Why Modi Govt Can’t Face Unpleasant Truths About Minorities

Under the Modi-led BJP government, minorities have been subjected to majoritarian pressures, writes Suhit K Sen.

• The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has published a scathing report on treatment of India’s minorities.
  
• MEA said the USCIRF failed to understand India, its Constitution and society.
  
• But the USCIRF flags real concerns being faced by Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists.
  
• There is genuine and widespread concern over the government’s ‘pervasive culture of impunity’.
  
• Since the BJP came to power, majoritarian assertion has become increasingly virulent.

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has not been very kind in assessing India’s track record in its 2015 report, citing various incidents and types of harassment and intimidation of minorities. The Central government is thus less than gratified, especially, one presumes, at being grouped alongside Afghanistan, China, Russia, Turkey, et al. But before we get to the merits of the case, a word on India’s official response would be in order.

A spokesman of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) issued an official statement, which accused the commission of failing to understand India, its Constitution and society. It painted India as a ‘vibrant, pluralistic society founded on democratic principles’ and chastised the commission, a foreign entity which had no locus standi, for its pronouncements on Indian citizens’ constitutional rights. It ended with a withering exit line: ‘We take no cognizance of their report’.

India’s Evasive Stance

Well, the Concise Oxford Dictionary provides several meanings of the word cognizance; among them are: ‘knowledge or awareness’. The phrase ‘take cognizance of’ similarly means ‘attend to’ or ‘take account of’. Issuing an official statement to proclaim that India does not take cognizance of the report is somewhat hilarious. But that aside it also points to a peculiarly Indian conundrum in respect of the west generally and the US and UK particularly

Just as the middle and upper middle classes are so often conflicted about them, craving recognition and approbation, on the one hand, while wanting desperately to assert independence usually through some kind of nativism, on the other, it equally often appears that the political (or foreign affairs) establishment is afflicted by a similar schizophrenia.

On the one hand, ever since liberalisation began to be rolled out, New Delhi has simultaneously desired a special relationship with Washington (irrespective of which party is in power on either side), while asserting its independence. This is why, perhaps, the US quasi-official report stings just enough to prompt a defence alongside a show of petulant indifference.

Obviously, it does not wash, and neither does the ambitious claim put out by the government. The USCIRF report flags a number of concerns. First, with regard to Muslims, it mentions the ban on cow slaughter in various states, which is an unfair restriction on Muslims, apart from adversely affecting livelihoods of Muslims and Dalits. Second, it says inflammatory rhetoric is employed by Union ministers and others against Muslims, especially wild claims that the percentage of Muslims in India is increasing because they have larger families, and increasing communal violence.

With respect to Christians, it mentions the restrictions on conversion in many states by legislation, and in respect of Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains, the report mentions the continued refusal of the states to recognise them as being separate from Hindus.

Does US Have Any Right?

There are two issues here. First, there is the question of jurisdiction. In other words, what right does a US committee have to sit in judgement over religious freedoms in India and the rest of the world? The obvious answer is none, especially given the fact that minority ethnic communities as well as Muslims suffer serious discrimination in the US. On the other hand, if a US committee wishes to so pronounce judgement, the only way to deal with it is actually ignore the report. As mentioned, the Indian government failed to do that.

The second issue is that of facticity. Everything that the USCIRF has said has been said by people in India as well; among them are not only political opponents of the BJP, but also members of the intelligentsia, including journalists and citizens. Many of the latter are liberals who do not necessarily have a partisan agenda to peddle.

There is genuine and widespread concern that under the present dispensation a ‘pervasive culture of impunity’, in the words of the report, has been created, if not actively promoted, which has emboldened some members of the BJP and its fraternal organisations to attack, intimidate and harass minority groups, especially Muslims. A case in point is the repeated attacks on people transporting cattle for any purpose based on the assumption that such transportation is necessarily for slaughter.

While we can safely ignore the US report, we cannot ignore the fact that ever since the BJP came to power, majoritarian assertion has become increasingly virulent in most parts of north India. We cannot ignore the fact that the central government and a number of state governments are complicit in the orchestrated attacks on minorities and the rights and freedoms guaranteed to citizens by the constitution.

Factually, the US report is far closer to the truth than the MEA.

(The writer is a Kolkata-based freelance journalist and researcher.)