Reward for hate speech?
What message is the appointment of Amit Shah as BJP president sending?
Doesn~t the ruling party in the country care that he was also charged for hate speech, asks GEETA SESHU
If there was a single most important example of the ‘reward’ politicians get for hate speech, it must be Amit Shah’s elevation to the post of President of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Barely a few months ago, Shah was in Shamli in Uttar Pradesh, exhorting voters to seek revenge:
"The elections in Uttar Pradesh, especially in western Uttar Pradesh, is an election for honour, for seeking revenge for the insult, and for teaching a lesson to those who committed injustice."
Shamli was one of the worst affected areas during the riots in Muzzafarnagar last year. Subsequently, an FIR was lodged against Shah under the Representation of People’s Act and the Election Commission prohibited him from addressing public meetings and rallies but this was later lifted after Shah gave an undertaking that he would not violate the code of conduct imposed by the commission for the election period.
Now, of course, the elections are over and the BJP is the party in the government. There isn’t much information about the status of the cases filed against him or whether a chargesheet has been filed. What we do know is that hate speech is not the only charge against Shah.
Amit Shah is of course, no stranger to controversy. As Gujarat’s minister of state for Home, he was arrested in 2010 and spent three months in jail in the Sohrabudding fake encounter case. The CBI investigating the case wanted him charged separately in the Tulsiram Prajapati case (the witness to the Sohrabuddin encounter who died in police custody). Banned from entering his home state so as not to influence the case against him, he received a reprieve in April this year when the Supreme Court confirmed his bail plea.
The elevation of Shah to the party president’s post should not have any bearings on the operation of the mills of justice, which must grind away anyway. But what message is this appointment sending? Or, doesn’t the ruling party in the country care?
Culprits all
The ruling party’s responsibility in sending out a strong message against hate speech cannot be underscored enough. Unlike other political parties, the Congress I was prompt in distancing itself from Imran Masood’s utterances in the election campaigning in Sahranpur. Its leader, Rahul Gandhi, denounced Masood’s comments in an election meeting in the same constituency, though he played safe and didn’t name the politician responsible.
When Uttar Pradesh minority affairs minister Azam Khan was also charged with hate speech and banned from addressing rallies, the Samajwadi Party came out in support, defending his comments on Kargil.
In Mumbai, Maharashtra, the Shiv Sena leader Ramdas Kadam shared a stage with then Prime Ministerial aspirant Narendra Modi where he made a hate speech that Modi would destroy Pakistan within six months of assuming power.
Interestingly, in the meeting itself, Modi didn’t respond but his social media machinery tweeted his disapproval against the speeches of VHP leader Pravin Togadia and BJP’s Giriraj Singh.
Last week, the Trinamool Congress defended its member and Bengali actor, Tapas Pal, for his statements that women opponents should be raped and added, “I carry a revolver myself. I shall pull the trigger myself”.
Trinamool Congress leaders initially denied he had said any such thing, but with a video record of the statements, Pal apologized. Now, following a PIL, the Kolkata High Court has asked the West Bengal government for a report on the action it has taken on the comments. But Chief Minister Mamta Banerjee only said she was deeply pained by the remarks, putting paid to any further action on the issue.
But with the example set by the country’s ruling party, can one expect anything else?
Subscribe To The Newsletter