Home demolitions drive in India: A new wave of Human rights violation?

Credit:CBS NEWS

Dozens of people whose houses have been demolished say that is what is happening to them. Most of them are Muslims. The state government of Uttar Pradesh maintains the houses were built illegally, but the demolitions took place as emotions were high across India. People rallied in several cities protesting against offensive comments that two members of the governing BJP made about the prophet Muhammad. Hundreds of thousands of people across India recently protested against Nupur Sharma. She was suspended from the governing BJP for making islamophobic remarks. The BJP-run government of Uttar Pradesh state is cracking down on dissenters. Authorities have demolished at least four homes belonging to Muslims. They say the houses were built illegally.

At least 300 people have been arrested nationwide. Others have been booked for hate speech. Many of them are Hindus. Local authorities say they've received names of dozens of protesters and will begin examining their homes for irregularities that are sparking fear in this town that more demolitions could be carried out. Courts have recently condemned similar demolitions, but authorities say these are part of a larger anti-encroachment drive in the state. Many people are protesting against these demolitions. They say the government is trying to intimidate the centers and is singling out Muslims. 

Monitoring groups say, there's been an increase in attacks on Muslims since Hindu nationalist Narendra Modi became prime minister in 2014. India administered Kashmir, the only Muslim majority state, had its constitutional autonomy revoked in 2019. Rights organizations have documented mass graves, torture, and extrajudicial killings carried out by the Indian armed forces. In 2020, dozens of people were killed in protests against a new citizenship law that fast-tracks nationality for some minorities but excludes Muslims. Laws against slaughtering cattle, anti-conversion legislation, and bans on headscarves have legitimized discrimination against religious minorities, especially Muslims. Prime Minister Modi has been criticized for his silence on hate speech which often comes from within his own party.

To watch the full video, "Pakistan-Russia relations and energy crisis", click Global Lenses

Protesters in different cities are protesting against the demolition of Muslim houses. The local government says the buildings were built illegally, while rights groups say it is part of intimidating Muslims.

Legal perspective on demolitions?

You have to look at what has been happening in the country for the last two months. Forget the years, but in the last few months alone, the same thing has been carried out one after another in the BJP-ruled states. Violence or small-scale riots or clashes take place between the two communities and the very next day or the day after, the houses of the Muslims are demolished and the justification is given. On the one hand, the government says that this is the way to punish those who throw stones or promote violence in the society. On the other hand, they also offer legal justification that these are illegal houses. This is a bizarre coincidence and no one is missing out on why this demolition is happening just days after the violence. I would like to reiterate that none of these people have been convicted of any crime, even firs have been registered against very few people. Their houses are being demolished purely on the basis of allegations made by the state police. Many of them, in fact, the house that was demolished in Allahabad belonged to a young activist Afrin, and his father, Mohammed Javed. They are fierce critics of the government. They have been here for a couple of years now. Just to reiterate that the notice was placed on his house after 10pm on Saturday night and his house was demolished on Sunday afternoon. There is a lot of contradiction in this because they were not given enough time to explain the reason. When that happens, you are not only directly targeting the critics, but you are also sending a message to all Muslims across the country that if they stand up against the government, their home, a place in which they feel secure, would be dropped to the ground.

In India, well-known activists had their houses demolished namely Mohammed Javed. There are also Hindu nationalist politicians who are known for their sectarian rhetoric against the country's Muslim minority.

Does that not violate constitutional laws that ban collective punishment?

As far as I know, a case is being filed with the Allahabad High Court. The activists whom the police and the administration call the rioters because one week ago, in India a very coherent event was observed that was stoning at different places in different states at the same time. The fact is that the court is taking a call on them because they committed wrongs. It is also a fact that notices of illegal constructions were given in May at least in the case of Muhammad who is the center of everyone's attention as his daughter Farina also joined the protest at JNU (Jawaharlal Nehru University). They have a history of echoing voices over issues where the Indian government has taken steps like the Citizenship Amendment Act and the present one. It is a fact that these activists have a history of disturbing law and order in different parts of the country. There is also a history that notices were issued to these houses a month ago. In the case of Javed, the authority's justification was that he was not responding to a series of emails, notices, and the final notice stated that if you do not do so, it will be acted upon. Keeping opinions and prejudices aside, they have gone to court, and if the court deems it appropriate that it has been done illegally and with the intention of harassing a few people, the court will take a call on it.

Officials have said that these demolitions are being done because of illegal construction. Whereas many activists say these demolitions are being done because it is a crackdown on dissent and activism. 

India curbing freedom?

 As far as the law is concerned, no law allows demolition without adequate notice. Second, the law does not allow the state to take any action in response to certain demonstrations by members of the Muslim community. These two aspects are very important to note. India is still a democracy and people have the right to peaceful protest, which is guaranteed under the constitution under the broader right to life. Hence, there is room for dissent. You can criticize and disagree with the government. Every time when you disagree with the government, if the government is only resorting to using police force to retaliate to invoke animosity, provocation, and bulldozing over people's houses, then I understand that India is falling far short of democracy. This is the critical problem we are facing here. In terms of law, this is in fact against constitutional values ​​and is against legislation that provides the proper due process. Do you see the right to hearing and the various other rights that are part of the principles of natural justice being offered? In most of these cases, none of them are being complied with. Various people whose houses have already been demolished, do not know the reason for what particular protest, on the basis of which participation and on what day, the state has taken this action. So as far as the allegations are concerned, there is complete darkness. The price to be paid by those who are not yet guilty but only accused of certain crimes is quite high. They have only been displaced in a country that is not doing so on welfare measures, to begin with. And being evicted overnight for actions you even don't know about. What has been done is a tragedy. Global leaders, as well as world citizenry, need to take note of what is happening in India which is very scary and horrible for Indian Muslims.

Once I interviewed Afrin's younger sister, who is 19 years old. She has been living in this house all her life. The house was built 20 years ago. It was a gift from her grandfather to her mother and she tells me that for the last 20 years the family has been very diligent, regularly paying all their taxes like house tax, water tax and all its bills. The father has been charged with the crime while the mother owns the house. This is the number one discrepancy if the mother owns the house then why she is being punished when the father has no ownership rights over the house. Secondly, as a matter of argument, if there is in fact an illegal house, why are the establishment and the administration accepting all the house tax bills for 20 years? In all these 20 years, why was this illegality not considered until months ago? Thirdly, for the sake of argument, say that this is an illegal house and say that they were informed in advance, then, on the one hand, it is said that this house has been demolished because it is illegal. On the other hand, it is also said that these people disturbed the law. Police broke into the media, saying that they have played an important role in the disruption. So which one is right? Their houses were demolished because they were illegal or because they (people) were rioters? When you start saying that these people play a key role in violence and that is why we are doing it, you are effectively saying that this is a state's retaliation against its citizens. It's straight out of the Israeli playbook. I would like to reiterate that when Israel moves forward and demolishes houses, it does so in the occupied territories. It does not demolish houses against its own citizens. This is even worse. It is a state of retaliation against supposed citizens who have now become second-class citizens. (Fatima)

A letter was sent to the chief justice of India’s Supreme Court. There are six prominent former judges and six senior lawyers who are saying that the government in Uttar Pradesh state had acted illegally by demolishing the house of a Muslim activist following the protests. 

Role of judiciary:

This is a very important question and I think we must first look at the context in which judicial activity operates in India. It is important to note that the courts, in India, especially the Supreme Court, is a very interventionist and an active court. This is not a differential court. This is the context in which we are talking about the fact that we have a very active judiciary. If you look at how the judiciary is reacting to something that I would describe as a fundamental political crisis in modern India, I, as a lawyer, am absolutely concerned about the intervention of the judiciary and I'm not optimistic. Since 2014, the Supreme Court in particular has been very differential with respect to the central government. There are various tactics being adopted for not hearing cases against the government and not making negative remarks against the government in a series of cases. There are instances where there have been significant violations of rights and the government has supposedly been the culprit, but the courts have refused to look into it. This is the context in which we have been talking since 2014 in which we have to decide whether we should be optimistic about the courts and I would not think so considering the series of court rulings over the years. If you look at the various rulings, you will see that the court has been very active in declaring aspects of civil liberties. For example, we have the ruling that adultery is no longer a criminal offense. We have a ruling that states that punishment that prohibits unnatural sex is unconstitutional. But when it comes to solid political issues where the central government is at the helm of affairs and it is supposedly the culprit, the courts appear to be quite reluctant to intervene. Therefore, at this political juncture, I do not have any serious expectations from the Supreme Court or any other court.

What does growing religious intolerance mean for the future of India?

In the last eight years, India has really come to be an authoritarian nation that most of us do not even honestly recognize. It's heartbreaking. But at the same time, as journalists, it is our job to cover these shows day in and day out. This is one of the many issues of religious discrimination being meted out by the state. This effectively means that Muslims are then considered second-class citizens and in fact feel that they have no connection to their own country, the country they chose during the partition in 1947 and did not go to Pakistan. Today, 75 years later, when such things happen and they are not safe in their homes because they do not know when it will be raised to the ground; when hijab-wearing girls would not be allowed in their schools and colleges in Karnataka, and when mob lynching and cow gallenism will become common. Effectively, all of this makes you at least less optimistic about this country, especially the Muslims. I cannot tell you how many Muslims have left this country in the last five years or who are thinking of leaving this country because it has become so difficult to live here as a dignified and equal citizen.

There have been protests held in several cities against two former officials of the BJP who had made remarks about the prophet Muhammad which many considered offensive. Prime Minister Modi has thus far kept silent on remarks. 

Modi's silence?

Nupur Sharma was sacked by the BJP and it could not be could not be done without the consent of the Prime Minister as his reputation in the Middle East and Arab world is high and he has made a great influence in the region be it Israel or Saudi Arabia. So if there are other people besides Nupur Sharma who have made remarks against the prophet, I am not aware of it. It must be true. There are many reasons why India has made so much progress in the last few years, there has been no discrimination. This rise of Hinduism is certainly troubling because it is a new phenomenon and it has latent fears for minorities like Muslims. It is natural that they are anxious and it intensifies when they see that none of their MLAs and MPs are elected. Whenever a small remark is made about a population of 1.3 billion, it is as if the whole nation is against Muslims. On the ground, I still feel that we may go along with the beauty. About these riots, when are said to be protests, you must see the extent of stones pelted out of the mosque on a special day at a certain time. People came with stones and started throwing and injuring people and vehicles and policemen. It is also a matter of concern for the neutral citizen as he knows that the Prophet's mark was made by a BJP whose activities were excluded.

Subscribe to our website and allow notifications for more in-depth articles.