FOCUS
Media, unlike any other activity or institution, has the onerous responsibility of protecting the fabric of society, because its reach is phenomenal, its power immense. Hence, being even-handed in handling sensitive issues is absolutely without debate. It is sacrosanct. But what is the truth? Has it acted with responsibility? We need not go far. Rejecting a report by the ‘US Panel on Global Religious Freedom’, placing India on the ‘Watch List’, Raphael Cheenath, Archbishop of Cuttack in Orissa had reportedly observed that "India is secular in word as well as practice. There should be no doubt over the secular credentials of India. What the U.S commission said is against our country’s constitution." Commenting on the last year’s imbroglio in Kandhamal, the Archbishop said "Country’s secular character over powered a few communal elements, and one should not forget the basis of a country which thrives on secular character since ages" the report stated. Expressing similar views, Swarupanada Patra of Orissa Minority Forum, so also Orissa Secular Front have reportedly stated that "despite some painful experiences, it could not be generalized to embarrass the strong secular foundation of India and the civil society of majority community has been extremely cordial and supportive of minority community."
Now this is an extremely positive report titled as "Christian leaders stand by India’s Secularism". By the very nature of things in India, this report should have appeared in the front page instead it appeared as page 11, on 15th August. Whereas see this title on the first page, on 20th August, " Scarf episode opens up Mangalore College to the idea of a dress code", and follows it up with its editorial the next day. "Intolerance in the academia". Then on 23rd August it was "MANGALORE COLLEGE REFUSES SEAT TO ST STUDENT" (in capital letters), in the front page. On 11th September it was "Exactly a year after Church attacks, another hit in Bangalore", again in the front page. Thus it appears evident that placement of news has some inexplicable dimension.
Sometime last month, a leading English language news paper from Bangalore had this editorial for public consumption. Under the title "Intolerance in the Academia" it wrote as follows. "Educational institutions should focus on what they are supposed to focus: Improving the quality of education imparted to the lakhs of students. The two news items that have appeared earlier this week suggest a new development in the making that is disconcerting. In Bantwal and Uppinangady, both in Dakshina Kannada, there is evidence of increasing intolerance that needs to be
nipped in the bud. Take the case of Aysha Asmin, a first-year student of Sri Venkataramana Swamy College (SVSC), Bantwal. She was given two options by her principal Seetharamayya- ‘abide’ by the college rules or quit. This move was provoked by the fact that she wore a burqa to college. The fact is such a rule was not mentioned at the time of Aysha’s admission nor apparently in the college prospectus. Similar objections had been initially raised by the college management at the Government First Grade College, Uppinangady as well but for the time being Muslim girls have been permitted to wear a headscarf.
How long this temporary state of affairs will last and whether this ad hoc step effectively addresses the situation are two aspects that bear watching. Happily however, the district deputy commissioner has issued a show cause notice and we hope the Department of College Education would take necessary action to prevent repeats of Aysha’s situation. It is surprising, how ever, that the state home minister, V Acharya, has backed the college decision citing ‘discipline’. At the cost of an individual freedom as enshrined in our Constitution? The college principal’s statement ridiculing religious freedom has not helped matters, and neither has the fact that he was under pressure from certain organizations. Coupled with the Mangalore University vice-chancellor K M Kaveriappa’s assurance to Aysha that he would secure an admission in any college of her choice, all add up to indicate that the system is being subjected to some sort of cultural Talibanism which is not welcome at all.
Authorities should examine whether institutions aided by the government have the right to impose arbitrary rules that serve to disrupt the fabric of society. Let us not forget that Dakshina Kannada has been at the centre of disturbing developments for a while now. Whether it is the banning of burqas or the shameful sight of hooligans, backed by Pramod Muthalik’s Sri Ram Sene, beating up boys and girls in Mangalore in January this year, it all boils down to a disturbing malice that should not be allowed to gain currency."
This editorial has thrown up many points of debate. It said about the role of educational institutions is to improve the quality of education and not to be intolerant to dresses of its students. Its indeed true that improving the quality of education is the primary role of these institutions. But it’s also true that the college truly helps the students community to become responsible and responsive to his/her surroundings and society at large, where the question of asserting one’s so-called right is compromised in the larger interest of institutional discipline. There are enough precedence to quote where an educational institution can have its own dress code. Not only that, according to informed sources, girl student in the centre of controversy had even signed a declaration that she would abide by the rules of admission to the college as against the editorial observations to the contrary. So where does the question of intolerance comes?
The editorial questioned the propriety of enforcing discipline at the cost of individual freedom as enshrined in the constitution? Now
where in the constitution it is mentioned that people should have their freedom at the cost of discipline? Haven’t our schools taught us that freedom and responsibility go to-gether? Besides, article 30 of the Constitution, apparently permits all private and minority institutions to have its own set of do’s and donts. Giving hint of his exasperation, the editor seem to think that "the system is being subjected to some sort of cultural Talibanism which is not welcome at all". Sure, Talibanism is not welcome at all, anywhere in India. But what is Talibanism? Shouldn’t our honourable editor make a trip down to SWAT valley or POK or Kandahar to have a first hand knowledge of what constitute Talibanism? Here we need to recount that once Shabhana Azmi, actor cum social activist cum former Rajya Sabha
Member and an intellectual by her own right had asked the Imam of Jama Masjid Delhi to go to one such place to address his cockeyed bent of mind.
Before concluding that Dakshina Kannada in general and Mangalore in particular should be saved from the lumpens like Mutalik, the editor questions the ‘arbitrary’ right of institutions to disrupt the fabric of society. Now it is at this juncture that editor has exposed himself rather badly.
Media, unlike any other activity or institution, has the onerous responsibility of protecting the fabric of society, because its reach is phenomenal, its power immense. Hence, being even-handed in handling sensitive issues is absolutely without debate. It is sacrosanct. But what is the truth? Has it acted with responsibility? We need not go far. Rejecting a report by the ‘US Panel on Global
Religious Freedom’, placing India on the ‘Watch List’, Raphael Cheenath, Archbishop of Cuttack in Orissa had reportedly observed that "India is secular in word as well as practice. There should be no doubt over the secular credentials of India. What the U.S commission said is against our country’s constitution." Commenting on the last year’s imbroglio in Kandhamal, the Archbishop said "Country’s secular character over powered a few communal elements, and one should not forget the basis of a country which thrives on secular character since ages" the report stated. Expressing similar views, Swarupanada Patra of Orissa Minority Forum, so also Orissa Secular Front have reportedly stated that "despite some painful experiences, it could not be generalized to embarrass the strong secular foundation of India and the civil society of majority community has been extremely cordial and supportive of minority community."
Now this is an extremely positive report titled as "Christian leaders stand by India’s Secularism". By the very nature of things in India, this report should have appeared in the front page instead it appeared on page 11, on 15th August. Whereas see this title on the first page, on 20th August, " Scarf episode opens up Mangalore College to the idea of a dress code", and follows it up with its editorial the next day. "Intolerance in the academia". Then on 23rd August it was "MANGALORE COLLEGE REFUSES SEAT TO ST STUDENT" (in capital letters), in the front page. On 11th September it was "Exactly a year after Church attacks, another hit in Bangalore", again in the front page. Thus it appears evident that placement of news has some inexplicable dimension.
The editor reminds "Let us not forget that Dakshina Kannada has been the centre of disturbing development for a while now". Here it requires to be told very emphatically and very seriously that it is the media, especially the English media, which caused the completely avoidable damage to the fair name of Mangalore. They had blown up a purely law and order problem into a kind of national catastrophe, with all hybrid type journalists descending on the city to cover the ‘rape’ of Mangalore.
The WEEK, is accepted to be a respectable and responsible member of the print media. However, that they do not apply their judicious mind for an even-handed reportage was very evident when an interview by one Soni Mishra and the then Union Minister of Women and Child Welfare Renuka Chaudhry, was published in their issue of 5th April 2009. Among many questions asked were these two questions.
1. Does the Mangalore incident indicate a dangerous trend?
2. Will the Mangalore incident be an issue in the election?
Here what needs to be stressed is, this Soni Mishra and Minister Renuka Chandhary have never visited Mangalore. Sitting in their air-conditioned cucoon in New Delhi, how these ill informed interlocutors pass value judgment based purely on baised and sensational media coverage to defame a city and its people? It is an irresponsibility at its height. What about the WEEK, haven’t they become part of a politicized campaign? These two well fed and well placed women, were also discussing the women’s welfare in the said interview. In their earnestness to cover the ‘Pub’ incident to fix Mangalore, both completely forgot that there is a burning issue of 10 lakh Anganwadi Workers (AW), who are women, just like them. Are they aware of the contributions these AWs have made to the success of a globally unique initiative called ICDS, to address the malnutrition among infants and their mothers? In Karnataka, their salary is Rs: 1750/-, in other states it may be less than this. Are these high flying women, the women’s welfare minister and her journalist interlocutor aware that it took some 32 years to reach this paltry sum of salary? It is the contribution of these faceless AWs which has raised the general well being of children and women of the marginalized section of our society and not these Ministry officials and its hardly productive staff, if one compares their salary. A letter written to the WEEK, stating in the end, "In the interest of equity and fairness they should just shut up if they cannot address the injustice to women in truer perspective" was not published in their 2/3 pages of ‘Letters to the Editor’ column.
Recapitulating the events at SVS college, a local Kannada daily informs that, there were two girl students who attended the college wearing burqa. On explaining the terms of their admission, one of the students complied. The parent of the other was informed too about his ward refusing to change. Both parent and the student, citing their religious requirement, expressed their desire to change the college and the student stopped attending the SVS college. Apparently the matter was closed. But, was it?! According to the same Kannada daily, after about 10 days of this incident, on 17th Aug, father-daughter duo came to the college and the daughter clad in burqa entered the classroom and occupied her seat. The daily informed that the girl student was clearly explained, college’s inability to let her sit in the class with her burqa on. Within minutes, the Kannada daily further states, two reporters from two English dailies barged into the chamber of the Principal, as if it was all planned, to question the rationale of the refusal. Rest, as the cliché goes, is history. The next day one of two paper had this title "College bans Muslim headscarf", although, reportedly it was burqa. Quite frankly, at the end, we are left to wonder who is intolerant, the college or the media and more specifically English media!
This brings us to the issue of "Politics of Identity". There are two sections of human population, the world over, who identify themselves through their dress code. One is the Islam and the other Sikh. Islam was born in the middle eastern country of Saudi Arabia and the other in India. In Islam it is the females who are covering their body from head to toe and in Sikhs it is the males, who grow long hair and use turban to cover their uncut hair on their head. This was the practice in the beginning. How valid it is now? is a question best left to their religious leaders. But, one thing is very clear, whether Muslim leadership accepts this or not, the burqa has certainly become an impediment in merging their women folks into Indian mainstream.
And if they do not come in to the main stream, the oneness of India as a secular nation can always be in jeopardy.
Here, certain a
mount of assertiveness or stubbornness, inspired and insisted by hardliners, can be assumed to be visible. Every section of society has, both hardliners and liberals. But most societies allow their liberals to make their point of view known and allow the freedom to its people to accept it or not. That’s true evolution. Same can be said of most religions the world over, including Sikhs. Despite there being a religious diktat to the contrary a Sikh who has cut his hair or shaven his beard is not banned from practicing his religion or stopped from entering their temple, Gurudwara. It may be true that managing the hygiene and maintenance of long hair on the head and long beard can be quite harrowing for a Sikh faithful, but Sikh religious leaders have greatly evolved in their acceptance of Sikhs who do not sport turban and grow long hair. This is a positive development. However , there have been instances where there have been protests by the community in case where turbans were not allowed. Here, the community could keep its mind open and get going.
But when it comes to Islam, it is reliably understood that burqa or veil for women is not ordained in Quran. During the recent controversy in Mangalore, there have been flurry of articles by Muslim writer
s who informed emphatically that Burqa is really un-islamic. The news report "Burqa not a part of Islam: Scholars", says it all. The report quotes renowned Islamic scholar Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, who has reportedly stated "Burqa is not a part of Islam. It is a part of culture, the culture that the people of the sub continent have been following since ages. Nobody can enforce a dress code in the name of Islam. It is categorically un-Islamic. If a college has a rule not a wear a burqa or headscarf then that should be followed and respected. If you don’t agree you quit the college."
Expressing similar sentiment was Fareeda Khan, who teaches in Jamia Milia University of New Delhi, who has reportedly stated to the media, "The burqa has become a symbol of rigidity and has nothing to do with Islam. You should accept that the burqa has been misused for suicide bombings. Why not avoid the burqa? It is not part of any Islamic dress code. I also suggest to my students to not wear a burqa in the university". "What is the big deal about it?" She asked. Here it is fair to recount that one of the two brothers, who were managing the Lal Masjid affairs in Karachi, escaped the police dragnet by using burqa.
Adding to the on going debate, a London date lined, an AFP report states. "French Muslim Minister calls for Full Ban on Burqa". A ban on wearing the all covering burqa in France would stem the spread of what French Minister Fadela Amara called the "cancer" of radical Islam, a report quoted her as saying. The Minister for Urban Regeneration, who is a Muslim of Algerian descent, told the Financial Times, that the "head-to-toe body covering and veil represented the oppression of women, their enslavement, their humiliation". France, according to her, was a beacon for an enlightened Islam at ease with modernity. So it was necessary to fight the gangrene, the cancer of radical Islam which completely distorts the message of Islam. "The vast majority of Muslims are against the burqa. Those who have struggled for women’s rights back home in Algeria, we know what it represents and what the obscurantist political project is, that lies behind it, to confiscate the most fundamental of liberties". The comment reportedly came as French law makers conduct hearings on whether to ban the burqa after president Sarkozy said it was "not welcome" in secular France, home to Europe’s biggest Muslim minority.
Thus, it appears fairly clear that a section of the community is enforcing an undeclared agenda of pushing its members to a segregated identity of being exclusive. Doesn’t this attitude only help in keeping the divide and promoting the divide? especially when majority of girl students are unhappy wearing the burqa, but comply under parental pressure. Does the media and the liberal leaders of Muslim community have the responsibility of an open debate in the larger context of socio-political bonhomie among diverse sections of our pluralistic society? Don’t you think such a debate is necessary in the overall interest of our country as a secular nation?
Of course we have lunatics like Hafeez Said and some of the Pakistan based groups who want to Islamise India and the world. Their wild dreams shall always remain in the wild. But unfortunately these lunatic aberrations are not being condemned by either m
edia or political leadership of India or other countries. That has emboldened these lumpen elements to continue their mad agenda, which, truly speaking has indeed destroyed the world peace.
Coming to the absences of editorial even handedness, in being selective in reportage, there are many instances which can be recounted to refresh the public memory. On 4th Sept, in this English daily under reference, a detailed article appeared in the centre page regarding, the so-called LOVE BOMBS. According
to this article there is an organized gang, a Pakistani based terror outfit, is enticing, kidnapping young Hindu girls with all kinds of attraction with the larger goal of Islamic Jehad, using Kerala based young men. Operation has been going on since quite some time, and police have been dismissing these cases as elopement, until local police in Kerala came across by chance an incident involving a policeman’s daughter. For the first time, Kerala police woke up to a very sinister and organized anti-national operation in its own backyards. The article states that On 31st Aug. Malayala Manorama came up with a comprehensive story on the policeman's daughter which has thrown dirty muck on the face of power that be, state and centre. But unfortunately, reporters and the editor of this English paper had neither any report nor any editorial comment. The author of this LOVE BOMB has made some scathing observation for good measure. "And where are all the women's rights activists who painted the entire country red following the attack on a pub in Mangalore by the self styled Ram Sene? Of course, through this exposure Malayala Manorama has done a great national service as a conscientious news paper". Another story appeared in a local Kannada daily during the mid-August, about the demand by terrorist of a separate Malabar Muslim state, and celebrating Pakistan independence day hoisting Pakistani flag in places like Wayanad, Kannur and some other Muslim dominated districts. However coastal English papers were deafeningly silent on these issues. It appears rather very strange that when it comes to writing anything against Hindus or any institution run by Hindu organizations, these English papers are generally upfront, but they go dumb when it comes to writing anything about the negative activities of Muslims and others, the so-called minorities. Surely, as a journalist, its nobody’s case that he represents the truer side of the larger picture without any private, personal likes or dislikes. What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong, and a picture in proper perspective has to be given at all times for the public at large. This is sacrosanct.
I & C Feature
Comments