Politics of Faith or Politics of Fear? Assam at a Crossroads Ahead of Elections

As Assam moves closer to another Assembly election, the political discourse in the state appears to be sliding into deeply polarising territory. Statements made recently by Antar Rashtriya Hindu Parishad leader Dr Pravin Bhai Togadia, echoed and amplified in the larger political ecosystem, have once again raised uncomfortable questions about the use of religion as a political weapon.

At a workers’ conference organised by the Antar Rashtriya Hindu Parishad and Rashtriya Bajrang Dal in Bongaigaon, Dr Togadia called for what he described as “decisive action” against alleged illegal Bangladeshi immigrants. His remarks went far beyond administrative or legal concerns and ventured into something that directly targets an entire community—specifically Muslims identified by the term “Miya”.

Calls to cancel ration cards, jail people accused of encroachment, revoke medical degrees obtained from Bangladesh, and identify “Bangladeshis” through blood or DNA tests are not merely policy suggestions; they reflect a narrative built on hatred towards a particular religion. The assertion that Assam can be made “Bangladeshi-free” within two months, without due process or reliance on legal documentation, raises serious constitutional and ethical concerns.

What is particularly troubling is the merging of illegal immigration—a legitimate administrative issue—with religious identity. Immigration status is a legal question, not a religious one. Yet, the repeated emphasis on “Miya” Muslims blurs this distinction, effectively branding an entire community as outsiders and threats.

The situation becomes more alarming when rhetoric appears to translate into administrative action. The recent controversy in Nalbari, where over 200 Assamese Muslims reportedly found their names deleted from voter lists despite having voted for decades, has sparked widespread outrage. The affected individuals claim they were neither notified nor given a chance to respond before being effectively disenfranchised. If voter list revisions disproportionately affect one religious community, it raises unavoidable questions about intent and fairness.

Leaders like Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma and Pravin Togadia argue that stringent steps are necessary to protect Assam’s identity and resources. However, the Constitution of India does not permit the state to determine citizenship, voting rights, or access to welfare based on religion. Any such action must follow transparent procedures, legal safeguards, and the principles of natural justice.

The lodging of an FIR in Delhi against Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma for allegedly making derogatory remarks against the Miya community further underscores how provocative political language can cross legal and moral lines. While courts will decide the merits of such cases, the broader issue remains: should electoral success be built on defaming a community?

History offers a cautionary tale. Colonial rulers once exploited religious divisions to weaken Indian society. Today, when political leaders invoke similar divisions for electoral gain, the damage is not limited to one election cycle. It erodes trust, deepens social fault lines, and normalises hatred as a political tool.

Democracy thrives on debate, dissent, and diversity—not on exclusion. Fighting elections on the basis of development, governance, and accountability strengthens institutions. Fighting them on the basis of religion weakens the very idea of India as a pluralistic republic.

As Assam looks ahead, the question is no longer just about elections. It is about what kind of society the state—and the country—chooses to become. Is it one governed by the rule of law and constitutional values, or one driven by fear and majoritarianism?

The answer will shape not only the outcome of the next election, but the moral direction of the nation itself.

Also Read: Over 7.6 Lakh Students to Appear as HSLC Exams Start Feb 10, HS from Feb 11