How Congress Party Allegedly Made Bharat a Muslim Nation Through the Constitution

Paromita Das

GG News Bureau

New Delhi, 17th July. The Indian National Congress, the party that led Bharat to independence and governed for much of its post-independence history, has faced criticism for its policies towards religious minorities, particularly Muslims. Some argue that the Congress has used constitutional amendments and legislative acts to favor Muslims at the expense of Hindus. This article examines these claims through specific constitutional provisions and legislative acts.

Historical Context and Congress’s Secular Stance

The Congress party, since its inception, has upheld the principles of secularism and inclusive governance. Post-independence, under leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, the party sought to establish a secular state where all religions would coexist harmoniously. However, the secular approach has often been perceived differently by various segments of the population, leading to accusations of minority appeasement.

Article 25 (1950): Freedom of Religion

Article 25 of the Bharatiya Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, including the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion. Critics argue that this article has been used to facilitate religious conversions, particularly of Hindus to other religions, thereby threatening the demographic balance.

Article 28 and 30 (1950): Religious Education

Article 28 prohibits religious instruction in educational institutions wholly funded by the state, while Article 30 grants minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. Detractors claim that these articles have disadvantaged Hindu educational institutions by preventing them from offering religious education, unlike their Muslim and Christian counterparts.

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HRCE) Act (1951)

The HRCE Act gave the government control over Hindu temples and their finances, a move seen as an infringement on Hindu religious autonomy. Critics argue that similar control was not imposed on mosques or churches, allowing them to remain independent and financially self-sufficient.

Hindu Code Bill (1956)

The Hindu Code Bill reformed Hindu personal law, addressing issues like divorce, inheritance, and dowry. However, it left Muslim Personal Law untouched, allowing practices like polygamy to continue among Muslims. This disparity is viewed as discriminatory against Hindus.

Special Marriage Act (1954)

The Special Marriage Act allows individuals to marry outside their religious communities without converting. Critics allege that this act has facilitated the marriage of Muslim men to Hindu women, perceived as a demographic threat to the Hindu population.

Secularism and the Emergency (1975)

During the Emergency imposed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, the word “secularism” was added to the Constitution. Critics argue that this move was used to undermine Hindu interests while promoting minority rights, particularly those of Muslims.

National Commission for Minorities Act (1992)

The establishment of the National Commission for Minorities provided a platform for minority communities, particularly Muslims, to voice their concerns and seek redress. Critics argue that this institutionalized a majority-minority divide in a supposedly secular country.

Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act (1991)

This act aimed to maintain the religious character of places of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947. Critics argue that it prevented Hindus from reclaiming temples that had been converted into mosques.

Waqf Act (1995)

The Waqf Act provides for the administration of waqf properties, which are religious endowments in Islam. Critics claim that this act has enabled Muslims to acquire vast tracts of land, making them significant landowners in Bharat.

Ram Setu Affidavit (2007)

The Congress-led government submitted an affidavit in the Supreme Court denying the existence of the mythological Ram Setu bridge. This was seen as an attempt to undermine Hindu religious sentiments.

“Saffron Terrorism” (2009)

In 2009, the Congress party coined the term “saffron terrorism” to describe acts of violence by Hindu extremist groups. Critics argue that this unfairly labeled Hinduism as extremist while ignoring extremism in other religions.

Media and Perception

The media is accused of labeling those who question these policies as communal or extremist. Critics argue that this has stifled legitimate debate and allowed the Congress to implement policies perceived as anti-Hindu without significant opposition.

Conclusion

Critics of the Congress party argue that it has systematically used constitutional provisions and legislative acts to undermine Hindu interests and favor Muslims. They claim that this has been part of a broader strategy to weaken Hinduism and change Bharat’s demographic and cultural landscape. While these views are contentious and highly debated, they reflect a significant perspective in Bharat’s complex socio-political landscape.