Law and Order India

India’s democracy is not only largest but also complex due to the numerous demographics it has to serve.   Nevertheless, it is a country with great potential, amazing infrastructure and timeless spirituality and culture.  

If we really desire to win back the title of ‘sone ki chidiya’ for India, the means and methods of governance needs a realistic and transparent transition.  One of the biggest roadblock that keeps barricading our collective social, economic and progressive growth as a nation is the consensus lack of disciplined law and order in our land.  Despite having one of the largest police force in the world, the establishment itself can be seen dysfunctional from within.  There are perhaps handful cities or towns where law is not only limited to books and regulations, but also put into practice.  Judiciary is one department which holds truly highest power in respect to governance, yet in a vast country of India has failed to create a systematic structure and respect in its netizens.  

No matter what 

CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act)

What has CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) to do with ‘Rambhakt’ sentiment?

A country with such a complex demographics and large population cannot be appeased easily.  And perhaps the intention of the ruling party to introduce this Amendment to ensure proper citizenship and contain population is definitely not an invalid one.  

Then what is the entire commotion of the protests and agitation about?  Well, the source lies within the actual ‘content’ of the Clause of this amended law itself.  The content simply fails to use nonpartisan language or formation to describe the Clause itself.     

The second para of the Citizenship Amendment Law reads: 

“3A. Exemption of certain class of foreigners. – (1) Persons belonging to minority communities in Bangladesh and Pakistan, namely, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians who were compelled to seek shelter in India due to religious persecution or fear of religious persecution and entered into India on or before the 31st December, 2014”

1) The clause should have simply been omitted the mention of different religious/ethnic backgrounds in its premise as the nature of content of any constitutional law must read nonpartisan and also should be stringed with any religion when written.

2) In case all other minorities from Bangladesh, Pakistan can be granted citizenship due to ‘fear of religious persecution’, then the Ahmediya community which is a minority and have history of religious persecution not mentioned in the clause.          

3) Or the Clause could have clarified the status of minority Muslims separately.    

The manner in which this Clause has been scripted with a nonpartisan voice (deliberately or not) it has triggered the subtle and passive religious sentiments of many into protests and aggression.   In addition, the filmy language and tone of some of the governing party members (goli maro, button dabao etc) thus projecting their ‘Hindutva’ sentiments is the perfect catalyst to create a perfect desi-bomb or a desi kata in Shaheen Baagh’s case.  

In a span of 3 days, two young boys walk absolutely carefree with a pistol in public place, courageously scream their ‘rambhakt’ sentiments in front of more than a dozen policemen and showcase their anger and hate against muslim?  Regardless of the facts behind who, why and how these boys managed to come this far, it is not normal.  This is not good.      

But of course…they cannot be termed as terrorists. Right?  

(I am a mild mannered reporter. Views expressed here are my own and do not necessary reflect that of my computer)