The left and right of RIGHTS

It was shocking to read how the Supreme Court of India is violating the basic fundamental right to practice one’s religion, in the papers that day.

In a recent judgment passed by the SC on 30 March 2009, it rejected the plea of a Muslim student who said that he be permitted to sport a beard in his convent school.

Justice Makandeya Katju quoted: “ We don’t want to have talibans in our country. Tomorrow a girl student may come and say that she wants to wear a burqa.”

It is rather unfortunate that the Supreme Court sees ‘the beard’ as a sign of ‘Islamic Extremism’ that will lead to the ‘talibanisation’ of the country. What it does not see is that by giving such judgements, what effect it is having on the country and its youth is worse than that.

Eevn in today’s era Muslims are time and again subject to suspicion. In order to prove their national identity they are expected to erase all possible signs that project their religious image. A Muslim is either referred to as an extremist Muslim if he has any possible signs that prove his religion, or he is termed as a liberal Muslim if he tries to break out in order to seek a regular ‘accepted’ identity.

It is highly unfortunate that the very basic pillar that secures rights for all citizens of the country and that ‘treats them as equals’ has passed a judgment that is so very non-secularist. One has a right to practice his/her own religion freely and sporting a beard is an indispensable part of Islam. Why is it that Muslims have to prove their nationality in a way that in itself is un-secularist?

In a recent case Politician Varun Gandhi made a hate speech against Muslims in Pilibhit and almost caused a riot like situation in his very obviously staged arrest. His mother was however quoted saying in an interview to a TV News Channel that whatever he said was ‘true’. What the Indian Media doesn’t report is that the young ‘Gandhi’ is a product of decades of communalization. Even though he made use of his basic right of speech ,after this judgment by the Supreme Court we don’t even went to get into the premise of ‘Justice’ and his speech being un-democratic and extremist. The fact that there are more Varun Gandhis out there and the SC will hardly make any difference to their acts makes one wonder – what state of affairs are we talking about and whether we need to question on the politics and science of the term Democratic and Secular India.

After the recent attacks in Mumbai on November 26 , the media immediately launched an open attack on Pakistan and created war hysteria among the masses. Newspapers and news channels used terms like “Islamic terrorism” and “Muslim fanatics” evidently raising fingers at the Muslim sect. In the case of the Malegaon Blast arrests of Sadhvi Pragya Thakur and other alleged accused, when the media used terms like “Hindu terrorism”, BJP immediately thrashed the media for using the term. However if in a similar manner had Islamic groups come forward to object the use of terms like “Muslim Fanatics” and “Islamic terrorism” , they would have been termed anti-national.

It is rather unfortunate that we don’t even question ourselves when such acts happen, perhaps they still wouldn’t matter to a non-Muslim. Perhaps if we could really understand the terms Democracy and secularism India would be a better place to live in.