In Punjab, violence in the name of religion
It is disconcerting to see the head granthi (priest) of the Akal Takht, Giani Malkit Singh, justify the murder of a woman 'social media influencer' as 'appropriate action' on the ground that she allegedly promoted obscenity. The Giani is only parroting an allegation that Amritpal Singh Mehron, self-styled leader of Quam de Rakhe, a radical outfit, made to justify the murder Kanchan Kumari who was active on social media as Kamal Kaur Bhabhi. The Giani added that 'this kind of treatment should be meted out to those who indulge in spreading vulgarity and defaming the Sikh community'.
The Giani's endorsement of murder is unacceptable for multiple reasons. First, the law of the land is supreme. If Mehron or anyone has a complaint against the social media output of a person, they need to seek remedy under the country's law. The judiciary will then decide on the matter and award punishment. Vigilante justice has no place in a society bound by the rule of law and guided by due process. Second, the approval has come from a religious leader. The Giani is second only to the Jathedar (head) of the Akal Takht, the highest temporal seat of Sikhism. The faithful look up to his office for religious and moral guidance. He ought to be a sobering voice in a state that has seen sectarian violence and a society that has not fully healed from Operation Bluestar, the 1984 anti-Sikh violence, and terrorism. Instead, he chose to condone the murder of a woman; the stature of his office is such that his words could have a disturbing resonance.
Punjab has been on the edge multiple times over the sensitive issue of religious sacrilege. Radical groups, some of them guided by the foreign hand, have tried to exploit the social unrest and many charlatans have sought refuge in the faith ecosystem to build social and political capital. The Sikh clergy should not give legitimacy to these troublemakers. For the political leadership, the task is cut out: Do not let anyone create mischief in the name of religion.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Sukanta apologises for hurling ‘slipper' at Sikh CISF officer
Kolkata: Junior Union minister and Bengal BJP president Sukanta Majumdar, in a statement on Tuesday, apologised for the June 12 incident when he threw a placard, symbolically representing a slipper, that hit a Sikh CISF officer in his own security detail. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It happened during a BJP protest over the Maheshtala violence. The issue snowballed into a major controversy after a Kolkata-based Sikh body, Sri Guru Singh Sabha, lodged an FIR against Majumdar at Kalighat police station on June 14. In a statement on X, Majumdar, referring to the protests, said: "Amidst the chaotic circumstances, a placard I hurled in protest, which symbolically represented a slipper, accidentally landed on the sacred turban of a Sikh CISF officer assigned to my security. If this unfortunate and unintended incident hurt the religious sentiments of any member of the Sikh community, I offer my deepest and most sincere apologies. It was never my intention to cause any offence or disrespect." Majumdar said the incident took place on June 12, "during a peaceful and democratic protest in front of the residence of the chief minister of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, at Kalighat, Kolkata. I, along with several senior state leaders and karyakartas of Bharatiya Janata Party Paschimbanga, was detained by Kolkata Police and forcefully placed in a prison van." "Both I and every karyakarta of Bharatiya Janata Party, West Bengal, hold the religious beliefs, the sanctity of the turban, and the revered traditions of the Sikh community in highest esteem," the minister added. Sri Guru Singh Sabha general secretary Inderjeet Singh Sekhon, who lodged the FIR, said: "Such an act is not only an affront to the Sikh community but also violates the basic fabric of India's constitutional values that ensure respect for all religions and communities. The deliberate nature of the act is clearly visible, leaving no scope for any unintentional justification." The FIR was lodged under BNS sections 302 (protects individuals from actions intended to harm their religious sentiments) and 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt).
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Elon Musk's X takes New York to court, calls hate speech law unconstitutional
Elon Musk's X Corp sued New York on Tuesday, challenging the constitutionality of a state law requiring social media companies to disclose how they monitor hate speech, extremism, disinformation, harassment and foreign political interference.X said the law known as the Stop Hiding Hate Act violated the First Amendment and state constitution by subjecting it to lawsuits and heavy fines unless it disclosed "highly sensitive and controversial speech" that New York may find what content is acceptable on social media platforms "engenders considerable debate among reasonable people about where to draw the correct proverbial line," X said. "This is not a role that the government may play." The complaint filed in Manhattan federal court also quoted a letter from two legislators who sponsored the law, which said X and Musk in particular had a "disturbing record" on content moderation "that threatens the foundations of our democracy."New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat who enforces the state's laws, is the named defendant in X's lawsuit. Her office did not immediately respond to requests for the world's richest person and recently a close adviser to Republican President Donald Trump, has described himself as a free speech did away with the content moderation policy of Twitter, as X was previously known, after he bought the company for USD 44 billion in October York's law requires social media companies to disclose steps they take to eliminate hate on their platforms, and to report their progress. Civil fines could reach USD 15,000 per violation per law was written by state Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assemblymember Grace Lee, both Democrats, with help from the Anti-Defamation League. It was signed in December by Governor Kathy Hochul, also a Democrat.X said New York based its law on a nearly identical 2023 California law whose enforcement was partially blocked by a federal appeals court last September because of free speech agreed in a February settlement with X not to enforce the law's disclosure requirements.A spokesman for Hoylman-Sigal had no immediate comment. Lee's office did not immediately respond to requests for InMust Watch
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Elon Musk's X sues New York to block social media hate speech law
NEW YORK: Elon Musk's X Corp sued New York on Tuesday, challenging the constitutionality of a state law requiring social media companies to disclose how they monitor hate speech, extremism, disinformation, harassment and foreign political interference.X said the law known as the Stop Hiding Hate Act violated the First Amendment and state constitution by subjecting it to lawsuits and heavy fines unless it disclosed "highly sensitive and controversial speech" that New York may find what content is acceptable on social media platforms "engenders considerable debate among reasonable people about where to draw the correct proverbial line," X said. "This is not a role that the government may play." The complaint filed in Manhattan federal court also quoted a letter from two legislators who sponsored the law, which said X and Musk in particular had a "disturbing record" on content moderation "that threatens the foundations of our democracy."New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat who enforces the state's laws, is the named defendant in X's lawsuit. Her office did not immediately respond to requests for the world's richest person and recently a close adviser to Republican President Donald Trump, has described himself as a free speech did away with the content moderation policy of Twitter, as X was previously known, after he bought the company for $44 billion in October York's law requires social media companies to disclose steps they take to eliminate hate on their platforms, and to report their progress. Civil fines could reach $15,000 per violation per law was written by state Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assemblymember Grace Lee, both Democrats, with help from the Anti-Defamation League. It was signed in December by Governor Kathy Hochul, also a Democrat.X said New York based its law on a nearly identical 2023 California law whose enforcement was partially blocked by a federal appeals court last September because of free speech agreed in a February settlement with X not to enforce the law's disclosure a joint statement, Hoylman-Sigal and Lee said they were confident a judge would uphold New York's content moderation law."The fact that Elon Musk would go to these lengths to avoid disclosing straightforward information to New Yorkers" shows why the law is necessary, the legislators case is X Corp v James, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 25-05068.
