1    |    2    |    3    |    4    |    5    |    6    |    7    |    8    |    9    |    10    |    Next Page >> Communalism and Communal Incidents in Karnataka Report Prepared By Alternative Law Forum, People's Union of Civil Liberties, and People's Democratic Forum Since the information contained in this analysis is entirely drawn from fact finding reports and related sources, it is important that this analysis is supplemented with perspectives (conceptual and historical) and analysis of causal factors that led to each communal incident. For instance, in most communal incidents one has seen that the muscling out of minority businesses through communal violence is a prevalent causal factor. We have consciously tried to be descriptive in our analysis in order to build a basic narrative, which avoids hasty generalizations and theorizations based on insufficient evidence. Hence it is important that you bring in this level of deeper analysis and additional inputs from personal knowledge. Introduction The genocide in Gujarat and the continuing malfunctioning of the state government, judiciary, police and the bureaucracy, does not augur well for the secular fabric of this nation. However, Gujarat cannot and must not become the only focal point since the manifestations of fascist Hindutva are to be found in various processes of saffronisation of common people, regional political parties, education, bureaucrats, police, and military among others as well, in almost all states. Further, what happened in Gujarat was not a knee jerk reaction but an implementation of reasoned, well planned strategy on ground that was continuously being prepared for it. It is in this light, therefore, that one must examine the threat of the fascist forces that “Karnataka will be the Gujarat of the South”. What does this mean and what are the processes that are being mirrored here? In such a scenario we have set about the task of analyzing the growth of communalism in Karnataka, specifically concentrating on its manifestations as communal riots, flare-ups and tensions. We believe that this is an important task as this would give us an insight into the method behind the spread of communalism, probably then offering some leads on how to counter the same. We are also aware that the task that is cut out requires the concerted efforts of not one individual or organization but as many as possible, especially since the scale is Karnataka. In this exercise we have tried to come up with our understanding of what incidents communicate a communal sound, and, further, the various forms that a communal incident may play itself out as. We have assembled together details of various communal incidents from various press and fact-finding reports. We have tried to differentiate between various communal incidents on the basis of the violence intensity, spread of influence area, communal historicity, and reason for incident among other factors. On this basis we have found it useful to anatomize a communal conflict in terms of three stages of its build-up. Stage 1 being an initial process of communalization, Stage 2 being the eruption of a communal incident on a limited scale (to test the waters as it were), and, Stage 3 being the organization of a full-fledged communal riot These processes obviously overlap but these categorization help us to understand that the communal incident is not a spontaneous reaction but is a manifestation of an organized campaign. Process of communalization Communal tension basically indicates towards the gradual communalization of a particular area and represents an under-the-surface tension. Communal flare-ups An isolated manifestation of this tension in the form of a communal incident of lesser intensity of violence which does not have any spin-off into other areas is what we call communal flare-up. The area itself slips back into a communal tense one after the flare-up. Communal riots A communal riot represents the most intense manifestation of growing communal tension and indicates to further possibility of similar incidents of same or greater intensity and capacity to spill over into other, including surrounding areas. A communal riot results, more so than the above two stages, in extreme violence such as killings and destruction of property. Overt causes of various communal incidents Disputed spaces Baba Budangiri Bababudangiri represents a unique example of composite culture of India. Hindus and Muslims alike offer their obeisance to the place in a very cordial manner. It was never a point of dispute throughout the centuries. It is only after 1975 that the dispute emerged regarding the management of the Dargah/Peetha. The then caretaker of the Dargah, Shah Khadri and two Hindu litigants challenged the government order making it a Wakf property. The judgment pronounced that the shrine is revered equally by the Hindus and Muslims, and ordered the status quo to be maintained. The court also upheld the rights of Shah Khadri regarding the inheritance. In the post-Ayodhya development, the Sangh Parivar took up the programmes to make it a controversial spot. After the fizzling out of the Idgah Maidan issue in Hubli, they targeted Bababudangiri/Datta Peetha Dargah to rouse communal passions. This is connected with the BJP's game plan of securing a foothold in Karnataka and to extend its supremacy. From 1984 onwards, the Datta Jayanthi celebrations were made a formal affair. The various Hindu swamijis who had never bothered to visit the place earlier made a beeline to the shrine. With this, the shrine that was the property of a single family suddenly came under attack as though it was a public property. The various aspects of the management, and Shah Khadri's personal life were vilified. The whole issue reached a flash point in 1998, with the Sangh Parivar's aggressive politics of confrontation wherein rathyatras were organized to rouse communal passions. The Sangh Parivar succeeded in making it an all-Karnataka controversial issue and a flash point of communal confrontation. The silence of the Government of Karnataka added advantage to the Sangh Parivar forces. December 1999 reached the peak of the aggressive posture of the Sangh Parivar with the organizing of jeep yatras and creation of a sense of insecurity and tension among the minorities. The state administration allowed the Sangh Parivar-led Hindutva forces to perform Hindu rituals including yagnas and homas and installation of idols which were never a tradition in the shrine nor were allowed by the Court of Law which in fact had directed all the parties to the dispute to maintain the status quo. The care-taker alleged that the administration was not allowing measures for the improvement and upkeep of the Dargah. The local administration was hand in glove with the activities of the Sangh Parivar by providing all facilities and support. Overall, it is the state Government which has fallen into the trap of the Sangh Parivar foregoing its secular responsibilities. Idgah Maidan in Jayanagar, Bangalore The disputed Idgah property lies in the middle of Jayanagar and is located adjacent to the main road, in Jayanagar. This Idgah is surrounded by a bus stand on two sides and houses and shops on other sides, besides four urinals attached to the wall. One part of the Idgah is used as a burial ground and in another part namaz or prayer is offered in makeshift mosque. This Idgah property was donated to the wakf board in 1935 by the then Maharaja of princely state. Since there were hardly any Muslims living in the vicinity, a custodian from Basavangudi, 3 Kms from Jayanagar was appointed to look after the property. This arrangement continued for many years ill the Muslim population grew in Jayanagar and demanded the handing over of the property to them to construct a mosque for prayers. This was resented and the issue went to court. Meanwhile the plan of the Bangalore Corporation to convert Jayanagar into a bigger extension added fuel to this problem, when they demanded a portion of land from the Idgah to broaden the main road. This was also refused till the katha was transferred to Jayanagar Muslims and a suitable compensation was given to them. Meanwhile, a court order was passed, saying that ‘the Basavangudi Muslims are in possession and their possession can’t be disturbed except in due course of law’, thereby stalling the Corporations efforts and giving a clear edge to Basavangudi Muslims. The problem got aggravated when Muslims of Jayanagar formed a youth forum and started digging a bore well inside Idgah property. This was objected to. A stone thrown from nowhere triggered of the controversy and the riot. Wild rumours soon followed that the mosque was being attacked and a portion was demolished. Soon riots spread to Muslim-dominated areas like Tilaknagar, Gauri Palya, Bismilla Nagar, Yarab nagar, Lashker and Banergatta Road. This riot was seen as many as a ‘clash of two Muslim groups’, while the police see this as a ‘Hindu Muslim conflict’. The riot blew over within 36 hours being restricted to certain selected pockets, and did not spread throughout the state, or even the city itself. Five people were killed, most deaths occurring due to police firing on innocent people, 83 persons were injured and property worth more than Rs 20 lakhs was destroyed. Idgah Maidan at Hubli The Idgah Maidan is a small ground near the Hubli Bus Station, the rights over which have been the subject of a court case from 1972. There is an old prayer wall on the maidan. In 1921, the Anjuman-e –Islam obtained a lease for 999 years for Rs. 1 per year on the condition that the site would be used for religious purposes. In 1960, the Anjuman was given permission to construct a building on the grounds. Soon after some shops were constructed, a few local people contested the rights of the Anjuman over the land. The Munsiff Court decided against the Anjuman in 1973, and so did a civil court. In 1992, the High Court also upheld the verdict of the lower courts and ordered demolition of the shops. The HC also declared that nobody could claim customary rights over the property. The Anjuman appealed to the SC for a review, and obtained a stay order on the demolition. Meanwhile, the Sangh Parivar appealed to the SC against the HC ruling over customary rights. The Parivar tried to establish that the public, and not the Anjuman, has rights over the disputed property. In 1992, after the rath yatra of the then BJP President, MM Joshi, to hoist the national flag in Srinagar on Republic Day, the party’s workers at Hubli wanted to celebrate the occasion by hoisting a flag in the Idgah Maidan at the same time. It was objected to by local Muslim leaders, and the police sensing trouble, prevented the BJP workers from hoisting the flag. To take up the cause, a new organization called the ‘Rashtradhwaja Gourava Samrakshana Samiti’ (Committee to protect the honor of the national flag) was formed. The party had decided to hold the flag-hoisting ceremony at the Idgah Maidan on August 15, 1992. The police managed to stop them, but the Samiti was encouraged further to continue with its program after seeing the massive support the program had evoked. Ever since then, the BJP used this issue to gain political mileage by taking credit for protecting the pride of the national flag and condemning the government for ‘appeasing the minorities’. The BJP's game plan was simple: the land belonged to the government, hence the nation. Not hoisting the national flag was an anti-national act. So, they insisted every year on Independence Day and Republic Day to hoist the flag on this disputed area. Matters turned grave on August 15, 1994 when communal riots broke out. On the 15th, a large number of people were arrested while rushing towards the maidan shouting slogans and carrying the national flag. Police entered streets firing, without provocation, on innocent civilians. There were five deaths on the 15th due to police firing and one on the 19th when the driver of a police van fired at a group of people killing an innocent woman. The SC gave an interim order in 1995 that the six structures on the Maidan should not be demolished and no one should be allowed to enter the Maidan till the Court gave its final verdict. The BJP contended that that the SC ruling was only with regard to the land in dispute and the building on the said land, and the State government should allow flag hoisting there on January 26. The issue was sorted out partially when the Anjuman-e-Islam itself hoisted the flag on 26 January. Minor incidents did mar the hoisting, when a 3000 strong crowd indulged in pelting public with stones for not being able to take part in the event, leading to the police to resolve to lathi-charges and tear gas. In 2001, problems came up again when birthday celebrations of Mr. Ashok Singhal, the VHP President was held in the Idgah Grounds. Violence erupted killing one person in police firing, following Mr. Singhal’s visit because the police failed to manage the processions taken out by the VHP and the Bajrang Dal activists. The problem started when some VHP and Bajrang Dal members tried to rush into the Idgah Maidan to hoist a flag. It was said that they wanted to demolish the Idgah structure and also try to bring down a banner containing writings from the Quran. Members allegedly attacked the police that tried to stop them. Others On June 21st, 1993, in Bidar, six men were injured in a clash between two communities, when people of one community began worshipping at a place on which the other community had some claims. When members of one community asked the worshippers of the other community to vacate the place, clashes broke out.    1    |    2    |    3    |    4    |    5    |    6    |    7    |    8    |    9    |    10    |    Next Page >>