The experience of minorities around the world suggests a pattern of discrimination and insecurity. They are even subjected to genocide and denied dignity, identities, and cultures. Bangladesh is no exception, where minorities form roughly 9 per cent of its 170-million population.

The recent reported attacks on religious minorities in Bangladesh after the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League government on August 5 have reignited debates on minority rights in the country. The arrest of Chinmoy Krishna Das, a Hindu monk, on sedition charges and later denial of bail to him has amplified concerns about the treatment of minorities in the country.

Advertisement

The violent protests against Sheikh Hasina’s government had begun in July, in response to the reinstatement of a quota system by the High Court that reserves 30 per cent of government jobs for children of freedom fighters of the 1971 War of Independence. With rising un employment and high demand for government jobs, the quota was perceived by students as favouring supporters of the Awami League party. Though the Supreme Court eventually reduced this quota to 5 per cent, the protests continued unabated, demanding justice for those who were killed, injured, and arrested during the protest. According to a United Nations (UN) Human Rights Office report, nearly 400 people were reportedly killed between July 16 and August 4, while around 250 deaths were reported following the new wave of protests between August 5 and 6.

The protesters forced Sheikh Hasina to resign as Prime Minister on August 5. She fled to India about an hour before mobs stormed her official residence. This was followed by the formation of an interim government on August 8 headed by Nobel Laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus and backed by the army. The caretaker government also enjoys the support of the protesting students, opposition leaders, civil society organisations, and advocacy groups. Ever since the ouster of Sheikh Hasina, her supporters and religious minorities have faced mounting threats and attacks by mobs with little or no resistance from police and security forces.

Cases of arson and looting of minorities’ homes and shops, and vandalism and desecration of their places of worship have been reported. Sheikh Hasina was largely perceived to be representing a secular government under which Hindus and other religious minorities felt more protected in comparison to previous military regimes or BNP-Jamaat governments when attacks on minorities had notably increased. The Bangladesh Hindu Bud dhist Christian Unity Council, a minority rights group, claimed that there were more than 200 incidents of communal violence targeting minorities in around 52 odd districts between August 4 and August 20.

The Council asserted that the killings of nine Hindu men and 69 attacks on places of worship were part of a wave of anti-Hindu communal atrocities. However, the interim government has refuted these claims as exaggerated and often fake and part of a larger conspiracy to undermine it. The interim government later acknowledged 88 incidents of violence against minorities, primarily Hindus, but stated that they were inadvertently caught up in the wider political unrest following the fall of Hasina’s government. Some fact checkers, like Netra News, have also asserted that the killings were “politically and personally motivated, not religiously driven.”

Amid conflicting reports, it is difficult to ascertain whether the attacks against minorities were driven by their religious identity or because of their political affiliation with the Awami League government. Most probably, it may be a mix of both. Bangladesh represents a unique case of how a state founded on the principle of secularism soon abandoned the same to embrace Islam as the state religion. Bangladesh began its constitutional journey in 1972, recognising secularism along with nationalism, democracy, and socialism as core foundational principles of the state and its legal system. Though the constitution did not recognise any special safeguards for minorities, it contained multiple provisions, especially the fundamental rights guarantees, which were considered vital for safeguarding their interests and rights.

After recognising secularism as a fundamental principle of state policy in article 8, the constitution outlined its essential ingredients in article 12, eliminating communalism in all its forms, preventing the state from granting political status to any religion, prohibiting abuse of religion for political purposes, and proscribing discrimination or persecution of individuals based on their religious practices.

The principle of secularism has been complemented in article 41 guaranteeing every citizen the right to profess, practice, or propagate any religion, along with the right to establish, maintain, and manage their own religious institutions. It also safeguards students against attending religious instruction or participating in ceremonies related to a religion other than their own. The constitution also allows every citizen the freedom to live according to the separate personal laws that govern the institutions of marriage, divorce, dower, maintenance, guardianship, custody, and inheritance, as well as all other family matters.

Discrimination by the state against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth is prohibited by article 28(1), besides the state’s responsibility under article 23A to safeguard and promote the unique cultures and traditions of different tribes, ethnic groups, and communities. Notwithstanding these constitutional safeguards, minorities in Bangladesh have suffered discrimination and persecution with the country gradually drifting towards the Islamisation of the polity, especially during the military regimes of Ziaur Rahman (1975-1981) and H M Ershad (1982-1990). While Zia scrapped secularism and declared ‘absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah’ as a new constitutional principle, Ershad declared Islam as the state religion, making the minorities more vulnerable.

Though secularism was restored in the constitution in 2011, Islam remains the state religion even today. Political instability in any country severely undermines the position of minorities as it makes it easier for both governments and societies to scapegoat them. The current developments unfolding in Bangladesh are not a good sign either for its minorities or India. With fundamentalist forces gaining ground and the situation remaining volatile, the safety and security of minorities and protecting Bangladesh’s secular image must be the prime concern. Politicising minority rights abuses in Bangladesh in India will have cascading effects.

The concern about reported attacks on minorities is legitimate and ge nuine, but exaggerating the scale and intensity of these incidents to peddle anti-Muslim sentiments in India would delegitimise and undermine the actual concerns of minorities in Bangladesh, which we intend to protect. The ouster of Sheikh Hasina has significant political and security implications for India, with which it shares the longest land border. She has been a valuable ally and helped India combat the insurgency in its turbulent north-eastern region by eradicating training camps in Bangladesh used by separatists. The grant of asylum to Sheikh Hasina by India has strengthened a widespread belief in Bangladesh that India propped up her increasingly authoritarian rule, causing a rise in anti-India sentiments. India will need to recalibrate its relations with Bangladesh’s interim government to prevent the opening of another security front along with China and Pakistan.

The Indian government must ensure that its soil is not used by Hasina for her political pursuits. Any mishandling of the situation would further alienate Bangladesh, which has been India’s most valuable ally in the subcontinent. The Indian Foreign Secretary, Vikram Misri, who visited Bangladesh on December 9, reiterated India’s commitment to strengthening ties with the interim government while raising concerns over attacks against religious minorities and their places of worship.

(The writer is Professor and Chairman, Department of Strategic and Security Studies at Aligarh Muslim University)