations active in India at the behest of Pakistani spy agency ISI. Thousands of people have been killed in the last 4 decades due to these terror attacks. Islamic terror is biggest threat to India. However Home Minister Shinde in his remark shamelessly said that it was ‘Hindu terror’ or the saffron terror which was the biggest threat to India. He later went on to regret his remarks which was merely based on a handful of hindus being charged for terror activities. He tried to appease a particular community by using this term, which later on was proved wrong. This remark however caught up big time with other sympathizers of Islamic terrorism who were exposed
In all of these cases, the common thing is that, Muslims have been given special privileges either by way of extra judicial process or favourable laws or by support of Five Star activists, powerful politicians and eminent journalists who consider them as victims. Their Communal Assertion has got them what they wanted and more often than not it has come at a serious cost of sacrificing the Constitutional as well as Moral values, more dangerously at the helm of Nation’s interest. Despite the laws of the Nation being modern are superseded by age old Arabic Laws, where else does it happen in a Democracy?
In the next edition we will see how the most powerful men are indulged in Votebank politics and ruining the Nation of its cultural and communal harmony.