Discussion on Zakia Jafri Protest Petition, Report

On 7^th of May 2013 SAHMAT and Communalism Combat together organised  a discussion on the protest petiton filed by Zakia Jafri. She has been assisted in her legal endeavours by the Mumbai-based by Citizens for Justice and Peace .The interaction with senior representatives of the political class and journalists was held at India International Centre, New Delhi. People from varied walks of life participated in the discussion and put forward different viewpoints on the issue of communalism in general and  in particular what happened in 2002 in the state of Gujarat and the role of the state administration in conspiring to allow violence to spread. The audience comprised of lawyers, journalists,teachers among others. A cross section of political parties also got represented with the presence of D.P. Tripathi, Brinda Karat, Mani Shankar Aiyer, A.B. Bardhan, Sitaram Yechury; all of whom participated in the discussion and made it more lively and enriching. Zakia Jafri, her son Tanvir Jafri and former DGP Gujarat, RB Sreekumar particpated in the interaction.

Ram Rehman initiated the proceedings by giving a short introduction that was one in a series of public hearings, protests and discussions organised by SAHMAT along with Communalism Combat and CJP since 2002. Teesta Setalvad initiated the discussion. She gave a brief outline of the evidences that were available but ignored by the Special Investigation Team (SIT).  She then argued that the Gujarat pogrom was distinct from other acts of communal violence by the sheer depth of orchestration and connivance by sections of the government and administration. Setalvad in her arguments laid bare the fact that the Gujarat pogrom was preceded by several warnings given to the home ministryadministration by the State Intelligence Bureau (SIB) that were laid bare by the affidavits of former ADGP Intelligence, RB Sreekumar. These signals were deliberately ignored by the government. She underlined the fact that SIT during the course of its investigations turned a complete blind eye to documentary evidences that pointed to the deliberate neutralisation of the neutralisation including evidence from the mobile records, PCR (police control room messages) and SIB messaged.   She put forth the point that various methods were used to mobilize the crowds along communal lines especially the use of provocative hate speech and hate writing including by the chief minister, senior functionaries and frontmen of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). In her short introduction she gave details of the pogrom and the incidents which preceded the actual period of killings. She appealed for debates or interactive sessions on these issue to enable the political class conscious of this menace. The fact that Zakia Jafri has fought bravely the Gujarat administration and has withstood all kinds of threats was also highlighted by her. Before concluding Setalvad also cautioned that the scope of discussion should be broadened to communal mobilisation and its portents across the country and should not remained focus not only on what happened in Gujarat in 2002.

D.P. Tripathi in his short speech elaborated upon the wider communalisation of the polity and administration in Gujarat, within which the communal mobilisation and 2002 carnage needed to be located. He congratulated Zakia Jafri on her bravery and courage. In this context he shared discussions he had had, in 1985 with former Gujarat chief minister, Madhav Rao Solanki who had predicted that the aggressive anti-reservation agitation would eventually take a sharp anti-minority, communal term. Solanki, an extremely progressive politician had predicted aggressive hindu mobilisation. He also reminisced about his meeting with Ahsan Jafri . This was way back in 1985. He concluded by arguing forcefully that it is the weakness of secular forces which has allowed phenomena like Bal Thackeray and Narendra Modi to rise and grow, and the communal mobilization of the sort witnessed in recent times in Gujarat and other parts of the country to take place.

Brinda Karat applauded the courage of conviction of Zakia Jafri and her family for waging this legal battle which is both significant and a rallying point for secular forces in the country. The absence of professionalism in the investigation by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the conspiracy and widespread communal violence in Gujarat, was specially also highlighted by Karat. She underlined the point that SIT has functioned in a non-transparent and unaccountable manner deliberately concealing evidence that exposed the governance by Modi and his government. It has therefore been a struggle to bring these documents into the public domain. Now that these are available and have been analysed threadbare in the Zakia Jafri protest petition, the secular forces need to disseminate this information to explode the bubble of good governance that is being so brazenly claimed by the government of Gujarat. With more than ample evidence of Narendra Modi’s complicity in what happened in his state in 2002, he had no right to continue as chief minister nor harbour intentions of becoming prime minister, stressed Karat. Modi, she stressed, has violated all the minimum norms of governance but despite this he and his party continue to project him, unashamedly. Karat also appreciated the role played by Teesta Setalvad at great personal risk and deplored the attacks made on her. In her speech Karat also reminded all those present that it had been the Left parties who had taken a direct political stand on the issue, demanding his resignation. She also emphasised that the documents that are now part of the protest petition, have brought out some important facts about what actually happened in those days of February and March in 2002 in the state of Gujarat and these need to be disseminated widely. Karat also pointed out the urgent need to link the battle against communalism with movements for social justice. She also mentioned that secularism combined with a strong political class, executive and judicial system is an important pre-requisite for  fighting the menace of communalism.  She said that it is illogical to believe that the issue communal mobilization can be isolated from that of electoral reform. The two issues are intricately related to each other.

Kamaal Farooqui in his very brief speech raised issues related to finding ways to expose the SIT and also take the initiative given by this interaction to involve larger sections of the people. He said that it is surprising that the expose by Headlines Today did an expose of the SIT investigation the day the protest petition was filed (April 15, 2013) but this story was largely ignored by the mdeia in general. He also wondered whether there is a possibility of filing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against SIT chairperson RK Raghavan for the unprofessional and biased role he has played in the investigation by concealing evidence and manipulating it. Intervening in the debate Teesta Setalvad expressed her anguish at the media’s lacklustre response to the serious issues of misgovernance and communal mobilisation, stating that it appeared to have been party to promoting Modi as the future PM of the country, consciously ignoring exposures to his role in Gujarat carnage. This deadlock created by sections of the mainstream media needs to be overcome. She said that it is surprising how there had been relative silence on the pathbreaking Naroda Patia verdict (29.8.2012) and its implications for the BJP nationally. A ruling party MLA and former minister Maya Kodnani had been convicted to life imprisonment for distributing weapons and inciting mobs as well as being party to a conspiracy. Yet the media remained soft on grilling the party for this indictment despite the fact that the Judge had held that a cold blooded conspiracy had taken 96 lives. The media has been complicit in allowing the  political consequences of that judgement to become defused.

R.B. Shreekumar  in his turn profusely thanked Setalvad and CJP for their undying support extended to him in his fight against the Gujarat administration at a time when everyone had deserted him. Going into the details of the role Gujarat police played during the period of carnage in 2002 he bought out some little known facts. He stressed that there is truckload of evidence of involvement of against Modi  apart from organizations such as RSS, Bajrang Dal and VHP. Refering to the role of Babu Bajrangi and Maya Kodnani he stated that it is surprising that it is only in one case that the planner(s) was arrested while in all others it were the foot soldiers who have been arrested.This, according to him  does not send a correct signal. As a sidenote he mentioned that subversion is a masterpiece of Narendra Modi. He argued that the subversion was done by the people who were in judicial power, rather than by just the police administration. He argued that unlike the 1984 pogrom when not a single Sikh policeman testified in the case of Gujarat 2002 atleast three to four police officals have testified against the state government. All those policemen who acted as servants of the Indian Constitution have been harassed and victimised by the Gujarat government.

Congress Member of Parliament and former union minister, Mani Shankar Aiyer began by saying that very little in our politics is issue based. He talked about his visit to Porbandar before the defeat of Congress in Gujarat when his own partymen urged not to mention Modi’s name in the campaign. Listening to this one was reminded of a popular fantasy tale in which the main villian character whos name is Voldemort is often called as He Who Must Not Be Named.  The Congress by not taking a clear and principled position on the issue of secularism was risking both taking the right stand and defeat. He advocated that on such a critical issue like secularism, it was adviseable to  go down fighting rather than compromise. Even in Parliament he said that while the vast silent majority across party lines stood for secularism, it is the voluble minority that did not. Yet he felt that the minority supporting the divisive forces of communalism is not strong enough to challenge a country as diverse as India. In conclusion he said that the best gift that BJP could give to this nation is to adopt Modi as its prime ministerial candidate as that would allow all the secular forces to come together and fight the phenomenon unitedly. However, he also expressed his fear that such a move could also backlash. 

Zakia Jafri spoke with powerful clarity about the horrors she and her family had to go through during the harrowing days from February 28, 2002 onwards. Commenting on recent remarks by Modi that he stood for both Hindus and Muslims, she said in response, “who were the mobs that attacked us that day, at Gulberg?” That is my only answer to him. She and other families who lived at Gulberg had also been affected in the 1969 communal violence and had to spend 4-6 months in relief camps. She described in detail the incident which eventually led to Ahsan Jafri’s death. In her speech she brought to light the gruesome details of his killing. Listening to her a cold shudder went up one’s spine.  She said that her husband was confident that nothing would happen to him as he had cordial relatins with everyone living in that area. (Ahsan Jafri was a renowned trade unionist and lawyer). But subsequent pre-planned developments showed how wrong he was proven. Before ending Mrs. Jafri also spoke about the manner in which she left her home and went to safety that evening with fellow residents. She said that the Commisioner of Police never came to meet them when she reached his office at night that day after escaping from the horrors.  Intervening at this point Teesta Setalvad said that killing of Ahsan Jaferi was not merely a vendetta against Muslims in general which was orchestrated in 2002 in several districts of Gujarat but his killing had also to do with Modi’s personal vendetta against Ahsan Jafri as he had campaigned against him in Rajkot days before (Fenruary 21-22 2002) when Modi had won the bye-election with a narrow margin of 14,000-odd votes, The minority community, especially women had responded to Ahsan Jafri’s campaign. This point has been raised in the protest petition filed by Zakia Jafri.  

Tanvir Jaferi talked about his father. He reminced about his childhood at his home and his relations with his father. He also thanked everyone present for being with them in their struggle for justice.

Sitaram Yechury congratulated Zakia Jafri and Teesta Setalvad for forcing the court to reopen and sustain this case. He pointed out that that this was merely a personal fight of the Jafris but this a crucial battle struggle at various levels; one being the conservation of the country’s secular fabric when the state of Gujarat has failed to provide protection. The failure of deliverance of justice whether it is in Gujarat or anywhere else in the country would spell doom for the republic’s secular ethos. He himself recalled what happened 28^th of Feb 2002 in Delhi, parliament was on. Little news of what had been happening in Gujarat had percolated through as it was a budget day. Media attention was  on budget and little on Gujarat. He recounted his experience of his visit to Gujarat on March 1 as part of a four member delegation which comprised of Amar Singh, Shabana Azmi, Raj Babbar (Sitaram Yechury was not a Member of Parliament at that point of time). Yechury narrated his experience of his interaction with Modi when he spoke to him on the phone during his visit. Yechury who had known Modi since his sojourn in Delhi asked him what he and his administration were doing. “Sabak sikha raje hain (teaching them a lesson),”  was the chilling reply. He brought out the details of the atmosphere which was prevailing when he visited the state during those days in 2002. He also narrated his experience when he visited the Police Commisioner’s office on 1^st of March. The situation he saw there was a revelation for him as he had not seen such a situation anywhere in peace time. He said that the gravity of the violence in Gujarat is still not known to the people. But it is due to people like Setalvad and Mrs. Jafri  that truth came through in bits and pieces and is still coming in the public domain. History taught us lessons through the coincidences of dates, he said reminding us that it was on 27^th February (1933) that the Reichstag (German Parliament) was set on fire and it was on the same date that Godhra (2002) had happened. January 30 (1948) the day Gandhi was killed and January 30 the same date that Hitler assumed power. The delivery of justice is crucial said Yechury.  There is  deeper struggle between the three visions of India viz. secular, secularism with social justice and theocratic state;  and the result of this battle would show us how our country will be like. He in the end stressed that one cannot even think of isolating secularism from social justice and equality and that both go hand in hand.

Report of 7 May 2013 by Amol Saghar

Discussion on Zakia Jafri Protest Petition on 7th May 2013 at IIC

Communalism Combat 

SAHMAT
Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust
29, Feroze Shah Road,New Delhi-110001
Telephone- 23381276/ 23070787
e-mail-sahmat8@yahoo.com
1.5.2013

Dear  Friends,

For over two decades now, we at SAHMAT and Communalism Combat have stood for the strengthening of India’s secular, democratic values by taking on frontally the divisive forces of communalism and fundamentalism.

As part of this ongoing battle, we believe it is imperative to host a detailed discussion/interaction between senior representatives of the political class, mass organisations and editors and journalists over the Issues Arising out of the Zakia Protest Petition, a landmark effort in the battle against impunity and for pinning responsibility for communal misgovernance.

We therefore invite you to join us at the Literature Hall. IIC Annexe, India International Centre between 2 pm to 5 pm on Tuesday, May 7, 2013 to participate in such a discussion.

The filing of the Zakia Jafri Protest Petition before the Magistrate on 15 April 2013 is a significant landmark in the sustained battle for the Rule of Law, Constitutional Governance and against communal forces and their vicious mobilisation within organs of the state and through unholy alliances with non-state actors. The petition, filed after a sustained battle to get a fair and transparent investigation against a chief minister, cabinet colleagues, senior administrators, policemen and front men and women of the RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal will now make a strong case for charge sheeting of 59 accused.

Apart from the individual accused involved in this case, against whom a strong case for criminal culpability and administrative connivance and failure has been made out, the wider issues raised are critical to understand. Communal mobilisation precedes violence. It’s transformation into brute attacks against targeted sections of the population remain fundamental threats to the lasting security of all Indians, communal harmony and the secularisation of the Indian polity.

We believe therefore the wider issues raised through the Zakia Jafri Protest Petition are debated widely to ensure a greater understanding of such mobilisation and to build a resistance to the same in future. Only then can we collectively demand a transparent and accountable system of governance from our representatives and the parties that they represent.

" In all probability Mrs Zakia Jafri and son Tanvir Jafri will also be present for the discussions. "

We look forward to such a sustained discussion and your participation.

Yours Sincerely

Ram Rahman, Teesta Setalvad

For Communalism Combat & SAHMAT

Issues Raised

·         Aggressive Mobilisation of Communal Forces and Response of State Agencies & Government

·         Monitoring and Check on Hate Speech, Hate Writing, Pamphleteering

·         State and Government Response to a Tragedy like Godhra on 27 February 2002

·         Contemporaneous Records that Reveal Government Callousness or Indifference

·         Transparency in Summoning assistance from the Military /Paramilitary forces

·         Comparative Analysis of Districts & Commission records worst affected (15) and those that held
      their own (SPs/DMs refused to bow down to political masters)

·         Role of Whistleblowers in Pinning down Accountability

·         Role of Survivors/Activists/ Legal and Civil Rights Groups

·         Role of the Political Class

·         Role of Media

Discussion on Zakia Jafri's protest Petition,2 pm to 5 pm on Tuesday, May 7, 2013, Literature Hall. IIC Annexe, India International Centre

May Day, (Play by Bigul), 30-04-2013, at the SAHMAT Office

24th National Street Theatre Day

Book Release on 10th April 2013

The Hindu Coverage

Statement on Actions taken against Cultural and Sports Representatives and others from Pakistan

As a cultural organisation, devoted to the cause of solidarity of all peoples, SAHMAT has been dismayed by the series of official and semi-official measures that have followed the unfortunate incidents on the Line of Actual Control in Jammu and Kashmir, in which soldiers on both sides have lost their lives. On such occasions it is most important to keep the avenues of communication open, even if for the purpose of conveying one’s own version of events to such people on the other side whom one can reach. To close down such avenues deliberately is surely sense-less and self-defeating. By shutting down visas that were to be made available to aged Pakistan entrants, sending back Pakistan cricketers and sportswomen, refusing to stage Manto’s plays by visiting Pakistan theatre persons, and banning Pakistan’s persons of literature from participating in functions in India, are measures that manifestly belittle the image of our Republic, and do nothing to serve the cause of peace and improve relations between our two peoples. SAHMAT notes that amidst the jingoistic din of the media, some leading newspapers in their editorials have shown maturity by criticising these measures and the official pronouncements which inspired these actions. India and Pakistan have a rich cultural legacy to share, of which a common appreciation of Manto and the devotion to the sport of cricket are just two illustrations. Only those who scorn this legacy, and therefore the richness of their own culture, can commit the acts of intolerance that have taken place. SAHMAT hopes that good sense will prevail and our doors will be soon reopened to ordinary people as well as representatives of culture and sport from Pakistan. It goes without saying that we also hope similar gestures will be made by the Government of Pakistan. Date:24-01-2013 Ashok Kumari For SAHMAT

24th Safdar Hashmi Memorial, 1st Jan. 2013, 2 pm

Mumbai Incident

(Those who wish to add their name, please send them immediately)
November 20, 2012

Press Statement

Communalism Combat and SAHMAT condemn the illegal and arbitrary arrests of two young women in Palghar, Maharashtra for their Facebook message disapproving the coercive shutdown of the city of Mumbai and other parts of Maharashtra following the death of the Shiv Sena Chief Shri Bal Thackeray. The Thane rural police have behaved arbitrarily and against the law for which the policemen involved must be prosecuted. Shiv Sena goons also vandalized a clinic being run by an uncle of one of the girls. It is condemnable that under the Congress-NCP Government it was not the vandals who destroyed medical equipment and threatened the patients at Palghar who were promptly acted against but two young girls who have every right to express their opinion. Today’s media reports state that nine persons have been arrested for the attack on the Medical Clinic but no details have been made available, including the names of the criminals.

The illegal arrest of two young girls in Palghar is one more instance of the growing politics of intimidation threat and violence that are not firmly dealt with by the authorities. Even today the reaction of the Maharashtra police does not inspire confidence and is the most recent in a long list of actions undertaken by the police under the IT Act which are questionable. It is clear from media reports that there is nothing remotely offensive or anything pertaining to religious sentiments in the message posted by one of the women. This is a clear case of misuse of the IT Act, once again underlining the need for a thorough review of some of its provisions that are open to gross misuse. We demand the immediate withdrawal of the false cases against the young women, arrest of those responsible for attacking the clinic and action against the police officials responsible for the arrests.

We would also like to record that on Wednesday, November 14 2012, an OB Van of Television Today was vandalised when it was shooting visuals of Shiv Sainiks removing decorative Diwali lanterns outside Bal Thackeray’s residence. The media accorded minimal coverage to this incident of vandalism and the FIR registered by the media organisation against miscreants who are “unknown persons.” This combined strategy of both the organisers of mobs and the police in deliberately failing to identify offenders is the time-tested technique of ensuring that no criminal prosecutions are launched nor the guilty punished. This was an attack on press freedom.

Teesta Setalvad, Ram Rahman, Javed Anand, Cyrus Guzder, MK Raina, Rajendra Prasad, Madhu Prasad, CP Chandrasekhar, Madangopal Singh, Vivan Sundaram, Dr. P.K. Shukla, Sohail Hashmi.

email:- sahmat8@yahoo.com

Statement on date 05-11-2012

Date: 05-11-2012
Statement
This is with reference to the unseemly controversy created during the Tata Literature Live festival in Mumbai. We stand by Girish Karnad, actor and playwright, and extend our solidarity. In condemning the Lifetime Achievement Award to V. S Naipaul by the organisers of the Festival, Karnad has articulated in no unequivocal terms his condemnation of a writer who has consistently displayed a rabid antipathy towards the Indian Muslims. The “wound” in the title is the one inflicted on India by Babar’s invasion. Since the publication of his non-fiction book on India, A Wounded Civilisation, Naipaul has , as Karnad rightly pointed out ‘never missed a chance to accuse them (the Indian Muslims) of having savaged India for five centuries, brought, among other dreadful things, poverty into it, and destroyed glorious Indian culture.’ In questioning the conferment of the Lifetime Achievement Award, Karnad is not questioning Naipauls’ positions which are fairly well-known to most of us in India; he is in fact questioning the award. We take this opportunity to lend our voice to the questions raised by Karnad: ‘Do they (the festival organiser) mean to valorize Naipaul’s stand that Indian Muslims are raiders and marauders? Are they supporting his continued argument that Muslim buildings in India are monuments to rape and loot? Or are they by their silence suggesting that these views do not matter?’

Issed by
SAHMAT
Progressive Writers Association
Janwadi Lekhak Sangh

Parcham, Act One & SAHMAT Present Sangharsh ke Geet on Oct. 11, 2012, 6 p.m.,

Manto Seminar, 28th & 29th September 2012, at Nehru Memorial Museum & Library, Delhi, Coverage

Imaging a Legend (Coverage)

The Hindu
India Education Review
Deccan Herald
Hindustan Times
Millennium Post
Business Standard
The Indian Express
Jagran Post

SAHMAT presents Two Short Films (10th & 12th July 2012) at Muktdhara Bhavan, Goal Market

SAHMAT exhibition opening at Triveni on 31st May, 5.30 pm, Tagore Tells and the Patua Paints.

In order to commemorate 150th birth anniversary of Rabindra Nath Tagore SAHMAT undertook the project Tagore Tells and the Patua Paints. Rabindranath Tagore’s vanguard contribution to children’s education in India has been universally acknowledged. Sahaj Path, a primer for basic acquisition of language skills, is a classic work. Paying tribute to this creativity, the project sought to produce new versions of three children’s texts by Tagore, in book-form in Hindi, English and Bengali, illustrated by one of the most creative communities of traditional visual artists of rural Bengal, the patuas. The texts chosen were The Parrot’s Tale (Tota-kahini ), a tale in prose, Birpurush ( The Hero), a small boy’s fantasy in verse about an adventure and Diner Alo Nibhe Elo ( Daylight is fading), a poem describing a rainy sunset. The visuals have been composed by eleven patuas of the younger generation. The patuas were from the districts of East Medinipur and West Medinipur. A work-shop was held in Kolkotta during May 11 to 18, 2012. Altogether there were 6 men and 5 women, of whom Mairun, the eldest, was about 60 years of age, while the youngest, Suratan and Saikat were around 16 or 17. Both of them are high school students and their syllabus affords them some acquaintance with Tagore’s poems. To the others, the texts were completely new. Thirty two works that were created during the work-shop are being exhibited at Triveni Kala Sangam from 31 May to 6 June. The exhibition will open on 31 May at 5. 30 pm. Three books Tota Kahini, Beer Purish, Brishti Pare Tapar Tupur will be released on the occasion. The project was conceived and co-ordinated by Malini Bhattacharya. Shri Sitaram Yechury, M.P., Chairman Standing Committee of Parliament on Tourism, Transport and Culture will be the Chief Guest.

STATEMENT ON CARTOON CONTROVERSY

We the undersigned are concerned that Shri Kapil Sibal, Minister for Human Resource Development, made an ex cathedra announcement, that the cartoon in the Class XI text book, found offensive by several members of Parliament, would be removed, and that he was looking into other potentially offensive cartoons with a view to their possible removal.Whatever be the merits of the case against the cartoon, the matter should not be treated as one of mere executive discretion. This establishes the kind of precedent that should be avoided. Such issues are bound to come up from time to time, therefore appropriate procedures have to be followed, such as the setting up of a Committee of academics to look into each case, so that summary judgments of the ministers concerned, under political pressures of various kinds, do not determine the contents of our academic syllabi. We strongly condemn the vandalism perpetrated by a group of people in the office of Professor Suhas Palshikar, one of the Advisors for the textbook. Such vandalism is fundamentally antithetical to the democratic values cherished by Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar for which he is justly revered by all Indians.

Romila Thapar, Prabhat Patnaik, Zoya Hasan, Amitabh Kundu, Mushirul Hasan, C.P. Chandrasekar, Pralay Kanungo, Gopal Guru, Jayati Ghosh, Ram Rahman, N.K.Sharma, Sudhanva Deshpande, Rajendra Prasad, P.K.Shukla, M.K.Raina.

24th NATIONAL STREET THEATRE DAY

Press Release

On January 1, 1989 Safdar Hashmi was fatally attacked while he and his theatre group, Jana Natya Manch, were performing in Sahibabad, 20 kms from Delhi. The spontaneous nationwide protest led to the formation of a platform of artists, cultural activists and scholars, SAHMAT, committed to upholding the values of freedom of expression in creative practice. For the last 24 years, Safdar's birthday, April 12, has been observed as National Street Theatre Day by street theatre groups all across the country, with hundreds of performances, readings, workshops, conventions, seminars, and protest demonstrations. SAHMAT publishes a poster every year, copies of which are sent all over the country, besides organising street theatre performances, workshops and festivals, to mark the occasion.

SAHMAT, through its diverse activities, has been carrying forward the legacy of the progressive movement in the field of culture, which had manifested in the period of the struggle for independence in India in the formation of the Progressive Writers Association (PWA, 1936) and the Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA, 1943). To mark National Street Theatre Day 2012, SAHMAT has brought out a book titled Balraj and Bhisham Sahni: Brothers in Political Theatre, which discusses the formation and functioning of IPTA through the lives and contributions of the two brothers Balraj Sahni and Bhisham Sahni. The book contains some rare photographs of persons associated with IPTA and of IPTA in performance, besides essays by Kalpana Sahni (daughter of Bhisham Sahni and niece of Balraj Sahni) and P.C. Joshi, first general secretary of the Communist Party of India ( 1935-1947). The book will be released on April 12 by the historian Romila Thapar. Popular IPTA songs will be sung on the occasion by, among others, Harshi Anand, who has had the privilege of singing with founder-members of IPTA's singing squad like Prem Dhawan in the 1940s. The evening's programme will be held at the Sahmat office, 29 Ferozeshah Road, 6 pm onwards.

Redefining the Secular in Indian Society

Redefining the Secular in Indian Society

Sukumar Muralidharan

IT is a word that has been tossed around in political contests and minutely dissected in scholarly circles. But “secularism” still remains an elusive concept. And in practice, “secular” politics is besieged at a number of levels, unable at any time to rise above particular, sectional interests.
An event on December 7, organised by the Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust (SAHMAT) and Social Scientist, was the occasion for a scholarly inquiry into the deeper meanings and definitions of the “secular” in Indian society. There are numerous --- and mostly irreconcilable --- definitions already in circulation. December 7 became, for this reason, an exercise in redefinition and rediscovery, in retrieving a principle from depths of conceptual confusion.
The event had to be organised on December 7 as it was the Muharram on December 6, the anniversary of Babri Masjid demolition.

MEMORABLE
OCCASION
As it happened, the event took place only a few days after the eightieth birthday of Romila Thapar, one of India’s greatest historians. Though this aspect was downplayed in deference to the individual’s unease with the public observance of a personal milestone, all speakers opened their remarks with eloquent tributes to an institution builder, teacher and mentor for generations of scholars. Beyond the world of academia, Romila Thapar has illumined trails of history that have long remained obscure for the wider public, considerably enhancing the quality of public discourse.
The historian K N Panikkar recounted some part of the public debt owed this remarkable career as an academic and public intellectual. Romila Thapar combined “scholarly pursuit with social commitment” in a manner that lent “direction to many a public issue.” While exploring new frontiers in historical scholarship, she also had time to frontally combat the “political abuse of history” – which indeed was a term of her coinage from the dark days of the Ayodhya movement, when the forces of Hindutva had managed to recruit large numbers to the cause of effacing a medieval mosque. Aside from giving a rigorous scholarly orientation to the effort of defeating the spurious historiography of Hindutva, Panikkar remarked, Romila Thapar was at the forefront of the campaign for sanity and tolerance in public life.
In remarks that opened the evening’s discussions, Romila Thapar spoke about the shifty and elusive character of “secularism” as a political principle. It is not difficult to identify events and actions that are antithetical to secularism. But as an affirmative principle, “secularism” is very difficult to pin down.
In this conceptual vacuum, parties of an overtly communal stripe have portrayed secularism as a denial of religion and the primordial identities that make the Indian nation what it is. Others have turned its supposed principle of religious tolerance into the sanction for the perpetuation of a clerical hegemony. Still others have recoiled from the futility of the entire project of building a secular order in a society of intense religiosity, ascribing the pathologies of modern sectarian politics entirely to the denial of identities held basic to social existence.
Romila Thapar warned against all these possible outcomes of a muddled thinking. The definition popular in India, she said, “either equates secularism with atheism….. or else, more commonly, (refers) to the coexistence of all religions.” Neither has great validity, since “personal belief is not central to the secular” so much as the “control of society by religious institutions.” And religious coexistence or tolerance is a meaning that has evolved specifically in the Indian historical context, as an antidote to the communal politics of both the Hindu and Muslim stripe. Yet it is a definition that has not accounted for either the “fact of religions being of unequal status,” or for the “underlying hierarchy in concepts such as the majority and the minority communities.”

FOCUS SHIFTING
TO SECULARISATION
Coexistence or religious tolerance cannot in this sense be a primary criterion. The secular ideal originates in the western milieu where the issue of coexistence was of relatively little consequence, since subjects of the sovereign were normally enjoined to follow the faith he patronised. What was germane rather was the subordination of the religious authority to the worldly power. In the Romila Thapar’s words: “The secular implies the primacy of civil laws….. Identities of religion, race, caste, language and so on would be subordinated to the identity of citizenship, based on equal rights, duties and obligations of all citizens on the state.”
The focus then shifts from secularism as a principle supposedly embedded in the institutions of governance, towards secularisation as a process accompanying the consolidation of the nation-state. Religion loses its primary claim to citizen allegiance and is confined to a private sphere, while the civic compact takes over the public domain. People live together in “civil society” not because they resemble each other in terms of religion or any other marker of identity, but because they share a common set of values, embodied in a system of civil law.
But is this separation of the private and public spheres always feasible? And can religion be all that easily confined to the private sphere or demoted as a primary criterion of identity fixation? Religion is of course a medium for the socialisation of the individual and a private religion would be in some senses, a contradiction in terms. A more credible approach would be to view secularisation in terms of the balance of power between social institutions, as a process by which the civic compact as embodied in a secular constitution supersedes the decrees of religious authority.
Historically, secularisation has also corresponded to the diminution of the political power of the ecclesiastical orders, typified for instance by the loss of their tithes and titles to land. That understanding though, is of limited relevance in India, where an ecclesiastical order on the lines of the Catholic Church never really existed.
Instances when sovereigns have specifically enjoined tolerance for various faiths as a political commitment are not lacking from Indian history. So too are there numerous instances of the sovereign power patronising a variety of religious institutions and orders. But these cannot be used to buttress the argument for secularism, since their focus was “the furtherance of religion as a social force.”
A more credible source for secular doctrines in Romila Thapar’s assessment could be found in the various nastika sects which existed from the earliest times in India and despite all their internal disagreements, were almost all “opposed to divine sanction as necessary for civil laws.”
The nastika view was that “the universe is self-created” and life itself constituted by a combination of elements. Human consciousness and knowledge are finite and derived from perception, rather than revelation. In Romila Thapar’s words again, the nastika sects held that “laws, being man-made, can be changed.” These were arguments that the Buddhists and Jainas found extremely congenial to their mission of propagating “social ethics as the mainspring of human behaviour, where the laws and values of society should ensure the equality and dignity of its members.”

INDIAN TRADITION
& MODERN DEBATE
Moving rapidly forward to contemporary times, these aspects of Indian tradition are of obvious relevance to the modern debate on secularism. From being a rather pale assurance of religious tolerance, secularism becomes a more robust principle of ensuring that constitutional guarantees of liberty and equality are fulfilled. Key assurances of the Indian constitution, such as equality before the law and fair opportunity, have obviously been breached repeatedly and without any gesture of redress from the state. Words and deeds are being increasingly subject to control and manipulation in accordance with “invented laws of what are described as religious and cultural tradition.” The rich multiplicities of history are being effaced in “monolithic structures” that answer the seeming need for a nation-state to define itself by primordial identities rather than the civic compact.
For Romila Thapar, these circumstances made the task of “redefining the secular in Indian society” an absolute imperative. Opportunities were available, since as a nation, India still has “the freedom to choose the values that should govern our society.” The retrieval of the secular could begin by shifting the focus “from a passive coexistence of religions to the more dynamic coexistence of citizens with….. equal rights and obligations, guarded by the vigilance of a free and just society.”
Picking up on some of these themes, K N Panikkar drew attention to the need for understanding secularism in the context of “community formation” in modern times and the newly minted forms of religious identity that emerged within the colonial milieu. Small and diverse communities that existed on the basis of their economic and social functions, were under the influence of colonial modernity, incorporated into one or the other religious group. Religion had been a “perceived and experienced reality” in pre-colonial times, without generating a consciousness that transcended the local milieu. These identities became entrenched as civil society was incorporated into the colonial system. Moreover, in early nationalist propaganda, these newly minted identities were seen as congruent with “national” identities.
To view secularism as an outcome of religious harmony is to invert the perspective, since tolerance only emerges when secularism is in place. Secularism as a principle, however, began its journey in India burdened with the deadweight of religion, which in turn was perceived as a monolithic doctrine in which the multiple cultural diversities of the real world were effaced. Religious harmony fails to achieve the secular ideal because every religion has within it, various kinds of cultural and social hierarchies. Coexistence thus becomes a formula for the sustenance of difference and for the perpetuation of these inequalities within each religious order.
It was “logical” to have accorded a degree of priority to religious harmony, given the reality of Indian society, where multiple religious traditions had at various times sprouted and flourished. But the notion was not sufficient to achieve a truly inclusive social order. “For realising inclusiveness, cultural plurality is not sufficient,” said Panikkar, “what is essential is cultural equality.”
In its practice in India, secularism in both its state and society centred versions, was enclosed within the discourse of “religious consciousness.” It failed to reconcile between the “religious and material conditions of existence.” Redefining the secular requires that areas of human existence other than the religious, such as culture and economy, be incorporated into its praxis. It requires that “the values of democracy and social justice and cultural equality” be introduced as integral elements of the secular compact.

REDEFINING THE SECULAR:
A PROGRAMME OF URGENCY
Secularism accorded priority to the political values of liberty and equality, over the codes of duty and obedience ordained by religion. Concluding the discussion, Prabhat Patnaik argued that what is often taken to be the purely ethical impulse towards freedom has a basis in reason. Every individual has a rational cause to struggle for freedom as part of a human collective, since nobody can call himself free while there are many who are unfree.
This collective endeavour for freedom fosters the domain of the “secular.” It creates the community that strives for a transcendence of narrower values imposed by religion. But it is threatened by the forces of reaction which seek to impose an order based on religious values. More subtly, the bourgeois order which retains a formal commitment to secularism, may seek to engineer schisms in the collective struggle for freedom, reducing each individual to an atomised existence, impelling him in turn to seek an anchorage in an older, familiar network of religious community.
The denial of human freedom then is the logical course of a bourgeois political order which exalts an individual’s seeming gain at the expense of society, as the ultimate benchmark of achievement. With the untold riches foretold on that pathway now proving illusory and the world order built on the unfettered and unaccountable rampage of finance capital in palpable crisis, the forces of reaction seem poised to resume their push towards absolute political power. A redefinition of the secular in Indian society is clearly a political programme of surpassing urgency.
Rajen Gurukkal and P Sainath also expressed their opinions on this occasion.

23rd Safdar Hashmi Memorial, 1st Jan. 2012

SAHMAT CALENDAR 2012