The identical chorus of the Indians irrespective of their party and so-called ideological affiliation proves the proverb that all thieves are cousins, what denounces the boast of India’s ruling elites that they belong to a democratic and secular country.
In the truest sense of the term, India is neither a secular nor a democratic country. Holding a general election after every five years doesn’t necessarily mean that real democratic prevails there. What are the features of a democratic country? It allows and ensures freedom of opinion and speech, liberty to the practice of religion, equal justice for all irrespective of caste and creed, rich or poor, ownership of land, above all security of life and property. All these are the minimum rights of any civilized, not to speak of a democratic country. If anybody looks into the happenings in India, he would find how the Indians, particularly the minority communities, especially the Muslims are deprived of these basic rights.
I study and closely watch India and its elite groups since 1972. My bitter conclusion is: most of the Indian leaders, intellectuals, bureaucrats, cultural activists, film artists, even judges aren’t above their communal identity. They are secular and non-communal in words, but extreme communal and non-secular in their deeds. Not only BJP or RSS or Hindu Mahasabha or Shiv Sena or Bajrang Dal etc., but all other parties, right from Congress to communist party leaders and activists, are also communal. They are outwardly liberals and seculars, but inwardly communal and criminals?
Indian Congress before and after the partition of the subcontinent committed anti-Muslim crimes. Most of the anti-Muslim riots, lootings, rapes, occurred during the rule of Nehru, his daughter Indira and their successors. None can tell how many thousands of anti-Muslim riots occurred during the Congress rule in India and how many millions of Muslims were killed or crippled for life, women raped, residences and shops were looted or demolished or burnt.
It is Congress that grabbed Muslim lands and regions swindled, cheated and deceived the Muslims. Nehru, influencing the Hindu King Hari Singh of Kashmir, a predominantly Muslim country, occupied parts of Kashmir on October 22, 1947, whose people still want to merge with Pakistan. The Kashmiris to date endure the curse such occupation of Nehru.
But in case of Hyderabad, a Hindu-majority independent country ruled by a Muslim dynasty, whose rulers were prominently known as Nazim, Nehru used the Hindu card. Nehru wished Nizam to merge Hyderabad with India arguing its Hindu majority character, but he forgot that he occupied a Muslim majority Kashmir using the Hindu King. Nizam opted to remain independent whose country was a member of the UN. Being annoyed Nehru clique accused that they have indications that the Nizam bid to join Pakistan. Using this lame and baseless excuse Nehru on December 6 of 1948 launched a brutal and barbarous military invasion against Hyderabad. Indian soldiers and police were engaged in arson, looting and mass murder and rape of Muslim women.
Indian soldiers themselves took an active hand in the butchery. At a number of places, members of the armed forces brought out Muslim adult males from villages and towns and massacred them in cold blood.
The massacre was so alarming and widespread that Nehru was compelled to form a fact-finding committee led by Congress leader Pandit Sunderlal. The report detailed such grievous incidents of killings and human rights violations that it was never made public.
India using Hindu card occupied Muslim-ruled Junagadh, Manavadar, Bhopal, even Hindu-ruled princely state of Travancore that opted to remain independent or join Pakistan. Congress government of Nehru grabbed almost all the 556 princely states of the subcontinent.
Still, the Muslims blindly supported Congress and used them as Congress vote-bank. But it never rose above the Hindu communal level. Congress is worse to BJP in serving Hindu interest. When in 1992 BJP-RSS-led Hindu criminals demolished Babri Mosque, Congress-led government in Delhi remained silent and allowed the mob to demolish it. Even Congress government didn’t save the Muslims when the Hindu hooligans initiated anti-Muslim riot after the demolition of the mosque.
Now as soon as the Supreme Court awarded verdict to construct a Hindu Mandir on the site of the Babri Mosque, Congress was in competition with BJP to welcome the verdict. The tone of Congress and that of BJP is almost identical. Rahul Gandhi instantly tweeted welcoming it.
Meanwhile, ‘India Today’ on November 9 reported that the Congress said it ‘respects the Supreme Court verdict in the Ajodhya case and is in favor of Ram temple construction’.
In a resolution passed by the Congress Working Committee chaired by party Chief Sonia Gandhi, the Congress also appealed to all parties concerned and all communities to “abide by the secular values and spirit of fraternity enshrined in the Constitution and to maintain peace and harmony”.
“It is the responsibility of each one of us to reaffirm our the tradition of mutual respect and unity among all that has defined our society through the ages,” Congress’s chief spokesperson Randeep Surjewala quoted the resolution as saying.
Asked if the Congress was supportive of Ram temple construction, he answered the Congress is in favor of Ram temple construction, Randeep Surjewala said. What a secular Congress is!
A vital question arises, what type of ‘secularism’ or ‘spirit of fraternity’ or ‘mutual respect’ Congress means, whence spirit of Hinduism and communalism were gravely exposed in the verdict of the Supreme Court. It is painful that Congress’s suggestion to the Muslims is equal to swallow poison, the curse of losing their legal cause, their holy place — Babri Mosque.
In fact, all the parties in India, including Congress, BJP, RSS, Hindu Mahasabha, Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena, etc., are birds of the same feathers, i.e., all thieves are cousins, in case of Muslim interest. Other than a microscopic number, 99 percent of Hindus are malice to the Muslims.
And Indian judges, intelligence agencies, bureaucrats, none are above their communal line. Had the judiciary been impartial and independent the site of Babri Mosque couldn’t be recognized as the birthplace of Rama, in imaginary Hindu lord of fiction.
Retired Supreme Court judge Asok Kumar Ganguly denouncing the verdict raised some vital questions: “You have said that there was a structure under the mosque but you have not said that the structure was that of a temple. There is no evidence that after the demolition of a temple, a mosque has been built. On the basis of what archaeological insight can court decide that after 500 years?”
The Supreme Court, he pointed out, has accepted that if namaz is offered in a place then it has to be considered a mosque.
“So considering it a mosque, which has been standing there for 500 years, how do you decide the title after 500 years? On what basis can you do it? Those who have come here (in court) to depose have documents. On the basis of archaeological report you cannot decide titles,” said Ganguly.
“And today what will people think? That in 1992 this mosque was demolished, now it is 2019, and in 2022 they challenge the Supreme Court? What happens to constitutional morality? That is something I felt a little disturbed about,” said Ganguly who retired in 2012.
(Hindustan Times, November 10, 2019)
The Telegraph online edition (November 10, 2019) quoted Ganguly as saying, “Who owned the land 500 years ago, does anybody know? We cannot recreate history. The responsibility of the court is to preserve whatever there is. To preserve the rights to whatever there is. The court has no duty to recreate history. What was there five centuries ago, the court is not supposed to know. The court should say that the mosque was there — a fact. Not a historical fact, (but) a fact that everybody has seen. Its demolition has been seen by everybody. That should be restored. If they have no right to have a mosque, then how are you directing the government to give five acres of land to build a mosque? Why? You are accepting that the demolition of the mosque was not proper.”
Ganguly on November 9 in the Anandabazar Patrika, a Bengali daily of Kolkata questioned, “Was there any Ramachandra in reality? Is there any document where he was born? Are there such records? Rama is confined only to epic. Relying on the epic many people might have believed that there was a lord, named Rama. But on the basis of such belief, a mosque cannot become a mandir. If I tell that it is my belief that I had a house beneath your house, will you give me the land demolishing your house?”
I think Indian politicians, or judges, have any logical answer to these questions of Justice Ganguly. I firmly believe Indian judges are also communal and inimical to the Muslims. The verdict of the Indian Supreme Court on Babri Mosques and some other cases prove they are impartial and one-eyed. Their verdict clearly proves that they are leaned to the ruling elites when it relates to Muslim interest. Their verdict ventilated the purpose of Modi what he will use for his political interest.
Indian Supreme Court earlier also sided with the communalist Modi, who was accused of killing over 2,000 Muslims in Gujrat in 2002. He was branded as the number of the killer in the world. The US denied his visa to enter the States. But the Indian Supreme Court relieved him of the charges of killing the Muslims, blazing and demolishing the residences and shops.
So many instances could be cited the partiality and injustice of the Supreme Court to jeopardize Muslims and their vital rights. It repeatedly happens as the judges are communal.
The Babri Mosque verdict was a dictated and imposed symbol of communal and political biases. Supreme Court also proves that any crime against the Muslims is legal in India. All Hindus in rank and file are consorted to deny and deprive the Muslims of their rights, as the Hindus are, as if, all thieves are cousins of one another.
This a great lesson for the Indian Muslims. There is none to help other than Allah, the Almighty. They should unite themselves. They should not use themselves as the vote-bank of any party. They should have their own party one party. Congress, even BJP awarding them some portfolios proves that their parties are non-communal. It is unfortunate that some Muslims accept such a trap for their self-interest. They deny this such offer for their own sake.
Mohammad Zainal Abedin is a Bangladesh-origin American journalist who edits Weekly Runner News of NY