Home Blog Page 476

The India that needs right leaders

Sushant Sharma
-
0
The India that needs right leaders

In my last article, I talked about how this generation has an onerous challenge to create a new order in India. The opportunity in the challenge is that this new order would become the default Indian way of life.

One thing we can learn from USA is their relentless focus on business and economy. The key theme of every possible election in USA has been wages, markets, and capital accumulation. If one was to make a hierarchy of issues of importance in most of the successful economies, you’ll find out that softer topics related to social welfare, health, abortion, and education are never the top priority. It takes us to the next obvious question – Why is it so?

A widely used theory in economics argues that the economy of USA benefited a lot from increasing regional imbalances after the great depression when the rich were getting richer and poor were getting poorer. Tax breaks were given to the rich and corporations; thereby, stimulating the entrepreneurial incentive. The period from 1940 to 1970 was a glorious period of USA when it stamped itself as the default superpower of the world. In the same period great brands and companies took the leadership in their respective categories. It further strengthened the geo-political power of USA to create the new global order with so-called “multilateral-trade” bodies – IMF, World Bank and WTO.

How do the market forces work? More money remains in the private sector leading to business investment such as buying new factories, upgrading technology, and equipment as well as hiring more workers. In the later periods of the century, America witnessed a trickle-down of wealth; henceforth, boosting the standard of living. What started as a policy of disproportionate allocation of resources ended with creating economic equality. 

However, just tax cuts are not sufficient. What is needed is a complete policy overhaul; in fact a cultural change like never before. The entrepreneurs in India need an ecosystem that allows them to flourish. There are multiple layers to get very ordinary work done, despite tax holidays to corporations. There are always bottlenecks despite the continuous alteration of public policy, which completely destroys the spirit of entrepreneurship. It starts with appreciating benefits of capitalism – it is the only proven route to social welfare. When there is competition, there is innovation and when there is innovation there is a cheaper way to do the same business activity. Where many in India would criticise capitalism as good for business and bad for people, the numbers from USA prove it is rather the other way around.

I believe that entrepreneurs do the service of highest order to their country. A businessman has to create value for others before capturing value for himself. As a result, capitalism is the greatest incentive system in the world for focusing on others and their needs. And the result of that is empathy and understanding. Often, an entrepreneur’s net worth is merely the register of how much he has improved the lives of his fellow human beings.

The cultural change has to come. Government should have a policy to create awareness about the businessman and industrialists as national icons. Just to share a really disturbing fact – no Indian entrepreneur has ever been given a Bharat Ratna. Firstly, the government should consider to create more management institutions in India with a relentless focus to create not just managers, but leaders with entrepreneurial acumen. They can be supported through government supported incubation centres to support early stage ventures. There should be landmarks importance such as a museum that celebrates the contribution of entrepreneurs from India. We need people of India to set the right role models.

Agony of Heaven’s demolition in 1990

Pranjal Chaudhari
-
0
Agony of Heaven’s demolition in 1990

Agar firdaus bar roo-e zameen ast,
Hameen ast-o hameen ast-o hameen ast.

If there is a heaven on earth, it’s here, it’s here.. This line by renowned poet Amir Khusrau, is very often used to describe Kashmir, the most beautiful state of India. But, it has been evident that apart from calm breezy winds and the snow clad mountains, the state has faced extreme Islamist militancy in the 80s and 90s. The state was ruined for the vested political interests of some regional political parties who were supported the militants across the border from Pakistan.

During the 80s & 90s when this state was governed more by Presidential Rule than that of a democratically elected Chief Minister, it succumbed to the vile intentions of politicians who stood with the cross border sponsorship of terrorism instead of extending their focus on development of the state. The state’s economic, cultural, and geographic heritage has witnessed drastic transformation in the past four decades.

But the most stringent development of it was the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits from the valley between 1989-1991. This period witness forced exodus of Hindus residing in Kashmir valley to Jammu and other parts of the country. According to the Indian government, more than 62,000 families are registered as Kashmiri refugees including some Sikh and Muslim families. Most families were resettled in Jammu, National Capital Region surrounding Delhi and other neighboring states. These families since then have been waiting with a heavy heart to be back to their real homes.

Major contributors this devil idea of persecuting Hindus from the valley was planned by ISI with the alleged help of brain washed and mobilized Muslims of the state who lacked the basic acumen of social existence of humanity in themselves. Islamization of Kashmir valley began quietly during the 80’s when Abdullah Government changed the names of about 2500 villages from their native names to new Islamic names.In a tragic sequence of events in India’s democratic history, the then Minister of Home Affairs Mufti Mohammad Sayeed allegedly convinced then Prime Minister V.P. Singh to appoint Jagmohan as the governor of Kashmir. Abdullah resented Jagmohan who had been appointed as the governor earlier in April 1984 as well and had recommended Abdullah’s dismissal to Rajiv Gandhi in July 1984. Abdullah had also earlier threatened that he would resign if Jagmohan was made the Governor.

However, the Central government went ahead and appointed him as Governor on 19 January 1990. In response, Abdullah resigned on the same day and Jagmohan suggested the dissolution of the State Assembly. Jagmohan’s role during the Kashmir exodus has already been talked all around by historians, intellectuals and politicians.

This incident gave rise to widespread Islamist militancy in the state that has continued till recently until the Union Government dared to revoke the controversial and draconian Article 370. And since the revocation of Article 370, Kashmir as a part of the J&K Union Territory seems have to become the old peace-loving beautiful paradise on earth for the world.

An open letter to John Oliver, the host of Last Week Tonight on HBO!

bapiraju3
-
0
An open letter to John Oliver, the host of Last Week Tonight on HBO!

Dear Sir,

I am writing this letter to air my grievance with respect to your Last Week Tonight episode aired on 24-02-2020. Firstly, before I start with my grievance I would like to tell you that I have been a fan of your work and always assumed that your show did due diligence on each and every topic that you have broadcast on your show. Unfortunately, that assumption has been proved wrong with your latest episode.

For the host of a show, who prides himself on being meticulous with facts your latest episode is devoid of facts. One can expect such factless ramblings from someone like a Hasan Minhaj but to hear you come out with such a biased reporting of events is frankly disappointing. Your understanding of India or its history is utterly one-sided and doesn’t in anyway do justice to my country or its people.

Please remember that India is the largest democracy in the world and one among very few countries, which does not persecute people based on their faith. The idea of secularism was not espoused by Gandhi or Nehru as you have put forth in your episode but we have been a secular nation even before the aforementioned people came into the scene. Let me give you an example of that. The Persians, who follow the Parsi faith were literally massacred and driven out of their homes by Islamic invaders and they found a home in this great country of mine and were embraced with open arms by the people of this country. So did the Jews persecuted by Nazi Germany.

And another history lesson that you might have to brush up is the fact that religious persecution happened in this country before Independence and not by some Hindu King or Hindus but the Moghuls who invaded this country, who raped, looted and massacred millions of Hindus for following their faith and also destroyed and desecrated our temples. Shortly after that followed the British, who themselves sought to divide the country along communal lines so as to easily conquer my country. So to call Hindus of this country as intolerant speaks a lot about your ignorance of the true facts.

And furthermore you have vilified the people of this country by calling the democratically elected government of my country as Islamophobic. You have criticized the Citizenship Amendment Act, which aims to give citizenship to persecuted minorities from the three Islamic states of Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Pakistan, who have sought refuge in this country before 31-12-2014. Please check the date once again so that you would understand that it doesn’t give a free pass to all and sundry as you have so eloquently put forth in your episode.

Coming to the NRC or the National Register of Citizens, it is a much needed exercise to identify illegal immigrants in my country, who have not come here for the purpose of livelihood but are responsible for the many acts of terrorism in my country. Please understand that unlike the comfort of your studio, the threat of terrorism to my country is very real due to the policy of death by a thousand cuts followed by our Islamic neighbours, namely Pakistan. A country which renegaged on its promise to protect the rights of minorities in its country in spite of signing an accord to that effect. Please read the Nehru-Liaquat Ali Pact for further information on the same.

You have further said that people without papers will be thrown out or the CAA along with the NRC is a threat to Indian Muslims. Please read the CAA before making such blatant and malicious statements against my country. And speaking of NRC, which country in this world allows people to just walk in without any identity proof? You yourself had to apply for citizenship to USA and could not enter the country without a valid Visa. So to criticize my nation’s right to create a National Register of Citizens is hypocritical and malicious.

Lets now talk about the Prime Minister of my country whom you have portrayed as Hitler in disguise by your subtle insinuations. You have raked up the Godhra riots as an example to further your agenda without even bothering to present the full picture of the same. Just so that you understand the Godhra riots did happen under the watch of the then Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi but to vilify the man without getting into the facts speaks about your inherent bias against the Man.

Firstly, as the Chief Minister of the State he tried every means to stop the carnage that was happening and even asked for the assistance of the Army from the Central Government of that time headed by the Congress party but his pleas fell on deaf ears. Furthermore, he was given a clean chit by the Supreme Court monitered Special Investigation Team appointed by the Congress, who have said that he has done everything he could possibly do as the CM of Gujarat to stop the riots. And the reason for the Godhra riots was not some random disagreement between two communities but the burning down of passenger bogie filled with Hindu passengers returning from a piligrimage by a rampaging Muslim mob. That incident sparked the flame which became a raging fire.

And lets now talk about the RSS, which you called a Hindu militant organisation. That insinuation cannot be more far from the truth. The RSS is not a militant organisation but an organisation, which came into being to protect the rights of the Hindus, who were not only vilified but also persecuted by the very establishment of this country. We have been a country of Hindus since time immemorial but to be downgraded to the level of Second class citizens in my own country by successive governments in order to appease minorities has been the norm since Independence and speaks volumes about the tolerance of my culture. Please remember that even after Independence, Kashmiri Pandits were raped and made to run for their dear life by the Militant Muslims of Kashmir and yet not a tear was shed by the Government of that time.

It is this present government, which is working tirelessly for the benefit of this entire country and yet in your urgency to put down Modi, you have simply glossed over the facts. We have been plagued by corruption, nepotism and dynastic politics since the time of our independence, which led to gradual decay and overall poverty in my country. It is the present government, which has been working diligently to right those wrongs and has not shied away from taking tough steps to ensure that is possible. The demonitisation of the ₹500 and ₹1000 notes helped in curbing the menace of counterfeit currency and also ensured that the unaccounted money which was lying in gunny sacks of a few corrupt politicians and their coterie of misfits came back into the banking system. Furthermore, it also helped in the digitization of our economy.

The abrogation of Article 370, helped in restoring normalcy to the Union territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. It also ensured that the people of Kashmir were able to avail all the benefits of government schemes. The erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir was a hotbed for Islamic terrorism and the aforementioned move helped in neutralising the threat to a great extent. There are many other steps this government has taken to improve the livelihood of the people and therefore the people of this country elected our Prime Minister with an even bigger mandate. So to criticize the democratically elected leader of my country and its people without properly understanding the facts speaks volumes about your bias and the nature of your show.

It is with great sadness today that I have penned this letter to you Sir. I have always enjoyed watching your shows and this latest offering by you has made me realise that your shows are not about the truth but about your biases in the garb of truth. It saddens me to see that a person I so admired must have been biased about a lot of other things as well. I am sure you would not bother about this letter or might even ridicule it but for all the Hindu hating you have done on your show let me tell you that Hindus by their own culture and teachings have always been tolerant and believe that there are many paths to God and don’t believe in the concept of there is only one God and all the other Gods are false, like the Abrahamic religions, which propagate that very idea.

As a regular viewer of your episodes, I have come to expect better standards and the truth from your show but alas after your latest offering I might have to revisit that notion about your show being unbiased and truthful!

Thank you and with utmost disappointment I end this letter.

“दर-अल-हरब” से “दर-अल- इस्लाम” तक: इस्लाम को अपने इन सिद्धांतों को बदलना होगा

dhaara370
-
0
“दर-अल-हरब” से “दर-अल- इस्लाम” तक: इस्लाम को अपने इन सिद्धांतों को बदलना होगा

क्या इस्लाम उपनिवेशवाद को अभिन्न अंग मानता है?

इस्लामी धर्मशास्त्र में “दर अल-हरब” और “दर अल-इस्लाम” के मायने क्या हैं? इन शब्दों का क्या मतलब है और यह मुस्लिम राष्ट्रों और चरमपंथियों को कैसे प्रवृत्त और प्रभावित करता है? आज के वैश्विक परिप्रेक्ष्य में यह समझना और समझाना अति महत्वपूर्ण हो गया है।

“दर अल-हरब” और “दर अल-इस्लाम” का अर्थ

सामान्य अर्थ में, “दर अल-हरब” को “युद्ध या अराजकता का क्षेत्र” के रूप में समझा जाता है। यह उन क्षेत्रों के लिए नाम है जहां इस्लाम प्रभावी नहीं है या सत्ता में नहीं है या फिर जहां अल्लाह के आदेश को नहीं माना जाता है। इसलिए, वहां निरंतर संघर्ष ही आदर्श है, जब तक कि वहां भी इस्लाम का शासन स्थापित ना हो जाए. काश्मीर से कश्मीरी पंडितों को मार कर, महिलायों का बलात्कार कर भागने पर मजबूर कर देना और तमिलनाडु में श्री रामलिंगम जैसे लोगों की हत्या कर दिया जाना इस बात का गवाह है कि हिंदुस्तान जैसे “दर-अल-हरब” क्षेत्र में संघर्ष हीं इस्लाम का आदेश है. पाकिस्तान में हिन्दू युवतियों का अपहरण कर धर्मान्तरण करवाना यह साफ़ करता है कि जब तक आखिरी इंसान अल्लाह के आदेश के सामने झुक नहीं जाता इस्लाम का संघर्ष जारी रहना चाहिए.

इसके विपरीत, “दर अल-इस्लाम” “अमन का क्षेत्र” है। यह उन क्षेत्रों/देशों के नाम है जहाँ इस्लाम का शासन है और जहाँ अल्लाह के आदेश को माना जाता है। यह वह जगह है जहां अमन और चैन राज करती है। पर इस सिद्धांत का खोखलापन आप ईरान,इराक, सीरिया, अफगानिस्तान, पाकिस्तान, फिलीस्तीन तथा अन्य इस्लामिक देशों की आतंरिक हालत से समझ सकते हैं.

पर भेद इतना सरल नहीं है जितना कि दिखाई देता है। दरअसल इस विभाजन का धर्म के बजाय कानूनी आधार माना जाता है। फर्ज कीजिये कि एक देश में इस्लामी सरकार है लेकिन वह आधुनिक मूल्यों के आधार पर चलता है जहाँ शरिया के बहुत से पुराने एवं अप्रासंगिक आदेशों को नहीं लागू किया जाता हो तो वैसे इस्लामी देश भी “दर अल-हरब” अथवा “युद्ध या अराजकता का क्षेत्र” की श्रेणी में रखे जायेंगे और चरमपंथियों की कोशिश रहेगी कि संघर्ष या राजनितिक नियंत्रण कर के वहां भी अल्लाह के आदेशों को हुबहू लागू किया जाय.

एक मुस्लिम बहुल देश, जो इस्लामिक कानून से शासित नहीं है, अभी भी “दर-अल-हरब” है। इस्लामी कानून द्वारा शासित एक मुस्लिम-अल्पसंख्यक राष्ट्र भी “दर-अल-इस्लाम” का हिस्सा होने के योग्य है। जहाँ भी मुसलमान प्रभारी हैं और इस्लामी कानून लागू करते हैं, वहाँ “दर-अल-इस्लाम” है।

“युद्ध के क्षेत्र” का मतलब

“दर-अल-हरब”, या “युद्ध का क्षेत्र” को थोड़ा और विस्तार से समझने की आवश्यकता है।

“दर-अल-हरब” अथवा युद्ध के क्षेत्र के रूप में इसकी पहचान इस सिद्धांत पर आधारित है कि अल्लाह के आदेशों का अवहेलना करने का अनिवार्य परिणाम है संघर्ष अथवा युद्ध।

जब हर कोई अल्लाह द्वारा निर्धारित नियमों का पालन करेगा, तो उसका परिणाम अमन और चैन होगा।

यहाँ बिलकुल स्पष्ट हो जाता है कि जब तक विश्व का हर व्यक्ति इस्लाम को कबूल नहीं कर लेता, तब तक “अमन का क्षेत्र” या “ दर अल-इस्लाम” कि स्थपाना नहीं मानी जायेगी और तब तक यह युद्ध जारी रहना चाहिए.

ध्यान देने योग्य तथ्य यह है कि “युद्ध” “दर-अल-हरब”और दर-अल-इस्लाम के बीच संबंध के बारे में भी वर्णन करता है। मुसलमानों से अपेक्षा की जाती है कि वे अल्लाह के आदेश और इच्छा को पूरी मानवता के लिए लाएँ और यदि आवश्यक हो तो बलपूर्वक ऐसा करें।

“दर-अल-हरब”को नियंत्रित करने वाली सरकारें इस्लामी रूप से वैध शक्तियां नहीं हैं क्योंकि वे अल्लाह से अपने अधिकार प्राप्त नहीं करती हैं। कोई फर्क नहीं पड़ता कि वास्तविक राजनीतिक प्रणाली क्या है, इसे मौलिक और आवश्यक रूप से अमान्य माना जाता है। हालाँकि, इसका मतलब यह नहीं है कि इस्लामिक सरकारें उनके साथ अस्थायी शांति संधियों में प्रवेश नहीं कर सकती हैं. व्यापार और सुरक्षा के लिए इस्लामिक सरकारें “दर-अल-हरब” को नियंत्रित करने वाली सरकारों के साथ अस्थायी संधियाँ कर सकती हैं, जैसा कि पाकिस्तान और चीन के बीच देखा जा सकता है।

सौभाग्य से, सभी मुसलमान वास्तव में गैर-मुस्लिमों के साथ अपने सामान्य संबंधों में इस तरह के व्यवहार नहीं करते हैं – अन्यथा, दुनिया शायद इससे भी बदतर स्थिति में होगी। पर यह भी कटु सत्य है कि आधुनिक समय में भी, इन सिद्धांतों और विचारों को कभी भी निरस्त नहीं किया गया है। उन सिद्धांतों को लागू किया जा रहा हो या नहीं पर ये सिद्धांत आज भी इस्लामिक समाज में गहरी जड़ें जमाई हुई है और उपयुक्त वातावरण पाते हीं उनका विकृत चेहरा हम सब को देखने को मिलता रहता है.

मुस्लिम राष्ट्रों और गैर मुस्लिम राष्ट्रों के सामने इस्लाम के औपनिवेशिक सिद्धांतों का सुरसा की तरह मुंह बाये चुनौतियाँ

इस्लाम और अन्य संस्कृतियों और धर्मों के साथ शांतिपूर्वक सह-अस्तित्व के लिए यह सिद्धांत एक बड़ी चुनौती के रूप में उपस्थित है. इसमें इस्लाम के अलावा अन्य सभी मान्यताओं के अस्तित्व को हर पल एक खतरे का आभास बना रहता है। जहाँ अन्य धर्मों ने अपने पुराने मान्यतायों को आधुनिक जरूरतों के अनुसार लगातार बदलता रहा वहीं इस्लाम आज भी इस तरह के सिद्धांतों को ढो रहा है। यह न केवल गैर-मुसलमानों के लिए बल्कि स्वयं मुसलमानों के लिए भी गंभीर खतरे पैदा करता है।

ये खतरे इस्लामी चरमपंथियों की देन है जो उन पुराने विचारों को औसत मुस्लिम की तुलना में बहुत अधिक शाब्दिक अर्थो में और अधिक गंभीरता से लेते हैं।यही कारण है कि मध्य पूर्व में आधुनिक धर्मनिरपेक्ष सरकारों को भी पर्याप्त रूप से इस्लामी नहीं माना जाता है . ऐसे में चरमपंथियों के अनुसार, यह उनका इस्लामिक फर्ज है कि काफिरों को सत्ता से पदच्युत कर पुनः अल्लाह का शासन स्थापित करे, चाहे उसके लिए कितना ही खून क्यूँ ना बहाना पड़े.

इस धारणा से उस रवैये को बल मिलता है कि यदि कोई क्षेत्र जो कभी दर अल-इस्लाम का हिस्सा था, वह दर अल-हरब के नियंत्रण में आता है, तो यह इस्लाम पर हमला माना जाएगा । इसलिए, सभी मुसलमानों का फर्ज है कि वे खोई हुई भूमि को पुनः प्राप्त करने के लिए संघर्ष करें। यह विचार धर्मनिरपेक्ष अरब सरकारों के विरोध में न केवल कट्टरता को प्रेरित करता है, बल्कि इजरायल राज्य के अस्तित्व को भी चुनौती देता रहता है। चरमपंथियों के लिए, इज़राइल दर अल-इस्लाम क्षेत्र पर एक घुसपैठ है और इस्लामी शासन को उस भूमि पर पुनः बहाल करने से कम कुछ भी स्वीकार्य नहीं है।

उपसंहार

इस्लाम का कानून या अल्लाह का आदेश सभी लोगों तक पहुँचाने का धार्मिक लक्ष्य को लागू करने के प्रयास में नतीजतन लोग मरेंगे – यहां तक ​​कि मुस्लिम या गैर मुस्लिम, बच्चे और औरतें और अन्य सामान्य नागरिक कोई भी हो। और यह उन सबको भली प्रकार पता भी है. फिर भी वे अगर जान हथेली पर लिए चलते हैं तो उसका कारण है इस्लाम का कर्तव्य के प्रति निष्ठा ना की परिणाम के प्रति. मुस्लिम नैतिकता कर्तव्य की नैतिकता है, परिणाम की नहीं। नैतिक व्यवहार वह है जो अल्लाह के आदेशों के अनुसार हो और जो अल्लाह की इच्छा का पालन करता हो चाहे परिणाम स्वरुप बच्चे और औरतों के ऊपर जुल्म क्यूँ न ढाना पड़े । अनैतिक व्यवहार वह है जो अल्लाह की आदेशों का अवज्ञा करता है। कर्तव्य पथ पर चलने के भयानक एवं दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण नतीजे हो सकते हैं, पर इस्लाम कर्त्तव्य को प्राथमिक मानता है परिणाम को नहीं.परिणाम व्यवहार के मूल्यांकन के लिए एक मानदंड के रूप में काम नहीं कर सकता है। इसी का गलत फायदा उठाकर चरमपंथी धर्मगुरु नौजवानों को आतंकवादी घटना अंजाम देने के लिए मानसिक तौर पर तैयार करते हैं. उन्हें यह अच्छी तरह पढ़ा दिया जाता है कि अल्लाह के रास्ते पर चलते हुए बच्चे, औरतें, सामान्य नागरिक कोई भी मरें फर्क नहीं पड़ता क्यूंकि तुम अल्लाह के आदेश का पालन करने के लिए ये सब कर रहे हो.

Disclaimer: किसी की धार्मिक भावना को आहत करना कतई उद्देश्य नहीं है, उद्देश्य सिर्फ यह है कि हम एक दुसरे शांतिपूर्ण सह अस्तित्व के सामने खड़े चुनौतियों को समझें और उसका समाधान करें .

Is Delhi the new Kashmir of India?

Rajesh_Dubey
-
0
Is Delhi the new Kashmir of India?

Stone-pelting masked crowd, provoking ‘azadi’ chants, burning cities, and Hindus running scared, trying to protect their rear end. If you are not blind, you know I am talking about Delhi that has been set afire by Islamists who are waging war against India for giving citizenship to minorities in Islamic countries, mainly Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh, persecuted by the barbarians living in these countries.

The point I am raising in this piece is not about CAA, but about the sheer hate India’s Muslims have deep in their heart against ‘Kaafirs‘, aka Hindus. Many decades ago, Kashmir was a heavenly peaceful land where Hindus were free to worship their gods. Driven by their philosophy of ‘Sarv Dharm Sambhav’, they let Muslims settle and prosper. Muslims too cheered for them, until the day Muslims became the majority. What happened next is a history of dark horror stories. Hindus were killed, their women were raped, their kids were butchered like chicken, and their houses were reduced to ashes. Everything changed within a night. The horrific screams billowing from that darkness still haunt those Kashmiri Pundits who could manage to run away from their own land and houses. From that day, Kashmir was purged of ‘Kaafirs‘. Kashmir was the first unofficial Islamic state of Free India. Once they got hold, they made it their own ‘Afghanistan’, with terrorism as the only prospering industry that seduced its youths, stone-pelting on Indian soldiers became a ritual for Islamists after every Friday prayers, and anti-India scheming became the single point political agenda of its politicians.

Today, the same plan is being hatched in many other parts of India, with Delhi as the epicenter of this ‘Seize India’ or ‘Gajwa-e-Hind’ movement by Islamists. Their opposition to CAA while displaying Indian flag is just a façade to blunt any criticism from their opponents and gain sympathy at the world stage. Even they know that CAA is about protecting persecuted minorities in Islamist republics like Pakistan. So to assume that there are so braindead to understand this simple thing would be a grave mistake. They are, in fact, very smart.

What is unfolding today is exactly an experiment, or ‘prayog’, as Mr. Modi stated a few days back. The ‘prayog’ is to see how Islamists can hijack a city or state without suffering any casualty, and achieve their end-objective, which is to subjugate the state to yield to their unconstitutional demand. Using women and children as the face of their protests so that state doesn’t use force, blocking roads and capturing important public places to instill a sense of fear in mind of other religions like Hindus forcing them to flee, and thus increase the landmass in their fold are the key strategies that mullahs and other strategists who are supporting these anti-India and anti-Hindu Islamic movements.

Today, we see the same things that have been happening in Kashmir; masked youths pelting stones on police, forcing non-Muslims to go to other places, and instilling a sense of fear in them. Delhi is the new Kashmir.

Non-Muslims need to take a call on how they would like to respond to these threats in these difficult times to ensure they do not repeat what Kashmiri Pundits had to do. They can no more run away because they will never find another India once they give up on their motherland. Remember, there is no other Bharat on this planet.

Delhi violence is no longer a protest but sheer terrorism

shalini06
-
0
Delhi violence is no longer a protest but sheer terrorism

1. The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 was passed by the Parliament of India on 11 December 2019. It amended the Citizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for religious persecuted minorities i.e Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who wants to flee the persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.

2. The National Register of Citizens (NRC) was first prepared in Assam in 1951 after the Census 1951 was conducted by the Congress government. RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO NRC.
Now the situation is such that-

Delhi is burning. Muslim mob have turned violent and have started to terrorize everyone who supports CAA. 9 people already killed. Buses, cars and government properties burned by these “protesters”.

What are the questions which needs to be answered?

1. Why are Muslims of countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh oppressing non-Muslims?

2. Why SOME Muslims are not letting them come to India?

3. Why they have so much of sympathy for Bangladeshi immigrants who terrorize Indians?

4. What kind of peaceful protests involve stone pelting, killing cops, firing shots and vandalizing public and government property?

5. Why the left and congress can’t see that these protests are not protests but hate propaganda and violence?

6. What is the Delhi CM doing?

7. Who is “guiding” this violence?

8. Why are slogans like “Hinduon Ki Kabr Khudegi Jamia Ki Dharti Par” raised? What is the relevance?

9. Why are Islamic slogans raised in these protests? Again what is the relevance if these protests are about constitution and secularism in this country?

10. Most important question-Why minority rights are only when its Islam in every country? What about other minorities?

Bhisma or Karna or Drona couldn’t win Duryodhana, so shall MK Stalin by Prashan Kishore

S Ranganathan
-
0
Bhisma or Karna or Drona couldn’t win Duryodhana, so shall MK Stalin by Prashan Kishore

After 10 years of being out of power both at centre and in the state, still DMK is jittery and hopeless of winning the next assembly election and that is why the party has buried all its hatred for Brahmins, Hindi speaking North Indians who are called as Aryans and finally has prostrated before a Brahmin brain – Prashant Kishore (PK) to help the party in some way to win the next election.

Since the formation of DMK, it has been playing caste politics, politics of hatred and negativity, politics of lies, hate Hinduism, abuse Hindu Gods, abuse Brahmins, appease minority etc., and that was how the party had won in in the past. But now the situation has changed at the ground level. Leadership vacuum is killing the party. Today the party is led by an uncharismatic, amateurish and incapable of giving inspiring or enthusing speeches or repartee or intellectual rhetoric is leading the party purely due to the fact that he is the owner of the party. People from the party are also ironically sick and tired of the family show in DMK where the father, son, son-in-law alone matters a lot than party cadres or dedicated workers. Party did not had any ideology was well known but today the party also has gone leaderless family show.

Because of the fear and insecurity that the porous leadership of Stalin may be questioned later by some or many strong leaders from within the party, DMK family would have decided to hire the services of Prashant Kishore so that if the party wins, the credit would go to PK and not the party leaders and if it loses, the blame can be shifted to the party cadres, that they did not cooperate fully with PK.

The big question is whether PK can make Stalin win?

Many people raise their eye brows and doubt such possibility. People wonder why even after long 10 years of anti-incumbency faced by AIADMK, still DMK is jittery and need a Hindi speaking North Indian Brahmin to give intelligence and wisdom to the party to win election?

It means the entry of PK shows nothing but the fear and lack of confidence of DMK. The reason for such fear is obvious. In 2019 election, DMK successfully sold lies, negativity and divisiveness and won the election. Today none of the MP’s of DMK has shown any performance and as result, DMK is facing a big challenge from people because people have lost all hope of DMK.

Further EPS of AIADMK has reached everyone in the state, even the last man in the street, addressed the multi-various problems of common man, governing the state very well and above all, also have shown an exemplary leadership quality which is above comparison with Stalin. Certainly late Amma is still alive in Tamil Nadu may be in the form of noble spirit, guiding EPS stage by stage to save the state from family rule. The cadres of AIADMK must remember the truth that by supporting EPS they are supporting the late Amma and MGR and therefore it is their fundamental duty to support AIADMK to save the state.

We must reflect our great mythology Mahabharat to understand whether PK can make DMK win 2021 assembly election.

Duryodhana was an embodiment of negativity, jealous, greed, dynastic culture, power hungry etc. Duryodhana could get the support all great warriors like Bhishma, Drona, Karna, Kripacharya etc., but still could not win the war against Pandavas because Lord Krishna was with Pandavas.

Duryodhana could not win because he was a cheat, evil at heart, greedy and lacks all morality, honesty and ethics. All his negative qualities although could survive for quite long but failed at the end.

When his father was the king of Hastinapur, Duryodhana could enjoy all paraphernalia and also could claim he was the true heir to the throne. But Duryodhana could not win because the universal truth is that adharma, aneeti and negativity shall never win and only truth and dharma alone triumph at the end. So even if aneeti and negativity receives the support of great warriors like Bhishma, Drona, Karna etc., it could not win at the end.

The similar possibility we cannot rule out in the case of DMK. The party is seen as party of negativity, hate Hindus, abuse Hind Gods, divide castes in the name of social justice, corruption, nepotism, dynastic culture etc. When DMK carries such huge baggage, PK cannot help DMK like how Bhishma, Karna, Drona or Kripacharya could not help evil Duryodhana. Duryodhana was always under the influence of Shakuni another evil designer.

There is no doubt PK cannot help DMK win next election but certainly PK will win Hinduism in DMK and DMK may melt down its hatred towards Hinduism and would also change its mind set towards the brilliance of Brahmins; PK.

The working style of PK indicates that he would bring a bit of Hinduism popularly referred as soft Hinduism in every political party that hires him for strategic consultancy so that India shall be ready to embrace the historic re-naming of India as Hindu Rastra soon. Hope people of Tamil Nadu will defeat DMK in stocks and barrel and save the state from corrupt, dynastic politics and politics of lies, negativity and hatred of DMK.

People should make 2021 assembly election between EPS and Super Star Rajnikanth and DMK should be reduced to a mere fringe player.

Comparison between fall of Roman Empire and fall of congress party without dynasty culture

S Ranganathan
-
0
Comparison between fall of Roman Empire and fall of congress party without dynasty culture

If we reflect the history to understand how the Roman Empire had fallen and the role of the then Roman Emperor Constantine in ending the empire, we can draw several similarities with the disintegration of congress party in India since 2014 and how the great dynast Raghul Gandhi is playing the role of Emperor Constantine of Rome in destroying the congress party in India.

The Roman Emperor Constantine permitted Christianity to spread in Rome which undermined the native religious tradition of Rome. Subsequently the emperor Constantine splits the empire into two parts; western half and eastern half around Constantinople, a city he named after himself.

The western empire spoke Latin and called them Roman Catholic. The eastern empire spoke Greek and worshipped under the eastern orthodox branch of the Christian church. In the passage of time, east survived but the west declined. The fall of Rome really refers only to the decline of the western half of the empire and not the east. But the phrase fall of Rome is understood largely as the fall of entire Rome.

Congress party soon after the assassination of Indira Gandhi chose her son Rajiv Gandhi as its leader and Prime Minister of India. The sympathy wave gave a landslide victory for the first dynast son post assassination of Indira Gandhi and he ruled and ruined India for 5 years. Bofors scandal was the biggest contribution of Rajiv Gandhi to Indian politics.

Subsequently he was too assassinated by LTTE in Tamil Nadu during parliamentary election campaign and as a result, Narasimha Rao came to power and he headed first non-Gandhi family free government and party. But the sycophants in congress party could not tolerate the growth congress party without family to be their loyal sycophant and hence dismantled the robust, democratic congress party and brought back the wife of Rajiv Gandhi to the helm of affairs. Thereon competitive sycophancy of all those non-winnable, post-retired politicians of congress party came to the centre stage. Such change in congress party can be equated with how the Roman Emperor Constantine had embraced Christianity and ruined the local religious tradition of Rome. Exactly the same way, congress party had imported a leader from Italy and derecognised its own eminent leaders like Sharad Pawar, Rajesh Pilot, Madava Rao Scindia, Shagma etc. Of course, the congress party also ridiculed PV Narasimha Rao.

However, thanks to the political ignorance or gullibility of people of India and the greed of many tukede tukede gangs to come to power to loot the nation, UPA came to power twice and that was the end of India. Thanks to Modiji and BJP, India is been saved and slowly it started to grow and transform. 

The fall of Rome and fall of congress shares great similarity.

We often refer the fall of Rome as fall of only the western Rome and not the entire Rome. Similarly the fall of congress is only the fall of party’s support base among people and not the fall of dynasty culture in congress because still the sycophants and unwinnable, post retired leaders of congress party fight for only the coronation of either the mother or her son or if not, the daughter. If nothing works; the sycophants also may agree to give the mantle to son-in-law or his children even if they are minors.

Fall of congress has not ended the fall of dynasty culture in congress but still the party want only the family to run the show.

India has transformed under Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The dynastic culture is not going to work anymore. Therefore congress has to choose its new leader outside of the family and not again from the family. India is sick and tired of the stupid dynast who vomits nonsense and stupidity in public against Modi whom people worship and adore like God. Make congress Raghul Gandhi mukt and Sonia pariwar mukt and save the party from total disappearance.

Liberals continue to live in parallel universe: Ref: Justice Dananjay Yashwant Chandrachud‘s lecture on “Binding India together“

chandra298
-
0
Liberals continue to live in parallel universe: Ref: Justice Dananjay Yashwant Chandrachud‘s lecture on “Binding India together“

My first reaction on going through the excerpts of talk delivered by Mr.D.Y. Chandrachud and reproduced by TOI in the op-ed page was one of great relieves that providence has not bestowed  the political leadership of this country to these legal luminaries.

It may help us to know that Mr. D.Y. Chandrachud was part of the historic verdicts relating to  Sabarimala, decriminalization of article 377 and gave dissenting opinion on constitutional validity of Aadhar, Bhima Koregaon arrests, construction of new Goa airport for environmental concerns. This should clearly reveal the liberal streaks in him.

The lecture delivered by Mr. D.Y.C fits to a ‘T’ of a typical intellectual Liberal’s romantic fantasisation of an ideal liberalised democracy. As was to be expected the main theme of the lecture capsulised following principles- Labeling dissent as anti National strikes at the heart of constitutional values, State apparatus should not be used to curb legitimate and peaceful protests, Pluralism is the unique feature of Indian democracy which should be preserved at all cost and therefore dialogues and consensus process should take precedence over Majority mandate supported policies.

Somehow after the advent of BJP regime under Modi suddenly the topics of intolerance, respect for dissent, threat to pluralistic society, etc have been regularly doing rounds in media and liberal lobbies that are unfavorably disposed to the change in the regime. There is a strong prejudice amongst them that a government of the majority community securing majority numbers will necessarily be intolerant. As long as a coalition govt was ruling the roost, such a perception never  came up because it was assumed that the intolerance surfaces only if given the right numbers.

With regard to protests in India, there never was any dearth of it. Protest is the standard route for any new political party trying to make a niche place for itself in the political arena and a life-line for political parties relegated by electorates. We even had the astounding spectacle of the entire Delhi govt under Arvind Kejriwal taking to streets on a protest.

Under the NDA regime there have been countless protests and agitations. Aarey colony Bachao protest, stir concerning reservation for Patidar, Jat and Maratha community, agitation seeking woman entry in places of worship, farmers agitation, trade union protests, central govt employees protest, and above all and most shockingly protest against Supreme Court judgments on- SC/ST atrocities act, Ban on Jallikattu festival etc. But not all of them got labeled as anti National protests. However some of them like JNU protests and CAA protests at various places did have a clear cut  stamp of anti-national elements masterminding the protest. Under UPA regime too agitation against Kunda Kulam atomic project was perceived by the then govt as being staged by anti national elements at the behest of inimical groups operating against the country. Labeling of a protest as anti National is not a new phenomena.

The govt intelligence agencies armed with better surveillance and intelligence gathering system are in a better position to assess the true character of the protests and agitations, than the media intellectuals and their cronies. For the kind attention of Liberals so much endeared with congress party it needs to be taken note of that when it comes to handling of protests by the  Indian govts the NDA fares much better than the UPA regime.

Who can forget the unfortunate scene of a 70 year old Anna Hazare running for cover across the Ramlila ground to escape police Lathi charge under the order of govt which was averse to Anna Hazare staging a peaceful hunger strike (unlike  the Biryani glutting current day protestors). In the same protest venue Baba Ramdev who hastily managed to drape himself with ladies attire had to jump from the high rise dais to save himself from the police assault. Police used tear gas shells to drive away peaceful protesters in the ram Lila ground. For the pro congress liberals, who are laboring hard to attach Jalianwala Baug syndrome to Saheen Bagh protest, it would come as a disappointment that Jailan wala Baug was already enacted under Indira Gandhi regime when she gave firing order on the helpless Naga Sadhus who were staging protest to demand cow slaughter ban. As per disclosed reports 10 sadhus died in the firing.

The Liberals believe that “Pluralism” is the quintessential of liberal democracies. Liberals turn a blind eye to the plight of many Nations  where  the very preoccupation to uphold pluralism has given the incitement  for  the rise of  fundamentalists. Pluralism sure  needs to be respected  but it cannot be artificially bolstered. The onus of sustaining pluralism does not rest so much with central authorities, as many liberals would like to believe, as it would rest with the individual constituent of the pluralistic  society. There is no constitution in the world which stipulates that the political parties vying for political power should not contest more than a limited number of seats to allow equitable representation of the pluralistic society. Therefore the expectation for the maintenance of a pluralistic society, especially when there is reluctance on the part of one of the constituent group to merge with the mainstream and appear supercilious, can at best be described as quixotic.

In Indian context the pseudo secular policy practiced by the past regimes at the expense of majority community to give an illusion of a pluralistic society existing in harmony was an aberration and not the real norm. The majority were silently fuming waiting for an opportunity to explode. Now when these aberrations gets corrected people start cringing about the new norm, which in fact is the more true representation of the ground realities. Unless the trunk of the tree grows strong the various branches cannot be sustained. In the name of pluralism if the  trunk is sacrificed the very tree will collapse.

There is a sudden awakening and realization in many liberalized democracies of the world about the futility of unequivocal adherence to the pluralism and the danger posed by this to the very existence of the Nation. Today every govt  is under pressure to review its immigrant policy. Why has the  pluralism the idolized theme of liberal champions come under critical review. The answer is that the growing threat of religious fundamentalism spreading far and wide has put paid to the idea of a pluralistic society. Every country is  vying for a course correction to arrive at a controlled pluralism from the chaos of liberalized pluralism.

The stereotypical Liberals come with this  inexplicable obsession for inclusivity and dialogue process as the mandatory requirements for a healthy democracy. For every policy and every govt initiative if protest take place to paralyze the govt and public life then what about the grievances of the people who have elected the govt. If electoral democracy has to be sacrificed to uphold inclusivity at all cost then someone has to invent a new format for democracy because  sometimes it may not be feasible to retrofit new add-ons to old versions.

The success of dialogue process depends on the willingness of the parties concerned to  participate with genuine intention. Where the intention of the participant is to deliberately derail the dialogue process (the posture adopted by Indian opposition parties) is it really possible to have an  all round consensus on every policy  through so called dialogue process. Even if it is granted that it is indeed possible then in such a case what will be the time frame for such consensus? What will happen to the pace of development and progress of a country if it is constantly locked in dialogue processes. Is there any worthwhile purpose of having an elected govt with majority mandate if everything has to be decided by the consensus through dialogue process. Should  the greatest advantage of a single party majority be sacrificed for this so called consensus though dialogue process which the coalition govts are plagued with.

We do not have to go further looking for the consequences for a country choosing to govern by the consensus through dialogue mode. If we consider hypothetically United nations as a single  country and the 193 member  states as representing the wide diversified pluralistic society then can we imagine what will be the consequences when a country runs replicating UN governance mode. The united Nations has just not been able to address many of the critical issues that has plagued the world for decades- Nuclear proliferation, human rights, border disputes, refugee crisis, terrorism etc. For every issue it has earmarked a special body to address it. How effectively it has been addressed is there for everybody to see .

Here again few strong members like USA could get away with a war on a country for alleged  possession of weapons of mass destruction and after that create total mess  in the world peace order by leaving back a disturbed middle eastern region as a  perennial  source of  problem. China could get away with gunning down students protesting in Tiananmen square  with army tanks and Chinese ugyr Muslims could forcibly be sent to de indoctrination camp, without even a whimper of protest from human rights council. Russia could get away with annexation of crime peninsula and united nations at best could bring in an ineffective sanction  against Russia. There are many more such examples where the United Nations has come across as an impotent body. This is exactly how a country like India would come to be if it has to model its governance based on dialogue and consensus mode and this would in turn definitely  ensure that India  stays put as a developing country for an eternity  .

All this bootless errand to uphold that elusive utopian ideals of a pluralistic society, is it really worth the while? It is something that the future generation need to ponder over seriously. Strangely when after few decades the pan Islamisation takes full control of the polity taking advantage of this obligation of many countries to sustain a pluralistic society, there will not be any print media available to carry such articles nor there will be any intelligentsia  left to articulate their critical view.

Tail piece– Perhaps the judicial luminaries need to take note of the shocking public celebration of Hyderabad rapists killed under police encounter and  also seriously ponder over the preference of the dissenters to take to streets than approach Judiciary. It would serve India better if they address their own short comings instead of giving sermons on how to govern  the country.

Uniform Civil Code: The right time is now

sranjan
-
0
Uniform Civil Code: The right time is now

The three biggest obstacles against the UCC are Muslims, leftists and liberals. All three have now decided that India, as a secular country should not have any law that discriminates between religions in the aftermath of CAA. The government should take cognizance of this at once. This is the ripe moment to unveil Islamists and show their true colour, to the brain washed Hindu liberals and divisive left (no hope). The so called Dalit “leaders”, very well know that Muslims would not give up their seats for them in minority education institutes yet they constantly berate their fellow Hindus for easy money. This may put a stop to their funding.

HISTORY

The Second Law Commission Report 1835 was to separate the personal laws of the various religions and communities of India and keep it out of the proposed codification. Queen Victoria’s Proclamation of 1858 reflected that when the British government took over the administration of the India after displacing the East India Company in the wake of the 1857 revolt, promising absolute non-interference in religious matters.

“We do strictly charge and enjoin all those who may be in authority under us that they abstain from all interference with the religious belief or worship of any of our subjects on pain of our highest displeasure.”

It meant the clear separation of the two spheres of law. One governed by the British and Anglo-Indian law, in crime, land relations, laws of contract and evidence, which applied equally to every citizen irrespective of religion. Second the personal laws of the people on matters such as inheritance, succession, marriage and religious ceremonies and so on.

HINDU LAW COMMITTEE AND CODIFYING HINDU LAW 1941

Also known as Benegal Narsing Rau Committee recommended a codified Hindu law. The committee after reviewing THE HINDU WOMEN’S RIGHTS TO PROPERTY ACT 1937 recommended a civil code of marriage and succession for Hindus. In March 1942, it presented the government with two draft bills regarding Hindu succession and marriage. It was kept pending until the Rau Committee was revived and reconstituted once more in 1944. It sent its report to the Indian Parliament with a draft Bill in February, 1947.

The Rau Committee report dealt comprehensively with succession including maintenance, marriage, divorce, minority, guardianship and adoption. As procedure, the draft went before a select committee again, this time chaired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. It came up for discussion in February 1951. Endless discussions continued, the Hindu Code Bill lapsed and it was re-submitted in 1952.

UCC and its implementation were added in Article 44 as a Directive Principle Of State Policy as a mere gesture to indicate the willingness of Parliament to consider the issue of a uniform civil code at some later point in time specifying that “The State shall endeavour to secure for citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.” This decision to include the UCC only as a non-justiciable Directive Principle rather than as a justiciable Article shows the lack of morality of the then government.

The house was divided back then also, like it is now between those who wanted to reform the society by adopting Uniform Civil Code and others, basically muslim representatives who perpetuated personal laws. The proponents of Uniform Civil Code were also vehemently opposed by the minority communities in the Constituent Assembly. It’s incorporation in Directive Principles of State Policy are not enforceable in the court and nothing politically could eventually be enforced because minorities mainly Muslims felt that their personal laws are violated or abrogated by it. Dr. B.R.Ambedkar resigned from the Government of India on the issue of the Uniform Civil Code. In his resignation speech he bared his disappointment that he felt when the original intent and thrust of the Code was gradually diluted. He held special grievances against the Prime Minister Nehru, who chose to make compromises. In his vigorous speech he said:

“To leave inequality between class and class, between sex and sex, which is the soul of Hindu Society untouched and to go on passing legislation relating to economic problems, is to make a farce of our Constitution and to build a palace on a dung heap? This is the significance I attached to the Hindu Code. It is for its sake that I stayed on notwithstanding my differences.”

A series of Bills were then passed collectively known as Hindu Code Bill (covers Buddhist, Sikhs, Jains) as well as different religious denominations of Hindus which allows right to divorce and inheritance to women, made caste irrelevant to marriage and abolished bigamy and polygamy.

THE FOUR HINDU ACTS

1: The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955:

To amend and codify laws relating to marriage among Hindus and others. Others in this context, the Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs. Besides the amendment and codification of law it introduced separation and divorce which was earlier non-existent in Hindu Sastra. This enactment brought uniformity of law for all sections of Hindus including any person who is a convert or re-convert to the Hindu, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh religion.

The Act provided for conditions under which a Hindu marriage was to be solemnised, registration of such marriages, the restitution of conjugal rights as well as judicial separation, the provision for divorces, punishment for divorces etc.

2: The Hindu Succession Act, 1956:

To amend and codify the law relating to intestate or unwilled succession, among Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. This Act lays down a uniform and comprehensive system of inheritance and applies to persons governed by all schools of religious thoughts.

The Hindu woman’s limited estate was abolished by the Act. Any property possessed by a Hindu female is to be held by her as her absolute property and she is given full power to deal with it and dispose it of according to her will. Some parts of this Act were amended in 2005 by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005. It revised rules on coparcenary property, giving daughters of the deceased equal rights with sons with same liabilities and disabilities. The amendment furthers equal rights between males and females in the legal system.

3: The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956:

It enhanced Guardians and Wards Act of 1890. This Act specifically served to define guardianship relationships between adults and minors, as well as between people of all ages and their respective property. No concept of “stepfather” and “stepmother”

4: The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. 1956:

This Act dealt specifically with the legal process of adopting children by a Hindu adult, as well as the legal obligations of a Hindu to provide “maintenance” to various family members including, but not limited to, his wife or wives, parents, and in-laws.

What changes will UCC bring and the need for it:

Illegitimate children of Persons who are Muslims, Christians, Parsis or Jews do not get the benefit of maintenance. The acts have been made applicable only to Hindus and all those considered under the umbrella term of Hindus, including Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs.

As the Acts applied only to religions under the umbrella term ‘Hindu’, women from the other religions remained victims. The Muslim women did not get the benefit of inheritance of agricultural land.

Under Muslim law, maintenance is known as ‘Nafqah’. It is denied mostly under the reason that the wife has disobeyed the reasonable commands of her husband. When a divorced woman has no relatives and does not have enough means to pay the maintenance, the State Waqf Board can choose pay the maintenance but not always. The ‘liability’ of husband to pay the maintenance thus restricts to the period of the iddah (3-4 months) only. The women may also receive a sum of mahr agreed to be paid to her at the time of her marriage or at any time thereafter according to Muslim law.

It will end discrimination against majority in their religious matters. The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act 1951 allows state governments to take over temples and control their vast properties & assets.

Some facts:

  • Hindu’s places of worship can be controlled by state governments but not of Muslims and Christians.
  • Hindu’s places of worship can be brought under government control but not of Muslims and Christians.
  • Hindu’s places of worship can be managed by government but not of Muslims and Christians.
  • Hindus places of worship’s administration, including religious rituals can be run by government but not of Muslims and Christians.
  • Hindu’s places of worship’s assests can be can be disposed or sold by the government but not of Muslims and Christians.
  • Hindu’s places worship’s income are taxed but not of Muslims and Christians.
  • Hindu’s place of worship income can be used for other purposes but not of Muslims and Christians.
  • Educational institutions run by religious bodies of Hindus can not discriminate in hiring of teachers, workers and in student admissions while receiving government funds but muslims and Christians run institutions have the power to discriminate anything and everything.

Different laws for minority schools and “majority” schools:

Even those minority schools which receive money from the government in the form of grants/aid, need not comply with the regulations of the Right to Education Act. The government has made even private schools that receive no money from the government under RTE regulations to reserve 25 per cent of their seats for children from economically weaker sections, but has exempted minority schools. Hindu schools receive no such exemption.

Different Tax laws:

Hindu Undivided Families can only save taxes where as Muslims are exempted from paying stamps duty of any amount under gift deed.

UCC will:

Give equal status to all citizens irrespective of their religion, class, caste, gender etc.

It will lead to reduction in litigation emanating from multiple personal laws.

Bring gender equality. It will bring both men and women at par.

Promote the national integration. All Indian citizens are equal before the court of law i.e. the criminal laws, civil law and same personal laws for all.

End the issue of constant reform of existing personal laws. Presence of so many laws creates confusion, complexity and inconsistencies in the adjudication of personal matters, at times leading to delayed justice or no justice.

Stop the politicization of issues of discrimination, concessions or special privileges enjoyed by others over the majority on the basis of their particular religious personal laws.

Nehru accepted that the Bill was incomplete, but was reluctant to change, fearing the anger of other communities.

How “uniform” is it in Goa

The Family Laws of Goa are uniform in all respects is a misconception. “Concordat ” i.e. the Treaty signed between the King of Portugal and the Pope in 1940 permits the Catholics to get married in Church but simultaneously takes away the Jurisdiction of the Civil Courts in matters of separation of spouses, annulment of Marriage and Divorce and further proceeds to make our constitutionally created High Court of Judicature a mere post office performing the onerous task of conveying the decrees of the Canonical Courts to the Civil Registrars for recording the dissolution of marriage in the marriage Register maintained by the Civil Registrar. The law vests no power in the High Court to examine the Decrees of Canonical Courts on the touchstone of Constitutional validity or Public Policy.

1...475476477...889Page 476 of 889