BEVU-BELLA, a mixture of neem flowers and jaggery eaten on Ugadi, signifies the sweet and bitter experiences of life, and the value of equanimity. This year, though, the Hindu new year festival was more bitter than sweet in Karnataka. After the recent hijab row and the ban on Muslim vendors on temple premises, the call to boycott halal meat has fanned communal flames in the southern state.
On the eve of Ugadi, April 1, Vishva Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal workers distributed handbills to convince meat-eating Hindus to boycott halal; they were asked to choose jhatka meat to celebrate Hosa Thodaku, the customary non-vegetarian feast prepared on the day after the new year.
“Halal meat is creating a parallel economy where Muslims get to dominate the business,” said BJP national general secretary C.T. Ravi. “Halal meat is dear to Muslims as the animal is slaughtered as per Islamic norms and offered to their god (Allah). For Hindus, halal meat is somebody’s leftover food and cannot be offered to our gods or eaten. While religious harmony is necessary, it cannot be one-way. There is nothing secular about halal.”
While halal (permissible) refers to meat from an animal killed by cutting the carotid artery, the jugular vein and the windpipe—allowing the animal to die a slow death as the blood drains out—jhatka refers to killing the animal with a single blow. There is no consensus on the less painful method. A Central government order under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Slaughter House) Rules, 2001, mandates stunning (electric shock) the animal before slaughter. But the rule exists only on paper; most meat stalls and abattoirs prefer halal as Hindu customers have not opposed it.
Said Mohan Gowda, state spokesperson of the right-wing Hindu Janajagruti Samiti: “For a meat product to be halal, the animal must be slaughtered only by a Muslim. This deprives Hindus of jobs, especially some dalits who were traditionally butchers. The halal economy is not just restricted to meat products, but also extends to pharmaceutical products, personal care products, cosmetics, housing, hotels and hospitals. This parallel system of certification is also creating a parallel economy, which excludes non-Muslims. Most businesses run by Hindus get halal certification for the lure of a larger market as they cannot have two supply chains—halal and non-halal meat. This is not only imposition of Islamic beliefs and lifestyle on non-Muslims, but also a stealthy way to extract money from Hindu-run businesses in the name of halal certification. The money earned through the certification is used to convert India into an Islamic state and fund anti-national activities.”
The Hindu groups have claimed that the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, one of the oldest halal-certifying trusts in India, has extended legal support to accused in terror cases. “Hindus are indirectly funding terror by opting for halal certification,” said Sri Ram Sene chief Pramod Muthalik. He added that the economic boycott of Muslims was the only “effective tool” to change their “separatist” mindset. “The Muslims are rejecting our judiciary, they block cities for months protesting the Citizenship (Amendment) Act,” he said. “They called for boycotting Patanjali products during the anti-CAA protests. Last October, Muslims had boycotted fisherwomen at Gangolli fishing port as they had taken part in an anti-cow slaughter protest march.”
Some Hindu activists also brought up jizya—a tax non-Muslims had to pay under Islamic rule—saying that companies now had to pay for halal certification even though clearance from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India was the only official accreditation needed.
In January 2021, India’s Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority had removed the word “halal” from its manual on red meat. Instead, it said that animals would be slaughtered according to the requirements of the importing country.
Food for fight: A meat shop owner with jhatka tag in Bengaluru | Sudhakar D.
Now, with Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai saying that his government would look into “serious” objections to halal food, state ministers have started openly supporting the boycott. “The government is clear that food is a personal preference,” said State Revenue Minister R. Ashoka. “It is up to the citizens to decide what they will buy and from where. Nobody has the right to snatch away this choice.”
Said State Endowment Minister Shashikala Jolle: “The halal vs non-halal debate is an issue in coastal Karnataka and Hindu outfits are spreading awareness about the ‘jhatka cut’ because it has to be offered to God.”
State BJP president Nalinkumar Kateel has hinted that, like in the hijab case, the government would seek a ‘legal solution’ to the halal row, signalling regulation of halal certification.
On the other side, the Social Democratic Party of India—the political wing of the Islamic organisation Popular Front of India—has threatened state-wide protests. “Any boycott is a criminal offence,” said SDPI state president Abdul Majeed. “The agenda-driven campaigns are emerging out of the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) headquarters to divert people’s attention from real issues like price rise, economic slump and unemployment. Ban on Muslim vendors in temple fairs is also part of this campaign. It is not a Hindu-Muslim issue; they have peacefully co-existed in the state. This is part of the conspiracy hatched by the Sangh Parivar. I urge the police to register suo motu cases against those spreading hatred.”
Janata Dal (Secular) leader H.D. Kumaraswamy even called Bommai a “puppet” in the hands of right-wing Hindu groups. “The divisive campaign affects the society as there is a symbiotic relationship between the two communities,” said the former chief minister. He also recited Kannada poet Kuvempu’s line—‘Sarva janangada shantiya thota’ (a garden of peace for all religions)—to describe Karnataka.
The Congress, though, is a divided house; its two tallest leaders—state party president D.K. Shivakumar and former chief minister Siddaramaiah—are not on the same page on most issues. While the former has steered clear of contentious issues fearing a backlash from Hindus, which could damage the party’s prospects in next year’s elections, Siddaramaiah has criticised the BJP government and also his own party’s indecisiveness.
Recently, during a party meeting that Rahul Gandhi attended, Siddaramaiah said: “The Congress has the responsibility to protect minorities, OBCs and others. We must stop overthinking and should have clarity. Minorities are afraid and want us to stand with them.”
The current communal polarisation in Karnataka started in January. Six students from a government college in Udupi opposed the institute’s ban on wearing hijab inside classrooms, triggering the pro- and anti-hijab protests statewide.
On March 15, a three-judge bench of the Karnataka High Court—hearing a bunch of petitions challenging the hijab ban—ruled that wearing the hijab was not an “essential religious practice” in Islam. Two days later, many upset Muslims closed their shops in protest and some challenged the order in the Supreme Court. Several girls refused to remove their hijabs and chose to skip classes and also final exams. The Campus Front of India, the Popular Front’s student wing, gained traction among Muslims with its pro-hijab protests.
The BJP claimed that the SDPI had triggered the hijab controversy for political gain. The High Court, too, observed that the way the episode had unfolded gave room to suspect that “unseen hands” were at work to engineer social unrest.
In “retaliation”, Hindu outfits called for a ban on Muslim vendors in temple fairs and festivals. The Hosa Marigudi temple in Udupi district was the first to do so; during its annual fair, it not only barred Muslim vendors, but also barred sub-contracting of the shops to non-Hindus. “The local devotees were outraged when Muslims shut their shops on March 17 to support the bandh to protest the hijab case verdict,” said Prakash Kukkehalli, an office-bearer of the right-wing Hindu Jagaran Vedike, Mangaluru. “We welcome the temple committee decision.”
Hindu activists met major temple committees in the state, asking them to do the same. In Shivamogga, they even cited the killing of Hindu activist Harsha (on February 20), allegedly by radical Islamists, as the reason to bar Muslim vendors.
State Home Minister Araga Jnanendra called the ban only a “reaction” to the protests against the High Court order in the hijab case.
Karnataka Law Minister J.C. Madhuswamy defended the ban citing rule 12 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 2002. “The rule states that no property, including land, building or sites situated near temples, shall be leased to non-Hindus,” he said. “The rule was not brought by the BJP, but by the S.M. Krishna-led Congress government in the state.”
Majeed, however, said, “We had staged a peaceful bandh against the High Court verdict as it ruled that wearing a hijab was not an essential religious practice. The community was hurt and bandh was a legal way to express it. When the Babri Masjid verdict was out, Muslims did not protest. But when the Supreme Court gave its verdict in the Sabarimala temple entry case, there were massive protests in Kerala by the BJP.”
Even non-politicians weighed in on the matter. Biocon chief Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw called for an end to “communal exclusion”. “If IT-BT (information technology-biotechnology) became communal,” she tweeted, “It would destroy our global leadership. @BSBommai please resolve this growing religious divide.”
Amit Malviya, in-charge of the BJP’s National Information and Technology department, counter-tweeted: “It is unfortunate to see people like Kiran Shaw impose their personal, politically coloured opinion, and conflate it with India’s leadership in the ITBT sector. Did [she] speak up when a belligerent minority sought to prioritise hijab over education or the Congress framed rules excluding non-Hindus from Hindu institutions?”
A delegation of 61 writers, activists and academics also wrote to Bommai, raising concerns over the “deliberate attempt to fuel communal hatred in the state” and asked him to uphold constitutional values and act against those fuelling communal hatred.
The BJP government’s plans to introduce Bhagavad Gita lessons in schools and tone down Tipu Sultan’s “glorified content” in school textbooks have also riled opposition parties and intellectuals.
The question is: Will the communal divide bring political dividends?
While the BJP has been the direct beneficiary of the communal polarisation, the SDPI—the new kid on the block—is threatening to dislodge parties like the Congress and the JD(S). Kumaraswamy has sensed trouble brewing in the Vokkaliga heartland, which has always backed the JD(S). The BJP’s rise is threatening his party’s space. His frequent outbursts against “fringe” hindutva activists and his attacks on the Congress for its “reluctance” to take a stand on communal issues are seen as a bid to woo the Muslims. The Congress, however, is unclear on which vote bank to woo.
The garden of peace, meanwhile, is being infiltrated by weeds of hate.