RETURN OF TASLEEMA IN BENGAL

 

RETURN OF TASLEEMA IN BENGAL

SARASIJ MAJUMDER

Tasleema Nasreen is a free thinker, and writer who borne in erstwhile East Pakistan, but banished from Bangladesh for her bold, factual, and truthful narration of Muslim social and economic crimes on minority Hindu Bengalis, who fought shoulder to shoulder in “MUKTI YUDDHA’—but became victim in the new borne state, which once declared it a Secular country.

But—soon Bangladesh became ISLAMIST PAKISTAN NUMBER—2.

Hunted in her own HOMELAND, she escaped for life. After living in exile across Europe and the United States, she relocated to Kolkata in 2004, which she considered her cultural home, on a renewable temporary residence permit issued by the then   Indian government. Off course west Bengal is her natural choice, and she has a historic and cultural bond with the State.

Her initial stay in the city lasted until November 2007, when she was forced to leave West Bengal following violent protests and riots against her autobiographical work, Dwikhandita (SPLIT). She was subsequently moved to Jaipur and then Delhi.

Buddha Babu-the then CM of ruling party CPI(M), holding a flag of Secularism, yielded to Minority Demand of Muslim Community of Bengal, and ordered her expulsion!!

However, the demand for her return today transcends the personal desire of a writer; it serves as a litmus test for the credibility of West Bengal’s state ethos, freedom of speech, and BJP’s commitment to go beyond Minority appeasement.

Born in Mymensingh in 1962, Tasleema evolved from a physician to a writer, championing causes such as women's rights and opposing religious fundamentalism and the persecution of minorities. The publication of *Lajja* (Shame) in 1993 made her a target of Islamist fundamentalists in her motherland as well as in South-East Asia. Facing death threats, lawsuits, and the risk of arrest, she was forced to leave Bangladesh in 1994. Although she found safety in Europe, she was deprived of her linguistic homeland and Bengali Culture; consequently, she moved to Kolkata in 2004.

Yet, the very Bengal that prides itself on a legacy of rationalism, the Renaissance, and secularism was the one that exiled her a second time.

The then intellectuals, and established writers of Bengal was more interested to protect their commercial market in Bangladesh!!! I don’t want to name them here. You can look and read their published articles on ‘TASLEEMA’.

The Left Front government banned her autobiographical work, *Dwikhandita* (Split). In 2005, the Calcutta High Court overturned the ban. Thus, while the judiciary upheld the rights of readers and freedom of expression, the CPI-M government capitulated to pressure from Islamist fundamentalists.

Following an attack on her in Hyderabad in 2007, violent protests by an agitated Muslim mob erupted in Kolkata on November 21 of that same year. It was the state's duty to quell the violence and ensure the writer's safety. Instead, the Left government did the exact opposite—it hastily removed Tasleema from West Bengal overnight. Her life in a secret safe house in Delhi effectively became a form of house arrest; she left India in 2008. Although she later returned to this country, the route back to Kolkata never got reopened.

It was at that moment that the mask of the CPM's so-called secularism was torn away.

Secularism is not merely a word uttered in speeches; a state’s true character is revealed by whom it protects during a crisis. On one side stood the stones, threats, and organized frenzy of a mob; on the other, a single pen. The Left government chose to exile the pen. This decision was not merely a sign of administrative weakness—it effectively yielded to the threats posed by the mob and legalized the non-existent power of a veto. It was as if the state had declared that if the minority mob rioted, and their wrath—not the Constitution—would have the final say.

Despite projecting itself as the only Secular Political Party of India, the CPM’s conduct regarding Tasleema was deeply communal. For communalism is not merely politics conducted in the name of the any religion; placing the organized pressure of any religious group above civil liberties also constitutes communalism. Expelling a writer to appease those issuing threats in the name of Islam is not secularism—it is a surrender to fundamentalism for the sake of electoral gain.

 

When the Trinamool came to power in 2011, they could have rectified this injustice. They could have declared that the new government would bring back—with dignity and security—the writer whom the Left Front had humiliated and ousted. But the Trinamool did not do so; instead, they silently cemented that exile. In 2012, the launch event for her book at the Kolkata Book Fair was cancelled in the face of threats from Muslims. In the years that followed, the government took no visible initiative to facilitate her normal cultural return.

Left Front had expelled her overnight; the Trinamool converted and extended that single night into nearly two dark decades.

The rhetoric of the two parties differs, and though each other once aimed at either’s throat, their political grammar is identical: viewing Muslim citizens not as independent individuals but as a monolithic vote bank; regarding conservative religious leadership as the sole representative of the entire community; and sacrificing the voices of women, atheists, reformers, and freethinkers out of fear of displeasing that community.

They attempt to sell this shameless, cowardly surrender to Islamic fundamentalists to Hindus as "secularism." It is impossible to sell ROTTEN THOUGHTS. Consequently, I am unaware of any Hindus—save for a few unhinged and uneducated ones—who believe in the secularism espoused by the CPM or the Trinamool. Even progressive Muslims do not believe in their brand of non-existent secularism.

True secularism performs two simultaneous tasks: it protects the lives, religious practices, and equal rights of minorities, while also safeguarding the freedom to criticize religion. Just as the right to offer prayers is constitutional, the right to question religion is democratic. If the state acts merely as a guardian of religious sentiments rather than a protector of the freedom of thought, it is not secular—it is merely appeasement-oriented. Therefore, the CPM, Trinamool, or Congress are not secular parties.

Tasleema is not an Indian citizen; thus, residing in India is not her automatic fundamental right. However, Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty for every individual. Simultaneously, Indian readers, publishers, and cultural activists possess the constitutional right to read, publish, and discuss her writings.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in the *S. Rangarajan* case also clarified that legitimate expression cannot be suppressed due to threats of protest or violence; managing a hostile crowd is the state's responsibility. Furthermore, the *S.R. Bommai* case established secularism as a part of the Constitution's basic structure.

In light of these principles, the CPM's decision in 2007 represented a defeat for constitutional morality. Failing to control a violent, fundamentalist Muslim mob and instead removing the very person under attack does not constitute the rule of law; it is, in fact, a Political Cowardice. Yet, this is precisely the shameful act THAT THE CPM committed.

Bringing Tasleema back to Kolkata does not imply agreement with every one of her views. Her writings may be criticized or proven wrong, and if they violate the law, she can face trial in court. But exile cannot be the answer. The response to a book should be another book, and the response to an argument should be a counter-argument—not stones, *fatwas*, or administrative expulsion.

Her return, therefore, serves as a symbolic act of atonement by BENGAL—for the CPI-M's hypocritical secularism, legalized and continued by Trinamool.

 

Disclaimer: The BLOG is posted for posterity. All information are available in public domain.

Jai Jagannath, Jai Hind