Minority, a relative term

But, the state’s Home minister, R R Patil, believes the definition of minorities is relative to geographical space and has nothing to do with Hindus, Christians, Muslims or Sikhs.
For example Hindus are in minority in states like Kashmir, Meghalaya or Nagaland and so are Marathi-speaking people minorities in Belgaum.

Talking to Deccan Herald, Patil, without naming BJP, caustically says that parties attacking the bill are harbouring, “myopic view and are probably scared of their own political strategies… and that’s why these parties are terming the proposed bill as dangerous, divisive and disastrous.”

“I don’t share the logic that Hindu community will suffer wave of persecution or for that matter the bill is anti-Hindu or anti-majoritarianist,” he says. When pointed out that BJP is also concerned about possible changes that may occur between Centre-State power structures, he admits, “True, the bill has certain inadequacies and that is why it is more important that we have a constructive debate rather than have damaging discussions based on a flawed logic and espouse volatile paranoia amongst people.”

“Here we have been thinking over it. Not just on the constitutional legalese involved in it but also on the necessity of the bill. After all it seeks to bring to book those who make lives of minorities… an everyday psychological and physical horror,” he notes.

“The proposed bill no doubt needs fine tuning but to condemn it as ‘dangerous,’ is sheer disinformation and a deliberate spreading of paranoia in the name of unity. The state-centre power relationship has to be deliberated over, but one cannot dismiss it outright," Patil points out, informing that very soon after deliberations Maharashtra government will be sending its suggestions to the Centre.

Related stories
Towards a riot-free India
An investment of diminishing returns
Anti-riot bill a dire necessity
Millennium’s dark decade