Guest Column | Akali politics: Familiar crossroads & the way forward

Once again, the Sikh politics finds itself in a familiar mess. The correct description, however, is Akali politics as the community’s political spectrum is not limited to any one party – not even to several parties claiming to be Panthic.

There are Sikhs in every political party. As a matter of fact, except in 1985, 1989 and 1997, more Sikhs seem to have voted for political parties other than all the ‘Panthic’ parties put together, including Akalis.

Of these, the 1985 and 1989 polls were held following extraordinary events and under circumstances which can barely be described as normal. And in 1997, the Akali wave cut across all communities and cannot be described purely as a Panthic wave.

Shifting nature of loyalties

At the centre of the present mess is the shifting nature of loyalties and stand of various Akali leaders to the relevance and role played in Akali politics by the jathedars of Akal Takht. No Akali leader nor faction can claim to be totally guilt-free in this. Worse, their stand has been shifting depending on their political convenience. And this needs some pondering in order to understand the complicated nature of the issue and to put the events of December 2 and their aftermath in perspective.

Some of the leaders who are now advocating an active intervention of the jathedar in the organisational matters of the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) stood firmly opposed to this intervention when the same controversy and the same crisis created the same mess in April-May 1994. Prominent among those actively opposing Akal Takht intervention in SAD’s organisational matters then were Sukhdev Dhindsa, Kuldip Singh Wadala, father of Gurptap Singh Wadala and now-deceased stalwarts Ranjit Brahmpura, Sewa ,and even Bibi Jagir Kaur. All of them opposed the then Akal Takht jathedar Manjit Singh’s attempt to do exactly what jathedar Raghbir Singh was trying to do. In fact, jathedar Kuldip Singh Wadala was then the most vocal in the this anti-interventionist campaign. He categorically maintained that “the glory of the Takht Sahib must not be embroiled in factional fights of politicians.”

The main plea of these leaders then was that the supremacy of Akal Takht actually implied providing political, religious and ideological direction to the entire “Sikh jagat” in all political parties. The SAD held a special position in this regard only because it was founded at Akal Takht. But the country then was under the British regime and the present Constitution did not apply.

These leaders, including Dhindsa and Wadala, had then maintained that the then jathedar Manjit Singh was actually misinterpreting the meaning and significance of “religio-temporal supremacy” of august institution.

On May 14, 1994, when the SAD leadership finally appeared at Akal Takht, jathedar Manjit Singh seemed to agree with these leaders and refused to interfere in Akali organisational affairs, infuriating the anti-Badal faction led by the stalwart Gurcharan Singh Tohra. But the same ex-Jathedar Manjit Singh now wants his successors to do what he had himself refused to do — intervene.

This in fact is the third such occasion when one or the other Akali faction have dragged rivals before Akal Takht . All three attempts have ended in a fiasco and on all three occasions, divisions in the community have deepened instead of achieving the desired goal of Panthic unity.

Larger issues remain unresolved

In the current mess, four of the five religio-political hukamnamas (edicts, including those affecting Sukhbir Singh Badal, were implemented in toto by SAD leadership. Only one of these — the 7-member committee for fresh membership— the party appealed in writing for a review in the light of what it feared a likely ban on the party. That appeal has neither been accepted nor rejected by clergy to date. But jathedar Raghbir Singh went on record publicly, categorically and emphatically praising the Akali decision to start membership drive. He also hailed the SAD decision to assign duties for this to cadres and leaders, including members of the 7- member committee.

That should have put an end to the confusion. It didn’t. Just a few days later, the jathedar contradicted himself, and told the committee also to start its own “membership drive for the party” – without involving the party in it!

While a debate will rage on who went back on what, the larger issue remains unresolved. And that issue is: what role should Akal Takht play in the orgainsational matters of a political party or parties – like the SAD – especially under the changed constitutional provisions.

Supremacy — organisational or ideological?

There are only two ways to resolve this issue once and for all. One of these is to implement the concept of Miri Piri in its original form. To achieve that, the Akal Takht should take over the political leadership of the Sikh qaum, dissolve all Panthic parties ( including the SAD) , set up a new outfit directly under the presidency of the jathedar. He should then directly run the affairs of this Sikh party. Jathedar Raghbir Singh was right in observing that the jurisdiction of the Takht covers the entire “Sikh Jagat”- and not just Akalis. That being so, an edict will have to be issued by jathedar, declaring that henceforth, the religio-political leadership of the Sikhs vests with Akal Takht alone and every Sikh must adhere to and vote for only the party headed by its jathedar, who alone would be the ex-offico president of the exclusively Sikh party.

No Sikh should then align with or vote for any other political party. This alone can realise a complete harmony of religion with politics in real and complete terms – as far as organisational structure goes. Those who maintain the direct intervention of Akal Takht in these matters will not create any legal problems should happily support this idea.This would definitely invite a legal ban on this party and it can never take part in elections nor form a government under the Constitution. But, as Giani Harpreet Singh, says: “So be it”. Ikk vaar nahin, sau var pabandi lag jae. This a small sacrifice to make.” Is the community ready for it? If it is, then no time should be wasted in putting this into practice. The only other way is to redefine what is meant by the supremacy and the role of jathedar of Akal Takht in religio-political matters.

Does this role mean the power and responsibility to run the day-to-day mainstream organisational affairs of a political party in the modern-day democratic politics? Or does it mean providing ideological direction and clarity to humanity at large – and to the Sikh community in particular?

Sikh intelligentsia must band together

The answer to these questions will help in putting an end to the confusion that has prevailed in Sikh politics all through since the times of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. We have seen how different groups of politicians, including the present leadership, have sought to interpret and abuse this sacred institution to serve their own petty personal or partisan political interests. In the absence of clarity on this issue, this mess will continue.

Sikh scholars, historians, ideologues and learned religious interpreters, cutting across political lines, must join heads to ponder over the issue and provide a clear pathway for clarity in future. They must guide the Sikhs on how to preserve the purity of their faith and yet adapt to the compulsions of the emerging political realities around them in modern times.

The author is a freelance writer and former adviser to former CM and Late Parkash Singh Badal