Combating communalism just takes some doing

We need to recall the work done by . Jawaharlal Nehru in countering communal violence after the birth of independent India. The National Integration Council (NIC) owes its establishment to the initiative taken him in the wake of major communal conflagrations in Jabalpur and other places in central India. He convened a national integration conference in September, 1961 to find ways to combat communalism, casteism, regionalism, linguistic chauvinism and narrow mindedness. The NIC held its first meeting on June 2 and 3, 1962. Specific policy measures like broad-basing recruitment to central paramilitary forces, issuing guidelines to deal strictly with outbreaks of communal violence, and insertion of stricter penal provisions were the result of consensus arrived at by the council.

The NIC was last re-constituted in February 2005 after a gap of 15 years. The NIC consists of the prime minister as the chairperson, with 141 members. Dr. Manmohan Singh while inaugurating the proceedings, identified “communalism, casteism, regionalism and linguism” as the banes of national integration. Now, in the background of communal violence and atrocities perpetuated against Christians in Orissa, Karnataka and many other parts of the country, Dr Singh has convened a meeting of the National Integration Council on October 13, 2008.

The 7th report of the Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) on “capacity building for conflict resolution” suggested several administrative and legal steps to tackle communalism, including :

— NIC should consider all factors impinging on national cohesion, and not only communalism or communal violence.

— Substantive issues before the council may be considered in detail in smaller, subject-matter specific committees.

— The council is to meet at least once a year, while the sub-committees could meet as often as required to complete the assigned task.

— Summary proceedings of the NIC may be laid before the Houses of Parliament.

— The Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR) and the Planning Commission may take a lead in the matter of establishing a multi-disciplinary research and policy analysis platform to discuss issues concerning national integration either in an existing institution or by promoting a new institution or as a network.

The Commission also examined the reports of various commissions of inquiry into past cases of communal conflagration such as the Justice Raghubir Dayal Commission (Ranchi riots, 1967), Justice P Jaganmohan Reddy Commission (Ahmedabad riots, 1969), Justice D P Madon Commission (Bhiwandi riots, 1970), Justice Ranganath Misra Commission (Delhi riots, 1984), Justice B N Srikrishna Commission (Bombay riots 1992-93) and also the NHRC reports. They have analysed the causes , response and shortcomings of the administration and the police in handling such crises. These causes may be categorised as under:

1. Systemic problems

— Conflict resolution mechanisms are ineffective

— Intelligence gathered is not accurate, timely and actionable

— Bad personnel policies — poor choice of officials and short tenures — lead to inadequate grasp of local conditions.

2. Administrative shortcomings

— The administration and the police fail to anticipate and read indicators which precipitated violence

— Even after the appearance of first signals, the administration and police are slow to react

—Field functionaries tend to seek and wait for instructions from superiors and tend to interfere in local matters undermining local initiative and authority

— The administration and police at times act in a partisan manner

— At times there is failure of leadership, even total abdication on the part of those entrusted with the maintenance of public order.

3. Post-riot management deficiencies

— Rehabilitation is often neglected, breeding resentment and residual anger

—Officials are not held to account for their failures, thus perpetuating incompetence.

There is need for further involvement of citizens in developing internal mechanisms for diffusing conflict situations. These include:

—Cooperation and coordination with the police (community policing).

—Cooperation and coordination with the administration (citizens’ committees).

The Commission also felt there are several existing provisions in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which deal extensively with offences relating to religious, racial, linguistic or regional groups, castes and community but are rarely used. Thus, Section 153(A) of the IPC defines offences such as promoting enmity between communities on different grounds and prescribes punishments. In the same way, certain offences based on bias against religion, race, language or regional group, caste or community and which are prejudicial to national integration are dealt with in Section 153 B of the IPC. Further, Chapter XV of the IPC contains provisions regarding offences relating to religion. Briefly, these include:

i. Section 295 — Injuring or defiling place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class.

ii. Section 295A — Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.

iii. Section 296 —Disturbing religious assembly.

iv. Section 297— Trespassing on burial places etc.

v. Section 298— Uttering, words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person.

The Commission concluded that while there are adequate provisions in the IPC/CrPC to deal with communal offences, some of these have not been effectively used. This is partly because as per provisions of 190 CrPC, cognisance cannot be taken by a court of law except with the prior sanction of the Union or the state government or the district magistrate (in case of offences under Section 153 B and sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 505). Such sanctions are generally difficult to procure. The Commission felt that no sanction of the Union government or the state government should be necessary for prosecution under Section 153(A) and the law should be amended accordingly.

Communal violence invariably leads to oppression, marginalisation and alienation of minorities and can be one of the reasons for the growth of terrorism. The ARC’s 7th report will provide some guidance for administrators on how communal violence can be nipped in the bud by prompt action. However, this also requires recognition on part of all our political parties that communal politics may generate short term political gains but creates long term obstacles in our effort to build a united, secular and peaceful India.

The writer heads the second Administrative Reforms Commission