India began as a plural democracy; respect for diversity was the core value. The provisions of safeguards for minorities were in-built. These safeguards were formulated by the Constituent Assembly’s committee on Minorities headed by Sardar Patel. Seven decades down the line, where do we stand in matters of security and economic welfare of the religious minorities?
Most of the inquiry commission reports related to communal violence, the scholarly works on communal violence by the likes of Paul Brass, Asghar Ali Engineer and recently from Yale University, paint a very painful picture of the communal violence, showing that the Muslims minorities in particular and lately Christian Minorities have suffered adversely. Sachar Committee Report (2006) showed the economic marginalisation of Muslim minorities.
The events of the last few decades and more so of the last six years show the rising intimidation, marginalisation and increasing fear among this community. The lynchings in the name of cow-beef and the harassment around love jihad have brought to fore the type of problems our country is facing on the scale of democratic freedoms. This was most clearly demonstrated when the large section of the media with full support of the ruling dispensation coined terms like ‘Corona bomb’ and ‘Corona Jihad’ in the wake of Covid. To add salt to the wound, the present Government initiated NRC in Assam on the grounds that over 50 Lakh Bangladeshis have infiltrated into India particularly in Assam. When the final count came only 19 odd lakh people were found without proper citizenship papers out of which 12.5 Lakhs were Hindus!
Undeterred by this, the ruling Government brought in the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in which the persecuted communities in neighbouring countries are entitled for citizenship barring the Muslims. The trap was clear that those people who were without papers and were Hindus will get citizenship through the back door while millions of Muslims without proper papers will be disenfranchised from citizenship to be shunted to detention centers.
It was in this background that our ex-Vice President Hamdi Ansari wrote his memoirs “By a Many Happy Accident: Recollections of a Life”. In discussions and interviews by different channels around the release of the book he voiced some of the concerns. He tried to emphasise that our citizenship is not based on religion. As most of the comments on his book and also on his life revolved around his being a Muslim, he underlined the fact that in his diplomatic and political life Muslim ness did not matter, what mattered was professional competence. As such this sums up his career which spanned over four decades and served the country in a very honourable way.
That apart the communal elements constantly targeted him for his being Muslim. In one of the Republic Day parade (2015), when the army saluted as Jan Gan Man, the national anthem was sung. A picture was circulated to create the misconception that Ansari did not salute when the anthem was being sung. In this picture President is seen saluting along with him Prime Minister Narendra Modi and defense Minister are also saluting. Ansari stands still and the picture highlights his not saluting. The criticism of his not saluting tricolor was propagated. At such an occasion only the President, who is Commander-in-Chief of the army salutes. No one is supposed to salute at that time. What Ansari did was as per the protocol, while those who saluted with the President did not follow the guidelines laid down!
When Ansari retired in his farewell speech the Prime Minster took a dig. “A big part of your working life was in West Asia… in the same atmosphere and debate… after retirement, it was minority’s commission or AMU… that was your circumference,” he had said.
In the response to the release of his book, the communal forces again are uttering that India gave you so many top positions and you are disgruntled! You can very well leave the country and stay in the one where you feel at home. These types of comments show the mindset of the sectarian nationalists who see the citizens only in their religion’s identity. Ansari is not talking of his personal unhappiness. Being a thorough democrat and Indian nationalist, he is trying to draw our attention to the declining ethos of our country. Since the identity issues, the emotive issues like Ram Temple, Cow-beef, Ghar Wapasi and Love jihad have taken the front stage our democratic foundations are being eroded to no end.
Similarly, he points out that with the current Government, the word secularism has gone into eclipse, it has disappeared from Governments dictionary. One can argue that even earlier the practice of secularism was on a weak wicket, e.g. the responses to Shah Bano Judgment did go contrary to the values of secularism. Numerous reasons can be attributed to the weakness in practice of secularism. Still at most levels it had honourable place. What was missing was the astute sense of implementing it in the complex scenario where intense propaganda against protective clauses for minorities was projected as ‘minority appeasement’. Now there is not even an iota of consideration that as a secular state Prime Minister should not inaugurate a religious place of worship or issues like violence in the name Cow-Beef should not enjoy impunity. There is not even the smallest consideration that in CAA how we can bar granting of citizenship to people of particular religion.
Ansari points out, “Overall, the very fact that Indian-ness of any citizen being questioned is a disturbing thought,’ and “enhanced apprehensions of insecurity amongst segments of our citizen body, particularly Dalits, Muslims and Christians” and the “illiberal form of nationalism that promotes intolerance”.
The critics of pluralism and diversity assert that what is prevailing is genuine secularism as it has balanced the earlier tilt towards minorities. They also try to equate few other killings as lynchings, to show that there is no insecurity for Dalits and minorities as such. Ansari’s observations need to be taken seriously and course correction of our democracy needs to be undertaken.
(The writer is a human rights defender and a former professor at the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay.)
