BJP8217;s target practice

The two incidents show how increasingly difficult it is for the minority communities quot;to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes,quot; a freedom that the Constitution grants them. The local administration can frustrate such plans in umpteen ways. As if this is not enough, the Uttar Pradesh government has enacted a new law, which makes it mandatory to get permission from the district magistrate before any worship centre is set up. A similar law is said to have quietly existed for nearly four decades in Rajasthan. To be fair to the Ram Prakash Gupta ministry, it is a secular law in that it does not discriminate against any religion.

But it is not the wording of the Bill but the motive behind it that raises suspicion. Lalji Tandon, a senior BJP leader and Cabinet minister of UP, has argued that the purposeis to gather information about land use and stop random growth of shrines. He cannot be found fault with on this score. In Karnataka recently, Chief Minister S.M. Krishna had to make an appeal to the believers not to encroach upon a particular public park, the size of which has been shrinking as a result of wanton quot;religiousquot; encroachments. Tandon is candid in enumerating the reasons for bringing forward the Bill.

On both sides of the Indo-Nepal border, there has been a mushroom growth of mosques and madrasas and he gives the exact figures. On the Indian side, the number of mosques increased from 74 to 146 over a period of 20 years and the madrasas from 61 to 121. On the Nepal side too, there has been a similar increase. But then the increase has to be seen against the fact that the border stretches nearly 800 kms, which means that in 20 years, a new mosque has come up in every 10 km. Is that something so worrying that a new law has to be enacted? But conveniently, the government is silent on the figures oftemples that have come up during the same period in the same area.

Instead, figures of the percentage-wise increase in the population of Hindus and Muslims in the border districts are given. For instance, the Hindu population in Maharajganj increased by 22.76 per cent in 1981-1991 whereas the Muslim population increased by 39.41 per cent. No doubt, it is an alarming increase! Nonetheless, it is peanuts compared to the phenomenal increase in the population of Christians at Kamala Nagar in Bhopal, where I was one of the first to shift. Within two months of my stay there, the Christian population increased by 50 per cent, i.e., when my first child was born. It is no wonder that when the Sangh Parivar talks about population growth, the figures are always given in percentages.

The government8217;s assumption is that these mosques serve as sanctuaries for militants and as a base for ISI operations. quot;Anti-national activities, rackets in fake currency, smuggling of narcotics and white sugar, clandestine supply ofillegal arms8230; have all been reported from border areas.quot; But how are these going to stop if the district magistrates are given additional powers under the new law? First, it is too farfetched to assume that these shrines are hideouts for anti-national elements. If the government is convinced that these are indeed hideouts, does anything prevent the police and the paramilitary forces from ferreting them out?

So far, has it done anything in this regard? Instead, why not have some Muslim staff in the Intelligence Bureau and the Research and Analyses Wing so that they can fathom the Muslim mind and provide better intelligence input? In any case, the unofficial ban on recruitment of Muslims in these organisations has not served any purpose except raising questions about their secular character.

According to the minister8217;s own admission, the increase in the number of mosques on the Nepal side is intriguing because there has been no growth in the population of Muslims in that country as conversion is bannedthere. So what guarantee is there that new mosques will not come up along the border on the Nepal side as the UP law8217;s jurisdiction does not extend to that country? Incidentally, IC 814 had begun its ill-fated flight from that Hindu Kingdom. Or, what if they operate from the old mosques and madrasas?

The power to grant permission for new shrines vests with the DM and the only authority to hear appeals is the divisional commissioner. In other words, the government does not trust the judiciary. This reminds one about the infamous Bihar Press Bill, brought forward by the Jagannath Mishra government in the Eighties. One of its salient features was that only the executive magistrates could hear petitions regarding individual cases registered under the draconian law. It is worth recalling that the BJP was at that time in the forefront of the agitation against Mishra8217;s law.

The Bill is justified on the grounds of the ISI8217;s activity. On December 26 I and other passengers had a harrowing experience when two wheelsof the Kochi-bound Mangla Express came off the speeding train near Jhansi. We had a providential escape and we were treated to a handful of Glucose biscuits and steaming cups of tea by the Railways as a compensation for our agony.

Perchance the train had overturned, I am sure, the ISI would have been blamed. In the melee, who would have noticed the detached wheels?It is puerile to believe that the UP law will curb the activities of the ISI. But what will happen is that the minorities will have a genuine problem in establishing places of worship. The majority community won8217;t be affected because most of the temples come up in a laissez-faire manner and are seldom as per approved plans and layouts. In Delhi, there is a full-fledged temple in an office belonging to the electricity board. The UP Bill may come a cropper in tackling the ISI but it will be deadly for the law-abiding and the religiously-minded. More so when the Khuranas are not around to help them.