For over six months, the team at the Indian Council for Historical Research (ICHR), an autonomous body under the ministry of Education, were made to gather each morning to sing the national anthem. Also, images of ‘Bharat Mata’ and of former Jan Sangh president Deendayal Upadhyaya adorned the office of member secretary of the ICHR, Umesh Kadam and the ICHR conference room. This daily singing of the anthem was stopped Friday and the two images were removed from both the rooms as well. The Indian Express has reported that these steps were taken  after some “objections.” 

When contacted, ICHR chairman Raghuvendra Tanwar and Member Secretary Kadam confirmed that this indeed was the sequence of events developments but refused to elaborate. According to a senior official: “The singing of the national anthem started based on a verbal order last September and stopped today, also on a verbal order. There was no written order to remove images of Bharat Mata and Upadhyaya but these were removed today from both places.” 

Sources said in both the rooms, images of Bharat Mata and Upadhyaya were on the wall with pictures of President Draupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Asked about the images of Bharat Mata and Upadhyaya, Kadam said, “There was no written order (to put these images). People come and present such things and we install them at an appropriate place.” Apparently, the national anthem was sung by staff at 10 am each day in front of the ICHR library. Kadam insisted that the singing of the national anthem was “voluntary.” 

Sources said that the singing of the anthem began after Kadam joined ICHR on August 11 last year. When contacted, chairman Tanwar said: “It is true that there was no proper permission (for images and national anthem). Neither from the (Governing) Council, nor from me. have no role in the removal of the images or stopping the national anthem. I have not visited ICHR office since February 10, 2023.” Tanwar added: “ICHR is a non-sectarian body. We have to maintain its sanctity.” 

Kadam was teaching, most recently at Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University as Professor (Chair Medieval Indian History) where he has also been Dean of Student’s Welfare. Tanwar, Professor Emeritus, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, was nominated as Chairman of the ICHR in January last year. His latest work “The Story of India’s Partition” was published in 2021 by the Government of India in both English and Hindi. 

Established in March 1972, the primary aim of ICHR, according to its mission statement, is to “foster objective and scientific writing of history.”

Related:

India’s Post Truth Era in ICHR’s Book on Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose

Saffronisation Thrust in ICHR Continues Undeterred

The post ICHR stops singing of national anthem, removes images of Bharat Mata, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya after ‘objections’ were raised appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Claim: A few Muslim women insulted the National Anthem by remaining seated while it was sung at a Muzaffarnagar Municipality Board meeting

Busted! The National Song i.e Vande Mataram was being sung at the event, and not the National Anthem. As there is no protocol surrounding the National Song, it is not mandatory to stand up when it is sung.

Over the last few days, a tweet has gone viral claiming that four Muslim women present at a meeting of the Muzaffarnagar Municipality Board, insulted the National Anthem by not standing up when other members rose to sing it.

UP: Burqa clad Muslim women Councillors disrespect the national anthem at Muzaffarnagar Municipality Board meeting

This is an offence under “Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act”, 1971 and must be jailed for one year.

Union Minister Sanjeev Balyan was at the meeting. pic.twitter.com/aXuxn5nS5x

— Arun ?? (@arunpudur) June 19, 2022

Subsequent similar tweets revealed that what was being sung was not the National Anthem i.e Jana Gana Mana, but the National Song i.e Vande Mataram, as can be clearly heard in the video shared with this tweet:

Video from the Muzaffarnagar Municipality Board meeting, where Muslim women desrespected the National Song by staying seated on their seats, while other members were standing. The meeting was held in the presence of Union minister @drsanjeevbalyan#BharatBandh #JUSTICEforNEETUG pic.twitter.com/SNb0VM205u

— Sandeepk_72 (@sandeep879_) June 20, 2022

However, given how the people who refused to stand up were Muslim women, that too those who were sporting burqas, the controversy spun out of control, and soon gained a communal hue, harking back to the controversy surrounding Muslims and Vande Mataram, that first emerged in September 2006.

At that time, Jamiat-Ulema-i-Hind chief Mahmood Madani had claimed that Muslims “cannot and should not” sing Vande Mataram and threatened to move court if forced to recite it. He told media persons, “Muslims are firm in their resolve that they cannot and should not sing Vande Mataram and they should not be forced to do so,” adding, “The Centre hasn’t made the recitation of the song mandatory and the states should also follow that. If forced to sing, we will protest it by peaceful means. We will take this issue to court.”

Elaborating on how singing the song was in contravention with Islamic beliefs Madani pointed to stanzas in the song that mention Indian deity Durga, and that Muslims were forbidden from worshipping anyone other than Allah. Rediff.com quoted him as saying, “Ibadat sirf ek Khuda ki hoti hai (only God is worshipped), Vande Mataram is a tribute to Goddess Durga, therefore, we cannot recite it.”

Protocol surrounding Vande Mataram

But leaving religious beliefs aside, it is important to note here that while there is a protocol to be followed when it comes to the National Anthem, there is no such protocol pertaining to the National Song. This is in fact as per a formal submission made by the government before the Rajya Sabha in November 2016. In response to a question raised by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Member of Parliament Vikas Mahatme, about rules regarding singing or playing of the National Song, Kiren Rijiju, who was then a Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs responded with a written submission that said, “Government has not framed any rules or issued instructions laying down circumstances in which the National Song may be sung or played.”

The answer may be viewed here: 

A few months later, in February 2017, a Supreme Court Bench headed by then Justice Deepak Mishra and also comprising Justices R Banumathi and Mohan M Shantanagoudar, found that though Article 51A (fundamental duties) of the Constitution requires to promote the National Anthem and the National Flag, “The Article does not refer to National Song. It only refers to National Flag and National Anthem. Therefore, we do not intend to enter into any debate as far as the National Song is concerned.” The court therefore refused to entertain a petition by BJP spokesperson Ashwini Upadhyay demanding directions from the top court to the government to frame a national policy to promote Vande Mataram. His plea to make reciting the National Anthem compulsory in offices, courts and legislative houses and Parliament was also declined.

Latest PIL related to Vande Mataram

Now, the same Ashwini Upadhyay has once again moved court demanding that the National Song – Vande Mataram be given the same status as the National Anthem – Jana Gana Mana. He has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) before the Delhi High Court to this effect and also sought direction to the Centre and State Governments to ensure that ‘Jana-Gana-Mana’ and ‘Vande Mataram’ are played and sung in all schools and educational institutions on every working day. The division bench of acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Sachin Datta, on May 26, sought the Centre’s response in the matter within six weeks, and the next date of hearing is November 9.

Vande Mataram and the Indian Freedom Struggle

The song was originally a poem that was part of Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay’s 1882 novel Anadamath, and offered praise to the motherland. It played a role in uniting freedom fighters, and the British even banned it from being sung in public. Thus, singing Vande Mataram became an act of defiance against the British colonial rulers and the song became an integral part of India’s Independence movement and therefore its history and culture. Over the years, it has been sung to many different tunes – from the pacier version associated with the freedom movement to the slower version played on Doordarshan early every morning.

Related:

Hate Buster: Mob protesting Nupur Sharma’s anti-Prophet comments did not kill Kolkata policeman
Hate Buster: Conspiracy theories about Taj Mahal collapse, yet again
Hate Buster: Nope! Eating from Muslim-owned restaurants does not cause impotence
Hate Buster: Harsha Jingade’s sister does not support calls to boycott Muslim businesses
Hate Buster: Why is the right wing so scared of Sai Baba of Shirdi?

The post Hate Buster! Muslim women did not break protocol by remaining seated during Vande Mataram appeared first on SabrangIndia.

24-year-old Faizan became a household name after a video of him being forced to sing the national anthem even as he lay injured and writhing in agony on the ground went viral on social media during the February 2020 North east Delhi violence. The young man and his friends had been beaten brutally, and a few days later Faizan succumbed to his injuries.

In a plea seeking a court-monitored Special Investigation Team probe into his death, the Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi police to file an affidavit regarding the preservation of documents and working of the CCTV cameras at the police station.

Justice Yogesh Khanna said: “….with regard to direction to respondent No.3 to file an affidavit supporting all the relevant material regarding functioning of CCTV cameras of Police Station Jyoti Nagar and in particular on February 24, 2020 and February 25, 2020, let an affidavit be filed qua the functioning of said CCTV cameras along with material evidence qua its non-functioning on specific days or month, be filed before the next date of hearing with an advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner.”

The Single-judge Bench also directed that if the CCTV cameras were not functioning, documents supporting that fact had to be produced in court. According to LiveLaw, the petitioner Kismatun’s (Faizan’s mother) advocates, Vrinda Grover and Soutik Banerjee, had earlier told the Court that the police have claimed that the CCTV cameras of the police station were not working on the relevant date.

According to the Indian Express, the police have filed a status report in the court stating that they are still trying to ascertain the identity of officers seen in the viral video and that only one policeman has been “pinpointed on probable basis”.

The video was shared over social media and WhatsApp when the incident first came to light on February 25, during the communal violence of Northeast Delhi. The video showed the three men, writhing in pain on the ground surrounded by a group of Delhi police personnel, who stood by, purportedly taunting and ordering them to sing the national anthem, and also Vande Mataram, occasionally, hitting them with their lathis.

Faizan, who was a resident of Kardam Puri, succumbed to his injuries at LNJP Hospital. Dr Kishore Singh, medical director of the hospital, had been quoted by the Indian Express, “He was admitted to the neurosurgery ward on February 25 and died three days later. He had suffered gunshot wounds and was critical.”

The matter will be heard on March 15, 2021.

The order may be read here: 

Related:

Northeast Delhi violence: Policeman from ‘national anthem’ video questioned

The post Faizan police brutality case: Delhi HC directs police to file affidavit on working CCTV cameras appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Hoax claim that circulated for a while
(Image added by Kafila for no good reason)

Sindh was a fairly significant part of the British Empire ever since it was absentmindedly conquered by General Napier in the 1840s. (He is believed to sent his superiors a brief message on the conquest, Peccavi, Latin for ‘I have sinned’, which is to say, Sindh. The man was an insufferable nerd).

However, the Partition of 1947 placed Sindh on the wrong side of the Indian border, and its continued presence in the national anthem does not sit well with some Indians. “Why Sindh?” they ask plaintively. “Why not Rajasthan or Jammu & Kashmir? What about the North East States? Isn’t it time we rewrote Jana Gana Mana to reflect our current political realities, etc?”

Passing lightly over the fact that replacing ‘Sindh’ with ‘the North East States and Sikkim’ would play hell with the scansion of the disputed line, there are apparently very good arguments for not tinkering with Jana Gana Mana as it has stood from 1911.  I have only the haziest notion of what these arguments are, but among other things, we are told it would “disregard its existence as a poem by Rabindranath Tagore and an associated ethic that you do not take other people’s poetry and make changes to them.”

Just for the record, the Constituent Assembly didn’t worry overmuch about this ‘associated ethic’, making it clear that the anthem was “subject to such alterations in the words as the government may authorise as occasion arises”.

As for its existence as a poem by Tagore, and whether the old man would have approved of replacing Sindh with the North East and former princely states, it’s a moot point.

Poets admittedly don’t take kindly to lesser beings tinkering with their immortal verse. Take the case of Tagore’s disciple and noted Sinhala versifier, Ananda Samarakoon, who wrote the lyrics of the Sri Lankan national anthem, Sri Lanka Matha. What Samarakoon actually wrote was Namo Namo Matha, but for reasons I fail to understand, the opening line was considered terribly inauspicious, and it was changed without the poet’s permission.

Samarkoon was so upset by this that he killed himself a year later, in 1962.

Tagore having died in 1941 of natural causes, and his works now being out of copyright, there would probably be few, if any, dire consequences to changing the lyrics without the poet’s consent.

But my grouse with Jana Gana Mana – beyond the tedium of having to stand up for it forty times at the last International Film Festival of India – lies not with its inclusion of Sindh and its contiguous districts.

Or even with the rather more controversial possibility that he wrote it to honour George, the King Emperor.

George was undeniably on a visit to these parts in 1911, when Bharot Bhagyo Bidhata – Dispenser of India’s Destiny – was composed. Now follow me closely here: the song was first sung at a convention of the Indian National Congress in Calcutta in December 1911. And it was sung on a day when the agenda comprised a loyal welcome to the dim-witted monarch (“he did nothing at all but kill animals and stick in stamps,” complained his biographer) on his visit to India.

Was Tagore praising the bewhiskered King Emperor, who would shortly bestow a knighthood on the poet for services rendered, or an altogether different and as yet unnamed dispenser of India’s destiny?

Of course, there is no reason why India’s destiny could not have been dispensed, jointly or singly, by entities other than King George. Tagore himself did not dispute contemporary reports on the putative subject of his hymn until 1937 — long after he had surrendered his knighthood, and shortly after George had succumbed to the ill effects of heavy smoking and falling off his horse – when he observed that the Reader of the Collective Mind of India could not be George V, VI or any other George.

(I have to say I agree. It should have been Edward VIII, a far more personable king than the notably colourless George VI.)

However, my problem with Jana Gana Mana is more essential.

Piqued by repeated calls to remove Sindh from the roll-call of British Provinces in the national anthem, one proud Sindhi has pointed out that the national anthem is a poem, and we should stop trying to turn it into “a cartographic document”.

Really? Not a cartographic document?

Though Jana Gana Mana is written in a form of highly sanskritised Bengali barely understood by deshbhakts, it’s readily available in translation. And it should be abundantly clear that – except for the first and last lines where the poet grovels before the Ruler of our Minds in a winning manner – the remainder of the poem is unapologetically cartographic.  In a few short lines, it demarcates the borders of British India through its colonial-era provinces, and fills in the map of India with physical details like rivers and mountains.

Granted, it’s rather sketchy, but the man was a poet, not a geographer.

And this insistence on geographic as opposed to demographic virtues, it should be noted, is common to all anthems written or inspired by our national poet.

Shortly after tripping over the poet, now prostrate with gratitude before the Eternal Charioteer, we are tempted to ask, where are the people? Surely, somewhere among the echoing mountains and singing rivers, surrounded by the great ocean that’s even now chanting the name of the Dispenser of India’s Fortune, there should be people, some 250 million of them even in 1911.  Where are the Tillers, the Pathmakers, the Travellers, the Maidens, and the Boatmen – wraith-like and largely metaphoric, to be sure – that surface randomly in the poet’s vast oeuvre?

One looks for them in vain. We, the People of India, are markedly absent in the national anthem.

Tagore, a fastidious member of Bengal’s bhadralok, loved people in the abstract but probably had a mild horror of them in the teeming mass. And even back in the late 19^th century, they teemed like nobody’s business. Writing in the 1870s, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay, a more muscular Bengali, had swords flashing out in seventy million hands – no doubt the population of undivided Bengal — and seventy million voices roaring “thy dreadful name from shore to shore” in Vande Mataram. Tagore set Bankim Chandra’s poem to music, but all this roaring and flashing was evidently not his style.

Had seventy million, or indeed fewer, voices roared anything at all in the proximity of his sensitive ears, one feels Tagore would instantly have departed for the Kumaon hills and written something profound about faded futile flowers and a languorous sorrow weighing upon his heart.

It is not recorded if he ever really encountered a Tiller, tattered and stained, in the sun-embroidered green of mist laden hills, but had he done so, I assume the poet would have been nonplussed.

One could, of course, argue that the absence of anything remotely human in the Indian national anthem was an oversight on the poet’s part, but let’s take a look at the other anthem penned by him, Bangladesh’s Amar Sonar Bangla, written in 1905.

Needless to say, the poem is replete with the aroma of mango orchards in the springtime, mature fields of paddy, banyan trees and what not. (Somewhere in the fourth verse – not included in the Bangladesh anthem – the poet glorifies a village and realizes, too late, that there are villagers. “Shepherds and farmers are my brothers,” he observes elliptically and moves on).

Ditto Ananda Samarakoon’s Sri Lanka Matha which, though laden with grain and luscious fruit, and fragrant flowers of radiant hue, is as deficient in living, breathing people as his preceptor Tagore’s Indian and Bangladeshi anthems.

I have little doubt that Tagore, faced with the daunting task of writing a hymn to the Lord of India’s Destiny, reached for the nearest and possibly only model he knew, said to be the oldest official national anthem in the world, God Save the [gendered noun for current British monarch].

The original lyrics of God Save the King/Queen, which coincidentally refer to yet another George, is terse and to the point: send him victorious, happy and glorious, long to reign over us, it insists, omitting altogether the fractious natives of the island kingdom and its colonies except as subjects to be reigned over. Armed with this misanthropic model, Tagore dashed off Jana Gana Mana, which, like God Save the King and Candle in the Wind, is admirably capacious in its ability to embrace whichever Ruler of Hearts is currently on the ascendant.

I am not suggesting that national anthems should not point with quiet pride to the geographical features of their respective nations and their associated flora and fauna, but surely a nation is more than the sum of its rivers and mountains.

Take, for instance, the Portuguese national anthem, which was officially adopted in 1911, when Tagore was laboring over Jana Gana Mana. 

Heroes of the sea, noble people,
Valiant and immortal nation,
Raise once again today,
The splendor of Portugal!

There, right at the beginning, you have people. It must have been pretty evident to the poet, a young bloke named Henrique Lopes de Mendonça, that a nation is its people and not its topography, though Portugal is well endowed with picturesque hills and valleys.

La Marseillaise, older than A Portuguesa by a hundred years, likewise has no time for lofty crests and mellow leas. “Allons enfants de la Patrie,” it begins, “Arise, children of the fatherland, the day of glory has arrived.” After observing that ferocious soldiers – Austrians, in this case – were “coming right into your arms, to cut the throats of your sons, your women”, it goes on to explain what Frenchmen do when faced with tyrants and bloodthirsty despots. (Not retreat behind the Maginot Line and dial the Pentagon, this was an earlier time). Blood soaked fields are invoked.

Similarly, the German national anthem begins with a rousing appeal for unity, justice and freedom for the Fatherland, on the broad principle that the Fatherland comprises its people. (Earlier verses praising German women, German wine and German song have regrettably been dropped from the Deutschlandlied). 
As I have observed earlier, Vande Matarm is actually a more robust poem, reflecting the kind of homicidal nationalism that’s so characteristic of European anthems. But you wouldn’t guess that from the wishy-washy two verses that are now identified as the “national song“. The original song begins mildly enough with orchard gleams, cool winds and blossoming trees, but things escalate quickly.

Unlike Tagore, who declined to identify the Protector of India’s Fate, Bankim Chandra tactlessly invokes Durga and Lakshmi, which kind of takes the shine off the poem for many Indians. But it’s otherwise quite a rousing number, as anyone who has heard Hemant Kumar’s song from the 1952 film, Anand Math, will agree.

A hundred years is a long time in a nation’s history, and national anthems aren’t carved in stone. The uneasy acceptance that anthems are subject to alterations is possibly one reason why Jana Gana Mana does not find a place in the Constitution of India, and was merely presented to the Constituent Assembly on 24 January 1950 in a statement read by Dr. Rajendra Prasad, who immediately moved on to more pressing matters like the falling number of women members in Parliament.

Should Jana Gana Mana be subject to alterations? Can Sindh be replaced with some other state or union territory or, indeed, be retained while other territories overlooked by the poet are added to the list? Or – and this is not uncommon – should we adopt a new anthem altogether, one that’s more in tune with the zeitgeist?

Back in school, while struggling with the incomprehensible language of Jana Gana Mana and Vande Mataram, I’d frequently wondered why a simpler song could not have been adopted as the national anthem.
Like Sare Jahan Se Accha. 

Muhammad Iqbal’s exquisite “Tarānah-i-Hindi” (quite literally the Anthem of the People of India), is liberally sprinkled with tall mountains and frolicking rivers, but it acknowledges the nation’s nightingales, the people of India, whom the poet evidently held in high regard. Maẕhab nahīṉ sikhātā āpas meṉ bair rakhnā, says the poet, Hindī haiṉ ham, wat̤an hai Hindositāṉ hamārāa, an observation on Indianness that resonates a hundred years later.

If only Iqbal hadn’t gone and mucked it all up by writing “Tarana-e-Milli“.

Sajan Venniyoor is an independent media consultant.

Courtesy: Kafila.online
 

The post We, the People of India, are markedly absent in our national anthem appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image: PTI

English translation of the lead story published on the front page of the multi-edition of the Urdu daily, Inquilab on Thursday

The Yogi government has further hardened its stance towards madrasas in the state. Last week an official circular was sent to all madrasas, instructing them on how Independence Day was to be celebrated in their institutions. Now, despite the fact that most madrasas celebrated Independence Day with fervor and enthusiasm, and the spirit of patriotism was rekindled among the children, the state government continues to eye madrasas with suspicion. 

According to sources, the authorities have received complaints that though Independence Day was celebrated and the tricolor hoisted, instead of the national anthem, what was sung in some madrasas was poet-philosopher Mohammed Iqbal’s sarey jehan se achcha Hindustan hamara.

It is feared that stringent action is likely against such madrasas, including the prosecution of madrasa authorities under the draconian provisions of the National Security Act (NSA). This has triggered a mixed reaction among Muslims. While some are critical of the madrasa authorities who decided not to sing the national anthem, many Muslims blame the Yogi government for needlessly raking up an issue.

The city Qazi of Lucknow, Maulana Abul Irfan Miyan of Firangi Mahal said it was a strange government in power in UP which instead of concentrating its energies major concerns of the state is trying to keep people trapped in religious and sentimental issues. He wanted to know whether citizens were free to celebrate Independence in their own way or as per the diktat of the government.

The maulana also wanted to know which would be a fit case for invoking the National Security Act: not singing national anthem or lynching people in the name of the holy cow. He ended up asking the government not to target madrasas and asserted that Muslims do not need a certificate from anyone as regards their love for the country.

Meanwhile, the UP state spokesperson of the Congress, Hilal Naqvi said the government should know when and under what circumstances to invoke the NSA. Naqvi added that to begin with he was not prepared to believe that any madrasa was remiss in not celebrating Independence Day. Even if some madrasas were at fault, is it an offence that invites the provisions of NSA? He alleged that both the state and the central governments were resorting to such measures to hide their own failures in governance.

It may be noted that the national anthem was sung in most madrasas on Independence Day and the same was also videographed. But reports are circulating in the media that in some madrasas the national anthem was not sung and the government is now proposing to take legal action against them. The District Magistrate and the district police are reportedly compiling a list of madrasas where the national anthem was not sung. Reportedly Bareilly district is especially under the scanner.

According to reports, the national anthem was sung in most madrasas in central and eastern UP but in many places a video shoot of the same was not done. The authorities from such madrasas are being quizzed over why they did not ensure the video shoot despite clear instructions to that effect.

It may be recalled that the Qazi of Bareily, Maulana Asad Raza Khan had announced in advance that singing Jana, gana, mana… was against the teachings of Islam since there are some words in the national anthem which were un-Islamic.

According to sources, the government is determined to act against madrasas against which there is definite evidence of the national anthem not having been sung there.

The circular issued by the UP Madrasa Board to all madrasas had made it clear that the hoisting of the national flag and singing of national anthem were obligatory on Independence Day. Under the draconian provisions of the NSA, the government may detain any person for any period of time without stating the reasons for the same.
 

The post Action under draconian NSA likely against UP madrasas for not singing national anthem on Independence Day appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said people are not obliged to stand up when the national anthem is played as part of a film or documentary, reported ANI. 

Earlier, on November 30 had said that all cinema halls across the country must start playing the national anthem before every movie screening. The bench comprising justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy had ordered that this be accompanied by the national flag on the screen, and that members of the public should stand for the anthem.

The post No Need to Stand up for National Anthem played as part of a Film or Documentary: Supreme Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The incident took place at a theatre in suburban Goregaon on Wednesday evening, they said.

The victim, Amalraj Dasan, was allegedly hit on his face by a person for not standing up while the National Anthem was being played in a scene during the screening of film “Dangal”.

The particular scene pertained to depiction of winning of a gold medal by daughter of Mahavir Phogat (enacted by Aamir Khan).

The accused, identified as Shirish Madhukar, has been booked under IPC section 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 504 (intentional insult with intent to broke peace), police said adding that a probe into the matter is on.

Courtesy: Janta Ka Reporter

The post Elderly man assaulted for not standing up during Dangal’s National Anthem scene appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Three people manhandled in Chennai for not standing up for national anthem at Chennai film festival appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Courtesy: Indian cultural Forum

The post “Making the National Anthem Compulsory in Cinema Halls is a Call to Violence”: Sadanand Menon appeared first on SabrangIndia.

राष्ट्रीय ध्वज और अन्य राष्ट्रीय प्रतीकों के सम्मान की रक्षा की लिए देश में पहले से ही कई कानून लागू हैं। कुछ मामलों में कानूनों व नियमों और व्यक्तिगत स्वतंत्रता के बीच टकराव के उदाहरण सामने आए हैं। केरल में जेहनोवास विटनेस नामक एक पंथ के विद्यार्थियों ने अपने स्कूल में यह कहकर राष्ट्रगान गाने से इंकार कर दिया था कि ऐसा करना मूर्ति पूजा होगी, जो कि उनकी धार्मिक आस्थाओं के अनुरूप नहीं है। इन विद्यार्थियों को स्कूल से निष्कासित कर दिया गया। मामला उच्चतम न्यायालय तक गया, जिसने विद्यार्थियों के पक्ष में फैसला दिया और उनका निष्कासन रद्द कर दिया गया।

प्रजातंत्र में नागरिकों के अधिकारों और राज्य के प्रति उनके कर्तव्यों में संतुलन आवश्यक है। इसीलिए संविधान सभी नागरिकों को कुछ मूलाधिकार देता है और उन्हें अभिव्यक्ति की आज़ादी भी उपलब्ध करवाता है। एक दशक पहले, उच्चतम न्यायालय ने व्यक्तिगत स्वतंत्रता के पक्ष में अपना निर्णय दिया था। ऐसा लगता है कि अब गंगा उलटी बह रही है। बात-बात पर ‘‘राष्ट्रवाद, मातृभूमि के प्रति प्रेम और देशभक्ति’’ जैसे जुमलों को उछाला जा रहा है। जो लोग सत्ताधारी दल या सरकार की नीतियों से असहमत हैं, उन्हें राष्ट्रविरोधी बताया जा रहा है और यह कहा जा रहा है कि वे ‘‘देशभक्त’’ नहीं हैं। यहां तक कि एटीएम या बैंकों के बाहर अपने ही खातों से पैसा निकालने के लिए घंटों कतार में खड़े रहने का भी महिमामंडन किया जा रहा है। यह कहा जा रहा है कि यह देशभक्ति है और राष्ट्र की खातिर लोग लाईनों में घंटों खड़े हैं। ये कतारें मोदी सरकार द्वारा लिए गए नोटबंदी के निर्णय का परिणाम हैं और इन्हें देशभक्ति से जोड़ा जाना हास्यास्पद प्रतीत होता है। उच्चतम न्यायालय का यह आदेश एक ऐसे समय आया है जब देशभक्ति और राष्ट्रवाद जैसी अवधारणाओं का इस्तेमाल, असहमति और विरोध को दबाने के लिए किया जा रहा है।

जबसे मोदी सरकार सत्ता में आई है, तभी से वह अपने विरोधियों की राष्ट्रभक्ति/राष्ट्रवाद पर प्रश्नचिन्ह लगा रही है। हैदराबाद केंद्रीय विश्वविद्यालय में अंबेडकर स्टूडेंट्स एसोसिएशन की गतिविधियों को ‘राष्ट्रविरोधी’ बताया गया और तत्कालीन केंद्रीय मानव संसाधन मंत्री के दबाव में विश्वविद्यालय के कुलपति ने रोहित वेम्युला को होस्टल से निकाल दिया और उसकी शिष्यवृत्ति बंद कर दी। इसके बाद, रोहित ने आत्महत्या कर ली। ऐसा ही कुछ दिल्ली स्थित जवाहरलाल नेहरू विश्वविद्यालय में हुआ, जहां जेएनयू छात्रसंघ के अध्यक्ष कन्हैया कुमार और उनके साथियों को कटघरे में खड़ा करने के लिए एक नकली सीडी कुछ टेलिवीजन न्यूज़ चैनलों पर चलाई गई। कन्हैया कुमार को देशद्रोही करार दे दिया गया। बाद में यह सामने आया कि कन्हैया कुमार ने तथाकथित देशद्रोही नारे लगाए ही नहीं थे। वैसे भी, संवैधानिक स्थिति यह है कि केवल नारे लगाना देशद्रोह नहीं है।  देशभक्ति और राष्ट्रवाद के मुद्दों पर भड़काए जा रहे जुनून के नतीजे में गोवा में राष्ट्रगान के समय खड़े न होने पर एक ऐसे व्यक्ति की पिटाई कर दी गई जो व्हीलचेयर से उठ भी नहीं सकता था। मुंबई में एक युवा पटकथा लेखक को राष्ट्रगान के समय खड़े न होने पर सिनेमा हॉल से धक्के देकर बाहर निकाल दिया गया।

राष्ट्रवाद के मुद्दे पर इस तरह की ज़ोर-जबरदस्ती, चिंता का विषय है। देशभक्ति क्या है और देशभक्त कौन है, इसे परिभाषित करना आसान नहीं है। जब देश में राजाओं और नवाबों का शासन था, उस समय वे अपने प्रजाजनों से यह अपेक्षा करते थे कि वे उनके प्रति पूरी तरह वफादार रहें। राजा के प्रति वफादार न रहने की सज़ा बहुत कड़ी थी जिसमें हाथ काट देने से लेकर मृत्युदंड तक शामिल था।

ब्रिटिश राज में देश में दो तरह के राष्ट्रवाद एक साथ अस्तित्व में थे। एक ओर उद्योगपतियों, श्रमिकों और शिक्षित लोगों का उभरता हुआ वर्ग था, जो धर्मनिरपेक्ष-प्रजातांत्रिक भारत के निर्माण के लिए साम्राज्यवाद व औपनिवेशवाद के खिलाफ खड़ा था। सरकार की निगाह में ये लोग देशभक्त नहीं थे। धर्म के नाम पर राष्ट्रवाद की शुरूआत, राजाओं और ज़मींदारों ने की। वे अंग्रेज़ों के प्रति वफादार थे। ब्रिटिश साम्राज्य इन वर्गों को देशभक्त मानता था। उनकी संस्था यूनाईटेड इंडिया पेट्रिऑटिक एसोसिएशन, धार्मिक राष्ट्रवाद की जनक बनी। मुस्लिम राष्ट्रवादी और हिन्दू राष्ट्रवादी दोनों ब्रिटिश शासकों के प्रति वफादार थे और तत्कालीन सरकार की निगाहों में देशभक्त थे। ब्रिटिश सरकार के विरूद्ध जो राष्ट्रवाद संघर्षरत था, वह व्यापक और समावेशी था और किसी एक जाति, धर्म या वर्ग तक सीमित नहीं था। मुस्लिम लीग और हिन्दू महासभा-आरएसएस का राष्ट्रवाद, धार्मिक पहचान के आसपास बुना गया था। इसके विपरीत, महात्मा गांधी के नेतृत्व वाला राष्ट्रवाद, प्रजातांत्रिक मूल्यों और धर्मनिरपेक्षता पर आधारित था और उदारवादी था। स्वाधीनता के बाद, सांप्रदायिक संगठनों ने राज्य के प्रति संपूर्ण निष्ठा को राष्ट्रवाद का पर्यायवाची मान लिया। जो भी लोग सरकार या राज्य से सहमत नहीं हैं, वे देशभक्त नहीं हैं। यह ठीक वही अवधारणा है जो राजाओं और नवाबों की थी। यह ठीक वही अवधारणा है जो दुनिया के सभी तानाशाहों की थी और है।

संघ व भाजपा इस समय देश में जो वातावरण बना रहे हैं, उससे एकाधिकारवाद और तानाशाही की पदचाप सुनाई दे रही है। राजाओं-नवाबों के शासनकाल में शासक सर्वोच्च था और सभी प्रजाजन उसके अधीन थे। राजा के प्रति वफादारी ही देशभक्ति थी। तानाशाह भी जनता से अपने प्रति पूर्ण समर्पण और वफादारी चाहते हैं और इसे ही देशभक्ति बताते हैं। आरएसएस-भाजपा का यह मानना है कि राज्य सर्वोच्च है और नागरिकों को केवल उसके प्रति अपने कर्तव्यों का पालन करना चाहिए। ऐसा लगता है कि उच्चतम न्यायालय का यह आदेश, इसी तरह की मानसिकता की उपज है।
इस तरह का अतिराष्ट्रवाद, प्रजातंत्र को तानाशाही में बदल सकता है। हमें उम्मीद है कि उच्चतम न्यायालय को इस तथ्य का अहसास होगा और वह अपने इस निर्णय पर पुनर्विचार करेगा।

(मूल अंग्रेजी से हिन्दी रूपांतरण अमरीश हरदेनिया)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author's personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

The post सिनेमा हॉलों में राष्ट्रगान, ज़बरिया देशभक्ति appeared first on SabrangIndia.