View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by सबको प्यारा भगवा हमारा (@jay_shree_ram_kattar)

The divisive actions of the right-wing group Bajrang Dal mirrored a pattern observed during the Navratri and garba festivals. During Navratri, right-wing outfits sought to communalize festivities by placing posters throughout the state and banning Muslims from participating in Navratri and Garba events due to their Muslim identity.

At that time, the right-wing not only promoted communal exclusivity but also banned the entry of Muslims at such events, creating a hostile and hateful environment. The display of similar posters further reinforced the right-wings outfits divisive narrative, promoting the narrative that economic participation should be restricted to members of the Hindu community during the Diwali festival.

In Bhopal, a large billboard featuring a poster from Bajrang Dal urges Hindus to make purchases exclusively within their community and such posters have been put up at different squares and intersections in Bhopal. It is written on them, ‘Apna festival, Apno se Vyavahar’, can be seen here:

Kavita Narendra Yadav, Chairperson of the Shamgarh Municipal Council in Mandsaur district, has also shown support for these initiatives, which raises questions about the role of local governance in promoting communal agendas.

The poster can be seen here:

Bharat Raksha Manch’s poster in Ujjain:

Bajrang Dal’s poster in Devas, MP:

BJP leader also promoted the divisive agenda

Former BJP MP and Assam BJP’s state-in-charge Harish Dwivedi has also endorsed the divisive agenda of right-wing groups. On his social media platform X, he stated, “Friends, the sacred festival of Diwali begins tomorrow, and in this sequence, we will celebrate the holy festival of Dhanteras. In our Sanatan Dharma, it is believed that on the auspicious day of Dhanteras, we all should make a purchase of something new according to our means. You are all aware that right now, certain extremists from a specific community are repeatedly calling for their members to only shop at their community’s stores.”

“I urge all you Sanatani brothers to respond appropriately to these extremists by making your purchases from Sanatani shops this festival.” He added.

मित्रो दीपावली का पवित्र पर्व कल से प्रारंभ हो रहा है , उसी क्रम में कल धनतेरस का पवित्र त्योहार है । हमारे सनातन धर्म में यह मान्यता है की धनतेरस के शुभ दिन हम सब अपने सामर्थ्य के अनुसार कोई नई बस्तु की खरीदारी अवश्य करते है । साथियो आप सबको पता है इस समय एक समुदाय बिशेष के… pic.twitter.com/J7rPLkd1KA

— Harish Dwivedi (@HarishD_BJP) October 28, 2024

The Bajrang Dal’s ongoing efforts to communalise festivals are evident in their recent campaigns promoting exclusive shopping within the Hindu community, following communal agenda during the Navratri and garba festivals, where Muslim youth faced assaults and exclusion. Bajrang Dal’s “Apna Tyohar” posters in Madhya Pradesh not only encourage boycotting Muslim businesses during Diwali but also reflect a broader strategy to foster division. It is particularly concerning that local administrations have allowed such communal posters and billboards to proliferate divisive agendas. The communal narrative promoted by right-wing groups seeks to marginalize Muslims from economic activities, echoing a broader anti-Muslim agenda. This was evident in communal attempts like the UP-government’s directive (later stayed by the Supreme Court) that required hotel and Dhaba owners to display nameplates, which further alienated Muslim businesses.

It is noteworthy that in Madhya Pradesh, Chief Minister Mohan Yadav has urged people to buy goods from local shops for Diwali, setting an example by personally purchasing items from these stores. However, Bajrang Dal has put a different spin on this message.

Related:

Navratri celebrations disrupted by targeted attacks on Muslim youth and artist

VHP leader assaults Muslim youth attempting to enter Navratri event in UP

When Navratri’s joyous Garba dance becomes a garb for exclusion: Gujarat, MP

The post Bajrang Dal’s billboards in MP, urge Hindus to shop exclusively within their community appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The detailed Letter Petition also states that

“In light of the recent events that have occurred in the Nuh region in Haryana, a deep concern has arisen due to videos that have surfaced on social media of hate speech and incitement of targeted violence, that are disrupting peace and harmony in our society.

“We, as members of the legal community and of The Delhi High Court Women Lawyers Forum, residing in Delhi and Gurgaon, have approached Your Lordship, vide this Letter Petition, to bring to your notice the fact that hate speech videos are circulating on social media which purport to have been recorded at rallies in Haryana. We humbly seek urgent and expeditious directions to the State of Haryana to prevent incidents of hate speech and to take action against those who have perpetrated it, in violation of directions repeatedly issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and to immediately track and ban these videos that amplify hate speech and create an atmosphere of fear.

“The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Suo Moto issued directions vide Order dated 7.8.2023 in CWP-PIL-68/2023, staying illegal demolitions by the State, and expressed concern on whether the buildings belonging to a particular community are being brought down under the guise of a law and order problem. The swift and sensitive approach of the Court has gone a long way in building confidence of citizens in the rule of law.

“The Hon’ble Supreme Court, recently on 11.08.2023 in Shaheen Abdullah vs. Union of India observed that there has to be harmony and comity between the communities and that the calls to boycott the Muslim community after the recent communal violence at Nuh was “unacceptable”. This Court has accordingly mooted the idea of the DGP to constitute a committee to verify all material and issue directions to the concerned officer and that the Police needs to be sensitized.

“The Hon’ble Supreme Court,recently on 11.08.2023 in Shaheen Abdullah vs. Union of India observed that there has to be harmony and comity between the communities and that the calls to boycott the Muslim community after the recent communal violence at Nuh was “unacceptable”. This Court has accordingly mooted the idea of the DGP to constitute a committee to verify all material and issue directions to the concerned officer and that the Police needs to be sensitized.

“In Tehseen S. Poonawalla V. Unionof India and Others (2018) 9 SCC 501, this Court has recorded that mob vigilantism and mob violence have to be prevented by the governments by taking strict action. That rising intolerance and growing polarisation expressed through incidents of mob violence cannot be permitted to become the normal way of life or the normal state of law and order in the country. The State has a sacrosanct duty to protect its people from unruly elements and perpetrators of vigilantism, with utmost sincerity.

“Specific guidelines have been issued with regard to both the Central Government and the State Government. They include having police-patrolling in sensitive areas so that anti-social elements involved in crimes related to mob­ violence against any caste or community remain within the boundaries of law and indeed,fear taking the law into their own hands.

“The State and Centre are required to broadcast on radio, TV and other media as well as their official platforms, that such violence shall invite serious consequences. They are also required to curb AND stop dissemination of information of irresponsible and explosive messages, videos and other material that may have a tendency to incite mob violence of any kind. The police is required to register FIRs (First Information Reports) against persons who disseminate such messages, videos and other material. Nodal officers are required to be designated for information and action. Such cases require to be fast-tracked, and preferably concluded within 6 months. Compensation where required, is to be granted within 30 days. Failure of the district administration must be seen as an act of deliberate negligence.

“The Supreme Court has concluded the above judgment by emphatically noting that it is the duty of the State to ensure that the machinery of law and order functions effectively and efficiently to maintain peace, and to preserve our quintessentially secular ethos and pluralistic social fabric in a democratic set­ up, governed by the rule of law.

“The Supreme Court has issued further directives in October 2022 and April 2023 mandating immediate suo moto action to register First Information Reports in cases involving hate-speech offences even if no complaint is forthcoming and to proceed against the offenders in accordance with law. The order made it clear that such action will be taken irrespective of the religion of the maker of the speech or the person who commits such acts, so that the secular character of the Bharat as envisaged by the Preamble, is preserved and protected.

“Despite such repeated guidelines and directions, the unprecedented incidents of hate speech in Nuh and other districts, reveal a comprehensive failure on the part of the State Administration and Police to implement preventive measures, as well as, to have appropriate responsive measures during, and after, these incidents of hate speech. Unchecked hate speech in rallies and speeches not only carry the risk of inciting violence but also, foster and spread an environment and culture of communal fear, harassment, and discrimination.

“The concern is magnified by the fact that the videos circulating on social media show individuals carrying arms in processions and chanting communal slogans in contravention of the Constitution, the Arms Act and the law laid down by Supreme Court through its rulings. Yet, there doesn’t seem to be any verification of these videos, and action against persons indulging in such acts. This is a dangerous threat to social harmony and the rule of law in India. If allowed unchecked, it might be impossible to control this growing trend of hate and violence.

“As women, as mothers and as officers of the Court, we feel a strong commitment to communal harmony, rule of law and with this sense of responsibility we have approached your Lordship for the following directions to the State Government: to promote an environment of dignity and liberty for citizens of all religions in the State of Haryana and fraternity between communities by announcing programmes that highlight inclusion and awards for acts of communal harmony; to take steps in accordance with the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to prevent incidents of hate speech; to track and ban videos that threaten harm to any community/ places of worship or urge economic boycott of any community; to take immediate action against persons found responsible for committing acts of hate speech.

The list of signatories are below:

Delhi High Court Women Lawyers Forum (The List of Signatories is provided below)

1. Miriam Fozia Rahman
2. Kirti Singh
3. Malavika Rajkotia
4. Nandita Rao
5. Jhum Jhum Sarkar
6. Zeba Khair
7. Neha Rastogi
8. Mahjabeen
9. Amrita Sharma
10. Shefali Sewak
11. Ruchi Singh
12. Abiha Zaidi
13. Ashima Obhan
14. Iti Pandey
15. Sangeeta Bharti
16. Swaty S. Malik
17. Soni Singh
18. Sunita Dutt
19. Tara Narula
20. Shalini Nair
21. Kajal Chandra
22. Anjesh Dahiya
23. Monika Tyagi
24. Anjali Sharma
25. Radhalakshmi R.
26. Sydrah Sarfaraz
27. Geeta Luthra
28. Suruchi Suri
29. Swathi Sukumar
30. Tarannum Cheema
31. Indira Unninayar
32. Pooja Dodd
33. Shivambika Sinha
34. Sanhita D Sensarma
35. Nusrat Hussain
36. Latika Malhotra
37. Manali Singhal
38. Naomi Chandra
39. Sonia Singhani
40. Vidhi Gupta
41. Ritu Bhalla
42. Chetna Bhalla
43. Meera Chature Sankhari
44. Bijoylashmi Das
45. Pooja Saigal
46. Meghna Mital Sankhla
47. Meenal Duggal
48. Sonal Sarda
49. Renu Gupta
50. Yashna Malik
51. Anu Bagai
52. Rubal Bansal Maini
53. Shweta Kapoor
54. Surbhi Arora
55. Saumya Tandon
56. Ishani Chandra
57. Nitika Khaitan
58. Rohini Vijh
59. Seema Misra
60. Nimita Kaul
61. Jagriti Ahuja
62. Anita Abraham
63. Vidhi Jain
64. Gayatri Virmani
65. Rekha saroha
66. Mani Gupta
67. Aishwarya Nabh
68. Rana Parween Siddiqui
69. Shobhana Takiar
70. Sumita kapil
71. Aishwarya Rao
72. Gayatri Verma
73. Beena Panday
74. Kanika Singh
75. Purnima Malik
76. Gunjan Bansal
77. Ritambhra Kalra
78. Radhika Kolluru
79. Haripriya Padmanabhan
80. Surbhi Mehta
81. Anubha Rastogi
82. Karuna Krishan Thareja
83. Chand Chopra
84. Garima Sachdeva
85. Nidhi Mohan Parashar
86. Arundhati Katju
87. Nandita Chauhan
88. Gauri Puri
89. U Deepaprabha
90. Shivani Nair
91. Vishakha Gupta
92. Shreya Singhal
93. Prachi Vashisht
94. Priya Pathania
95. Pusshp Gupta
96. Ananya Roy
97. Noorun Nahar Firdausi
98. Rachita Garg
99. RooheHina Dua
100. Harshita Singhal
101. Suruchi Jaiswal

Related:

‘Ethnic cleansing by State?’ HC stops Haryana’s Nuh & Gurugram demolitions

Nuh Haryana: Who cast the first stone?

Bail not Jail for Bajrang Dal man, Bittu who posted a provocative video on day of Nuh clash

The post Delhi HC Women Lawyer’s Forum petitions CJI against calls for socio-economic boycott of Muslims at Nuh, Haryana appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A video surfaced on Twitter on April 11 showing a crowd of about 100 people, men and women, taking an oath in Bastar Chhattisgarh, to economically boycott Muslims and Christians.  

“Today I vow that I will not deal in trade with any non-Hindu be it Muslim or Christian; be it milk, fruit, mattress, grocery or any type of goods. I take an oath to economically boycott them completely. We pray to Lord Ram that he gives us strength to fulfil this oath” the oath was then concluded with chants of “Jai Shree Ram”. The speaker, who introduced himself as Mukesh Chandak, addressing the crowd said that Hindu businesses should boldly display religious symbols like Swastika, Om etc so that people know that they belong to Hindus.

This is from #Bastar, #Chhattisgarh.

Local #Hindus took oath for economic boycott of #Muslims and #Christians.#Hindutva #HateSpeech pic.twitter.com/H0Vzd3PUb2

— Hate Detector ? (@HateDetectors) April 11, 2023

Economic boycott is one of the most pervasive means of religious persecution which hits the minorities where it would hurt anybody the most, their livelihoods. If a person is unable to earn their daily bread because the ‘majority’ community refuses to deal with them, employ them or carry out any trade with them, they will certainly be pushed towards poverty and the lowest rung of the society.  

Last month, Sabrang India had done a piece on how economic boycott of Muslims could push them further beyond marginalisation. Pointing towards the real economic impact such boycotts have on the community, the article states that Muslim community has largely been on the precipice of poor economic outcomes, based on various studies.  The Census 2011 data showed that almost a quarter of India’s 370,000 beggars are Muslim. A report released in 2018 titled “Vision 2025- Socio-Economic Inequalities, Why does India’s economic growth need an inclusive agenda” [authored by economist Amir Ullah Khan and historian Abdul Azim Akhtar], found that most Muslim asserted that their socio-economic condition had not improved  in the last 10 years. As per the survey, in terms of monthly per capita expenditure, Muslims were at the lowest rung, below SCs and STs in urban areas and slightly above STs in rural areas, reported Times of India.

Such calls for economic boycott were also made in Gujarat in the aftermath of the 2002 pogrom. An archival article of Communalism Combat details how Muslim were discriminated against after the pogrom even a whole year later.

“Muslim women from over 40 households who used to work as agricultural labourers are not entertained, and youth who drove transport vehicles have had their businesses taken over. Hunger and deprivation continues to hit the 400 Muslim residents of Por, with over 70 young persons out of jobs. The total strength of this Patel dominated village is 5,000, of which Muslims number 1,100. Women were also involved in milching cattle, an occupation that is today unavailable to them as they do not have access to buffaloes that were either stolen or driven away. The mosque in Por, which was systematically pulled down using a bulldozer belonging to the municipal corporation, has however been re-built. While some of the village elders such as Nathubhai Nagar are trying to break the social boycott, others insist that for Muslims, the quid pro quo for leading a normal life will be their withdrawal of the pending criminal case where 35 villagers have been accused of rioting and arson. With the survivors adamant on getting justice, (senior advocate Allah Rakha is appearing for the victims), the deadlock, stealthily, continues.”

Economic boycott is also manifested in temple fairs where non-hindus are not allowed to set up stalls. Such instances are rampant in many districts of Karnataka. In March last year, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) general secretary Chikkamagaravalli Thimme Gowda Raavu a.k.a CT Ravi had said, “Halal is an economic Jehad. It means that it is used like a Jehad so that Muslims should not do business with others. It has been imposed. When they think that Halal meat should be used, what is wrong in saying that it should not be used?” 

A right wing leader emerging from Uttarakhand, Radha Semwal Dhoni had , last month, recorded a video where she pointed cameras at Muslim vendors and asked them their names and their Aadhar card as well. She claims that they represent themselves as Hindus and that they have come from Lucknow. In the video she says that the vendors lie and spit on the vegetables and sell these in her area (where she lives). She asks them, “why do you come here? Why don’t you carry an Aadhar card? Do you want to sell us vegetables that have been spat on?” to this, one of the vendors says, “it’s not true, we are not spitting on vegetables”.

Articles 21, 14 and 15 are all guarantees that every person has the right to life, equality and non-discrimination. Article 19 ensures freedom of movement and the right to undertake economic activity. While Article 14 says that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India, Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth. Further under article 15(2), no citizen shall be subject to any restriction or condition with regards to access to shops or the used of roads and places of public resort maintained out of state funds or made for the use of general public, merely on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

Despite such constitutional safeguards, people are giving such calls for economic boycotts against the minority communities. This is a brazen move to push the minorities to economic deprivation and social ostracization to a point where they will be compelled to live in poverty or flee the country fearing further deprivation and persecution; either of which is the worst outcome for the communities.

Related:

Marginalising the already marginalised: Economic Boycott Targeting Muslims

Are increasing calls for economic boycott of Muslims a sinister precursor to something worse?

Hate Watch: Indians reject #BoycottMuslims call

The post Oath for economic boycott of minorities administered in Chhattisgarh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court while hearing a plea to prevent Sakal Hindu Samaj’s proposed meeting on February 5, has taken on record an undertaking that the meeting will only be allowed if no hate speech will be made. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State of Maharashtra gave the undertaking before the bench of Justices KM Joseph and JB Pardiwala that if permission is granted for the meeting to be held in Mumbai, it will be subject to the condition that “nobody will make any hate speech and act in defiance of law or disturb the public order”.   

The petitioner, Shaheen Abdullah had contended that similar to its anti-Muslim speech during ‘Hindu Jan Aakrosh Morcha’ held in Mumbai on January 29, it can be apprehended that the same will be repeated during the February 5 meeting as well. The Mumbai rally, purportedly organized against ‘love jihad’ and ‘land jihad’, ended with a provocative speech by Goshamahal MLA T Raja Singh calling for a boycott of Muslim owned businesses and for Hindus to ‘slit throats’ . Sakal Hindu Samaj is an umbrella organization of several Hindutva organizations including Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (HJS), Shiv Pratishthan and Sanatan Sanstha. Mumbai police estimated that the rally was attended by 10,000 to 12,000 citizens.

A detailed account of the rally may be read here.

Yesterday, Abdullah had appeared before a bench of Justices K.M. Joseph, Aniruddha Bose and Hrishikesh Roy seeking urgent hearing in the matter. The bench had however expressed its dismay over petitioners knocking at the doors of the top court each time, “We are with you on this, but understand that the Supreme Court cannot be triggered every time there is a rally notified. We have already passed an order which is clear enough. Just imagine rallies happening all across the country. Every time there will be an application before the Supreme Court. How can that be feasible?”

The bench was not keen to pass an order on every such event taking place. The bench also expressed its anguish over the non-compliance of its earlier orders. In October last year, the Supreme Court had instructed the Police in Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to take action against hate speech suo moto, without waiting for a complaint. The court had even warned that delay in taking action would amount to contempt of court.

Senior Counsel Kapil Sibal appearing for the petitioner urged that the police should invoke Section 151 of Code of Criminal Procedure-which gives power to the police to arrest persons to prevent cognizable offences. The bench thus directed that officers should invoke its powers under section 151 of CrPC in case the occasion for the same arises. On Sibal’s appeal, the court also directed that the meeting be videographed and the video be submitted to the court at the next hearing.

The court has also sought the State’s response on the allegations made by the petitioner against the meeting held on January 29. SG Mehta questioned why a petitioner from Kerala was raising concerns about an event in Maharashtra and accused him of selectively taking up causes. Sibal pointed out that during the January 29 rally MP of the ruling party also made some grave and perilous statements  and calls for social and economic boycott of Muslims were made. He also pointed out that the police cannot possibly vet the speeches before they are delivered. However, SG Mehta opposed the plea for passing directions, as it would amount to ‘pre-speech censorship’.

The order may be read here:

Related:

Mumbai: BJP leaders attend far right Hindutva rally where calls for economic boycott of Muslims, violence against them are made

Review of 2022: A year of discrimination & violence experienced by India’s religious minorities

Joining the anti-minority hate speech brigade, Baba Ramdev spews venom

The post Hate speech: SC asks for video of Sakal Hindu Samaj proposed meet in Mumbai on Feb 5 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bengaluru: The Hindu activists here on Thursday started a door-to-door campaign in connection with boycotting halal certified products during the Diwali festivities.

The activists said that they were also planning to distribute ‘halal jihad’ handbook to the people to create awareness among them. The campaign will be taken up in Jayanagar and Basavanagudi Assembly constituencies of Bengaluru.

Jayanagar Assembly constituency is represented by Congress MLA Sowmya Reddy and Basavanagudi constituency is represented by BJP MLA Ravisubramanya. There are sensitive pockets, especially the Jayanagar locality and the police are closely monitoring the situation.

The campaign has been taken up by the Hindu Jana Jagruthi Samithi, Sri Rama Sena, Raastra Rakshana Pade and Vishva Hindu Sanatana Parishat. 

#Hindujanajagruti has called for a *#Halal_Free_Diwali asking #Hindus not buy products from #Muslim vendors. Yesterday,they released book on #HalalJihad & have asked to boycott #Muslim shops. #Karnataka pic.twitter.com/QDEjy9XlPl

— Imran Khan (@KeypadGuerilla) October 17, 2022

The auto-rickshaws will be used to spread awareness messages through mikes, loud speakers, said the activists. They said that the meeting would be conducted with hotel owners, industrialists, shop owners and Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) traders not to go for halal certification.

Hindu organisations had given a call of boycott for halal certified products on Tuesday (October 18). The organisations claim that they were also taking up a campaign to get rid of halal certification. They have also alleged that through the halal certification on products, one religion is riding over another economically.

Hindu Jana Jagruthi Committee State Spokesperson Mohan Gowda had announced that the campaign against halal would be carried on till the end of Diwali festival.

Courtesy: The Daily Siasat

The post Hindu activists begin door-to-door campaign against halal products in Karnataka appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Two weeks after calls for economic boycott of Muslims in the districts of Karnataka, a temple in Belur in Hassan district is paving the way for strengthening inter-faith bonds. The temple will not only continue its tradition of reciting Koranic verses at the beginning of the upcoming chariot festival, it has also made provisions for non-Hindus to set up stalls in the complex.

Amidst reports of non-Hindus being shunned from temples and Hindu festivals in other parts of the country, this news comes as a breath of fresh air and reassures everyone that deep down inside, all Indians value pluralism and unity.

The temple of Chennakeshavain Beluris administered by the Karanatakamuzrai department. Belur temple executive officer, VidyulathatoldTimes of India, “The muzrai commissioner’s office has directed that no officer, person or organisation is allowed to interfere in any tradition, ritual or custom under Section 58 of Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 2002. Hence, the chanting of Quran verses will be conducted as mentioned in the Belur temple manual before pulling the chariot on the day of Brahma Rathotsava.”

As many as15 non-Hindus have been permitted to set up stalls during the two-day annual temple chariot festival starting today. According to the Times of India, the Chief Executive Officer of Belur Taluk Municipal Council, Sujay Kumar said, “There is no rule or law to stop non-Hindu vendors from carrying out business during temple fairs. Anyone can set up a stall by paying the prescribed fee.”The lone Muslim vendor who was asked to vacate his shop from the temple complex has been reportedly running a children’s toy shop for more than 50 years now in the temple complex. It has been reported that 15 out of the 60 makeshift stalls would now be set up for the temple fair by non-Hindu vendors in a huge parcel of land about 100 metres from the temple.

Former Chief Minister HD Kumaraswamy has reportedly said that he would not allow any attempts to disturb communal harmony in his home district and has therefore asked former minister HD Revanna to amicably resolve the issue.

The ban on the Muslim minority from conducting business at temple first started in Marikamba temple in Shivamogga, which was then followed by other temples in Dakshina Kannada, Hassan, Tumukur, Chikkamagalur and other districts.The issue came to light when it was raised during zero hour in the State Assembly by Congress Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) UT Khader on March 23, 2022. The Karnataka State government made a statement in defence of the said ban by citing Rule 31, sub-rule 12, of the Karnataka Religious institutions and Charitable Endowment Rule 2002, which bans the leasing of land or buildings near temples to non-Hindus.

Reportedly, banners were put up outside some of these temples urging them not to lease stalls to Muslims. According to The Print, “Hindutva organisations including the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), Hindu JagaranaVedike, and the Bajrang Dal have been submitting memorandums to temple authorities, municipal officials, and town councils, calling for a ban on Muslims setting up shops and stalls.”

As per Rule 31(12) of the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Rules 2002, “No property, including land, building or sites situated near the institution (temple) shall be leased out to non-Hindus.”

Citing the Karnataka Religious institutions and Charitable Endowment Act, 2002, State Law Minister, JC Madhuswamy reportedly stated in the Assembly, “If these recent incidents of banning Muslim traders have occurred outside the premises of the religious institutions, we will rectify them. Otherwise, as per norms, no other community is allowed to set up shop on the premises.”

In what seemed like a defence of JC Madhuswamy’s statement, Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai reportedly said, “During such jathras (religious fairs), there are a lot of shops that are sub-leased. These people who take up the lease from the temple management board would do it for money. This is something that the government cannot interfere in. When it is such cases, we will look into the laws as well as the facts of the case.”

In sharp contrast to the stance of his party in Karnataka and elsewhere and the ruling government on the issue, BJP leader AH Vishwanath had spoken sharply and vociferously against these brazen attempts to not just deny Muslims their livelihood but on the political moves to create social divisions and schisms. The former Congress leader who is now a Member of Legislative Council (MLC) said, “No God or religion preaches these kinds of things. Religions are inclusive and not exclusive.” He further said, “This is a very sorry state of affairs. The government must take action or there will be a reaction from the people. People need livelihoods to feed themselves and clothe themselves and if there is no means of livelihood then what is the point of democracy, religion, caste — throw it all away. When there is no means to buy food, what are we searching for in this world.”

With a brazen confidence, Sri Rama Sene chief Pramod Muthalik, who isa serial hate offender with a history of making misogynistic statements, and even encouraging violence against women as witnessed during the infamous Mangalore pub attack in 2009, had said that the ban would continue until Muslims stopped eating beef, reported The Telegraph.

Leaving no stone unturned to inculpate the Opposition, the BJP led state government had argued in the Assembly that the said rules banning lease of land or buildings near temples to non-Hindus were framed in 2002 when the Congress was in power.

Explaining the reason behind framing these rules in 2002, former chief minister SM Krishna who was previously with the Congress had reportedly stated, “While non-Hindus were not allowed to do business near temples, Hindus were also not allowed to do business near mosques or churches. This was done to help vendors of respective faiths and not on religious lines.”

What is of particular concern however, is that there appears to be a pattern behind such calls for socio-economic boycott that have taken a particular turn in Karnataka, a state that goes to the polls next year. Other parts of India and within Karnataka too, have been a series of incidents reported that show that Muslim vendors and traders are not just being banned from temple fairs but are also being illegally kept out of streets that lead to the temples. This is a serious and calculated assault on their livelihood and a direct violation of Articles 14, 15(1) and 15(2) of the Constitution.

Therefore, the nod given to non-Hindus in Hassan district of Karnataka comes as ray of hope amongst the communal atmosphere in most parts of the country. Hopefully, this sets a strong precedent and other temples in the State of Karnataka also follow suit.

Related:

Are increasing calls for economic boycott of Muslims a sinister precursor to something worse?
Don’t stop at Muslim-owned dhabas, VHP, Bajrang Dal warn buses in Gujarat
CJP moves NCM over hate crimes against Muslims in Madhya Pradesh
Why is iDdosa batter giving communal trolls indigestion?
Hate Watch: Hindutva group raises slogans outside Muslim-owned shop in Gujarat

The post Belur Temple to continue reciting Koranic verses, have stalls by non-Hindus appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Followed by the Hijab controversy, the Muslim minority are now being banned from conducting business at temple fairs in Karnataka. What first started in Marikamba temple in Shivamogga has now been followed suit by other temples in Dakshina Kannada, Hassan, Tumukur, Chikkamagalur and other districts.

Reportedly, banners have been put up outside some of these temples urging them not to lease stalls to Muslims. According to The Print, “Hindutva organisations including the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), Hindu Jagarana Vedike, and the Bajrang Dal have been submitting memorandums to temple authorities, municipal officials, and town councils, calling for a ban on Muslims setting up shops and stalls.”

The issue came to light when it was raised during zero hour in the State Assembly by Congress Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) UT Khader on March 23, 2022. The Karnataka State government made a statement in defence of the said ban by citing Rule 31, sub-rule 12, of the Karnataka Religious institutions and Charitable Endowment Rule 2002, which bans the leasing of land or buildings near temples to non-Hindus.

As per Rule 31(12) of the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Rules 2002, “No property, including land, building or sites situated near the institution (temple) shall be leased out to non-Hindus.”

Citing the Karnataka Religious institutions and Charitable Endowment Act, 2002, State Law Minister, JC Madhuswamy reportedly stated in the Assembly, “If these recent incidents of banning Muslim traders have occurred outside the premises of the religious institutions, we will rectify them. Otherwise, as per norms, no other community is allowed to set up shop on the premises.”

What seems like a defence to JC Madhuswamy’s statement, Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai reportedly stated, “During such jathras (religious fairs), there are a lot of shops that are sub-leased. These people who take up the lease from the temple management board would do it for money. This is something that the government cannot interfere in. When it is such cases, we will look into the laws as well as the facts of the case.”

In sharp contrast to the stance of his party in Karnataka and elsewhere and the ruling government on the issue, BJP leader AH Vishwanath has spoken sharply and vociferously against these brazen attempts to not just deny Muslims their livelihood but on the political moves to create social divisions and schisms. The former Congress leader who is now a Member of Legislative Council (MLC) said, “No God or religion preaches these kinds of things. Religions are inclusive and not exclusive”, adding to this he has stated, “This is a very sorry state of affairs. The government must take action or there will be a reaction from the people. People need livelihoods to feed themselves and cloth themselves and if there is no means of livelihood then what is the point of democracy, religion, caste — throw it all away. When there is no means to buy food, what are we searching for in this world”

With a brazen confidence, a serial hate offender with a history of making misogynistic statements, and even encouraging violence against women as witnessed during the infamous Magalore pub attack in 2009, Sri Rama Sene chief Pramod Muthalik said that the ban would continue until Muslims stopped eating beef, reported The Telegraph.

Leaving no stone unturned to inculpate the Opposition, the BJP led state government argued in the Assembly that the said rules banning lease of land or buildings near temples to non-Hindus were framed in 2002 when the Congress was in power.

Explaining the raison d’etre behind framing these rules in 2002, former chief minister SM Krishna who was with the Congress reportedly stated, “While non-Hindus were not allowed to do business near temples, Hindus were also not allowed to do business near mosques or churches. This was done to help vendors of respective faiths and not on religious lines.”

What is of particular concern however, is that there appears to be a pattern behind such calls for socio-economic boycott that have taken a particular turn in Karnataka, a state that goes to the polls next year. Other parts of India and within Karnataka too, have been a series of incidents reported that show that Muslim vendors and traders are not just being banned from temple fairs but are also being illegally kept out of streets that lead to the temples. This is a serious and calculated assault on their livelihood and a direct violation of Articles 14, 15(1) and 15(2) of the Constitution.

What is the Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowment Act, 1997, and how was it erroneously applied?

As explained in the (said) legislation’s statement of objects and reasons, the State Government of Karnataka decided to enact a new law to replace several local Acts to bring about “uniformity” in the matter of regulating all Charitable Endowments and Hindu Religious Institutions in the state. This was in 1997.

A similar law had been enacted in a few other states decades earlier. For example, in Tamil Nadu (1959), Madras (1951) and Andhra Pradesh (1987) for the same purpose, i.e. for the administration and regulation of temples and the endowed properties attached thereto.

A close reading of the Karnataka law, reveals its intention, to ensure better administration, protection and preservation of temples and the endowed properties attached thereto, so that the substantial assets donated by believers as part of ritual charity –in good faith– do not get misused.

Significantly, Rule 31 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Rules, 2002 only talks about the terms of the lease and renewal of immovable property of a notified institution that comes under the Act. Sub-rule 12 under Rule 31 imposes the restriction for the long-term leasing of an immovable property – land, building or area which is located near a Hindu institution or temple to non-Hindus.

The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) Karnataka has written to both Karnataka CM Bommai and Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot stating, “(It is) a deliberate misinterpretation of the provision, as Rule 31 only deals with long-term leases of immovable property owned by a temple (up to 30 years for land, and five years for shops and buildings). It does not deal with the short-term licences which would be used to allot stalls or spaces to vendors during a festival. The matter in question here is not of leasing out immovable property but allocation of such short-term licenses for temporary instalment can be dismantled.”

Bangalore based advocates Arvind Narain and Shujayathulla, both Presidents of PUCL Karnataka and Robin Christopher, general secretary, have in this representation pointed out a distinction between a lease and a licence. Moreover, the PUCL representation calls out the boycott for its unconstitutionality.

“The boycott calls are sought to be given a fig leaf of legitimacy by referring to Rule 31(12) of the 2002 Rules of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997, which state that no property, including land, building or sites situated near the institution shall be leased out to non-Hindus. However as Senior advocate Chander Uday Singh pointed out this is a deliberate misinterpretation of the provision as Rule 31 only deals with long-term leases of immoveable property owned by a temple.  It does not deal with the short-term licences which would be used to allot stalls or spaces to vendors during a festival. Rule 7 also specifically prohibits sub-lease, leading one to the conclusion that the contract temple authorities enter into with traders can only be a licensing agreement. 

However, going beyond the question of whether the temple actions are justified by the rule 31(2) cited by the Hon’ble law minister, the larger questions is the constitutionality of the same. Both economic boycott and calling for economic boycott is violative of the constitutional promise of non-discrimination enacted in Article 15. Article 15, explicitly prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, besides race, caste, sex or place of birth. Article 15(2) further proclaims that no citizen be subject to any ‘restriction’ with regard to ‘access to shops’, ‘maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public’.

The representation also states that, “A lease is akin to a permanent transfer of rights as far as property is concerned. So, the concept of sub-leasing exists. A licence is a temporary transfer of property. You do not acquire any ownership rights under a licence.” Therefore, the said boycott of Muslim vendors is not justified under the law.

Recalling that Dr BR Ambedkar was a vociferous opponent of social and economic boycotts noting that it was a form of ‘tyranny of the majority’. In Ambedkar’s words, “The method of open violence pales before it, for it has the most far reaching and deadening effect.” It is more dangerous because it passes as a lawful method consistent with the theory of freedom of contract. Warning that such a trend as seen in Karnataka and other parts of India could lead to widespread exclusion even crimes against humanity like in Rwanda and Hitler’s Germany, PUCL calls on the government of Karnataka to:

1. Immediately withdraw of all such decisions Immediately withdraw the decisions, and ensure that Muslims and persons of all religious communities are provided an equal space and opportunity to carry out their businesses during all days of the festivals;
2. Immediately initiate criminal action against the organizations pressurizing and attempting to cause an economic boycott of Muslim businesses;
3. Ensure that immediate measures are taken to restore and maintain communal harmony across Karnataka as required by the Communal Harmony Guidelines, 2008 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, including keeping organizations that undermine communal harmony under scrutiny and taking appropriate action against them;
4. Clarify that the statements made by elected representatives erroneously interpreting the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 to legitimize the unconstitutional act of discrimination on grounds of religion.

The entire PUCL representation may be read here:

Where the Muslim minority is similarly discriminated against in other states of India

Uttar Pradesh

In Uttar Pradesh, right-wing Hindutva groups are often seen harassing and taking away the livelihood of Muslim minorities. During the State Assembly elections, Muslim vendors were forced to shut down their small daily-wage works, beaten and harassed by the said groups. While some were forced to change their stalls’ names, some faced intimidation and violence. In January 2021, mass gathering were openly called upon by Swami Anand Swaroop in a Hindu Sabha Meerut wherein hereportedlyasked the people to “boycott Muslims from social, economic and political bases so far that they themselves get converted to Hindu.”In another instance, Legislator Suresh Tiwari from Deoria town in the northern state of Uttar Pradeshreportedly said amidst the crushing economy during the pandemic, “Keep one thing in mind. I am telling everyone openly. There is no need to buy vegetables from ‘miyans’ [Muslims].”

Delhi

On March 23, 2022, previous participants in the infamous at Dharma Sansad in Haridwar, Uttarakhand in December 2021, Swami Jitendranand Saraswati and Vinod Sharma, were seen addressing a crowd of persons watching the film ‘The Kashmir Files’. He not only attempted to spread anti-Muslim sentiments and accused Muslims of dividing the country. This right-wing proponent spread this hate in front of young children addressing them to pick up arms to protect themselves.On March 22, 2022, a video of Vinod Sharma’s aides went viral on social media asking audience to boycott Muslim vendors and break their economic backbone. Around this time, a hotel in Delhi, the capital, denied accommodation to Kashmiri man on a hypothetical idea of ‘Kashmiri a crime” created by ‘Kashmir files’ movie.

Haryana

In Haryana, 23 “upper” caste persons have been booked for calling for an all-out boycott of more than 150 Dalit families. In Chhatar village, a Panchyat (council/gathering) dominated by the “upper” castes was called, in which it was collectively decided to boycott the ration (food supplies) and access to free movement (transport) to Dalit families living there. This was nothing short of coercive pressure on the Dalit community to withdraw a case filed against atrocities and abuse.SabrangIndia had reportedthis case of “upper” castes’abuse of the Dalit community.

Chhattisgarh

In Surguja district, there has been mass gatherings of Hindutva group taking an oath of communal discrimination.

Madhya Pradesh

In Pelampur, banners have been reportedlydisplayed banning entrance to the Muslim vendors inside the village.

Violation of Constitutional provisions

What is both crucialand interesting to note is that –be it Karnataka or elsewhere –the granting of such short-term licenses to Muslim traders was never an issue until now. Since 2002, no Muslim traders have everbeen prohibited from setting up stalls near Hindu pilgrimage sites or during festivals. This brazenly exclusionary and violent trend is clearly linked to the rise of the right-wing in politics; a trend made more dangerous by the fact that this surge in majoritarianism is used to reap electoral benefits. A meek Election Commission has not enforced its statutory powers to ensure non-partisan campaigning and a far from assertive judiciary has not stepped in either.

In a nutshell, the said call for boycott and boycott both violate fundamental rights conferred under articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Articles 21, 14 and 15 both guarantee that every person has the right to life, equality and non-discrimination. Article 19 ensures freedom of movement and the right to undertake economic activity. While Article 14 says that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India, Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth. Further under article 15(2), no citizen shall be subject to any restriction or condition with regards to access to shops or the used of roads and places of public resort maintained out of state funds or made for the use of general public, merely on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

1. Equality before law—The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.
2. Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth—(1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

(2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to— (a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or (b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.

The said boycott also violates the freedom of the Muslim citizens to carry on any occupation, trade or business as provided under article 19 of the Constitution.

1. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.—(1) All citizens shall have the right— (g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.

The economic boycott of Muslim citizens also violates their right to life under Article 21.

1. Protection of life and personal liberty—No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

In the case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India 1978 [AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 621], the Supreme Court had held that the right to life is not merely a physical right but includes within its ambit the right to live with human dignity. Elaborating on the same the Court in Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi 1981 [AIR 746, 1981 SCR (2) 516]observed:

“The right to live includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, viz., the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter over the head and facilities for reading writing and expressing oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing and mingling with fellow human beings and must include the right to basic necessities the basic necessities of life and also the right to carry on functions and activities as constitute the bare minimum expression of human self.”

The systematic targeting of the Muslim minorities over the time by politically powerful, right -wing Hindutva groups is also endangering their rights conferred under article 15 and 29 of the Constitution. While article 25 provides freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practise and propagate religion to all persons, article 29 protects the interests of minorities by giving them the right to conserve their language, script or culture of its own.

1. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion—(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion. (2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law— (a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice; (b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.
2. Protection of interests of minorities—(1) Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same.

Moreover, as per the Directive Principles of State Policy, the Constitution aims to create a socio-economic condition for the citizen of India to lead a good life. Under Article 38, the Constitution directs the state to promote social and economic welfare of the people and Article 39 the Constitution directs the State to formulate policies that secure people’s right to adequate means of livelihood.

1. State to secure a social order for the promotion of welfare of the people—1 [(1)] The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social, economic and political, shall inform all the institutions of the national life. 2 [(2) The State shall, in particular, strive to minimise the inequalities in income, and endeavour to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals but also amongst groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations.
2. Certain principles of policy to be followed by the State.—The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing— (a) that the citizens, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood; (b) that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good; (c) that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment;………

Legal precedents

In a recent and similar case(TM Rabbani vs. G Vaani Mohan & Ors), in December 2021, the Supreme Court had stayed a similar rule existing in Andhra Pradesh. The Court has stated, “We direct that none of the tenants/shop holders shall be excluded from participating in the auction or from the grant of leases including in the shopping complex on the ground of their religion.” The Court admitted that “it was impermissible for the State to either exclude the license holders from participating in the auction or from being granted leases, including in the shopping complex constructed by the State on the ground of religion”.

The special leave petition had been filed in Supreme Court against the order of Andhra Pradesh High Court who ruled against the Muslim minorities stating“…… the alleged acts of non-Hindus would cause serious inconvenience to worship deity by Hindus, as such to protect the interest of Hindu worshippers of deity and to avoid any amount of inconvenience or any prejudice to their interest; the State issued such rules inconsonance with the Act itself. Hence, we find no force in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the same is hereby rejected. We are of the confirmed view that such discrimination permitting Hindus only, debarring non-Hindus to participate in the auction of leasehold rights or license in respect of the shops and plots belonging to the respondent No.3 does not amount to violation of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.”

The Order of the SC and other related orders of the Andhra Pradesh High Court may all be read here.

The atmosphere in India has become quite hostile towards the Muslim minorites who are being constantly targeted with impunity, especially in states with BJP-led governments. Multiple and repeated instances of Hate Speech, Mob Lynchings and other kinds of exclusion and violence have spiralled. Things are made worse with the authorities taking no strict actions being taken against the human rights violators and hate offenders.

Recently, (BJP) General Secretary, CT Ravi –with decades long record for provocative speech —joined the right-wing groups’ hate call to boycott ‘Halal’ meat which has been equated with Muslim dietary habits, and called all Halal food ‘economic jihad’. Adopting a right-wing tactic to associate Muslims with words like Jihad/Jehad (Holy War), he has reportedly said, “Halal is an economic Jehad. It means that it is used like a Jehad so that Muslims should not do business with others. It has been imposed. When they think that Halal meat should be used, what is wrong in saying that it should not be used?”

While past years have seen some positive rulings emanating from India’s top court, the non-implementation of directions, renders even these without teeth. In 2016, Activist Lawyer Tehseen Poonawalla along with few others had filed a Writ Petition in the Supreme Court [Tehseen Poonawalla vs. UOI &Ors (2018) 9 SCC 501]troubled by the increasing incidents of cow-vigilantism in the country where private citizens violently punish people who they suspect of consuming beef.

The Court had condemned the widespread acts of mob lynching and violence in the country. While prescribing a bunch of guidelines to curb such unlawful activities, the Court had observed,

“It is our constitutional duty to take a call to protect lives and human rights. There cannot be a right higher than the right to live with dignity and further to be treated with humanness that the law provides. What the law provides may be taken away by lawful means; that is the fundamental concept of law. No one is entitled to shake the said foundation. No citizen can assault the human dignity of another, for such an action would comatose the majesty of law. In a civilized society, it is the fear of law that prevents crimes. Commencing from the legal space of democratic Athens till the legal system of modern societies today, the law makers try to prevent crimes and make the people aware of the same but some persons who develop masterly skill to transgress the law jostle in the streets that eventually leads to an atmosphere which witnesses bloodshed and tears. When the preventive measures face failure, the crime takes place and then there have to be remedial and punitive measures. Steps to be taken at every stage for implementation of law are extremely important. Hence, the guidelines are necessary to be prescribed.”

Drawing a perfect analogy to India’s current predicament, activist and author, Mr. Pieter Friedrich has rightly said, “In 1933, the Nazis said,Don’t buy from Jews. In 2022, the Nazi-inspired Hindu nationalists say,Don’t buy from Muslims. Economic boycott is the path to genocide. Fascism in India must be stopped.”

Related:

Don’t stop at Muslim-owned dhabas, VHP, Bajrang Dal warn buses in Gujarat
CJP moves NCM over hate crimes against Muslims in Madhya Pradesh
Why is iD dosa batter giving communal trolls indigestion?
Hate Watch: Hindutva group raises slogans outside Muslim-owned shop in Gujarat

The post Are increasing calls for economic boycott of Muslims a sinister precursor to something worse? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Two Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) members from Karnataka criticised their own party-led government for the ban on Muslim traders during Hindu festivities on March 28, 2022. MLA Anil Benake and MLC AH Vishwanath spoke to local news channels and voiced their criticism of such politics based on religious division.

A seasoned politician, formerly a member of both the Congress and the Janata Dal (Secular), Vishwanath spoke to Public TV around Monday denouncing the government for its inability to check the increasing instances of bans on Muslim traders. Earlier, the organising committee of the Kote Marikamba Jatra in Shivamogga district gave in to right-wing demands and banned Muslim shopkeepers from conducting business during the jatra (religious procession). Following this, more areas voiced this demand, garnering scorn from the veteran politician.

Vishwanath pointed out that many people from India work in other areas, including predominantly Muslim countries as well. He feared that if those countries followed the same policy then the situation would become “insane”.

“No god, religion has said don’t include him/them… No. The government must intervene. I don’t know why the government is mum over this issue. Are they [Muslims] not Kannadigas? The ones who stayed back in India are Indians. They are no one else but Indians. Without thinking anything, how can you say Muslims can’t do business here? This is a sorry state of affairs,” said Vishwanath.

He stressed that people need livelihoods to survive. If this is denied to people, then the purpose of democracy, religion, caste is moot. Similarly, first-time MLA Benake said it is wrong to tell people that they could purchase items from people just because the vendors were not Hindu. According to The Scroll, he said that the question of imposing restrictions does not arise because everyone has the opportunity to carry out their activities.

Related:

Karnataka: Why is the BJP gov’t endorsing “Congress time rule” prohibiting non-Hindu vendors on temple land?

Hate Watch: Cornered after news of anti-Muslim resolution, Udupi temple issues ‘clarification’

Saffronisation of education is okay, but hijabs are out?

Bowing to pressure from Hindutva groups, Karnataka festival ‘bans’ Muslim traders

The post Karnataka: Two BJP members condemn ban on Muslim traders during festivals appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Karnataka government has cited the state’s Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act as being the rule that “prohibits non-Hindu vendors from conducting their business on the premises or properties belonging to temples.” According to a report in The New Indian Express, Law Minister JC Madhuswamy told the Assembly on Wednesday that this “law was passed during the Congress government”.

His reply was in response to members of the Congress raising the issue of temple committees virtually banning Muslims and other non-Hindus from putting up stalls “in and around temples in coastal Karnataka.” According to the news report, the Congress had objected to reports of Hindu organisations putting up banners and posters near temples declaring this ‘prohibition’. 

Chief minister Basavaraj Bommai reportedly said, “The government couldn’t interfere if the ban was legal.” Madhuswamy defended the BJP government and said, “The government has no role. As per rules framed under the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act in 2003, non-Hindus cannot be given the lease of properties like ground, building or any other place that belongs to state-owned temples.” It is not known yet if the government even mentioned that the rule they claim was framed by Congress will be amended. According to the minister if the discriminatory banners “are put up on roads and away from the temples, only then the state government can take action against perpetrators.”

Some more from Karnataka have announced the anti-Muslim trader boycott soon after the Muslim is growing by the day, after the Marikamba temple in Shivamogga and Suggi Mahakali temple in Kaup-Udupi decided not to allot shops to traders from the minority community claiming this was “in the wake of hijab row.” Now Puttur in Dakshina Kannada and Nelamangala on the outskirts of Bengaluru city have also banned Muslim traders, reported The Hans India news portal. According to its report, the Puttur Mahalingeshwara temple “is one of the largest temples owned by the endowment department of the State government” and has now announced it “will not allot shops Muslim traders during its mega Jathra” this year. “Most of the traders who put up stalls at Mahalingeshwara temple are Muslims,” added the report, they “sell toys, fruits and vegetarian snacks and other food items” as well as run the games and entertainment stalls.

The issue was raised during zero hour in Assembly by Congress MLA UT Khader on Wednesday. “They are not stealing or indulging in dacoity. They are leading a respectful life. But because of some vested interests, banners and posters have been put up at various places across the state, insisting that non-Hindus are not allowed to do their business. It does not say who put up those posters. These are cowards who are indulging in such acts,” he reportedly said, adding that such a boycott was communal and an attempt “by communal elements, who want to disrupt peace in society. The police too are refusing to register cases.”

Shivajinagar MLA Rizwan Ahmed added that “banning a certain religion is a dangerous trend, and it can turn from bad to worse.”

#shivamogga ; Bajrang Dal ‘Bans’ Muslims From Shivamogga Fair,Mandates Display Of Saffron Flags At Stalls.

Bajrang Dal leaders obtained a tender by paying Rs 9 lakh to allot stalls to vendors in the fair and directed them to hoist saffron flag on stalls without fail.#Karnataka pic.twitter.com/edxMpbrm71

— Hate Watch K@rnataka (@Hatewatchkarnat) March 23, 2022

However, once cornered about the anti-Muslim boycott annual fair at Marigudi Temple in Kaup, Udupi, Karnataka, the temple management Shree Kote Marikamba Seva Samiti “clarified” its stand a couple of days ago saying, “Ddecision to allot stalls is left to the person who has won the tender and the committee does not interfere with the process… no community is kept out of the celebrations.” Its president S K Mariyappa told the media on Sunday that “people should not lend their ears to rumours that a particular community is being kept out of the celebrations.” He also claimed that Muslims “are taking part in different activities related to the fair” and that “Muslims bring rice and other essential products for the jatra. Hence, there is no need for unnecessary confusion.” His claims come close on the heels of news reports that Muslims were not allowed to set up stalls at the temple fair. Mariyappa has now clarified, “The tender has been won by one Nagaraj, who will take a call on whom to allot stalls. The jatra committee will not interfere in the decision of the tender-holder. But, we have put a condition that no stalls should be erected around the temple.” 

However According to The Hindu, the boycott posters written in Kannada, lists out ‘rules’ that sound like Hindutva oaths such as, “We will not engage in business with those who don’t respect this land’s law and Constitution, those who slaughter the cattle we worship… We won’t let them set up business here either” Ironically, the report informed that  name ‘Bappanadu’ itself “comes from a Muslim Beary trader who is believed to have built this Hindu temple.” According to the news report, “There have been at least half a dozen instances this year alone of Muslims being ‘banned’ from doing business at temple fairs. Hindutva organisations including the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), Hindu Jagarana Vedike, and the Bajrang Dal have been submitting memorandums to temple authorities, municipal officials, and town councils, calling for a ban on Muslims setting up shops and stalls.”

Related:

Hate Watch: Cornered after news of anti-Muslim resolution, Udupi temple issues ‘clarification’

Bowing to pressure from Hindutva groups, Karnataka festival ‘bans’ Muslim traders

Hijab row: Udupi girls dubbed terrorists by BJP leader

How a state suffocated by Saffron got a new breath from Blue

The post Karnataka: Why is the BJP gov’t endorsing “Congress time rule” prohibiting non-Hindu vendors on temple land? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

An oath of communal discrimination was administered in the Surguja in Chhattisgarh. Video clips on social media show how some Hindutva group gathered a large group of locals and made them take an anti-Muslim oath in a open ground. It is not immediately clear which group is leading this hate speech.

“We Hindus will not buy goods from any Muslim shopkeeper. We Hindus will not sell or rent our land to any Muslim. We will take back spaces already rented. We hindu will not work with Muslims,” the oath in Hindi is repeated by the people, adding that Muslims will not be allowed in their villages.

This video is from Surguja in Chhattisgarh where some Hindutva people are taking oath.

We Hindus will not buy goods from any Muslim shopkeeper.

We Hindus will not sell or rent our land to any Muslim.

We hindu will not work with Muslims. Is Tarah se nafrat failayi ja rahi hai pic.twitter.com/rvekkMdnGD

— Rubina Afaque (@RubinaAfaqueIND) January 6, 2022

Not the first communal event in Surguja

While it is not yet known who led these illegal communal hate oath ceremonies, or if any action has been taken against any group yet, the area was in the news in October 2021, for communal hate. Hindutva leader Swami Parmatmanand, had then purportedly ordered a gathering of his followers to “behead those who come for religious conversions.” According to a report in the Quint, Parmatmanand was speaking at a protest organised against an alleged “rise in religious conversions of Hindus to Christianity.” That event was attended by prominent Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders such as Ramvichar Netam, a former MP, ex-chairman of the National Scheduled Tribes Commission, Nand Kumar Sai, and BJP spokesperson Anurag Singh Deo.

In that same month one of the most bizarre cases of communal discrimination, was reported from Chattisgarh, when the body of a dead tribal Christian woman was “re-converted” before her family was allowed to conduct her last rites. Reconversion, or as the right wing calls it ‘Sangh wapsi’ or ‘homecoming’ as they believe everyone is a Hindu and must ‘return’ to Hindu faith if they follow any other, has been rampant, but this is perhaps the first reported instance in recent times of a corpse being converted to hinduism. The village elders reportedly added that Christian “converted families who accept the tribal customs and culture will be welcomed”. All they have to do to ‘return to the fold’ is to ‘offer coconut and incense sticks before the goddess’ and give it in writing that they have stopped being Christian.

Now, an oath to boycott Muslims has been given. SabrangIndia’s calls to Surguja Collector and District Magistrate Sanjeev Kumar Jha to seek the official response to the hate oath now circulating have so far gone unanswered.

Why is this oath dangerous?

It is a part of the Pyramid of Hate, as it calls for “social exclusion, discrimination, harassment, bullying, exclusion in housing, employment, education issues,” of Muslims.

CJP Secretary and human rights defender Teesta Setalvad explains how minute biases and prejudices like looking down on one’s appearance, their mannerisms, how one chooses to pray, has the capacity to consume us within a society. “It is these bias attitudes of stereotyping, insensitive remarks, fear of differences, non-inclusive language, micro aggressions justifying biases by seeking out like-minded people, that takes shape in the form of hate,” says Setalvad. This prejudiced attitude is the first stage in the pyramid of hate.

The next stage is acts of prejudice which involves name calling, social exclusion, targeting particular sections of the society by telling belittling jokes. The third stage is discrimination, where certain communities are subject to harassment, bullying, exclusion in housing, employment, education issues, based on their race, sexual orientation, caste, class, religion etc. The fourth stage in the hate pyramid is that of violence, of targeted hate crime which includes threat, assault, battery, murder, and terrorism. In a recent live session on social media Setalvad explained how India has already entered the fourth stage of the pyramid which must compel the majority community to break this chain of silence against institutional hate. The fifth and last stage is genocide, a deliberate systematic cleansing of a community.

Related:

Hate Speech: The worst words of 2021, we hope do not spill over into 2022
Poisoning people’s minds to ensure polarisation in the coming polls
Why does the PM look the other way when BJP leaders give communal speeches?
Activists counter call for genocide with a call for secularity
Uttarakhand: Will Jitendra Narayan Singh Tyagi nee Wasim Rizvi benefit from the FIR against him, or will he be the scapegoat?

The post Socio-economic boycott of Muslims underway in Chhattisgarh? appeared first on SabrangIndia.