THE STATES

Shifting the blame

The Bharatiya Janata Party and its sister organisations blame the Church for instigating the violence that followed the announcement of the Jharkhand government's controversial domicile policy.

PURNIMA S. TRIPATHI

AFTER Muslims in Gujarat, it is the turn of Christians in Jharkhand to be targeted by the Sangh Parivar. In a planned manner, the Bharatiya Janata Party and its sister organisations are out to make the latest controversy over the State government's domicile policy appear as an issue between Christian and Hindu tribal people. The BJP has alleged that the clashes that occurred between tribal and non-tribal people in the last week of July, following the announcement of the government's new domicile policy, which left at least five people killed in police firing, many more injured and property worth lakhs of rupees destroyed, was fomented by the Church. The party said that the domicile policy was a "non-issue" and that the Church, under the guise of supporting it, instigated tribal Christian youth to attack non-tribal people in order to "defame the BJP government and tarnish the image of the Chief Minister who was doing an exceedingly good job in the face of extreme adversities".

Kailashpati Mishra, national vice-president of the party, said: "The Church is trying to blow the issue out of proportion to create a tribal versus non-tribal divide. The Christian missionaries were upset because the BJP, with the help of various RSS [Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh]-sponsored programmes known as the Vanvaasi Kalyan Yojana, had halted the process of conversion of Hindu tribal people to Christianity. In the government's domicile policy the missionaries saw an opportunity to hit at the government." Mishra, who was appointed by the party high command to handle the latest crisis in the State, claimed that the "violence was a conspiracy planned and executed by Christian missionaries inside a church in the Adarshnagar locality of Ranchi". He said: "I have definite information that Christian tribal youth were collected in a church on the night of July 23, were made to consume liquor, and were given arms and asked to attack non-tribal areas during the bandh the next day." Mishra told Frontline that the conspiracy theory gained credibility because the Christian missionaries knew that Chief Minister Babulal Marandi would be away in New Delhi on July 24 and they could utilise his absence to foment trouble. "Hats off to the police force that acted with utmost restraint, otherwise hundreds would have died in Ranchi on that day because the scene in Adarshnagar resembled one from the Mahabharat," Mishra said. According to Mishra, the clashes started when the non-tribal people retaliated following attacks by "Christian tribal people". During a pro-domicile policy bandh in Ranchi on July 24, tribal youth supporting the government's domicile policy had attacked the houses and other establishments of non-tribal people and set fire to a police station. They used bows and arrows and other arms. The non-tribal people retaliated.

AFP
During a demonstration against the domicile policy in Ranchi on July 23.

Kailashpati Mishra alleged: "Christian missionaries were upset at their loosening hold over the tribal people. They had created an impression in the minds of the tribal people that they could become MPs or MLAs only if they converted to Christianity. We have undertaken programmes in the tribal areas and now they [tribal people] know that this was not the case. There are many non-Christian tribal MLAs and MPs. This way we have prevented conversions and that was why the Church was upset." Mishra said he had "evidence" for whatever he had said and was even willing to "go to jail" if proved wrong. "Let the Church come forward and sue me if what I have said is wrong. I have proof," he said, and added that "the BJP cannot be a victim in the hands of Christian missionaries".

THE BJP's myopic view of the domicile issue and its subsequent fallout, however, threaten social turmoil. There is no denying that the Chief Minister opened a Pandora's box by proclaiming that only "locals" (their status would be decided on the basis of available land records) were eligible for certain types of jobs. The problem is that only land records from 1932 are available in the majority of areas and with such a criterion most of the settlers (natives of Bihar and other States) become "outsiders" and ineligible for certain Class III and IV government jobs. The government policy also triggered a chain reaction at the social level. The latent hostility among the tribal people against "outsiders" has come to the fore and generated a sense of insecurity among the non-tribal people because the police have been seen to be acting in a partisan manner. Reports of police inaction as tribal youth went on the rampage on July 24 gave credence to this feeling. While BJP functionaries like Mishra describe the police inaction as "restraint", the majority of the non-tribal people believe that they were acting on the basis of instructions from "above". Yet another disturbing dimension of the "anti-Church" campaign is that it could result in clashes between Christian and Hindu tribal people.

Ironically, the BJP's control over the region is based on the support of the very people who suddenly find themselves being treated as 'outsiders'. The reality has now sunk in BJP circles that the party will face a problem if it loses the support of this vote bank. Although the damage control exercise has begun, it has achieved little success so far. An all-party meeting convened by the Chief Minister following instructions from the BJP high command was boycotted by the Opposition. The Opposition says that instead of bulldozing his way through, Marandi should have taken them into confidence before announcing such a policy. Predictably, the BJP is now blaming the Opposition for all the confusion, saying that it had not said that 1932 would be the cut-off date. According to Mishra, anybody holding proof of land ownership, irrespective of the date, is a "local" person and would be entitled to apply for all jobs. The BJP declared that even the cases of people with no land records, the "poorest of the poor", would be dealt with "sympathetically" and a mechanism would be evolved so that "nobody suffered". But, as Mishra says, it would be a lengthy process and only a cool-headed discussion would show a way out. However, for the time being, recruitments to Class III and IV jobs have been postponed and a five-Judge High Court Bench is examining the matter. The BJP has obviously not come to grips with the real dimensions of the problem. This was evident in the statement made by Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani in the Lok Sabha on July 31. In his statement, which was read out by Minister of State for Home I.D. Swami, Advani merely gave the details of the violence in the State and reiterated that the definition of a "local" person was only meant for giving "preference" in certain jobs and that these jobs were open to people belonging to other categories as well. "There is no discrimination in anybody participating in the selection process," he said. Describing the violent fallout as a "law and order problem", Advani said that the State government had been directed to ensure that nobody was allowed to take the law into their own hands.

Advani's statement glosses over the social and political dimensions of the issue. By treating the problem as a "law and order" issue, ignoring the political dynamics of the State, the BJP has antagonised the large non-tribal population, which has sustained it so far. There is a feeling of alienation among the non-tribal people already, and so far no attempt has been made by the BJP to address it. S.N. Srivastava, a retired Professor of Ranchi University, who was a BJP supporter until this issue came up, said: "A tribal versus non-tribal divide has certainly been created. The people have become disenchanted with the BJP and if elections are held in the next six months, the party will lose its deposit everywhere in the urban areas."

However, for Srivastava and others like him, the dilemma is that other political parties too are not above board. No party, including the Congress(I) and the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM), has spelt out its stand clearly. They have not opposed the domicile policy for fear of losing the tribal vote, and yet are opposing the government. "This is a complex issue and cannot be defined in simple terms. There are locals who do not own an inch of land. How do you ensure justice for them?" asked Congress(I) leader Oscar Fernandes, who is in charge of the party's affairs in the State. He said that the Chief Minister should have discussed the issue with all political parties to arrive at a "mutually agreed" formula.

S. SUBRAMANIUM
Chief Minister Babulal Marandi.

The JMM too is ambiguous on its stand. "We are not opposed to the local people being given their due share, but how to decide who is a local person and who is not? How to decide the criteria of domicile?" asked Muktinath Upadhyaya, the JMM's national spokesperson. He said that instead of adopting the politics of consensus, the BJP had chosen its favourite path of "divide and rule".

The majority of non-tribal people in Jharkhand today face a dilemma. Ironically for them, the man they had opposed tooth and nail, Rashtriya Janata Dal president Laloo Prasad Yadav, is the only one who has come out strongly against the domicile policy. Unless the BJP treads with caution, Laloo Prasad Yadav may once again walk away with the cake in the next elections on the basis of support of the non-tribal people.

However, the BJP has displayed no signs of having woken up to the challenges. In a casual manner, the government announced a modification to the policy, which has become the butt of ridicule within the party itself. According to the modified criteria, anybody who gets five "local people" to certify for him or her can be declared a "local person" irrespective of when he or she had settled in the State. This has triggered protests within the BJP itself. "This is one of the most non-technical and non-scientific decisions Babulal Marandi has taken so far," said BJP leader Shailendra Mahato, who had left the JMM in the wake of the infamous JMM bribery scandal involving, among others, former Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao. Mahato said that there was no need for the government to announce any modifications and the domicile policy, as announced earlier, should have been allowed to stay. "Every agitation dies after some time. Like the previous anti-reservation stir, this issue too would die its natural death because it only has the support of a handful of non-tribal people," Mahato said.

While the government and the party appear intent on implementing the domicile policy, the chaos on the ground continues. For instance, recently, a group of tribal people created mayhem near the Birla Institute of Technology at Mesra on the outskirts of Ranchi, where the counselling for admission to various engineering courses was going on. Demanding that "local people" be given direct admission in the institute without having to go through the entrance examination, they blocked the main highway for hours, stoned vehicles and damaged property in and around the institute. Although the situation was brought under control after the police fired in the air and burst teargas shells, tension continued in the area. If such a state of affairs continues, the BJP is bound to lose ground in the State, which used to be its stronghold in undivided Bihar.