The Popular Front of India (PFI) has accused the police and the Home Department of remaining mute spectators in the face of rabble-rousing by RSS and BJP leaders and their alleged open calls for instigating riots.
Addressing the media here on Saturday, PFI office-bearers urged the Home Department to wake up from inertia, as peace and tranquillity in the State was being threatened. PFI State president C.P. Muhammed, State secretary C.A. Rauf, and Ernakulam district president V.K. Salim were present.
They alleged that a march organised by the RSS in remembrance of the slain K.T. Jayakrishnan was rife with slogans brimming with communal hatred and hostility. Though it was against the CPI(M), it effectively was reduced to an open call for riots targeting the Muslim community, thus exposing the real designs of the RSS and the BJP.
Mr. Muhammed pointed out how BJP State secretary K. Surendran had endorsed slogans calling for the demolition of mosques, which, he said, amounted to openly promoting communal elements.
He added that Mr. Surendran’s allegation that there were 22 safe havens of the PFI in the State, and that they were not even accessible to the police was baseless. “Who authorised Surendran to speak about matters related to the Home Department? While there is not a single place belonging to Muslims that is out of bounds of the police or any other agency, the number of places where the RSS is denied entry in the State is on the rise, as people have realised their extremist nature. The provocative and communal overtures by the RSS were an attempt to grab power overcoming that non-acceptance by the public,” Mr. Muhammed said.
PFI office-bearers said the organisation was in favour of COVID-19 vaccination, and that it was for the government to undertake awareness campaigns to address any reluctance on the part of certain segments of the population against vaccination.
They also claimed that they had not taken out protest march to the Bishop’s House in Pala or raised provocative slogans over the controversial ‘narcotics jihad’ statement but only exercised their democratic right demanding action against the “dangerous statement”.
