Political twist to azaan row should not distract from governance issues

Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray (File image: PTI)

The azaan on loudspeaker row in Maharashtra, which has sparked off copycat agitations elsewhere, has turned into a socio-political-legal minefield. This is the intended effect of the controversy shaped by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and amplified by the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) in the last few weeks.

It’s clear that yet another marker of Muslims – after hijab and halal meat – is being put through the churn. The azaan issue is an old one; it was periodically brought out from the cold in an election season by cynical politicians. Civil society dealt with it in different ways – some activists approached courts, some mosques were requested to lower volume, others voluntarily did so, a few stubbornly refused, a handful in smaller towns or villages did away with the loudspeakers, and so on.

That the use of loudspeakers in public places by any religious place or for any purpose causes noise pollution, certainly disturbance, is now a well-recognised fact. Sustained or sudden exposure to noise is, indeed, a health hazard. India got its Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules back in 2000 and the Rules were clarified by the Supreme Court five years later.  Anti-noise activists have run campaigns to bring down noise levels especially during festivals. However, three areas remained off their radar: construction work, transport sector, and loudspeakers on religious places especially on mosques.

When political parties choose to target mosques but ignore noise pollution from the other sources, it gives away their agenda. The BJP and a number of Hindutva organisations have made a loud racket about azaan, especially the early morning one, over the years. Its Maharashtra unit reignited the issue in early April demanding that the Uddhav Thackeray-led coalition government — comprising Shiv Sena, Congress and Nationalist Congress Party — come down hard on the use of loudspeakers for azaan.

Within days, MNS chief Raj Thackeray picked up the issue, his words matching those of the BJP, his style as thundering as his late uncle Bal Thackeray’s. He gave his cousin and Maharashtra chief minister Uddhav Thackeray time till May 3^rd — day of Ramzan Eid — after which, he said at a massive rally in Aurangabad, his men would chant Hanuman Chalisa on loudspeakers opposite every mosque when loudspeakers went off for azaan. MNS workers did that in a few places in Mumbai and elsewhere.

Police forces across Maharashtra and in Mumbai were on high alert for any disturbance in law and order; Raj was booked for provocative speech by the Aurangabad police, 250 people of the MNS cadre were detained and more than 13,000 issued notices under the Criminal Procedure Code. Many mosques in Mumbai, reports suggested, did not play the early morning azaan on loudspeakers while others toned down their volume. Nearly 1,500 mosques and 1,300 temples sought police permission for loudspeakers, other reports said. Thackeray stood unrelenting: Hanuman Chalisa will be played on loudspeakers opposite mosques till their loudspeakers are removed.

This is a textbook case of a social or civic issue given a political-communal turn in ways that threaten public order and distract from core governance issues. Did mosques violate the Noise Rules? Certainly so, especially when azaans went off at 5AM or earlier against the clear mandate of no-loudspeakers between 10PM and 6AM, and when decibel levels exceeded the limit specified in the Noise Rules. It was for the state or city’s police machinery to treat it as a violation — like a traffic light or speed violation — and resolve it at local level with community leaders as they have done during Navratri or Diwali celebration.

The neglect and inaction by the police, conveniently ignored by politicians in power, allowed the issue to be weaponised by the likes of Raj Thackeray. That mosques shut off loudspeakers or turned down azaan volume earns Raj – and the BJP – brownie points and perhaps votes too. In the process, another controversy opened up about which party – Shiv Sena or MNS – was the true torch-bearer of Hindutva and Bal Thackeray’s legacy. Raj used his uncle’s old videos to shame Uddhav; Shiv Sena hit back with videos in which the late Thackeray had expressed sadness and disappointment in Raj breaking away.

His uncle’s doppelganger, he had held out promise early on winning a few seats in local and state elections, charting out a comprehensive blueprint for Maharashtra’s all-round development, and so on. However, he looked lost lately as his cousin Uddhav took Shiv Sena into newer territory, formed alliances with its once arch rival Congress, and became the chief minister. The political realignment in 2019 left Raj, who had run running a wildly popular anti-BJP campaign for the assembly poll, high and dry. Searching for ways to be relevant and ensure his party’s survival, he appears to play the BJP’s game.

The BJP has been hard at work to dislocate Uddhav Thackeray’s government and return to power; vitiating the law-and-order situation to attract the imposition of President’s Rule followed by elections is part of its strategy. Connect the dots of most controversies that dogged the Maharashtra government in the last two-and-half years and the picture becomes clear. That Raj should stoop to play this duplicitous game is unfortunate.

Cousin versus cousin, battle for Thackeray’s legacy, fight over whose is the real Hindutva, all make for grand theatre in which the BJP is pulling the strings and watching its trump card – Hindu versus Muslim – threaten to singe Maharashtra.

Views are personal and do not represent the stand of this publication.