CPI(M), Congress, and BJP draw battle lines over Sabarimala theft, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, and religious fundamentalism

The political landscape of Kerala, often characterized by its unique bipolar LDF-UDF dynamics, is currently witnessing a heightened ideological battle, with religious and social issues taking center stage. The recent pronouncements by the CPI(M), Congress, and BJP regarding the Sabarimala theft, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, and religious fundamentalism highlight the intense competition and the shifting narratives employed by these parties to consolidate their vote banks and influence public discourse. This confrontation is not merely a regional skirmish but reflects broader national trends concerning secularism, identity politics, and the role of religion in public life.

**Background Context and What Happened:**

Kerala has historically been a bastion of secularism, social reform, and strong political consciousness. The state's politics have largely revolved around the Left Democratic Front (LDF), led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)), and the United Democratic Front (UDF), led by the Indian National Congress. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has traditionally struggled to make significant inroads but has been steadily growing its presence, particularly by leveraging religious sentiments. The Sabarimala Ayyappan Temple, a prominent Hindu pilgrimage site, became a flashpoint following the Supreme Court's landmark judgment on September 28, 2018, which lifted the ban on women of menstruating age entering the temple. This verdict sparked massive protests across Kerala, with various Hindu organizations and the BJP vehemently opposing the implementation, citing tradition and faith. The CPI(M)-led LDF government, bound by its constitutional duty, attempted to implement the verdict, leading to accusations of hurting religious sentiments, while the Congress adopted a more ambiguous stance, trying to balance traditionalist views with progressive principles. This incident significantly altered the political discourse, bringing religious identity to the forefront.

The current situation sees the CPI(M) declaring a 'mass movement against schismatic politics,' a veiled reference to what it perceives as divisive communal forces attempting to polarize society. This is a strategic move to counter the BJP's narrative and reclaim its secular credentials. Meanwhile, the BJP has announced observing the upcoming Makaravilakku season (a significant pilgrimage period at Sabarimala) as a 'faith protection month.' This directly appeals to Hindu devotees, aiming to position the BJP as the sole protector of Hindu faith and traditions, a strategy honed during the 2018 Sabarimala protests. The Congress, caught between these two narratives, is attempting to expose the LDF's 'rightward drift to Hindutva politics.' This accusation stems from the LDF's perceived softening of stance on certain religious matters or its engagement with minority groups, which the Congress interprets as a tactical shift mirroring Hindutva strategies for electoral gains, thereby attempting to regain its traditional centrist secular space.

**Key Stakeholders Involved:**

* **CPI(M) (LDF):** The ruling party, traditionally championing secularism and social justice. Its challenge is to navigate religious sensitivities while upholding constitutional principles and maintaining its progressive image. Its 'mass movement against schismatic politics' is aimed at consolidating secular and minority votes.

* **Indian National Congress (UDF):** The principal opposition, often seen as a centrist party. It struggles to counter both the BJP's Hindutva push and the CPI(M)'s progressive secular stance. Its strategy of highlighting the LDF's 'rightward drift' aims to appeal to minority communities and secular voters who might feel alienated by perceived shifts in the LDF's approach.

* **Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP):** An aspiring third force in Kerala, it seeks to capitalize on religious identity, particularly among Hindus. Its 'faith protection month' initiative is a clear attempt to polarize the electorate along religious lines and gain electoral mileage, building on the momentum from the Sabarimala protests.

* **Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH):** While not a political party, JIH is an influential Islamic organization in India with a significant presence in Kerala. Its ideological positions and social activities often become subjects of political debate, particularly by parties seeking to polarize or consolidate minority votes. Mentioning it in the context of 'religious fundamentalism' indicates its role in the broader discourse on religious identity and alleged extremism.

**Why this Matters for India and Historical Context:**

This political maneuvering in Kerala is highly significant for India. It underscores the increasing role of religious identity and communal narratives in electoral politics across the country. Kerala, despite its high literacy and social development indicators, is not immune to identity politics. The Sabarimala issue, in particular, brought to the fore the conflict between traditional religious practices and constitutional principles of equality, mirroring debates seen in other parts of India regarding personal laws and religious freedom. Historically, India has grappled with the definition and implementation of secularism, enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution (added by the 42nd Amendment in 1976). This dynamic in Kerala reflects the ongoing tension between a state's duty to uphold constitutional values and the sensitivities of religious communities, a challenge faced by governments nationwide. The rise of the BJP in previously impenetrable regions like Kerala also indicates a broader trend of national parties expanding their footprint by adopting localized strategies, often involving cultural nationalism and religious appeals.

**Related Constitutional Articles, Acts, or Policies:**

* **Preamble:** Emphasizes India as a 'Secular' democratic republic.

* **Article 14:** Guarantees 'Equality before law and equal protection of laws,' which was central to the Sabarimala verdict concerning gender equality.

* **Article 15:** Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

* **Article 25:** Guarantees 'Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion,' subject to public order, morality, and health. This article is often cited by religious groups to protect their traditions.

* **Article 26:** Grants 'Freedom to manage religious affairs,' allowing religious denominations to manage their own affairs, again subject to public order, morality, and health. The conflict often arises in interpreting the scope of 'public order, morality, and health' versus established religious practices.

* **Supreme Court Judgments:** The 2018 Sabarimala verdict (Indian Young Lawyers Association v. The State of Kerala) is a direct reference, highlighting judicial intervention in matters of faith and tradition.

**Future Implications:**

This intensified political rhetoric has several future implications. Firstly, it could lead to increased communal polarization within Kerala, potentially eroding the state's long-standing tradition of social harmony. Secondly, it signals a more aggressive stance from the BJP to break the LDF-UDF duopoly, making future elections even more fiercely contested. Thirdly, the Congress's attempt to brand the LDF as 'rightward-leaning' indicates a struggle for ideological space, potentially pushing traditional secular voters to re-evaluate their political allegiances. The outcome of these ideological battles will not only shape Kerala's future political landscape but also offer insights into the evolving nature of Indian secularism and the interplay of religion, tradition, and constitutional modernity in the country's democratic process. It underscores the challenges political parties face in balancing electoral pragmatism with constitutional principles and the diverse demands of a multi-religious society.