Son of slain B.C. Sikh leader says family, friends always believed India played role in assassination | CBC News
by Abdul Mussawer Safi 19 October 2023
The assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar opened a new chapter in India’s domestic politics as well as in the diplomatic spheres of India. Pluralistic society and secularism used to be the main essence of India’s democracy, but since 2014, the events have changed parallel. It is a known fact that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is the political organization of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), whose ambition is to establish Hindu Rashtriya, the homeland for “Hindus.” These racial-inspired ambitions not only threaten minorities like Muslims and Sikhs but also Hindus, who are at the bottom of the hierarchical system of Sanata Dharma. Dalits and Shudra are also suffering from the fascist policies of Prime Minister Modi.
For decades, the Sikh community has struggled, demanding a separate state, “Khalistan,” in the Indian Punjab Province. This statement might not sound very good because the possible results of this demand will be upsetting and may lead to a large-scale massacre. Here, the question arises: What do democratic states need to do in response to such demands? Do the states need to urge us to suppress the voices by force? Alternatively, to give them a democratic way to put their demands forward in any available means, just like parliament to solve it by consensus.
India, the so-called largest democracy, is changing after the Hardeep assassination. The diplomatic ties between India and Canada got strained; both countries have deported 40 diplomats from each other. Additionally, India’s “authoritative” government and its agencies confiscated the property of those who have close ties with Hardeep. It is essential to mention that the Khalistan movement is banned in India and negates its demand. For safety and security, they intended to continue their struggle overseas.
In 2020, Indian authorities intended to charge Canadian lawyer Gurpatwant Singh Pannun with terrorism and sedition. In June, masked assailants killed Nijjar, the Sikhs for Justice (SFJ) region leader for Canada. India prohibits supporters of Khalistan. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said there were “credible reasons to believe that agents of the government of India were involved” in Nijjar’s killing. In a video, Pannun urged Canadian Hindus to “return to India” and accused them of taking a “jingoistic approach” by supporting New Delhi. She writes, “This is about the Sikh homeland of Punjab that India occupies and the indigenous people of Punjab’s resources that Delhi plunders.” Pannun’s film was deemed “hateful and divisive” by the World Sikh Organization of Canada. India claims Nijjar was murdered and accuses Trudeau of breaching their privacy. As China expands, both nations desire improved commercial and geopolitical relations.
The origins and identity of Sikhism, a religion that originated in northern India but has Hinduism and Islam as influences are contentious issues. A Sikh fundamentalist started an armed insurrection in the 1980s, which the Indian military eventually put down. Unfortunately, the conflict claimed hundreds of lives, leaving permanent scars in India. As a result, the Indian government has declared the Khalistan movement illegal and labeled numerous affiliated groups “terrorist organizations.” The memory of the violence endures, and the topic continues to be sensitive for many.
No matter how weak, every group strives for its recognition, and it is the primary responsibility of the state to fulfill the demands of such groups, communities, and ethnicities. The Indian government needs to keep the promise of declaring India a secular state. Because the secular state ensures the rights of every citizen, it does not matter if they belong to any group. However, if India does not understand the sensitivity and possible repercussions of such policies, there will be a massive rift in Indian society.