Nov. 24, 2007 - The Fig Leaf Falls

By Debarshi Das, Sanhati
Taslima Nasreen is no stranger to communal politics. Some would sniff she revels in being its victim. It seems neither does the greatest defender of secularism in the national political space, namely the Communist Party of India (Marxist), consider the same politics beyond the pale. On 28th November, 2003 the Left Front government in West Bengal banned Taslima Nasreen’s “Dwikhondito.” Some prominent Muslim citizens had appealed to the government that “the book contains false and fictitious comments regarding the holy Quran and commandments of Islam. This may jeopardise the tradition of communal peace among the Hindus and Muslims in the state.” Curiously the signatories were not the run of the mill skullcap Mullahs. They included a former Madrassa College principal, a former professor of Calcutta University cum member of the state Planning Board, and strangest of all, the incisive and robust Bengali writer Syed Mustafa Siraj.
The State Secretary of the party Anil Biswas had the familiar words, “The book has been banned because it can spread communal tension. The government has done this as a precautionary measure.” For good measure, he reminded us that the Left Front government had not banned a single book for political reasons in its 26 years of rule. What is to be noted is that all the books of literature which had been banned before the LF, were due to court orders and not because of government intervention (on charge of obscenity principally – Samaresh Basu’s “Bibar,” “Prajapati,” Buddhadeb Basu’s “Raatbhor Brishti”). The litterateur chief minister was silent when asked if banning of a book did not violate the freedom of writers and artistes in a democratic country.
However, there were people who were not ready to stomach the nose poking by the state. On 22nd September, 2005 on an appeal by APDR (Association for Protection of Democratic Rights) the Calcutta High Court revoked the ban. The Left Front government had an unusual comrade in this jihad on freedom of expression. The Anandabazar Patrika of 23rd September reports, “The lawyer of the State Government had appealed the Division Bench for a stay order of six weeks. On behalf of a Muslim organisation, Idrish Ali also appealed for a stay order of six weeks. This was turned down.”
The two reunited on the streets of Kolkata on 21st November, 2007. Idrish Ali of All India Minority Forum was one of the organisers for the proposed three hour blockade of Kolkata. They demonstration was against the Nandigram massacre, mishandling of Rizwanur Rahman case, and demanding cancellation of visa for Taslima Nasreen. Gradually, however, the last demand engulfed the other two. For five hours central Kolkata was at the mercy of a communal rabble. This is the first time since 1992’s Babri Masjid that the city witnessed dusk to dawn curfew in a number of localities. Questions have started to be asked as to why the police did not respond swiftly enough. And indeed the paralysis has a longer history. The administration did precious little when in late June a local imam announced a reward for eliminating her.
Doubt condenses into suspicion when Biman Bose, after a day of shameful ineptitude and prostration to Muslim fundamentalists, declares that she should better accommodate to fascist demands (later retracted). And suspicion almost reaches conviction as one learns “the Left Front government on Thursday [22nd November] nudged the controversial Bangladeshi writer to leave the state for Jaipur…the Buddha government liaised with Rajasthan Foundation, a body of Rajasthani businessmen in Bengal and led by a top cement manufacturer, to make arrangements for her stay in Jaipur.” Could not the progressive government of the day stand up to Muslim fundamentalism, as it supposedly does to the RSS Vanar Senas? Was this fleeing of the incompetent or is there any cynical electoral calculus underlying?
Perhaps it’s all a matter of appropriating political space. It would be a folly to ignore ‘Nandigram’ in the list of agenda of the Kolkata demonstration of AIMF. As the ‘Left’ is renouncing the anti-imperialist, pro-people stand, these popular demands would search for articulation from some quarters. As Germany and Iran have shown, visceral forces of fascism and religious fundamentalism would have a natural tendency to fill up the vacuum and to channelise people’s rage into destructive routes. It would be a failure of ominous proportions for the left movement in India if it does not recognise this and as an ad hoc measure, submits to opportunistic electoral deals.