Excerpts from the book “Hole in the bucket”  by  Prof. Rakesh Sinha, Director of India Policy Foundation – the book critically analyzes the Communal Violence Bill, 2011 put forth by National Advisory Council(NAC). The article brings out starting facts about the the Bill, and dispels the notion that it will stop “Communal Violence”. It also presents facts as to why the proposed Bill is discriminatory in nature to the Hindus.

Contact the India Policy Foundation at indiapolicy@gmail.com, http://www.indiapolicyfoundation.org or +91-11-2652-4018, if you wish to order a copy of the book.

Before reading the salient points from the book, if you wish to read all 56 pages of the CVB, here is the Communal Violence Bill 2011 from NAC’s website: http://nac.nic.in/pdf/pctvb.pdf

Now over to some key points from this 30 page book:

  1. The concept of Minority is flawed: In 1940s, two famous leaders, Tajamul Husain (Muslim) and HC Mukherjee (Christian) opposed the majority and minority concepts based on the forms of worship, in the Constituent Assembly of India.
  2. Sonia Gandhi’s Communal violence bill is unconstitutional per Professor Sinha. It provides two criminal laws, two legal systems and two punishments in India.
  3. The essence of the book is to expose that NAC and Sonia’s CVB’s agenda is to treat Muslims and Christians above Hindus in the eye of security laws. SC/ST & Linguistic minorities are merely added to hide the real agenda.
  4. R.Venkata Narayanan is quoted to have said, Sonia Gandhi’s CVB will be a “Hindu Apartheid Law”! That’s a strong statement exposing the discriminatory nature of this bill.
  5. The book goes back in time to show how Hitler’s Germany had biased view of a particular community. In Hitler’s Germany, Jews were held responsible for ALL acts of violence. Now Sonia’s CVB may do the same over Hindus :(
  6. If missionaries try fraudulent or forced conversions, Sonia’s CVB is NOT applicable to the violence between tribals & Christians.One wonders why is that scenario left out?
  7. Sonia’s CVB Article 3(F) will allow to charge a Hindu landlord of “depriving place of living”, if he just tries to vacate his Muslim tenant! That can be disastrous in basic society transactions such as renting a place.
  8. Sonia’s CVB Clause 114 A thru E term a rape of a 2 minority women as “Mass rape”. But 2 Hindu women raped is not mass rape! This to me sounds the most bizarre view of a serious crime such as rape, by communalizing it in the view of law.
  9. If Sonia’s CVB becomes law, a Christian or a Muslim from the “Group”, can criticize sati system, but if a Hindu criticizes burqa system, it becomes “hate disinformation”. For more information of who belongs to the “Group”, refer to the PDF mentioned above.
  10. Prof. Sinha highlights that Hitler’s 1933 Nazi law viewed police & bureaucracy as pro-Jew. Sonia’s 2011 CVB views police & bureaucracy as pro-Hindu. I say what a coincidence in the thought process!
  11. Sonia’s CVB Section 12: If police hit a minority (not Hindu) during terror investigation, it’s “torture” and severe punishment for police prescribed. But if a Hindu is hit, there is no special provision to punish the guilty police.
  12. Sonia’s CVB Section 120 makes it almost impossible for state administrations to demolish illegal Muslim or Christian religious structures. That’s a serious flaw.
  13. Sonia’s CVB Section 18 (I): Police MUST act against “daily activities” of Hindu organizations, if complained by minorities. The first thought that came to my mind.. RSS shakhas anyone? :)
  14. The book says, Hitler and Mussolini rewarded bureaucracy if they were “efficient” (translation: targeted Jews in the first case). Prof. Sinha feels, Sonia’s CVB replaces Jews with Hindus, which makes it a very dangerous bill.
  15. Prof. Sinha tracks back to 1930, when Muslim League’s baseless allegations against police & bureaucracy were common. This eventually led to the disastrous partition of India in 1947. If in 2011, Sonia’s CVB replicates the situation for a similar bias, what next?
  16. The book lists the top 3 sources of baseless allegation against India’s administration & police: a) Radiance. 2) Milli Gazette and 3) Communalism Combat (Teesta Setalvad & Javed Anand)
  17. Prof. Sinha categorically states that in the past 5 years, both Ranganath Mishra and Sachar Committee reports have not been able to cite even ONE instance of institutional bias against minorities of India. Hence the rabble rousers are to be ignored.
  18. Muslim scholars like AAA Faizi and Humayun Kabir have termed “institutional bias against minorities” in India as imaginary.
  19. The most important take away from this book is that while pretending to prevent “state sponsored riots”, Sonia Gandhi’s NAC is pushing “state sponsored communalism” via this draconian anti-Hindu CVB.
  20. Sonia’s CVB section 18:122, ALL members of a Hindu org may get ten years jail term, if just ONE member names someone in organization as criminal! Setup precisely to discourage people from becoming board members of Hindu organizations.
  21. Sonia’s CVB Sec 21 calls for a seven member national authority for final word, which is outside the RTI purview. The craziest part is that this authority must have four minorities & ALL decisions will be taken via majority vote. So essentially, this whole “above the common law” authority is designed be controlled by Muslims and Christians. To top it, this national authority must select its chairman and Vice Chairman from the minority groups. And here it the googly.. anyone with “bias” against minority shown anytime in their career till date, however minor it may be like talking against Muslim reservation just once, is barred! Needless to say, this pretty much negates any sane voice from either minority or majority community to make decisions.

The points on the Bill have been sourced from the blog Kiran’s thoughts

 

1,062 total views, 4 views today