Supreme Court s Secular Fundamentalism
The Supreme Court's January 2 ruling on the issue of religion and the election process is deeply flawed. India's divided polity is bound to use its flaws to bring a mountain of cases before the judiciary, which will find it impossible to settle them in a consistent and principled manner. The apex court's inconsistency is already evident in its refusal to review its own 'Hindutva judgment' in 1995, which held that since 'Hindutva' connoted a 'way of life', invoking it would not amount to a corrupt electoral practice. The ruling is defective on both social and spiritual/ethical grounds. The democratic edifice in any country rests on its social foundation. Diversity in terms of religion, caste, language and race is an irrefutable and immutable characteristic of Indian society. To ignore this diversity, and to think of India as an undifferentiated collective of Indians, purged of their multiple social identities, is to live in a fantasy. Our electoral system is based on the principle of one-person, one-vote, but voters do vote guided by diverse social considerations. Their right to do So cannot be constrained, except by infringing upon their fundamental rights. If voters have this right, candidates too cannot be denied the right to promise that they would, if elected, try to set right certain social wrongs, injustices, inequalities or deprivations. Such socio-economic and political disparities and deprivations are incontrovertible realities of contemporary India. Theonly obligation on candidates is that they should not speak ill of other communities or incite social disharmony The entire history of social justice movements in post-Independence India, which have infused greater equity and vibrancy into our democracy, is testimony to the fact that diverse social groups, especially under-represented ones, have been mobilised electorally, following their social mobilisation. True, identity politics has created several problems, but these have to be set right by the democratic process itself, not by judicial fatwas. The Supreme Court's ruling that religion can have no role in elections, since the latter are a "secular exercise", is also highly problematic since it seeks to de-legitimise the role of religion in our national life. Ours is a deeplyreligious society But this fact does not come in the way of India being a secular nation. Indeed, India'smulti-faith charac er is a guarantor of secularism. The apex court has erred by looking at religion only as an identity marker of voters and candidates. But isn't religion also a source of ethics and spiritual light? It is indeed the most powerful provider of moral guidaindividuals as well as collectives (poparties, leaders and functionariesstate,judges included). Mahatma Gandhi said: "For m politics bereft of religion is absoludirt, ever to be shunned. Politicsconcern nations and that which concerns the welfare of nations m one of the concerns of a man who religiously inclined, in other wore seeker after God and Truth. For m and Truth are convertible terms Therefore, in politics also we haveestablish the Kingdom of Heaven(Young India, June 18,1925.) True, religion has been often m in the electoral process. But its miscannot be stopped by banishing relitself. The answer lies in reformingreligious practice, as also the practpolitics, governance, statecraft andjustice delivery Irreligious secularpoisonous. (The writerwas aide toformer PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee.)
DISCLAIMER:
The views expressed in the Article above are Sudheendra Kulkarni kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it.
Courtesy : Sudheendra Kulkarni Speaking Tree,Times of India
Supreme Court s Secular Fundamentalism
The Supreme Court's January 2 ruling on the issue of religion and the election process is deeply flawed. India's divided polity is bound to use its flaws to bring a mountain of cases before the judiciary, which will find it impossible to settle them in a consistent and principled manner. The apex court's inconsistency is already evident in its refusal to review its own 'Hindutva judgment' in 1995, which held that since 'Hindutva' connoted a 'way of life', invoking it would not amount to a corrupt electoral practice. The ruling is defective on both social and spiritual/ethical grounds. The democratic edifice in any country rests on its social foundation. Diversity in terms of religion, caste, language and race is an irrefutable and immutable characteristic of Indian society. To ignore this diversity, and to think of India as an undifferentiated collective of Indians, purged of their multiple social identities, is to live in a fantasy. Our electoral system is based on the principle of one-person, one-vote, but voters do vote guided by diverse social considerations. Their right to do So cannot be constrained, except by infringing upon their fundamental rights. If voters have this right, candidates too cannot be denied the right to promise that they would, if elected, try to set right certain social wrongs, injustices, inequalities or deprivations. Such socio-economic and political disparities and deprivations are incontrovertible realities of contemporary India. Theonly obligation on candidates is that they should not speak ill of other communities or incite social disharmony The entire history of social justice movements in post-Independence India, which have infused greater equity and vibrancy into our democracy, is testimony to the fact that diverse social groups, especially under-represented ones, have been mobilised electorally, following their social mobilisation. True, identity politics has created several problems, but these have to be set right by the democratic process itself, not by judicial fatwas. The Supreme Court's ruling that religion can have no role in elections, since the latter are a "secular exercise", is also highly problematic since it seeks to de-legitimise the role of religion in our national life. Ours is a deeplyreligious society But this fact does not come in the way of India being a secular nation. Indeed, India'smulti-faith charac er is a guarantor of secularism. The apex court has erred by looking at religion only as an identity marker of voters and candidates. But isn't religion also a source of ethics and spiritual light? It is indeed the most powerful provider of moral guidaindividuals as well as collectives (poparties, leaders and functionariesstate,judges included). Mahatma Gandhi said: "For m politics bereft of religion is absoludirt, ever to be shunned. Politicsconcern nations and that which concerns the welfare of nations m one of the concerns of a man who religiously inclined, in other wore seeker after God and Truth. For m and Truth are convertible terms Therefore, in politics also we haveestablish the Kingdom of Heaven(Young India, June 18,1925.) True, religion has been often m in the electoral process. But its miscannot be stopped by banishing relitself. The answer lies in reformingreligious practice, as also the practpolitics, governance, statecraft andjustice delivery Irreligious secularpoisonous. (The writerwas aide toformer PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee.)
DISCLAIMER:
The views expressed in the Article above are Sudheendra Kulkarni kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it.
Courtesy : Sudheendra Kulkarni Speaking Tree,Times of India