Author: Sudheendra Kulkarni
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: May 29 2011
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/dump-nacs-communal-bill/796643/0
In the wake of Anna Hazare's recent fast over
the Jan Lokpal Bill (which has some serious flaws), some angry critics asked:
"Who are these unelected civil society representatives to coerce a democratically
elected government to pass a particular law? They have no faith in the Constitution."
What these critics conveniently overlooked is that the UPA government itself
has institutionalised a body of unelected representatives of civil society,
the National Advisory Council, with the specific mandate to "provide
policy and legislative inputs to Government." There is no provision for
NAC in the Constitution, and certainly not for a body whose chairperson wields
more effective power than the Prime Minister himself. No doubt, some of its
individual members are distinguished personalities from the domain of social-sector
development, but the concept of NAC is nothing but an unconcealed and unacceptable
deviation from the Constitutional scheme of governance and law-making.
In spite of enjoying enormous clout in policy
review and law-making, NAC's own functioning has, so far, never been subjected
to any review by Parliament. Precisely because NAC and its chairperson enjoy
authority without accountability, its policy pronouncements and draft bills
exert subtle and not-so-subtle coercive pressure on the government. Have you
ever heard a single Congress minister, MP or senior government official criticising
NAC on any matter?
If Sonia Gandhi wanted her party to interface
with civil society organisations and to use their inputs to provide suitable
advice to government, it would have been laudable. After all, political parties
(BJP included), their elected representatives and bureaucrats rarely seek
policy and governance ideas from civil society groups. But she has done next
to nothing to strengthen the interface between civil society and her own party
and its MPs, MLAs and state governments. She has also done next to nothing
to get her MPs and MLAs to better perform their primary functions of law-making,
policy-review and monitoring of governmental activities. What she and the
UPA government have done is to disempower MPs and empower an extra-Constitutional
body in something as basic as drafting of legislations and reviewing the government's
flagship programmes. And this body claims to have expertise on diverse issues
ranging from communal politics to land acquisition! Although NAC calls itself
'National', it is not broadbased in its membership and working groups, nor
in its consultation with civil society organisations of varied ideological
persuasions.
With these prefatory remarks on NAC, I draw
readers' attention to one of the most dangerous, discriminatory and ill-conceived
draft bills ever to come up for consideration of the Union Cabinet since Independence.
The Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations)
Bill, 2011, prepared by NAC and cleared by its chairperson, reeks of the mindset
of minority communalism, which the Congress has frequently appeased for vote-bank
considerations. Some critics have slammed the bill for infringing on the powers
of state governments. A valid criticism. However, the bill's real danger lies
in the fact that it holds individuals and organisations of only the majority
community, and never the minority community, responsible for any communal
violence. Thus, the perpetrators of the torching of the train at Godhra would
not be covered under this proposed law, nor would those foreign-funded church
organisations who are indulging in systematic conversion of the SCs, STs and
the other poor in Hindu society based on clandestine hate propaganda against
Hinduism. (They never target the Muslim poor since the repercussions of doing
so would be predictable.) Stigmatising the majority community as ipso facto
a victimiser in any incident of communal violence, irrespective of the facts
of the case, and declaring members of a minority community to be always innocent
victims is a perversion of all canons of law, besides being a terrible blow
to India's national unity and integrity. NAC's law would not cover Shia-Sunni
conflicts, nor incidents like the chopping of the hand of a Christian professor
in Kerala last year by a Muslim radical group, since both the victim and the
victimiser in such cases belong to minority communities. Similarly, it would
not consider the derogative description of Hindus as kafirs and heathens as
hate speech. It would also condone widespread discriminatory activities by
minority educational institutions-something that prompted Sandeep Dikshit,
a Congress MP and son of Delhi's chief minister, to describe St Stephen's
College a "communal institution". As regards the draconian punitive
provisions proposed by NAC, they are an affront to a democratic state and
society. The bill's basic conceptual flaw is that it equates communal violence
with terrorist violence. But none should be surprised if the Congress, which
opposed an anti-terror law tooth and nail until 26/11, backs NAC's politically
motivated bill without the slightest demur.
Communal violence is a blot on India, irrespective
of whether members of community A, B or C get killed. It must be put down
with a heavy hand, irrespective of whether it is fomented by Hindu or non-Hindu
communal organisations. But let us also remember that there are many effective
ways, in addition to sincere implementation of the existing laws, to neutralise
the poison of communalism. India's age-old plural social-cultural-spiritual
traditions provide rich and reliable resources to promote inter-faith harmony
and peace. It is sad to see that the Congress party, which was once a natural
political manifestation of these nationalistic traditions, is about to fall
prey to a toxic legislative enterprise by a cabal of Hindu-bashing activists.
- sudheenkulkarni@gmail.com
