Monday 12 February 2018

Such Significance of Secularism being a Pillar of the Indian Constitution


Such Significance of Secularism being a Pillar of the Indian Constitution

Rajindar Sachar

The Preamble of Our Constitution mandates. WE THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.

It is well settled that the Preamble is the key to the Constitution and the objectives mentioned in the Preamble, namely the ideals of Socialism, Secularism and Democracy, must govern any programme of the governments.

It is self evident that secularism as a philosophy as highlighted in the Preamble is one of the working foundations of the Indian Constitution.

It is implicit in the secular character of the Indian State that no religion can claim superiority of status on any other religion. All religions under our Constitution have equal acceptance and status. A single citizenship is assured to all persons irrespective of their religion.

Secularism does not signify anti-religion. In India people fervently believe in their respective religions and an overwhelming number of persons of all communities give equal respect to the religion of others. Secularism signifies giving equal dignity and respect to all religions. Of course it goes without saying that the Indian State has no religion of its own, nor for that matter can any religion claim superiority over another religion such as by resorting to the false premise that it is indigenous while others are foreign. This is heresy not permitted by our Constitution, which gives equal reverence to all the religions practiced by the various communities of India. The Supreme Court too has declared that the concept of secularism is that the State will have no religion of its own.

All religions have the same message. Thus Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam (the world is one family) shows the spirit of tolerance in Hinduism. The same message of humanity and common good runs through all religions. Thus the Holy Quran proclaims, “All the created ones belong to the family of God . . . so, an Arab has no precedence over a non-Arab, a White over a Black”. And Christ said succinctly, “All are children of God.”

It is a truism that in any country the faith and the confidence of the minorities in the impartial and even functioning of the State is the acid test of being a civilised State. This is accepted wisdom, and was succinctly expressed by Lord Acton as follows:

          A state which is incompetent to satisfy different races condemns itself; a state which labours to neutralise, to absorb or to expel them is destitute of the chief basis of self-government.

We need only substitute minorities for races in the above quotation to apply the test to India.

But much earlier, the founding fathers/mothers of Indian Constitution with their vision to secure to all citizens justice, liberty, equality and fraternity provided these rights for the minorities. Thus the Fundamental Rights Chapter in Part III of our Constitution specifically provides, vide Articles 25 to 30, various rights and privileges for the minorities such as:

i. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.
ii. Freedom to manage religious affairs.
iii. Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion.
iv. Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious worship in certain educational institutions.
v. Protection of interests of minorities.
vi. Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.

Supreme Court and Secularism
However, mere provision of Rights can give no assurance by itself. It is for this reason that Article 32 guarantees to every citizen the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. This article gives an assurance to the minorities that in case of apprehension that the political process is not giving them justice, they are not without remedy. The Supreme Court has upheld secularism in no uncertain terms. In the words of Chief Justice S.R. Das in the case pertaining to the Kerala Education Bill 1957 [AIR 1958 SC 956]:

          We the people of India have given unto ourselves the Constitution which is not for any    particular community or section but for all. Its provisions are intended to protect all, minority as well as majority communities. . . . It   is, we conceive, the duty of this Court to uphold the fundamental rights and thereby honour the sacred obligation to the minority communities who are of our own.

The same sentiment was expressed by the Supreme Court when it said [Dr. Ismael Faruqui vs. Union of India, 1994 (6) SCC 360]:

          It is clear from the constitutional scheme that it guarantees equality in the matter of religion to all individuals and groups irrespective of their faith emphasising that there is no religion of the State itself. The Preamble of the Constitution read in particular with Articles 25 to 28 emphasises this aspect. . . . The concept of secularism is one facet of the right to equality woven as the central golden thread in the fabric depicting the pattern of the scheme in our Constitution.

The Court stressed that:

          The purpose of law in plural societies is not the progressive assimilation of  the minorities in the majoritarian milieu. This would not solve the problem; but would vainly seek to dissolve it.

Posing the question as to what is the law’s purpose, it referred with approval to the test laid down by Lord Scarman of the House of Lords of the UK:

          The purpose of the law must be not to extinguish the groups which make the        society but to devise political, social and legal means of preventing them from falling apart and so destroying the plural society of which they are members.

Thus inclusive development in India and for that matter in any country is the only path to prosperity. It is an undeniable truth and needs to be irrevocably accepted by all in India, namely that the minorities, Muslims and Christians are not outsiders. They are an integral part of India. Let me quote what Swami Vivekananda, one of the greatest spiritual personalities of India, has to say of the intimate connection between the spirit of Islam and Hinduism. He told the Hindus not to talk of the superiority of one religion over another. Even toleration of other faiths was not right; it smacked of blasphemy. He pointed out that his guru, Sri Ramakrishna Paramhansa, had accepted all religions as true. Swami Vivekananda in fact profusely praised Islam and in a letter to his friend Mohammed Sarfraz Hussain (10 June 1898) without any hesitation wrote:

          Therefore I am firmly persuaded that without the help of practical Islam,    theories of Vedantism, however fine and wonderful they may be, are entirely      valueless to the vast mass of mankind. . . . For our own motherland a junction of the two great systems Hinduism and Islam—Vedanta brain and Islam body—is the only hope. I see in my mind’s eye the future perfect India rising out of this chaos and strife, glorious and invincible, with Vedanta brain and Islam body.

There can thus be no real progress in India which does not include minorities, Muslims, Christians as equal stakeholders. It needs to be emphasised that development and growth in the country has to be all inclusive—the mode of development must necessarily take into account the needs and sensitivities of minorities, Dalits, tribals in India. This was reaffirmed and emphasised recently by the Socialist Party (India), which is inspired by and follows the philosophy and programme of Shri Jayaprakash Narayan and Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia, thus; “that they must be treated as a special trust and there is an urgent need to attend to their problems immediately.”

United Nations and Minorities

The UN Declaration of the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities 1992 mandates in Article 1 that States shall protect the existence of the national or ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identity of minorities within their respective territories and shall encourage conditions for the promotion of that identity.

The minorities, many a times, may feel that there is discrimination against them in the mater of employment, housing, for obtaining loans from the public or private sector banks, or opportunities for good schooling. It is self evident that if minorities have these perceptions, law must provide an effective mechanism which should examine their complaints and be able to give effective relief.

In this connection it heartening to find confirmation in the report of UN Human Rights Council, Forum on Minority Issues, on December 14–15, 2010 wherein it has made some significant recommendations on minorities and their effective participation in economic life, which each country is mandated to follow. The Council emphasises:

          Consequently, the right of minorities to participate effectively in economic life must be fully taken into account by governments seeking to promote equality at every level. From implementing non-discrimination in employment and enforcing protection laws in the private sector to developing national economic development and international development assistance schemes, governments face the constant challenge of ensuring that the rights of minorities are protected and that they benefit as equal members in society. . . .

          Governments can consider both targeted and inclusive approaches to addressing the economic and social exclusion of minorities. . . .

          Governments should gather and regularly publicize disaggregated data to measure and monitor the effective participation of minorities in economic life. Improved data collection should be made a priority for the areas of employment and labour rights, poverty rates, access to social security, access to credit and other financial services, education and training, and property and land tenure rights.

In the report of the Working Group on Minorities formed by UN Sub Commission on Protection of Minorities, it was the unanimous view that the assimilative approach was not promoted by the United Nations, and that formal recognition of minorities is the first crucial step towards their effective participation in society. This means not only participation in governance, but also involvement in the economy. Also accepted was the need for multi-lingual education and respect for cultural identity of minorities and the need to ensure fair representation of minorities within the law enforcement system and the workplace. The basic task is to reconcile the pluralism which then exists in that State, and the need to respect the identity of the various groups, with the overall concerns of non-discrimination, equality, national security, territorial integrity and political independence.

UN Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues has recently emphasised the following:

          The outcome document of the 2005 World Summit of Heads of State and   Government, approved by the General Assembly, notes that “the promotion and protection of the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious, and linguistic minorities contributes to political and social stability and peace and enriches the cultural diversity and heritage of  society.”

Respect for minority rights assists in achieving stable and prosperous societies, in which human rights, development and security are achieved by all, and shared by all.

Inclusive Development Sole Path to Prosperity

As a member of the United Nations, the Indian government has a legal obligation to give concrete shape to these requirements, if its claim to minority welfare is to have any meaning.

Amongst the various recommendations by the High Level Committee constituted by the Prime Minister on the ‘Social, Economic and Educational Status of the Muslim Community of India’ (report submitted in November 2006), a very urgent recommendation dealt with the unfairness of divisions of electoral constituencies which results in lesser number of Muslims in the legislature as compared to what they are broadly entitled based on the population. This anomaly arises from the irrational demarcation of seats in the legislature.

Thus for instance, in UP there is abundant potential for a substantial number of Muslims to win seats. UP sends the largest number of members (80) to the Lok Sabha. There are 25–52% Muslim’s in 18 seats, in 23 seats Muslims are 15–24% and in another 18 seats Muslims are 10–14%. The demographic–electoral reflection is similar in most other states. However, the constituencies with substantial number of Muslims have been reserved for Scheduled Castes, and constituencies with substantial number of Scheduled Caste voters are unreserved. This is unfair to both Muslims and the SC electorate. The Committee had concluded that Muslims were thus denied benefits in politics since assembly constituencies where the voter population from the community was substantial were reserved for scheduled caste candidates. It would therefore be more equitable to reserve those constituencies for SCs where their voter population is high, rather than those where it is low and the Muslims presence is higher.

The Committee had hoped that its report would receive the attention of the government immediately because the Delimitation Commission was at that time engaged in this exercise. However, the High Powered Committee’s suggestion was ignored during the delimitation. This anomaly is a reason for the low representation of Muslims in the legislatures. How inequitable that important issues related to the community are ignored or don’t get the desired priority! Somebody has to take the responsibility for taking concrete action on this issue; mere lip sympathy is a facade.

Inclusive development in the country alone is the path to prosperity. It is an undeniable truth and needs to be irrevocably accepted by all in the country that minorities, Muslims and Christians, are not outsiders. They are an integral part of India. There can be no real progress which does not include minorities, Muslims and Christians, as equal stakeholders. I cannot put it better than what Sir Sayyed Ahmed Khan, one of the greatest leaders of our country, had to say over a century back. Gandhiji repeated it in 1921, and also in another prayer meeting at Rajghat on 24 March 1947 thus:

          In the words of Sir Sayyed Ahmed Khan, I would say that Hindus and       Muslims are the two eyes of mother India. Just as the trouble in one eye affects the other too, similarly the whole of India suffers when either Hindus    or Muslims suffer.

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s clarion call emphasises that composite culture is the bedrock of secularism pervading our country. He said thus:

          Islam has now as great a claim on the soil of India as Hinduism. If Hinduism has been the religion of the people here for several thousands. of years, Islam also has been their religion for a thousand years. Just as a Hindu can say with pride that he is an Indian and follows Hinduism, so also we can say with equal pride that we are Indians and follow Islam. I shall enlarge this orbit still further. The Indian Christian is equally entitled to say with pride that he is an Indian and is following a religion of India, namely Christianity.

          Eleven hundred years of common history have enriched India with our common achievement. Our languages, our poetry, our literature, our culture, our art, our dress, our manners and customs, the innumerable happenings of our daily life, everything bears the stamp of our joint endeavour. There is indeed no aspect of our life which has escaped this stamp. . . .

          This joint wealth is the heritage of our common nationality, and we do not want to leave it and go back to the times when this joint life had not begun. If there are any Hindus amongst us who desire to bring back the Hindu life of a thousand years ago and more, they dream, and such dreams are vain fantasies. So also if there are any Muslims who wish to revive their past civilisation and culture, which they brought a thousand years ago from Iran and Central Asia, they dream also and the sooner they wake up the better. These are unnatural fancies which cannot take root in the soil of reality. I am one of those who believe that revival may be a necessity in a religion but    in social matters it is a denial of progress.


Email : rsachar1@vsnl.net

No comments:

Post a Comment