RTE Act Should Be Amended
Sir, It’s nice to see Media Scan completing one year successfully, growing rapidly. My best wishes, as always. Some of our present day scholars dreamt about 100% literate India by the year 2020. In this regard, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan’s scheme is really commendable. It should be most appropriate way to implement the Right to Education Act to have it amended after the points a section of Indians is raising concerns over, are discussed debated and finalized with the concerned authorities. It is the way the developed countries adopt. Suggestions must be taken from reputed private educational institutions of all sects and communities for the purpose. Anyway it’s nice to see that our country is marching towards development and growth by adopting compulsory education for all. Muktuni, Vijayanagar, Bangalore
Through Education Terrorism Can Be Curbed
Dear Sir, The whole nation was crying for the damage done by terrorists through bomb blasts and blamed Islam and Muslims for it. Sorrowfully, as it unfolded later, our own patriotic brothers and sisters along with the security personnel have been found involved in this heinous crime against humanity and the nation. We should remain in constant touch with world leaders to confront terrorism and at the same time we should try to teach our security forces the potential to combat the menace. Our leaders must concentrate on education every citizen as education will prove to be a useful means to urge people to avert from terror activities and hence we will ensure that at least our future generation live in peace and harmony. Talapakati, Vaniyambadi, TN
Education Should Aim At Morals
Sir, I wholly agree with the opinion expressed in your article “RTE Ok, But What About Right To Religious Education” (MS, August). The government should leave the madaris on their situation. Every citizen must be educated. But there is no reason that religious education is excluded from the definition of education. Education is not all about making money, something called morals should be the real aim of education. This is what is taught in religious institutions. Sajeda Parveen, Jaipur
Jinnah Was Compelled To Demand For Separate Land?
Dear Sir, In 1930, British Officer chaired Cripps’s Commission and surveyed the Indian sub continent, which paved the way for SELF RULE.
Simon Commission taking this idea forward proposed for election. This was the first democratic step taken in AKHANDA BHARATH (Un-divided India ). In result to that Hindus, Muslims and other community representatives were elected for provincial councils, but some vested interests (P J Nehru, V B Patel & their master Mountbatten) conspired and distributed major posts to Hindu representatives avoiding Muslim elected member, resulting Jinnah to declare separate home Land for Muslims. History is repeating in Gujrat juncture. “Gujarat Government Creating Pakistans In India” (Media Scan, August, 2010). Aadil R A, Gargeshwari
Rich Should Take Care of Poor
Sir, This is with reference to your article “Zakat: Economic Upliftment and Dignity to the Poor” (Media Scan, August). While Islam encourages its adherents to show generosity towards their fellow human being it is sad to see that majority of them happened to be miser when it comes to take out money from their pockets for others. Millions of people throughout the world are living on the verge of starvation and on the other hand some Muslims fill their stomach with varieties of dishes. If only they could understand the plight of poor fellow beings. Md. Aslam Salim, AMU, UP
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Personal Laws: Victim Of Judges And Courts!
Muslims are entitled constitutionally to have their cases settled according to the Muslim Personal Law but often the courts do not give this benefit to them. And if they give, the self-coined explanation of the Personal Law by the judges is a matter of concern.
In a stark reminder of the infamous Shah Bano case, the Delhi High court recently issued a verdict that “Muslim husband” would be bound to maintain his divorced wife and minor children till she gets “remarried”. The decision issued as per the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPc) of the Indian Constitution has ignored the Muslim Personal Law.
Even though the Constitution has that “rule of decision” in any case where the parties are Muslims shall be the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat), the courts now and then come up with verdicts where the personal law is not considered. And in many cases the judges give decision in the view of the Personal Law but the decision contradicts it, as those laws are explained wrongly by the judges.
Contrary to the Muslim personal law provision that a husband has to give allowance to his divorced wife only till Iddat—three months in normal situation and in the case of pregnancy until the wife gives birth to the child—the Delhi HC verdict orders the husband to give her maintenance till she marries again.
Contrary to the Muslim personal law provision that a husband has to give allowance to his divorced wife only till Iddat—three months in normal situation and in the case of pregnancy until the wife gives birth to the child—the Delhi HC verdict orders the husband to give her maintenance till she marries again.
“It is crystal clear that even a Muslim divorced woman would be entitled to claim maintenance from a Muslim husband till she has not married (again). This being a beneficial piece of legislation (CrPC), the benefit must accrue to the divorced Muslim women,” the court observed.
The decision came as a result of the court dismissing a petition filed by a man challenging a lower court's award of maintenance of Rs 2,000 per month to his minor daughter living separately with her mother.
The court brushed aside the man's contention that the right to get maintenance for the minor children ceases after two years of divorce as provided in the Personal Law saying that the sustenance right cannot be restricted unless the divorcee gets remarried.
“I consider that the benefit cannot be denied to a minor daughter because of any restrictive provision contained in Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986,” Justice Dhingra said.
In the same way as the Indian Constitution has accorded some traditional laws the status of law, Muslim Personal Laws are also accepted. The decisions by Naga Court (Kachehri) cannot be abolished. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Parliament can constitute a law against this. Interestingly, the Naga population is far less than that of the Muslim community.
The recent Delhi HC verdict did not issue verdict as per the Muslim Personal Law while the two parties are Muslims. This is not a fair practice by courts. If the wife demands the decision be given under CrPC and her demand is given an ear why the demand by the husband that verdict be issued according to the Personal Law is ignored.
In the same way as the Indian Constitution has accorded some traditional laws the status of law, Muslim Personal Laws are also accepted. The decisions by Naga Court (Kachehri) cannot be abolished. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Parliament can constitute a law against this. Interestingly, the Naga population is far less than that of the Muslim community.
Nevertheless, more worrisome is the attitude of the judges when they make the Muslim Personal Law the base to give any decision and then explain the Law in their own way; which often contradicts the essence of the Personal Law.
This practice by the judges is known as “Judicial Activism”. It is awkward to listen or read the word “Judicial Activism” associated with the courts and judges. Each of law, courts and judges have vividly prescribed limits which they are supposed to observe. The use of “judicial activism” with them takes the mind to something beyond those explicit limits.
What “judicial activism” refers to is the outcome of the judges going astray from the right path only to adopt a new approach while leaving behind the usual way.
Anyone transgressing the limits tries to meddle into others affairs. Interruption though with good intention, is anyway interruption. In other words we call it ghuspaith. It draws capital punishment if performed on the border of a country but if done in the courts surprisingly it becomes an “art”.
The courts have crossed their limits and stretched their legs beyond Laxman Rekha. This affects their influence, degrades them and damages the respect people have for them. Strange stories emanate from the court premises and take their way to publicity. That judges have stepped out of their limits is not only wrong but it also goes against the dignity of the courts; the most respected institution and the last hope of citizens.
The courts have crossed their limits and stretched their legs beyond Laxman Rekha. This affects their influence, degrades them and damages the respect people have for them. Strange stories emanate from the court premises and take their way to publicity. That judges have stepped out of their limits is not only wrong but it also goes against the dignity of the courts; the most respected institution and the last hope of citizens.
Sorrowfully, the courts have shown interest even in administration. They have started directly dealing the issue of transfer posting. It was unexpected from the courts when some years back they took interest in the construction of roads and bridges, too. Such steps by the courts have damaged their dignity. The courts seem to have traded the path where “administration” lost its dignity.
As of now, even Islamic Shariah has become the victim of courts transgression. Commonly, the judges ignore Muslim Personal Law while delivering justice to Muslims, as is evident from Delhi HC judgement, and if they consider the Personal Law they explain according to their own understanding. Judges are expert at explaining the Constitution and they are duty bound to do it; they cannot explain Qur’an and Hadith (the base of Muslim Personal Law). Only those having in depth study and vast knowledge, and well versed in the Principles of Qur’an & Hadith can be eligible to explain Qur’an and Hadith.
Usually, the judges do not fulfil this criterion. They do not know Arabic (the source language of Qur’an and Hadith) nor do they have required knowledge for understanding the niceties of Qur’an and Hadith. Yet, the judges have vain hopes that they can understand Qur’an through translation. Wrong notion. They should avoid this.
In the past, the courts issued verdicts that left us regretting upon the ignorance of the judges. In a Bombay High Court verdict, the honourable judge wrote that there are found three sects in Muslims: Shi’ah, Sunni and Muztahid. Where we will find the third sect, only the honourable judge can tell. But the prestige of their ignorance has established in our hearts. It happened only because the little knowing judge felt him duty bound to express his ability on the base of little argument by an advocate and he knocked the door of Islamic beliefs. The judges should limit themselves to only knocking the doors of the court and the constitution. It is their subject and they know about this. As for Islamic beliefs, their knowledge is insufficient. If the judges dare speak about Islamic teachings, people will laugh at them.
Usually, the judges do not fulfil this criterion. They do not know Arabic (the source language of Qur’an and Hadith) nor do they have required knowledge for understanding the niceties of Qur’an and Hadith. Yet, the judges have vain hopes that they can understand Qur’an through translation. Wrong notion. They should avoid this.
Muslims have the legal right to seek settlement of their cases according to their Persona Laws. The Constitution of India grants religious freedom and talks about preservation of personal laws. All know that preservation of religious freedom is a basic right. It also means that if one claims of being a god, the judge cannot term him wrong. If anyone declares he is the avatar of any god or goddess, the Indian Constitution does not stop them nor does it prescribe any punishment for them.
Likewise, if anyone belongs to a certain religion, the judge will not explain his religion by his own. Rather he will resort to the scholars of that religion to know the details about the religion. So speak the Constitution and court patterns. But the wrong notion of the judges to know everything brought them to this extent where there is inscribed NO ENTRY board for them.
The foundation of the Muslim personal law is religious and it is based on Qur’an and Hadith. Muslims are duty bound religiously to obey them. These laws ensure the protection of Muslims’ beliefs and culture. What their beliefs, religious practices and culture refer to, only experts at Islamic teachings can explain. Judges are expected not to touch them.
As in the case of DNA test, the judges do not trust on their study of physics and chemistry books rather they want a forensic laboratory report—all the stages to the DNA tests are written in the books and people get expertise in the field through reading these very books coupled with subsequent experience. But none of the judges claim that there is no need of any expert for DNA test and he/she will study the books and abstract the result—in the same way by reading the translation of Qur’an and Hadith and studying the unauthorised translation of Hidayah, Aalamgiri (that too a certain part of them) they cannot reach to “justice”.
Justice with “justice” demands that authorised ulama are approached when it comes to know about Islamic commands. The best way is to turn to Muslim Personal Law Board in this case.
Muslims have the legal right to seek settlement of their cases according to their Persona Laws. The Constitution of India grants religious freedom and talks about preservation of personal laws. All know that preservation of religious freedom is a basic right.
The logic of the judges that Islamic Law is written and they have the right to explain them, is weak. To explain Qur’an and Hadith, to understand masaail through them, and to solve the masaail is a difficult task. For this very purpose, scores of sciences were invented throughout the centuries. Uncounted people spent their lives for this. As judges accept supporting evidence have importance in any case, supporting knowledge along with Qur’an and Hadith too is significant. Experienced lot knew the enormity of the situation and the superficial knowledge of the judges about Islam. Long way back in 1897, they instructed the judges in this regard. Following words were written in the decision of a preview council, “But it would be wrong for the Court on a point of this kind to attempt to put their own construction on the Quran in opposition to the express ruling of commentators of such great antiquity and high authority.” (1897) 24 Indian Appeal 196 (PG) Aga Mohammad Jaffar Bin Daneem Vs. Sonam Bee Bee)
As a matter of fact, the preservation of religious freedom or personal law and the Constitutional nod for the same is not a benefaction over Muslims or any certain group. Rather it is the need of the country. The existence of scores of religions, multiple cultures and myriad races in the country makes flexibility in the Constitution mandatory because it is must for the safety and unity of India. This is a way to ensure that the country remains united. Judges should keep in the mind the history of the Indian Constitution and its background. They should not go against the wisdom used by the Constitution makers. Or it will affect the unity of India and their activism will continue weakening the country.
“Judicial activism” looks strange. It has been in use for the last some years. Any decision having something new is termed as “judicial activism”. The verdicts beyond the constitutional jurisdiction and which comprise common needs and human values were added to it later. The matter went further and the judges explained the Constitution according to their understanding and tendency and it was named the broader meaning of the law, the social explanation of the Constitution and an explanation done according to the need of the Constitution.
The courts are not humanist, social reformers, constitution framers or religious authorities. Their jurisdiction is fixed and evident. If the party in any case is Muslim there is no reason that verdict is not issued according to their Personal Laws. It is their right allocated by the Indian Constitution.
The judges gave some verdicts that came as utter shock to us. No one can predict as to where the feeling of being omniscient and the intoxication of the knowledge and the chair will take the decisions. No guess how much more it will degrade the courts. Judicial activism, as per its physiques, meaning and explanation never suits the courts’ activities, the dignity, seriousness and far sightedness of the judges.
The courts are not humanist, social reformers, constitution framers or religious authorities. Their jurisdiction is fixed and evident. If the party in any case is Muslim there is no reason that verdict is not issued according to their Personal Laws. It is their right allocated by the Indian Constitution.
Moreover, the work of the judges is that of explaining the Constitution and implementing it. They have the knowledge of this and in this they are trained. They should serve being in their limits. It is the demand of their knowledge, dignity and respect. If they transgress their limits, not only their ignorance will be exposed but also their respect and grade will witness gradual decrease. In regards with the Muslim Personal Laws, they should resort to the authorised religious scholars of the community the same way they seek experts’ opinion in DNA or forensic tests.
Maulana Wali Rahmani
In a stark reminder of the infamous Shah Bano case, the Delhi High court recently issued a verdict that “Muslim husband” would be bound to maintain his divorced wife and minor children till she gets “remarried”. The decision issued as per the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPc) of the Indian Constitution has ignored the Muslim Personal Law.
Even though the Constitution has that “rule of decision” in any case where the parties are Muslims shall be the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat), the courts now and then come up with verdicts where the personal law is not considered. And in many cases the judges give decision in the view of the Personal Law but the decision contradicts it, as those laws are explained wrongly by the judges.
Contrary to the Muslim personal law provision that a husband has to give allowance to his divorced wife only till Iddat—three months in normal situation and in the case of pregnancy until the wife gives birth to the child—the Delhi HC verdict orders the husband to give her maintenance till she marries again.
Contrary to the Muslim personal law provision that a husband has to give allowance to his divorced wife only till Iddat—three months in normal situation and in the case of pregnancy until the wife gives birth to the child—the Delhi HC verdict orders the husband to give her maintenance till she marries again.
“It is crystal clear that even a Muslim divorced woman would be entitled to claim maintenance from a Muslim husband till she has not married (again). This being a beneficial piece of legislation (CrPC), the benefit must accrue to the divorced Muslim women,” the court observed.
The decision came as a result of the court dismissing a petition filed by a man challenging a lower court's award of maintenance of Rs 2,000 per month to his minor daughter living separately with her mother.
The court brushed aside the man's contention that the right to get maintenance for the minor children ceases after two years of divorce as provided in the Personal Law saying that the sustenance right cannot be restricted unless the divorcee gets remarried.
“I consider that the benefit cannot be denied to a minor daughter because of any restrictive provision contained in Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986,” Justice Dhingra said.
In the same way as the Indian Constitution has accorded some traditional laws the status of law, Muslim Personal Laws are also accepted. The decisions by Naga Court (Kachehri) cannot be abolished. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Parliament can constitute a law against this. Interestingly, the Naga population is far less than that of the Muslim community.
The recent Delhi HC verdict did not issue verdict as per the Muslim Personal Law while the two parties are Muslims. This is not a fair practice by courts. If the wife demands the decision be given under CrPC and her demand is given an ear why the demand by the husband that verdict be issued according to the Personal Law is ignored.
In the same way as the Indian Constitution has accorded some traditional laws the status of law, Muslim Personal Laws are also accepted. The decisions by Naga Court (Kachehri) cannot be abolished. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Parliament can constitute a law against this. Interestingly, the Naga population is far less than that of the Muslim community.
Nevertheless, more worrisome is the attitude of the judges when they make the Muslim Personal Law the base to give any decision and then explain the Law in their own way; which often contradicts the essence of the Personal Law.
This practice by the judges is known as “Judicial Activism”. It is awkward to listen or read the word “Judicial Activism” associated with the courts and judges. Each of law, courts and judges have vividly prescribed limits which they are supposed to observe. The use of “judicial activism” with them takes the mind to something beyond those explicit limits.
What “judicial activism” refers to is the outcome of the judges going astray from the right path only to adopt a new approach while leaving behind the usual way.
Anyone transgressing the limits tries to meddle into others affairs. Interruption though with good intention, is anyway interruption. In other words we call it ghuspaith. It draws capital punishment if performed on the border of a country but if done in the courts surprisingly it becomes an “art”.
The courts have crossed their limits and stretched their legs beyond Laxman Rekha. This affects their influence, degrades them and damages the respect people have for them. Strange stories emanate from the court premises and take their way to publicity. That judges have stepped out of their limits is not only wrong but it also goes against the dignity of the courts; the most respected institution and the last hope of citizens.
The courts have crossed their limits and stretched their legs beyond Laxman Rekha. This affects their influence, degrades them and damages the respect people have for them. Strange stories emanate from the court premises and take their way to publicity. That judges have stepped out of their limits is not only wrong but it also goes against the dignity of the courts; the most respected institution and the last hope of citizens.
Sorrowfully, the courts have shown interest even in administration. They have started directly dealing the issue of transfer posting. It was unexpected from the courts when some years back they took interest in the construction of roads and bridges, too. Such steps by the courts have damaged their dignity. The courts seem to have traded the path where “administration” lost its dignity.
As of now, even Islamic Shariah has become the victim of courts transgression. Commonly, the judges ignore Muslim Personal Law while delivering justice to Muslims, as is evident from Delhi HC judgement, and if they consider the Personal Law they explain according to their own understanding. Judges are expert at explaining the Constitution and they are duty bound to do it; they cannot explain Qur’an and Hadith (the base of Muslim Personal Law). Only those having in depth study and vast knowledge, and well versed in the Principles of Qur’an & Hadith can be eligible to explain Qur’an and Hadith.
Usually, the judges do not fulfil this criterion. They do not know Arabic (the source language of Qur’an and Hadith) nor do they have required knowledge for understanding the niceties of Qur’an and Hadith. Yet, the judges have vain hopes that they can understand Qur’an through translation. Wrong notion. They should avoid this.
In the past, the courts issued verdicts that left us regretting upon the ignorance of the judges. In a Bombay High Court verdict, the honourable judge wrote that there are found three sects in Muslims: Shi’ah, Sunni and Muztahid. Where we will find the third sect, only the honourable judge can tell. But the prestige of their ignorance has established in our hearts. It happened only because the little knowing judge felt him duty bound to express his ability on the base of little argument by an advocate and he knocked the door of Islamic beliefs. The judges should limit themselves to only knocking the doors of the court and the constitution. It is their subject and they know about this. As for Islamic beliefs, their knowledge is insufficient. If the judges dare speak about Islamic teachings, people will laugh at them.
Usually, the judges do not fulfil this criterion. They do not know Arabic (the source language of Qur’an and Hadith) nor do they have required knowledge for understanding the niceties of Qur’an and Hadith. Yet, the judges have vain hopes that they can understand Qur’an through translation. Wrong notion. They should avoid this.
Muslims have the legal right to seek settlement of their cases according to their Persona Laws. The Constitution of India grants religious freedom and talks about preservation of personal laws. All know that preservation of religious freedom is a basic right. It also means that if one claims of being a god, the judge cannot term him wrong. If anyone declares he is the avatar of any god or goddess, the Indian Constitution does not stop them nor does it prescribe any punishment for them.
Likewise, if anyone belongs to a certain religion, the judge will not explain his religion by his own. Rather he will resort to the scholars of that religion to know the details about the religion. So speak the Constitution and court patterns. But the wrong notion of the judges to know everything brought them to this extent where there is inscribed NO ENTRY board for them.
The foundation of the Muslim personal law is religious and it is based on Qur’an and Hadith. Muslims are duty bound religiously to obey them. These laws ensure the protection of Muslims’ beliefs and culture. What their beliefs, religious practices and culture refer to, only experts at Islamic teachings can explain. Judges are expected not to touch them.
As in the case of DNA test, the judges do not trust on their study of physics and chemistry books rather they want a forensic laboratory report—all the stages to the DNA tests are written in the books and people get expertise in the field through reading these very books coupled with subsequent experience. But none of the judges claim that there is no need of any expert for DNA test and he/she will study the books and abstract the result—in the same way by reading the translation of Qur’an and Hadith and studying the unauthorised translation of Hidayah, Aalamgiri (that too a certain part of them) they cannot reach to “justice”.
Justice with “justice” demands that authorised ulama are approached when it comes to know about Islamic commands. The best way is to turn to Muslim Personal Law Board in this case.
Muslims have the legal right to seek settlement of their cases according to their Persona Laws. The Constitution of India grants religious freedom and talks about preservation of personal laws. All know that preservation of religious freedom is a basic right.
The logic of the judges that Islamic Law is written and they have the right to explain them, is weak. To explain Qur’an and Hadith, to understand masaail through them, and to solve the masaail is a difficult task. For this very purpose, scores of sciences were invented throughout the centuries. Uncounted people spent their lives for this. As judges accept supporting evidence have importance in any case, supporting knowledge along with Qur’an and Hadith too is significant. Experienced lot knew the enormity of the situation and the superficial knowledge of the judges about Islam. Long way back in 1897, they instructed the judges in this regard. Following words were written in the decision of a preview council, “But it would be wrong for the Court on a point of this kind to attempt to put their own construction on the Quran in opposition to the express ruling of commentators of such great antiquity and high authority.” (1897) 24 Indian Appeal 196 (PG) Aga Mohammad Jaffar Bin Daneem Vs. Sonam Bee Bee)
As a matter of fact, the preservation of religious freedom or personal law and the Constitutional nod for the same is not a benefaction over Muslims or any certain group. Rather it is the need of the country. The existence of scores of religions, multiple cultures and myriad races in the country makes flexibility in the Constitution mandatory because it is must for the safety and unity of India. This is a way to ensure that the country remains united. Judges should keep in the mind the history of the Indian Constitution and its background. They should not go against the wisdom used by the Constitution makers. Or it will affect the unity of India and their activism will continue weakening the country.
“Judicial activism” looks strange. It has been in use for the last some years. Any decision having something new is termed as “judicial activism”. The verdicts beyond the constitutional jurisdiction and which comprise common needs and human values were added to it later. The matter went further and the judges explained the Constitution according to their understanding and tendency and it was named the broader meaning of the law, the social explanation of the Constitution and an explanation done according to the need of the Constitution.
The courts are not humanist, social reformers, constitution framers or religious authorities. Their jurisdiction is fixed and evident. If the party in any case is Muslim there is no reason that verdict is not issued according to their Personal Laws. It is their right allocated by the Indian Constitution.
The judges gave some verdicts that came as utter shock to us. No one can predict as to where the feeling of being omniscient and the intoxication of the knowledge and the chair will take the decisions. No guess how much more it will degrade the courts. Judicial activism, as per its physiques, meaning and explanation never suits the courts’ activities, the dignity, seriousness and far sightedness of the judges.
The courts are not humanist, social reformers, constitution framers or religious authorities. Their jurisdiction is fixed and evident. If the party in any case is Muslim there is no reason that verdict is not issued according to their Personal Laws. It is their right allocated by the Indian Constitution.
Moreover, the work of the judges is that of explaining the Constitution and implementing it. They have the knowledge of this and in this they are trained. They should serve being in their limits. It is the demand of their knowledge, dignity and respect. If they transgress their limits, not only their ignorance will be exposed but also their respect and grade will witness gradual decrease. In regards with the Muslim Personal Laws, they should resort to the authorised religious scholars of the community the same way they seek experts’ opinion in DNA or forensic tests.
Maulana Wali Rahmani
TERRORISM IS NOT COLOUR BOUND
The statement by the union minister Mr. P. Chidambaram associating terrorism with saffron colour should be condemned. But, in reality some perverted elements of the community holding the colour in religious respect have been at work to destroy the unity of India, using it to show off their presence in the country.
Terrorism has no colour’, say the leaders of the Hindu community demanding Mr. Chidambaram’s resignation or sacking for using the term “saffron terrorism” to explain the latest series of terrorist activities initiated by extremist Hindu outfits in India. The past months India has witnessed many cases in which terrorists with Hindu names and saffron clothes were arrested.
The Bharatiya Janata Party and their kin have been demanding an apology from the union home minister for hurting people’s sentiments using the saffron “colour”; the colour that represents their religion, their culture, their traditions and their flag.
Terrorism has become a curse for India. All the political parties show resolve to eliminate it from the country’s soil but its threat increases by with the passage of the day.
It is unfortunate that instead of giving a united fight against terrorism the political parties are indulging in politics in the name of terrorism. An unbiased view will be that terrorism has no colour neither it is specified to a particular religion or region. It may happen coincidently that in some cases people who are found involved in terror activities use a certain colour as their identity.
Saffron is the colour of saints, sadhus and Rajputs who laid their lives for their motherland. Any terrorism in any guise is terrorism.
Likewise, it is also wrong to say with certainty that people associated with some colour can never be wrong. Ravan was in saffron robe when he abducted Sita. It does not mean that he was not a terrorist. At the same time it cannot be said that since he wore saffron colour it is an insult to that colour.
Saffron is the colour of saints, sadhus and Rajputs who laid their lives for their motherland. Any terrorism in any guise is terrorism. Like Ravan who wore saffron to abduct Sita, BJP has also adopted saffron colour to hold Indian unity to ransom. People who were saffron robes were involved in bomb blasts in Modasa and Malegaon.
To curb terrorism stringent laws are not needed but strong willpower is needed.
When BJP was in centre there were laws like POTA. But they did not have strong willpower to fight against terrorism and so during BJP rule there were terrorist attacks on several places like Raghunath Mandir, Parliament, Red Fort and Akshardham.
It was the strong willpower of UPA government that a terrorist was caught alive in Mumbai and after his narco analysis test India proved to the world that terrorists were being aided by Pakistan. Under pressure from international community despite its unwillingness Pakistan was forced by the Central government to take action against terrorist camps. Consequently the terrorists have turned against Pakistan government and instead of coming to India they are carrying out bomb blasts in Pakistan itself.
To curb terrorism stringent laws are not needed but strong willpower is needed. When BJP was in centre there were laws like POTA. But they did not have strong willpower to fight against terrorism and so during BJP rule there were terrorist attacks on several places like Raghunath Mandir, Parliament, Red Fort and Akshardham.
This is due to the silent efforts of the present central government. Dr. Manmohan Singh’s and Mrs. Sonia Gandhi leadership. Both have impeccable records in politics, unlike their predecessors. On the other hand during the BJP’s rule instead of making Pakistan bow down Musharaff was called here and great hope was pinned on him. Instead of arresting any terrorist the BJP released a terrorist from jail and send them to Kandahar.
Chief Minister of Gujarat wishes that he should be safe and secure but terrorists should attack the state so that he can play his vote bank politics. Terrorists never used to come to Gujarat in the past. But during the rule of present Chief Minister the situation is such that his bungalow is like a fortress and terrorists struck Akshardham which is just opposite his bungalow.
The condemnation of associating terrorism with saffron colour should not undermine the threat posed by those for whom the saffron colour is their licence to indulge in criminal activity. After some of these traitors were put behind bars there has not been a single blast.
Why did the BJP reward Jethmalani who defended Afzal Guru? The same Jethmalani who defended Afzal is now the advocate for Amit Shah.
Narendra Modi while addressing a crowd in Bodakdev of Ahmedabad recently said: “Is not there a saffron flag on a temple? Would you call it a centre of terrorist activity? Many who wore saffron sacrificed for the country. Are you calling them terrorist? The prime minister has to apologise to the people of the country for this.”
The condemnation of associating terrorism with saffron colour should not undermine the threat posed by those for whom the saffron colour is their licence to indulge in criminal activity. After some of these traitors were put behind bars there has not been a single blast.
Do you salute the national flag? Isn’t saffron the colour of people and the country? This Central Government is calling you a terrorist,” said Narendra Modi, the hero of the mindset which promotes what is now being called saffron terror.
The first vital leads of this new form of militant Hindu terror were unearthed by Hemant Karkare before attaining martyrdom on 26/11. If anybody brought the holy saffron into disrepute, they are those sadhvis, swamis, retired Army officers and members of ultra right-wing outfits like Sanatan Sanstha and Abhinav Bharat who allegedly orchestrated several bomb blasts. Instead of denying it or protecting them, it’s our collective responsibility for the nation to help expose and punish all kinds of terror outfits without any religious or regional bias. Their acts are anti-Hindu and anti-national. Religion for them is a veneer to hide a malicious political agenda and climb the political ladder.
Six municipal corporations of Gujarat will be witnessing election in a month. And it appears the issue of saffron terrorism will be one of the main issues for the BJP. Already, starting from Rajkot, a good number of hoardings are being put up with Narendra Modi’s photo, the Tricolour along with the text: “Bhagavo chhe deshbhakti no saad, Congress kahe chhe Aatankvad.” (Saffron is voice of patriotism, but Congress says it’s terrorism).
Instead of denying it or protecting them, it’s our collective responsibility for the nation to help expose and punish all kinds of terror outfits without any religious or regional bias. Their acts are anti-Hindu and anti-national. Religion for them is a veneer to hide a malicious political agenda and climb the political ladder.
Neither the terrorists, nor people are colour-blind. Every terror has an extreme shade of a given colour. Sooner we identify and isolate it, the better it is for the nation.
Unfortunately, the power in democracy is all about numbers. The truck-load of paid taporis love to whistle on every illogical rhetorical remark which comes their way. The sovereign Republic of India stands for egalitarianism, trans-religious secularism and national unity based on fraternity. The politics of vote-bank and appeasement has destroyed this country. Meanwhile, in charged-up atmosphere due to saffron terrorism issue, Modi once again proved that voters of Gujarat are with the BJP. Kathlal is known to be a Congress reign, a seat that Congress never lost since Independence of India. It was said that the Congress can never lose here. With the BJP’s victory with whopping margin of 21,547 votes, Kathlal is no more a Congress bastion.
Instead of doing politics over terrorism, as is being done so far, all the political parties had better come up with a unanimous strategy to tackle the menace. Why not take immediate action against those shielding the terrorists or assisting them?
Abdul Hafiz Lakhani
lakhani63@yahoo.com
Babri Masjid Verdict
The Allahabad High Court verdict in the disputed Babri Masjid suit is yet to come (when the magazine was going to press) but the communal elements have already announced that they will not accept the judgement. The unnecessary provocation through distribution of pamphlets, sending SMSs and irresponsible statements reveals that they are not interested in peace.
In the past, Muslims and Hindus, even though they are integral parts of India, had bitter relations. Speaking to a program in Bangalore former RSS chief K. S. Sudarshan said, “It were the Englishmen who created hatred between Hindus and Muslims and tried to keep them away from one another. The Hindu-Muslim conflicts are political in nature.”
The tension between the communities reached its peak after the demolition of 16th century Babri Masjid in Ayodhya (U.P.). The alleged politically motivated initiative by communal elements is responsible for many riots taking place after December 6, 1992. The controversy over the Babri Masjid site started only in 19th century when the British had long before stepped into India. The dispute over the site was one of the many tricks the English used to create divisions among Indian inhabitants.
It was in January 16, 1950 that a case as to who owns the Ayodhya site was started. It is around 60 years since then and the case could not reach any conclusion as the politicians made it a medium to garner votes.
It is almost sure that once the High Court issues verdict—the would be Allahabad HC judgement can be challenged in the SC—in favour of either of the parties, it will disturb the communal harmony. Unless either Hindus or Muslims renounce the ownership of Babri Masjid site there remains every possibility of bloodshed.
Hindu brethren can come up with a laudable example of sacrificing for harmony, if they give up their resolution of building Ram Mandir at the disputed Ayodhya site. Thus a disturbance of communal can be avoided and it will be the practical proof that they are patriotic to India. They will be saving India from huge damage. It will not only send a positive message that peace is their priority but also will serve as an example of tolerance.
Hindu brethren are in majority in India and hence they are expected to exhibit tolerance in this case. If minorities present sacrifice by renouncing the ownership, that will not be the real sacrifice as they will be compelled to do so. The real sacrifice would be when the majority do it.
The fact is that in common sense of justice, one place of worship of one community cannot be pulled down by a mob illegally and forcefully and a place of worship of a another community be build exactly on the same spot forcefully citing law and order problems.
By this they can please Rama who loved peace. He will be happy that their adherents putting into practice the teachings of peace saved “Bharat Mata” from bloodshed only to show that Hindu religion is about peace. And the existence of a mosque at the place that Hindus say is the birthplace of Rama will convey the message that minorities in India are respected by the majority.
In the past, Muslims and Hindus, even though they are integral parts of India, had bitter relations. Speaking to a program in Bangalore former RSS chief K. S. Sudarshan said, “It were the Englishmen who created hatred between Hindus and Muslims and tried to keep them away from one another. The Hindu-Muslim conflicts are political in nature.”
The tension between the communities reached its peak after the demolition of 16th century Babri Masjid in Ayodhya (U.P.). The alleged politically motivated initiative by communal elements is responsible for many riots taking place after December 6, 1992. The controversy over the Babri Masjid site started only in 19th century when the British had long before stepped into India. The dispute over the site was one of the many tricks the English used to create divisions among Indian inhabitants.
It was in January 16, 1950 that a case as to who owns the Ayodhya site was started. It is around 60 years since then and the case could not reach any conclusion as the politicians made it a medium to garner votes.
It is almost sure that once the High Court issues verdict—the would be Allahabad HC judgement can be challenged in the SC—in favour of either of the parties, it will disturb the communal harmony. Unless either Hindus or Muslims renounce the ownership of Babri Masjid site there remains every possibility of bloodshed.
Hindu brethren can come up with a laudable example of sacrificing for harmony, if they give up their resolution of building Ram Mandir at the disputed Ayodhya site. Thus a disturbance of communal can be avoided and it will be the practical proof that they are patriotic to India. They will be saving India from huge damage. It will not only send a positive message that peace is their priority but also will serve as an example of tolerance.
Hindu brethren are in majority in India and hence they are expected to exhibit tolerance in this case. If minorities present sacrifice by renouncing the ownership, that will not be the real sacrifice as they will be compelled to do so. The real sacrifice would be when the majority do it.
The fact is that in common sense of justice, one place of worship of one community cannot be pulled down by a mob illegally and forcefully and a place of worship of a another community be build exactly on the same spot forcefully citing law and order problems.
By this they can please Rama who loved peace. He will be happy that their adherents putting into practice the teachings of peace saved “Bharat Mata” from bloodshed only to show that Hindu religion is about peace. And the existence of a mosque at the place that Hindus say is the birthplace of Rama will convey the message that minorities in India are respected by the majority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)