Saffron Terror

Praful Bidwai, Mid Day

The barbaric killing of Catholic priest Father Arul Doss in western Orissa is a black mark on Indian society and its claim to be tolerant, even civilized. That it happened a week after the murder of Sheikh Rehman, and within eight months of the burning of Rev. Graham Staines point to growing communal terror in Orissa. It may only be coincidence that Doss was killed on the eve of Janmashthami, Rehman on Raksha Bandhan day, and Stianes during Saraswati Puja. What is definitely not coincidental is the Hindutva inspiration behind the murders.

It is wrong to lay the blame mainly on the Orissa Government. It must of course, be condemned for the inefficiency, lack of coordination between the Mayurbhanj and Keonjhar police, and failure to apprehend suspect Dara Singh. But this must not be confused with the causative agency behind the killings – the Sangh Privar with its rabid anti-minority ideology and organization. The Orissa unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP claimed that Doss was killed because he was "an outsider, he had habits which local tribals didn’t like." Its official statement did not regret the ghastly killing, but rationalized it as the Adivasis’ resentment over "interference in their cultural life".

The BJP accuses Doss of having built a popular base among Adivasis. Yet it claims the same Adivasis killed him. Worse, it justifies the murder because Doss was "an outsider." This speaks of fascist xenophobia. Orissa DGP DK Mahapatra did himself no credit by saying Doss was killed because he practiced religious conversion. As DGP, Mahapatra’s job is not to make academic analyses of the causes of crime, so much as to control it. It’s a pity the Election Commission stayed his transfer. This will not embolden Orissa’s terrorized public. It bears recalling that only one of the 300 who watched Rehman’s daylight killing agreed to stand witness.

Behind the communal prejudice in Orissa was the misplaced view that religious conversion – church’s main preoccupation – is semi-legal or illegal. In reality the church is involved in running schools, colleges, hospitals and community centers. Religious instruction is only a minor component of its agenda. The right of religious conversion derives from the freedom to "practice and propagate" one’s faith, a fundamental right, itself part of the unalterable "basic structure" of the constitution. Those who rail against "forcible conversions" to "alien" faiths are either confusing today’s (marginal) phenomenon with early colonial practices in Goa or Mangalore, or elitistically arrogating to themselves the right to decide what’s best for the "unwashed" masses who don’t know they are being "duped".

Never mind who kept them "unwashed" and "ignorant" for centuries! Or that they don’t complain of coercive conversion! It is hard to argue that the fundamental right to proselytize be restricted. Nor are India’s religious minorities "outsiders". Christianity in India is centuries older than Christianity in Europe. Kerala’s Christians embraced their faith 800 years before Brahminical Hinduism was born. Indian Islam evolved through rich interaction with many faiths and cultures and is as integral to Indian society as Hinduism. As for the way "indigenous" faiths like Buddhism or Jainism were banished and persecuted by casteist Hindus the less said the better.

A truly attractive feature of most South Asian societies is that they have no permanent "outsiders". They have generally been open, porous and compellingly plural, and respect a multiplicity of faiths. There is a healthy kernel from the past which we can build on. Our modernist-secular constitutions mandate just this. Forces like the Sangh Parivar oppose this with false notions of homogeneity, "unity", uniformity, suppression of difference – in the name of national glory. Such notions trample upon minority rights by invoking the majority. This is not democracy. It is majoritarianism. Democracy is about the rule of the majority, but this is not a permanent majority, based upon religion or ethnicity but a changing entity, pertinent to issues. Democracy is about universal rights and freedoms. In their absence, majority rule can become authoritarian.

Minorities are vital to democracies. As Gandhiji often said, the real test of a civilized society is not how it treats its majority, but how it treats its minorities. Harassment and intimidation of minorities speaks of a democracy’s poverty. To put this in the language of modern ethics, the litmus test of fairness is to ask not how a democracy’s average or privileged members function, but how well-treated its underprivileged and weak feel. On this principle, the security of the minorities become absolutely crucial. It cannot be compromised. That is precisely what the Sangh Parivar has done.

The past 17 months were marked by unprecedented communal insecurity, attacks on artists (M F Husain, Ghulam Ali and Dilip Kumar), frenzied activity to complete a prefabricated Ram temple, and attempts to communalise defense and national identity. The BJP promised there would be no communal riots; we had them in Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu. The BJP said minorities have nothing to fear from "tolerant" Hindutva. After the Wadhwa commission cover-up, it justifies their butchery. L K Advani, the self-proclaimed guardian of the nation, promised a white paper on the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and its "subversive" local collaborators. It is nowhere to be seen.

Today’s communalised situation is a direct consequence or Hindutva prejudice, hatred and resort to deceit and violence. The election campaign, and the low poll turnout, shows the BJP has failed to drum up a wave or enthuse supporters. It has little to offer. So it is cynically sowing prejudice and hatred.