M. M Khajooria
A needless and unsavory controversy was raging in the media on the ‘issue’ of Hindu Chief Minister for Jammu and Kashmir state. It is sickening to find responsible political beings belonging to mainstream parties recklessly going communal on a constitutional matter subject to democratic process in a secular India . Ironically, the controversy was initiated by a television interview the PHE Minister Sham Lal Sharma of the Congress Party in which he raised the question of a Hindu Chief Minister . “The constitution” he argued does not debar anyone the privilege provided the legislature party elects him”. Right. But under the Constitution of the Secular, Democratic, Socialist Republic of India caste, creed and religion were totally irrelevant for the purpose of holding any elective office. So let his favourite person get elected to the Legislative Assembly and be elected as the leader of the majority party. Then the Governor will have no option but to invite him to form the government be he a Hindu, Budhist, Sikh, Jain or Muslim. Of course this is elementary. But a reminder seems to be in order.
Till the other day this country was ruled by a Sikh Prime Minister (for two consecutive terms), the External Affairs Minister was a Muslim, MoS External Affairs was a Sikh. Even the main spokesperson of the ministry was and is a Muslim. Deputy Chairman of the Planning commission was a Sikh. The Chief of the Army Staff was a Sikh and the Defence Minster a Christian. The head of the premier intelligence agency is a Muslim. We have had Muslim Presidents of the Republic and Vice Presidents. The present incumbent of the high office of Vice President is a Muslim. Rajasthan, Maharahtra and Bihar had the privilege of electing Muslim Chief Ministers. Field Marshall Manekshaw belonged to the tiny minority of Parsis. The instances can be multiplied. The nation did not confer upon them these high and sensitive positions because they professed any particular religion but because they were eminent Indians who had excelled in their respective fields and were considered as best suited to lead the nation or hold the crucial public assignments. Considerations of religious denominations in such matters were repugnant to the very idea of India and concept on India nation hood. I was particularly shocked to read the statement of Prof Saif ud din Soz, whom I personally hold in high esteem, in which he adopted an ambivalent stance by referring to the Muslim majority character of the State. Happily, the latest statement of Ghulam Nabi Azad states the position of his party in this regard unambiguously and firmly.
Addressing a workers convention in Shangus, Anantnag District, Peerzada Mansoor, the PDP MLA was reported to have said “There are certain parties which are trying to forge an alliance with communal elements and want to impose Hindu Chief Minister here”. “But” he thundered ” let me make it clear that J and K is a Muslim majority State and can be ruled by only Muslim Chief Minster” He further stressed that . “Installation of Hindu Chief Minister will prove detrimental for the political resolution of Kashmir.” Fortunately, the PDP leadership was quick and categorical in firmly stating their take on the issue. “PDP does not believe that religion is the deciding factor while electing a Chief Minister. It is the merit and popularity of the candidate that decide it”. Declared Nayeem Akhtar, the party Chief Spokesperson. (PTI.)He said “People of J and K need no certificate for their secular credentials as they have proved it time and again. People of Kashmir have been electing Pandit MLAs while Mufti Mohd Syed was elected from R S Pura (In Jammu District). These are hard facts integral to our composite culture, social ethos and secular conviction. Unfortunately, his comments on the statement of MLA Shangus did not gel with the party’s categorical assertion.
It would be naive to expect the separatists not utilise the controversy to further their own agenda. But as far as mainstream parties are concerned, all talk about religion as even remotely relevant for the election of the next or any future Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir must end here and now.
Looking back I do recall that in the year of My Lord 1963 a Hindu from Jammu almost made it to the Prime Minister Gaddi in the post independence era. Bakshi Ghulam Mohd had just returned from Delhi after scoring a self goal by submitting his uncalled for
resignation as Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir under ‘the Kamraj Plan. After the ‘BAKSHI SAHIB ISTEEFA WAPIS LO, NEHRU JI PHIR SOCHO’ ploy failed to click, Bakshi started short listing his possible successors. Imagine whose name was on the top, Lala Dina Nath Mahajan, a highly respected social activist, an outstanding lawyer and a senior Minister in his Cabinet. Pressures mounted by the other aspirants and ministerial
colleagues failed to make him budge. I was then posted as Superintendent of Police CID (Special Branch), with the whole State as my jurisdiction. SP SB was Prime Ministers’ intelligence resource person. In that capacity I was required to brief him about the
situation in the State every morning. I was personally acquainted with him as a student and youth leader. I therefore not only knew what was going on but in a way was sucked into the process. Bakshi was with great difficulty
persuaded to consult Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru before taking any precipitate action. And Panditji up set the apple cart. It was no secret Nehru wanted Sadiq to take over. Bakshi was
unwilling to oblige. Finally non-controversial Shamash-ud- Din of Anantnag ascended the throne. Fate, however willed otherwise. The theft of MOAI MUQADUS and the massive agitation that fallowed ended up easing Shamash ud Din out and installing G. M Sadiq as the Prime Minster. Lala ji, missed the bus.