“Plans for minorities, particularly Muslims, must have the first claim on resources, so that benefits of developments reach them equitably.”
– Dr. Manmohan Singh
Power, they say, is a heady wine. Better the Congress leadership always remembers this axiomatic truth and does not lose its mental equilibrium after the recent mauling of its chief foe in the General Elections 2009. The truth is the Saffron crashed under its own weight.
Today the Congress strength in the Lok Sabha is 206. Earlier it was only 145. The woolly-headed describe this rise as historic. Of course, this remarkable upward curve is likely to change the course of politics in the country. But there is little historic in it. The Congress had touched the pinnacle of glory in 1984 when it got 405 seats in the Lower House. The proverbial heady-wine took over the entire body soon with the result that in 1989, its strength was reduced to 197. It was at this stage that the party realised its nerve-centre had been infected with the germs of arrogance bordering on fascism. Making some amends in 1991 it secured 232. But again it sank to 141 in 1992, the year which saw the destruction of the Babri Masjid under the gazeful eye of then Congress Prime Minister Mr. P. V. Narasimha Rao. In 1995, the Congress could get only 114. The sink almost continued in 2004, when it got 145 only.
But in this election, the Congress alone has got 206. It is something remarkable. The significant factor behind the jump is Muslim vote. That this time Muslim number in the Lok Sabha is the lowest is a different question. But it is their planned voting pattern, as we see in the Muslim concentration districts that pushed the Congress up. This push-up, compared to 2004, caused four-fold gain to the Congress. In simple terms, the Congress Party has increased its tally of 12 in 2004 poll by 30 to the 2009 Lok Sabha elections.
MUSLIM RETURN
Here one feels inclined to quote J.P. Yadav from the Indian Express, May 28: One trend the Congress attributes its 2009 surge to is the “return” of Muslims to the party in several states, especially in West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh. In fact, the Congress tally in districts with 25% or more of minority presence went up four-fold to 42. But given that the party fielded only 18 Muslims of whom 11 were elected, the Council of Ministers announced had just five Muslim faces – one less than in the previous UPA government…. Of these five, only two are from the Congress. Incidentally, 30 Muslims were elected in this Lok Sabha, of whom 27 are with the UPA.
In comparison, the Council of Ministers has 10 Dalit faces up from seven in the last government… of the five Muslim faces, only two are of cabinet rank.
This is how the Congress treats its admirers, who nevertheless, know how to treat the ungrateful. This ungratefulness is not new to the betrayed. It has happened several times in the past; it may happen in the future. The reason is the fallacious thinking that the Muslim community has no alternative.
What the government has done during its previous term smacks of adhocism, tokenism and the patron-client syndrome while visionary programmes, insightful policies have been found conspicuous by absence.
POWERS TO TYRANTS
Javed Anand, Co-Editor; Communal Combat says in a 500-word article in a national daily: “And who says the Congress is any different? In response to persistent demands post-Gujarat 2002 for a new law on mass crimes, on coming to power the UPA government produced the Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005. It was sharply criticised for good reason. Instead of making strict provisions for the prosecution and punishment of state agents found guilty of dereliction of duty – failure to ensure the rule of law – it envisaged even greater powers to them. A second draft, not much better than the first, was then prepared but nothing has been heard on the subject for nearly three years now. This means that India still does not have any institutional arrangement to prevent future genocides and the security of India’s minorities remains subject to the electoral calculation of politicians.”
MUSLIM NOTHINGNESS
Muslims have, since 1947, realised their nothingness time and again. Even Muslim Ministers know this sad reality. Did Mr. Abdul Rehman Antulay, the former Minister for Minority Affairs, not prove a model good-for-nothing Minister?
The Muslim leadership does not believe that a Muslim Minister alone can ameliorate the minorities’ grievances. A Muslim Minister works under a pronounced complex, the complex of being a Muslim. He faces umpteen constraints including taunts, jibes, prejudices and bias of the Opposition leader as well as “friendly critics” of his own party. Most of the Muslim Ministers time-passes in erasing off the suspicion that being a Muslim he would go out of the way to help the Muslims or their causes. The biased sections of bureaucracy do not give him full cooperation. The case of the late Mr. Yunus Saleem is a case in point.
The Muslim leadership genuinely expects the government to stop forthwith the sad incidents of the Batla House variety on the basis of less-than-confirmed facts. Liquidation of suspected Muslim youths arches the eyebrows. Many a budding Muslim youth career has been destroyed in States like Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. Besides causing resentment in the minority such hasty measures lengthen the shadows between the government and the principal minority.
To the Muslim leadership, what is important is right remedial thinking, dedicated service and knowledge of Muslim problems. The In-charge Minister would do well to remain in close touch with the Muslim representative bodies like the All-India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat and the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board. These bodies know the pulse of the Muslim Minority.
MUSLIM MPs
As far as the Muslim parliamentarians are concerned, they must remember their moral obligations. The commendable manner in which the Muslim MPs acted during the Shah Bano case crisis is still fresh in many a memory.
In the meantime, let us remind the powers-that-be that they should show earnestness in the implementation of the recommendations of the Justice Rajinder Sachar Committee, released at the end of 2006. The eye-opener report had provided incontrovertible evidence of institutionalised prejudice and discrimination against the Muslim Minority, suffering at social, economic, educational and political levels.