Home / Articles / Is Congress a Muslim Party, is it against interests of Hindus?

Is Congress a Muslim Party, is it against interests of Hindus?

Ram Puniyani

Currently there is propaganda from BJP combine that Congress is anti Hindu party. On every conceivable occasion it states that Congress is insulting Hinduism. In the wake of the verdict of Mecca Masjid blast cases; as the accused got released; BJP spokespersons went hammer and tongs saying that Rahul Gandhi-Congress have defamed Hindu religion, they should apologize for that. In the ongoing campaign for Karnataka elections (2018) BJP has taken out a Yatra against so called ‘anti Hindu policies’ of Congress. The propaganda has gone to such an extent that even Sonia Gandhi, the ex-Congress President had to say that Congress is perceived as a party for Muslims!

How should we understand the policies of a party for any religious community? BJP is propagating that it is a party which is taking care of Hindu interests. Is it true? It has taken up issue like Ram Temple, Holy cow, article 370, love jihad etc. Have Hindus at large benefitted from it? We see that economic slide in the conditions of farmers, workers, dalits and increasing atrocities against Hindu women. The claim that these emotive issues are for the benefit of Hindus is a pure make believe propaganda which has led to polarization, increased hate and increase in the acts of violence. The major victim of these policies is not only the Muslims but Hindus in large numbers.

What about Congress being Anti Hindu, against Hinduism? Let’s take the case of Mecca masjid blast. The major part of investigation was initially done by Hemant Karkare, who was killed in the 26/11 act of terror on Mumbai. Swami Aseemanand, the accused, himself had confessed of his crime in front of a magistrate, which was not under duress, and his confession was legally valid. Most of the investigations pointed fingers to Aseemanand, Sadhvi Pragya, Lt. Col Purohit et al. During last four years of BJP rule the case has been so presented by agencies as to exonerate them all and put the blame of wrong investigation on the part of Maharashtra ATS. While Karkare was proceeding with the investigations, Modi and Thackeray had called him anti-Hindu. Karkare felt so much pressured by these intimidations that he sought the advice of his distinguished elder, Julio Reibero, who advised him to carry on with his honest work, ignoring the pressures.

While anti Hindu image of Congress has been constructed around such issues, its pro Muslim image has been constructed in last few decades more so after the reversal of Shah Bano issue by Congress government, which apparently was a flawed decision. Still it was just yielding to retrograde elements within Muslim community. Muslim community as a whole did not benefit from it. Dr. Manmohan Singh’s statement ‘Muslims have a first claim on national resources’, is yet another statement flouted to assert that Congress is pro Muslim. What this hidden from the public view is that this statement came in the wake of the Sachar Committee Report. This report had debunked the claim that Muslims have been appeased, it concluded that the economic condition of Muslims has got a big slide back while they are also the victims of communal violence, and that the only place they are over represented is the jails!

As such attempt to walk on the path of secularism in our country, which has suffered the impact of ‘divide and rule’ policy of British is not easy. With the rising Indian consciousness, Indian Nationalism, Indian National Congress came up with the people from all religions. Badruddin Tybaji presided over the Congress session in 1887. It also had Presidents who were Parsi, Christian, and Hindu notwithstanding. This time around Congress faced criticism from Muslim communalists (Sir Syed for example), as being a Hindu Party, while Hindu communalists (like Lala Lalchand) dubbed that Congress is appeasing Muslims at the cost of Hindu interests. All through Congress had to face criticism from these elements, as it had the primary focus on Indian Nationalism; it was practicing secularism with some slips here and there.

The criticism of Muslim communalists, Muslim League culminated in the formation of Pakistan. Hindu communalist, Hindu Mahasabha RSS criticism was that Gandhi is appeasing Muslims, it is due to Gandhi that Muslims have raised their head, due to which Pakistan was formed. The sharpest articulation of this came in the actions of Nathuram Godse, who was a trained RSS Pracharak and also became the Secretary of Pune Branch of Hindu Mahasabha in 1936. In his statement in the Court (‘May it please your honor’), he says that Gandhi is responsible for formation of Pakistan, he has compromised the Hindu interests and been pro-Muslim!

The present criticism of Congress, it being called a Muslim party, it being against Hindu interests seems to be a continuation of the arguments, which began with Hindu communalists in 1880s, via the articulations of Hindu Mahasabha-RSS-Godse, which have become intensified during last couple of decades. Surely the condition of Muslims has worsened during last several decades and during last four years, its status is having a ‘free fall’, while those in power, making these accusations, anti Congress propaganda are having a field day with emotive issues in which Hindus are as much of the losers as the other sections of society are.

Walking the secular talk is becoming more difficult by the day. Gandhi was killed for this and his disciple Nehru is being the subject of vilification and calumny for the same. The Muslim communalists rejoiced formation of Pakistan, where development and amity is missing. With Congress-Gandhi Nehru we could make a small journey towards fraternity and progress. The criticism of Congress as being Muslim party, as being against Hindus, reflects more about the sectarian agenda of those propagating it rather that the nature of Congress, which despite all the flaws has been trying to protect secular values, despite massive limitations!

About admin

Check Also

Civil and Military judicial systems: Need for bridging the gap

Military judicial systems, the World over, are known for delivering swift, speedy and credible justice during extraordinary times. Especially so when the routine of the run judicial system is unable to deliver justice due to any of the accepted multiple genuine reasons. Post 9/11 setting threw up such extraordinary environment when circumstances had rendered the normal judicial channels ineffective, particularly when it came to punishing hard core terrorists. This situation prevailed for about fifteen years and none of the terrorist was awarded meaningful penalty for heinous crimes, it was often observed that those arrested on these accounts were promptly granted bail and were repeatedly caught committing same crimes again and again. Under these conditions National Action Plan was formulated to counter terrorism and military courts were setup for a limited time. These courts served the purpose and award of meaningful punishments to had core terrorists helped in quelling the waves of terrorism promptly.Military courts were established for two years and during this period civil judiciary was expected to fix its weaknesses and be able to re-takeover the task. However, it failed to do so, so the military courts were asked to carry out the task for another two years; this period is to end in January 2019. However, civilian courts are still no better than what they were in January 2015. It is yet another testimony of the lack of faith in the country’s criminal justice system and the sheer ineptness of political system to reform it. Reasons that led to setting up of military courts continue to persist. And it goes to the credit of swift action by military courts alongside military operations that terrorism is on its fag end. Certainly Army’s Judge Advocate General’s team will have to answer many question, as to why pointed out technical gaps and procedural voids were not plugged-in during the trial proceedings. While at the same time, PHC bench needs to account for basing such decision mainly on technicalities, while mainly ignoring the substance matter, and that too in case of heinous crimes. There are many rungs between capital punishments and outright acquittal and one does not have to go berserk to jump straight from capital punishment to acquittal option without preferring to choose from whole assortment of lower degree punishments. Under the circumstances remanding the case for retrial should have been a win-win situation for all sides. Hopefully, a worthwhile solution would be found out. Army needs to undertake capacity enhancement of its JAG branch to avoid recurrences. And PHC should avoid outright choking of one of the parliament approved and constitutionally established judicial sub-system.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *