Communal Violence Bill: Nothing secular about it
Three days after the Delhi bomb blast on 7 September, the PM convened a meeting of the National Integration Council. Surprisingly, combating terrorism was not on the agenda. Instead, what topped the agenda was a controversial proposed bill called Prevention of Communal Violence Bill, 2011.
The drafting of this bill is amateurish. Moreover, the manipulative intent of the bill becomes clear if one goes through the definitions of "communal violence" and "group" outlined at the very start.
"Communal and targeted violence" means and includes any act or series of acts, whether spontaneous or planned, resulting in injury or harm to the person and of property knowingly directed against any person by virtue of his or her membership of any group, which destroys the secular fabric of the nation.
"Group" means a religious or linguistic minority, in any state in the Union of India, or Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes within the meaning of clauses (24) and (25) of Article 366 of the Constitution of India.
Thus, it is obvious that the government has assumed that all communal violence in the country is perpetrated by the majority community and directed at the minority community. If both sides inflict violence upon each other, the bill carries provisions of punishing only one side and it need not be reiterated which side it favors. The bill conveniently ignores the fact that most violent acts in India produce retaliatory violence and on many occasions, the retaliation has been far more savage than its trigger.
Apart from being partial and divisive, the bill carries two other cardinal flaws. One, it makes a mockery of the basic tenet of equality before the law. Two, it assigns a distinct religious identity to all citizens, as against seeing them merely as Indians.
Sexual assault, thus, is punishable under this bill only if committed against a person belonging to a minority 'group'. A 'hate propaganda' is an offence against minority community and not otherwise. Organised and targeted violence, financial help to such persons who commit an offence, torture or dereliction of duty by public servants are all offences only if committed against a member of the minority community and not otherwise.
Interestingly, the bill "extends to the whole of India, provided that the Central government may, with the consent of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, extend the act to that state." The bill thus provides Kashmir an easy escape route which in effect reiterates that the bill does not concern itself with the atrocities or violent acts committed on minorities in Kashmir.
Let us consider another situation: what if violence is committed against the majority community in a majority-dominated state? Given the demography of several districts of Kerala, UP and Assam, such a possibly exists at least theoretically. Doesn't the bill then give unnecessary leeway to certain sections of society to get away with violence?
Having dwelt upon the fallacies of the bill, it is worth questioning why the same government, which has steadfastly ruled out the need for any specific law to combat terror, should be in such tearing hurry to pass the Communal Violence Bill. After all, the last major communal violence took place in 2002 whereas the last major terror strike (if one chooses to ignore the sundry ones) took place in 2008.
The answer to this question can't ignore the vindictive, communal campaign which senior Congress leader Digvijay Singh has been running for nearly two years now. Nor can it isolate Rahul Gandhi's irresponsible reported remark to US Ambassador that Hindu terrorism is a bigger threat to the country than Islamic terror.
Does that by any chance hint that the communal agenda which the Congress has been pursuing lately has been laid out by none other than its crown prince?
Moreover, the proposed bill carries another furtive intent that doesn't go unnoticed. Communal violence constitutes a law and order problem, dealing with which is squarely within the domain of the state government. The Centre's jurisdiction is confined to issue advisories and in a worse case situation deciding whether under Article 356, the governance of the state can be carried on in accordance with the Constitution or not.
If the proposed bill becomes a law, then effectively the Central government would have usurped the jurisdiction of the states. This does not augur well for India's federal structure, especially when instances of the misuse of Article 356 are well known. The contents of this bill are so ill-intended that one can't help wondering if this bill was drafted on the wishful hope that Gujarat might see communal riots again, in which case the UPA could have ready grounds to dismiss the state government.
It is strange and ironical that while everyone criticises the UPA government on the issue of corruption, few are willing to acknowledge that this government might have been pushing a covert communal agenda for far too long now.
More about Tuhin A Sinha
Tuhin A. Sinha is an author, scriptwriter and columnist based in Mumbai, India.
Tuhin was born in Jamshedpur. He has studied at Loyola School, Jamshedpur, Hindu college, Delhi and the National Institute of Advertising, New Delhi.
Tuhin is best known for his novels, Of Love And Politics, That Thing Called Love and 22 Yards. That Thing Called Love is now out in several regional languages as well. Tuhin has scripted several TV shows, apart from having worked as story/script/creative consultant with leading Film and TV production houses.
Tuhin is also a guest columnist with TOI, DNA and some lifestyle magazines. A keen observer of national politics, the subject finds its way in many of Tuhin’s writings.
Tuhin is presently working on his fourth book, the Autobiography.
- + The Food Security Bill has the obituary of India's growth story written on it
- + Ahmedabad, Kishtwar and the Indian media
- + Why 2014 will be a watershed moment in Indian history
- + These ignorant MPs should try to seek a ban on Modi stepping out of Gujarat
- + Convenient, sporadic secularism is India's biggest scandal
- + Putting the Ishrat Jahan Case in perspective
- + Modi's micro initiatives for the farm sector are quite an eye opener
- + An Open Letter to L K Advani
- + Modi needs to take his battle to Amethi and Rae Bareli