THE Justice Somashekar Commission, set up to inquire into the sequence of events and circumstances leading to the attack on places of worship in Karnataka in 2008, exonerated the BJP State Government in Karnataka in its final report which was submitted and made public last week. The findings of the Somashekar Commission are important that they represent a black and white understanding of the debate on religious conversions.
For several years now, commentators of the left-liberal tendency have been eager to present attacks against religious minorities solely in terms of majoritarian violence perpetrated by elements affiliated to the Sangh. The Somashekar Commission squarely negates this static perspective and rightly identifies other events such as local groupism and competition in trade, political and economic activities which led to the attack. The contention that communal tension in itself was responsible for the attacks is not only revolting but also insulting to the intelligence of our society.
The Report absolves Hindus from having orchestrated the attacks. The Somashekar Commission has recorded in the clearest possible language that there is no basis to the apprehension of Christian petitioners that the mainstream Sangh or the BJP government in the State were directly or indirectly involved with the attacks.
Another important finding pertains to the circulation of derogatory literature with an insulting attitude towards Hindus as the reason for the attacks. This is significant because it establishes that demeaning and provocative literature was circulated by certain members of the Church and not by Hindus or affiliates of the Sangh organisations. The Report also points to the use of unaccounted local and foreign funds for the purpose of conversion by inducements. This charge is serious and must be investigated because if proved, it would demonstrate the direct or indirect involvement of foreign bodies in altering the religious demographics of the country.
Needless to say, some sections branded the report as directionless and pointed to the existence of a Hindu bias. These remarks are unfortunate and terribly short-sighted. It would appear to those critics that any report which does not damn the Sangh, smacks of a Hindu bias. As for direction, the Report has done well to detect the possibility of unaccounted external funding for the purpose of conversions as also identified that communal tensions cannot be provoked in a vacuum and are a product of several other socio-economic factors. In view of its catastrophic failure to have the Sangh Parivar indicted, it might be a good idea for the pseudo-secular crusaders to re-think and re-formulate their positions in the debate on religious conversion.
