s
a Malayali who was also a judge of the Supreme Court of India, Justice
Kallupurackal Thomas Thomas occupies an enviable place in the Kerala
Christian social pantheon. No one in his right mind would dare say he
is turning senile. Far from it. That man of justice, and of peace,
remains as sharp as when he was on the highest bench in the land. It
therefore remains a mystery why Justice Thomas, often invited by
right-wing forums in his twin identity as jurist and Christian, always
ends up praising the Hindutva lunatic fringe and denouncing the
conversions of new people turning to Christ.
In an address in Kochi on August 1, 2011, Justice
Thomas praised the RSS for its discipline and said the propaganda that
the organisation was anti-minority was “baseless”. The Press Trust of
India (PTI) reported that speaking at a function attended by RSS chief
Mohan Bhagwat, he also said the “smear campaign” against the RSS that
it was responsible for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi must end.
“There is a smear campaign that RSS was responsible for Gandhi’s
assassination just because the assassin was once an RSS worker,” he
said, adding that the organisation had been “completely exonerated” by
the court. “This smear campaign must end against RSS,” he said.
Gratuitously, Justice Thomas sought to expand his
personal views to make it seem as if he spoke for the entire Christian
community. “I am a Christian. I was born as a Christian and practise
that religion. I am a churchgoing Christian. But I have also learnt
many things about RSS,” he said. He said he became an admirer of the
RSS in 1979 when he was posted as district judge of Kozhikode, adding
that simple living and high thinking was its hallmark. During the
emergency the RSS was the only non-political organisation which fought
against it. “We owe very much to RSS for sacrificing many lives for
regaining our fundamental rights…” “The propaganda that RSS was
anti-minority was also baseless,” he said, adding that he was a great
admirer of the organisation, as discipline is given importance.
This writer shares some qualities with the venerable
justice. Like him, I too am a Christian, a Catholic as a matter of
fact. I was born a Christian and practise that religion. I am a
churchgoing Christian. But I have also learnt many things about the
RSS.
One may well have learnt a thing or two more about the
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh than his lordship. For while he was
rapidly climbing the ladder of jurisprudence, one was reporting on the
RSS 40 years ago, visiting their shakhas (cells), recording
what their leaders said and documenting their written statements and
literature. One saw the training of youngsters and college students
and the excesses of pot-bellied traders in khaki shorts and white
shirts an hour before they went back to their shops in Chandni Chowk
and Chawri Bazaar, the wholesale market in Old Delhi.
It was perhaps too early in the day because one did
not see what crowds in Jhansi saw decades later – the frightening
scene of RSS cadres practising with mock and real rifles and
double-barrelled guns down the main thoroughfares of the town, or of
RSS chief ministers themselves firing military hardware while posing
for photographs.
But one did see how RSS cadres were trained
during early morning meetings in public parks as much as in
closed-door vyayamshalas (gymnasiums), their boudhiki
(intellectual) brainwashing and their war games. And “exercises” no
less frightening – elaborate handwork with thick lathis, the sort
policemen carry at night. One also saw “children’s games” in which
boys formed a chain, holding hands, and then swooped down on a rival
group, trying to “abduct” or capture persons, presumably women. The
boudhikis were given to reading the editorials and main articles
in those poison pen official mouthpieces of the Sangh, the
Organiser in English, not read at the shakhas, and the
Hindi language Panchjanya, the mainstay of the morning
discourses. They would then discuss what damage the Muslims had done
to India. It would all conclude with another salute not to India but
to a mythical “Mother India”, more goddess than a symbol of the land
which they shared with practitioners of all other religions.
And therefore it is quite obvious that Justice Thomas,
as is his right, looked only at the pretty saffron flowers and forgot
to look at the blood which sullies the earth on which the RSS flag is
hoisted.
First things first. Let us get the Gandhi murder out
of the way, so to say. And I am indebted to Professor Shamsul Islam, a
global authority on the sangh parivar, for once again giving me
this documentary evidence. He remains, with Communalism Combat,
SAHMAT and the All India Christian Council, the national library on
this fascist organisation.
After the murder of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi on
January 30, 1948, the RSS was banned on February 4, 1948. It was
banned for anti-national activities and the government communiqué
banning the RSS was self-explanatory: “In their resolution of February
2, 1948, the government of India declared their determination to root
out the forces of hate and violence that are at work in our country
and imperil the freedom of the nation and darken her fair name. In
pursuance of this policy, the government of India have decided to
declare unlawful the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh” (cited in Justice
on Trial, RSS publication, Bangalore, 1962, p. 64).
The communiqué went on to disclose that the ban on the
RSS was imposed because “undesirable and even dangerous activities
have been carried on by members of the Sangh. It has been found that
in several parts of the country, individual members of the Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh have indulged in acts of violence involving arson,
robbery, dacoity and murder and have collected illicit arms and
ammunition. They have been found circulating leaflets exhorting people
to resort to terrorist methods, to collect firearms, to create
disaffection against the government and suborn the police and the
military” (ibid, pp. 65-66).
Prof Islam points out that the then home minister,
Sardar Patel, reputedly had a soft corner for the RSS. Patel continues
to be a favourite with the RSS. However, even Sardar Patel found it
difficult to defend the RSS in the aftermath of Gandhiji’s
assassination. In a letter written to the head of the RSS, Golwalkar,
dated September 11, 1948, Sardar Patel stated:
“Organising the Hindus and helping them is one thing
but going in for revenge for its sufferings on innocent and helpless
men, women and children is quite another thing. Apart from this, their
opposition to the Congress, that too of such virulence, disregarding
all considerations of personality, decency or decorum, created a kind
of unrest among the people. All their speeches were full of communal
poison. It was not necessary to spread poison in order to enthuse the
Hindus and organise for their protection. As a final result of the
poison, the country had to suffer the sacrifice of the invaluable life
of Gandhiji. Even an iota of the sympathy of the government, or of the
people, no more remained for the RSS. In fact, opposition grew.
Opposition turned more severe when the RSS men expressed joy and
distributed sweets after Gandhiji’s death. Under these conditions it
became inevitable for the government to take action against the RSS.
Since then, over six months have elapsed. We had hoped that after this
lapse of time, with full and proper consideration the RSS persons
would come to the right path. But from the reports that come to me, it
is evident that attempts to put fresh life into their same old
activities are afoot” (ibid, pp. 26-28).
The Hindu Mahasabha and the RSS were jointly
responsible for the murder of the father of the nation, Mahatma
Gandhi. This fact was further corroborated by Sardar Patel in a letter
to a prominent leader of the Hindu Mahasabha, Shyama Prasad Mookherjee,
on July 18, 1948. Sardar wrote:
“As regards the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha, the case
relating to Gandhiji’s murder is sub judice and I should not like to
say anything about the participation of the two organisations but our
reports do confirm that as a result of the activities of these two
bodies, particularly the former, an atmosphere was created in the
country in which such a ghastly tragedy became possible. There is no
doubt in my mind that the extreme section of the Hindu Mahasabha was
involved in the conspiracy. The activities of the RSS constituted a
clear threat to the existence of government and the state. Our reports
show that those activities, despite the ban, have not died down.
Indeed, as time has marched on, the RSS circles are becoming more
defiant and are indulging in their subversive activities in an
increasing measure” (Letter 64 in Sardar Patel: Select
Correspondence1945-1950, Volume 2, Navajivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad, 1977, pp. 276-277).
Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh, who was for
10 years chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, and union home minister P.
Chidambaram were supported by historical data when they called for a
focus on right-wing terror groups, especially the progeny of the RSS.
Chidambaram has recently favoured proper research and study of the
phenomenon, asking the security forces to deal with the right-wing
terror groups “sternly and fearlessly”. He said that these groups were
radicalising the youth in the same manner as was done by the banned
SIMI (Students Islamic Movement of India) or Indian Mujahideen. There
was no difference between the Indian Mujahideen and Hindu terror
groups and both were enemies of the country “so actually, we do not
have one enemy within today, we have two enemies within and hope there
will not be a third or a fourth or fifth,” Chidambaram said.
Digvijay Singh has repeatedly said: “I do not rule out
anything. If they want evidence about the Sangh’s involvement in
terror activity, I have got evidence.”
Just in case Justice Thomas, and his friends such as
Karnataka State Minorities Commission member PN Benjamin, whose
organisation, BIRD, provides an occasional platform for the former
judge’s fulminations and homilies, require judicial evidence, here is
a brief summary of extracts from the reports of a series of judicial
commissions that have investigated the role of the RSS in anti-Muslim
violence since the Ahmedabad riots of 1969. That is over 40 years of
history.
“There was not only a failure of intelligence and
culpable failure to suppress the outbreak of violence but [also]
deliberate attempts to suppress the truth from the commission,
especially the active participation in the riots of some RSS and Jan
Sangh leaders” (report of the Justice Jagmohan Reddy Commission on the
Ahmedabad riots of 1969).
“The organisation responsible for bringing communal
tension in Bhiwandi to a pitch is the Rashtriya Utsav Mandal. The
majority of the leaders and workers of the Rashtriya Utsav Mandal
belonged to the Jan Sangh or were pro-Jan Sangh and the rest, apart
from a few exceptions, belonged to the Shiv Sena” (report of the
Justice DP Madon Commission on the Bhiwandi, Jalgaon and Mahad riots
of 1970).
“In Tellicherry, the Hindus and Muslims were living as
brothers for centuries. The ‘Mopla riots’ did not affect the cordial
relationship that existed between the two communities in Tellicherry.
It was only after the RSS and the Jan Sangh set up their units and
began activities in Tellicherry that there came a change in the
situation. Their anti-Muslim propaganda, its reaction on the Muslims
who rallied round their communal organisation, the Muslim League,
which championed their cause, and the communal tension that followed
prepared the background for the disturbances… That is what the rioters
who attacked the house of Kunhammad asked him to do. “If you want to
save your life, you should go round the house three times repeating
the words ‘Rama, Rama’.” Kunhammad did that. But you cannot expect the
70 million Muslims of India to do that as a condition for maintaining
communal harmony in the country. This attitude of the RSS can only
help to compel the Muslims to take shelter under their own communal
organisation” (report of the Justice Joseph Vithayathil Commission on
the Tellicherry riots of 1971).
“The RSS adopts a militant and aggressive attitude and
sets itself up as the champion of what it considers to be the rights
of Hindus against minorities. It has taken upon itself to teach the
minorities their place and if they are not willing to learn their
place, to teach them a lesson. The RSS methodology for provoking
communal violence is: a) rousing communal feelings in the majority
community by the propaganda that Christians are not loyal citizens of
this country; b) deepening the fear in the majority community by
clever propaganda that the population of the minorities is increasing
and that of the Hindus is decreasing; c) infiltrating into the
administration and inducing members of the civil and police services
by adopting and developing communal attitudes; d) training young
people of the majority community in the use of weapons like daggers,
swords and spears; e) spreading rumours to widen the communal cleavage
and deepen communal feelings by giving a communal colour to any
trivial incident” (report of the Justice Venugopal Commission on the
Kanyakumari riots of 1982 between Hindus and Christians).
“The dispute on the route of the procession became
sharp and agitated reactions from a group of persons calling
themselves the Sanyukt Bajrang Bali Akhara Samiti who systematically
distributed pamphlets to heighten communal feelings and had
organisational links with the RSS. A call for the defiance of the
authority and the administration when it refused permission for one of
the routes led to a violent mob protesting and raising anti-Muslim
slogans and thereafter an incendiary leaflet doing the rounds of
Jamshedpur that is nothing short of an attempt to rouse the sentiments
of Hindus to a high pitch and to distort events and show some actions
as attacks on Hindus that appear to be part of a design. A survey had
already established that all policemen, havaldars, home guards,
etc were at heart ready to give support to them [Hindu communalist
organisations]” (report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Communal
Disturbances at Jamshedpur in April 1979 ).
“Even after it became apparent that the leaders of the
Shiv Sena were active in stoking the fire of the communal riots, the
police dragged their feet on the facile and exaggerated assumption
that if such leaders were arrested, the communal situation would
further flare up or, to put it in the words of the then chief
minister, Sudhakarrao Naik, ‘Bombay would burn’; not that Bombay did
not burn even otherwise” (report of the Justice BN Srikrishna
Commission on the Mumbai riots of 1992-1993).
Justice Thomas is invited to look up the full reports
if he wishes to.
It would help the church leadership too if it were to
read these reports.
