The Central government has followed up on the countrywide raids on the offices of the controversial Popular Front of India (PFI) with arrests of many of its leaders, and a ban on the organisation and its associates. The Ministry of Home Affairs has said in its notification that “the PFI and its associates operate openly as socio-economic, educational and political organisations but they have been pursuing a secret agenda to radicalise a particular section of the society working towards undermining the concept of democracy and show sheer disrespect towards the … Constitutional set up of the country”. These are serious charges and those familiar with the PFI’s activities, even from reports about them, would not contest the need to take action against the organisation. The government will have to validate its charges according to laid down procedures to confirm the ban.
Bans are administrative tools to deal with organisations that persistently resort to illegalities and pose threats to peace, public order and national security. But administrative actions are not always enough to tackle them. The RSS and the communist parties have been banned in the past but they have survived. Parties that are banned often represent political ideas and unless the politics is addressed the bans usually turn out to be ineffective. The PFI has a political arm called the SDPI which contests elections and has hundreds of elected representatives in states like Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and even UP. Many of the cadres of the PFI and the SDPI are the same. Bans often take the organisations away from the public view, but they do not cease to exist. Many continue their activities under other names or go underground, having been energised by the sense of victimhood and persecution that the ban gives them, and the sympathy that they evoke.
The politics of the PFI and the SDPI is rooted in the fear of a segment of the Muslim minority over the rise of the majoritarian ideology and the shrinking space for Muslims in national life. These fears have become aggravated with the perceived and real support of the state to the majoritarian idea, and the policies and practices that support it. The best way to deal with the threat posed by the PFI and its associates is to put an end to this divisive and exclusionary politics. Otherwise, the ban itself will be taken as another tool of this politics. The question will also be asked why organisations that advocate a majoritarian agenda, and pose a threat to public order and the Constitution, are not treated the way the PFI and its associates are.