New Delhi: The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has lauded the introduction of three new bills in Parliament to replace the colonial-era Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, and Indian Evidence Act. According to the Sangh’s English mouthpiece, Organiser, “anti-Bharat forces” will be upset by the “decolonisation of criminal codes” and must be exposed.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill (BSB) were introduced in the Lok Sabha 11 August and were referred to the Standing Committee on Home Affairs for examination.
Discussing the three bills, an editorial in Organiser said, “Some crucial proposals in these bills are stringent punishments for crimes against women, Love-Jihad-like crimes, and mob lynching. The Sedition Act will be replaced with provisions for criminalising the promotion of secessionism, separatism and armed rebellion, and other ‘subversive activities’ and ‘endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India’ etc…The act of terror is defined, and as per the new bills, all information-technology-based evidence will be considered valid.
“Not punishment, but the delivery of justice with a more sensitive, responsible and participatory approach seems to be the primary thinking behind this decolonisation of criminal codes. Naturally, some vested interests, including anti-Bharat forces, would be upset with this and should be exposed.”
The history of India’s science policies in the context of Chandrayaan-3, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s approach to foreign policy, the communal violence that erupted Haryana’s Nuh district on 31 July, the ethnic strife in Manipur, and the government’s new Vishwakarma scheme for artisans were among the other issues the Hindu Right press covered and commented on this past week.
‘C.V. Raman criticised Nehru’s science policies’
In an article in The Sunday Guardian written before the success of Chandrayaan-3, J. Nandakumar — the national convenor of Prajna Pravah, an RSS-affiliated organisation — criticised the Congress’s claim that the accomplishment was testament to the vision of India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru.
Nandakumar wrote that instead of focusing on excellence, Nehru promoted his “yes men” and allowed institutions to become bureaucratic cesspools. “Sir C.V. Raman was upset at the way the Nehru government was going ahead with its policy on scientific development in the country. Raman believed that Bharat could emerge as a major power in scientific research but feared that Nehru’s policies were adversely affecting its growth. He openly criticised Nehru’s policies on science administration and warned that this would lead to degradation of scientific institutions.
“Raman refused to be a member of the National Planning Commission, set up by Congress. Despite the invitation from the government, he did not join the Board of Scientific and Industrial Research. Interestingly, he did not attend the Bharat Ratna award ceremony,” Nandakumar wrote.
He also quoted Indian scientist Dhirendra Sharma, saying that much of the blame for this failure must be placed on two men who history has set on a high pedestal — Homi J. Bhabha, and his patron, Jawaharlal Nehru.
Also read: ‘India’ is a word linked with ‘slavery’, not identity— Hindu Right press on Opposition alliance
‘Like a pracharak’
Modi has brought his “expertise” as an RSS pracharak to foreign policy, political analyst Banu Nagrajan asserted in an Organiser article.
Referring to the buildup to the G20 summit this year, Nagarajan wrote, “[Modi’s] deep philosophical understanding of human nature through long years of organising and experience of governing are helping him to weave together the tapestry of events that not only places importance on the outward focus of India as a participant of a global event, but also as an inward focus of capacity building of citizens.”
He contrasted this with how events related to foreign affairs were conducted previously. “The usual elites gather in five star hotels in Delhi and dish out platitudes. It was as if only the elite could think about, opine on and find meaning in the utility of foreign policy. Now, democratisation of the event has raised possibilities of teasing out recommendations that are richer and more diverse.
“There was a time in the 2000s when there was a vigorous debate on India’s ‘strategic culture’ or the lack of it. Many theories were posited, such as how India was too poor to have a defined strategic culture; how Indian leaders have always focused more on internal cohesion…how we are not sophisticated enough to understand the nuances of other cultures etc. The debaters were mostly think tank snobs. (Their ability to explain, leave alone predict, global events, has been laid bare in the last decade or so.) That era is over.”
VHP on Nuh
The Vishva Hindu Parishad’s (VHP) magazine Hindu Vishwa carried an editorial on the violence in Nuh, advocating a “jihad-free” society.
“The manner in which the jihadis committed the misdeed of killing the pilgrims in Nuh, Haryana, is absolutely unforgivable,” the editorial said.
“Japan has even deprived them of citizenship. Declaring their mosques and madrassas as the base of jihad, the governments of many countries passed orders to demolish them and also demolished them.” It was perhaps referring to media reports that Islam was the fastest growing religion in Japan.
“India has been facing their tribal jihad continuously for 1,200 years. If their jihadi mentality was not there in this country, then, our governments would not have to spend huge amounts on the security of major institutions and places here…Several lakh crore rupees have been spent in Kashmir alone since 1986-87 due to mujahideens’ jihadi activities and are still being spent in many states,” it said.
Also read: ‘Islamism, wokeism’ threatening Europe’s liberalism — Hindu Right press weighs in on France riots
Manipur & narrative-building
In an article in Open magazine, RSS national executive member Ram Madhav argued that the ongoing strife in Manipur should not be considered a new occurrence, as the region has a history of conflict spanning both pre- and post-Independence periods.
“Manipur is a land of great patriots. Meiteis, Kukis and Nagas have produced countless people who served India in politics, the armed forces and the civil services. Of the over 200 martyrs of the Azad Hind Fauj at Moirang, more than 150 were Kukis,” Madhav wrote.
Drawing on his personal experience as the BJP’s Northeast in-charge, he wrote about the leadership dynamics in the region, particularly with regard to Manipur Chief Minister N. Biren Singh.
“…I had the opportunity to observe the leaders of the region from close quarters, including Biren Singh. Due to the fragile nature of the coalition and given the challenging internal situation that it inherited from the 15-year Congress rule, a leader who would be able to keep the alliance together and also manage the challenge from a strong Opposition was needed to head the coalition government. With his vast experience and contacts in the opposition camp, Biren Singh fitted the bill well and was chosen to become the 12th chief minister of the state,” he wrote.
Madhav argued that the Opposition’s efforts to project the current conflict in Manipur as a new phenomenon were misplaced. “The most important lesson is about narrative-building. Creating normalcy in Manipur depends on what narrative will be peddled. The Opposition seems determined to resort to a false narrative both inside Parliament and outside for its political benefit. It will perpetuate strife, and peace will elude Manipuris.”
On changing names
In an article in Dainik Jagran, BJP leader Hriday Narayan Dixit accused the Kerala government of hypocrisy with regard to the push to change the state’s name to Keralam. The state assembly had unanimously passed a resolution earlier this month urging the central government to change the name of the state officially.
“The fundamental question is why the so-called liberal-secular camp, which changes the names of institutions and centres in their respective regions, states, becomes aggressive on such proposals of nationalist thought,” Dixit wrote.
“Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath did not change the name of Allahabad city to Prayagraj in haste. Prayag is a well-established interstate cultural centre… These same elements created unnecessary hue and cry even after the Mughalsarai railway station in UP was named Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Junction. The so-called seculars object to every glorious memory associated with the life of the Hindu nation,” he wrote.
‘Bharatiya model of wealth creation’
Another Organiser editorial praised the Rs 13,000-crore Vishwakarma scheme, which the Union Cabinet approved this month. The scheme seeks to upskill and give financial support to traditional artisans and craftspeople.
The editorial said the philosophy behind the scheme was restoring the backbone of the “Bharatiya model of wealth creation”.
“The Western imitation in the name of socialism and then the market economy did not address the fundamental problems of the Bharatiya economy. The artisan communities and their innovations and ability to develop cooperative entrepreneurship have been the natural strengths of the Bharatiya economy that sustained as clusters despite the adverse policies,” it said.
(Edited by Smriti Sinha)
Also read: ‘Colonial construct’ of hills vs plains is cause of Manipur clashes, says Hindu Right press