The Karnataka government's decision, in principle, to seek a ban on the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) and its parent organisation, the Popular Front of India (PFI), after gathering evidence on their activities will be the first time, the state will be approaching the Centre to initiate action against such radical groups.
Official sources said no time frame has been set by the government for the police to submit evidence on both the outfits. The Union Ministry of Home Affairs is the empowering authority before whom the cases have to be recommended, while the legal recourse for the outfits to challenge any decision on the ban are the courts. According to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs official website, there are 41 organisations which have been banned under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act , 1967 so far.
The SDPI and PFI had come under the previous government’s scanner following incidents in the coastal belt. But the process to seek their ban did not happen due to various reasons. However, after the attack on Congress MLA Tanveer Sait in November 2019, followed by violence during the anti Citizenship Amendment Act protests in Mangaluru in December in which two persons died in police firing, Home Minister Basavaraj Bommai had made a statement in the Legislative Assembly, in January, of banning the SDPI which was a suspect in both the incidents. The recent violence in Bengaluru’s DJ Halli, which led to the death of at least four persons, and the arrest of SDPI members has the BJP government once again seeking its ban.
According to political analyst Harish Ramaswamy, “Banning an organisation or a group is not the solution because there are multiple ways by which these people can come back. We need to make them understand that they are not discriminated against - ensuring equality and keeping up the Constitutional promises. There is a feeling among the minorities that they do not have equal opportunity. One way of doing it is by giving them a positive assurance in terms of language and action.”
Harish Ramaswamy further added that there has to be inclusive development. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has spoken of ‘sab ka saath, sab ka vikaas’, but there will be peripheral elements in parties, who create problems. The Sachar Committee report on minorities mentions that the minorities are living in conditions that are worse than the SCs and the STs - the Caste Census leaked in Karnataka puts their population as second only to SCs and STs.
“But the question is, are the states sharing power and public space with them? There is a feeling that minorities are not selected for jobs or not given positions they rightfully deserve. All these affirmative actions can help one quell these outbursts of violence which is condemnable and by these positive actions one can overcome their anger and make our society inclusive,'' he added.
Supreme Court senior advocate and Congress party's spokesperson Brijesh Kalappa, supporting the ban, said the Centre need not wait for any recommendations from states to ban radical groups and organisations. “Why is Prime Minister Narendra Modi allowing the SDPI or the All India Majlis-e- Ittehadul Muslimeen to thrive? He can suo motu ban them. After the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, then Home Minister Sardar Vallabhai Patel banned the RSS immediately without waiting for any recommendation,” he maintained.
Karnataka state SDPI president Elyas Muhammed Thumbe said if the state government was seeking to ban the SDPI, the same yardstick should be applied to the Congress as the majority of those involved in the DJ Halli violence were from that party. “The SDPI was accused of 27 political murders in the coastal belt which has come down to 13 after police investigations and even in these, some were done by the right wing groups due to family disputes or mistaken identity. Political murders is a decorative metaphor used against us to cover up for others lapses. All parties are swinging their swords at us,'' he alleged.
A few of the founders of PFI, including E Abubacker and P Koya, were also founding members of the outlawed Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) in 1977 in Aligarh Muslim University, Uttar Pradesh. Most of the office-bearers of the PFI, including members of the current leadership, have had an association with SIMI before it was banned.
The Rashtriya Swayam Sevak (RSS) has been banned several times. It was first banned by the British and later after the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, and during the Emergency. Sardar Vallabhai Patel as Home Minister in Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's cabinet initiated the ban on the RSS in February 1948 which was revoked in July 1949. The ‘Iron Man’ as he was called, Patel wrote to the RSS explaining the reasons why he was banning it
The Vishwa Hindu Parishad, a socio-cultural organisation, whose founding fathers were RSS leaders MS Golwalkar and SS Apte was also banned after the Babri Masjid demolition, which was revoked a year later, reimposed in 1995 and subsequently lifted.
The Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) founded in Aligarh in 1977 was banned for two years in 2001, also after the 9/11 terror attack in the United States. Though the ban was lifted temporarily in 2008, it was extended for another five years in 2019.
The Popular Front of India was banned by the Kerala government in 2012 for allegedly spreading hate against people from the North East in the wake of Assam riots leading to mass exodus of these people from states down south.
Shortly after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992, the Narasimha Rao government banned Bajrang Dal as some members of this group had participated in the demolition. The ban was revoked a year later.
Naheed Ataulla is a journalist who has covered Karnataka politics for over two decades, and is a former Political Editor of The Times of India.