(MENAFN- Gulf Times) Just when Prime Minister Narendra Modi's plane was touching down last Wednesday night at Delhi's international airport at the end of his week-long visit to Ireland and the US, a mob of about 100 Hindus were dragging 50-year-old Mohamed Akhlaq from inside his house in Bisara village in Gautam Buddh Nagar district of Uttar Pradesh and beating him to death for the alleged "sin" that he and his family had eaten beef and had stored more of the meat in his fridge.
If the Hindu fanatics had their way they would kill about a quarter of India's population or about 300mn people, Hindu included, who commit this "sin". For that is the rough estimate of beef-eaters in the country and fanatical Hindus, who think the cow - and not any other animal, including the bull or the buffalo - is holy, are ready to kill to uphold their belief. I may be exaggerating, of course, about the possibility of such a massacre, but does it really matter to the family of Akhlaq how many are killed? Will it bring any solace to his mother, wife, sons and daughter if the head of their family was only one among a thousand or a million killed?
Modi was literally in tears while reminiscing his childhood at the Town Hall Q&A with Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg during his US visit. He broke down as he talked about the suffering his mother had to go through to bring up her children. Most Indians - except, of course, courtiers of the Congress Party's first family - also shed a tear with him.
Most Indians - except, of course, the cow-worshipping fanatics - shed a tear with Mohamed Sartaj, son of Akhlaq, as he told national television that in spite of the fate that had overtaken his family, he still believed India's secular fabric was strong enough to withstand the onslaught of a misguided few. Sartaj also appealed to politicians not to play politics over his father's murder.
But Indian politicians are nothing if they can't play politics. The only imagery that comes to mind is that of a vulture that has spotted a prey from up above. Local representatives in the state assembly and parliament - the latter is a minister in Modi's government - were the first ones to swoop in on Bisara. But this was an opportunity that no one wanted to miss. So you had Arvind Kejriwal and his entourage of Aam Aadmi Party apparatchiks braving a four-hour blockade by villagers against his presence, finally managing his photo-op with the bereaved family. What Delhi's chief minister has got to do with a murder in a neighbouring state when there are enough murder victims - and an epidemic -like dengue scare to boot - in his own city state was perhaps of little relevance to Kejriwal.
If it provided an opportunity to talk ill of other political parties, especially the Bharatiya Janata Party and Prime Minister Modi, Kejriwal would gladly travel to the end of the earth. And so would Rahul Gandhi who till the other day was reportedly in Aspen, Colorado attending a conference of world leaders about which the rest of the world had heard little, but on return wasted no time in rushing to sit with Akhlaq's wife and children.
Kejriwal at least had only an hour's drive to reach Bisara but Asaduddin Owaisi, member of parliament and president of All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, travelled all of 1,600km from Hyderabad to vent his anger at the state of affairs, making sure that all television cameras were trained on him as he spoke.
Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav refrained from travelling to Bisara but instead got Akhalq's family to fly to Lucknow to meet him. Yadav's gesture of announcing a compensation of Rs3mn to the family could hardly hide the stupidity of his police force that sent the meat recovered from Akhlaq's fridge for forensic testing to verify if it was beef or not. What if it indeed was beef? Would that be enough for the police to conclude that Akhlaq was killed for a reason, and a justifiable one at that? Yes, Uttar Pradesh had banned cow slaughter more than 60 years ago, but there was no ban on eating or storing beef which could be brought in from other states that allowed the slaughter.
It is the primary duty of the Akhilesh Yadav government to ensure the right to life as enshrined in the constitution because law and order is a state subject. But if you listen to Yadav's senior cabinet colleague and top Samajwadi Party functionary Azam Khan, it is for the UN to maintain peace and order in Uttar Pradesh and the rest of India. Khan, who has taken the oath under the Indian Constitution, has sought the intervention of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, "humbly requesting" him to "take care of us." Even a sixth grader would tell you that neither the UN nor its secretary-general can entertain petitions from individuals. But Azam Khan cannot be bothered with such trivialities. And if democratic governments work on the basis of collective responsibility of ministerial cabinets, isn't Azam Khan equally responsible for the crumbling law and order in UP?
Any which way you look at it, Akhlaq's was a murder most foul. But give the BJP's spin-doctors some print space and they would like you to believe it was "an accident" (Modi's minister for culture and tourism Mahesh Sharma) or the result of liberal Muslims not "standing up for Hindus" when one or more of them is murdered (RSS ideologue Tarun Vijay). Sangeet Som, the BJP's local MLA, goes one step further and warns of dire consequences if "innocents are framed" for the murder of Akhlaq.
As beef and the controversy surrounding it has taken centre stage in the national press, Sushil Modi, one of the BJP aspirants for the Bihar chief minister's post next month, declared that his party would impose a ban on cow slaughter in the state if his party were to win the upcoming elections. Not to be outdone, senior Congressman Digvijaya Singh said his party would support a nationwide ban on cow slaughter without realising that in Congress-ruled Kerala beef is the main source of animal protein for the majority of people.
In the midst of all this political play, the one politician who should have spoken and whose words could have brought some solace to Akhlaq's family is observing a deafening silence. No, the prime minister cannot be expected to react to every murder or rape that happens in this vast country. Nor is this is the first time that lynch-mobs have ruled the roost in Uttar Pradesh.
But the religious polarisation for political ends that the politicians are trying to reap from Akhlaq's death could well upend Modi's grand plans for India's development and economic emancipation. His many foreign tours highlighting a "we-are-open-for-business" attitude will not bear much fruit. So it will be for his own good that Modi speaks, or at least sends the message across. And if, after all these years, the thought of his mother's struggle still chokes his voice, won't he do well if he were to call that mother whose innocent son was beaten to death before her eyes and say sorry?
It is not as if Indians in general do not know that their prime minister condemns such acts of violence. Not long ago he told Reuters he is pained even when a pup gets run over by a car, but that statement was twisted beyond recognition by his political rivals. But then should the prime minister fight shy of issuing statements just because his rivals will nit-pick them? Indians know that Modi is made of sterner stuff.
So any statement, even a 140-character tweet, would be enough. Not so much for the public but for those fringe elements in his own party who want to drag India from the digital to the medieval age. The message should be strong and clear that there is no place for bigotry and misplaced religiosity in his scheme of things and those party men who interpret his intentions the wrong way will do so at their own peril.
And as long as such a message is not forthcoming from the prime minister, upstarts within his own party will continue to work overtime thinking the prime minister approves of their deeds. Of course, all this is possible only if Modi has the party under his command. Not if he is under someone else's command!
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.