KashifAsrar
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2006
- Messages
- 1,008
- Reaction score
- 0
An article from ToI dated 23 April 2007.
Kashif
Ratna Kapur
Recently a German judge declined the request of a Muslim woman to secure a divorce from her husband, on the grounds that the Qurâan sanctions the beating of women. In Britain, head teachers have been given the authority to ban Muslim girls from wearing the niqab on several grounds, including security. In India, the BJP continues its assault on the integrity of the Muslim community, accusing Muslim men of posing as Hindus, marrying Hindu women and later declaring their Muslim identity in its latest communal CD. And all of these virulent attacks on Muslims are taking place in democratic countries that preach inclusion, diversity, freedom of religion, and of course, free speech.
Islam is a culture that is now frequently essentialised and pitted against universal norms and values such as freedom or liberty. And because it is cast as existing outside of these norms, as a threat, it is not entitled to the same standard of human rights and civility as the ârest of usâ. The Gujarat pogroms were an example of such a response, where the sangh parivar justified the actions of the rioters as an expression of âHinduâ anger against years of appeasement of the Muslim minorities and an act in defence of the honour of Hindu women and the nation.
Muslims remain mocked and humiliated by the propaganda of the Hindu right, and the Election Commission is correct in recognising the egregiousness of their latest communal CD. But the actions of the EC still leave the broader issue unaddressed. Muslims are under siege here and elsewhere in the world. And the liberal democratic process has far from enabling and promoting their rights, achieved precisely the opposite. The Hindu right has cleverly used the tools of democracy and fundamental rights to cast the Muslims as opposed to democracy and violators of basic rights. Muslims are invited to surrender their âspecialâ rights that violate Indiaâs commitment to secularism, and become a part of the mainstream. Should they refuse, they are cast as disloyal and threats to the security of the democratic state and the Hindu national polity. This project of assimilation is pursued in and through the discourse of rights rather than in opposition to such rights. This strategy is not specific to the Hindu right, but used by conservative and mainstream movements in many liberal democracies.
But forcing the Muslims to choose between performing a cultural strip and becoming âjust like usâ, ignores the historic disadvantage to which this community has been and continues to be subjected. The Sachar committee has recognised the blatant extent to which the Muslims have been âlagging behindâ. It has made several recommendations recognising that equality is not achieved merely by treating everybody the same and ignoring difference. If equality is to be achieved in result, then it is necessary at times to accommodate difference, as a rule and not an exception. If Muslims and other sectors of the population are increasingly alienated by the very democratic process that is intended to include them, through an interpretation of rights based on majoritarian norms, where will they go? The cornerstone of any democratic state lies in the protection of the rights of minorities.
One of the recommendations of the Sachar committee is the establishment of an equal opportunities commission to examine the grievances of disadvantaged communities. A second is the establishment of a diversity index based on incentives to encourage greater diversity in educational institutions and employment. These initiatives would benefit Muslims, as well as others such as women, girls, and OBCs, encouraging integration without the coerciveness of assimilation.
India is home to one of the worldâs largest Muslim populations. It thus remains incumbent on us to demonstrate effective ways to integrate the religious minority community and not perpetuate the global divide being reinforced by democratic countries throughout the world along the lines of religion. Focusing on forceful evictions of Bangladeshi Muslims in the name of the âwar on terrorâ, or permitting vituperative CDs in the name of protecting the right to free speech will do little to integrate Muslims. If we fail to promote the rights of these minorities, we will sow the seeds and encourage the production of the very terrorism we are seeking to resolve.
The writer is with the Centre for Feminist Legal Research.
Kashif
Donât alienate Muslims
Ratna Kapur
Recently a German judge declined the request of a Muslim woman to secure a divorce from her husband, on the grounds that the Qurâan sanctions the beating of women. In Britain, head teachers have been given the authority to ban Muslim girls from wearing the niqab on several grounds, including security. In India, the BJP continues its assault on the integrity of the Muslim community, accusing Muslim men of posing as Hindus, marrying Hindu women and later declaring their Muslim identity in its latest communal CD. And all of these virulent attacks on Muslims are taking place in democratic countries that preach inclusion, diversity, freedom of religion, and of course, free speech.
Islam is a culture that is now frequently essentialised and pitted against universal norms and values such as freedom or liberty. And because it is cast as existing outside of these norms, as a threat, it is not entitled to the same standard of human rights and civility as the ârest of usâ. The Gujarat pogroms were an example of such a response, where the sangh parivar justified the actions of the rioters as an expression of âHinduâ anger against years of appeasement of the Muslim minorities and an act in defence of the honour of Hindu women and the nation.
Muslims remain mocked and humiliated by the propaganda of the Hindu right, and the Election Commission is correct in recognising the egregiousness of their latest communal CD. But the actions of the EC still leave the broader issue unaddressed. Muslims are under siege here and elsewhere in the world. And the liberal democratic process has far from enabling and promoting their rights, achieved precisely the opposite. The Hindu right has cleverly used the tools of democracy and fundamental rights to cast the Muslims as opposed to democracy and violators of basic rights. Muslims are invited to surrender their âspecialâ rights that violate Indiaâs commitment to secularism, and become a part of the mainstream. Should they refuse, they are cast as disloyal and threats to the security of the democratic state and the Hindu national polity. This project of assimilation is pursued in and through the discourse of rights rather than in opposition to such rights. This strategy is not specific to the Hindu right, but used by conservative and mainstream movements in many liberal democracies.
But forcing the Muslims to choose between performing a cultural strip and becoming âjust like usâ, ignores the historic disadvantage to which this community has been and continues to be subjected. The Sachar committee has recognised the blatant extent to which the Muslims have been âlagging behindâ. It has made several recommendations recognising that equality is not achieved merely by treating everybody the same and ignoring difference. If equality is to be achieved in result, then it is necessary at times to accommodate difference, as a rule and not an exception. If Muslims and other sectors of the population are increasingly alienated by the very democratic process that is intended to include them, through an interpretation of rights based on majoritarian norms, where will they go? The cornerstone of any democratic state lies in the protection of the rights of minorities.
One of the recommendations of the Sachar committee is the establishment of an equal opportunities commission to examine the grievances of disadvantaged communities. A second is the establishment of a diversity index based on incentives to encourage greater diversity in educational institutions and employment. These initiatives would benefit Muslims, as well as others such as women, girls, and OBCs, encouraging integration without the coerciveness of assimilation.
India is home to one of the worldâs largest Muslim populations. It thus remains incumbent on us to demonstrate effective ways to integrate the religious minority community and not perpetuate the global divide being reinforced by democratic countries throughout the world along the lines of religion. Focusing on forceful evictions of Bangladeshi Muslims in the name of the âwar on terrorâ, or permitting vituperative CDs in the name of protecting the right to free speech will do little to integrate Muslims. If we fail to promote the rights of these minorities, we will sow the seeds and encourage the production of the very terrorism we are seeking to resolve.
The writer is with the Centre for Feminist Legal Research.
