Assam: Leading citizens urge Gauhati HC to take suo motu cognisance of CM Himanta’s statements
They argued that “silence or inaction against violations of the Constitution” could lead to the erosion of “the moral authority of the Constitution.”
In a letter to Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar on Thursday, citizens drew the apex court’s attention to a series of public statements by Sarma, “apparently amounting to hate speech, intimidation of the executive and open defamation of a particular community”, citing the CM’s remarks on ‘Miyas’ (Bengali-speaking Muslims).
They argued that Bengali-speaking Muslims have become “part of the larger Assamese society” over 100 years and that the CM’s statements “enter the forbidden constitutional territory of threats of dehumanization, collective stigmatization and state-sponsored harassment”.
‘Miya’ is actually a derogatory term used for Bengali-speaking Muslims in Assam, and non-Bengali-speaking people often describe them as Bangladeshi immigrants. In recent years, activists in the community have begun to adopt the term as a gesture of defiance.
Citizens alleged that Sarma “incited physical harm, economic discrimination and social humiliation”, citing his statement urging the public to pay less than the actual fare, especially for rickshaws pulled by Bengali-speaking Muslims.
The 43 signatories include academician and intellectual Hiren Gohain, former DGP Harekrishna Deka, former archbishop of Guwahati, Thomas Menamparampil, Rajya Sabha MP Ajit Bhuyan, environmental scientist Dulal Chandra Goswami, retired principal of Assam Medical College TR Borbora, advocate Santanu Borthakur, joint convener of Joint Council of Trade Unions Garga Talukdar and litterateur Arupa. Patangia Kalita. They also highlighted the CM’s statements that he had directed BJP workers to raise objections targeting Bengali-speaking Muslims during the ongoing Special Revision (SR) of electoral rolls.
“A constitutionally mandated and quasi-judicial process like SR cannot be turned into a partisan or communal exercise at the behest of the prime minister,” the letter said. While the statement is included, it is also stated that the Election Commission has not yet taken the issue into consideration.
The letter stated that a prime minister had sworn to carry out his duties without compassion or ill will, adding: “Subjecting a religious community to public suffering, economic deprivation, intense scrutiny and exclusion is fundamentally incompatible with this oath.”
He further said, “Assam chief minister’s brazen hate speech undermines national integration and directly promotes enmity between different groups on the basis of religion.”
They also claimed that Sarma’s statements were against secularism, which constitutes the basic structure of the Constitution.
Arguing that it was an appropriate case for the court to exercise suo moto jurisdiction, they called on the chief justice to “direct the authorities to file cases against hate speech, executive interference and violations of fundamental rights.”
They called on the court to “protect the dignity, equality, and safety of the affected community” and “reaffirm that constitutional officers are bound by their oath and constitutional discipline.”
Prominent citizens also called for the court’s intervention to “bolster public confidence in secular constitutional government and the rule of law.”
“Silence or inaction in the face of such clear constitutional violations risks normalizing them and eroding the moral authority of the Constitution itself,” the letter said. The statement was included.
