Execution to satisfy the ‘hurt ego’of a divided society

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

Yakub Memon is executed in the morning of July 30^th, at the Central Jail in Nagpur. The ‘nationalists’ are celebrating and anchors are ‘informing’ that we have send a ‘strong’ message against terrorism and that no ‘terrorist’ will ever think of attempting to redo it again. We saw his funeral in Mumbai where thousands turn up despite attempt by media as well as authorities to play it down. An anchor was preaching on his show from outside the ‘bada-kabristan’ in Mumbai thanking the police and media both for not making Yakub Memon a hero. He said, ‘why we should make a terrorist a hero, it means playing in the hands of Pakistanis and ISI’. Both the anchors were having a sigh of relief once the burial was done and crowd started dispersing. Mumbai Police had already banned TV cameras from the venue and none opposed it in the ‘national’ interest. Of-course, the anchor was ‘alarmed’ to see the huge crowd but felt that no untoward incident took place perhaps because of the alacrity of the Mumbai Police. It is another matter that these ‘parrots’ never realize why there were so many people and was there a message in it ? How do you read to an incident where over ten thousand people have gathered for the last rite of a man who is condemned to hanging despite loud cries of his being anti-national? Have all the people or I should say Muslims who participated in the burial of Yakub Memon become ‘anti-national’ as they turned up despite the threat to them as well as how police and intelligence agencies ‘read’ their participation. Is it a rejection of what is being spoken over our mass media about the man or is it show of deep regret and outrage that the man who came to India in the hope that judiciary will do justice and he would stand vindicated, was betrayed? Is it not sense of helplessness and betrayal which the Muslim community is feeling when they are being taught to ‘respect’ the courts and ‘rule of law’? The same Mumbai, a few years back, saw, official cremation of man whose goons on the street were responsible for the worst ever massacre of people in Mumbai in 1993 in the aftermath of Babari demolition.

Nobody is making a case for those who kill people in the name of caste, religion and even nationality but it is our duty to see that the persons who are charged must get all the available avenues to access law to defend him. We cannot make a person criminal or terrorist just because police or intelligence agencies say so or media start debating after they ‘produce’ some ‘break news’. Most of the time, it is happening because majority of those who are being charge-sheeted, accused or executed are coming from one particular community. It is the community which is facing the wrath of a highly communalized middle classes and ‘blood-thirsty’ media. It was not that those who were fighting for Yakub defended the indefensible terror attack on Mumbai. No human rights defender world over can ever defend a terror violence that kills innocent citizens for no fault of theirs. Unfortunately, much before the courts could have come to a final conclusion about Yakub Memon, the public opinion in India had started building up for his hanging and punishment. A person who is facing death penalty has a right to use all the available legal tools to protect him but here we tried to scuttle that. I can understand of common people talking revenge killing but do not expect it from the ‘opinion makers’ who have conveniently forgotten the history of communalism and who was the first ‘terrorist’ in independent India killing Gandhi in 1948. We use stories according to our suitability and in a very shrewd way media has become the mouthpiece of the ruling party and its real power centre ‘the Sangh Parivar’.

Though Memon was found guilty by the courts to but on many time the Apex Court has turned the earlier decisions of the lower courts upside down much to the relief of the individuals who would have been hanged. It is not me but legal luminaries like Ram Jethmalani, Prashant Bhushan, N.D.Pancholi and others who felt that the Supreme Court must hear the petition again. Many others like them felt that he should have been given another chance. Haven’t we seen how Balbir Singh who was condemned to death in the Indira Gandhi assassination case along with Satwant Singh and Beant Singh was not found guilty by the Supreme Court? Once a person is hanged there is no chance of rectifying the mistake as Justice Markandey Katju said many times that the Supreme Court too can make mistakes and if a person is alive that mistake can be undone. That is why human rights activists have opposed death penalty apart from many other factors which we will discuss in the article later on.  Given the nature of accounts of the last days of Yakub Memon in the Nagpur jail, it is said that his behavior with other jail mates was wonderful and that they kept fast for him. The jail officials were also appreciable of his behavior and the sad part is that he remained chanting the fact that he was being hanged for the sins of his brother. Even the reports suggest that when he was being taken to the gallows the officials ask him to confess but he remained firm of the fact that he was innocent. When a Maulvi asked him to confess sin before being hanged Yakub told that he was innocent. It was clear that Yakub had high hopes on Indian judiciary and felt that some miracle would happen and courts would accept his innocence.  It is often said that people often speak the truth before death and if Yakub’s continuous cry of innocence before his hanging shows anything it definitely speak something which we need to take seriously.

The best comment on Yakub Memon’s hanging came from Akar Patel, Executive Director, Amnesty International, India who said, ‘ This morning, the Indian government essentially killed a man in cold blood to show that killing is wrong’. He further added that “This execution will not deliver justice for the 1993 Mumbai blasts. It is a misguided attempt to prevent terrorism, and a disappointing use of the criminal justice system as a tool for retribution.”

Seriously speaking one has to understand whether retribution has ever helped any one or not. In the criminal justice system focus is too much on the ‘accused’ but no effort is made to help the ‘victims’. It is the victims who suffer and have to endure the pain for life but for the power it is the shortest route that once you ‘punish’ the ‘accused’ justice is done and case is closed. Ordinary people will not ask so many questions as an atmosphere is created around the accused hence forgetting their own pain they too feel once retribution is done, justice is done.

It is therefore more important for us to understand how ‘justice’ is done and who are the people face retribution. In an interview to Uttam Sengupta in Outlook Magazine, Anup Surendranath, Assistant Professor, National Law University, Delhi and head of ‘Death Penalty Research Project’ in India, says,’ ‘I would not like to divulge all the details till we actually publish the report. But clearly an overwhelming majority of the convicts on death row are from backward castes, dalits and minorities. Most of them are actually first-time offenders and not habitual offenders as is widely believed. Most of them were convicted on the basis of recoveries arising out of confessions in a police station (such confessions are inadmissible as evidence in a court of law). Over 80 per cent of them, I would say, were tortured. And of course virtually all of them are poor. We knew it intuitively but for the first time in this country we are crunching numbers and actual case studies to show the reality on the ground. We also have interesting findings on the categories of crimes for which individuals are sentenced to death, the quality of evidence used, the nature of legal assistance, treatment in prisons etc’.

Unlike the legal critiques whether Memon was complicit in the Bombay blasts or not, I am writing this purely on the basis of my concern as a citizen of India and as a human rights defender. And definitely for that a few things are important to suggest in the beginning before the ‘nationalists’ could shout loud and send me to Saudi Arabia a country I despise because of its wahhabism and Islamic laws of Shariat which remain brutal to the date, that the way issues are blown out of proportion and given a communal angle to defame and vilify a community is dangerous and detrimental to our national interest.

None is suggesting that those killed in the terror blasts in Mumbai in 1993 shouldn’t get justice. In numerous other cases we are seeking punishment to the guilty and state then feel that it has ‘fulfilled’ its duty. There is overemphasis on ‘punishment’ but nothing on the ‘affirmative’ action in rehabilitating the ‘victims’ of the violence. Yesterday in a panel discussion where I participated, one of the victim said that he is ‘happy’ with ‘punishment’ to Yakub Memon but that does not help the victims problems and issues which need positive planning and financial help to their honorable rehabilitation who have lost everything. India’s track record in providing necessary medico-psychological as well as legal assistance to victims is worth forgetting and it is time we need our focus on people too apart from bringing the culprit to justice.

That is why Indian political establishment need to address the issue seriously and do an introspection of the social attitude on the issues of violence at all level. First, as a society we need to understand that state is there to protect individuals from being violated but for doing that taking resort to violence will not solve the problem. There are two side of a situation related to violation of human rights or where a criminal activity has happened. First there is an accused or many of them and the state has to ensure that he or she is brought to law. This is the legal language and none talk of that state will give ‘punishment’ to him or them.  Second side is the issue of victims who face enormous difficulty, mental disturbance and physical pain after the incidents that it is impossible for fill the vacuum of their lives yet society and state have to do their best to bring them to a stage where they can lead a normal life.

There is no doubt that the number of executions in India is definitely much lessor than many of the societies we love to compare ourselves. The Hindu fanatics and Hindu secularists remind us Pakistan and Middle East when they shout as how Yakub could have been dead long before if he had lived in any of the Islamic societies. There are others who have been suggesting why we are creating ‘obstacles’ for them when he is found guilty.  My only submission is whether we ever think of a child in the family when make a mistake the parents scold him or at the maximum rebuke him or her but none seek an injurious penalty for their child. Even if the child makes a horrendous mistake, we always try to suggest,’ give him another chance for improvement’. It means when we scold the child, it is from the thought that he will become better or improve. When we say ‘bring him to justice’, some where we also feel that punishment means atonement and if we feel the person is not worthy for society we suggest life imprisonment. Now, after the execution everyone is sighing a relief that the ‘guilty’ is ‘punished. But is that true? Has Yakub Memon really been punished? He is dead now and not there to face punishment. Frankly speaking, it is his family which is now being punished for no fault of theirs.  

For many, ‘Your guilt is based on your identity’. When Arvind Kejariwal and Anna Hazare shouted everything against the constitution, our parliament and political class nothing happen to them because at the end of the day everybody in the ‘power’ knew who were the ‘protesters’. Anna’s movement strengthened the upper caste hegemony over ‘vandemataram’ nationalism in India. Can we imagine similar protest in Bastar and would the police and administration treat the speakers the same way if they speak the same language. No, the prejudices in the minds of Indian elite are being strengthened and that is the threat perception for future.  It is serious time of introspection for each one us including our Supreme Court, and government if they want to see the idea of a secular socialist republic India grow with equal rights to all the citizens of the country irrespective of their religious and ethnic status.

Reports suggest that capital punishment cases are rising in India. ‘India Spend’ story point out 1303 cases of death penalty between the year 2004-2013 as per National Crime Record Bureau statistics.

According to Amnesty International over 101 countries have abolished death penalty till July 2015. There are 22 countries which carry out executions.  It says, ‘execution is the ultimate, irrevocable punishment: the risk of executing an innocent person can never be eliminated. Since 1973, for example, 150 US prisoners sent to death row have later been exonerated. Others have been executed despite serious doubts about their guilt.

In an detailed report by Chaitnya Mallapur, published in ‘India spend’ suggest how a UN General Assembly adopted resolution  ‘towards the abolition of capital punishment and the protection of human rights when it endorsed a call for a worldwide moratorium on the death penalty’ in 2007 was opposed by India, China, Japan and United States. The article states that, ‘In 2013, nearly 778 executions were reported in 22 countries, a 14% growth over 682 executions in 2012’.

It need to be understood that death penalty has not reduced the crime rate anywhere and nor are the proven fact that militarism reduce criminality. World’s most peaceful countries are devoid of any such criminal practice and have always stood against capital punishment. Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and many other countries which have made higher standards of human life and dignity the motto of their constitution have vehemently opposed death penalty and torture in custody. The crime record in these countries is much below than those where brutality in capital punishment is visible. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, have the highest and most brutal form of execution not just hanging but also through bullet squad and stoning but the crime has not reduced. If brutality in punishment had reduced crime rate we would not have seen any crime in any of the Middle Eastern societies for now and they would have been the ‘best’ countries to live and enjoy life but that does not happen. In fact, states continue to use the brutal retribution to justify their position and silence the opposition. Most of the time, it is the innocent dissenters from ethnic, religious or racial minorities who bear the brunt of this.

Many times execution is made media event to ‘project’ an image of the ‘strong’ state to send a signal to majority communities who feel ‘assertion’ of minorities as a threat. In democracies the governments and power elites have learnt to behave in ‘symbolisms’ and through a ‘diversionary route’. So, with execution you focus on the ‘guilty’ and rarely discuss the issue pertaining to the communities. India’s track record is dismal in terms of providing justice to minorities and marginalized. Since independence thousands have died in different communal riots in various parts of the country and yet nothing happened in terms of providing any soothing balm to the people. The victims of Bhagalpur, Delhi 1984, Gujarat 2002, Mumbai 1993 apart from the bomb blasts at Macca Masjid, Malegaon and Samjhauta Express have not got any justice so far neither in terms of any support to them nor in finding out the conspiracy and bringing the culprits to justice. There are serious allegation leveled by a senior lawyer in Maharastra how she was asked to slow down in many of these cases. In hundreds of massacres and daily humiliations of Dalits all over the country not a single case has reached to the culmination level despite the SC-ST Prevention of Atrocities Act. Those who demolished Babari Masjid have got the political power but never got any punishment so far. Nearly 10 million Aadivasis have been ‘displaced’ for the ‘well beings’ of their ‘fellow Indians’ who don’t even look towards them in great respect and yet when they protest and ask for an honorable settlement they are hounded as a Maoist. The facts are not great in United States as well where reports are coming out clearly how the racial discrimination is a much bigger and dirtier reality than so-called war against ‘terrorism’. Similarly, India might claim war on terrorism but at the home turf it is the Dalits and aadivasis who face the biggest discrimination based on their birth at the hands of the caste Hindus who claim sole monopoly over our ‘nationalism’.

The research shows that most of those facing retributive punishment in Indian jails belong to Muslims, Aadivasis and Dalits for their ‘dissent’ against government policies and politics of the day. They are citizens of the country and want to live a happy life. They only ask for justice and honorable life like their fellow citizens. Will Indian law be applied in the same way as being applied to these groups? One senior judge quoted Manusmriti in the court of the law when delivering judgment about Yakub Memon. It is painful if not shameful when someone quotes Manusmriti in the Court because it is the antithesis of our modern day secular constitution. We want judgment based on our modern laws defined by Baba Saheb Ambedkar and not based on Manusmiriti which give different kind punishment for one or similar act based on the identity of your birth or your caste. It means a crime committed by Brahmin and a Shudra or Dalit will get different punishment due to nature of your castes and not based on the nature of your crime.

At the end, I won’t speak much but the data by the National Law School about the Death Penalty unambiguously suggest that democratic India is very much punishing its people on the basis of the laws of Manu and now time has come to stand and be counted for a more civilized implementation of our secular laws and putting the authority of the Constitution of India everywhere as people of this country have faith in the Constitution but definitely not on those who believe in Manusmriti and its greatness. We can never get justice from those who have faith in any religious laws as they ultimately divide people and believe in street justice based on your caste and religious identity which is brutal in nature and against all international covenants and treaties meant for the protection of Human Rights.

The legacy of Abdul Kalam

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

Former president Dr APJ Kalam’s death has brought back into discussion on his work, career and mission as the middle class India fed by absolutely communalized media has spared no time in making Kalam an ‘Einstien’ of India and perhaps the greatest president of India. Many called him ‘statesman’ while other said he was the ‘greatest’ scientist of the world. Indians are habitual of using adjectives to describe someone dear to them. Kalam was darling of India whose trolls hate those on social media as well as in public life who show their dissent to their futile and superfluous ‘vision’. Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that he has lost a ‘margdarshak’ or what we term as guide. Was Abdul Kalam really a Margdarshak of Modi or RSS or they coopted him after his massive popularity with urbanized India with his ‘nationalistic’ views which attract the communalized middle classes.

Let us not forget that the proposal of Abdul Kalam for the position of President of India was suggested none other than Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav who promoted Kalam for next president when he was the defence minister of the country. Mulayam’s Kalam agenda was important for him to project himself as a supporter of Muslims who are ‘nationalists’ too keeping in mind the 2004 general elections. Mulayam always nursed his ambition for being prime minister and for that Kalam’s elevation to become India’s President was sending a goodwill message to the Muslim community.

There is no doubt that Kalam became a hero of Sangh Parivar for various reasons. On certain things he actually fitted in the broader vision of Sangh Parivar as an ideal Muslim like Sikandar Bakht and Arif who have been part of their club for long and did not open their mouth on violence against Muslims or discrimination at different level. In fact, any talk of discrimination on part of Muslim was rebutted by them as those inspired and instigated by Pakistanis and Saudi Arabia. Therefore it is important for us to understand as what is an ideal or ‘nationalist’ or patriotic Muslim for the Sangh Parivar and its ideologues? So, I can describe here what the Hindutva’s ideologues consider an ‘ideal Muslim’. ‘An idealist Muslim is the one who read ‘Gita’ and consider it the world’s best book and decry Quoran or everything that Muslim do in the name of identity. He or she would despite Urdu and read Sanskrit and speak about the ‘greatness’ of this dying language. He or she should not feel hurt of Vandemataram and devote their time on Yoga and Suryanamsakaram. These days ideal Muslims are also those who love Lord Hanuman after watching ‘Bajrangi Bhaijan’ and love ‘Indian culture i.e essentially Hindu brahmanic culture and way of life. An ideal Muslim must adapt to Hindu traditions and leave his own Islamic identity. He must shout loudly as ‘Bharat mata kee Jai’ and his only identity is that he has ‘Hindu ancestors’ and he must admit that he or his family were ‘forcibly’ ‘converted’ to Islam. President Abdul Kalam was a perfect Muslim that way for Sangh Parivar who never bothered about his Muslim identity or I would say rarely tried to get identified with Indian Muslims or their issues and that is why he got more support in this communalized atmosphere from the Hindu middle classes.

Kalam’s death happened at a time when we saw terrorist attack in Gurudaspur in Punjab yet media ignored that incident and focused entirely on Kalam. Could it have been possible if there was a UPA government and the attack had happened? We know how the Indian media criminally ignored the death of former Prime Minister V P Singh because they did not want to discuss anything about him as everything about him was ‘negative’ for them. For Kalam, as Arun Jaitley said,’ everything about him was ‘positive’. The media focus deflated from Gurudaspur attack and we saw extraordinary coverage on Kalam with each media house virtually making him the ‘biggest’ icon of independent India.

Indian middle classes always look for a hero who can satisfy their jingoistic nationalism. Frankly speaking Abdul Kalam was not a scientist but I would call him a technocrat managing things at DRDO. Therefore one can’t put Kalam to the company of illustrious scientists like Homi Bhabha, Vikram Sarabhai or Prof Satish Dhavan but unfortunately in the mass eulogy a majority of ‘devotees’ might not even heard of these great scientists who made India’s nuclear as well as space programmes huge success as Kalam publically surpass all other scientists at the moment. The fact is that missiles or nuclear bomb for which we are giving Kalam the ‘biggest’ ‘scientist’ certificate is certainly not new ‘research’ as it is already available with many countries at the moment. The fear is that these technologies can now go in the hands of unaccountable rogue elements like ISIS and Taliban too. So that does not make both ISIS and Talibans great scientific mind.

There is nothing wrong with having a vision but the issue is, how do you plan to achieve it? Kalam was lovable to the middle classes because he provided ‘quotable quotes’ to achieve their ‘dreams’. Indians are very fancy of ‘quotes’ perhaps consider them essential shortcuts for success and the more quotes you have the better your image among the people. ‘Always dream high’, he would say. ‘Respect your elders, tread the right path and help your country’. The other day, I heard him speaking about education in an interview to Times Now,’ The aims of education should be that students should not become ‘jobseekers’ but ‘job providers’. Now, all this look very great but how will we reach and is the aim of education is just about ‘jobs’ and not changing our attitudes and way of life. We all know. He had a vision for 2020 which he was going to IIMs and other institutions and speaking students but how do you achieve that. We rarely heard anything to remove mass poverty in the country from Dr Kalam ? We never heard him saying what he proposed to eradicate hunger and malnutrition in our country.

Kalam was ‘great’ because he never spoke of discrimination. He never spoke of problems being faced by the minorities and marginalized and that makes him the ‘best person’ for the Sangh Parivar project whose main agenda is that minorities should thank that they are being allowed to live in India. Just do your duty and don’t ask any question. The entire ‘Gita’ ‘gyan’ is meant for minorities in their scheme of things to know their limitations and keep quiet.

While one can appreciate Kalam not using his religious identity for his political purposes and he could have promoted humanism and passion with his convictions. He was a popular man and could have promoted towards developing scientific spirit as per article 51A of our constitution and yet he chose not to do so. Instead, we found him bowing to Sai Baba and many other Babas and Shankaracharyas which gave them legitimacy. Kalam lost his science at the feet of Sai Baba and therefore promoted irrationality and religiosity.

One thing is clear that India’s ruling elite want to use our identities for their own purposes. It is justification of their policies and pretention of their ‘tolerance’. When K.R.Narayanan became president of India, he was called an ‘intellectual’ and then untouchable president. Powers tried to pretend as if the issue of violence against Dalits did not exist and every issue is resolved. For many days, he was the ‘sweetest’ president but as soon as he started questioning the government and returning many of their bills, he became a thorn in their wider game plan. It is another matter that Narayanan never really compromised with his ideology and made it his dharma to remind the government of the day all the time to focus on constitution and eradication of poverty and violence and discrimination against Dalits. He was immensely loved by people but definitely they are not the ‘uppercaste’ India who matters for our ‘opinion-makers’.

Though Kalam opened Rashtrapati Bhavan for common citizen particularly for children yet we did not see him showing any concern about the violence against the Dalits and Aadivasis. There were no words of wisdom from him on caste and gender discrimination. He had no view on the displacement of aadivasis and destruction of our environment. Planting a few saplings will not wash the sin of destroying huge forest and habitat of the people. Abdul Kalam inherited the rich legacy of President K.R.Narayanan who gave new hope to millions of Dalits and other marginalized and took it upon him to remind the government of following the constitution and rule of law. Unfortunately, Kalam could do nothing except speaking of ‘high’ voltage rhetoric like Narendra Modi. Like Modi, Kalam too suffered with an idea of ‘intellectualism’ and a ‘great’ ‘speaker’ but the only factor for them is the Hindu middle classes who do not want to hear any issue of discrimination or affirmative action for any one. This class only wants to eulogize the brahmanical values and violent reprisal in dealing with all those who are deemed as dissenters or thorns.

We did not hear anything substantial on Gujarat 2002 from President Kalam publically even when he mentioned that Prime Minister Vajpayee did not want him to go there. It is said that President Kalam loved ‘poor’ and students but we rarely saw him interacting with ‘sarkari’ school children or at some government colleges in remote areas which do not have teachers or even labs. Those were not his concern. Kalam supported India’s missile programme and proved himself a great ‘patriot’ as mentioned by a minister. It is sad that we have to use word like ‘patriot’ for a person who has been the father of our missile programme and our president. Is there anyone who is not a patriot? Yes, for the Sangh trolls all those who disagree with their brand of brahmanical nationalism are not patriots.

Kalam definitely was not an RSS man but he did nothing to keep away from them or people like them. He did not speak anything even after demitting the office on communal violence and hate mongers. He would have promoted scientific thinking and modernity but then he prostrated at the feet of Shankaracharyas and Saibaba, much to the comfort and happiness of the brahmanical forces led by Sangh Parivar. With his clean image, Kalam could have made things easier for Muslims in India but unfortunately he created more difficulties for them. His image is being sold to the world putting extreme pressure on Muslims to be ‘like’ him, an issue which even Muslims in his own town would not agree. One should not forget that years ago in the middle 80s, it was Rameshwaram where several hundred people embrace Islam after suffering at the hands of caste Hindus. It is not that Kalam was unaware of such things but he kept quiet on everything which was uncomfortable for the right wingers in India and therefore became a ‘delighted’ person for them.

Kalam’s best legacy would be to simple and active all their life. There is no doubt that he remained a simple man who loved to teach, interact and was a hard worker. He remained apolitical till end though that itself was a political statement favoring those who did not want him to raise any uncomfortable question. Kalam definitely made an impression with people of India who loved him and saw in rise that dreams if followed properly and diligently could be achieved. That way, he was a role model for millions of youngsters. He met with an end which would be envious for any one. After living a healthy and purposeful, Kalam passed away doing things which he wanted to do and among those who were his biggest fans. Even if he has not been influence our political discourse, Kalam will always be remembered for his honesty, simplicity and work-holism but let us give him due respect but not over-hype him to the ‘greatest’ as he was neither a statesman nor a scientist.

Political economy of beef banning campaign

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

The ‘gautmata’ brigade had started its march to Parliament Street once the new government took over in May 2014. Jantar Mantar saw large number of Babas and Sadhus with their cows and carts until one fine day the NDMC officials had to act and forcibly evict them from the place. The matter is not whether they remained there or not but the realization that their ‘own’ dispensation is there now and hence it was important to rake up the issue.  A trip to the rural hinterland of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar will give you a glimpse of how the ‘cow protection’ is being converted into an electoral issue through polarizing the society.

Soon after it different offshoots of the Sangh Parivar started raising issues, which are the ‘heart’ of the party and thought that it is the right time to raise them. While the politicians know it well that even if they get huge majority the issues the party is emphasizing will only disintegrate the country. India can’t afford another partition and its wounded psyche.  The issues like Love-Jehad, Ramzade verses Haramzade, vande-mataram, Ram mandir, Bangladeshi refugees, cow protection started cropping up again and again. The government on its own never tried to assure people of these ‘agendas’ and things became clear with BJP’s choice of leaders in different states where party came to power. In Jharkhand, it chose a non-Adivasi to lead the party in a very similar way as Chhattishgarh’s adivasis are being ruled by another non aadivasi Raman Singh. In Haryana and Maharastra two Sangh Parivar persons without any administrative experiences were handed over the charge of their states.  Both Mohan Lal Khattar and Devinder Fadnavis came from active RSS background and cleared their intentions in the very beginning. Khattar is unable to control communal riot in Haryana and implementing the Sangh agenda dutifully while Fadnavis too is focusing the Sangh agenda to polarize things.

Cow beef is banned in India and known to every one but what is disturbing now is that Maharastra act brought into it the progenies of the cow family. Therefore slaughtering and killing of buffaloes, bulls, oxen too become illegal. The thought behind these things are very clear to push Muslims and others engaged in the business to virtually workless. There is no alternative provided by the government and more than the government agencies it is the Shiv Sena , the partner of the BJP in Maharastra which is ‘doing’ the work, making allegations against Muslims and threatening people with dire consequences.

The fact is that Maharastra is already reeling under severe drought and the government has failed to provide them any support. A huge number of persons engaged in the business will virtually become jobless as Times of India reports quoting, ‘ Mumbai Suburban Beef Traders’ Association president Mohammad Ali Qureshi,  said: “It will affect beef traders’ business as water buffalo meat accounts for just 25 per cent of our total sale. It will render many of us jobless while prices of other meat will go up and it will also affect rural economy. The farmers, already under debt, will have to maintain useless cattle on expensive fodder. The poor will not be able to afford high-priced mutton’.   He said: “An ailing bullock or ox sells for about Rs 10,000 to 14,000 and farmers, unable to afford upkeep of such cattle, often sell it to slaughterhouses.” 

     

In Haryana where the economy of babas is growing like Gujarat as they get huge donation to ‘serve’ ‘gaumata’ but a farmer who met me recently informed how it is becoming difficult to control stray animals of cow family. The babas, he said, only need female cows and they leave the males as free. These male progenies of cows later become bulls and uncontrollable ‘saands’ who can enter in any field thus destroying crops and injuring and killing many innocent people. We have seen the condition of cows in Gujarat where they are allowed to roam around in the streets and in the night sleep in open. A country looking forward as modern nation of 21^st century can not afford such stupidities becoming our main work of life. One fact is clear that a farmer will find it difficult to own cow and its family as what happen once she stop giving milk. Where to cremate it ? Do we need the enormous dangers of all this ? We don’t have space to cremate for human being. The bio fuel is no more available and for burial we wont have enough space in future and we are now asking for more. At home, our parents suffer and we don’t care for her mothers.  We earn, go abroad, become even prime minister but have no time for our mother. We don’t even feel her worthy of staying with her sons and daughters even when we have the capacity to keep her with us. Is not it the biggest hypocrisy of our time? Moreover, we appreciate those who cater their cattle but need to see what happen in the later years. A recent RTI revealed that Indian army gives a ‘decent euthanasia’ to its celebrity Dogs when they are out of use or say retired. Don’t these dogs have right to life after they have finished their work in the army? It is clear that army has purely a work-based relationship with these dogs and once their services are over they are killed. It shows that human relationship with animals even when we all love them is till they are useful to us. We love them even for some more years but it may not be possible to keep them for over and doing ‘seva’ of them as the Babas want us to do.  Not every one has huge funds, Land and donation to serve them as the big babas these days. All the animals can be useful to us during the life and even after the life too.

Interestingly after the Maharastra ban, the Harayana government also acted. A number of the Sangh affiliates also jumped in and appreciated the Maharastra government’s effort in ‘respecting’ the Hindu ‘sentiments’.  The demand grew louder everywhere and Muslims were being blamed for ‘eating’ beef as if it is their sole concern. The Maharastra act has draconian provisions where police can intrude in your kitchen and dining table too and question you regarding the food. Clearly such tendencies were more political and economical in nature to destroy the business of Muslims and deny them their basic food. However, it is not just Muslims who eat beef as has been proved through many reports and arguments. BJP’s agenda on beef is solely aimed at isolating Muslim further and creating a fictitious debate related to it.

One need to understand and ask a question as why Goa’s BJP government did not ban beef as it is a state bordering Maharastra? As per Indian Express report on March 21^st, 2015, the chief minister of Goa, Laxmikant Parsekar on Friday said the state will never ban beef as it does not believe in interfering with the food habits of its people. Parsekar told The Indian Express, “As the CM, I have to take care of all people in the state including its 38 per cent minorities. Christians account for 30 per cent of the population while the remaining are from the Muslim community. It is not like they started consuming beef recently; this has always been part of their daily cuisine. How can I ban it?

Later the Union Minister of State for Home Mr Kiren Rijiju also admitted that he too eat beef and that the ban can not work in the Northeast as it is the part of their food culture. Mr Rijiju’s statement came in the aftermath of a protest against the visit of Amit Shah, BJP’s president to the visit of North East. All the major political leaders of BJP actually openly said that they are not going to seek ban on beef in the Northeast.

Here lies the basic issue of beef eating, which as a habit and food culture, is accepted by the BJP leadership openly without any ambiguity. Though Kiran Rijju has detracted his own statement as a ‘beefeater’ claiming he was misquoted yet he defended that beef was part of northeastern culture. Now question is when BJP’s own leaders have accepted that beef eating is culture of many communities in India and not necessarily Muslims then why its leaders and ministers are unable to control them from raising the rhetoric of ‘gaumata’.  What forced Rajnath Singh to say that he would ‘starve’ Bangladesh of beef eating?  One respect Rijiju’s point that state should respect the ‘feelings’ of ‘majority’ community and therefore in the Northeast beef ban is unworkable as the majority community eats beef while in the other regions we should ‘respect’ the sentiments of the ‘majority’ community which does not eat beef. Unfortunately, Rijiju must understand that democracy today is not a ‘majoritarian’ rule but respecting the ‘sentiments’ of minorities too. A huge number of people in each state today, are migrants who bring their cultures and practices to those states. It is a well-known fact that minorities are not supposed to merge and assimilate their identities and cultural habits in the majoritarian cultural but allowed to develop their own. These are well-established laws internationally and respected here in India too. If majority in several states speak Hindi does not mean people have no right to promote Urdu language. If a majority of Indians are vegetarian or eat non-beef meet we respect their sentiments and not put beef in their plate. Nobody ask for beef in the house of those who don’t eat it. Nobody offer beef to any one who does not eat it and that is what we call ‘respecting’ the sentiments.  The cultural respect is powerful in India more than anywhere else and people respect vegetarian people’s habits too.

The Central Indian states of Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan were more vegetarian in nature but there too it depended on communities. And communities too don’t have the same food habits everywhere. It is not that upper castes don’t eat meet or beef. There are so many of them who eat and there are hundreds of Muslims who are vegetarian but they is because of their choice and not of compulsion.  Even among Dalits and Aadivasis the food habit is not the same. A number of communities used to do the skin tanning work in the north but did not eat beef but at many places they ate it. And it is not beef alone, the forest dwelling working masses of this country depended on forest and hence forest produce were part of their food culture. They used the entire edible meat as protein and that is why physically all these communities were stronger and hard workers. Hence it is a conspiracy of the power elite to deny people rights over their resources and ensure that they continue to fight for their basic needs too. The reason for BJP not shouting beef ban in Goa and Northeast is the low population of Muslims which will not give them chance to communalise the issue and gain politically. One must keep in mind that it is not just Christians who eat beef in Northeast but Hindus too hence BJP and Hindutva’s moral police can’t implement its brahmanical agenda in the northeast and hence keeping quiet and respecting the ‘sentiments’ of the people.

Food habits are part of our long nurtured cultural practices. It depends on the geographical environment of the region also. Vegetarianism actually grew with places where farmers kept cattle as pet and agricultural help but it is also a fact that aadivasis, Dalits and all those nomadic communities who lived with nature used to eat them. Today all the communities and their food producing resources are ironically in the hands of powerful corporate in the name of ‘development’. It is not just beef eating which has been denied to India’s indigenous people but they are also fighting for access to natural resources.  Understand the economic reasons of India’s ruling brahmanical class using religious taboos to unleash its agenda for profit through business.

According to reports India was widely tipped as the topmost beef exporter in the world leaving behind Brazil and its beef exporter will record breaking this year as Russia too has approved India’s beef for its consumption. So beef i.e. buffalo meat, has actually left basmati rice far behind as far as exports from India is concerned.

A report in Times of India suggest that beef meet has recorded 13% increase in value of Rs 26,965 crore and its expected to cross over Rs 30,000 crore by the end of the year 2015. However there is a slight slow down as per the report but it is not due to any policy of the government but due to turmoil in the international market.

 
"The devaluation of Brazilian currency and problems in the re-export of buffalo meat from Vietnam to Hong Kong have affected Indian exports," said DB Sabharwal, secretary of All India Meat & Livestock Exporters' Association. Vietnam is the largest buyer of Indian buffalo meat, while Brazil is India's main competitor.’

The fact is that ban on slaughtering is not going to affect the export the buffalo meat as many in the market believe even today. We have to understand that the Sangh Parivar campaign is not to finish and eliminate 30,000 crore beef export business, many of whom may be their financiers.  In fact, it is a careful strategy of the powerful companies owned by Jains and Marwadis who are in the business to promote this hysteria in India so that they can earn billions through exporting it. As per Times of India, Priya Sud, partner of Delhi-based Al Noor Exports feel that the Maharastra and other acts would be beneficial for exports.

 "It could bring an end to illegal slaughter and raise the price for buffalo meat, thus proving to be beneficial for companies like us who are engaged in legal slaughter and export of buffalo meat," said With prospects of purchases from a big market like Russia and several countries like Egypt buying more Indian bovine meat, the company will have to increase the production to full capacity, she added.

The glaring facts are open now. India registered a growth of 44% in meat export mainly the buffalo meat and is exporting meat to over 70 countries with demand coming mostly from Russia, China and other South East Asian countries. As per Times of India reported on April 1^st, 2013, ‘Uttar Pradesh is the top buffalo meat-producing state with 3 lakh tonnes in 2011. At least 70% of the buffalo meat is exported. "Our meat is lean and cheaper. We supply halal meat, which is preferred in Gulf countries," said Surendra Kumar Ranjan, director of Uttar Pradesh-based Hind Agro Industries’.

Bovine meat export is a huge business like any other export as it gives you big income. In India it remained food of the underdogs as they can afford to pay for it. Unfortunately it is not like sugar or onions where export created shortage at domestic level became an election issue and therefore government had to stop the export of these essential commodities. The underdogs of Indian society are not the Brahmins, Marwaris or Jains whose ‘sentiments’ the government is too much concerned about, but the poor Muslims, Dalits and Aadivsis who have regularly faced state ‘abduction’ of their resources. Years ago the aadivasis had access to minor or major forest produce like Anwala, Mahua and bambooshoots but now they cant have that. Most of these produce have gone to private corporations making the lives of indigenous people more miserable. As a child of the mountains, I enjoyed eating vegetable of fresh bambooshoots which was one of the most delicious food in Uttarakhand known as ‘banskils’ apart from many other local forest produce but today the forest department will now allow to access these. Our life has been snatched by the big corporations in the name of ‘development’ and poor people are being pushed to believing in ‘Gods’ for the ‘ill-fate’. So snatch people’s resources, hand them to crony capitalists and suppress people’s voice through either sending religious pontiffs to these regions or if they too fail to curtail the rebellion then the armed police to kill. It is not without any reason that Madhya Pradesh government has stopped providing eggs in the mid day meal to school children since the Jain community complained against it. It is shocking as this country has diverse people and much more than the Jains and Marwadis. Why should the government deny the eggs to Aadivasi children? How are Jains getting offended with Aadivasi eating eggs?

India is a signatory to all International treaties related to eliminate hunger, poverty and malnutrition. In 1996, at the World Food Summit in Rome, Heads of States of various countries adopted a definition of Food security, ‘“Food security, at the individual, household, national, regional and global levels [is achieved] when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient,safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”

This definition is again refined in The State of Food Insecurity 2001:

“Food security [is] a situation that exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”.

The loud noise over beef issue is basically an attempt to hide the dirty fact from public life that on the one side it is an issue to keep the politics of polarization continue in the election so that all the non Muslims are kept ‘united’ under one umbrella and their contradictions gets eliminated under the big umbrella of Brahmanism while helping the ‘exporters’ to peacefully engage in their ‘work’. The question we ask why beef is a stick to beat Muslims saving the powerful beef exporting lobby ? Who are these beef exporters and its powerful lobby ? I hope I need not to write things here as I have already provided you their ‘statement’ about why the ban help them ? One thing is clear that beef may be a food habit of Muslims and many others like Dalits and Aadivasis, it’s the business for those who most of the time claim that they cant even kill an ‘ant’ and are absolute ‘vegetarian’. Its important for them to know that vegetarianism is not synonymous to ‘goodness’ as they think. If they are so much faithful to their ‘religion’ and ideology then they must leave their ‘export’ of beef and other meat product. Why should Muslims and Dalit face the tyranny of the Indian state when the leather shoes are not produced by them but by Batas, Action,  Mesco and other companies who are definitely not ownedDalits or Aadivasis. Definitely, this leather is not of lion or goat. Let the anti beef campaigner do campaign against all kind of leather product and start a dharna at the business houses of these people who produce them. Its not possible as here lies the reality of the corporate religion nexus. Habits, culture, principles, ideologies are meant for poor but for these ‘sellers’ it is profit even if they have to sale the sentiments of the people and lit a fire to kill people if that give them business. The right wingers in India will never touch an issue which is ‘economically’ as well as politically loss making. Beef ban and the noise subsequently help it both the way, a booming business of export and rich crop of hatred to harvest during the elections. Shame.

Vegetarian Vigilantism

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

Vegetarianism is basically considered to be a ‘nonviolent’ approach towards nature and our food habits. People who did not like ‘animal slaughtering’ and ‘cruelty’ on them would often turn vegetarians. Many people are vegetarians because of their taste for the food others are because of basic cultural values they inherited but it is a fact that a majority of India is not vegetarian and that vegetarianism is basically belong to the values of caste Hindus in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan regions. Mostly vegetarians in India are becoming highly illiberal and contemptuous towards those who are ‘different’ than them in food habits. It was not true several years back. My mother was a devout vegetarian but she did not stop us eating meat. Many of my friends even today may not eat non-veg but they are cook non veg and perhaps delicious than others.

The war in India is not just being vegetarian and non-vegetarian but gone further. It is a well thought action to isolate Muslims and Christians on the basis of their food habits even when the facts are that not all of them eat it. Contrary to this, a very large number of caste Hindus eats beef.  It was never a taboo with communities of Dalits and Aadivasis. But the politics behind the whole debate actually intend to communalize the matter further for ulterior political profits.

The debate now is not between vegetarianism verses non veg loving people but it further aim to divide the non-veg lovers and hence those who eat beef are sought to be isolated in this entire game plan. Frankly speaking cow slaughter was banned in India since 1947 and various states too had enacted different laws towards cow protection hence raking up that issue is nothing but purely political. Fact right now is that they have further expanded the ‘cow family’ and hence decided that they are not just contend with cow slaughtering but even beyond that and hence the slaughtering of buffaloes and others animals of cow family is legally prohibited in Maharastra and other states. The hidden agenda of the Sangh Parivar and its various offshoots is visible with state after state amending their laws and including more ‘progenies’ of the cow family, which was not there earlier. So, it is not merely that you are satisfied with Cow but now the Maharastra act has extended the ‘protection’ to the progenies of cow. In fact, India’s home minister openly said that he would ‘starve’ Dhaka of its basic diet, as police would be more vigilant to stop smuggling of cows and its progenies.

So the distortion of the news is that we are talking against cow slaughtering, which is already prohibited under the law, but its progenies, which was never, and no religious sanctity was given to them at any point of time. In fact, slaughtering of buffaloes has been one of the major rituals in Nepal as well as in several temples in Assam and Uttarakhand in India. 

Historically cow and its progenies were useful animals for people for not just milk and other produces but also for the purpose of farming. There are proofs of Brahmins eating beef as said by Prof D.N.Jha in his famous work. The Dalits and Aadivasis too eat beef and other wild animals, which were the biggest source of protein for them. There is no Yjna in the ancient text without killings of animals. The gods and goddess that are displayed in today’s time have a violent track record and non-talked about nonviolence. Hence it would be a travesty of truth to suggest that vegetarianism is part of India’s culture.

Nonviolence was a Buddhist doctrine while Bhagwat Gita and Ramayana’s stories are not just full of violence but ‘adharma’ too as Dr Ambedkar exposed in his skillful analysis of ‘Riddles of Hinduism’. It is not a hidden fact that all the ‘rakshasa’s and ‘evils’ in these ‘epics’ are either people of black color or Dalit-Adivasis. So ‘dharma’ became a doctrine to create and impose a brahmanical supremacy over Dalit Bahujan masses.  When Buddhism was spreading in entire country and became the philosophy of life for millions of people here the brahmanical forces retaliated violently against the same and the result was Buddhism was thrown out of its land of birth. Jainism too was a nonviolent doctrine but unfortunately it has completely coopted by the Hindutva and their business interests today. The Aryan Supremacy was established ‘mythologically’ to kill the spirit of the asserting Asuras or anaryas so varnashram dharma and its ‘divine’ philosophy became the biggest weapon.

Over the period the struggle for human dignity and human rights are part and parcel of India’s social as well as mythological structure. The mythological structure that denied the vast majority basic human rights and human dignity actually continued to humiliate them till the oppression gave rise to different new philosophies of life which provided a window of opportunity to all the oppressed. Buddhism, Jainism, Sikkhism, Kabirpanthis, Ravidasis provided the opportunity further. That apart, Islam and Christianity too came as a liberator for thousands of people who were treated as untouchables. The vast working masses of Indians belonging to Dalits, aadivasis and backward communities were actually protectors of natural resources, environment and animals. But at the same point of time animal meat of any variety was a source of protein for them.

The Brahmins realized this and used ‘nonviolence’ as a tool to make these powerful communities virtually ‘vegetarian’ and ensured that their ‘assertion’ and ‘rebellion’ is dumbed through ‘divinity’ of these acts. Brahmanical ‘nonviolence’ therefore was nothing but a multipronged strategy to defeat Buddhism philosophically on the one side and develop an alternative where its supremacy remained intact. Hence throughout the history brahmanical vegetarian violence has played a dangerous game in dividing communities. When Buddhism was reaching the masses the Brahmins used all kind of violence to stop its growth but after the Mughal rule in India the priorities shifted. They were the first to compromise and adjust with the power but once the British arrived in India these same forces formed groups and associations to be associated with them. Cow Protection and vegetarianism gained currency during the British period when the Muslims were on the receiving end and Indian civil services were being replaced by the caste Hindus however the influence of Muslim remained powerful as ever and they fought against the British regime with much vigor and power. In the 1920s when Congress was attempting to bring Muslims in its fold to fight a joint battle against British, the Rastriya Swayam Sevak Sangh was also taking shape in Nagpur, a land of revolution and revolt of the Dalit Bahujan against Brahmanical hierarchy. Islam and Christianity was proving to be a liberating ground for the Dalits to get rid of the untouchability and further an alliance of these forces would have made the statusquo difficult to maintain. The politics of symbolism began from here to mobilise people under ‘Hindu’ identity and for that an artificial construct of India as ‘pitrabhumi’ or father land came handy to create an impression that only those who have India as their fatherland are actually the rightful inheritor of this country. The Dusshera festival and using the brahmanical symbolism became a fashion for political mobilization as from Tilak to Gandhi all used these symbolism for their own political purposes resulting in deep division among the society.

The problem with such divisive Hindutva politics was to deliberately blame Muslims for all the ailments of India to legitimize their vicious communal agenda. Hence after the partition when we had the national government under Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, RSS continued with its divisive legacy of Hindu Rastra as a counter to political Islam. As Pakistan was created in the name of religion, RSS wanted a Hindu Rastra, which according to their own theology was ‘brahmanical’ in nature. There is no history of the RSS fighting against caste system, untouchability, dowry system and other evils of Hindu society. Their focus was Muslim and Islam so that they can cover up the whole inequality and dirty caste system of the Hindu society. Assault on Muslim was also necessary to arrest the ‘conversion’ and keep the Dalits with in the Hindu caste framework. Initially, they provided the cheap services and later with assertive Dalits with Ambedkar’s vision became the real cultural threat for brahmanical Hindutva and hence all efforts were made to coopt and assimilate them in broader agenda of Sangh Parivar.

As the Muslims and Dalits along with OBCs and Aadivasis were coming together and forming rainbow coalition to fight against Brahmanical hegemony the worries of Sangh Parivar were inevitable. While they condemn Congress party for ‘appeasing’ Muslims and not acknowledging Dr Ambedkar, it need to be checked if our memories are not faded that Dr Ambedkar was given Bharat Ratna by V.P.Singh who is the most hated figure for the Sangh Parivar and their upper caste followers. In fact, if V P government had survived in 1990, the political landscape of India would have been absolutely different than what it is today. That government fell in the house of people on November 7^th, 1990 for fulfilling a constitutional obligation to protect religious place of fellow countrymen in Ayodhya. Yes, Singh acted toughly against Hindutva elements who tried to demolish Babari Masjid in October, 1990.

The biggest challenge for the Sangh Parivar led brahmanical Hindutva was to break the alliance between these diverse segments. Their number increased in Parliament and state assemblies. The issue of Ram Mandir flopped and slowly Dalits have fascinatingly adopted Dr Ambedkar’s way of life and embraced Buddhism. All the Babas and corporate attempt to bring them to Hindu fold failed and hence it became essential to divide them further aliening with Muslims. Today, the Sangh Parivar is celebrating Dr Ambedkar’s birthday but don’t we know one of their ideologue Arun Shourie wrote ‘ Worshipping the False God’ in the 1990s. Sangh Parivar is trying to use Ambedkar from 1990s but it never condemned Shourie’s writings on Ambedkar and his attempt to denigrate Ambedkar and make him look a petty politician. There are many dalit ‘scholars’ at the disposal of Sangh Parivar who compared Ambedkar and Jagjivan Ram. Two mouthpieces of Sangh namely ‘Organiser’ and ‘Panchjanya’ devoted its whole issue on Dr Ambedkar and his ‘association’ with Hindutva. His term ‘reclamation’ of our inheritance is being misinterpreted and his differences with Congress are being highlighted. One has to understand that Dr Ambedkar fought against Congress because he felt that it was serving the upper caste Hindus interest and is least bothered about Dalits and other marginalized. If Sangh was that powerful those times, he would have fought against them too. Ambedkar’s writings are selectively being used against Congress and Muslims. As mentioned earlier Ambedkar’s fight was against inhuman brahmanical system and he wanted a dignified solution to the issue of Dalits where they participate in power structure with their head high and ensure that benefit of this participation reach to the poorest of the poor.

The vegetarian vigilantes today have made life of law abiding Indian citizens difficult. Understand it how they are intruding in your personal lives right from your right to freedom of expression to food habits to who should be your soul-mate. They have become extra-state actors at the moment though acting at the behest of state and using its absolute freedom towards them. They started with Vandemataram and Ram Mandir movement and realized that they have to move ahead and hence used corruption as an entry point. Today in power, they want to control everything. So it is not merely what you should eat but who you should stay and who you should love.  Every day hundreds of their ‘philosophers’ and ‘guides’ are looking for new issues to humiliate and intimidate the Muslims and Christians and create an artificial threat to others. It is important to understand the designs of such forces that India will have to run through the preamble of its constitution and all the international charters that we signed.

It is important to understand their modus operandi and why beef has now become the major issues and it will remain as long as we have ‘democracy’ and ‘elections’ to win but every issue that the Sangh Parivar raises have not just politics but ‘economic’ interest too and therefore ignoring the vast business interest of their ‘client’ would be detrimental for them.