Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen sees the hand of Congress and BJP behind its present troubles
The Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen wants a debate on ‘hate speeches’ in the country. Right now, it feels, there is a selective targeting of only one community.
Several persons who have hurt the religious sentiments of Muslims are allowed to go scot-free while a slew of cases are booked against the Majlis legislator, Akbaruddin Owaisi. “You can’t have a selective approach. Let there be a definite policy,” is the unanimous argument of several party leaders. They point out how the community sentiments are being hurt systematically. At the recent literary fest at Jaipur, writer Salman Rushdie hurt the Muslims but everyone felt he had a ‘right to offend’. A series of cartoons appeared about the Prophet of Islam but no action was taken. Well-known lawyer, Ram Jathmalani, called Lord Rama a ‘bad husband’ and Union Minister, Jairam Ramesh, said the country needed toilets and not temples. Yet, no cases were booked. But in the case of Mr. Akbaruddin police swung into action immediately. “Is the law to be applied only against Muslims?” asks the MIM president Asaduddin Owaisi.
This view is also shared by a section of the community. Many feel it is wrong to take out portions of Mr. Akbaruddin’s speech and dubbed it ‘hateful’ without seeing it in its entirety.
The Majlis sees the hand of Congress and BJP behind its present troubles. But it feels the BJP will not be able to reap electoral gains from the Akbaruddin episode. At best it could only galvanise its ‘depleted’ cadres in the city.
“Why are there no protests in Rayalaseema and Andhra if it is a question of hurting the religious sentiments? This only shows that the BJP is raking up the issue only to polarise votes in Telangana where it stands to gain from bifurcation of the State” argues the MIM chief.
The Majlis, which has consistently maintained that the BJP will emerge stronger in the event of creation of Telangana, feels its fears have been confirmed by the present controversy. “Even before the State is bifurcated the BJP is targeting Muslims and what it would do can well be imagined,” says a senior leader.
Keywords: MIM, Akbaruddin, hate speech, arrest, Nirmal, Nizamabad
If at all there is a need for debate, let it be there -- the ends of the debate must be to eliminate hate speech of all kinds, not to justify it.
If the severity of the hate and its possible impact that the said speech professed is not realised today by Indian muslims,I fear it will be too late.Yes,RSS own beliefs are full of hate for one community and without doubt ethnocentric,but the point needs explaining on two counts,even they cannot directly incite violence like the way this man did for well more than an hour.Second ,decades of functioning has only provided RSS a marginal significance.While this man had twenty thousands listening to him.
Yes i say let there be a debate on hate hoopla in the Lok Sabha and also take up uniform civil code discussion, Art. 370, removal of subsidies for Haj, proselytization / conversion by Christians and Muslims against Hindus in India. Let there be a grand debate in both houses of parliament.
According to Freedom of speech, you have to right to express your feeling until it does not threatens others life and liberty. In case of Salman Rushdie, Ram Jathmalani and Jairam Ramesh they never threatened any ones life. Thats why there is was no need of action on them. In case of Akbaruddin he threatened life of 80 crore Hindus and thats a reason for a action. Hope this helps.
In an open democracy with free speech guaranteed by constitution, application of laws to limit freedom of speech should only be limited to extreme cases. People should be allowed to speak their mind even if it is hurtful for others. In many instances what they have are genuine grievances which can be sorted out by negotiation. Limiting free speech is a recipe for generating hard core terrorist organisations.
There is a difference. In the case of speeches by Hindu nationalists, they have not directly talked about eliminating Muslims and it has never been anti-India in nature. These speeches by MIM and its leaders go way too far by any yard-stick. He talks of India as a separate entity. His speeches are not only communal, offensive and hateful they are also anti-national.
It is interesting to hear Mr Owaisi (the elder)'s comments. His initial response was that nobody is greater than law and the law of the land would prevail. Now he is trying to make the matter political by saying others are not punished when they did the same. There was nothing to be taken out of context in the speeches his younger brother delivered to stir up communal tensions -they are widely available on internet to see for everybody. It is interesting to say that BJP is to gain from this incident and hence they are opposing the creation of Telangana. The percentage of Muslims is significant in Telangana and by joining forces with YSRCP and playing the divisive card of Dalits and backward castes, they are aiming for their own political gains and emerge as a strong political force across Telangana. Before saying that this situation strengthens BJP, they should restrain from giving them the chance by doing such foolish things as to incite communal violence.
Please Email the Editor