Communal Violence in 2016 in India - a report by CSSS
Communal Violence in 2016
By CSSS team: Irfan
Engineer, Neha Dabhade and Suraj Nair
India continued
to be confronted with the menace of communal violence in the year 2016. The
Centre for Study of Society and Secularism (CSSS) monitors communal violence tracking
5 newspapers in two languages – English and Urdu. Some newspaper reports were
then cross checked with web portal TwoCircles.net. The newspapers monitored
were Mumbai editions of The Times of
India, The Indian Express, The Hindu, Inquilab and Sahafat.
Violence is a
broad term which encompasses in its ambit communal attitudes or symbolic
violence, structural violence and physical attacks resulting in injuries,
deaths or loss of property. However, the present report is limited to physical
violence wherein communal hatred motivates attacks on members of a community only
on the basis of their religious identity. The report excludes primarily ethnic
violence with communal overtones as, for instance, in Manipur. This report does
not include inter-sect or inter denominational violence, for instance within
the Muslim community in Kalyan between Barelvis and Salafis on 28th
December.
Every year CSSS
reports communal violence on basis of data and figures released by National
Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). However
neither the NCRB nor the Ministry of Home Affairs has released data on communal
violence for the year 2016. There is usually a huge gap between the communal
violence reported by the media and the data of communal violence gathered by
the NCRB and MHA. For instance, in the year 2015, according to the Home
Ministry data, there were 751 incidents of communal violence in which 97 people
died and 2264 were injured. Whereas the 5 newspapers mentioned above, reported only
47 incidents in the same year in which 15 lives were lost and 272 suffered
injuries.
The MHA data for
the year 2016 is available only till the month of May. According to MHA data,
upto May 2016 there were 278 incidents of communal violence in which 38 lives
were lost and 903 were injured. The state wise break of the MHA data on
communal violence in the year 2016 till May is as under:
States
|
Incidents
|
Killed
|
Injured
|
||||
Assam
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
||||
Bihar
|
23
|
0
|
85
|
||||
Chhattisgarh
|
1
|
0
|
3
|
||||
Delhi
|
4
|
0
|
16
|
||||
Gujarat
|
16
|
3
|
38
|
||||
Himachal
Pradesh
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
||||
J
& K
|
4
|
0
|
4
|
||||
Jharkhand
|
12
|
5
|
76
|
||||
Karnataka
|
40
|
4
|
116
|
||||
Kerala
|
3
|
0
|
3
|
||||
Madhya
Pradesh
|
35
|
2
|
110
|
||||
Maharashtra
|
40
|
4
|
127
|
||||
Manipur
|
4
|
3
|
58
|
||||
Odisha
|
2
|
0
|
26
|
||||
Rajasthan
|
16
|
1
|
20
|
||||
Tamil
Nadu
|
3
|
0
|
3
|
||||
Telangana
|
3
|
1
|
6
|
||||
Uttrakhand
|
2
|
0
|
7
|
||||
Uttar
Pradesh
|
61
|
13
|
185
|
||||
West
Bengal
|
7
|
2
|
18
|
||||
Total
|
278
|
38
|
903
|
||||
Source:
Statement referred to in reply to part (a to c) of Lok Sabha starred question
N0. 35 for 19.07.2016. Showing number of communal incidents, persons
killed/injured therein in 2016 (upto May)
For the sake of
analysis in this study we refer only to the aforesaid newspapers and we compare
it with newspaper reports of communal violence in 2015.
According to the
data from the aforesaid newspapers, in the year 2016, there were 62 incidents
of communal violence as compared to 47 incidents in 2015. In 2016, 8 deaths
were reported in the newspapers against 15 deaths reported in the same
newspapers in 2015. 435 injuries were reported in 2015 whereas the number of
injuries reported in 2016 is 676. 323 arrests were reported in 2015 in
comparison to 823 arrests reported in 2016.
Comparison between number of Communal Violence
Incidents, Deaths, Injuries and Persons Arrested in 2015 and 2016
[Table could not be inserted]
Communal violence 2016: Salient trends
Highest
incidents of communal violence in 2016 were reported from the poll bound state
of Uttar Pradesh (18 out of 62 incidents), followed by Bihar (10), Maharashtra
(8), Jharkhand (6) and Madhya Pradesh (5). These five states made up for nearly
76% of total incidents of violence reported in 2016.
State wise break up of number of communal incidents:
{Graph could not be inserted}
Prominent
scholars including Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer and Ashutosh Varshney described communal
violence primarily as an urban phenomenon. We observe communal violence
increasingly spreading to rural areas as well. The data in 2016 shows that out
of 62 incidents of communal violence, 18 incidents took place in rural areas.
In 2016, Punjab
witnessed communal violence for the first time after the Khalistan related
extremism was neutralized. This time it was conflict between a section of Muslim
and Hindu communities. The local Sikhs were in support of the Muslims. West
Bengal is witnessing steady rise in communal violence after near riot free
regime during the Left Front rule (24, 16 and 27 in the years 2013, 2014 and
2015 respectively according to Home Ministry data for those years).
Regime wise
analysis of the data shows that almost 40.3% of incidents of communal violence
were reported from states ruled by BJP which made up for 50% of the states
where communal violence took place. 4.8% incidents of communal violence were
reported from Karnataka ruled by Congress. Congress rules 8% of the states
where communal violence was reported. Lastly, 54.8% incidents were reported
from states ruled by parties other than Congress and BJP and they ruled in 42%
of states where incidents of communal violence were reported.
Regime wise comparison of number of incidents of
communal violence
{Graph could not be inserted}
The major triggers
of communal violence in 2016 have been festivals like Muharram and Durga Puja. The
second major trigger of violence was social media. While posts in social media were
used as triggers in 7 cases of incidents of communal violence, it was used as a
platform and tool of mobilization in other incidents too like Peda in Bijnor,
UP.
The response of
the police during communal violence has been wanting. The police took preventive
action only in 3 out of 62 incidents reported. The police failed to respond
effectively in BJP as well as non BJP/Congress ruled states.
Growing incidents
of communal violence is increasingly normalizing violence in the society. Citizens
are becoming indifferent to communal violence. In such a scenario and taking
into consideration the above trends, it can be gauged and predicted that
communal violence as a phenomenon in the society will continue and there is no
end to it in immediate future or short term.
Communal violence Analysis:
As mentioned
earlier, the states that have reported the highest incidents of communal
violence are UP, Bihar, Maharashtra, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh. Together
they account for 47 out of 62 incidents of communal violence, constituting 75.81%
of total incidents of communal violence.
Uttar Pradesh is
slated for Assembly elections in 2017. It has been generally observed by many
social scientists that impending elections and political mobilization
strategies tend to be along caste and communal fault lines contributing to
communal polarization and communal violence.
Bihar has
witnessed increasing incidents of communal violence after coalition of JD(U)
and BJP split in 2013. Maharashtra which falls in the West zone has been always
prone to communal riots.
Communal
violence in 2016 claimed 8 lives. 7 out of the 8 deceased were Muslims and the
community of the remaining one deceased was not specified.
Zone wise analysis:
Zone wise
analysis shows that the North zone of the country has reported highest
incidents of violence – 42 incidents were reported in the North zone. West zone
reported 12 incidents, while South and East zone each reported 4 incidents.
North zone includes Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Punjab and
Rajasthan. The West zone consists of Maharashtra and Gujarat. The South zone
comprises of states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka while the East zone comprises
of the states of West Bengal and Chhattisgarh. The North and West zone which is
generally referred to as the cow belt for higher reverence of cows has
traditionally been the hot site of communal violence.
Zone wise breakup of incidents of communal violence:
{Graph could not be displayed}
Triggers of communal violence:
A number of
communal incidents took place because of the clash of Muharram and Durga Puja
being on the same day. Stone pelting and tensions were experienced during the
processions. Festivals and desecration of places of worship and sacred symbols were
exploited to trigger communal violence. In Deoband, UP, locals found vandalised
idols in a temple on 27th July. Suspect belonging to the Muslim
community was caught and beaten up by locals before he was handed over to the
police. Officers claimed Sadik appeared to be mentally-challenged. Though the
gates of a religious structure of his community was found damaged late at
night, police acted proactively and repaired the gates in the night itself and
the situation was under control. In Shahabad, Karnataka, a youth called Shiva
posted an inflammatory post on facebook against the Muslim community and was arrested
for the same. Next day a Dussehra cut out was found desecrated. Rama Sene and
VHP tried to exploit this incident to fan communal violence. The Muslims were
being blamed for desecration and hurting the sentiments of the Hindus. This
misinformation was spread to apparently secure the release of Shiva. Later it
was found that some Hindu youth had desecrated the Dussehra cut off. The police
arrested 5 Hindus and one Muslim in this case and prevented riots on a large
scale.
Festival
processions and Social Media were used as trigger events of communal violence. Social
media posts triggered off 7 incidents of communal violence. Derogatory posts
about Prophet Mohammad or Hindu Gods/Goddesses or other community were
circulated on social media like facebook and whatsapp which triggered off
violence. In one such instance in Sagar situated in Madhya Pradesh, a nephew of
an RSS member was found guilty of posting objectionable post. One Muslim youth
lost his life and 3 were injured in the violence that ensued in Ilambazar in
West Bengal. 21 incidents took place during festivals of Durga puja, Muharrum,
Ganpati procession, Hanuman jayanti and Eid-e- Miladun. Festival related
incidents were reported highest in UP (8) followed by Bihar (4), Jharkhand (3),
Maharashtra, West Bengal and Karnataka reporting two each.
Losses and Damages suffered in communal violence:
Muslims suffered
more in terms of deaths, injury and damage of property. They also suffered more
in terms of coercive force used by the state as a riot control measure, post
riot arrests, and launching of prosecutions. Out of 62 incidents, in 12
incidents religion wise disaggregated data of arrests was available. In these
12 incidents, 178 arrested were Muslims and 75 were Hindus.
In the case of
injuries, religion wise disaggregated data was available in 5 incidents. In these
five incidents, 46 injured were Muslims and 11 were Hindus. In terms of deaths,
religion wise disaggregated data was available in 4 incidents. 7 deaths were those
of Muslims. In the case of damage to properties, disaggregated data was available
in 3 incidents for vehicles, 6 belonged to Muslims and none to Hindus. In the
cases of houses attacked, disaggregated data was available in 3 incidents – 1 house
belonged to Hindu and 67 belonged to Muslims. Disaggregated data was available
in 3 incidents for shops attacked – 3 houses belonged to Hindus and 56 belonged
to Muslims. These figures strike one as
odd since the arrests indicate that the Muslims are perpetrators in the
communal violence. But if this was the case, then the victims ought to have
been the Hindus which should have reflected in the figures related to the
number of deaths, injuries, houses/ shops/ vehicles attacked. But the figures
tell a different story where major loss has been borne by the Muslims. Communal
violence is a double whammy for the Muslim community as targets of violence as
well as the consequent police actions. That is why there is no effective
deterrence against communal violence.
Regime wise comparison of arrests, injuries and
deaths of Hindus and Muslims
{Graph could not be displayed}
Regime wise comparison of property – Vehicles,
Houses and Shops attacked of Hindus and Muslims
{Graph could not be displayed}
Regime wise analysis:
6 out of 12
states where communal violence was reported are under BJP rule, one under
Congress and 5 under other parties.
40.3% of
incidents of communal violence were reported from states ruled by BJP comprising
of 26% of the total population. 4.8% incidents of communal violence were
reported in states ruled by Congress which constitute for 3% of the total
population. 54.8% incidents were reported from states ruled by parties other
than Congress and BJP comprising of 72% of the population.
Regime wise comparison of percentage of incidents
and percentage of population of states:
No. of states ruled by BJP, Congress and Others
where incidents of communal violence took place
{Graph could not be displayed}
It has been
observed from the data and number of incidents reported that in BJP ruled
states, there is low intensity communal violence. There are no deaths but higher
number of injuries (446) in 25 incidents. The number of deaths is low so as to
not attract undue media attention or criticism from international organizations
but communal violence is allowed to brew sub radar. This sub radar communal
violence is used to impress upon the Muslims that they are second class
citizens. The higher number of incidents is also because that the perpetrators
didn’t anticipate punitive action against them.
The Congress
government in Karnataka was successful in preventing a riot in Shahabad where one
Muslim and five Hindus were arrested (referred to above). In 2015, the media reported three incidents of
communal violence in Karnataka and in 2016 also this number has remained the
same suggesting no increase in the number of communal incidents.
The role of non
BJP and non Congress governments has been distressing. The Samajwadi Party government
in UP has failed to check communal violence though electoral calculations
should require it to prevent communal violence. Communal violence benefits BJP
as seen in 2014 general elections post Muzzafarnagar riots. However the role of
the Hindu nationalist actors can’t be ruled out given the hate speeches. The
Samajwadi party led government in spite of booking persons allegedly involved
in communal violence under the National Security Act and giving compensation to
survivors of communal violence has by and large failed to prevent or contain
communal violence. It was able to avert one incident of communal violence in
Shahjahanpur due to active intervention of the police.
The Mamta
Banerjee led government in West Bengal has also failed to arrest communal
violence which has undermined the secular Bengali identity and helped emergence
of a stronger Hindu identity amongst the Hindus in West Bengal. The failure to
check communal violence can be attributed to either the lack of intention to prevent
or contain communal violence or the ability to prevent/ contain it. However the
BJP stands to benefit from the communal violence in West Bengal due to the
polarization it achieved. Bihar government prevented one riot in Bettiah.
How were riots dealt with?
Ruling regimes are
able to exert tight control on the state police as they determine postings/
transfers and promotions of the police personnel. There is little incentive to the
police to act independently and uphold law and order even when it goes against
the political interests of the ruling party. The police action (or inaction)
during riots is largely determined either by their own biases and prejudicial
attitudes or due to political pressure exerted. It is important to examine the
role of police at three different stages of communal violence – prevention,
control during riots and post riot actions. We here examine the role of police
at all three stages in BJP, Congress and non-BJP/non-Congress ruled states.
The police were
able to prevent only 3 incidents of communal violence and all three states were
ruled by non-BJP governed states (Bihar, Karnataka and UP).
At the stage of
riot control, the action of police has been inadequate in all states except
Karnataka. The observation is based on comparison of religion wise arrests and
victim community. In BJP ruled states, religion wise disaggregated data is
available in 5 incidents. Out of 189 people arrested in the BJP ruled stated
for which religion wise disaggregated data is available, 18 arrested were
Hindus and 171 arrested were Muslims even though the victims were by and large
Muslims (see the graphs). In case of states ruled by the non BJP and non
Congress governments, religion wise disaggregated data is available in 6
incidents. There were 52 arrests of Hindus (51 from UP alone) and 6 arrests of
Muslims. The victim community in these riots was Muslim.
70 police personnel
were also injured during the riots – 12 each in Umerkhed and Nandurbar. In all,
27 police personnel were injured in Maharashtra. 14 police personnel were injured
in Khodadadpur (UP). BJP ruled Maharashtra thus reports highest number of
injuries of the police.
Maharashtra
police has also arrested the highest number of Muslims – 156 (Badlapur 21,
Umerkhed 63 and Malkapur 72) out of 179 Muslims arrested in all the communal
riots. In Umerkhed for which religion wise disaggregated data is available, 25
Muslims were injured whereas no Hindus were killed or injured whereas 4 houses
were attacked whose community is not specified.
Comparison between no. of arrested from Hindu and
Muslim community from the three areas of Malkapur, Nandurbar and Umarkhed.
{Graph could not be displayed}
Comparison between no. of arrested and injured from
Hindu and Muslim community in Umarkhed
{Graph could not be displayed}
In Peda in
Bijnore, the police though didn’t respond in a timely manner which allowed the
communal violence to take place, the police later arrested 23 Hindus. National
Security Act was invoked against the accused 2 accused. In other incidents too,
UP Government has invoked draconian law – NSA. However that has not proved to be a deterrent
as high number of communal violence persists.
=============
For the original copy with all relevant graphs and figures, contact:
Irfan Engineer
Director,
Centre for Study of Society and Secularism
Call: +91-22-26149668 | Fax: +91-22-6100712
Director,
Centre for Study of Society and Secularism
Call: +91-22-26149668 | Fax: +91-22-6100712
Comments
Post a Comment