FAKE SECULARISM

Public discourse, including public domain in the country is getting increasingly communally surcharged. Every incident or development is viewed through the communal prism, especially so if it involves the minority community. When the Prime Minister of the country says that showing special favours to the deprived sections of the minority community, is not appeasement, he only sees the religion behind the deprived sections. This itself smacks of communal approach to the genuine problems of the citizens irrespective of their religious background.

It is not the government alone that promotes communal mindset in the country, but the so-called secularists and rights activists do their best to communally sensitise the people. As a logical corollary, we are also hearing voices that condone acts of terrorism with the cause and effect theory, which always takes one-way route, and also try to find human trait in every terrorist.

There were fears, when so much of media attention was on 26/11 accused Kasab, that he may be made to appear like a hero. The fears have come true when a left-leaning political commentator wrote in a national daily that Kasab was only a puppet and not the puppeteer quoting his statement to the interrogators that he too was a human and that he wanted to run away when his mentors had instructed the group to carry on killing till the end.

According to this columnist, “puppets like Kasab commit inhuman crimes they are told to do, but when confronted with their victims long after the frenzy is over, they sometimes become ordinary human beings again”. The writer wants to make a distinction between them and their controllers and says: “The only tears Kasab’s bosses must be shedding would be at his capture. Kasab on the other hand, surrounded by Indians, Hindus at that, people whom he’s been trained to kill, wonders if anyone will tie him a rakhi” Perhaps the writer thinks on Kasab’s behalf and there will be no wonder if our activists launch a campaign “Rakhi for Kasab” on the lines of “no noose for Afzal Guru”.

The double standards that our “secularists” adopt while dealing with the Gujarat chief minister in comparison with other chief ministers in rest of the states expose their communal mindset and a sense of fake secularism. True, Modi’s track record in 2002 is sullied; that does not mean everything that followed has to be viewed with the same glasses. Emergency in 2005 was a terrible event in the history of post Independent India, but the nation did not look at Indira Gandhi as a despot during the rest of her political career. There are so many Congress chief ministers who bloodied their hands while instigating communal riots. They are forgotten and forgiven. But not Narendra Modi. He can’t be hauled over the coals on any other area like governance, development and corruption-free environment. So, Post-Godhra stick comes handy for the secularists to beat him up with.

Let’s take the case of ban on Jaswant’s book on Jinnah. This columnist does not believe in banning books. Counter to a controversial book is another book exposing the contrived interpretations, if at all. But, let us recall the ban that Rajiv Gandhi imposed on “Satanic Verses”. I don’t remember that anybody had the guts to question the ban nor was there any appeal against the ban in any judicial forum. We never talked about the freedom of expression of Danish cartoonists. We only talked about the offence it caused to a particular community.

Even if there was a petition against “Satanic Verses”, it is doubtful whether it would have been entertained. There was no protest against the ban onTasleema Nasreen’s books as well. But look at the sanctimonious protests against the ban on Jaswant’s book, because it showed a leader, perceived to be a right winger, on poor light.

Now, the media frenzy is on Ahmadabad Judicial Magistrate’s report on Ishrat Jahan’s encounter as if there are no fake encounters in states other than Gujarat. Even after Gujarat High Court stayed the report and ordered an enquiry into the conduct of the Magistrate, newspapers and television channels have not stopped focusing on the report.

In the neighbouring state of Maharashstra one Khwaja Yunus (26) was picked up from Aurangabad by Mumbai Police in December 2002 in connection with a bomb blast in a BEST bus in Ghatkopar. On Jan 7 2003, the police enacted a “drama” of Yunus’s escape while being escorted to the court and since then there is no trace of Yunus. Speculation is that he has been killed in an alleged fake encounter. An SI of Mumbai Police, Daya Nayak, has 83 shoot-outs to his dubious credit and he is named “Encounter Specialist” a la Salaskar martyred on 26/11. Nayak is facing trial not for encounters, but in a disproportionate assets case.

It is not just Maharashtra alone. Data available with National Crime Record Bureau indicate that UP topped the list with 68 fake encounters in 2003-04, Bihar 11, Andhra Pradesh 14, Madhya Pradesh 7. As recently as in July this year, an insurance employee who landed in Dehra Dun to join his duties was killed in a fake encounter. In the year 2009 between April and July, there were 28 fake encounters in the country, according to Union Minister Ajay Maken who gave this data in Parliament. According to NHRC, the second highest number of incidents was in Manipur during 2008-09 with 16 cases, out of which 6 were in just four months in 2009. But, Supreme Court wants only Modi to come clean on encounters and to get to the bottom of such encounters.

The Union government, which was caught on the wrong foot with its affidavit, has booted out the officials responsible for the affidavit which endorsed the fact that Ishrat Jahan and her accomplices were indeed LeT Operatives. All India Muslim League wants all the Gujarat-cadre officers posted at the Centre should be repatriated. A leading national daily had Gujarat as the lead story on three consecutive days with letters to the editor predominantly from one community.

Of course there were two letters in the same daily pointing out the bias. One reader recalled Warangal encounter last year when two suspects involved in a case of acid attack on college girls were killed in “fake encounters”. At that time the police were lauded for their “bravery”. Fortunately for the cops, the suspects were not from the minority community. In such a case, it would have taken a different turn.
Another reader pointed out that the affidavit filed by the Centre also says Ishrat, Javed and the two persons (who are yet to be identified and believed to be Pakistanis since no one claimed their bodies) were terror suspects. Had they planted bombs and killed innocent people, would we not have blamed the Gujarat police for not acting promptly on the intelligence provided?

Admittedly, terrorists or no terrorists, no one can be killed in cold blood. When America wants Osama bin Laden dead or alive or when it eliminated Mehsud and other Talibans, no one talked about their human rights. May be, there are two categories of terrorists and their human rights vary depending on their geographical location.