Communalism

BJP’s Blatant MCC Violations Ahead of Polls Show That Merely Serving Notices Won’t Be Enough

Given the alarming situation, the EC needs to show us its institutional spine rather than resort to its copybook of sending notices and seeking explanations.

New Delhi: As the assembly polls in Jharkhand and Maharashtra ended on November 20, it may be a good time to review the impunity with which the BJP violated the model code of conduct in its social media campaigns.

Unmindful of the provisions of the model code, the BJP posted blatantly communal social media videos in Jharkhand targeting the Muslim community. Earlier this week, its campaign in the state used the unverified pretext of an increasing problem of illegal “infiltration” from Bangladesh – an accusation that its opponents have vehemently denied – to visually depict Muslims as unwelcome guests in an assumed Hindu state. The video was titled “Poore Jharkhand ka kaya palat kar denge.”

This is despite the fact that a similar video circulated by the saffron party the previous week had already drawn sharp responses from many quarters. It had circulated a video that showed caricatures of incumbent chief minister Hemant Soren, his wife Kalpana Soren and other INDIA bloc leaders as corrupt politicians who were conspiring to ally with Muslim “outsiders” to come back to power.

The Congress and the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha immediately registered a complaint with the Election Commission (EC) saying the video was “misleading”, “malicious” and “divisive”. Police reportedly registered an FIR in the matter after receiving directions from election authorities.

Both videos were posted on BJP’s X handles and other social media platforms with such impunity that it would force any observer to question the level playing ground in the election process, let alone worry about the openly communal political campaign.

But more importantly, the business-as-usual approach shown by the EC in such matters in one election after another, especially when it should know that such videos are not merely posted on official handles but also circulated widely on unofficial channels, merely tells you how much the system of checks and balances established by the model code of conduct has become obsolete.

That the biggest party in the world has to resort to such low levels to win elections isn’t a surprise anymore, given the way the BJP has outdone itself in its anti-Muslim rhetoric in every successive election. However, this surely concerns many who believe that a free and fair election process is the most legitimate way to sustain Indian democracy, however uneven it may have been.

The EC eventually sent a directive to its state poll chief on November 17 to take down the video depicting Muslims as squatters, but not before it was widely circulated and became a polarising talking point. It also sought an “explanation” from the state BJP for violating the model code of conduct.

Sending notices without any punitive action against the BJP has only emboldened it to carry on with its blatantly communal campaigns. The EC’s own lacklustre actions in such cases have raised questions about the institution’s integrity like never before.

While the BJP circulated such videos in Jharkhand, it gave a clarion call to the Hindu electorate to “unite” in Maharashtra in a similar video that showed Muslims as “attackers” and “infiltrators” – a video that may be easily seen as its most ideologically charged until date.

The saffron party’s recent slogans “batenge toh katenge” or “ek hai toh safe hai” are being misleadingly spun by the BJP as appeals to people for larger unity, but anyone knows that such slogans were borne out of hate speech by leaders like Adityanath and Himanta Biswa Sarma, who carried out sustained and unambiguous campaigns against Muslims during the run-up to the assembly polls in Jharkhand and Maharashtra, and also bypolls in 50 constituencies.

The EC’s lack of enthusiasm in tightening the screws on such hateful campaigns can only draw exasperated responses in such a polarised political climate and encourage cynicism in the whole election process.

What would require the EC to implement its own model code of conduct?

The model code of conduct clearly says, “No party or candidate shall include in any activity which may aggravate existing differences or create mutual hatred or cause tension between different castes and communities, religious or linguistic.”

“There shall be no appeal to caste or communal feelings for securing votes. Mosques, Churches, Temples or other places of worship shall not be used as a forum for election propaganda,” the rules further add.

The way the BJP’s Jharkhand and Maharashtra campaigns have unfolded doesn’t merely indicate violations of the model code but a crushing blow to the values of the constitution.

The painfully bureaucratic process to register complaints and draw out responses from the EC at a time when the ruling party has shown no hesitation to violate the model code of conduct needs to be immediately addressed.

Expecting that the BJP will show self-restraint may be too much wishful thinking, given its record over the last decade when even the prime minister has not hesitated to project Indian Muslims in poor light, even when he and his party have ostensibly justified those remarks as targeting the Congress or any other opposition party.

Given how it is already an alarming situation, the EC really needs to show us its institutional spine rather than resort to the copybook of sending notices and seeking explanations, especially when the violators of model code have interpreted such shaming as just recourse to indulge in more violations.

Will the EC step up its efforts to give a clear restraining signal to the BJP? At the moment, it seems so unlikely that it may well be a hopeful fantasy.

Ahead of Maharashtra Polls, Shadow Accounts – Most Pro-Mahayuti – Spend Big on Facebook: Report

Some advertisements run by pro-Mahayuti shadow accounts featured hate speech and were not taken down, the report also said.

New Delhi: Pro-Mahayuti “shadow accounts” on Facebook spread communal advertisements ahead of the Maharashtra elections and spent over seven times more than their opposition counterparts on ads in recent weeks, a report by civil society organisations said.

Some advertisements run by pro-Mahayuti shadow accounts featured hate speech and were not taken down, despite hate speech being banned on Meta platforms, it said.

The report also flagged activity by government accounts it said raised questions about the misuse of the public exchequer.

Titled ‘Maharashtra’s Shadow Politics: How Meta Permits, Profits From and Promotes Shadow Political Advertisements’, the report released on November 13 was prepared by the Dalit Solidarity Forum, Eko, Hindus for Human Rights, the Indian American Muslim Council and the India Civil Watch International organisations.

In it, the civil society groups described the shadow accounts they studied as largely containing unverifiable or no contact information.

“This shadow infrastructure does not even meet the limited restrictions established by Meta for disclaimers in India,” the report also said, referring to Meta rules saying that ads about social issues, elections and politics require ‘paid for by’ disclaimers that “accurately represent the name of the entity or person responsible for the ad”.

“For several shadow pages, the disclaimer name is a vague term that cannot be traced back to any particular entity,” the report continued.

Such shadow accounts supported both the Mahayuti and the opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA), it said. However, the number of pro-Mahayuti shadow accounts it counted outnumbered the pro-MVA ones by fourteen times.

While the report said the shadow accounts concerned were run by parties in the Mahayuti or the MVA, The Wire could not independently verify this.

Ads target ‘land jihad’, ‘politics of fatwas’

An example of a pro-Mahayuti Facebook page the civil society groups identified as a shadow page is ‘Maha Bighadi’, among whose ads is a poster – seemingly AI-generated – depicting bearded men wearing skull caps charging in the direction of the viewer and which warns of “land jihad”.

“Hindus, know the modus operandi of jihadis. Land jihad is done by usurping the land. An illegal mosque [is built] over time. When the local administration goes to demolish the construction, they create riots,” the poster said in Marathi as per the report.

In a different ad, Maha Bighadi depicts a man in a skull cap along with the caption “See the consequences of one wrong opinion! Courage of the jihadi tribe in Chhatrapati Shivaji’s Maharashtra. Now it has increased so much that they want 15% reserved seats in the election.”

Another such page is the pro-BJP ‘Lekha Jokha Maharashtracha’ on Facebook, which sponsored an ad cautioning Hindus to “beware, defeat the politics of fatwas and vote for Hindutva Mahayuti”.

Also read: Far-Right Shadow Advertisers Dominate Indian Poll Spending on Meta for Pro-Modi, Anti-Muslim Push

No information was provided on either Maha Bighadi’s or Lekha Jokha Maharashtracha’s disclaimers for verification, the report said, adding that the two pages spent Rs 27.62 lakh and Rs 42.12 lakh respectively in the 90 days between August 5 and November 2.

The report accused the Mahayuti’s main party, the BJP, of following a “differential” style of campaigning in which a “clean official front” is kept distinct from “a powerful perception-building attack machine through shadow pages”.

It also said that pro-BJP shadow accounts pushed content that was “overtly Islamophobic”, characterised by “fear mongering” and “full of hate speech”.

On the contrary, the report said it found “no hate speech or communal content” among the ads paid for by accounts aligned with the MVA.

Maratha issue prominent not on official pages but shadow ones

Even as issues concerning the state’s Marathas – including the demand within the community of OBC reservation – have taken centre stage this election season, political parties’ official pages on Facebook tend to be silent on the topic, the report said.

However, it added, the issue is prominently highlighted by shadow accounts, which “yet again reinforces the fact that shadow accounts are used to circulate politically sensitive content without being traceable to political parties.”

Shadow accounts “constantly rake[d] up the Maratha quota issue” by “branding the opposition as ‘anti-quota’ and ‘anti-Maratha’,” the report also said.

It reported that pro-MVA accounts put less emphasis on the Maratha issue but occasionally pushed content relating to Maratha pride.

Pro-Mahayuti accounts outspend pro-opposition counterparts

Another point of contrast between pro-Mahayuti and pro-MVA Facebook accounts that the report studied were the amounts of money they spent on ads.

Fifty-six shadow accounts promoting the Mahayuti pushed 32,114 ads between August 5 and November 2, spending a total of Rs 3.32 crore, while four pro-MVA shadow accounts sponsored 771 ads in the same period of time, costing them Rs 50.5 lakh – this amounted to a sevenfold difference between the two sides, the report said.

Also read: Who Has the Most to Lose in the Three Senas’ Race for the Marathi Vote?

In fact, the number of impressions garnered per rupee spent on ads for one pro-BJP account was higher than those for the official account run by the saffron party, the report said.

According to its findings, while the official BJP Maharashtra Facebook page between August and November saw nine impressions per rupee spent on ads, Lekha Jokha Maharashtracha – which the report alleged is “the main node of the BJP shadow network” – enjoyed 91 impressions per rupee spent.

Eko campaigner Maen Hammad said in a statement: “What’s unfolding in Maharashtra is a repeat offense by Meta – profiting from election ads while ignoring hate speech and illegal shadow campaigns boosting the BJP. Meta has prioritised revenue over enforcing Indian electoral laws and its own guidelines, allowing communal attacks and divisive narratives to spread unchecked.

“This isn’t just a policy failure; it’s a business model where profit takes priority over democracy and community safety.”

Government accounts spent money on ads largely before elections, report says

The report said it found that four Maharashtra government department pages spent money on ads in the months before the general elections earlier this year, stopped advertising after that, and resumed spending ahead of the state assembly elections.

These pages were for the Maharashtra Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Board, the state Jal Jeevan Mission, the Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department and the state women and children’s department, it said.

This “raises serious questions about the misuse of the public exchequer”, the civil society groups said.

Gone Are the Days of Rule of Law, We Now Have Gunda Raj in India

This criminalisation of the Indian public officialdom is the most concerning development of the last 10 years.

Rule of law in India seems to be getting replaced with gunda raj (rule of might). Two recent incidents illustrate this trend. First, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) disrupted an annual film festival in Udaipur that has been held there for nine years. Second, the demolition of a mazar in the prestigious Doon School in Dehradun by right-wing goons.

On Saturday (November 16), RSS members disrupted Shabnam Virmani’s film Had-Anhad on the second day of the Udaipur Film Festival. Later, the Rabindranath Tagore Medical College administration succumbed to their pressure and withdrew permission for the festival. The RSS members were reportedly upset that the festival had been dedicated to the children of Palestine and the late professor G.N. Saibaba.

The film festival’s organisers and the RSS workers were summoned to the principal’s office for a discussion. While the college administration had given permission for the festival – charging a fee for the use of the college hall – the principal was unable to say anything to the RSS workers in support of his permission. He merely asked the organisers to resolve the dispute by agreeing with the RSS’s demand.

According to the RSS, G.N. Sai Baba was a terrorist. Palestine is also a terrorist entity. Therefore, paying tribute to them is tantamount to supporting terrorism. They ordered the organisers to accept in writing that they had made a mistake by organising a program in memory of the children killed in Palestine. RSS members also allegedly told the organisers that they would have to pay tribute to Kanhaiyalal Teli, a tailor who was hacked to death in 2022, and Devraj Mochi, a boy from the Dalit community who was stabbed by his classmate earlier this year. The RSS workers had brought a draft with them, which they wanted the organisers to release without any changes.

The organisers said that they were against all kinds of violence and murder, but the RSS members were adamant that they release a video based on their draft.

The police too were present in the principal’s office. However, they did not tell the RSS workers that they neither had the right to intimidate any citizen, nor stop a programme from happening.

There were some doctors also present in the office who seemed to agree with the RSS disrupters.

The principal then asked the organisers to seek permission from the district administration. While this was not a prerequisite for organising the event, the principal created this new condition without which the festival could not be allowed to continue.

When the organisers requested that the ongoing film be allowed to finish, the principal forcibly halted the screening.

The organisers spoke to the district magistrate (DM) and claimed that his attitude was no different from that of the RSS. He allegedly refused to give permission for the event saying that the matter was between the college and festival’s organisers.

However, practical wisdom indicates that if a public programme is disrupted and attendees attacked, then it should be treated as a crime. It is also the district administration’s job to prevent this and restrain the disrupters.

The organisers requested security for the festival venue from the administration but the DM allegedly refused.

This is the same DM under whose supervision the administration bulldozed the house of an accused some time ago. In a fight between children in a school in Udaipur, one child stabbed another. The child accused of the stabbing happened to belong to the Muslim community. The administration responded by bulldozing his house. It is a separate matter that the child’s family was renting that house and that some other families also lived there. But did the administration have the right to demolish it? Is this not gunda raj in itself?

Also read: ‘Nothing but Anarchy, Collective Punishment’: Supreme Court’s Searing Remarks on ‘Bulldozer Justice’

The Supreme Court in its recent judgement declared this use of bulldozers illegal and has said that the administrative officials would be held responsible for it. The court said that they will have to bear the consequences of violating the law. The implication of the court’s order is that the Udaipur administration had committed a crime by bulldozing the house where the child lived.

It is therefore not surprising that such an officer is standing with the RSS.

The second incident occurred at the Doon School in Dehradun.

Some miscreants trespassed onto the school premises by jumping over the wall and demolished Mazar located on campus. The Mazar had been there for a long time and the school had no objection to its presence. However, some outsiders who took issue with it destroyed the structure.

The school administration has not filed a report regarding this act of trespassing and vandalism. It has claimed in a letter to the students’ parents that no structure within the premises was demolished. What was removed was a structure which a contractor had built on his own. But the right-wing goons have live streamed their feat and claimed that they had the administration’s permission. Yet, the DM in question denied any knowledge of the incident.

“We did not issue any orders for its demolition. However, we did send a team including the SDM to the place to verify the facts related to the mazar and ensure that law and order are maintained,” the DM said.

That law and order has already been broken did not occur to him.Two crimes have been committed: one of trespassing, the other of demolishing a structure. But the district administration seems to be at peace with these.

These two recent incidents should scare us as citizens.

It seems that India’s administrative officers are asserting that ensuring public safety is not their responsibility. Moreover, they appear to align themselves with the hooliganism of the RSS and other Hindutva groups. The responsibility for upholding the rule of law in India rests with the administration and the police. If they refuse to fulfil this duty and instead join hand with RSS goons, can the rule of law survive in this country?

If police officers start washing the feet of kanwariyas and showering flowers on them, then they will also shut down the businesses of Muslims. It was the Muzaffarnagar and Saharanpur police which issued orders requiring shopkeepers to prominently display their names and those of their employees. And it is these officers that silently watch Hindutva goons force Muslims to close their meat shops whenever they want.

We have not given enough thought to the implications of the administration turning into a coercive arm of Hindutva politics. While we often defend them by saying that they are merely following orders from above. The administration can also refuse to obey these orders. If they do not do so, then it is nothing less of a crime.

This is what the Supreme Court meant when it held the executive authorities responsible for the demolition of houses and properties of those accused of crime. It said, “We are of the view that in such matters the public officials, who take the law in their hands, should be made accountable for such high-handed actions.. For the executive to act in a transparent manner so as to avoid the vice of arbitrariness, we are of the view that certain binding directives need to be formulated. This will ensure that public officials do not act in a high-handed, arbitrary, and discriminatory manner. Further, if they indulge in such acts, accountability must be fastened upon them.”

The Udaipur and Dehradun incidents show us that through inaction and non-interference, public officials are aiding and abetting criminal acts, especially those involving Hindutva goons. This criminalisation of the Indian public officialdom is the most concerning development of the last 10 years.

Bengal: Internet Restricted Amid Communal Tension in Parts of Murshidabad

Police are investigating how an offensive message ended up on an illuminated display at a festival.

Kolkata: Internet access was restricted in parts of Murshidabad district of Bengal following a surge in communal tensions sparked by an message displayed at a local religious event. The message led to vandalism, arson, and injuries to several individuals from both communities.

The incident took place at Beldanga, where an illuminated display showed a phrase that was deemed insulting to Muslims. The Wire has seen videos that were shared of the purported message on social media but has not been able to independently verify them. Clashes took place in the area in response, locals and police said.

Authorities have arrested 17 people and claim to have brought the situation under control. However, tensions remain high.

“Tensions escalated due to a local issue. We are identifying the guilty individuals and taking appropriate action. I request everyone to cooperate with the police in maintaining law and order. I appeal to both parties not to take the law into their own hands,” said superintendent of police, Murshidabad, Surya Pratap Yadav.

Police are investigating how the offensive message ended up on the illuminated display. Heightened security measures were implemented in Beldanga on November 17 as well, as 163 puja committees organised a joint procession for the immersion of Jagaddhatri idols. The district police chief and local MP visited the area to oversee security operations.

“Such incidents have never happened here before. The police are investigating how a derogatory remark about a religious leader was written on a display at a festive arch. This remark provoked people from one community, leading to clashes with the police and injuries to several people. However, the situation is now relatively under control. I don’t think Kartik Maharaj has anything to do with this incident,” said Abu Taher Khan, MP, Murshidabad.

In the lead-up to the Lok Sabha elections, the area witnessed similar communal tensions. At the time, chief minister Mamata Banerjee accused the spiritual leader Kartik Maharaj, who is linked to a local religious institution, of instigating unrest.

Murshidabad’s Beldanga is historically linked to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh through a local ashram which was once patronised by M.S. Golwalkar. The area has been a hotbed of communal tension for decades despite its agricultural prosperity.

“Murshidabad is a district of harmony, but planned communal forces want to incite riots. These disturbances are a step towards creating a division that can pave the way for the implementation of the National Register of Citizens. The BJP is starting a game of division in Beldanga by putting forward social faces like Kartik Maharaj,” observed local writer and social activist Manik Fakir, who has been tracking RSS politics in the region.

Former MP and state Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury said that he too is loathe to place the blame on a particular person. “However, for the past few years, there have been planned attempts to spread religious hatred and create unrest. We trust that local well-wishers can thwart this conspiracy. A few evil forces are doing this in a planned manner, we have demanded that they be investigated and punished accordingly,” Chowdhury said.

CPI(M) leader Mohammad Salim condemned the incident and called for “strict action against all those responsible.”

Soon after the clashes, BJP leaders took to social media to put the blame on the Muslim community. A post by BJP leader Amit Malviya making such a claim is no longer on X, presumably as a result of a notice by the Bengal police.

West Bengal Police wrote on X: “Malicious efforts are being made from certain quarters to spread misinformation and rumours about last night’s incident at Beldanga in Murshidabad where clashes took place between two groups over some condemnable mischief.”

Translated from the Bengali original by Aparna Bhattacharya.

Despite Stern Rebuke by Supreme Court, Adityanath Issues Bulldozer Threat in Jharkhand

‘These bulldozers are parked here to retrieve the money looted in dacoities, to get back the money taken in these dacoities,’ the UP chief minister said in Jamtara.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court may have deemed bulldozer justice “totally unconstitutional” and equated it a “lawless state of affairs” but that has not deterred Uttar Pradesh chief minister Adityanath from warning of their use in future.

Wrapping up his election campaign in Jharkhand on November 18, Adityanath hinted at the use of bulldozers against political opponents if the Bharatiya Janata Party was voted to power in the state. In fact, just five days after the apex court stated that the government would not be allowed to demolish the property of an accused person without following due process of law, bulldozers were parked at the venue of at least two public meetings addressed by Adityanath in Jharkhand on November 18.

Adityanath’s defiant reference to the bulldozer comes in the wake of two adverse decisions in the Supreme Court against the government on the trend of illegal demolition of property. A three-judge bench including the then Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, on November 6, directed Adityanath’s government to pay a senior journalist Manoj Tibrewal a compensation of Rs 25 lakh after his ancestral house and shop were unlawfully demolished by officials for widening a road in Maharajganj. In its judgment, the court said that “Bulldozer justice is simply unacceptable under the rule of law” and that, “Justice through bulldozers is unknown to any civilised system of jurisprudence.”

Then, on November 13, the Supreme Court while indicting the government for starting a trend of illegally demolishing homes and properties of persons accused of crime, said such arbitrary actions by officials would be dealt with a heavy hand of the law.

These words seem to have had no impact on Adityanath, who has often glorified the use of bulldozers, earning the moniker ‘bulldozer baba‘ – ‘father who uses bulldozers’. While accusing the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha-led government in Jharkhand of looting the resources of the state, Adityanath said bulldozers were ready to retrieve the money.

“Isi dacoity se paisa nikalne ke liye bulldozer khada hain. Isi dacoity ke paise ko vapas lene ke liye (these bulldozers are parked here to retrieve the money looted in dacoities, to get back the money taken in these dacoities),” Adityanath said in Jamtara district. The statement was met with loud cheers.

Also read: In Jharkhand and Maharashtra, Yogi Unleashes Rhetoric of Hatred to Mobilise Hindus Behind BJP

His allegations that the JMM and its partner Congress had looted the resources of the state along with the funds sent by the central government of Narendra Modi were based on the recovery of alleged unaccounted cash from two opposition leaders during raids by central agencies. In May, the Enforcement Directorate said that it recovered around Rs 20 crore in “unaccounted cash” from the premises of the domestic help of the personal secretary to Jharkhand minister Alamgir Khan. In a previous rally in Koderma, Adityanath had compared Alamgir Khan to Mughal emperor Aurangzeb.

In December 2023, the Income Tax department said it had recovered Rs 350 crore in cash from entities linked to the companies of Congress Rajya Sabha MP Dhiraj Sahu.

Referring to both these raids, Adityanath said the “mountain of notes” recovered from Sahu and Khan were examples of how the JMM-Congress government had looted the state. “This money does not belong to the JMM or the Congress but to the people of Jharkhand,” said Adityanath as he warned that the bulldozers (parked at his rally venue) would retrieve the money.

The bulldozers also featured in his rally in Rajmahal. But he did not refer to them in the rally. However, in a post made later on social media site X (formerly Twitter), Adityanath shared a picture of the rally in Rajmahal showing his supporters perched on three bulldozers. Two of the bulldozers had supporters holding large saffron flags (shaped as stacked triangles).

Adityanath referred to the use of bulldozers in a recent rally in Koderma, where he gloated about the impact demolitions through bulldozers had in his state UP ever since he assumed power. “Prior to 2017, the mafia would walk around UP with the chests pumped. But after 2017, when bulldozers started being used, even the most dreaded mafia left the lands of UP. Today, some are in jail while others have embarked on a ‘ram naam satya hain’ yatra,” said Adityanath.

How Does India See Its Muslim Population?

A recent survey is revealing of a fair degree of anti-Muslim prejudice among Hindus.

Every five years, the Lok Sabha elections offer a window to analyse the representation of the Muslim minority in the parliament of India. From that point of view, the 2024 elections have reconfirmed a structural trend as the share of Muslim members of parliament further eroded, dropping from 4.6% in 2019 to 4.4%. Muslims represented 14.5% of the Indian population in the 2011 census.

No Muslim candidate has been elected, not only among those – very few – nominated by the Bharatiya Janata Party, but also among those (equally small in numbers) who had been given a ticket by its NDA allies.

On the opposition side, the situation is different but Muslims are still under represented by almost half since only 7.9% of the INDIA Lok Sabha members come from India’s largest minority. It is also important to note that, in contrast to the government that had been formed in 2019 which had one Muslim MP – Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, a Rajya Sabha Member – there’s none this time.

How far can we explain this invisibilisation by the general perception of this minority by the Hindu majority?

Illustration: Pariplab Chakraborty.

And how are Muslims assessing their own situation and perceiving their community as well as its leaders?

These are the question this column addresses on the basis of a survey commissioned in the framework of the Henry Luce Foundation-funded ‘Indian Muslims Project’. This project, initiated in 2020 by scholars of Sciences Po, Princeton University and Columbia University, includes about 50 researchers from India, the US and Europe. The study was conducted by the CSDS from March 28 to April 8, 2024 as part of its National Electoral Study in 400 polling stations spread across 100 assembly constituencies in 100 parliamentary constituencies. It achieved a sample of 10,019 respondents spread across 19 states of India – Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Delhi, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Telangana. The sampling design adopted was multi-stage random sampling. This procedure ensured that the selected sample was fully representative of the cross-section of voters in the country.

The survey is revealing of a fair degree of anti-Muslim prejudice among Hindus. 27 % of the latter “fully” or “somewhat” consider that Muslims are not as “trustworthy as anyone else”. Among Hindu Dalit and Hindu Adivasi respondents (as classified by the survey) respectively 28.7% and 31% share these views. But the most significant faultline is geographical rather than social: only 13% of the south Indian respondents “fully” or “somewhat” disagree with the idea that Muslims are as “trustworthy as anyone else”, against 27% in the Hindi belt and 20% in the West.

Similarly, 26% of the Hindus interviewed “fully” or “somewhat” disagree with the idea that Muslims are as “patriotic as any Indian”. Again, Hindu Dalits and Hindu Adivasis are more prejudiced than other Hindus, at respectively 30% and 28.5% (against 24.3% for ‘upper’ caste Hindus). And again the gap between the North and the South is very significant: only 18.1% of the south Indian respondents “fully” or “somewhat” disagree with the India that Muslims were as patriotic as any Indian, against 28.1% in the Hindi belt and 21% in the West.

This perception harks back to an old idea that Muslims are unduly favoured.

A very large proportion of the Hindu voters who have been interviewed, 47%, “fully” or “somewhat” agree with the idea that Muslims are “unnecessarily appeased or pampered” – even though all the available data demonstrate that Indian Muslims are undergoing an impoverishment process and are marginalised on the job market and the housing market, as well as in the educational system (at least in the North and the West). A consensus seems to prevail here also from the point of view of caste and communities: Dalits and Adivasis are only slightly less inclined to share this view (at 43.4% and 43.5%) than the ‘upper’ castes and the upper OBCs – at 46.8% and 49.9%.

Illustration: Pariplab Chakraborty

This viewpoint explains that a substantial fraction of the Hindus – 22 % – consider that “only Hindus” should benefit from reservations. By contrast, 71% of Muslims think that Hindus and Muslims should get access to this form of positive discrimination. However, when the question is more specific and the interviewees asked should both Hindus and Muslims be given reservations in the Scheduled Castes category – a majority of Hindus and Muslims agree (among the Hindu Dalits, only 28.1% don’t), a clear reflection of an idea that Muslim Dalits, at least, are not “pampered” and need as much support as other Dalits.

The fact that, according to the Hindu respondents, nothing special has to be done for the other Muslims reflects their assessment of the general condition of this minority: 60 to 68% of the Hindu respondents, according to the caste group, think that Muslims are not “treated unfairly by the state authorities”. By contrast, 43 % of the Muslim respondents think otherwise.

This is largely related to a deep sense of insecurity: 53.8 % of the Muslim respondents consider that they are not “as safe as any other citizen in the country” and 11% of them say that they are “not safe at all”. This perception stands in stark contrast with those of the Hindus – whatever their caste – who appear in a rather complete denial of the Muslims’ condition: 60 to 62% of them claim that Muslims are equally safe.

Hindus are expressing these views despite the fact that they interact less with Muslims than with people of other communities: only half of the Hindu respondents have “a friend who is a Muslim” – caste making no difference here either. This proportion is still smaller in the Hindi belt, in spite of the size of the Muslim population in UP. Only 50.6% of the Hindi belt respondents have a friend who is a Muslim when 65.9% of the south Indian respondents do.

Another paradox needs to be highlighted: the Hindu respondents argue that Muslims are not treated differently than others, are not unsafe and are even pampered or appeased, but they admit that Muslims are not properly represented in the political sphere – and they attribute this problem to some lack of leadership. There are more Hindu respondents who consider that “the absence of serious and committed leaders among Muslims affects their representation in politics” than Hindu respondents who think otherwise – whatever the caste group. An even larger proportion of Muslims – 50.2% – think alike.

In the same vein, 52% to 54% of the Hindu respondents consider that “There is a need for better and articulate Muslim leaders in India”, a view shared by 81.1% of Muslims, but, at the same time, 61.8% of the Muslim respondents consider that “the Muslim community has able, honest and committed leaders” (it simply needs to have more), something the Hindu respondents deny: there are more Hindu respondents who think that Muslims don’t have such leaders than respondents who think otherwise, irrespective of caste. The contrast between the Hindi belt and the South, here, is complete: while 38.1% of the Hindi belt respondents think that the Muslim community does not have “honest and committed leaders” (against 27.6% who think that it does), 48.9% of the South Indians consider that the Muslim community has such leaders (against only 24.3% who think that it doesn’t).

Many Muslims attribute their situation to the leaders of the community themselves: 50% of them report that absence of serious leaders amongst Muslims affects their representation. 64% of the Muslim voters interviewed stand in full agreement to need for more articulate Muslim leaders. However, 62% also feel that they have committed leaders – but they are too few.

The data we have analysed so far reflect the growing polarisation of the Indian society, a process that is more pronounced in the Hindi belt than in the rest of the country. To put it in a nutshell, Muslims feel more and more insecure and unfairly treated when Hindus consider that not only are they as secure as others and treated the same way as others – even pampered and appeased – but (here there is a contradiction) that their plea – which, therefore, is not so good – reflects a lack of leadership and justifies some reservations (at least for Dalit Muslims).

Most of the items reviewed so far have not revealed any significant difference due to the social background of the Hindu respondents.

This communal polarisation of the Indian society stems from the rise to power of the Bharatiya Janata Party whose discourse systematically demonises the Muslims. But it also results from the groundwork of the Sangh Parivar at the societal level, a strategy of mobilisation that has found expression in the Ram Janmabhoomi movement for decades. A majority of the Hindu respondents, precisely, consider that the construction of the Ram temple “helped in consolidating the Hindu identity”. Interestingly, 59% of the ‘upper’ caste Hindus share this view, against 46.7% of the Hindu Dalits only. This view is also more popular in the Hindi belt than in the South: 49.4% against 43.8%.

Illustration: Pariplab Chakraborty

While the very idea of consolidating the Hindu identity went together with the notion of polarisation and majoritarianism, a majority of the Hindu respondents do not consider that the Ayodhya movement has further divided society. In fact, the percentage of Hindu respondents who say that the building of the Ram temple will “foster harmony between Hindus and Muslims” is larger than the percentage of those who consider that it will “increase differences among communities”. Note that the gap is larger among the ‘upper’ castes (35.% against 19.1%) than among the Dalits (25.6% against 23.4%).

These data can be interpreted as the reflection of a clear denial of reality. But one may also see it as the sign of a certain attachment to the coexistence of different communities. This reading is virtually substantiated by the fact that in our survey only a small minority of Hindus – 10 to 16 % of the total according to caste groups – consider that “India belongs only to Hindus”, a huge majority of the Hindu respondents – between 74% and 80% – saying that the country “belongs to citizens of all religions”.

More importantly, about 50% of the respondents – caste and religion making no difference – declare that “leaders from other religions can also effectively represent [their] interests and concerns”. In the same vein, there are more respondents – between 39.4% and 50.5% according to their caste group – who say that they will contact a leader of a different religion or a leader from their community the same way to get their work done, if the two leaders belong to the same party and are equally competent, than a respondent who declares that they will contact a leader from their community first. But geography makes a big difference here too: while only 24.5% of the South Indian respondents would prefer a “leader from the same religion”, they are 40.7% in the Hindi belt! Similarly, while 61% of the South Indians consider that “leaders from other religions can also effectively represent [one’s] interests and concerns”, only 45.8% of those of the Hindi belt think alike.

Another contrasted piece of information may be found in the responses to the question: does your “vote affect how things are run in this country?” While 63.3% of the ‘upper’ caste Hindus share this view, only 51.3 % of the Muslims (the lowest proportion) do. This difference is reconfirmed by data on voter turnout. Certainly, the proportion of Muslim citizens who voted in 2024 has increased from 60% in 2019 to 62%. But since 2014, it is much lower than the overall turn out – whereas it was above the national average in the late 1990s. In 1999, 67% of the Muslims who were allowed to vote did so, when the overall turnout was only 60%. Many more Muslim potential voters abstain today, as if they had lost faith in the electoral process.

Christophe Jaffrelot is research director at CERI-Sciences Po/CNRS, Professor of Politics and Sociology at King’s College London and Non Resident Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. His publications include Modi’s India: Hindu Nationalism and the Rise of Ethnic Democracy, Princeton University Press, 2021, and Gujarat under Modi: Laboratory of today’s India, Hurst, 2024, both of which are published in India by Westland.

‘Time for a New Manipur CM or President’s Rule, but Absence of Clear Thinking Means Problem Will Remain’

Pradip Phanjoubam identified two reasons why even after 18 months the crisis in Manipur has not been brought under control.

Pradip Phanjoubam, a senior journalist, columnist and author, tells Karan Thapar that it’s time for a new chief minister or president’s rule in Manipur.

Phanjoubam says the Union government has allowed the crisis in Manipur to become a frozen conflict. But this has not led to peace instead we have, from time to time, the absence of violence but periodically, as happened recently in Jiribam, violence, deaths and abduction erupt.

Phanjoubam identified two reasons why even after 18 months the crisis in Manipur has not been brought under control. The first is that the Union and state government have shied away from forceful action. There has not been the required show of state power.

The second reason is that because the BJP controls both the Union and state government in Manipur, Delhi is reluctant to act in any way that would taint the BJP government in Manipur.

Manipur: CM Biren Calls Party and Ally MLAs’ Meeting, ‘Completely Failed to Resolve Crisis,’ Says NPP

A key ally of the Bharatiya Janata Party in the Northeast, the National People’s Party, withdrew support to it citing its failure to ‘restore normalcy’ in Manipur.

New Delhi: With Manipur once again in the throes of escalated ethnic violence – ongoing in the state since May last year – Manipur chief minister N Biren Singh has called a meeting of all members of the legislative assembly of his party and allies.

The move comes as a key ally of the Bharatiya Janata Party in the Northeast, the National People’s Party withdrew support to it citing its failure to “restore normalcy” in Manipur. Although NPP pulling out does not significantly impact the BJP’s status in the Manipur assembly, it is the second largest ally in the state and the move can have ramifications in the northeast.

Indian Express has reported that NPP chief Conrad Sangma has mentioned Biren by name in his letter to BJP chief J.P. Nadda “We strongly feel that the Manipur state government under the leadership of Shri Biren Singh has completely failed to resolve the crisis and restore normalcy,” he wrote.

Twenty people have died in the state since November 7, reports say.

Last week, six members of a Meitei family went missing from a shelter camp at Jiribam district following a gun battle that led to the death of people who Manipur police said were 10 armed militants and who have been reported to have belonged to the Kuki community. Five of the six, whom Meitei residents of the camp said had been abducted, were found dead by November 16. Among them is an eight-month-old baby. A 25-year-old woman, the mother of the two deceased children among the five, is missing.

This led to protests across Manipur valley regions, with mobs targeting BJP leaders’ and MLAs’ houses. Internet is suspended in Imphal West, Imphal East, Bishnupur, Thoubal, Kakching, Kangpokpi, and Churachandpur districts. The Imphal West district is also under curfew.

A 61-year-old woman and a two-year-old boy were additionally found floating in a river at Lakhipur in Assam on November 17, The Hindu has meanwhile reported.

In addition, the body of a 27-year-old man from the Kuki-Zo community was recovered in Jiribam. “His hands were tied and he had been shot in the head,” the report quoted the police as having said.

Manipur’s cabinet has, without specifying why, asked the Union home ministry to “review and withdraw” its November 14 notification declaring six police jurisdictions in the state’s Imphal valley and Jiribam as disturbed areas under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act or AFSPA.

In Vidarbha, Two Campaigns in Two Shades Over a Single Book – the Constitution

In a door-to-door constitution distribution campaign, a Hindutva organisation will also be distributing the book titled ‘Congress Yug Mein Samvidhan Ki Hatya’.

Nagpur: A day after Congress leader Rahul Gandhi held a meeting to honour the constitution in Nagpur on November 6, 2024, an organisation named Samvidhan Jagar Samithi launched the ‘Har Ghar Samvidhan’ campaign as part of its ‘Samvidhan Baato’ or ‘constitution distribution’ movement.

‘Har Ghar Samvidhan’ translates to ‘a constitution in every home’.

At a press conference held the day after Gandhi’s visit, members of the Samvidhan Jagar Samithi gathered at Patrakar Bhawan in Nagpur to discuss the campaign’s message and distribution plans.

Addressing the media, Sagar Jadhav stated, “Our organisation will distribute copies of the constitution to every household in Nagpur and later to the entire country. It’s time to inform the nation about who has made changes to the constitution.”

In this door-to-door campaign, the organisation will also be distributing the book titled Congress Yug Mein Samvidhan Ki Hatya (“Congress-era murder of the constitution”), a Marathi pamphlet that focuses on laws enacted during the Congress regime.

Sagar Jadhav, member of of the Samvidhan Jagar Samithi. Photo: The Wire.

When asked what the campaign entails, Sagar said the key points in the Marathi book emphasise that the constitution as drafted by Ambedkar “did not include provisions for the Waqf Board, Muslim Personal Law Board, Minority Board, government funding for madrasas, or salaries for Maulvis.” According to the book, Ambedkar’s original vision upheld equal rights for men and women and did not include Article 370, which gave Jammu and Kashmir its special status. Further, the book alleges that “while the Nehru-Gandhi family’s interpretation of the constitution prohibited Hindus from practicing polygamy, it permitted Muslims to have up to four wives, changing Ambedkar’s original intent.”

This door-to-door ‘Samvidhan’ campaign lends itself to the Mahayuti government’s ‘Ghar Ghar Samvidhan’ campaign which it announced this October, ostensibly to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the Indian constitution. A government resolution on this initiative was issued on Mahaparinirvan Day, October 14. The Wire discovered copies of the book Congress Yuga Mein Samvidhan Ki Hatya in BJP offices as well.

A different constitution campaign

In the recent Lok Sabha elections, the Congress-led INDIA bloc’s central plank was the Bharatiya Janata Party government’s threat to the constitution. It is believed to have prevented the BJP from gaining a clear majority.

Rahul Gandhi’s ‘Samvidhan Samman Sammelan’ was organised by Yuva Adhikar Manch, an organisation which has been raising the caste census issue over the past six years. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi accused the RSS-BJP of promoting an agenda that undermines the rights of marginalised communities protected by the constitution.

“The RSS knows that if it directly attacks the constitution, it would be defeated within minutes,” Gandhi said, urging the organisation to openly confront the values enshrined in the constitution. He argued that instead of taking a direct approach, the RSS and BJP have adopted covert strategies, using narratives of “development, progress, and economy” to disguise their true intentions. “If they have the courage, they should come forward, and we’ll accept their challenge,” he added.

Meanwhile, Umesh Korram, chief convenor of Yuva Adhikar Manch, said, “We have been demanding this for six years – the government should allocate budgets based on caste demographics and include 50% OBCs in policymaking roles.” Korram and his team met Gandhi on March 13, 2024, during his second Bharat Jodo Yatra, where they discussed the idea of a caste census.

Despite being home to the RSS, the Vidarbha region has historically been a Congress stronghold, only to be breached by the BJP a decade ago. The RSS became less active in Lok Sabha efforts after J.P. Nadda’s statement regarding its political role. However, senior journalist Sudhir Pathak, who covers the RSS, told The Wire that the Sangh has been working on the ground for the Hindutva party long before the election began. “What J.P. Nadda said has now been resolved after the meeting that took place in August-September in Kerala,” he said.

Ahead of the assembly polls in Maharashtra, both the BJP and Congress are focusing on the Vidarbha region, which holds 62 seats, making it crucial for both parties to secure wins here to gain an advantage in their respective alliances. Of the 76 seats where the BJP and Congress face off directly, 36 are in Vidarbha.

As J&K Assembly Roars for Resolution, Can Restoring Article 370 Heal the Region?

The battle of the resolutions played out in the UT Assembly has a deeper context, both in the past, as well as in charting the future course for the former state of J&K, the first to have its status stripped to a UT’s and being bifurcated, without consulting its state assembly.

New Delhi: On November 4, when the Jammu and Kashmir assembly sprang to life after six long and unsettling years, along with it, also came to life the accusations, allegations and arguments over Article 370 – a constitutional guarantee guarding the region – which was read down by parliament under the aegis of the Narendra Modi government in 2019.

Day one unfolded with MLAs of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) racing with a self- articulated resolution for the restoration of Article 370- with no prior consultation with other members of the Assembly. PDP’s letter to the Speaker Abdul Rahim Rather not only resonated with condemnation but was also meant to convey the urgency which they had shown to speak about Article 370.

Subsequently, on November 6, when the deputy chief minister and National Conference (NC) leader Surinder Kumar Chaudhary, declared that the assembly “reaffirms the importance of special status and constitutional guarantees which safeguarded the identity, culture and rights of the people of Jammu and Kashmir and expresses concern over their unilateral removal” – the event was met with chaos, manhandling and sloganeering. The BJP was adamant to show that they weren’t party to the tabling of any resolution that carried the faintest whiff of Article 370.

But this did not end here. Several legislators from other parties like PDP, JKPC, Awami Ittehad Party, also brought in a fresh Article-370 resolution to the Assembly on November 7. This session turned violent as this new resolution drafted by non-NC leaders became a major bone of contention with leaders engaging in a scuffle.

Statehood, Special Status and Suspicion

Merely 10 days after winning the assembly elections, at their first cabinet meeting, the J&K cabinet unanimously adopted a resolution seeking restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir. A day later, on October 19, Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha cleared a resolution passed by chief minister Omar Abdullah-led Cabinet urging the Union government to restore statehood to the Union Territory.

The restoration of statehood was not only on the NC’s election manifesto, but was also emphasised by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union home minister Amit Shah that the region would return to statehood, post the assembly elections. No real timeline was specified by them.

Recently however, when the NC came up with its own resolution for restoring Article 370, it was labelled as ‘weak worded’ by the opposition, and totally dismissed by BJP MLAs. Sajad Lone, MLA Handwara and Peoples Conference President called for a reinforcement of the recently passed resolution, deeming it “weak” and criticising its lack of mention of Article 370, 35A, as well as the absence of an explicit condemnation of the unilateral decisions of August 5, 2019. Several Kashmiri leaders also expressed suspicion over NC’s soft stance over restoration of Article 370.

Lone told The Wire:

“This was the first assemblage of people of J&K in the form of an assembly after August 5, 2019. We may be disempowered and a UT. But in the context of August 5, 2019 the present assembly is the most potent and relevant constitutional and political institution. It comes nearest to having the representative character to accept or reject August 5, 2019, and reflects the will of the people. That won’t change anything. But it would be a historical milestone. An unambiguous rejection would have set the record straight that the decision of August 5 was taken against the will of the Kashmiri people.”

About NC’s articulation of the resolution, he said that he failed to understand what the compulsion was to be so tactical and miserly with words.

“Where in this resolution have the words ‘Article 370′, ’35A’ or ‘August 5’ been used? There was not even an indirect reference. The word special status is from political folklore not from the constitution. These words do not exist in the constitution. Now even the Congress is saying that 370 is not a part of the resolution. They are their ally. What more proof does one need?” Lone asked.

The resolution or resolutions for the restoration of Article 370 must be mindful of the kind of resolutions that previous committees have articulated. Previous resolutions with their demands for the restoration of the pre-1953 status in the relationship between the Union government and the state have been key in strengthening the bond between the Union of India and the region of Jammu and Kashmir. Though diluted and forgotten over the years, on July 1, 2000, after a week-long debate, a resolution was passed in the legislative assembly of Jammu and Kashmir. This resolution called for restoration of the pre-1953 status of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, in which the J&K government would have control over all matters except defence, communications and foreign affairs. This resolution, through the State Autonomy Committee which was shaped in November 1996 right after the National Conference formed the government in October – was carved out with the hope to hand to the people of Jammu and Kashmir a special power, a status that would be guarded by the constitution of India. This status, in a way, guaranteed that the state and its people were valued for the trust they put while acceding to India, unlike the resolution passed on November 6, 2024.

Also read: Amidst ‘Jai Shree Ram’ Chants, J&K Assembly Passes Resolution to Restore Special Status

Restoration amid rebellion

Though senior BJP leader and former J&K minister Sunil Sharma was among the first to oppose the move, according to Shagun Parihar, MLA Kishtwar, it was looking like a contest between which party would claim the floor first for raking up the contentious issue.

“It looked like Waheed Para and Omar Abdullah were competing to steal the limelight in connection with Article 370. I admit that it was on their manifestos, but several other agendas like electricity, water supply, education were also on their manifestos, which need attention. They are still trying to fool Kashmiris using Article 370” Parihar told The Wire.

Parihar, in her statement, is majorly echoing the words of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who days ago, at an election rally in Nashik, said that his govt would never allow the restoration of Article 370.

On November 8, after the J&K assembly passed the resolution demanding the restoration of Article 370, Modi said that the action was part of a conspiracy against the union territory, simultaneously attacking the NC-Congress Alliance.

Democracy diluted

At the core of the controversy is PDP’s MLA from Pulwama, Waheed Para – who shifted shape during the days that the assembly was in session. From meekly getting a letter delivered to the Speaker in session, to raging in anger for his voice to be heard, Para was also seen snatching resolution papers from opposing members, trying to save them from being torn and tossed around.

“I feel it is important for us to fight back, to make our voice heard, to stand against the wrongs that were committed against us” Para said. The Wire asked Para what his next move would be, considering that the Union Government would most probably not assent to the resolution; he said that he would still want to continue pushing for the rights that were snatched from Kashmir. “We need our guarantees back, bestowing us with our constitutional rights would act as a confidence building measure between the government of India and people of Kashmir” he said.

For academic Siddiq Wahid, the events that defined the assembly session were a consequence of the deep trust deficit between the peoples of J&K and the Union government. “Whether it will result in the “restoration” of the former state’s dignity, autonomy and laws will depend on the intentions of the UT and Central government. ‘We the people’ of the former state wait to see,” Wahid said.

The Wire contacted MLAs and office bearers of the National Conference, but they were not available for comment.