Of late increasing blasts and waves of violence are rocking city after city in India. After every blast or violence one or other outfits / mastermind is named as suspect. Thereafter that case(s) is transferred from the Police to the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) and then from the ATS to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). And finally 'Operation Cover-up' takes place only with a covert view not to punish the culprit(s). This raises the obvious question: does continuance of intimidation indicate that our apex investigation agencies or judiciary are not discharging their functional duties as is required? There might be "n" numbers of reasons for initiating 'Operation Cover-up' as there might be equal numbers of reasons for terrorism activities flaring up.
Considering the gravity of "n" numbers, government's action plan as is being suggested by intellectuals need not only be zero tolerance but must also be zero chances approach. In this context let's see, one among many, Zero chance measure that would have complimented to normalize the turbulent situation long back. But no, it's still kept brewing for vote bank politics!! Recently at the annual conference of State Minorities Commissions in New Delhi, our beloved Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh stressed pluralism of the Indian culture saying "India does not belong to any single race and that it belongs to a mosaic of religiously, linguistically and culturally varied communities ... India must remain a nation where pluralism and socio-religious variety are respected. In a pluralistic society like ours, national identity cannot be adjudged by any litmus test ... This nation does not belong to any single race." This expression is absolutely true and in line with the Constitution of India. But the biggest question is: Is his government practicing what he is preaching? On the contrary, his government is seen pampering "minorities" and yet not willing to finalize "minority" related 103rd Amendment - a perfect double role strategy which smells dubiousness. In this context, for better understanding, let me divide the period from 1540 to date into four phases. First phase: Times started becoming different from 1540 when Portuguese landed in Goa. That was a disturbing phase due to Inquisition and fervor of religious conviction either by force or by coercion. Phase Two: even after first phase, all Goans (Hindus, Christians and Muslims) lived in perfect harmony intermixing with each other. Third Phase: Our harmonically intermixing attitude turned our Goan mindset to get our Goa liberated from colonial bondage. We achieved what we wanted and again lived harmoniously. No signs of hatred at any level were visible. Fourth Phase: Today in liberated Goa we see disturbances from all fronts. Goans openly say "any thing can happen to our Goa at any time.. This is more because our politicians are pampering Influx, slum dwellers and the Minorities ". At the start of the fourth phase Goa did witness influx, slums, minorities but pampering attitude like today was hardly noticeable. All this is going on unnoticed only because the term "Minority" is not defined legally & logically nor any Intellectual, Individual, organization, or NGOs made any attempt to specify as to what parameters need to be considered to declare certain group as "Minority" in the state or nation. In 2005, politicians were literarily shaken by two judgments of apex court i.e. 1) T. M. A. Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka case, wherein eleven judges bench raised important question as to 'What is the meaning and content of the expression "minority" in Article 30 of the Constitution of India?'. This bench also spelt out that "Linguistic and religious minorities are covered by the expression "minority" under Article 30 of the Constitution. Since reorganization of the States in India has been on linguistic lines, therefore, for the purpose of determining the minority, the unit will be the State and not the whole of India. Thus, religious and linguistic minorities, who have been put on a par in Article 30, have to be considered state wise"; 2) Subsequent to this judgment, Supreme Court, after T. M. A. Pai Foundation case judgment, once again, in Bal Patil & Others vs. Union of India case reinterred the same stand. (Hence forth these two cases will be referred as "landmark judgments)'. Factually, for the Ministry of Minority Affairs in India, redefining "minority" state wise, in accordance with apex court's landmark judgments has become a task as tough as bringing out water from a rock. And the bill for giving constitutional status to National Commission for Minorities (NCM) is hanging since 2004 and in view of the sensitive issues involved in it nobody wants to put their hand in it. The Ministry is in a fix over defining the term "minority" for more than one reasons - firstly in view of the coming elections and secondly opposition from the so-called minorities. The cabinet cleared the official amendment to the Constitution - the 103rd Amendment Bill 2004, at a meeting chaired by the Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh and was introduced in Parliament in 2004 only to be referee to Parliament Standing Committee. - A perfect eye washing technique. As an eye opener, in Judiciary 2005, again after T. M. A. Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka case, Supreme Court in Bal Patil & Others vs. Union of India case pronounced: Minorities needs to be defined in relation to their population in a state. Following this judgment, the Standing Committee directed the Ministry to make changes in the bill in line with the apex court rulings! At this point, it's time to recall and read the ruling / the judgment which was passed by Allahabad High Court. The Allahabad High Court had held that Muslims with 18.5 per cent of Uttar Pradesh's population in 2001 - were not a religious minority in the state. The judgment also pronounced that state government should treat members of the Muslim community as equal to those belonging to the non-minority communities without discrimination in accordance with the law. Just imagine if this same ruling was to be applied to Christians in Goa at that point of time what picture Goans would have witnessed - A peace march or a protest march! Realizing implication of this judgment, 'Operation Cover-up' was initiated the very next day by divisional bench staying the High Court judgment. Thereby the High Court judgment became a forgotten judgment.But no one ever thought that that forgotten judgment, so called bad in the eyes of settled laws, turned out to be an eye opener to Apex Court to deliver Landmark Judgments. Before landmark judgments, the 103rd Amendment was proposed only to give constitutional status to the National Commission for Minorities and to invest it with quasi-judicial powers because it lacks teeth. But after landmark judgments the proposed 103rd Constitutional Amendment had to be revised to have state-wise minority status rather than national status, as is the norm now. As per the amendment redrafted, Minorities in states will have to be decided through a presidential notification in consultation with the state government. After landmark judgments, the government, in the last budget session, gave notice for moving an amendment to Article 340 over and above the Constitution (103rd Amendment) Bill to redefine minorities as per the apex court decision although it was an eye wash to general public, as parliament was planed to be adjourned sine die before the amendment could be moved. There after leaders of the minority communities and experts opposing the move started arguing that a state-specific definition of minorities would result in distortions in minority rights. They argued saying "Christians in many North-eastern states including Goa, Sikhs in Punjab, Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir will have to be declared majority groups and consequently deprived of constitutionally-sanctioned minority rights". They also argued saying "103rd amendment would result in many other anomalies like Christian students becoming ineligible for admission in minority educational institutions in other states as they would not have a domicile minority status there". In short, if the bill (103rd Amendment) has to see the light of the day it has to be amended to give definitions of minorities in line with apexes courts landmark judgments and also abolish the existing national minorities pari passu. Such amendment once in place will obviate any confusion on the question of minorities. This is exactly what our politicians don't want for their own vote bank politics. It is for this reason, proposed 103rd Amendment Bill 2004 is deliberately kept hanging to die an unnatural death. Dr. U. G. Barad