It was only a few months ago that Anna M. M. Vetticad—a journalist distinguished by numerous media accolades and widely acclaimed for her fearless film criticism and astute observations—was subjected to a barrage of online abuse from the Sangh Parivar's online cohort. Her transgression? Writing the phrase Inshallah (God willing) in a Facebook post and wearing a keffiyeh at the Wayanad Literature Festival in a striking gesture of solidarity with children falling victim to genocide. Unmoved by the vitriol, Anna delivered a characteristic riposte, asserting that she would continue to use beautiful words, and added, with wry elegance, that she hoped, Inshallah, her detractors might find a remedy for their nervousness. Yet, if a new circular currently circulating in the name of the Gujarat Police is to be believed, the landscape has grown distinctly more ominous; under its provisions, the mere use of Arabic terms in everyday discourse, or the expression of protest and indignation regarding the global tribulations of the Muslim community, is now marked out as a matter warranting state surveillance.
Three days ago, a document began circulating across social media platforms, containing a checklist and an official notice issued in the name of Praful Vaniya, the Superintendent of the Gujarat Police Intelligence Bureau, concerning the state's newly established Anti-Radicalisation Cell. Marked 'strictly confidential' and bearing both the official insignia and the address of the Gujarat Police, the authenticity of the document has thus far not been publicly denied by the police headquarters. Furthermore, the authorities have not responded to the pressing inquiries raised by civil rights activists and the media alike.
The criteria laid down in the circular to identify, monitor, and subject to counselling individuals deemed 'radicalised' are nothing short of chilling. The Gujarat Police have catalogued a range of ordinary behaviours as definitive symptoms of radicalisation: growing a beard, wearing a niqab, the frequent use of Arabic words, and attending Arabic colleges or madrasas. Also treated as indicative of radicalisation are the practice of i'tikaf (spiritual seclusion in a mosque) and the sudden abandonment of studies or employment under the pretext of Islamic obligations. Furthermore, the checklist earmarks the downloading of VPN applications, the use of encrypted messaging services such as Signal and Element, and the sharing of nasheeds (Islamic devotional hymns) as suspicious activities requiring vigilant scrutiny. Officers are explicitly directed to compile a comprehensive directory of maulavis teaching in madrasas and to gather intelligence on whether they maintain any affiliations with organisations espousing extremist ideologies.
Given that growing a beard, seeking solace in a mosque, and employing phrases such as Insha Allah and Masha Allah are intrinsic elements of ordinary Muslim life, one is compelled to ask: is the true objective of the Gujarat Police to counter extremism, or is it to engender suspicion and isolate members of the Muslim community from their fellow citizens? There is little doubt that these directives have been brrowed directly from the handbooks of fascism. Though the nation's leading Islamic scholars and organisations have declared with one voice that terrorism and extremism are fundamentally antithetical to Islam and must be utterly eschewed, this circular serves a far more insidious purpose. It effectively streamlines the machinery of the state, making it alarmingly simple to level fabricated allegations and slap trumped-up charges against anyone who happens to fall foul of the establishment.
Whilst the existence of radicalisation across diverse communities remains an undeniable reality, the prominent civil rights activist Shabnam Hashmi asserted that the stratagem of the Gujarat Police serves merely to pave the way for the harassment and detention of dissenting voices. She further cautioned that though the crosshairs are trained upon Muslims today, tomorrow they may very well be trained upon Dalits, Adivasis, or Christians. Echoing these grave concerns, Dr John Brittas, a Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha representing the CPI(M) from Kerala, has sent a formal missive to the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Bhupendra Patel. In it, he pointed out that any state action which creates the impression of targeting a specific community stands in flagrant violation of the constitutional guarantee ensuring equal protection of the law for all citizens.
By unjustly demolishing mosques, imposing gratuitous restrictions on congregational prayers and sacrificial rituals, and even criminalising the breaking of the fast, BJP administrations have already systematically curtailed the religious freedoms of the Muslim community across various parts of the nation; they went so far as to attempt to saddle the community with the blame for the COVID-19 pandemic itself. There is now every likelihood that this circular issued by the Gujarat Police will soon be photocopied and republished by constabularies in other states.
Conferences and orators openly advocating the social boycott of Muslims and Christians, and issuing unvarnished clarion calls for the genocide of Muslims, are ubiquitous. And numerous are those roaming with absolute impunity after participating in horrific lynchings. Needless to say, Gujarat is the very land that bore witness to the most egregious communal terrorism and visceral bigotry this millennium has seen. Yet, the authorities failed to discern any symptoms of radicalisation amongst those monsters who dashed infants against stones and subjected a pregnant woman to gang rape. Or are those very individuals—who, upon their state-sanctioned release, were welcomed by the Sangh Parivar with garlands and celebratory tilaks—considered the cultured citizens envisioned by this 'New India'?