Hot News

Bhoomi Pujan

Bhoomi Pujan

History was in the making when Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of the secular India, visited Ram Janmabhoomi and participated in a purely religious ceremony of Bhoomi pujan of Ram Temple in Ayodhya. While laying the foundation stone of the biggest Hindu temple in the world, P M Modi was in fact laying the foundation of a new republic, a Hindutva Rashtra.

A year ago on 5th August 2019, the BJP fulfilled another of its core ideological agenda by revoking article 370 and dividing the Jammu and Kashmir State into two Union Territories. August 5 might have chosen for the Bhoomi pujan either in view of celebrating the anniversary of the abrogation of article 370 or to keep out of the memories of the people of India the revocation of article 370 and the consequent curbs imposed on the freedoms and rights of the people guaranteed by the Constitution of India. In the absence of the Bhoomi pujan the media would have focused on the current situation in Jammu and Kashmir and asked uncomfortable questions to the BJP government. Otherwise what was the urgency for organizing the foundation laying ceremony in the midst of the unprecedented spread of pandemic Coronavirus by infecting more than 20 lakh people and killing more than 50,000 on 5th August?  

Prior to the foundation ceremony of the temple the Hindutva leaders made various statements to tell the people of India that the ceremony planned and executed in the midst of extraordinary spread of Coronavirus is symbolic of the fundamental transformation that has taken place in the republic of   India   ever since the BJP came to power in 2014. According to senior RSS functionary Dattatreya Hosabale, the Ram temple in Ayodhya is a symbol of "cultural nationalism" in the country. Virendra Parekh in an article titled, “Founding the Hindu Rashtra, not just a temple” asserted that the Bhoomi pujan of Ram temple is truly a symbol of laying the foundation of Hindutva Rashtra.

It is pertinent to quote what Pratap Bhanu Mehta wrote on 5th August in his article in The Indian Express under the title, “Ayodhya’s Ram temple is first real colonization of Hinduism by political power”. “ You know this temple is not a product of piety, but retaliation and revenge for an event centuries ago”.  He further writes about the intention of the actors behind the temple project. “They made Ram synonymous with revenge, with an insecure pride, with a blood curdling aggression, violence towards others, a coarsening of culture, and the erasure of every last shred of genuine piety in public devotion and public life”.

Observers of Indian politics can easily understand that the first term of the Modi government (2014-19) was the preparation of the ground for a new republic and the last 15 months have been ruthless actions to rewrite the constitution of India. The first stint of the Modi government was marked by proliferation of hate speech, lynching by cow vigilantes with impunity, suppression of free speech, filing false cases against the university students who espoused the cause of democracy and dissent, branding anyone who disagreed with the BJP and the Sangh Parivar as anti-national and putting behind the bars journalists and social activist who raised the issues of injustice and oppression.  

Suhas Palsikar in his article titled, “At Ayodhya, we will see dismantling of the old, and the Bhoomi pujan of the new republic” in the Indian Express on 4th August, has pointed out five pillars on which the new republic is being built.  The first pillar is transformation of the Indian State into a ‘repository of repression’. Enforcement and investigation agencies are being used to target the mainstream politicians of the opposition parties. Mehbooba Mufti, the former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, is in detention for more than a year.

The second pillar of the new republic is “delegitimization of dissent and critique”. This was rampant during the first term of the Modi government. But suppression of dissent has become more ferocious during the last fifteen months.  For example, the Delhi police have claimed that the Delhi riots in February were a conspiracy by the CAA protesters. They alleged that the protestors were willing to “advocate and execute a secessionist movement in the country by propagating an armed rebellion against the lawfully constituted government of the day”. Fourteen people were arrested in the main conspiracy case, which includes charges under India’s draconian anti-terror law, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. Six of those arrested are students.

At the same time no criminal cases have been filed against the BJP leaders who made provocative hate speeches which were mainly responsible for the outbreak of communal riots. Every act of dissent is being criminalized whereas dissent is the lifeblood of democracy. Video footages have appeared showing the complicity of the Delhi police during the Delhi riots. The police is being used for suppressing dissent.

The third political transformation is related to “the willingness of the judiciary to look the other way”. In the Ayodhya dispute, the SC declared that the demolition of Babri Masjid was a criminal, illegal and unconstitutional act.  At the same time, the court gave the disputed land to the party that was responsible for the Ram Janamabhoomi agitation.

The decision in the cases challenging the constitutional validity of CAA and abrogation of Article 370 are still pending with SC. In a democracy the judiciary is the guardian of freedom and the rights of the citizens and the protector of the constitution. The inordinate delay in deciding some crucial cases related to the constitution and individual freedoms by the SC has created suspicion in the minds of some citizens regarding the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.   The statement of the human rights activist lawyer, Prashant Bhushan, on the failure of the Supreme Court in defending democracy is to be seen against this backdrop. “The Supreme Court (SC) remained a mute spectator as communal riots ravaged north-east Delhi”, advocate Prashant Bhushan said on Sunday in his counter-affidavit filed in response to the contempt of court case initiated against him by the SC for his tweets against the apex court and the Chief Justice of India (CJI), SA Bobde.

The fourth is the indifference of the opposition parties. The opposition parties failed to take a firm stand on various issues. Regarding the Kashmir issue majority of the opposition parities supported the move of the Central government. Many parties, including the Congress, has hailed the building of Ram temple, forgetting the fact that it is built on debris of thousands of people who were killed in the communal riots aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition. “If the BJP is guilty of dismantling the republic, all other parties are silent approvers, writes Suhas Palsikar.

Finally, the new republic is founded on a militant culture of majoritarianism. This has been in the making during the last three decades through the Ayodhya movement spearheaded by the Sangh Parivar organizations. The failure of the Congress through its omissions and commissions since 1980 is equally responsible for the present scenario.

Some political observers and activists have described the present political scenario in India as ‘undeclared emergency’. Yogendra Yadav, president of Swaraj India party, disagrees with the concept of undeclared emergency. He describes the present situation as “authoritarian capture of democracy’. He agrees with the view of Suhas Palsikar that the first Republic inaugurated with the Constitution of India is already over. According to Yogendra Yadav, the formal procedures of democracy have been used to subvert the substance of democracy. Hence it is more dangerous than declaring emergency because emergency is for a short period, but subversion of democracy could be for a long period.

In order to substantiate his view Yogendra Yadv refers to a book published in 2018 under the title, How Democracies Die: What History Reveals About Our Future by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt. The authors of the book hold the view that democracies mostly die an unspectacular, slow and barely visible death, mostly at the hands of democratically elected leaders, often through legal instruments. “The tragic paradox of the electoral route to authoritarianism is that democracy’s assassins use the very institutions of democracy – gradually, subtly, and even legally – to kill it.” This takes three forms: capturing of referees, sidelining of players and rewriting of rules.

In the context of India the referees are investigating agencies like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), oversight institutions like the Central Information Commission (CIC) and Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), and, of course, the apex judiciary. Their capture by the Modi government has been smooth and more or less complete as per the view of Yogendra Yadav.

The second technique used by the government is sidelining the players. The main players in a democracy are opposition leaders, media, cultural icons and business leaders. The Modi government has not been taking the opposition parties seriously mainly due to two reasons. First of all, the main opposition, the Congress is in disarray with minuscule number of 44 seats in the Lok Sabha and there is no unity among the opposition parties.  Most of the media in India is totally under the control of the government without having the ownership. That is why they are given the nickname godi (adopted) media. The business leaders are generally on the side of the ruling party and the BJP is adept in getting their support through a strategy of give and take.

The third technique is rewriting the rules i.e. amending and changing the constitution. In order to implement its Hindutva agenda the BJP has already made changes in the constitutional provisions through CAA and abrogation of article 370. With the support of a pliant judiciary and almost total control over the constitutional bodies like Election Commission the government need not change the constitution for the time being. The BJP has proved adequately that without changing the words the spirit of the constitution can be killed.

Thus laying the foundation stone of the Ram temple in Ayodhya by the Prime Minister in the presence of Yogi Adityanath, the CM of UP and Mohan Bhagwat, the RSS sarsanchalak is an open declaration of the arrival of the Hindutva Rashtra. Indeed, it is not simply laying the foundation of a temple alone.

(The writer can be reached at: jacobpt48@gmail.com)

(Published on 10th August 2020, Volume XXXII, Issue 33)