DR. S. AUSAF SAIED VASFI comments on the Muslim presence in Lok Sabha and underlines the need of a Muslim party with sufficient room for others who agree with its objectives and programme.
Six Muslim intellectuals of the National Capital on May 25 protested against the outrageously low Muslim representation in the union cabinet. Their line of argument is: Muslims voted overwhelmingly in favour of the Congress Party in the 2009 parliamentary elections. The Justice Rajinder Sachar Committee Report had made recommendations to that effect. The UPA Chairperson as well as the Prime Minister had earlier made solemn assurances that fair Muslim representation of minorities would be made at all levels. The Muslim intellectuals also referred to the need of Muslim empowerment.
POLITICALLY CORRECT
The 150-word advertisement in some national dailies, earnestly pleading the case, took exception to the inclusion of only one Muslim in the 20 Cabinet Ministers sworn in on May 22. The second and final swearing-in added five, at various levels, not 11 as demanded by the Muslim intellectuals.
The signatories to the appeal that ends in bold letters at “We wish the new government all success” include Dr. Syed Zafar Mahmood, President Zakat Foundation of India, Mr. M.J. Khan, President I.M.R.C. and National Economic Forum of Muslims, Mr. P. A. Inamdar, President Religious and Linguistic Minorities Association, Dr. Zafarul-Islam Khan Khan, Editor, Milli Gazette, Mr. K.M.S. Khan, World Education and Development Organisation and Mr. Mujtaba Farooq, Secretary Jamaat-e-Islami Hind.
Whatever these gentlemen said is politically correct, and correct absolutely. Their honesty of purpose, their sincerity, the dedication with which they take up the many challenges and causes of the Ummah is beyond reproach.
PAINFUL FACT
What, however, they have overlooked is the painful fact that the Indian Muslims, who happen to be over 160 million, do not have the necessary weight that could have compelled the powers-that-be to take their cognizance. They have neither the necessary leverage nor the necessary guts that is a must for the resolution of problems.
Before dealing with this fundamental issue, let us also confront a few embarrassing questions in the background of the fact that India has had Muslim Presidents, Muslim Vice-Presidents, a Muslim Chief Justice, a Muslim Air Marshal, several Muslim Chief Ministers and Muslim Ministers in the States as well as the Central Cabinet. Had they been able to solve Muslim problems, the six well-meaning Muslim intellectuals would not have felt the need to raise their (Muslim Ministers’) presence in the Union Cabinet.
And suppose – for the sake of argument – the second Congress-led UPA Government obliges the Muslim community, shall the said 11 powerful ministers be allowed to resolve the Muslim grievances? Would these 11 ministers compel the genocide-charged, Mr. Narendra Modi to face justice? Would they be able to reopen the Batla House point-blank firing case in which were liquidated two innocents? Could they provide justice for the sufferers of the Mumbai riots? Can these 11 ministers delete Article which envisages a uniform civil code for the multi-religious Bharat? Can they save Article 370 from deletion from the Constitution? The too-obvious reply is a big “NO”.
ANOTHER ANGLE
Look at the issue from another angle: Franchise in our country is held on the basis of party system. Elections are not held on the basis of community or religion, culture or language. The six intellectuals’ quite genuine demand ignores this fact. Since the dawn of alliance-politics, allies are given berths. It is on this basis that the party-in-power or its allies that castes and regions are also represented.
This however does not mean that demanding equity in political representation is wrong. Far from being wrong, it is necessary because in the words of Smith, Muslims of India, constitutionally speaking, are co-rulers in the country. They are power sharers.
EXISTING SYSTEM
This entire argument boils down to the point that it is a party with its ideology or manifesto and not a community as a community that finds representation in parliament or cabinet. In the existing system, the Muslim-backed representatives find their place in the State and Central legislatures. If they articulate Muslim issues there, well and good. If they do not, or the party whip forbids them to do so, nothing can be done for the reversal of the situation.
This brings us straight to the need of a Muslim Party, a party of Muslims for Muslims, of course with sufficient room for others, who agree with its objectives and programme. It would save Muslims, as happens to be the present case, from issuing appeals and entreaties for the resolution of their problems. This party, feel some thinking sections of the Muslim society, would add to the weight of Muslim persona. Let the Muslim leadership think and act with clarity.