Of
late the religious minorities in India have been subjected to
discrimination, harassment and atrocities of all kinds. Not many
such incidents are brought to the notice of the law-enforcing
authorities. For, those at the helm of affairs by and large belong
to majority-community, otherwise known as Hindu community. Even
those incidents that are highlighted are either manipulated or
hushed up somehow. The incidents that are marked by anti-minority
attitude of the government employees are being set aside for want of
follow-up from the minorities. At times, such incidents are diluted
and portrayed as those that stem from the individual rivalry on
account of trespass and civil tort. Attempts are also made to show
them as such incidents which are not smacked of any communal bias.
But then, there are innumerable incidents, be they apparent or
latent, speak volumes to vindicate the point that it is communal
angle that is predominant in all of them. Again, it is minorities
who are at the receiving end in most of the cases. Gujarat killings
are still fresh in our memory.
Suffice it to cite a case of a naked atrocity to secure forcible
migration of a 70-year old minority community widow, Mrs Ahmadi Khan
in the village of Jassipur of Mayurbhanj district in the state of
Orissa on January 28, 2009. More than the agony that the old lady
suffered due to the atrocity of Anil Modak and others on another
occasion (May11, 2009) also, the criminal role of local VHP/Bajrangdal
activists with the connivance of local police that caused her
depression added injury to the insult. Despite her request to the
Mayurbhanj SP, the FIR was not filed till date. In contrast, a false
case was foisted against her, courtesy another police official in
the district. There were attempts to approach the National Human
Rights Commission, the Minorities Commission, besides the PIL in the
Cuttack Court. But no significant remedy is available to the
aggrieved party, the old lady. It seems that the Orissa High Court
had directed the CB-CID last week to conduct enquiry and submit
status report within a week, but in vain. There are several such
incidents that are marked by communal colour seemed to be happening
in various parts of the country. The society is so polarised that
such cases are being viewed as communal ones, and thus justified if
that victims does not belong to them. Sensitivity to such heinous
crimes is lost and humanity has become a casualty.
While it is unfair to brand all Hindus as communal, it is also
unfair to paint all minorities, be they Muslims, Christians, Sikhs,
jains etc., as fundamentalist. In other words, it is pointless to
generalise all the religious people as communal as there are only a
handful of such people in any religion who, at times, become
narrow-minded and chauvinistic. Their overt and covert actions of
spontaneous nature might provoke reactions from the rival groups
that tend to jeopardise the peace and tranquillity in the society.
Sometimes such actions lead to the rise of communal riots, whereas
at some other times, they might lead to the vertical division of the
society on the basis of religion, as was the case with the partition
of India in 1947!
Besides, there are also times when mere doubts and apprehensions
about the minority communities are raised and propagated in the
public and private fora. Although such deliberate acts do not lead
to any violent incidents these would certainly create mental agony
and distress among the minorities. As a result, minorities feel
humiliated and harassed even when they are not at fault. Meanwhile,
the religious fundamentalists and communalists take this opportunity
to their advantage and attribute malintentions and treachery to the
minorities. In fact, there are occasions (International Sporting
events etc.,) when the minorities are treated as traitors of the
country and thus, abused as antinationalistic once for all! This
sort of sectarian attitude in the majority community towards the
minorities would keep them insecure. Thus, their apprehensions about
lack of protection of right, liberty and property are
understandable. It is time the governments implement the reports of
Rajendra Sachar Committee that concern the overall development of
minorities in the country.
Thanks to the prevailing socio-economic conditions that are
responsible for marginalising them would compel some such aggrieved
persons to behave in an abnormal manner. In any democratic society
it is numbers that matter. But it does not mean that minorities and
their views are to be neglected nor undermined during the course of
decision-making. Majority always does not represent common interest,
leave alone rational interests. At times, it so happens that even
minority would also represent the interest of majority, if not
interests of all. Viewed in that perspective, one should be careful
about the views of both majority and minority, and due recognition
is to be paid to both the views invariably.
As a
matter of fact, majority has been viewed as ‘’mobocracy’ from the
ancient times onwards. Sometimes, its practice would lead to
development of perverted form of governance whereby reason and
rationality become casualties. Incidentally, ancient philosophers
like Socrates and Plato suffered during the regimes of democrats,
for being truthful and straightforward. Even Lord Jesus Christ and
Prophet Muhammad also faced the same wrath of mobs of their times.
There were several such examples that can be traced in the history.
Thus, democracy should not be treated as merely head-counting and
thereby giving the reason, rationality and logic a go-bye!
Meanwhile, the concept of minorities has been understood in many
ways. It is not religion alone that could be the basis for
categorizing people in terms of majority and minorities. Language,
culture, geography, gender, colour, caste, sub-caste and other
aspects could also to be taken as factors for categorization. For
instance, in the case of Hinduism, all castes and sub-castes are
further categorized as distinct communities that constitute
different sizes of population. Given this sort of categorization,
Hindus per se do not become the majority-community. It is a
community of communities of different castes and sub-castes, whose
interests clash each other and one another. In the recent past,
Hindus are found to be engaged in acrimonious battles for sharing
power, political and otherwise. Failed to inculcate the noble
feelings of Dr.BRAmbedkar, father of Indian constitution, the upper
caste Hindus are not treating the so-called lower castes as brothers
and sisters. The social evil of untouchability has been practised
though it is prohibited in the Constitution, the sacred document of
India.
The
marginalised communities like Dalits, Adivasis, OBCs and women have
been deprived of their constitutional rights on end. Obviously, the
majority Vs minority controversy has taken a different turn with the
spread of Ambedkar philosophy, and more so with popularisation of
the concept of Bahujan Samaj of Manyasri kanshiramji! While the
majority Hindus are polarised in terms of minority-Upper castes that
constitute Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vyshyas on the one hand, the
majority-Lower castes that constitute the Shudras and Atishudras, on
the other hand. Since the majority-Lower castes are found oppressed
socially and otherwise at the hands of Upper castes, they wish to
break the chains of Hinduism only to join the religious minorities
of Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism as a larger
entity. Since the idea is based on apprehensions of the marginalised
communities, its implementation would certainly alter the social
composition of the majority and minority notions. Ultimately, this
larger entity would make them majority for political purpose that
would ensure political power over a period of time. That alone would
assure minimum rights for the minorities who are otherwise feel
suffocating due to communal perpetuation.
The author is a Research Associate,
Dept. Of Political Science, Osmania University, Hyderabad,
kvidyassagarr@gmail.com.
|