‘…attack Muslims not our
prophet.’(Hindu, Jan. 31). ‘The perceived threat that overwhelmed each decision
[blocking Rushdie’s presence] was the potential malevolence of the mob and the
stampede--this threat perception might have been real or exaggerated or
imaginary, we have no way of really gauging.’ (Tehelka)
I cancel my engagements for
attending the Jaipur Literary Festivals, world’s most beautiful island of
literary and cultural biosphere. Proudly owning it, here we listen/meet
constellations of prestigious national/international awards winners, forgotten
voices; incarcerated Kashmiri autobiographers; dramatists and poets; contesting
voices on current concerns; world cultural icons and vernacular giants. It’s a
lifetime experience at one place and free! Sabotaging such festival is shameful
to harass the JLF organizers. As a citizen of India, I find ban on democratic
freedom of expression and free movements of individuals unacceptable.
While the proposition ‘attack Muslims not our
prophet’ is insane, the conjecture of ‘malevolence of mob’ during the JLF needs
scrutiny. Human right activists wanted meeting with the Rajasthan Muslim Forum,
demanding the ban, and the Forum’s with the JLF organizers for resolving
perceived issues. I organized both the meetings to resolves the issue. Because,
the controversy is a neat political choreography.
The Forum echoed Deoband seminary’s
call, though both didn’t care in 2007. The
Forum, headed by a Quari, is a heterogeneous conglomeration, a miniature
‘parliament,’ of 25 socio-cultural organizations with varying ideological
orientations, angular contours and worldviews. During communal violence and disasters
it acts in unity and gets support from secular organizations like PUCL. Victims
of violence, police atrocities and detentions approach the Forum for help and
voice, not Muslim politicians, bureaucrats, Shahr Quazi or Muftis.
To the PUCL members Forum emotionally
resented: Rushdie insulted our Prophet, his family and Islam. How can the
government give him visa, honor, and welcome to a ‘criminal?’ Assuaging their
feelings, facts were corrected: government is neither welcoming nor honoring Rushdie;
he is not a criminal in law’s eye. A PIO, he doesn’t need visa. His
Satanic Verses, banned for import, wasn’t listed in JLF schedule (nor in 2007 when
Rushdie participated). Rushdie’s topics were ‘Hinglish’ and his ‘Midnight’s
Children’ novel. Therefore, opposition to him was unjustified. Forum remained adamant,
despite some internal dissent. However, it assured that the protest, if any, would
be peaceful. We were convinced, given its track record of peaceful large protest
rallies and meetings. Its legitimate right to protest wasn’t contested.
In Forum’s meeting with the JLF team
on 19th, it reiterated: Rushdie
shouldn’t come to Jaipur, echoing demand of three Congress politicians (two
Muslims). Respecting Forum’s rights to demonstrate peacefully, the organizers showed
their inability to ‘withdraw’ invitation
to Rushdie. Deadlock followed. Though, the Forum expressed its warm support to
the JLF, owning it proudly as its own festival! Therefore, the fear of
malevolent threat and stampede was unfounded, if not fabricated. Muslims were at
fault in their understanding of the Indian law, approach and being ‘noisy,’ but
not malevolent in action. Malevolence
was elsewhere.
On 19th night a senior politician
and a police officer assured the Forum: “Rushdie wouldn’t be allowed to enter
Rajasthan. We will face the bullets!’ Smacking communal politics, it was
repulsive. When I asked about the GOI advisory to the state about Rushdie, the
officer feigned ignorance! Seeing Muslims unyielding, Jaipur Police
Commissioner confirmed cancellation of Rushdie’s visit. It could have been done
earlier. Having experienced a holed up life for years, following the Iranian
Fatwa on his head, Rushdie was genuinely scared to land in a speculative stormy
weather. Perhaps, he feared being skewered,
prevented by police at airports/hotels as an alibi for maintaining law and
order.
Police acknowledges gratefully Forum’s
periodic protest meetings and rallies as remarkably peaceful. Recently Muslims
suffered widespread communal violence causing loss of lives, property, and shrine
sacrileges in Udaipur, Jodhpur, Jhalawar, Sawaimadhopur and
Gopalgarh (Bharatpur). Forum’s protests were peaceful, unlike the recent
violent protests by the Gujjars and Jats. Therefore, calling a bare group of 80-125
Muslims, amidst 400-500 police force in the JLF as ‘potentially malevolent’
protesters was hyperbolic. There was
something underneath.
Communalization of politics and
police isn’t a secret. Policemen have tarred their uniform for pleasing political
masters. Rajasthan’s five police officers, including three IPS for alleged fake
encounters, are behind bar/absconding. Muslims are asking pertinent questions.
Why these ‘protesters’ were projected as a ‘malevolent’ crowd of 2000-4000 in
park, roads and the venue? Police knew the exact numbers. Why it didn’t tell
this to the organizers and media, for containing rumors, if any. Many responsible
Muslims disagreed with the dubious
spectacle after Rushdie’s visit was cancelled. Sagacity is alien to impatience for attention!
Was the police silent to ‘seal’
cancellation of the video link by letting the ‘desired’ panic flourish among
organizers, excitement in media and uncertainties in audience as a grand political
choreographed act? Why was the announcement of cancellation, that too by the
Diggi House owner, at the eleventh hour causing tension? Was he arm-twisted to appease
‘malevolent’ protesters/police/politicians? Did the police have separate
understanding with the protesters, politicians, organizers and hotel owner? If
not, then why the ‘disruptive’ protesters, even holding valid passes, were allowed
to enter the venue? What is prevention? Does police allow disruptive elements, holding
valid tickets, to enter railway stations/cinema halls? May be in a soft state.
Muslims often become political pawns.
Four speakers’ reading from the Satanic Verses was apparently an impulsive
symbolic protest. Court cases slapped on them are patently politically
motivated. (To intimidate, a litigant claimed that Muslims thought to get fatwa
on this author too!) The fatwa factories should know that their diktat to ban
Rushdie’s visit is illegal. India
isn’t a theocratic Islamic/Hindu state. Freedoms of expression and mobility are
Constitutional rights, fanatics like or not. Rushdie doesn’t have red corner alert
on him. Don’t read The Satanic Verses or Styarth Prakash (not banned), if they offend.
Though the video link was cancelled, what could Muslims do when Rushdie’s
interview on NDTV channel was relayed for two days at prime time? In the internet
era sanctions, boundaries and bans are melting.
Sporadic attacks on Quran, the Prophet,
Muslims, and their institutions haven’t dampened the Islamic spirit. Orthodoxies,
introversion and ignorance of its clergy selling frozen pipe dreams to hungry
Muslims do. Creating high octane Rushdie flash, ignoring the basic educational,
gender and economic problems of Muslims, doesn’t show the Indian clergy in good
lights. For his publicity Rushdie should be grateful to the clergy, not to his
weird, complex, dull book, which I had read in Britain.
Essentially, the protest should,
indeed, be read as a larger symbolic narrative of their pervasive deep resentments:
‘Why aren’t our life and property protected during riots? Where are the promises
of justice and honor? Why are innocent Muslim youths incarcerated in jails for years?
Why aren’t they compensated and their honor restored? Why minority institutions
often remain headless? Why lands and permissions for our Institutions delayed/denied?
Why are we discriminated against for education
and employment? Why is our world permanently redlined: dark and dirty, dry taps;
no school, park and hospital?’ This ignored world of voices and anger is a dense
ecological tinderbox, superintended by a hegemonic politico-religious nexus.
Sure, the JLF organizers and
writers, many condemning the Gujarat carnage,
were expected to understand the present nature of the Indian society, standards
of politics and governance for avoiding ‘tragic mistakes.’ But the dangerous
world of fatwas, ban on cow slaughter, opposing freedoms of artists, writers,
filmmakers and journalists, religious rituals in official functions, statues
(Manu’s in a High Court) and temples in government premises, communal school
texts, financing of pilgrimages, and governments’ expediently bending as willows
during elections and communal frenzy are more problematic, threatening the very
foundations of our secular state and polity, freedoms and peace.
---------------------------
Professor M. Hasan taught in HCM
Rajasthan State Institute of Public Administration, Jodhpur
and Nairobi
universities, and was member, AMU Academic Council. Currently, he is member of
Rajasthan Rajiv Gandhi Social Security Mission.
Add: 54 Kidwainagar, Jaipur
302015; Mob. 09784678786; email: mhasan23@rediffmail.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment