Insaf Morcha Convener Shahabuddin's Letter to PM Vajpayee, 19 February, 2000

"The controversy raised by the Government of Gujarat's decision to allow government servants to become members, or to participate in the activities, of the RSS (and its various fronts organisations, by implication) is not set at rest by the RSS Chief's declaration that RSS will not press the Central Government in this regard. Nor is it settled by your announcement that the RSS does not want its members to join the Government.

For one thing, the Government has not yet publicly prescribed the RSS membership as a pre-condition for government service. For another, the question is actually the reverse: whether the Government wants its employees to join the RSS.

Two questions arise:

1) Whether there is currently any bar on any person, who has been a member of the RSS or has been participating in its activities e.g. attending the Shakhas, being admitted into government service.

2) Whether any Government servant, who is in service, may join the RSS or any of its front organisations or participate in their public activities.

In our democratic system, a Government servant may become a member of a political party or organisation but he cannot take an active or prominently part in its activities. There is no such bar on members of social or cultural or even religious organisations or institutions. So ultimately it has to be decided whether the RSS, alongwith the hundreds of its front and attached organisations, is a social or cultural or religious organisation or a political organisation.

Right from independence, the RSS, though not a political party, has been considered to be a political organisation, particularly after the establishment of the BJS and subsequently the birth of the BJP. It has played a consistent role in their working and taken a stand on all political eustions of national concern. In fact its social and cultural views are defined in political terms.

Therefore, what is more important, even if it is defined as a social or cultural organisation, in its philosophy, its ideology, its very raison d'être which runs counter to Nationalism, Democracy, Secularism and Federalism on which the Indian State is based. RSS stands for Hindu Nationalism or, more refinedly Cultural Nationalism based on Hindutva or Hindu Culture.

RSS does not believe in Democracy because it rejects the rule of law; to achieve its objectives it methodically generates and exploits religious and even racial sentiments. Not only it admires fascism, its pronouncements have a fascist ring.

The RSS is not secular because it aims at the Hinduisation of the Indian society and polity, through assimilation, forcibly, if necessary, of all religious minorities and because its Hindu-centric vision of India envisages the supremacy of the Hindus and leaves no space of dignity for any non-Hindus.'

The RSS does not believe in Federalism because it wants the country to be governed as a monolithic, centralised state.

My submission to you is that if any person, who believes in the ideology of the RSS and associates with and whose mindset has been formed by the instruction in the Shakhas can be neutral or free from bias in a situation of conflict of interest between Hindus and non-Hindus. Such a person is not fit to be a public servant in a multi-religious society, in a multi-level polity, whatever his level.

Seen from another angle, such a Government servant, particularly in the law-enforcing machinery, will not command the confidence of the minority communities in a situation of tension. This will cast a shadow on the goodwill of the administration and affect its efficiency and performance.

This means that while the Political Executive will inevitably have a political colour, the public administration should be politically colourless, and remain neutral in situations of conflict at the interface between various social groups.

That is why, I plead with you not to open the doors of public administration, at any level, to any person, who is directly or indirectly involved in politics and who is actively associated with any organisation, political, social or cultural, whose basic postulates and concepts are contrary to the foundations on which the Indian State rests."

Review of Functioning of Constitution Soli Sorabjee's Reply to Shahabuddin,

18 February, 2000

You may rest assured that so long as I am on the Review Commission there will be no tampering with the fundamental rights of the minorities. The apprehension which you have expressed about the transfer of Uniform Civil Code to the chapter on Fundamental Rights is without any basis.

The Commission will be course be inviting views from all sections of the civil society in the form of a questionnaire.

Shahabuddin's Response, 19 February, 2000

I sincerely thank you for the kind assurance in your letter of 18 February, 2000.

Indeed, all minorities will be grateful to you for your vigil on their rights.