Deploying religious dogmas or beliefs or using faith as a justification for narrow-ended political motives is a dangerous tendency with far-reaching socio-political implications.
Pakistan’s most controversial and hated military dictator General Ziaul Haq did so and the country is currently simmering in the aftermath of his crooked way of soliciting the support of the religious right. The Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, the Objectives’ Resolution and amePPndments to the Blasphemy Act – with the support of the Pakistani chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood i.e. Jamaat-e-Islami – are a few examples that illustrate the havocs that motivated legislation, particularly ordinances (though it’s a farce to term an ordinance a piece of legislation) can play with the socio-political fabric of a society.
Pakistan finds itself caught in an inextricable situation, particularly reeling from the consequences of the blasphemy law, that has predominantly been used as an instrument to settle political scores or for economic gains before recourse to the law itself. It has certainly narrowed the space for voices that demand a parliamentary review of such laws.
Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India is undergoing similar tribulations; the BJP, RSS and Shiv Sena are all jointly pressing ahead with to colour as much of India in the spirit of Hindutva as possible. Its fallout cannot be different from what has befallen Pakistan. It could be in fact much worse in case of India, where the right and its far right allies constitute two-thirds majority in parliament, unlike in Pakistan, where the religious right never went beyond 10 percent (except for the 2002 general elections immediately after the 9/11 terror attacks).
In March, for instance, the Gujarat Assembly (India) passed the Gujarat Animal Preservation (Amendment) Bill, 2017, making its anti-cow slaughter law the toughest in the country with the offence becoming non-bailable and punishable with a life sentence. Under the new law, the maximum punishment for cow slaughter will be life imprisonment and a fine of up to Rs 500,000. Slaughter of cows, calves, bulls and bullocks have been included in the law. Additionally, it bans transportation of animals at night, with punishments of up to 10 years.
Minister of State for Home Pradeepsinh Jadeja justified the amendments saying “cows not just have religious significance, they also have an economic significance in our society. It is necessary to increase the punishment to deter those involved in slaughtering cows”.
A few months before the bill was passed, Chief Minister Vijay Rupani had declared that his government’s mission was to make Gujarat a vegetarian state. He made the statement despite the fact that beef-eaters or those dependent on cattle slaughter for livelihood – including Dalits, Muslims and other backward classes constitute more than 50 percent of Gujarat’s population.
Reproducing a few excerpts from Ms Anupama Katakam’s article “Cow Politics” in the fortnightly magazine Frontline would not be out of place.
“They are operating like we are in the medieval times. The state instead of debunking holy cow theories is perpetuating it,” Jignesh Mewani, a social activist and lawyer working on Dalit rights in Gujarat, said. Mewani, who led the movement for Dalits after the Una incident, said: “These laws are absolutely obnoxious and clearly send out a message to Dalits and Muslims that this is the way the State is going to be run: majoritarian rule.”
“Una (when BJP-RSS vigilantes beat up four Dalit tanners for killing and skinning a cow in July 2016) created fear, and the new law has caused a complete shutdown. The law gives the authorities a free rein to enter anyone’s home or workspace, declare the dead animal a cow, and then it is life imprisonment for the poor man. His life is destroyed. It will lead to many more Akhlaqs [the man who was lynched to death in Dadri, Uttar Pradesh, accused of consuming cow meat],” he said.
In the beginning of the article, Anupama Katakam wrote: “Liberal voices are questioning the move, saying amendments made on the basis of religious sentiments are dangerous and anti-constitutional.
Another journalist, Latha Jishnu, based in New Delhi, says, “The sweeping ban on the commercial transportation of cattle for slaughter, imposed by Modi regime, sent the world’s largest supposed democracy into a frenzy when overnight, it destroyed the livelihood of millions of Muslims, Dalits and tribals who depend on cattle trade for survival and had already been faced with mounting violence by cow protection groups.”
These alarming reports and the physical manifestations of the “anti-cow-slaughter campaign” (attacks on religious minorities and the Dalit/untouchables who make nearly one-fifth of India’s population) throw a big question; how are such laws different from those in Muslim societies, where legislation pieces such as the blasphemy law are used as a pretext to deliver vigilante-justice and for which the entire West, as well as liberals in India, have often ostracised Pakistan and Malaysia?
Examples of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya and Iraq amply demonstrate that once unleashed, the religiously disguised political motives spin out of control, with overbearing consequences for society at large. A groundswell of “conformists” had helped the general enforce his religious notions on Pakistan.
The same is happening in India, as liberal voices face increasing ire and ostracism by the far right. Pakistan is struggling to extricate itself from the consequences of conformism. Will a nation of 1.3 billion, with over 500 million non-Hindu religious minorities, manage this? Probably not! And that should be alarming for everybody. Preying on people’s religious sentiments for political motives is a dangerous ploy one needs to desist from. It’s akin to playing with fire, which eventually become impossible to dowse with logic and fear of law.
The writer is Editor, Strategic Affairs
Published in Daily Times, June 24th, 2017