Don’t bow down to religious fanatics!!!

In the case of Ambedkar cartoon, the inclusion of that cartoon injures the already stigmatized community by maligning the savior of the community. In a period of assertion of identities, we should not tolerate distortion of history in the name of cartoon or illustrations. Hence we asked for its removal. But in the case of the exclusion of ‘Andal’ story from the syllabus of MSU, the academia is yielding to the perceived threats of right wing extremist groups. The incident of dropping the Short story ‘Andal’ by D.Selvaraj from the syllabus of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, surrendering academic freedom in the face of right-wing political pressure, was against the very spirit of secularism which promotes space to distinct ways of thought and ideologies. Deleting the short story of D.Selvaraj, a socially committed Tamil writer whose novels mostly discuss Dalit issues, peasant struggles, plight of tea plantation workers etc is an act that is deeply disturbing, an instance of academic policing. Such a knee-jerk measure will only encourage sectarian politics and deny a space that allows a free exchange of ideas, and helps shape critical minds.

Tamil culture possesses a long-standing fable tradition with anthropomorphised gods and deities as characters that can stand as commonly recognized types of human behavior. As part of that tradition of pouring in modern insights into classical religious myths, the Short story ‘Andal’ shows a fluidity of the Dravidian style of interpreting religious myths in a folklorist way. Indeed, Periyar EVR has written many interesting tales about the religious myths which no fundamentalist can digest. It is very regressive and unfortunate that M.S University has withdrawn the short story from its curriculum following the footsteps of Delhi University which removed A K Ramanujan's essay 'Three Hundred Ramayanas' and Mumbai University which removed Rohinton Mistry's novel 'Such a Long Journey.’ It is the duty of the University to disseminate the true knowledge and diversity to the students rather than succumbing to outside forces, both political and social. Looking at the larger context, it hardly comes as a shock that the administration has arbitrarily removed D.Selvaraj’s ‘Andal’ by giving up all values of liberalism, secularism and democracy.

The university’s decision to scrap the short story was an instance of a secular institution buckling under the pressure of right wing organisations. This proves that the academic space has become very vulnerable today posing a great threat to academic freedom, creativity and critical acumen. The more the university bans intellectual creativity, the more it becomes a breeding ground for alliterates. It is a shame that in a pluralist nation, a secular university has reached such a pass that it has to think on what to include so as not to generate controversy. As an alumnus of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University and an academician, I strongly believe that every act which is inimical to the open exchange of ideas must be resisted by the academic community.

For your reading the new brief “Varsity denies maligning Andal in Tamil syllabus” [The Hindu 28-06-2012]

The Manonmaniam Sundaranar University has categorically denied media reports that the curriculum for first semester Tamil language contained a short story maligning Andal, the poet-saint of Srivilliputtur, and that it was removed following opposition from various quarters.

Andal, the only woman poet among the 12 Alwars, composers of Vaishnavite devotional poetry, is revered as a saint and worshipped as a deity in Vaishnavite temples.

A report on Monday alleged that ‘Nonbu,’ a collection of short stories, which was approved by the Board of Studies , had offensive and sacrilegious remarks against Andal. Even as various organisations started warning that they would go on an protest, the MSU authorities received a large number of e-mails condemning the university “for including controversial information” about Andal in the syllabus.

A senior faculty member of the MSU said the Board of Tamil Studies, which met here recently to finalise the curriculum for first semester Tamil Language, decided to include writer D. Selvaraj’s ‘Nonbu’, a compilation of 14 short stories, including a story on Andal, published by New Century Book House (NCBH) seven years ago. After a couple of members expressed reservations over the inclusion of ‘Andal’ in the curriculum owing to certain views expressed in the story, it was decided to include ‘Saraswathi’ in its place.

Since the Board of Studies had to seek permission from the publisher for replacing ‘Andal’ with ‘Saraswathi,’ a formal letter was sent to NCBH and the publisher accepted the proposal. Now, the curriculum does not contain ‘Andal’ and, in its place, ‘Saraswathi’ has been included.

“Against this backdrop, rumours are being spread with ulterior motive that the MSU curriculum had maligned ‘Andal’ by including a controversial story in the syllabus,” the faculty member said.

Ten copies with the story of ‘Saraswathi’ had been printed and one copy was recently sent to the Chairman of MSU Conveners’ Committee and Law Secretary G. Jayachandarn. “He is satisfied with the content of the curriculum as there is no reference in any place maligning Andal,” said the faculty member.

Endorsing the faculty member’s views, Registrar S. Manickam said ‘Nonbu’ was not published by the MSU and instead, it had included it as a portion of the syllabus after obtaining permission from the NCBH.

Cartoon on Ambedkar and Anti-Hindi agitation should go!!

It is a rare event that captures the attention of the nation for any extended period of time. Usually, it takes a communal riot, the inhuman face of the Gujarat Pogrom or a trivial video of Godman Nithyanandha allegedly romancing with actress Ranjitha to focus the better part of India’s elite circles onto a single event for more than a passing second. It is strange to think then, that a satanic or silly cartoon of Dr.Ambedkar would ignite a storm of controversy encompassing the majority of the intellectuals for the past few months.

Unfortunately, the NCERT chose to include this particularly inflammatory cartoon of Ambedkar being whipped by Nehru for the snail’s pace in the making of Indian constitution.  Debating the merit of the cartoon doesn’t work as the cartoon is based on an offensive stereotype. It might seem hypocritical for the NCERT to withdraw the cartoon from the text book, but it has a responsibility to raise debate — not become debate. In today's world of instant global communication, disagreements happen more quickly and resentments get established in real time.

It’s easy for the elites and upper caste intellectuals to say the furore over this cartoon is an overreaction, and that “it’s just a cartoon.” Some elite academicians complain that a cartoon which no Dalit in the past 60 years found offending has suddenly become disparaging to a few. It is true that Dalits remained ignorant for generations together as they were denied of all the educational avenues. Now, thanks to the Ambedkarite movement, they have started questioning the injustices meted out to them in the distant and recent past. Does the mainstream society still want them to face humiliation and keep silence. When the upper caste cry for justice they call it revolution and the cry of Dalits will be viewed as a sign of intolerance. Gandhi who stood for upholding the Varnashrama Dharma as the lifeblood of Hinduism thereby indirectly favouring the caste system and suppressing the Dalits is projected as the ‘Father of the Nation’ and progenitor of ‘Ahimsa.’ But the same textbook committee doesn’t dare to project Ambedkar as a national leader but only as a Dalit leader. Ambedkar, as the elite academicians point out, would have had the intellect and wisdom to appreciate and enjoy caricatures that lampooned him, but then the question is why not caricatures of other leaders. Will the same responsible academicians publish, for example, a cartoon of Shankar lampooning Gandhi as a protector of Varnashrama Dharma which appeared in the Hindustan Times in 1933? When everyone else disowns Ambedkar and prevents Dalits also from protecting his image, who else will come for his rescue.

Dalits everywhere are incensed by the publication of the cartoon deriding Ambedkar. Freedom of expression may at times be curtailed to avoid caste-based hatred. Dalit intellectuals, although deeply insulted by the cartoons, are no doubt embarrassed by their emotional brothers who are using the situation to attack the office of an academician like Suhash Palshikar. Dalits who rioted were not upset that they were forced to view a cartoon they found offensive; they were upset that the cartoon was printed in a class XI text book. This isn’t a case where one can say if you don’t like it, turn the channel or read another newspaper because Dalits sought the total elimination of such a cartoon, not merely the ability to ignore them. Other academicians supported the cartoon, arguing that academic textbooks should be immune from criticism. It is ironic that the intellectuals who speak out against intolerance on the part of the Dalit politicians are often the most intolerant in their views.

Academic books rarely cause riots in the streets, but the Ambedkar cartoon controversy may come close. At least this is the conclusion reached by the Centre, which considered the likelihood of violent protests by Dalits across the nation before making the decision to withdraw the negative cartoon images of Ambedkar from the Class XI text book.   The issue faded when the centre decided to remove the cartoon from the book. Yet, the centre seemed to have withdrawn the cartoon not based on malicious content but because of the risk of facing violent protests by the Dalits and the fear of losing Dalit vote bank.

The cautious reaction by Kapil Sibal is understandable, but I find the rationale troubling, as it assumes that Dalit politicians like Athavale or Thirumavalavan await any new pretext to spur violence and that the other major political parties are at their mercy for the votebank. The peddlers of anti-Dalit ideologies, the so-called ‘objective’ intellectuals, and blogs of elites would have us believe that Dalit leaders are lurking everywhere just waiting for an excuse to promote violence.

If the NCERT wants to use humour, it can make sure the humour is tasteful, healthy and appropriate rather than disrespectful, insulting, obnoxious and nasty.  The cartoon angered Dalits because the inclusion of such a cartoon is seen as a deliberate attempt to denigrate the messiah of dalits. I view the Centre’s decision to withdraw the cartoon as pragmatic, following the advice they sought, rather than cowardice or giving into political correctness. The main problem is not over the cartoon—whether viewed as satanic or silly—but with the question of implicitly inserting a conspicuous cartoon in a XI standard textbook. We have more to teach about the making of the constitution and the achievements and ordeals of Ambedkar than anything from the outdated cartoon.

Had the cartoon been published in newspapers, magazines or any other media, none bothers. Every Dalit objects because the degrading cartoon of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar finds a place in a class XI text book. As a teacher of many years, I wonder how many students will even notice the content of the lesson “The Making of the Indian Constitution” but they will be easily carried away by the force of the cartoon. Ambedkar himself cited the time taken for preparing the constitution in other nations:

The American convention met on May 25, 1787, and the constitution was passed in four months. The constitutional convention of Canada met on the October 10, 1864, and the constitution was passed into law in March 1867 involving a period of two years and five months. The Australian Constitutional Convention assembled in March 1891 and the constitution became law on July 9, 1900, consuming a period of nine years. The South African convention met in October 1908 and the Constitution became law, on the September 20, 1909 involving one year’s labour.

While admitting that India has taken more time than America and South Africa he pointed, “Our Constitution contains 395 articles while America has just seven articles divided into sections which total up to 21. The Canadian has 147, Australian 128, and South African 153 sections.” Unlike us these countries did not have to face the problems of amendments. They were passed as moved. Whereas, our Constitution assembly had to deal with 2,473 amendments.

The moral injury experienced by Dalits from publication of the objectionable cartoon is intelligible only once one understands the relationship of intimacy that Dalits have with Ambedkar. To see this, however, requires adopting an internal perspective on how Ambedkar is regarded as a kind of messiah, and more as an object of veneration than worship. The cartoon is viewed not as defaming Ambedkar but rather as defaming or rising to the level of stirring up hatred against the disadvantaged sections-the Dalits. If we look at the past, one can easily retrospect and understand how Dalits protested violently whenever Ambedkar’s statue was desecrated by Caste Hindu miscreants.  We need to consider what this cartoon may mean for a Dalit in a time when visible manifestations of hate and incitement to hatred are essentially contested. There is a great need to redefine what we call freedom of expression and make clear that our most basic freedom: to articulate critical opinions freely should not curtail our sense of respect and dignity.

By inserting a cartoon on the anti-Hindi agitation in a textbook, NCERT has again overstepped the thin veneer of respecting people’s sentiments. The depiction of the anti-Hindi agitators as aliterates when it comes to English is unwarranted and distorts the very spirit of the anti-Hindi movement in Tamilnadu. NCERT is so biased that it interpolates no cartoons critical of caste oppression and Hindi imposition in the textbooks. If undermining the greatness of the ‘prophet of the Dalits’ was the motive behind the reproduction of the cartoon on BR Ambedkar, the inclusion of the cartoon is intended to downgrade the anti-Hindi agitation from one of the major movements in post-Independent India to a mere stir by semi-literates.

However, the price of a society that allows free speech, so long as it does not directly incite violence, is that a few hatred-peddlers will get a platform. If all we see in the normative claims of Dalits are threats to academic autonomy, however, the debate will remain at its current impasse. Whatever said and done, the Committee headed by Thorat has decided to remove ten objectionable cartoons from the NCERT text books. It is a good sign that the government appointed committee has understood the feelings and apprehensions of Dalits and the Tamils.

The Hindu : Opinion / Letters : Don’t exclude

The Hindu : Opinion / Letters : Don’t exclude

Well said Iniyan Elango. One more thing should have been added to your letter. In the matrimonial Columns too, I could read a typical casteist advertisement very often which goes like this: Caste no bar(SC/ST excuse). The Hindu can avoid such advertisements but quite obviously they cannot sell the 16-page newsstuff+ supplements for Rs.5/- Infact your letter also got published thanks to the adverti...sement given by our enemy. Even communism is propagated only with the sponsorship of corporates. Dalit issues and identity issues are taken care of by the exploiters-the Brahmins. We are living in a complicated world. Whatever said and done, the mindset of the upper caste individuals wont change. If the Hindu refuses to publish their advertisement they may opt for the other mainstream Brahmin Newspapers. Anyhow, What you have said is a pinch of salt. We have to unravel an ocean of such subtle invisible discriminatory practices. Thank you for your letter.

Your ‘Property Plus’ supplement (April 7, 2012) carried an advertisement for the sale of flats with a caption stating “only Brahmins,” excluding non-Brahmin castes, Dalits and religious minorities such as Muslims, Christians, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs, etc., from buying or residing in the flats, thus discriminating against people on the basis of caste and religion, thereby violating the letter and spirit of Articles 15 and 17 of the Constitution. Excluding Dalits from buying the advertised flats can only be construed as an expression of untouchability against them.

Excluding people based on caste or religion from the sale, rental or residence of housing facilities is a blatant act of bigotry and oppression that causes great distress to the victims apart from leading to social balkanisation of our nation due to caste segregation and religious polarisation. Such advertisements and business practices which exclude people on the basis of caste or religion should be proscribed.

Iniyan Elango, Chennai

The Editor replies:

The Hindu stands against discrimination and exclusion. My colleagues do their best to scrutinise the fine print of all advertisements received to ensure they are not contrary to constitutional values. Sometimes, regrettably, things get by. The condition stipulated by the advertiser in this particular advertisement was inadvertently carried.

The Hindu had no intention to hurt the feelings of anyone. There is no question of The Hindu endorsing anything in any advertisement, much less one that is socially exclusive.

UPA II- Stop anti-poor acts!!

The UPA Government is making the common man’s life more miserable by hiking the petrol prices. The petrol price hike will hit the common man and the poorer sections hard as it will have a cascading effect on the economy. The rise in petroleum products is outrageous and atrocious. It is more due to the government’s inefficiency and incompetence than necessity. Since prices are increased at any time of the fiscal year, the annual budget has lost its importance. The people are forced to pay hefty prices for the government’s mismanagement and failures. Raising the price of petrol is the government’s easiest method to cover up the losses or deficit due to faulty planning and mismanagement. Notwithstanding the Centre’s justification that the petrol price hike will help the oil PSUs cut their losses and avert an impending financial crisis they face, the ripple effects of price hike will badly hit the poor who are already hit by galloping inflation of food items.

The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and the oil companies are in a dangerous nexus and the government’s stand on fuel price hike due to inflation is untenable. The facts and figures of losses of oil companies are unacceptable because petrol is an essential commodity that cannot be sold for profit. With inflation reaching newer heights, commuters especially those who commute daily by their private vehicles are a harried lot. People no longer will be able to bear the brunt of this hike as a majority of them belong to middle working class group. The government, therefore, should rollback the petrol price hike and the proposed price hike of  diesel, LPG and kerosene as it will result in increase in the prices of all essential commodities and public transport.

To hell with your poverty line

The fact that a rural Indian spending Rs. 22.50 a day would not be considered poor by a Planning Commission whose Deputy Chairman's foreign trips between May and October last year cost a daily average of Rs. 2.02 lakh (“The austerity of the affluent”- P. Sainath The Hindu dated 21^st May 2012) exposes the hypocrisy of the Indian state glorifying its economic growth rate even as India has about 26 million people living below poverty line and 35 per cent out of this group, classified as the poorest of the poor, have income level of less than Rs.22/- per day out of the total population. The politicians, government, bureaucrats, media, NGOs, civil society — collectively as a nation, under the hypnotising influence of global market forces and obsession with the projected economic growth rate have turned their faces away from the millions of poor people who famish with a meagre Rs.20/- per day income. As per 2001 Census, about 78 million people in the country were living without a home and more than that number were holed up in urban slums. The number of the poor living in the country is more than the poor living in any other country of the world.

Despite the socio-economic problems plaguing the Indian society, post-reforms period has been marked by high growth rate, placing the country among the fastest growing economies in the world. Unfortunately, the spurt in economic activity in the country and increase in the growth rate over the past few lustrums has not been able to make a discernible impact on the problem of poverty, deprivation and exploitation of the poor. The divide between the rich and the poor has become a tangible reality. Though there are more Indian billionaires in the Forbes list than ever before, the number of the poor and hungry is ever increasing. During this era of rapid growth, the problems of unequal and skewed distribution of economic resources and the fruits of growth have surfaced. The income gap between rich and poor has increased steadily in line with economic progress, but only recently, with unemployment and austerity measures hitting the poor has public resentment against inequality. One is left speechless and shocked when one finds a Montek Singh Ahluwalia or an FM or a PM waxing eloquent over GDP growth, liberalised economy, globalization and fixing Rs. 28/- as poverty line. The planning commission has not only fudged the poverty data to exaggerate the fall in poverty but also supplied misleading statistics.

The ever-widening rich-poor divide and income inequality tends to threaten the stability of India. In the present scenario, the role of the media, NGOs and civil society is important to expose and highlight the moral, social and administrative deficiencies in the political system. As Indian Constitution, through the Directive Principles of State Policy entrusts the responsibility of equitable distribution of economic resources to the government policies,  the government must strive hard to achieve the ultimate goal of equitable growth of the economy. Liberal economy cannot snatch away the basic right of decent living from the poor and the downtrodden. It is the responsibility of the government to take measures for bridging the widening gap, which requires pragmatic policies aimed at redistributive justice on a sustainable basis.

My Letter on ‘gagging the voice of Rationalists’ to The Hindu dated 08-05-2012  

Our secular credentials were questioned yet again when police filed FIRs and started investigations against Sanal Edamaraku, a rationalist who has been exposing miracles and pseudoscience beliefs for over three decades (“India's god laws fail the test of reason,” May 7). In exposing the ‘miracle' in a Mumbai church, he performed his fundamental duty as a citizen under Article 51-A of the Constitution. Lack of scientific temper is the biggest impediment to the progress of our nation. Exposing the truth about a said miracle does not amount to inciting hatred against Christians. Only exposure can lead to a debate and defence of ideas.

In response to the opinion page article “India's god laws fail the test of reason” in The Hindu dated 07-05-2012

Early in March, little drops of water began to drip from the feet of the statue of Jesus nailed to the cross on the church of Our Lady of Velankanni, down on to Mumbai's unlovely Irla Road. Hundreds began to flock to the church to collect the holy water in little plastic bottles, hoping the tears of the son of god would sanctify their homes and heal their beloved.

Sanal Edamaruku, the eminent rationalist thinker, arrived at the church a fortnight after the miracle began drawing crowds. It took him less than half an hour to discover the source of the divine tears: a filthy puddle formed by a blocked drain, from where water was being pushed up through a phenomenon all high-school physics students are familiar with, called capillary action.

For his discovery, Mr. Edamaruku now faces the prospect of three years in prison — and the absolute certainty that he will spend several more years hopping between lawyers' offices and courtrooms. In the wake of Mr. Edamaruku's miracle-busting Mumbai visit, three police stations in the capital received complaints against him for inciting religious hatred. First information reports were filed, and investigations initiated with exemplary — if unusual — alacrity.

Real courage

Mr. Edamaruku isn't the kind to be frightened. It takes real courage, in a piety-obsessed society, to expose the chicanery of Satya Sai Baba and packs of lesser miracle-peddlers who prey on the insecurities of the desperate and gullible. These actions have brought threats in their wake — but never from the state.

India's Constitution obliges all citizens to develop “scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform”. India's laws, though, are being used to persecute a man who has devoted his life to doing precisely that.

Like dozens of other intellectuals and artists, Mr. Edamaraku is a victim of India's god laws — colonial-era legislation obliging the state to punish those who offend the faith of others. Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code criminalises the actions of “whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons”. Its sibling, Section 295A, outlaws “deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class”. Section 153B goes further, proscribing “any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities”. Alarmingly, given the sweeping generalities in which these laws are written, truth is not an admissible defence.

In the decades since independence, these laws have been regularly used to hound intellectuals and artists who questioned religious beliefs. In 1993, the New Delhi-based progressive cultural organisation, Sahmat, organised an exhibition demonstrating that there were multiple versions of the Ramayana in Indian culture. Panels in the exhibition recorded that in one Buddhist tradition, Sita was Ram's sister; in a Jain version, she was the daughter of Ravan. Even though the exhibits drew on historian Romila Thapar's authoritative work, criminal cases were filed against Sahmat for offending the sentiments of traditionalist Hindus.

Punjab has seen a rash of god-related cases, mainly involving Dalit-led heterodoxies challenging the high traditions of the Akal Takht. In 2007, police filed cases against Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, the head of the syncretic Saccha Sauda sect, for his purportedly blasphemous use of Sikh iconography. Earlier, in 2001, similar charges were brought against Piara Singh Bhaniarawala, after he released the Bhavsagar Granth , a religious text suffused with miracle stories.

Islamic chauvinists have shown the same enthusiasm for the secular state's god laws as their Sikh and Hindu counterparts. Earlier this year, FIRs were filed against four writers who read out passages from Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses — a book that is wholly legal in India. Fear of Islamic neo-fundamentalists is pervasive, shaping cultural discourse even when its outcomes are not as dramatic as Mr. Rushdie's case. In 1995, writer Khalid Alvi reissued Angaarey — a path-breaking collection of Urdu short works banned in 1933 for its attacks on god. The collection's most-incendiary passages were censored out. India's feisty media didn't even murmur in protest after the magazine India Today was proscribed by Jammu and Kashmir in 2006 for carrying a cartoon with an image of the Kaaba as one among a metaphorical pack of political cards.

Even religious belief, ironically enough, can invite prosecution by the pious. Last year, the Kannada movie actress, Jayamala, was summoned before a Kerala court, along with astrologer P. Unnikrishna and his assistant Reghupathy, to face police charges that she had violated a taboo against women in the menstruating age from entering the Sabrimala temple.

For the most part, judges have shied away from condoning criticism of the pious, perhaps fearful of being held responsible for public disorder. In 1958, the Supreme Court heard litigation that grew out of the radical politician, E.V. Ramaswamy Naicker's decision to break a clay idol of Ganesha. Lower courts had held, in essence, that the idol was not a sanctified object. The Supreme Court differed, urging the lower judiciary “to pay due regard to the feelings and religious emotions of different classes of persons with different beliefs, irrespective … of whether they are rational or otherwise”.

‘Insult to religion'

Earlier, in 1957, the Supreme Court placed some limits on 295A saying it “does not penalise any and every act of insult to or attempt to insult the religion”. Instead, it “only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion perpetrated with deliberate and malicious intention ” (emphasis added). The court shied away, though, from the key question, of what an insult to religion actually was.

Hearing an appeal against the Uttar Pradesh government's decision to confiscate Naicker's contentious Ramayana , the Supreme Court again ducked this issue. In 1976, it simply said “the law fixes the mind of the Administration to the obligation to reflect on the need to restrict and to state the grounds which ignite its action”. “That is about all”, the judges concluded.

That hasn't, however, been all. In 1998, the Supreme Court upheld Karnataka's decision to ban P.V. Narayanna's Dharmakaarana , an award-winning re-reading of the Hindu saint, Basaveshwara. In 2007, the Bombay High Court similarly allowed Maharashtra to ban R.L. Bhasin's Islam , an aggressive attack on the faith. There have been several other similar cases. In some, the works involved were scurrilous, even inflammatory — but the principles established by courts have allowed State governments to stamp out critical works of scholarship and art.

Dangers ahead

Indians have grappled with these issues since at least 1924, when Arya Samaj activist Mahashe Rajpal published the pamphlet that led the state to enact several of the god laws. Rangila Rasul — in Urdu, ‘the colourful prophet' —was a frank, anti-Islam polemic. Lower courts condemned Rajpal to prison. In the Lahore High Court, though, Justice Dalip Singh argued that public outrage could not be the basis for legal proscription: “if the fact that Musalmans resent attacks on the Prophet was to be the measure [of legal sanction]”, he reasoned, “then an historical work in which the life of the prophet was considered and judgment passed on his character by a serious historian might [also] come within the definition”.

In 1927, when pre-independence India's central legislative assembly debated the Rangila Rasul affair, some endorsed Justice Singh's message. M.R. Jayakar likened religious fanaticism to a form of mental illness, and suggested that those who suffer from it be segregated “from the rest of the community”. This eminently sane suggestion wasn't, however, the consensus: the god laws were expanded to expressly punish works like Rangila Rasul .

Perhaps Indians can congratulate themselves that the god laws have not been used to persecute and kill religious dissenters, as the ever-expanding blasphemy laws which sprang up in Pakistan. Mr. Edamaruku's case ought to make clear, though, just where things are inexorably headed. If Indians wish to avoid the fate of the dystopia to the country's west, its citizens desperately need to accept the right of critics to attack, even insult, what they hold dear.

In 864 CE, the great physician, Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn Zakaria al-Razi, wrote: “The miracles of the prophets are imposters or belong to the domain of pious legend. The teachings of religions are contrary to the one truth: the proof of this is that they contradict one another. It is tradition and lazy custom that have led men to trust their religious leaders. Religions are the sole cause of the wars which ravage humanity; they are hostile to philosophical speculation and to scientific research. The alleged holy scriptures are books without values”.

Following a rich scholarly life, and a tenure as director of the hospital in Baghdad patronised by the caliph Abu al-Qasim Abd 'Allah, al-Razi died quietly at his home in Rey, surrounded by his students. In modern India, his thoughts would have led him to a somewhat less pleasant end.

Police investigation of Sanal Edamaraku for debunking a “miracle” at a church is a crime against the Constitution.

Bathoni Tola massacre- Miscarriage of Justice

There is an urgent need to sensitize the public on issues relating to underprivileged sections of society, and to insist that the media need to accord more priority to coverage of the grave violations of the basic rights of Dalits. The continued prevalence of atrocities against Dalits and the ways in which the Protection of Civil Rights Act (1955) and the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (1989) are routinely subverted deserve attention of the media. The response of the governments and the media has remained the same in all these atrocities; of outrage, and then forgetting the issue until the next atrocity occurs. Precisely for this reason, this verdict should wake up the national media, make them reflect, and act, to put an immediate end to caste based atrocities. The Judiciary entrusted with the dispensation of Justice has acted as the stooge of the dominant caste groups and failed to the hopes of the common man, as a custodian of human rights. The denial of victim’s Right to Justice, by the approach adopted by the government and prosecuting agencies facilitating the culprit to kill innocent Dalits get away with impunity and sadly the judicial decision in question is nothing but a betrayal of Dalits.

The verdict aquitting 23 persons in the gruesome Bathani Tola massacre left everyone with a sensitive mind shocked and dismayed. Needless to say, this judgement is a blatant miscarriage of justice as mass murderers are acquitted to escape punishment for their inhuman crimes. Moreover, the failure to punish the murderers, would not only subject to ridicule the judiciary but would render it far more difficult to deter similar mass killings in the future. This criminal trial failed to provide justice because it tended to focus on individuals and single acts instead of the broader role of institutional casteist forces. In treating the massacre as a purely criminal act, it actually masks caste realities. Justice and fairness of treatment for the victims belonging to the socially disadvantaged is practically non-existent in India. In denying justice, very sound and cogent reasons and arguments couched in ceremonial legalese are advanced on behalf of the aggressors. The verdict raises serious questions as to which need to be enquired with urgency, as the same can have far reaching consequences on the credibility of the entire justice delivery system, which prides itself of maintaining high standards of independence and utmost fairness. In a case which so speaks for itself, the stupor with which the entire system has worked is unpardonable, and the way accused have been allowed to go away scot free with impunity, has added insult to injury to the Dalits, already suffering social discrimination.  Indeed much has been said already about the delays associated with our criminal justice system, but sixteen years is too long a time, especially when all that is secured to the people is a grossly miscarriage of justice. The lack of potency, the successive governments and investigating agencies have projected in the prosecution of the accused and in failure to secure extradition of the accused, raises serious queries as to the how miniscule and insignificant the cost of Dalit lives becomes, when pitted against feudalism.

If the Government of Bihar expects Dalits to repose faith in Judiciary, it must do some soul searching on the mass acquittal of the Bathani Tola massacre case.  The massacre was a stigma on civil society and rarest of rare cases of brutality. The massacres at Khairlanji, Keelvenmani, and Bathani Tola stand out prominently in the minds of Dalits all over the nation as the sanguinary examples of Casteism. Blaming the lack of evidence – which is primarily the failure of the prosecution -is unlikely to assuage the sentiments of the victims. A fair verdict in this case alone will help wipe away the stigma of upper-caste bias which shadows India’s judiciary.