AkHIlESH HAS IGNorED MuSlIMS: AHMED BukHArI
Unlike this year’s Assembly polls, he had asked Muslims to support the SP in 2012.
Explaining why he appealed to Muslims in Uttar Pradesh to vote against the Samajwadi Party (SP), Syed Ahmed Bukhari, New Delhi’s Jama Masjid’s Shahi Imam, said that Muslims should send out the message that they are under no compulsion to vote for the so-called secular parties. Holding Akhilesh Yadav, the incumbent Chief Minister of UP, responsible for “inaction” towards development of Muslims in the state, Bukhari said that Muslims in UP have been “cheated”.
Contrary to this year’s Legislative Assembly elections, Bukhari in 2012 had asked Muslims to support the SP, but earlier this week, Bukhari appealed to Muslims that they should collectively vote for the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP).
Speaking to The Sunday Guardian, Bukhari explained why he changed sides this year and said, “In 2012, Mulayam and Akhilesh had come to me to request that I support their party in the upcoming elections. They wanted to discuss with me the cause of the minorities in the state. The issues that I told them, they included them in their election manifesto. But that was all. Since 2012, I have been remind- ing them of their promises. But Akhilesh failed to take responsibilities for the assurances he gave. Even Mulayam Singh Yadav asked Akhilesh that he should not ignore Muslims in UP. But Akhilesh did not do anything.” Taking a jibe at the dramatic division of SP between Mulayam and Akhilesh, Bukhari said, “The man who did not respect his old father and ousted him from the party that his father worked so hard for and forced him to cry in loneliness, cannot be deemed fit to serve the people.”
Asked why he is supporting the BSP, which, too, claims to be a secular party, Bukhari said, “BSP is also a secular party and it is not cheating the minorities. The Dalits and Muslims in UP are two most ignored communities. It is important for both these sects to unite and understand that they cannot allow themselves to be taken for granted. The secular parties think that minorities have no other option but to vote for them, but we should tell them that they are wrong.”
For passing politically mo- tivated statements around polls, Bukhari has been criticised for misusing his position and outreach by SP and Congress ministers. Commenting on his critics, Bukhari said, “The people who I am not supporting today, for them I was a good person back in 2012 because I was standing beside them. I am not claiming who will win or lose. I am a citizen of this country and I am only exercising my right to express my thoughts. I don’t think SP is the party that minorities should be voting in this election.” There have been demands to review the decision of the Election Commission to delay the results in multi-phased Assembly elections involving different states. The argument is that since political situations vary in different states, the Election Commission should not delay the results of a particular state Assembly election.
While elections for the Assemblies of Goa and Punjab took place on 4 February, the same for Uttarakhand will take place on 15 February. Seven-phase polling for the UP Assembly started on Saturday and will continue till 8 March. Elections for the Manipur Assembly will also be held on 4 and 8 March. However, results for all the Assembly elections would be declared on 11 March.
“There is no point delaying the election results. If voting for Goa and Punjab has taken place, what is the point holding the results till 11 March?
“The argument that the results may influence elections in the next phases is absurd as the political situations in different states are totally different. How will Goa results affect UP elections? The issues are different, players are different,” said a political thinker.
Jayaprakash Narayan, general secretary of Foundation for Democratic Reforms and ex-member of National Advisory Council, said: “I am against prolonging the election process. It’s a pain for the people of India to see such a long, staggered election. Regarding delaying the results of multi-phased elections, I would go one step ahead. In my view, we should have ‘direct elections’ for states. This will substantially reduce money power and corruption.”
According to Sanjay Kumar of Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), there is a ‘very tiny’ proportion who would tend to be influenced by the results of the voting pattern in other states and go by that pattern, and therefore there is no harm in announcing the results.
“There can be two views on it. But at least there should be a debate on how the process can be cut short. For example, in the present case, elections in Goa and Punjab should have been held close to the final result day. Why delay the results there for such a long time?” he asked.
Kumar, however, said: “If results are announced, there may be a ‘Bandwagon Effect’, meaning people in other states might go with the voting pattern of a neighbouring state. But there can be an ‘Underdog Effect’ as well. If people of a particular state do not want a particular party to come to power and if that party comes to power in another state, then they would tend to vote ‘against’ that party to make sure that it does not come to power in their state. So there are multiple sides to the idea and any decision should be taken after thorough discussion.”
Maj. General (Retired) Anil Verma of Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) said: “We have not though about the issue. But I think the Elections Commission holds counting of votes with the assumption that the results may affect voting in the subsequent phases. Probably the EC wants to create a level playing field for all political parties.”
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has already called for a national debate on holding simultaneous elections. The Election Commission has suggested Constitutional amendment so that terms of all state assemblies come to an end on the date on which term of the Lok Sabha is expiring.