Virendra Parekh
The Observer
May 21, 1999
Title: Saffron issues BJP can raise Author: Virendra Parekh Publication: The Observer Date: May 21, 1999 The Bharatiya Janata Party's decision to contest the forthcoming elections on the basis of the National Agenda of Governance instead of its own manifesto marks the triumph of political realism over Hindutva fervour that it commonly, though wrongly, attributed to it. It implies that the BJP would not raise issues like the Common Civil Code, Ayodhya and Article 370 in its campaign, although it has not formally changed its known position on any of these matters. The BJP has realised that, irrespective of the merits of its stand, it is not in a position to move ahead on its own in any of these matters. Nor is it absolutely urgent to do so. On Ayodhya, for instance, the general feeling among the Hindus is that the hard part of the problem is over and the soft part can wait until more opportune times. In Kashmir, L K Advani has demonstrated that Pakistan-backed terrorism can be combated successfully even without touching Article 370. The demand for a Common Civil Code is essentially a demand of secularism, not Hindutva. The present system of separate personal laws is a standing monument of the hypocrisy and cowardice of the secularist lobby. The Hindu temperament, with its unlimited catholicity and broadmindedness, militates against uniformity imposed through coercion. For the time being, therefore, the trouble of raising this highly inflammatory issue should be left to the secularist. It will also serve to show that while Mulayam Singh and others may woo Muslims for their votes, they are not at all interested in leading them out of their ghetto mentality. Fortunately for BJP, there are other, for safer and far more consequential issues waiting to be raised which have a potential for rousing Hindus without automatically provoking the minorities. A glaring example of the discrimination that Hindus are suffering in a democratic state with a Hindu majority is Article 30 of the Constitution. It lays down that minorities can establish and maintain government-aided educational institutions of their choice, implying the right to a communal bias in recruitment to teachers and students as well as religion-centred curriculum. Strangely, this right is denied to the Hindus in practice. The anomaly inherent in this situation became clear when Ramakrishna Mission sought to declare itself as a non-Hindu minority to prevent the West Bengal government's interference in the administration of its schools. It is another matter that the dishonest attempt was challenged in the court by its own members and struck down. A section of Arya Samaj also had sought to gain recognition as a religious minority. Such attempts on the part of organisations set up with the express purpose of defending and promoting Hinduism is a dirty word and many Hindus are ashamed to call themselves Hindu and that when under threat, they prefer the safe exit route to minority status rather than waiting upon BJP or the Sangh Parivar to defend them. The point, however, is that Article 30 constitutes a serious discrimination against Hindus on the ground of religion, and is in conflict with the professed secular character of the Indian state. In no other democratic country would the majority community tolerate such a discrimination. Yet this article rarely figures in public debate on secularism and communalism. This is a testimony to the grip of the secularist intelligentsia on public discourse, to the meekness of the Hindus as a people and to the incompetence of leaders of Hindutva movement in general. Here then is a Hindu issue that the BJP can raise: Amendment of Article 30 to extend the privileges of the minorities to every community including the Hindus. Such an amendment would benefit the Hindu society on the whole and will end a humiliating and damaging inequality. At the same time, it would not affect the minorities who will continue to retain the rights conceded to them in the present version of the Article. From the viewpoint of Hindutva movement, this is a sound theme for campaign. It is an issue of direct and substantial consequence, it exemplifies the discrimination that the Hindus suffer in secular India and thereby explains to the outside world why there has to be a Hindu movement in the first place. Most important, it is not directed anyone. If the BJP makes it a campaign point, other parties would be forced either to come out in support of it or to defend the existing inequality, presumably on the specious argument that equality before law constitutes an oppression of minorities. In either case, the BJP would gain sympathy and votes from the Hindus, without appearing minatory to the non-Hindus. True, the BJP manifesto does mention amendment of Article 30 as part of the constitutional reform. But it does not spell out precisely what amendment it has in mind, leading to the fears that it wants levelling up. In practice, BJP parliamentarians have rarely shown any interest in raising this matter. Another issue that the BJP can raise to mobilise Hindus without antagonising minorities is that unequal treatment of Hindu and non-Hindu places of worship. Muslims have full control of their mosques, Christians have full control of their churches, but Hindus are systematically deprived of the control of their temples. In a heart-rending article, published way back in 1991 in The Illustrated Weekly of India, 'Temple looting in Kerala - Then and Now' Leela Tampi gives a moving account of how Hindu temples have been dispossessed of the land that belonged to them and how even the offerings from devotees are siphoned off to the pockets of politicians and to non-Hindu purpose. Just one sample will do. "When India was at war with China, the Guruvayur Dewaswom was persuaded to transfer to the central government a huge quantity of gold. As far as known, this gold was never returned to the temple. The Guruvayur Dewaswom was also persuaded by the Kerala government in invest Rs one crore in Indira Vikas Patra. Huge amounts were plundered for political shown like the Congress party souvenir. A non-descript motion picture was made on Guruvayur Temple which made the temple poorer by Rs 20 lakh. It has become a practice to disburse money under false headings to politicians, their relatives and friends." In 1991, the then chief minister K Karunakaran ordered the Guruvayur Dewaswom to withdraw Rs 10 crore from banks and deposit the amount with the state treasury to help it out of a financial crisis. The ancient Shri Krishna temple in Dwarka badly needs repairs with some parts facing imminent collapse, but its income cannot be used for its repairs owing to the laws and regulations. Some years ago, an unsuccessful attempt was made to declare the Shirdi Sai Baba temple at Hyderabad a Hindu temple so that politicians can take it over and do what they have been doing to Hindu temples everywhere. Injustice to Hindus in education and temple management: These two problems have deep and painful effects on the life and the future of Hinduism. The BJP should raise them in its campaign, it should prepare short-team plans to remedy the injustice and its state governments should do their best to give at least a partial solution to these problems. Otherwise, it does not deserve a single Hindu vote in the forthcoming elections.
|
||