LOYALTY TO YOUR COUNTRY IS NON-NEGOTIABLE

Monday, 24 March 2014 | Joginder Singh

Sedition charges against the bunch of Kashmiri students cheering for Pakistan were dropped without even a formal apology coming from the accused. India need not be on the defensive about its laws and values

Some Kashmiri students studying in Uttar Pradesh were recently suspended for cheering and shouting slogans in favour of the Pakistani team which defeated India in a cricket match. The police registered a case against the students for sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code.

This section says: “1[Sedition — Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, 2[ the Government established by law in 3[ India], a 4[ shall be punished with 5[ imprisonment for life], to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine. Explanation 1 — The expression “disaffection” includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity. Explanation 2 — Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures of the Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means, without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section. Explanation 3 — Comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section.

However, the Government of Uttar Pradesh withdrew the charges of sedition against the Kashmiri students without a proper investigation. This would not have been possible if the police reforms ordered by the Supreme Court in 2006, giving limited functional independence to the police, had been implemented. But none of the States have initiated these reforms, much like the Union Government has also refused to give the Central Bureau of Investigative even limited independence, thus keeping the agency as a “caged parrot”.

The Kashmiri students were used to the leniency they enjoy in their home State, where cheering for Pakistan during crickets matches is an acceptable form of protest against the Indian state. The clearly didn’t realise that such behaviour may not be accepted in other parts of the country. However, they seem to have found friends within the Uttar Pradesh regime, perpetually seeking to consolidate its vote banks, who withdrew the sedition charges without even a formal apology from the students.

It is the writ of the separatists that runs in Jammu & Kashmir rather than that of the State Government. The latter decide on what day the Government offices will function and what excuse will be used to call a strike. Beyond making meaningless speeches about defending the country’s borders, this is business as usual for the Government as well.

Politicians will do just about anything to garner votes and gain power. This explains how the word ‘secularism’ has become synonymous with ‘minority appeasement’, particularly ‘Muslim appeasement’. The other religious minority communities are not big enough to make a difference to the fortunes of political parties, at least when viewed at the national level. However, it will be unfair to blame only Indian politicians for minority appeasement, as this is the case in most democracies around the world. The only difference is that, elsewhere political parties are united in safeguarding the territorial integrity of their country, unlike in India, where some politicians place their vested interests above national security concerns.

Nobody should tamper with the laws or misuse his position to manipulate the security forces to forward his personal interests. But in the case of the Kashmiri students, the Uttar Pradesh Government promptly ordered the police to withdraw the cases against those who had publicly expressed support for a country whose policies have been inimical to Indian interests.

Such Indian Muslims only bring a bad name to the rest of the community which is otherwise patriotic and loyal to India. Most Indian Muslims don’t want to be involved in such controversies and are opposed to religious extremism. In fact, recently students at Aligarh Muslim University warned the authorities: “Don’t turn AMU into a madarssa”. For them, madarssa is synonymous with religious fundamentalism. Indeed, there is a strong undercurrent at Aligarh Muslim University between students who call themselves liberals, and those who support orthodox practices on campus such as women wearing the burqa and students offering namaaz five times a day. This clash of ideologies has been simmering for a while now. It has divided the AMU community, and it became especially apparent after some students put up posters of burqa-clad women for a seminar titled, ‘Women’s Empowerment: An Alternative in Focus’.

The real problem in India is the absence of Government policy to deal with anti-Indian activities. The laws exist but no Government is willing to implement them. The Mughal empire fell because the Centre had become weak, and the subedaars or Provincial Governors hardly acknowledged its existence. This is true, to some extent, for the state of affairs between the Union and State Governments in India.

Then, there is also the issue of the civil society and its often perplexing views and opinions. What is this civil society? Who are its members and how are they different or any more civil than the rest of the country?

India has proposed multiple-entry visas to make travel across the Line of Control easier for the people of Kashmir. This is also supposed to be a confidence building measure with Pakistan. India has also proposed a bus service from Kargil to Skardu, which Pakistan had earlier rejected. Sadly, concessions after concessions have failed to persuade Pakistan to control terrorists who plot anti-India activities from its soil

Earlier, India had also conceded that Kashmiri terrorists, who had gone to Pakistan decades ago for training, would be allowed to return home. India granted Pakistan the Most Favoured Nation status in 1995 and Pakistan is still to reciprocate. Why should India always be the one bending over backwards to appease Pakistan? In any negotiation with Pakistan, there is the unfortunate stench of pacification. 

Coming back to the Kashmiris cheering for Pakistan, it is important to investigate if the students had been coached by anti-India elements. Letting them off the hook without following the due course of law is not clever policy, and it is not in the interests of the people. This country, with its democratic institutions and freedoms, belongs to all its citizens. Those who deny those to others deserve it not for themselves. India need not be apologetic about its laws and values.