Hijab issue comes handy for BJP’s agenda of polarisation of voters on religious lines, particularly in UP

A coincidence of events, deliberate or otherwise, has forced the issue of Uniform Civil Code to the fore in time for the crucial assembly elections, which would seem to be just fine with the BJP’s agenda of polarisation of voters on religious lines, particularly in the all-important state of Uttar Pradesh.

By all available indications, BJP-ruled Karnataka has contributed to this in no small measure by centre-staging the hijab controversy to prepare the ground for an emotionally surcharged debate on the Uniform Civil Code.

Even as the controversy over Hijab ban in Karnataka rages, Union Minister Giriraj Singh, known to spit fire when it comes to minority issues, has brought up the issue of Uniform Civil Code, saying the country needs one law that will be applicable to all communities.

Uttarakhand chief minister Pushkar S Dhami has further added to the fire by promising that his BJP government would form a committee to prepare the draft of a uniform civil code for implementation in the state after the current phase of assembly elections.

The saffron elements could not have asked for anything more when the Karnataka High Court issued an interim order, restraining students from wearing any particular form of religious dress, in effect meaning the hijab, over which campuses not only within Karnataka but outside the state as well are boiling over with rage against the arbitrary orders issued by college managements banning the traditional Muslim head scarf, until the court finally settles the issue.

Reports have emerged from Telangana that students wearing the hijab have been denied entry to some private colleges

The High Court order has been described as surprising by some as it suspends a fundamental right of the students to wear the dress of their choice during the pendency of the dispute, while the general practice is to grand relief to the aggrieved by staying the offending order.

The Supreme Court, meanwhile, has declined to interfere, though it has in recent times made great exceptions to bring relief to the people, by effectively intervening and forcing the government to act decisively in cases such as the great reverse migration of workers in the wake of the national lockdown as well as the national vaccination policy of the Modi government, which seemed to favour the corporates rather than the people.

The Supreme Court’s intervention in both cases have been historic in the sense that it helped drive home the role of the highest court of land in ensuring justice to the people when the government of the day had gone astray.

The Supreme Court under Chief Justice N V Ramana had particularly won acclaim for its decisive interventions that lived up to the cherished image that people had in their heart about how the highest court of the land. The response in terms of the hijab issue has so far been not consistent with such a role.

(IPA Service)

Views are personal