It's an incident of a state which is healthy and wealthy and called PUNJAB. The sweet and beautiful Punjab has it's own history of violence, discrimination, injustice and incited terrorism. Befort starting with the 1984 Sikh riots, let us start from the beginning and the first thing to learn about is Anandpur Sahib resolution.
In 1972 elections, Akali Dal was defeated and Congress party won elections and framed it's government in the state. Gyani Zail Singh emerged as the respective Chief Minister of Punjab.
Here starts the journey of the Anandpur Sahib resolution. Though it was a result of a long drawn aspirations but gained a momentum in 1973 when Akali Dal came out with its famous resolution called Anandpur Sahib Resolution.
Earlier, the consequences of Green revolution proved to be very beneficial for Punjab. Punjab emerged as a prosperous land for agricultural productivity. However, the industrial development in the state was not taking place in the same way the agriculture sector was growing. Large industrial units were at a risk if they were installed in a state which shared border with Pakistan.
This led to increased education opportunities with lack of job availability for the educated youth. This section were not satisfied with the government's functioning and thus, joined hands with militant organizations to display their grievances.
This long history of discrimination, economic backwardness, dissatisfaction were put forward to the government in Anandpur Sahib resolution in 1973. It included both religious and political issues.
Some of them were:
1) Propagating Sikhism to combat atheism
2) Establishing favourable conditions for encouraging their free expression, satisfaction and growth.
3) Eradication of poverty and exploitation
4) Many demands on spiritual grounds were made
5) Development of the farmers of Punjab by ensuring more irrigation and other facilities
Such demands were put forward by the Akali Dal.
However, Anandpur Sahib resolution became controversial because it asserted regional autonomy and desired to refine centre state relations. It spoke of the aspirations of Sikh Quam and also declared its goal as attaining bolbala of Sikhs.
This was regarded by Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister as a secessionist movement as it would hinder the unity of India and thus, the resolution was rejected.
Many developments took place after this incident which hold a significant place in the Indian history.
In my view, bringing forward the demands is a right of every citizen. The resolution demanded for equality and freedom of expressions which is a fundamental right of every citizen and the government must ensure that every citizen is treated equally.
One of the demands put forward by them was providing them sovereignty in their regional and religious matters. India is a secular country, there is no state religion and the government doesn't interfere in the religious matters as per the Constitution. However, the government has and should have the right to interfere in the religious matters if they hinder or infringe the fundamental rights of equality, privacy, life etc. So granting full sovereignty is a matter of grave concern. The examples of right intervention in religious matters can be seen in the abolishment of sati and widow remarriages.
India is federal in form but unitary in spirit. Demanding full sovereignty would ultimately mean threatening the spirit. And thus the unitary character is threatened to break.
To some extent, I believe that the demands were not liable to be fulfilled but the right to expression and equality are the fundamental rights which is mandated to be protected by the government.
We will continue with the operation blue Star.
No comments:
Post a Comment