Extreme acts require extreme responses punjab is right to make sacrilege punishable by life imprisonment

Extreme acts require extreme responses punjab is right to make sacrilege punishable by life imprisonment

Debate of any kind is, of course, an essential part of a healthy democracy. However, selective criticism defeats the very purpose of such debate. Unfortunately, what we are currently witnessing in Punjab, in the name of healthy debate on a subject of critical importance, is attributable to the latter category.

I am sure there is consensus on the fact that any attempt to divide the state on communal lines through defilement (Process of making unclean and impure) or attack on religious texts and institutions is not only abhorrent to the Indian psyche but a national security threat that needs to be dealt with an iron hand. Having said so, I am surprised at those who have reacted adversely to my government’s move to make such attempts punishable with life imprisonment. Evidently, they do not think dealing with an iron hand necessitates a strong penal measure like life imprisonment.

To them, and to other critics of our proposal to strengthen the punitive system to deal with such criminals, I would like to put a few questions.

First and foremost, do they not consider offenceaimed at destroying the peace and harmony of the state to be deserving the harshest punishment? Do they seriously believe that such offenders deserve leniency (Kind, gentle, or compassionate treatment especially towards someone who is undeserving of it.) in a nation that is founded on the pillar of secularism? Secondly, do they think the situation in Punjab is not extreme enough to warrant an extreme measure of the kind we have proposed? And finally, does protecting the secular character of our land amount to an attack on a particular religion, which is definitely not something any peace loving Indian can ever propound or promote?

Honest answers to these questions do not really require a detailed analysis of either the historical charter or the current situation in Punjab. A cursory examination would be enough to guide us towards finding the correct answers to these questions.

Punjab had witnessed several years of mayhem during the dark days of terrorism, that saw as many as 35,000 innocent people losing their lives to the senseless violence that had then become the norm rather than the exception. And mind you, all that happened in the name of religion and was unleashed by forces whose only agenda was to destroy the peace and harmony in the state.

What saddens and worries me is that similar attempts are now being made by certain sections to plunge the state once again into the cauldron of hatred and violence. And it is no secret that the hand behind this lies in neighbouring Pakistan, with whose law our proposed anti-blasphemy legislation is sought to be analogised by the handful of critics who obviously do not understand or relate to the problems of our state.

I still remember the early 1980s – in the days preceding the outbreak of terror in Punjab, when I rushed back to my parliamentary constituency of Patiala from Delhi on hearing the news of cigarette butts being found in a gurdwara and the ears of cows in a temple. It took only half an hour for the situation to flare up.

The same forces are manifestly at work once again to destroy the hard-earned peace in Punjab. The Justice Ranjit Singh Commission has found that in just three months, between September and December 2015, as many as around 60 cases of sacrilege (An act of great disrespect shown to God or to sacred ideas, people, or things.) were reported in Punjab. The total cases of sacrilege from January 2015 to March 2017 was 121. The legislation we have proposed will, in my opinion, go a long way in acting as an effective deterrent against violation of the holy texts of all religions, which is what the secular character of our nation provides for, and the Indian Constitution strives to uphold (Confirm or support (something which has been questioned).

One also needs to note that our amendment does not make unintentional acts punishable, but only targets deliberate acts aimed at creating religious tension in the state. At stake is the very future of the historic civilisation of our nation, and I, as chief minister of one of its states, will not allow our future to be destroyed by a handful of elements working on an agenda scripted by forces that are evidently inimical to our country.