By Shahidur Rashid Talukdar,
After a lot of scuffle, finally the Census 2011 form has included a column for religion. It is definitely a step towards transparency taken by the Census Authority. However, as it asks about religion on the column Q.7, it gives options such as Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, and Jain. None of these options is a religion. These options reflect what a follower of these religions calls himself or herself.
Now the question it prompts is that are the census authorities so naive as to fail to differentiate between the religion and its followers? India, being one of the oldest of civilizations, is mother to most of the religions and home to the rest for centuries. Having been acquainted with the religious and cultural traditions of all the major world religions for thousands of years, one is expected to know these basic traditions. Over 700 million Hindus don’t call their religion as “Hindu” which should be called “Hinduism”, around 200 million Muslims in India never call “Muslim” as their religion, rather Islam is the appropriate term and so is true about Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism, as well. However, as it seems, our officials are unaware of these traditions! Is it a case of bureaucratic high-handedness or a sheer carelessness? Although it does not affect anything for practical purposes, does not it show an apathy towards a serious matter?
The second point is the exercise of filling in these census forms by a pencil. It is supposed to be filled in with a ball point pen in front of the respondent so that it can’t be changed later. However, this is again a widely shared discontent among many sections of people that filling with pencils, the responses in the schedules can altered according to the census agent’s or any other subsequent processors’ intentions. And there is a legitimate reason to worry about this because in the past also, there have been many instances of people complaining that the names of members of some sections have been left out deliberately. The minorities and the most backward castes often fall prey to these nefarious designs.
One might argue that this practice has a positive side: it easens the process of filling out the forms. But the negative side, if approached by some unscrupulous individuals, much outweighs the positive side. So this needs to be fixed. The authorities must wake up. Transparency of intention is not enough; it must be shown by actions and practices.