Former Law Minister and senior Congress leader Salman Khurshid courted controversy for a statement he made in Aligarh Muslim University that his party’s hands are stained with the blood of Muslims.

The Congress immediately disagreed with the statement while the ruling BJP said the Congress engineered many riots in the past.

Khurshid defended his statement saying he had made the remarks in response to a query as his party came under attack. Acknowledging that communal riots and other sectarian clashes did take place during the Congress rule, Khurshid said the party’s hands were stained with blood.

The Congress leader also asserted that that was not a reason why his party should not come forward to protect Muslims against attacks. “We are ready to show the blood on our hands so that you realise that you too must not get blood on your hands. If you attack them, you are the ones who would get stains on your hands,” he said. “Have you ever known me to withdraw a statement? What I said, I will continue to say. What I didn’t say, I will never say,’ he added.

Reacting to the comment, Congress spokesperson PL Punia said the party disagrees with the statement in toto. “Everyone must know that both prior and post independence, Congress is the only party which has worked towards building an egalitarian society by carrying all sections of the people together including SC/ST, the poor as also religious and ethnic minorities. As these intrinsic foundational values are under attack today by Modi government, all leaders must remember that such unfounded statements only help the cause of those in power today who seek to divide the society on caste and communal lines to retain and attain power at any cost,” he said.

The BJP described Khurshid’s statement as an “acknowledgement” of its history of “engineering communal riots”.

Minority Affairs Minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said: “The Congress is a history-sheeter as far as communal riots are concerned. It has practised politics of divide and rule while using castes and communities to sow division in society. It created social tensions for votes. It continues with this tradition.”

comment COMMENT NOW