DR. S. AUSAF SAIED VASFI comes down heavily upon the Congress-led UPA dispensation for giving a short shrift to the Muslim standpoint while drafting the Communal Violence Bill.
The noteworthy aspect of the draft Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations Bill), prepared by the Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council (NAC) is dilution of several significant suggestions by the Muslim leadership and civil society, aimed at creating a riot-free ambiance in plural Bharat.
In the light of the draft, one cannot say for sure they read the comprehensive Muslim document on the issue at all. It is rather sad, if our feeling is true, especially because the inspiration behind the exercise is the riots in Gujarat in 2002.
One of the most controversial issues before the NAC was how to draft the new bill without causing bruises to the Constitution. They found a solution in Art. 355 which says inter alia: “It shall be the duty of the Union to protect every State against external aggression and internal disturbance and ensure the Government of every State carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.”
What has to be noted here is that Art. 355 has so far been used sparingly by the Central Government.
VULNERABLE NAC
The NAC, anyway, remains vulnerable to criticism saying an effort is being made to encroach upon the Government turf. What is feared is disempowerment of the administration and justice system. It is in the backdrop of this apprehension that National Authority and State Authorities have been proposed. The new law is meant for religious and linguistic minorities, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The benefits may reach to the Kashmiri Pandits and the migrants from UP and Bihar to Maharashtra. The said Authorities could take suo moto action. They could interrogate and call for evidence as well as monitor actions of the responsible persons.
The Saffron opposition has understandably found fault with the proposed Act. Mr. Arun Jaitely has seen ‘intrusion in the domain of State’ that will cause damage to ‘federal polity’. He finds the measure could be misused also. That the BJP will oppose it in Parliament is also understandable.
VARIOUS VIEWS
The Congress view, as expressed by Mr. Abhishek Singhvi, is “Those who continue to be proudly bound by the umbilical chord of the RSS, … have divisive communal agendas, … subscribe to the writings of Golwalkar, … carry the shame of Gujarat, Karnataka and Babri episode with ease, and sometimes with pride, … are naturally worried by a Communal Violence Bill.”
The Muslim view, that has been given a short shrift, is that primarily it is the lack of political will to prosecute the perpetrators of genocidal crimes, some States’ lamentable complicity, lack of impartial investigations and awful lack of security of the victims that keeps the atmosphere eternally vitiated. That is the loudest protest found among Muslims. The Act on the subject must trigger what is lacking on the part of the authorities.
The draft is also woefully silent on the horrendous gender-based crimes. Sexual crimes must be included in the offences of the document’s list on the subject. Equally important is shifting of the burden of proof on the accused.
The armed forces, by and large free from bias and prejudice, would never relish the idea of working under the police personnel of dubious reputation. That is another hurdle.
COMPREHENSIVE EVIL
The truth is that the communal discord is not a law and order subject. It is a comprehensive evil of our plural society and what adds to viciousness is that law and order happens to be a State subject, and the States have normally been found lacking in political and moral responsibility in this regard. Communalism is a human issue calling for a comprehensive solution. It involves a question of equality and fraternity and both these values cannot be cultivated through the pieces of strong legislations. The communal problem involves the issues dealt by Defence, Home, Human Resources, Information and the External Affairs Ministries. This fact calls for an honest, sincere approach. This background demands consideration of the Muslim leadership’s periodic and final submission on the ticklish subject.
REALISE MUSLIM WEIGHT
The Congress-led UPA dispensation did not cover itself with glory by giving a less-than-serious consideration to their pleas, made in the national, not communal or sectarian, interests.
While discussing amendments, Muslim views and standpoint should be given due weight, also because they constitute the principal minority of Bharat’s plural polity.