LIMITS TO RIGHT TO PROTEST
by SALIL KADER
Two incidents involving the Muslim community in India made it to the headlines of national news recently. The first one was related to the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten publishing cartoons caricaturing Prophet Mohammed as a terrorist. The second was the desecration of the Holy Qur'an in Ladakh region in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Both incidents led to protests by the Muslim community against the disrespect shown to their Prophet and the Holy Qur’an. Nothing wrong with it. In fact the protests were justified. However, what raises doubts is the manner in which these protests were conducted. Lets look at both these incidents separately and see where the demonstrations went off the track.
To begin with, it has to be acknowledged that the cartoons published by Jyllands-Posten were in bad taste and bound to provoke even the least devout Muslim. The argument that the publication of these cartoons falls within the ambit of ‘freedom of expression’ or ‘right to freedom of press’ does not hold water. Caricaturing Muslims as terrorists and illiterate, camel-riding morons in films and cartoons is not new. This has been done in the past too, especially in the post-9/11 period. Such depictions never became a cause for demonstrations and street violence of the kind witnessed this time. So what got their goat? This time the cartoonist chose to use the image of Prophet Mohammed instead of the thawb wearing Arab. This depiction went against two very basic beliefs of Muslims across the world. First, Islam forbids any pictorial or facial depiction of the Prophet. Therefore, the cartoon showing the Prophet in human form was nothing but blasphemy for Muslims. Second, according to Islamic beliefs Prophet Mohammed is the ‘insaan-i-kaamil’ or the ‘Perfect Man’. Honesty, justness, gentlemanly conduct, and an impeccable moral make-up characterised the Prophet. He was a spiritual guide who led his followers by example. Today the faithful are exhorted to follow the Prophet’s ‘path’, the sunnah, and lead a life as shown by him. It is this revered figure that the cartoons in Jyllands-Posten depicted in a deprecating manner.
As news about the cartoons spread, Muslims throughout the world, especially in Islamic countries, voiced their protest against this affront to their belief and their Prophet. The expression of these protests took various forms. Several Arab and Islamic nations demanded an apology from the Danish government and some even closed down their embassies in Denmark. The situation turned ugly when the Danish and Norwegian missions in Syria and Beirut were burnt down and death threats issued to the creators of the cartoons. Protests in Nigeria escalated into bloody clashes between Muslims and Christians claiming more than hundred lives. Pakistan and India witnessed their share of protestations, some of which sadly turned violent.
In the meanwhile we had a Muslim cleric in India issuing a fatwa ordering the killing of those who drew the cartoons and a minister in the government of the state of Uttar Pradesh in India instituting an ‘reward’ of Indian Rupees 51 crores to anyone who beheaded the cartoonist! Violent street protests continue to this day in various parts of the world. However, the question that arises is whether the path taken by some of these demonstrators was acceptable or not? In my humble opinion, they were not. More on it a little later.
Ladakh, like most peripheral regions of India, isn’t ‘banner headline’ material. That’s why the news reports about communal clashes between Muslims and Buddhists would have come as a surprise to most of us. However, the fact remains that tension between Muslim and Buddhist communities of Ladakh has been a sad reality of the region for sometime now. Matters reached a flashpoint in 1989 when the Buddhist community under the leadership of the Ladakh Buddhist Association declared a social boycott of Muslims. Even the Buddhist spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama failed to break the impasse. This boycott went on till 1992. Communal tensions have simmered ever since and minor incidents only aggravate the problem. The incident involving the “tearing of pages of the Holy Qur’an by unidentified people� was provocation enough to bring the Muslim protestors on the streets again. Quite clearly the act was a deliberate one intended to incite the Muslims and create unrest in the region by exploiting the underlying tensions between the two communities. Regrettably, the Muslims of Ladakh couldn’t see through it and fell right into the trap. The violence that followed is hard to defend. On what grounds did the Muslim groups attack Buddhist owned establishments and houses? Mere suspicion? Or if they had the proof that certain members of the Buddhist community were involved in the act of desecration of the Holy Qur’an, why didn’t they report the matter to the police and let the law takes it course?
In a civilised democracy, just as the right to freedom of expression is not absolute and unbridled, so is the right to protest. The moment a peaceful demonstration turns into a violent mob, the word protest loses meaning. Pray, what did the Muslims indulging in violence achieve by setting shops ablaze, damaging public and private property and inconveniencing fellow citizens in their respective countries? Did it in anyway assuage their indignation? Obviously not.
In a world where Islam and its followers have been demonised as terrorists, the pictures of Muslim youth rampaging through streets, indulging in arson and violence only go on to strengthen such stereotypes. As a matter of fact, the violence perpetrated by these protestors has only given credence to the message that the Jyllands-Posten cartoons sought to convey – that of a violent Muslim community.
It is high time that the moderate voices from amongst the community make themselves heard and send out a clear message that violence in any form is unacceptable. Saner and more tolerant minds are the need of the hour. Postscript: The Editor of Jyllands-Posten has apologised for publishing the offensive cartoons. That should effectively put this whole controversy to end.
(The author is doctoral researcher and writes on issues concerning Islam and Indian Muslims)