Communalism
On September 20, 2022, the government of Karnataka told the Supreme Court that Muslim girls in Udupi were goaded into wearing a hijab to school by the Popular Front of India (PFI) through social media messages. The state government made the argument while responding to a petition challenging the ban on wearing a hijab to school imposed by Karnataka, and upheld by the state high court. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the apex court that wearing a hijab was part of a ‘larger conspiracy’ orchestrated by the PFI to create social unrest.
On October 13 this year, the Supreme Court of India delivered a split verdict on pleas challenging the Karnataka high court order that had upheld the ban. A constitutional bench comprising the Chief Justice of India will now examine whether Muslim girls can or cannot wear a head scarf in school.
As on December 1 this year, there were 69,598 cases pending before the Supreme Court. Out of this, 488 matters are before constitutional benches, which means that they are being heard by five-, seven- or nine-judge benches. The backlog includes petitions challenging the Modi government’s Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019, pleas challenging the government’s decision to dilute Article 370 of the Constitution and petitions challenging the constitutional validity of demonetisation. All these pleas have been pending for more than two years. Despite the urgency of matters that have been placed on the back burner, the apex court is being forced to spend its time deciding whether schoolgoing Muslim girls can get an education while wearing a head scarf, a tradition some Muslims believe is integral to their faith.
The ban on wearing a hijab in classrooms may have highlighted the Karnataka government’s intolerance towards minorities, but the bias against the head scarf, it seems, is an old one. Muslim women who wear hijabs claim they are used to disapproving glares and people dismissing them as backward and uneducated.
by Seemi Pasha
21/12/2022
Why it leaves me, a Left-Liberal, at odds with me, a Progressive Muslim Javed Anand https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/supreme-court-verdict-on-hijab-split-wide-open-8207010/
Justice Dhulia noted the main thrust of his judgment was that the entire concept of essential religious practice was not essential to the dispute. The high court took a wrong path. According to him, it is ultimately a matter of choice and Articles 14 and 19. “The foremost question in my mind was the education of the girl child. Are we making her life any better?” He also held the view that the judgment in the Bijoe Emmanuel case “squarely covers the issue”. This refers to the 1986 ruling of the apex court that upheld the fundamental right of three school-going children from the Jehovah’s Witness sect to stand respectfully but not join others in singing the national anthem during the school assembly as it conflicted with the tenets of their faith. ..
The Liberal Me has no doubt that Justice Dhulia’s views are in consonance with constitutional values. But the Progressive Muslim Me fears that were a larger bench to subsequently rule accordingly, it would effectively strengthen the regressive sections among Indian Muslims...As is public knowledge, cutting across sectarian divides — Sunni, Shia, Barelvi, Deobandi, Wahhabi, Salafi, Maududian — virtually the entire Muslim clergy in India is of the view that hijab (niqab, burqa) is mandatory in Islam. The abstract principle of a woman’s freedom to choose, I fear, will feed into the it-is-mandatory argument; act as convenient cover for Islam’s patriarchs to keep, even push, women behind the veil...
Two, do Muslim girls studying in Muslim-run schools, 3-year-olds included, have the right to choose or they simply must conform?
In the event that the March order of the Karnataka High Court is struck down by a larger bench of the Supreme Court in the coming period, we might ponder on what students committed to Hindutva politics will make of the right to choose verdict. Classrooms becoming the new arena for competitive communalism? Muslim girls in hijab, Hindu boys in saffron scarves? Diversity, anyone?
Hijab Judgment of Supreme Court | सर्वोच्च न्यायालय का हिजाब पर फ़ैसला | Faizan Mustafa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83qGIZE0z70
Oct 14, 2022 Some comments on Youtube: Matir Manush We thank Dr. Faizan Mustafa as usual for his dedication to explain the matter of law to us with commitment and devotion. Justice Gupta expressed his opinion on the practice of Hijab with sincere reasoning. But we believe he failed to realize a simple matter.
Wearing Hijab is not harming or hurting anybody. It is not even disrupting the uniformity in the education places. But banning hijab is surely damaging one's freedom of personal choice. Banning hijab is shattering one's dream of education.
..justice Dhulia's verdict protect the integrity of our constitution. His judgement promotes the right of education of the girls. In other words the judgement of justice Dhulia is helping our girls to acquire knowledge which is very important for the nation. Our girls are a vulnerable group of people in the country. The judicial system should not and must not increase their vulnerability.
Rohit gupta New doctrines are laid down like trust doctrine, cross obligations and tolerance, laying down new dimensions of constitutional interpretation.
The question is of acoustomed to other way of living and there are countries, who have no school dress
Yazdy Palia I disagree with the line of reasoning. In their enthusiasm, the petitioner, the respondent and the judges, have not realised, that, the only issue in this case is
1. Does an institution, in India, has the right to frame their own rules?
2. Do the students and their supporters, have the right to impose their will on the institution created by individuals to educate children? It appears that all the three are competing with each other to violate fundamental rights.
[Hijab Case] Karnataka High Court judgment hurtful, deeply offensive: Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves argues before Supreme Court
.https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/hijab-case-karnataka-hc-judgment-hurtful-deeply-offensive-colin-gonsalves-argues-supreme-court "Parts of the judgment are deeply offensive to those who follow Islam, and it's contrary to at least three landmark judgments of this court", he said. He urged the court to consider remanding the case to the High Court for it to be heard again by a different bench reasoning that it did not conform to the kind of constitutional independence that it ought to have.
"I will show ten short points on how the judgment is on the perception of the majority. Where the minority point of view has been seen wrongly. It's basically a majoritarian judgment."
https://www.rediff.com/news/report/hijab-ban-we-are-not-interpreters-of-quran-says-sc/20220915.htm
The apex court, which was hearing arguments on a batch of pleas challenging the Karnataka high court verdict refusing to lift the ban on hijab in educational institutions of the state, made the observation after a counsel for one of the petitioners said the judgement under challenge is touching upon the Islamic and religious perspective.
"The one way is to interpret the Quran.... We are not interpreters of the Quran. We cannot do it and that is the argument raised also that the courts are not equipped to interpret religious scriptures," a bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia said.
The top court heard submissions of several lawyers, who appeared for the petitioners and argued on various aspects including the wearing of hijab being a matter of privacy, dignity and also autonomy, and whether the practice of wearing it is essential or not.
One of the advocates argued the way the high court interpreted the matter on Islamic and religious perspective was a 'wrong assessment'.
15/09/2022
read more
Hijab controversy now in Supreme Court | Prashant Bhushan | karnataka hijab news
13 Jul 2022
supreme court will hear the hijab issue next week as the judgement of Karnataka High Court Full Bench challenged by the petitioner which is delivered by Karnataka High Court in the hijab ban imposed by the Karnataka Government in educational institutions. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi.
controversy in karnataka | conspiracy to divide indian | protest over hijab
हिजाब मामले पर कर्नाटका हाईकोर्ट में सुनवाई
Subcategories
Hate Crime
Hate Speech / Incitement to violence
Hate Speech Maharashtra
PUCL Maharashtra has decided to showcase information on Hate Speech in Maharashtra as presented in the different websites, social media of Civil Society organisations and concerned individuals. Each one has their own style of documentation and each one is a shining node. We hope to have a decentralised platform which will valorise whatever work individuals an organisations are doing, such that while they do their regular work of posting, creating websites, blogs, data directories, such that it can be searched, and researched, and help activist (information activist, if you will) curate this content into learning modules, state of the art reports.. letting a thousand nodes glow.
250811-Jalgaon-lynching of Pathan after being seen with Hindu woman at cafe
A 21-year-old Muslim man was on Monday beaten to death allegedly by members of a Hindutva group in the town of Jamner in Maharashtra’s Jalgaon district. The perpetrators allegedly assaulted Suleman Rahim Khan Pathan after he was seen with a Hindu woman from the same village at a cafe
250114-Yavatmal
Two Muslim-owned restaurants in Wani, Yavatmal, were forcibly shut down by members of the Bajrang Dal
2501XX-Mumbai-Kurla
At the “Samrast Yatra” event in Kurla, Mumbai, organised by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal, a Jain monk disseminated hate speech rife with anti-Muslim propaganda.
250200-Rane
Rane’s speeches continued throughout the month of February, spreading more hateful conspiracy theories, and even suggesting that if Muslims “looked at Hindus in an incorrect manner,” they would face consequences. He stated that, “Our government is very bad. What is going on around I am aware of everything. You don’t have to struggle. Wherever something wrong is happening, wherever someone tries to slaughter a cow, wherever someone tries to smuggle, wherever green snakes try to wriggle, just make one call, and leave the rest of the arrangements to me., https://cjp.org.in/the-role-of-leaders-in-spreading-divisive-rhetoric/