Bharat Patrika

Karnataka's Hindu Right Targets Churches in response to Attacks on Indians in Australia

2010-01-25T20:05:00.000+05:30

Staff Correspondent. The Hindu
MANGALORE, January 24, 2010

A cross at St. Lourdes Catholic Church at Mundalli village in Bhatkal taluk of Uttara Kannada was desecrated on Friday, allegedly by activists of the local unit of Sri Rama Sene.

The church is 5 km from Bhatkal.

The accused were purportedly trying to pull down the cross, which is a few metres from the church.

But some custodians of the church saw them and raised an alarm, forcing the culprits to flee.

Needle of suspicion

The needle of suspicion turned towards the Sri Rama Sena activists as only a few days ago the local unit had threatened such an action in a memorandum addressed to the President and submitted to the Assistant Commissioner, after a protest.

The memorandum submitted on January 19 stated that “Christians in India are part of a conspiracy to target Indian Hindus in Australia.”

Memorandum

The memorandum, signed by convener of the Bhatkal unit of Sri Rama Sene Shankar Naik, said that if the President did not initiate action to prevent the attacks on “Indian Hindus” in Australia in two days (January 20 and 21), the sene would “ensure that there is not a single church in Bhatkal”.

Additional Superintendent of Police V.B. Gaonkar told The Hindu that Shankar Naik, his brother Keshav Naik and Shankar Moger of the sene were among those arrested in connection with the attack.

‘Habitual offenders’

All the three were “habitual offenders” and had several cases pending against them, he said.

Sources from Bhatkal said that the situation in the areas around the church was tense, but peaceful. Mr. Gaonkar said that additional forces had been deployed in the area to prevent any untoward incident.

Produced in court

Karwar Correspondent reports:

The police said that eight sene activists had been arrested in connection with the incident and they had been produced in court.

The five others arrested have been identified as Nitesh Mahale, Eshwar Naik, Mahadev Naik, Shekhar Kharvi and Devendra Naik

Shivaraj Ambari, president of the Uttara Kannada unit of the sene, denied that his organisation had any role in the incident and blamed some Christian organisations for it.

He said the sene was blamed for a similar incident at Humnabad in Bidar district a few months ago.

After investigation, a former pastor of the church was arrested in connection with the case, he said.

A.B.V.P. attack on 'Janchetna' Book Exhibition Van in Delhi University

2010-01-21T21:24:00.001+05:30

Nearly 25 members of Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad, the student wing of the R.S.S., attacked the 'Janchetna' Book Exhibition Van which has been displaying books inside the premises of Arts Faculty, Delhi University, with the permission of the University authorities. They broke the windscreen and glasses of the exhibition van and injured three activists Kunal, Sanjay and Naveen who were present at the exhibition. As is well known, 'Janchetna' is a cultural campaign propagating democratic and progressive ideas in the society through the writings and literature of the likes of Premchand, Bhagat Singh, Sharatchandra, Gorky, Tolstoy, Hemingway, Rahul Sankrityayan, Radhamohan Gokulji etc. This is not the first attack by the Sangh Parivar on 'Janchetna' book exhibition van. 'Janchetna' has been targeted by the sang parivar outfits even before. Last year too, A.B.V.P. had attacked the exhibition van in the Delhi University. Earlier, the ABVP, VHP and Bajrang Dal had attacked the exhibition van at Mathura, Meerut, Moradabad, Agra, Jaipur, Kota and several other places.

Today, the A.B.V.P. goondas were equipped with rods, hockeys etc. They had come with the aim of damaging the exhibition van and they were openly declaring that the 'Janchetna' van will not be allowed to propagate these ideas inside the campus. When the activists of 'Janchetna' tried to argue with them they attacked the activists and broke the windscreen and display glasses of the van. They threw away books by Bhagat Singh and other writers and also threatened to put the van on fire. Before the news of this attack could reach the volunteers and wellwishers of 'Janchetna', the goons had left the scene. Soon after the students affiliated with Disha Students Organisation, AISA and SFI came to express solidarity with 'Janchetna'. The entire democratic and progressive community of Delhi University is organizing of protest demonstration in the Arts Faculty Against this Fascist attack tomorrow.

The activists of 'Janchetna' have registered a complaint in the Proctor's Office and also lodged FIR in the Maurice Nagar Police Station. Sanjay, one of the activists present at the van during the attack, said that if the hooligans of A.B.V.P. believe that they can terrorise us through these kinds of acts, then they are grossly mistaken. The 'Janchetna' van will continue its work in the Arts Faculty and we will give a 'tit for tat' answer in case of any future attack. The security of the van is the duty of the University administration as they have granted the permission to hold exhibition in the Arts Faculty, and that of the Police administration. If they fail to provide protection, then we will be left with no other choice but to defend ourselves.

PRESS RELEASE
Satyam
For, Janchetna
Phone: Abhinav 9999379381 / Satyam 9910262009

In Memory of Jyoti Babu!

2010-01-17T15:38:00.015+05:30

The news came in the early afternoon. A friend had rung up. My TV is out of operation for quite a while. In the evening, another friend rung up to talk of.

It was a long and no doubt a distinguished career in the conventional sense of the term. He was by far the longest-serving Chief Minister in India. Only Gegong Apang of Arunnachal Pradesh has a somewhat comparable record. But then, Arunachal is not counted amongst the major states of India. In 1996, his name was proposed as the Indian Prime Minister by the combined anti-Congress - anti-BJP opposition and forcefully pursued. To the horror of many - just not the foes, but also friends. In fact, after an intense tussle, the Party, of which he was the Polit Buro (the highest rung of leadership) member rejected the proposal, despite the spirited bid by the then General Secretary of the Party and also Basu himself being clearly in favour. As a disciplined party soldier, he abided by the decision. But that could not stop him from publicly calling it a "historic blunder". Only a Jyoti Babu, not Comrade Basu, could go unpunished after chiding the party in public.

No other leader from the Left came anywhere remotely close to that. Only Tridib Chaudhuri, of the Revolutionary Socialist Party - a far smaller leftwing outfit, had been the combined opposition’s Presidential candidate against the ruling Congress in the year 1974. But that was for all intent and purpose a symbolic fight. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed would win hands down.

Not that he was loved by all, no human is that fortunate. But he definitely commanded widespread respect and also elicited some degree of awe. Born with a silver spoon in his mouth, so to say, grew up to become a Communist. While in Britain in late thirties - the colonial ruler of India in those days, studying to become a Barrister. As is the case with his many illustrious senior and junior comrades did. Not too uncommon in those days. The famous advocate Snehangshu Kanta Acharya, who would later become the Advocate general of West Bengal, was understandably very close to him, sharing a broadly similar aristocratic family roots and personal inclinations, in those days and also for long years thereafter. Not too many would remember him now though.. Basu, to be sure, had also intimately engaged with the labour movement, at least during his initial years. Was just not confined to parliamentary politics. And led historic popular agitations like the campaign against Bengal-Bihar merger, against one paisa tram fare rise etc.. (Not too many would remember now though.)

Jyoti Babu, as he was widely known - not Jyoti Da by any stretch nor even Comrade Basu - had his own distinctive air of aloof dignity tinged with evident haughtiness. That came with his aristocratic family roots, privileged foreign education, communist (presumably some superior) ideology, and of course Benglainess.

That was perhaps during the second United Front regime in West Bengal, which had assumed power in West Bengal. Those were the days of turmoil - both in the agrarian sector, and also in the cities. Physical bloody fights among the partners of the ruling coalition led by Ajoy Mukhopadhyay of the Bangla Congress was the norm of the day. The CPIM was the second most important constituent and Jyoti Basu was the Home Minister and the Dy. Chief Minister. Bloody clashes between the cadres of the two parties in the countryside were too frequent. And also verbal duel between the leaders. As the things turned particularly sour, Jyoti Babu held a press conference to narrate an alleged incident of atrocities perpetrated by the Bangla Congess men. He’d normally not get involved in such murky business. In this particular event a widow was reportedly assaulted and tortured, to which Basu did refer. A journalist, with mischief on mind, asked him to "elaborate" the "torture" bit. Basu was visibly disgusted. He retorted back that he has already that a widow has been assaulted and tortured. The persistent journalist refusing to give up explained that the other day Sushil Dhara, the second senior most leader of the Bangla Congress, and the Industries Minister (if my memory serves me right), had given an elaborate description of the torture inflicted by the CPM cadres on some women. the quintessential Jyoti Babu with unconcealed contempt shot back: I cannot go down to the level of Sushil Dhara!

A comparable example that comes to my mind would take place about a decade later.

In 1977, after the Janata Party government came to power, at the end of the Emergency, it dismissed the state governments run by the Congress. In the process, in West Bengal the Left Front led by the CPIM came to power. Dr. Ashok Mitra, at that time a close friend of Basu, now the Chief Minister, became the Finance Minister. The Sunday was quite a popular magazine in those days, edited by M J Akbar. Sometime later, on its last page, it carried an interview of Dr. Mitra, an eminent economist in his own right. The interviewer, at one point, asked him whether the economic philosophy of Morarji Desai, the Prime Minister, known for his conservative vies, is somewhat akin to that of Milton Friedman. Dr. Mitra curtly replied (I imagine I still remember): Why bother about Friedman? He has never heard of his name. (Just think of it! Morarji Bhai is the Prime Minister of the country, and Dr. Mitra is the Finance Minister of a constituent state!) That demonstrative intellectual arrogance (permeated with moral courage), I guess, would not be too commonplace elsewhere.

Jyoti Babu, despite being the best known leader of the CPIM towards which the Bengali upper middle class had a distinct animus, came to get identified with Bengali subnationalism and, even if somewhat strangely, struck a chord with the Bengali middle class. Though not exactly comparable, even then somewhat resembling Subhas Bose, a much taller figure and having a strong pan-national appeal cutting across regional divides. Basu is obviously far more parochial in terms of his appeal as compared to Bose. The only other two political figures whose names, in this context, come to mind are C R Das, a mentor of Bose, and subsequently Dr. B C Roy, the Chief Minister of West Bengal in its early independent years. He reportedly had a special soft corner for Basu despite political rivalries.

Ninety-five years is no short span. So Basu could do a lot and saw a lot. If the CPIM in West Bengal had peaked under the (somewhat tension ridden) joint stewardship of his and significantly lesser known, but perhaps even more powerful, Pramod Dasgupta (or PDG); he lived long enough to see the beginning of the dramatic decline of the party that he had nurtured for far too long.

Sukla Sen

17 01 10

Kerala Social Critic and Malayalam Writer Sacaria Heckled as He Spoke Against Moral Policing

2010-01-12T20:47:00.000+05:30

Kerala is in focus again, for its characteristic mofussil politics preoccupied with die-hard defending of the 'Left'. A literary seminar and book release was organized by December Books yesterday before at Payyanur which had been participated by many important writers and attended by an enlightened audience together with activists of the Purogamana Kala Sahitya Sangham(Forum for Progessive Art and Lierature). Pu.Ka .Sa is an all Kerala Organization patronized by the CPI(M).
Sacaria, the well known social critic and writer while releasing a book by Madhu Nair referred to the deplorable state of the society in which a man and a woman found in circumstances of having extra marital sex or even suspected of doing such thing, would be hounded by the moral brigade. He might be referring to the 'anaasasyam' case recently clamped on Rajmohan Unnithan at Manjeri, Malalappuram district in which a local mob led by DYFI and PDP activists surrounded a house and got the police to arrest Rajmohan (a Congress leader) under sections of an Act that prevent trafficking on women.
According to today's news paper reports, a group from the audience heckled Sacaria and threw filthy abuses at him. Later, while he was about to leave the town, a small group of DYFI men accosted him and keys of the car were forcibly snatched from the driver. The group of about half a dozen men comprising the son of a former MP reportedly told Sacaria that he would not be allowed to get away in good shape, with this kind of speeches made(against the movement and party!) at Payyanur. They threatened to smash his head and teeth. Sacaria reportedly replied that he would then be happy to have a taste of the DYFI culture of Payyanur. Irritated by this,the group persisted on giving threats and continued to pour abuses on Sacaria. The organizers of the event who too were CPM sympathizers finally succeeded in dissuading the small mob . Sensible intervention by writers like C V Balakrishnan also helped to diffuse the tension.
Along with this incident, someone within or outside Payyanur likes to recall many an expression of authoritarian 'Leftism' in the past. Beneath the superficial layer of 'Left' one might sometimes see unabashedly expressed casteism and misogyny as betrayed in the case of burning an autorikshaw owned and driven by a dalit woman in Dec 2005.
A benign SMS message which was already already in circulation that had been sportively forwarded by a young teacher in a parallel college to his female student some time in 2006 had led to his being expelled from job at the behest of SFI /DYFI enthusiasts and finally to his committing suicide. Sending this kind of 'controversial' SMS to a girl student by a male teacher was judged as giving disrepute to both the institution and the girl (who will marry her then?).Jagadeesh, the teacher had been badly roughed up in public and in broad day light by the die-hard 'Leftists'. But again, the poor teacher also had a back history of 'antagonizing' the Party just by keeping aloof from it, in spite of his residing in a Parrish largely under the diktat of the Party. Speakers in a meeting organized by the colleagues of Jagadeesh and a few human rights activists in the small town of Payyanur also had been threatened by a gang of 'Lleftists' in ways similar to the Sacaria episode.
Lot of reported and unreported incidents like this do occur, but the party leadership unfailingly find reasons to justify such acts of vandalism.
(Please check today's Deshabhimani, preferably Kannur edition to see how the party answers; sorry, I haven't seen it yet)
When even bigwigs of the literary world, like Sacaria are not spared of such attacks, the small scale human rights fighters of Payyanur can definitely be proud of bearing the brunt of such attacks on many occasions in the past. But pitiable indeed, is the plight of those organizing progressive events under the auspices of organizations like Pu.Ka. Sa (Forum for Progressive Art and Literature), who have to be contented with a second class status meekly witnessing these acts of vandalism and yet not being able to speak out for the fear of ostracizing and harassment by the big people who really manage their shows.

Payyanur and its people are always taken for granted by the CPI(M) .
Each election is a cake walk for 'Left'.
The opposition parties on the other hand, are neither too ambitious to challenge the 'Leftists' on the electoral arena nor do they feel any such need . Because they are content with many things they already share with the 'Left'- for example, the development activities, the feudal moral and cultural fabric woven with a unique mix of caste and gender, and so on.
End result : Everybody may fell happy there in Payyanur, with the 'Left' taking care of the cultural /moral concerns of all, though a few (outcastes?) will continue to make noises here and there. Again, thank them for not showing any sympathy to the RSS unlike at least the few who might be disillusioned with the Left in the Party villages elsewhere in Kannur district!

MF Hussain purged from Himachal Textbook

2010-01-11T17:51:00.000+05:30

Students in Himachal Pradesh need know only about artists who've lived and worked there. So, M.F. Husain should be banished from school books.
At least, that's what the BJP government thinks.
For the session starting March, the state's school board will replace a chapter on Husain in the Class XI Hindi textbooks by one on painters Sobha Singh and Nicholas Roerich.
"Husain has nothing to inspire students in Himachal," said board chairman Chaman Lal Gupta. "But these painters had a great association with Himachal.
They could ignite minds."
Artist-activist Ram Rahman said: "Husain's work is above petty politics and will outlast intolerable ideology."
Husain, who lives abroad because of threats from Hindutva elements for his portrayal of Hindu goddesses in the nude, could not be reached for comments. reached for comments.
INPUTS FROM NEW DELHI

Hindustan Times

08/01/2010

PUCL Press Statement on Detention of Himanshu in Chhattisgarh

2010-01-10T10:52:00.001+05:30

The PUCL condemns the detention of Himanshu of Vanvasi Chetna Ashram (VCA), Dantewada and PUCL State Executive member of the Chhattisgarh at Kanker Police Station today 3rd January, 2010. This detention has been made on the eve of the Public Hearing that was being organised by VCA on the atrocities being committed by police and security forces in that area. According to the VCA the detention of Himanshu at this stage is to clearly sabotage the hearing.

Himanshu’s detention follows a series of harassment that he and his organisation have been subjected to which include

Demolition of his ashram outside Dantewda,
Arrest of Sukhnath on 1st August, ’09 and of Kopa Kunjam on 10th December, ’09, both senior activists of VCA , under chhattisgharh Special Public Security Act, 2005, who were trying to implement the SC orders of implementing the Internally displaced people.
Preventing Himanshu from taking out a padyatra through the villages of Dantewada district, in December, ‘09
Intimidation by the police and salwa judum activists to harass women’s groups who were prevented from reaching Dantewada on 15 December, ’09.
Illegal Detention and intimidation of the 5 women who were fighting their own cases of rape by salwa judum members. They were forcibly made to sign papers by SPOs and Police when they were illegally detained after 15 December, ’09 for 5 days at Dronpal Police Station, that they were not wanting to pursue their cases
Intimidation by the administration of the landlord who rented the house to Himanshu following which he is being forced to vacate the premises.
Preventing Himanshu and VCa from even booking rooms at the local Dharmashala including forcing one owner to return the money of rooms he had booked for VCA.

Today too he was trying to escort Shambhu to Raipur, a victim of operation green hunt who sustained bullet injuries in her leg and had to get to Delhi for treatment. She was prevented by the Police from undertaking the travel so Himanshu with others boarded the vehicle and were detained at Kanker, Jagdalpur. PUCL demands that the Chhattisgarh State Government release Himanshu and Kopa and Sukhnath immediately along with ending all harassment of Himanshu Kumar and other members of the VCA who have a right to exercise their democratic rights.

PUCL demands that the State Government implement the SC orders of rehabilitation of internally displaced people which was the main work of Himanshu and the VCA which the local administration and the Government did not like. PUCL also demands Stopping of all operations like green hunt and others that are responsible for human rights violations and letting activists and media to freely move in the areas.

Prabhakar Sinha (President)

Pushkar Raj (General Secretary)
— Office: 270A, Patpar Ganj, , Mayur Vihar I, Delhi-110091
ph. 22750014
098106-56100
www.pucl.org

Why S M Mushrif’s book “Who Killed Karkare?” not discussed in media?

2010-01-06T17:30:00.002+05:30

By Mohd Ziyallah Khan,

To tell a truth in front of a tyrant ruler is the biggest crusade in the sight of Lord. And perhaps, this saying sounds so true to Mr. S M Mushrif (retired IPS officer – former IGP Maharashtra) when he wrote his book ‘Who killed Karkare?’ published a couple of months back. Ironically, despite all the truth he has managed to jot down in his daring work, he couldn’t get the kind of coverage or response in the Media.

The sort of debate or discussion it should spark off in the market sounds missing though, the reasons are obvious, which he himself disclosed in his recent visit to Nagpur on 2nd and 3rd January 2010 in a conference organised by Bahujan Sangarsh Samiti Nagpur Chapter.

He said that 20-25 different journalists from the various big and small media houses – both the print and electronic – which interviewed him on 28th October 2009 at his Pune residence, but nothing really appeared the following day, except in small time newspapers of the city. His work was totally kept under the carpet; nobody really cared to debate or discuss it in public domain, thanks to the kind of pressure the Saffron brigade has created on the media industry. So one can imagine the fear in which they dwell these days. To this point Mushrif added a humor saying, “the saffron elements happen to be the real terrorist, but with my book they seems to be terrorized, so in this way I now call myself a more bigger terrorist than them”.

The most interesting speech in the two-day program of Bahujan Sangarsh Samiti, was in the symposium on ‘Hindu Nation and Bahujan Society’ (Bahujan Society is referred to the non-Brahmin communities, including Muslims, Christians, Sikh, Dalits, OBC’s etc). In his speech, Mr Mushrif said that the real trouble before the anti-national elements (saffron groups) were the true nationalist people like Karkare, Salaskar, Kamte etc, who managed to find the real culprit behind the series of bomb blasts executed in various places including, Malegaon, Nanded and Parbhani etc. The two laptops recovered by Karkare after Sadhvi Pragya’s arrest disclosed, how the Hindu terror network was responsible for the series of bomb blasts carried out, making Muslim innocent youths responsible for the same.

The laptop recovered had ample of information about how the Hindu terror group materialized this anti-national activities using people and groups of different expertise and resource. These groups of men included some high profile industrialists, politicians, media professionals, historians, academicians and so on. This new nexus coming into light was well exposed by our real hero, the ATS Chief, Hemant Karkare. This man made a promise to himself that he will leave no stone unturned to let the world know the truth. However, before he could do this, he was knocked out of this mortal world in a very mysterious fashion during the 26/11 Mumbai attack.

According to Mushrif, the elimination of Karkare was nothing but an innovative way of getting rid of a person who was likely to expose the anti-national elements which is nothing but the saffron brigade. This innovative way is – certainly killing people like Karkare under the shadow of some operation like 26/11, so it was a good team work between the so called Lashkar men and the saffron elements.

According to Mushrif, the IB was well informed about the LeT men hatching a plan to attack the Taj, they had been knowing this fact since 18th November 2008, but unfortunately, they never passed on this information to the Navy or to the Mumbai police, rather they preferred to give it to the coast guard which has nothing to do with the internal security. So it was nothing but efforts done too little too late, failing thus to avert this attack. The IB despite being informed about the movement of the boat carrying the men with lethal weapons remained tongue tied. Earlier the IB was provided with 35 different suspicious cell no’s by the RAW, the same numbers used during those 72 hours of terror in Mumbai, including many ISD calls and only one call made in Mumbai, just before the death of Karkare. In this way Hemant Karkare was killed by the men as per the directions of the saffron elements, while the message went to the masses was, ‘LeT men killed him’.

According to Mushrif, he had found 11 stark contrasting elements in two operations. The Taj-Oberoy-Trident was completely different from the one at Cama and Rangbhavan lanes. How can same people be at two different places at the same time? Also, he came across so many loopholes, in the 26/11 investigation. Sr. IAS officer Rangari told Times of India, Mumbai edition that during the attack at CST, out of 35 CCTV cameras, 16 were shut down at that particular day for no valid reason. The SIM recovered at CST station of the terrorist belonged to a person based at Satara (a city in Maharashtra), the police investigation was intervened in the midst of the due process, and this owner of the SIM was never brought to books. The lady beside the coastal area identified these men who came from boat, and was the eyewitness to the massacre perpetrated at Taj in the broad daylight, but was soon forced to leave for US.

The interesting remark made by Mr. Mushrif at the end of his speech was, that the IB in India is worst than any RSS Shakha, and that if these men who happen to be custodians of our security and who remain hand in glove with the enemies of our society, then its time to stand up for a new revolution.

(The writer is a freelancer and media activist based in Nagpur, can be contacted at writeziya@gmail.com)

Link: http://whokilledkarkare.com/

The Watch Dog never become the Lap Dog!

2010-01-01T20:31:00.013+05:30

Media & Democracy in the wake of government's allegations against Thejas daily, a Malayalam News paper circulated only in Kerala.

What is the job of responsible media in democracy?

What are their duties?, rights?

and ultimately what should they stand for?

before going any further, let's go through the letter and major allegations against Thejas Publications and treat one by one.

1. It's the part of pan Islamic network and catering to communal agenda of certain organization

2. The publication invariably takes anti establishment views on issue like plight of Muslims,Kashmir and India's relations with USA & Israel

3. It describes Government's counter militancy effort as state sponsored terrorism, thereby endorsing the stance of militant element.

4. In their publications, contemporary developments/issues are invariably projected with a communal slant.

There is not even a single allegation was reported that it caters something communal via news.

The main stream journalists and activists are well co-operating with this publication by contributing news and articles to it.

Their anti establishment views:

What is the job of responsible media in democracy?

Is it something to propagate government views?

Or does media salute and report the police version of the story?

Else, does it swallow or persist it's readers to swallow establishment views?

Let me quote Thejas Daily Executive editor NP Chekuttty:

"In the past four years when we were running this newspaper, we had to take up strong and uncompromising positions; tough stances. We were asking why the six men from Muslim community were shot dead point blank at Beemapalli, we questioned the claim of the police that the boy from Pakistan who came here to meet his relatives was a terrorist (which he was not), we said there is a different tale to tell for Shahansha (in Love jihad case)... no other paper cared to tell this story as we did.

Now can anyone in their sense describe these as communal propaganda? I don't think so. Of course Thejas, in its editorial (December 19, 2009), has thrown the challenge: All its editions during the past four years are available in public domain (also available online free of charge www.thejasonline.com), and just locate one sentence in all these that can be dubbed a deliberate, malicious and hateful attack on another community, and confront us in the public sphere with the proof "

His full article could be read in below link

http://chespeak.blogspot.com/2009/12/in-defence-of-thejas-daily-reply-to.html

This is an attempt for "thought control" on the populous and a snooping in the freedom and independence of the Indian press - Practiced during 1975's emergency period

The fundamental rights of the Indian people were suspended, and strict controls were imposed on freedom of speech and press. In the shadow of "freedom of expression." Based on the First Amendment Act of 1951

To controll media,effective methods were applied by Indira Gandhi by

(1) allocation of government advertising; (2) shotgun merger of the news agencies;and (3) use of fear-arousal techniques on newspaper publishers, journalists and individual shareholders.

During censorship, most of the nation's domestic dailies, however, gave up the battle for press freedom. Their pages were "filled with fawning accounts of national events,flattering pictures of Gandhi and her ambitious son, and not coincidentally, lucrative government advertising.

In the beginning of censorship, when a few leading newspapers such as The Indian Express and The Statesman refused to abide the governmental censorship, the government withdrew its advertising support from these newspapers. Later on, this type of financial castigation was used on several other rebellious newspapers.

As Indian newspapers depend a great deal on governmental advertising this has kept many of them vulnerable to government manipulation. The large scale possibility of such manipulation, however, was not fully demonstrated until Indira Gandhi's government decided to take advantage of this unique circumstance.

without such ad revenues, it would be difficult for many Indian newspapers to stay in business.

And one thing to note here is the letter, asking to control the thejas, also condemn Kerala state government for giving state advertisement to Thejas and mention some institutions and persons they said to be 'the promoters' of Thejas.

This is a type of threatening practiced during Emergency to cut down the revenue from adverticement and donation and thus to make the media under financial pressure.

A responsible media cannot agree to the such terms of reporting

It must be kept aloof from governmental intrusion and exploitation. and it is not government's propaganda machine at all. They must be insured of a true independence.

The currently practicing media system has becoming a major barrier to the exercise of democracy and to the discussion of any of the mounting social problems that face us

when it comes to the reporting of the human rights-related incidents, the newspapers devote very little space to them, unless the incidents it self is a very newsworthy. and they seldom make a serious effort to follow up such stories, which they report in the beginning.

Instead it permeates the government views, the media, institutions & individuals who point out unpleasant realities of current or past Indian behavior are often subjected to social and/or governmental pressures and treated as pariahs or according to precedent as jihadis

Does the democratic State have the right to impinge upon the freedoms of the fourth estate in such an undemocratic manner?

Where the media does overstep its boundaries, the government should then step in and pull up the erring organisations. But passing such undue restraints on a responsible media that are reminiscent of those of a banana republic is unhealthy and unwanted for a stalwart democracy such as ours!

Should Indian politician be also held accountable for what they do in their personal lives?

2009-12-31T17:35:00.010+05:30

Do you think our Politicians must abide with a code of conduct? Or is it okay for them to guard their secrets under the garb of privacy? - a healthy discussion in the wake of alleged scandal stories in Kerala and Andhra Predesh.

Nicholas Sarkozy announces his affair with Carla Bruni. Bill Clinton Admits his liason with intern Monica Lewinsky.

Andhra Pradesh Governor N D Tiwari resigned in the wake of a raging controversy after a sting operation purportedly showed him in a compromising position with three women.

Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee leader Rajmohan Unnithan was taken into custody from a rental house after mid night with a woman and later handed them over to the police authorities.

Is it the turn of the Indian politicians who to be more transparent about their personal lives, considering the social powers and the role they have in shaping the Indian democracy? Or is it okay for them to guard their secrets under the garb of privacy?

"The alleged news story is nothing but a 'tissue of lies' and is denied" Tiwari said
"Nothing immoral was there and the issue is purely politically motivated" Unnithan said

There might have some politics behind both cases, Let's ignore that side of the story and whether it's right or wrong

Do you think they must abide with a code of conduct ?
What are your expectations ?

‘Govt let us down as we are Muslim’ - Family of Mumbai businessman

2009-12-30T22:01:00.007+05:30

“In all honesty, I feel we are being treated in this manner because we are Muslim. The Government’s intentions are not clean,”

Express news service

Posted: Wednesday, Dec 30, 2009 at 0335 hrs Mumbai:

The family of Mumbai businessman Roshan Jamal Khan, convicted by Spain’s anti-terror court earlier this month, on Tuesday alleged that the Government of India had let them down as he was a Muslim.
The family also said it would approach the Supreme Court of
Spain and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague if necessary.
Addressing a press conference, his brother Mehboob alleged that the government was treating the case with indifference as he was a Muslim. “I went to New Delhi several times to meet Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi and submitted files to their secretaries. The Ministry of External Affairs has not replied to us once. All we expect from the ministry is to request Spain to make evidence against my brother public. If they are able to produce evidence, we will shut our voices forever,” he said.
“In all honesty, I feel we are being treated in this manner because we are Muslim. The Government’s intentions are not clean,” he alleged.

Jamal Khan was among the 14 Muslim men picked up by the Spanish authorities from a Barcelona mosque on January 19 last year in connection with a terror plot. Four of them, including another Indian, were released later and a 15th suspect was detained in the Netherlands. Jamal Khan’s family has been maintaining that he had gone to Spain on business.
He was convicted, along with 10 Pakistanis, by the Spanish court on December 14 for belonging to a terrorist group linked to Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud. According to the prosecution, the group intended to bomb the Barcelona Metro transport system. The court acquitted them of a specific conspiracy to strike at the metro.
Jamal Khan’s lawyer has appealed against the conviction and the matter is likely to be heard in January first week. “We will take up the case in Spain’s Supreme Court if the appeal is turned down. If necessary, we will also go to the International Court of Justice. We are also in touch with Amnesty International,” said Mehboob.
Parvez Ubhare, a lawyer working with Khan’s family, said: “There is no evidence against Khan to associate him with a terrorist group. The court’s order is also contradictory since it has given a clean chit with regard to a conspiracy to bomb the Metro. It has relied solely on the statement of a protected witness who has worked for three years with the Taliban. It has also relied on an interview with an associate of Behtullah Mehsud eight months after the accused were arrested.”

Andhra : Irom Sharmila’s 10-year-fast is ignored

2009-12-30T21:32:00.002+05:30

Isn’t it ironic and smacks of the Centre’s double standards? One person in Andhra Pradesh fasts for ten days and Centre relents. Another person fasts in Manipur for nine years and more, supported by the relay fast of thousands of other women for one year now, and what does the Centre do? NOTHING. Wah, wah, Indian democracy!! Not proud to be an Indian".

This is a message sent to some of us by a woman journalist friend in Manipur. Indeed, if you are looking at what they call "mainland" India from the distant Northeast, it must seem strange that a 10-day-fast can result in talks for a separate state for Telangana but a 10-year-fast to demand the withdrawal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) from Manipur results in nothing.

Irom Sharmila, that iconic 36-year-old Manipuri woman, has spent the best part of almost 10 years being force fed against her will. She has undertaken a fast-unto-death demanding the withdrawal of the AFSPA.

Each year, the ritual is played out. Her period of detention for attempting suicide is one year. The authorities have to release her, usuallyin early March. She leaves the Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital in Imphal where she is incarcerated and being force fed through a tube shoved down her nose.

Earlier this year, many of us were witness to the moving moment when this pale young woman emerged from the hospital and was virtually carried by hundreds of older Manipuri woman who have been on a relay hunger strike in support, to the shamiana where they sit all day and all night in solidarity. Sharmila began speaking as she gained a little strength. But she would not give up her fast. So two days later she was rearrested and once again moved to the hospital.

And while this annual arrest and rearrest ritual continues, Manipur — and particularly Imphal — is caught in a permanent spiral of violence. For many months now, since the July 23 "encounter" killing of a young man, Chongkham Sanjit in broad daylight in Imphal’s busy market area (exposed by Tehelka through a series of photographs), the capital of Manipur has not been "normal". People are demanding that the killers of this young man be prosecuted. But AFSPA gives the security forces impunity. Their powers to act cannot be questioned.

As a result, there has been a civil strike that has immobilised the city. For months children have not attended school or college. There is violence, curfew and an aggravation of the perennial shortages that this land-locked city not far from the border of Myanmar faces even in so-called normal times. The 25 lakh citizens of the state of Manipur have seen little or no development for years while the rest of India, apparently, marches ahead. So my Manipuri friends have a right to ask why some fasts in the "mainland" yield results while their protests are never heard. Or if they are, then the result is promises that are never kept. Prime minister Manmohan Singh raised some hopes in 2004 when he went to Imphal and promised that the withdrawal of AFSPA would be considered.

He set up a committee headed by Supreme Court judge BP Jeevan Reddy to look into the issue. The committee strongly recommended that the Act be withdrawn pointing out that the Act, "for whatever reason, has become a symbol of oppression, an object of hate and an instrument of discrimination and high-handedness". But nothing happened. The promise was forgotten, the recommendation ignored. The Telangana issue has triggered a series of demands for separate states. The people of Gorkhaland have begun fasts, others are threatening to do so. But in the midst of all this fasting, we would do well to pause and think why only the demands of our "mainland" matter while the "periphery" — places like Manipur — are ignored, forgotten and rendered virtually invisible.

A chronicle of anti-Sikh riots - A new book on anti-Sikh riots

2009-12-28T21:04:00.002+05:30

The book meanders through the “murder of Sikhs” “what the state was doing” and the “men behind the violence”

I ACCUSE… — The Anti-Sikh Violence of 1984: Jarnail Singh; Penguin Books India Pvt. Limited, 11 Community Centre, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi-110017. Rs. 350.

On December 14, 2008, U.S. President George Bush Jr was in Baghdad. Two shoes were hurled at him by Muntadar al-Zaidi, a journalist. Muntadar was sentenced to a year in prison. On April 7, 2009, Jarnail Singh hurled a shoe at Union Minister P. Chidambaram to express his frustration at continued inaction against anti-Sikh rioters of 1984. Jarnail Singh, a reporter, was not prosecuted but he lost his job. The book under review is Singh’s account of the incident, its ba ckground and consequences.
Bloodbaths

Democracy in India has got soaked in blood many times. Class violence apart, there have been cases of group/mob violence before 1984 and after. Assam’s Nellie massacre in 1983 was worse than the 1984 anti-Sikh violence. Post-Babri Masjid demolition, there was group violence in Mumbai in 1992, about which we have a report by the Srikrishna Commission of Inquiry. Then, in 2002, came the Gujarat pogrom, the cases related to which are still under investigation. Six years on, Orissa was the scene of murderous attacks on members of the Christian community. In all these incidents, mobs were successful in committing unspeakable atrocities on hapless victims. Worse, most culprits are roaming free, with impunity.

The anti-Sikh violence of 1984, which resulted in the death of around 2,500 people, has many chroniclers, and Jarnail Singh is the latest. Among the chroniclers, some are of the sectarian ‘Khalistan Zindabad’ variety and some are of the non-sectarian, democratic, human rights type.

Punjab was not just the land of economic plenty. It also became the land of ecological nightmares, social disparity, and cultural distortion. Men from the dominant caste, say keen observers of Punjabi culture, are given to boasting on three counts — that they are enterprising Singhs, unlike ‘bhaiyas’; martial, not sissy; and Jats, not Dalits. Such a mindset inevitably courts collision with the ‘others’ of different hues.

And the movement for Khalistan was built around supremacist delusions born out of it. The Khalistan agitation consumed its own offsprings, although the saga has its home-grown panegyrists. Between 1981 and 1993, it claimed the lives of 11,694 people, of whom 7,139 (61 per cent) were Sikhs, says K.P.S. Gill in The Knights of Falsehood (1997).

In the non-sectarian category, Uma Chakravarti and Nandita Haksar got together to record the horrific events from a secular viewpoint. The Delhi Riots: Three Days in the Life of a Nation (1987) was the outcome of their joint venture.

The police did some good work in securing peace for Punjab but then they were guilty of unconscionable excesses too. The human rights perspective is available in the work of Ram Narayan Kumar (1953-2009). Kumar, who hailed from Andhra Pradesh, co-founded the Committee for Coordination on Disappearances in Punjab and co-authored Reduced to Ashes: The Insurgency and Human Rights in Punjab (2003), which provided a wealth of information on 600 cases of human rights violation. Taking cognisance of that information, the National Human Rights Commission initiated follow-up action and trials are on in some cases.
Twists and turns

Jarnail Singh’s book is a 165-page ‘quickie’ containing six chapters. Beginning with October 31, 1984 — the day Indira Gandhi was assassinated — it meanders through the “murder of Sikhs,” “what the state was doing,” and the “men behind the violence” before reaching the climax, the shoe-throwing episode.

Born to a migrant carpenter, the author grew up in a ‘refugee’ colony in Delhi with seven siblings. On becoming a journalist, Singh closely followed the twists and turns in the investigations/cases of Delhi anti-Sikh riots. At a Press conference when he could not take the “technical” responses to his questions anymore, he hurled a shoe at Mr. Chidambaram.

It is a matter of satisfaction for Singh that, after all, the wheels of law has turned, howsoever little or late! The foreword by Khushwant Singh is uncharacteristically dull. The publishers have rushed to publish it without an index. The book is non-sectarian and it might sell. But is it the best work in this genre?

Unnithan Episode and the Moralistic Mobocracy in Kerala

2009-12-25T05:06:00.002+05:30

A recent story from Kerala as reported by the Malayalam press and electronic media should perhaps remind us the need to uphold the Constitution of India Against Moralistic Terror

Just look at the horror stories in the media which tell us that Rajmohan Unnithan (a Congress leader) was caught for being in the company of a woman in a rented house. The local people led by DYFI and PDP activists surrounded the house and they summoned the police to stop the alleged ’anaashasyam…’. Police have reportedly booked Unnithan and the owner of the house for committing/abetting ‘anasaasyam’.

Don’t ask neither the media nor the police what is the section under which the case is booked here, though we are expected to assume that the crime as defined in the statute book is about racketeering on women by third parties with motivation for profit, is invoked. But this is routinely done by the police and an overenthusiastic moral brigade cutting across political spectrums from far right to left to ‘feminists’(?), in all cases of extra marital relationships.

‘Anaasasyam’ literally means undesirable activity, and in the common parlance, it simply means extra marital sex even with mutual consent! It is also among the most favourite items that make news for the evening dailies in every small/big town in Kerala.

Several pro CPM womens’ activists indeed did loudly protest the act of ’anaashasyam’ by a Congress leader…

(According to their logic, women in such cases can neither have the agency nor claims to rights as subjects. They are invariably seen as just the victims of ‘sthreepeedanam’, which means ‘harassment of women’ by a capitalist and sex tourism-oriented racket.

These protesters would have cared a damn for communal profiling of Muslims and dalits as terrorists.

It is no wonder, neither the Mangalore pub attack nor the cultural policing campaign by Sri Ram Sene was unequivocally condemned by the Kerala Leftists and the ’affiliated feminists’!

Stop torture and arbitrary arrests of peace activists and human rights defenders in Chhattisgarh - Amnesty

2009-12-25T01:09:00.002+05:30

"Immediately stop the torture and arbitrary arrest of peace activists and human rights defenders belonging to the Vanvasi Chetna Ashram (VCA) and drop all politically motivated charges against VCA member Kopa Kunjam. We believes that they are targeted because of they exposed human rights violations by the security forces." - Amnesty International

Press Release by
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
PUBLIC STATEMENT
AI index: ASA 20/023/2009
23 December 2009

India: Chhattisgarh authorities must stop torture and arbitrary arrests of peace activists and human rights defenders

Amnesty International urges authorities in the central Indian state of Chhattisgarh to immediately stop the torture and arbitrary arrest of peace activists and human rights defenders belonging to the Vanvasi Chetna Ashram (VCA) and drop all politically motivated charges against VCA member Kopa Kunjam, who was arrested on 10 December. The government must investigate reports of torture immediately, and bring those responsible to justice.

The VCA, a group professing the Gandhian ideology of non-violence, has been campaigning for the last four years against human rights abuses of Adivasi communities in the ongoing armed conflict in Chhattisgarh. The VCA also works for the return and resettlement of some 10,000 Adivasis who have been internally displaced by the conflict between the security forces and the Salwa Judum, a militia widely believed to be supported by the state government, and the armed opposition group the Communist Party of India (Maoist).

On 10 December, the Chhattisgarh state police arbitrarily arrested Kopa Kunjam and Alban Toppo, a lawyer working with the New Delhi-based Human Rights Law Network (NRLN) at Dantewada. They were taken first to the Dantewada police station and then to the Bhairamgarh police station in the neighbouring Bijapur district.

Alban Toppo reported that the police tortured him and Kopa Kunjam that night at the Bhairamgarh police station. They were beaten with thick bamboo sticks and rubber canes for 30 minutes. Toppo was forced to sign a letter stating that they had come to Bhairamgarh police station of their own accord. As a result of the torture, Toppo sustained injuries on his right elbow, biceps and back, causing severe pain and swelling. He could not move his hands and back because of the pain. Kopa Kunjam sustained serious injuries on his chest, back and leg, which left him unable to walk.

Although Toppo was released that night, he remained at the police station, as he had no means of returning home. Accompanied by police personnel, he was able to return the next morning. On 12 December, Kopa Kunjam appeared before a local court where he was charged,under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, with the murder of Punem Honga, a local leader and member of the Salwa Judum, who had been abducted by the Maoists on 2 June 2009.

Amnesty International believes that Kopa Kunjam is being targeted because he exposed human rights violations by the security forces, including the extrajudicial executions of 15 Adivasis at Singaram on 8 January and three Adivasis in front of the Matwada police station on 18 June 2009.

Amnesty International has received further reports that the Chhattisgarh police disrupted a peace march organized by the VCA on 14 December at Dantewada. On that day, the Kanker police prevented a group of 30 activists from proceeding to Dantewada and forced them to return to the state capital, Raipur, citing security problems. The VCA is now planning to hold the peace march on 25 December.

The arbitrary detention of the VCA activists clearly violates India’s Supreme Court guidelines issued in the D. K. Basu vs State of West Bengal case and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which India is a state party. Article 9 of the ICCPR guarantees the right to liberty, which includes freedom from arbitrary detention.

Amnesty International calls upon the Government of Chhattisgarh to:

drop all politically-motivated charges against Kopa Kunjam;
ensure a prompt, impartial, independent and effective investigation into the allegations of torture and ill-treatment of Kopa Kunjam and Alban Toppo. Those suspected of involvement including persons with command responsibility should be prosecuted, in proceedings which meet international standards of fairness. Also, the two victims must be awarded full reparation.
take all necessary measures to guarantee that human rights defenders are able to carry out their legitimate human rights activities without fear of torture and harassment.

Public Document

For more information please call Amnesty International’s press office in London, UK, on +44

20 7413 5566 or email: press@amnesty.org

International Secretariat, Amnesty International, 1 Easton St., London -WC1X 0DW, UK

www.amnesty.org

India: "Paid News" Undermines the Media - Press Release by the Editors Guild

2009-12-25T00:02:00.000+05:30

News organisations have to clearly distinguish between news and advertisements with full and proper disclosure norms. The recent pernicious practice of publishing "paid news" by some newspapers and television channels, especially during elections is deeply shocking!

PRESS RELEASE

23.12.2009

Editors Guild of India

email: editorsguildofindia@gmail.com

The Editors Guild of India is deeply shocked and seriously concerned at the increasing number of reports detailing the pernicious practice of publishing "paid news" by some newspapers and television channels, especially during recent elections. The Guild, at its Annual General Meeting held on December 22, 2009 has strongly condemned this practice which whittles the foundations of Indian journalism and calls upon all editors in the country to desist from publishing any form of advertisement which masquerade as news.

The Guild noted that it had always stood for publication of news which is in public interest; news which has been gathered due to the professional efforts of journalists; and news which is not influenced by malice, bias, favouritism or monetary influence. The Guild recognises that news media in print and electronic form, has a genuine right to publish and broadcast advertisements on all issues, subject to the voluntary Advertising Standards Council code and the News Broadcasting Standards Code.

It is imperative that news organisations have to clearly distinguish between news and advertisements with full and proper disclosure norms, so that no reader and viewer is tricked by any subterfuge of advertisements published and broadcast in the same format, language and style of news. It is disturbing that this "paid news" practice is also being used by companies, organisations and individuals, apart from political parties.

The Guild further deplores the practice of "private treaties" where news organisations accept free equity in unlisted companies in lieu of promoting these companies through news columns and television news programmes. The news organisations should disclose their commercial and equity interests in such companies to the readers and viewers in a transparent manner.

The Guild decries the unsavoury and unacceptable practice of some political parties and candidates offering payment for "news packages" to news media and its representatives to publish and telecast eulogising and misleading news reports on the political parties. Both the media organisations and editors who indulge in it, and the customers who offer payment for such "paid news" are guilty of undermining the free and fair press, for which every citizen of India is entitled to. Such irresponsible acts by a few media organisations and journalists is discrediting the entire media of the country, which has a glorious tradition of safeguarding democratic rights and exposing all kinds of injustices and inequities. Editors and journalists have been at the vanguard of the movement for creation of a just society, both during the days of colonial rule and Independent India. The ugly phenomenon of "paid news" will be a blot on the country’s democratic fabric.

The Guild calls upon publishers, editors and journalists of media organisations to unitedly fight this creeping menace of commercialisation and bartering of self respect of the media. During the coming months, the Guild will join hands with other media organisations to sensitize the media and civil society, including political parties and the Election Commission, on the need to eliminate this unacceptable practice.

The Guild will be shortly unveiling an initiative to encourage transparency regarding "paid news" and "private treaties." We appeal to all stakeholders to join us in pushing for a clean, transparent media.

Mr. Rajdeep Sardesai, President of the Guild announced the formation of an Ethics Committee headed by Mr. T N Ninan, Editor in Chief, Business Standard. The members are Mr. B G Varghese, Editor & columnist; Mr. Sumit Chakravarty, Editor, Mainstream and Ms. Madhu Kishwar, Editor, Manushi.

Rajdeep Sardesai (President)

K S Sachidananda Murthy (Secretary General)

Rohit Bansal (Treasurer)

Indian Democracy Under Threat If Unquestioned Powers To the Armed Forces Not Curbed

2009-12-24T20:49:00.000+05:30

Institutionalising injustice Making forces habitual to a culture of brutality and impunity

Editorial
Kashmir Times, 22 December 2009

The Shopian rapes and murders case is a grim pointer to a very bleak reality - that the process of institutionalising not just human rights abuse but also denial of justice is fully complete. This is amply demonstrated by the consistent effort by one investigating agency after the other to muddle up truth and fabricate evidence to hush up the case in an obvious bid to shield the guilty. The Shopian case becomes significant for the fact that it is not simply about denial of justice to the two victims and obfuscating truth. It is illustrative of how legal instruments and agencies of the State are misused in pursuit of institutionalising injustice. Had it not been for the very persistent and peaceful struggle of the people of Shopian, this process may never have become so evidentally clear. The series of investigations have pointed to an obvious bid to hush up the case rather than revealing the truth. The real picture has been obfuscated totally with too many distorted stories and rumours right from the very beginning. The latest CBI chargesheet which is also unable to explain why the police has not recorded any evidence in the first place or made attempts to fudge evidence, or given a detailed account of how and why the doctors in the first and second post mortems could have floated and circulated so many different post mortem reports, has only made wild assumptions which can be easily challenged. In the light of such distortions and contradictory stories freely flowing around, it maybe difficult at the moment to establish rape with concrete evidence. But there is enough evidence to suggest that the two women did not drown or did not die a natural death. But the clear negation of the same suggests that there is an obvious bid to shield the obvious - men in uniform.

In fact the Shopian investigations reveal the systematic patterns of denial of justice in the manner of fudging evidence and post mortem reports. Looking back, there are a series of cases of human rights abuse at the hands of security men that are littered with stories of fabricated evidence or of post mortem reports that were either fudged or never made public. Everything points out to a policy at the Centre to give unlimited and unaccountable powers to the men in uniform. Whether this is being done by design or sheer miscalculation, the fact remains that the centre is in no mood to rein in the powers of the security forces and the police which too has been involved in counter insurgency operation for the last one and a half decades. This clearly indicates how the agencies of the State are getting an upper hand on issues pertaining to Jammu and Kashmir. This has ominously dangerous portents. Not only would such a policy ensure a perpetuation of violence in Jammu and Kashmir, eclipsing all chances of dialogue, peace, justice and normalcy in this state. In a bid to ensure that the security forces are not demoralised or embarrassed in any way, the government has clearly tread on the path of ensuring that security forces are encouraged to carry on with repressive acts and brutality as also curbing the civil liberties and democratic rights of the citizen. This also does not augur well for any democratic country and the sustenance and stability of democracy. A sizeable chunk of the armed forces and other central para-military forces are operating in Jammu and Kashmir. Making such a major chunk of the forces habitual to a culture of brutality, impunity and unaccountable powers that cannot even be questioned by the Executive carries the perils of such a culture spilling out to other parts of the country. The areas of naxal-related violence, where stories from Kashmir, have started echoing may just be the tip of the ice-berg. These can spread out easily and quickly elsewhere also, threatening the very democratic fabric of the country, whose fragility is imminent if the forces continue to operate with unbridled and unreined freedom or unquestioned powers.

60 min video recording of the hindu right demolition squad in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992

2009-12-22T17:13:00.000+05:30

Newstrack’s December 1992 edition gave a minute-by-minute account of what happened in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992. And yet, M.S. Liberhan took 17 years to come up with what he came up with.

Saw this, Liberhan?

by Madhu Trehan

Hindustan Times, December 20, 2009

It should have taken 60 minutes — 30 minutes to watch the footage from Newstrack, the old video magazine, and 30 minutes to write the report. Newstrack’s December 1992 edition gave a minute-by-minute account of what happened in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992. And yet, M.S. Liberhan took 17 years to come up with what he came up with.

Mritinjoy Jha along with his team were in Ayodhya from November 23, 1992. Thousands of pumped-up, slogan-shouting people were pouring in, carrying pick-axes and other equipment. Manoj Raghuvanshi, with another Newstrack team, had pulled the story together. In his voice-over, Raghuvanshi spoke about “a chief minister who spoke from both sides of his mouth — promising the Supreme Court that no construction would take place on the disputed site — and a prime minister who trusted everybody, including his central forces sent ostensibly to defend the masjid”.

The recordings captured Hindu leaders, including Tyagi Maharaj and Acharya Dharmendra, exhorting the crowd that the masjid must be destroyed and a temple built. Uma Bharti in her speech made three crucial points by demanding answers from the crowd: “Will you restrain yourselves when the leaders ask you to? Will you maintain peace and observe rules? Will you obey your leaders?’” The crowd bellowed a yes. But did the BJP really believe that it could control the kar sevaks, the RSS volunteers, the Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad after its own passion-rousing rath yatra?

Rehearsals of demolition teams practising with ropes, pick-axes and boulders were recorded by Newstrack. The images included Bajrang Dal leader Ramesh Pratap in khaki shorts ‘directing’ with a whistle.

Each time they pulled down a ‘practice boulder’, there were cheers. Bajrang Dal president Vinay Katiyar stated on camera, “I have never formulated any strategy keeping the Supreme Court in mind.” At the Marg Darshak Mandal meeting on December 5, 1992, VHP president Ashok Singhal responded to Newstrack’s query on whether he would obey the Supreme Court order to maintain the status quo: “Nonsense! We have nothing to do with courts. We are unaffected by the court order.”

The disputed area was cordoned off and only sadhus and journalists were allowed in. Around 11.00 am on December 6, BJP leaders Murli Manohar Joshi, L.K. Advani and the VHP’s Ashok Singhal were seen walking into the area. Ayodhya District Magistrate R.N. Srivastava smugly told the Newstrack team: “We have made full arrangements,” adding excitedly, “There is a lot of enthusiasm in the public.” Any fear of anything happening? “No fear,” Srivastava replied. Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) D.B. Rai maintained that “peace and calm will prevail”. Srivastava, along with other senior bureaucrats, then settled down on a terrace to observe the demolition. Tea was served as they watched the proceedings.

As the mob started to demolish the cordoned-off area of the Babri Masjid, there was a clear divide between the general crowd and the hardcore kar sevaks. After being given a cue, the kar sevaks started assaulting journalists, breaking cameras and most journalists made a run for it. Newstrack’s sound recordist Ashok Bhanot hid tapes under a charpai in a nearby house. Another team carried on shooting.

The hardcore kar sevaks wearing yellow head-bands then started weeding out the general crowd (wearing orange head-bands) and only those trained and part of the demolition plan entered the area of the masjid. Singhal was seen shoving people himself. There was confusion among the faithful about why they were being thrown out. Those who resisted were beaten up. There was a specific plan with assigned roles for the demolition. Any ‘freelance’ help was not welcome.

“Watch this. The single-most crucial development that led to the destruction of the disputed structure — at this point there was no direct threat to the shrine and certainly no threat to the police — for some unknown reason: these troops suddenly lined up and filed out of the shrine area,” says Raghuvanshi in the voice-over of the footage. “Was this direct collusion? Were they ordered to leave and if so, by whom? There was no tear gas. No rubber bullets. No lathi charge. No firing. There was no attempt whatsoever to even try to defend the shrine.”

As sadhus blew conch-shells and kar sevaks scaled the barricades to the masjid with pick-axes, ropes and shovels, a small contingent of police stood just below the bureaucrats’ terrace. A police rebellion was caught on camera. As the demolition began, a frantic-looking SSP D.B. Rai ordered his troops to stop the demolition. The police force shuffled nervously, refusing to move even as Rai shouted at them. The bureaucrats kept sipping on their tea. Cameraman Bharat Raj realised then that the action to capture was not confined to the destruction of the masjid, but also the inaction around it.

The Censor Board banned the Newstrack tape. We appealed to the Appellate Tribunal in Bombay. Justice B. Lentin passed an order that stated, “Not only should this tape be allowed, it should be compulsory viewing for every citizen of India.” Doordarshan showed nothing.

We had 36 tapes of 20 minutes each, which totalled 12 hours. I was furious with Raghuvanshi for wasting so much tape on a 30-minute story. M.S. Liberhan asked Newstrack to hand over the tapes. I refused to hand over 12 hours of original tape and we gave him the edited story.

In the 17 years that Liberhan took to write his report, the BJP was in power for six years and the Congress for ten. One can presume that all the 48 extensions were given to Liberhan by both these parties, since the Congress and the BJP were in power for 16 out of the 17 years. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the tabling of the report did not suit either party.

Here’s the simple conclusion: both parties were responsible for the destruction of the Babri Masjid.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has ordered an inquiry into the leaking of the Liberhan report. This is the wrong inquiry to order. Journalists were simply doing their job to get the contents of the Liberhan report to the public. There should be an inquiry into who gave Liberhan 48 extensions and took Indian citizens for a Rs 8 crore ride.

Madhu Trehan produced and anchored Newstrack, a video magazine, from 1988 to 1995.

Gujarat: The forgotten riots of surat

2009-12-22T06:01:00.000+05:30

Inquiry commission for the 1992 riots that broke out in Surat in the wake of the Babri Masjid demolition was terminated in 1997 because it sought several extensions. And while a human rights group challenged the decision in court, this attempt failed to revive the commission.

by Parimal Dabhi

The Indian Express, Dec 17, 2009

Ahmedabad/ Surat : While Justice Liberhan may have submitted his report 17 years late, an inquiry commission for the 1992 riots that broke out in Surat in the wake of the Babri Masjid demolition was terminated in 1997 because it sought several extensions. And while a human rights group challenged the decision in court, this attempt failed to revive the commission.

Though the official death toll in the Surat riots stands at 152, many went missing, and property worth crores was damaged, no one has been held accountable. Lawyer-turned-BJP MLA Atmaram Parmar who defended the accused in the riots admits that there has not even been one conviction in cases of arson, rape and murder that are comparable to the 2002 riots in the state.

Incidentally, Shankersinh Vaghela, who as the chief minister in 1997 ordered the termination of the state inquiry commission, is the lone Congress leader to be indicted by the Liberhan Commission for his role in inciting the post-Babri Masjid demolition riots.

The ill-fated inquiry commission was ordered by Chimanbhai Patel’s Congress government two months after the Surat riots. It was initially headed by Justice (retd) I C Bhatt, but when he was appointed as the Lokayukta in 1995-96, Justice P M Chauhan replaced him.

Incidentally, it was on the issue of the Ayodhya rath yatra that Chimanbhai Patel’s support shifted from the BJP to Congress. Patel, heading the Janata Dal-Gujarat, became the chief minister with the BJP’s support in 1990 but the coalition fell apart on the issue of support to L K Advani’s rath yatra which began from Somnath in Gujarat. By 1992, Chimanbhai Patel emerged as a Congress chief minister after merging the Janata Dal-Gujarat with the party.

Further political ironies were to play out. Vaghela was the state BJP president when the riots broke out in 1992-93, but he went on to engineer a split in the party and toppled the Suresh Mehta-led BJP government in 1995. He then formed the government with the support of the Congress in October 1996. It was in 1997 that he ordered the termination of the inquiry commission, just when the final report was being dictated.

“I am strongly against giving extensions to the inquiry commissions as they become an instrument of getting various allowances only. And so, I ordered the termination of the Chauhan Commission when it did not meet the deadline,” says Vaghela.

While Vaghela’s decision to terminate the commission was challenged in the Gujarat High Court by a human rights group, Jan Sangharsh Manch (JSM), the division bench of the HC dismissed the petition saying that the state government has the power to terminate the inquiry commission. Mukul Sinha of JSM said that the HC decision was challenged in the Supreme Court but it “did not entertain the petition at the relevant time.”

The outcome is that the findings of the commission report may never be known. Justice Chauhan refuses to comment on it and the survivors — especially women and children who were raped and lost their entire families — are reluctant to recall the trauma they went through.

The only candid admission comes surprisingly from BJP MLA, Atmaram Parmar, who defended those accused in the riots’ cases “To the best of my knowledge not a single person had been convicted in any case of 1992 riots.”

Ram and Rahim as Good Neighbors

2009-12-21T22:24:00.000+05:30

The people of Ayodhya have to be taken on board along with the liberal leadership of the communities. Today the most amicable solution has to veer around respecting Ram and Allah both. Both temple and mosque can be accommodated in the area, with equal importance and respect.

by Ram Puniyani

The leak and tabling of Liberhan Commission report has created a big turmoil in the country. While most of the sides have been shouting hoarse about their own position on the issue, not much has been talked about the future solution of this vexed problem.

We recall that the mosque built by Mir Baqui around five centuries ago has been deliberately dragged into the controversy. At the time of Independence it was a mosque, no political party had claimed anything to the contrary. As per the understanding in the constitution, the status of 1947 was to be maintained in cases of places of worship. The installation of Ram lalla idols by deceit in midnight of 22nd Jan 1949 sowed the seeds of controversy. Later in 1975 the dispute between two local groups was taken up by Vishwa Hindu Parishad and in 1989, BJP decided to make a political issue out of it. The tragic demolition and the making of makeshift Ram temple there have added new dimensions to the issue.

It is around this issue that Hindu and Muslim communalists raised the emotional pitch and the tragedies which followed, the demolition, the post demolition communal violence and communalization, polarization of society along religious lines are too well known by now. The court case regarding the same is dragging from last several years without any outcome so far.

Where do we go from here? Do we let this sore to continue on the body politic of the nation? This may act as the trouble spot for the future. It is time that we look at all the aspects of the issue and try to bring a peaceful solution to the issue.

The first step in the issue is to realize that it the communal forces from both communities which have claimed that they represent the community and so they will decide on behalf of Hindus or Muslims respectively. The fact of the matter and, this has been confirmed by Liberhan Commission report, is that these communal groups neither represent the community nor reflect the opinion the communities as a whole. It is imperative that we look forward to the liberal sections, leadership from these communities to come forward and talk in the language of reconciliation. The liberal sections are those who have so far been ignored, but they are the one’s who have talked of peace and accommodation. The election results have also shown that those claiming to represent the aspirations of a particular community have been routed in popular elections. The elected representatives of the area have a major role to play in bringing the consensus. We cannot undo the past but we can definitely chart a peaceful path for future. The peaceful talks between these sections along with the local people of Ayodhya are the central core for solution.

The people of Ayodhya have also been the victims of the demolition and other offshoots of the dispute. What they think should be done at the site has to be taken seriously. They have to be taken on board along with the liberal leadership of the communities. Today the most amicable solution has to veer around respecting Ram and Allah both. Both temple and mosque can be accommodated in the area, with equal importance and respect.

Along with temple and mosque in the same spot we need to bring up a museum dedicated to the great tradition of Ayodhya. Ayodhya has not only been popular for Lord Ram, but it had also been a place for Buddhists and also people of other faith as well. It has been a sort of ‘No War zone’ (A- no, Yudhya-War, Ayodhya- A no war zone), and that spirit has to be cultivated all around. The emotive and divisive appeals need to be rejected by the nation as a whole. In that light the museum-memorial has to be the one of syncretic traditions, of saints who were followed by Muslims and Hindus both, of Sufis who again were respected by Hindus and Muslims both. While the history has been made to degenerate into hoarse shouting, a cool reasoned archeological based understanding should help us to go further. The negotiations between the communities have to be encouraged to the last.

The second line of action has to relate to the court verdict. The court verdict should be final for all of us. The formulation that faith will decide the birth place of the Lord has no place in a society governed by law and reason. The community leaders must give undertaking to respect the court verdict and act accordingly. Those not having faith in the courts cant be the part of the process of reconciliation as reconciliation has to be done in the framework of Indian Constitution. We have invested too much in this issue and it is time that not only this but even other such issues are not given any importance to ensure that the country, nation, can focus on the issues related to bread, butter shelter, employment and health.

Justice is so delayed and the organisers of anti Sikh Pogrom still not in dock

2009-12-21T11:39:00.000+05:30

Report of the Liberhan Commission, which has taken 17 years to prepare, the organized killing of Sikhs happened 25 years ago and nothing more than apologies has been offered.

The Telegraph, December 16 , 2009

The repetition of the promise that action will be taken against those who are accused of killing the Sikhs in 1984 is becoming as tedious as a tale told many times over. The latest in the series of promises comes from none other than the Union home minister, P. Chidambaram, who assured the Rajya Sabha that action against the 1984 riot accused would be speeded up. The home minister advised the lieutenant governor of Delhi, Tejinder Khanna, to sanction prosecution by the Central Bureau of Investigation in four riot cases before the end of 2009. Mr Chidambaram announced to the Upper House that the CBI’s investigations were complete in seven cases against the Congress’s three politicians, Dharam Das Shastri, Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar. (Shastri, it needs to be pointed out, is dead.) Messrs Tytler and Kumar are still active in politics, even though they were denied tickets in the Delhi assembly polls earlier this year. This kind of reassurance, even when it comes from the Union home minister, does precious little to assuage the grievances of the Sikhs. If anything, it aggravates the grievances since it bypasses certain crucial questions.

There is no satisfactory answer, for example, to the question why it has taken so long to arrive at a decision on the cases that go back to 1984. The other uncomfortable question relates to the presence of Mr Tytler and Mr Kumar in Congress politics. There is something to be said against the failure to suspend them or expel them from the Congress party. It would not be unfair to conclude that the only time Mr Chidambaram wakes up to take cognizance of Sikh grievances regarding the 1984 killings is when a Sikh hurls a shoe at him or when Sikh members of parliament raise the issue. It would be simplistic to only blame Mr Chidambaram about this state of affairs where justice is so delayed that it appears as if it has been deferred. There is something systemic in the delays that occur to unearth evidence and then to prosecute on incidents that are matters of national shame. One recent example is the report of the Liberhan Commission, which has taken 17 years to prepare. The pogrom against the Sikhs — the word, pogrom, is used advisedly since the epithet, riot, is an euphemism for what was a one-sided and organized killing — happened 25 years ago and nothing more than apologies has been offered.

India: Republic of Silence - A relevant Article in the light of Liberhan Report

2009-12-21T04:51:00.000+05:30

...but it is an impressive republic of silence as far as the question of arranging the reconstruction of the mosque is concerned, talk of building a Ram temple on the site is sought to be kept alive instead!

Cutting Corners - Ashok Mitra

The Telegraph, 18 December 2009

Hokum must have its kingdom. The judicial report on the culpability for the crime perpetrated on December 6, 1992, was first leaked and then laid on the floor of Parliament. The predictable sequel was an uproarious parliamentary debate. Countrymen are however not any more enlightened than they already were.

That horrid outrage was committed over 17 years ago, in broad daylight, with the world’s media looking on. Thousands watched the proceedings on the television screen; they even had the opportunity to watch the gleeful post-demolition celebrations and the faces of the celebrants. All that the judge’s report does is to state the obvious. The government is delighted; it has responded to the judicial blah-blah by an ‘action taken’ report, equally blah-blah, the purport being to make it plain that no action whatever is contemplated.

The parliamentary debate has been marked by the same bogus quality. Each party went through the motion of parading its anger, sorrow, indignation or self-righteousness for the sake of record, nothing beyond. It was hypocrisy reflecting a kind of mutual agreement among the different parties of the you-do-not-embarrass-us-too-much-and-we-too-will-behave genre. The nation is taken for a ride, since politicians are confident that the nation will accept the charade with philosophical equanimity: these are turbulent times, enough new problems are cropping up every day, little purpose is served by raking up the embers of that hideous episode, let bygones be bygones.

A similar consensus has presumably been reached on a related matter too. Whether P.V. Narasimha Rao, the then prime minister, was ‘daydreaming’ — as the judge’s report suggests — or actually taking an indolent Sunday afternoon nap while the Babri mosque was being demolished is no longer terribly important. To what extent he was responsible for what happened is now little more than academic speculation. What is, however, very much relevant is the commitment he made at twilight of that infamous day in a telecast address to the nation. It was a commitment by the nation’s prime minister on behalf of the Government of India. After disposing of the preliminaries concerning the events of the day, he had then announced his government’s resolve to ensure that the destroyed mosque was soon rebuilt on the same site.

It was a categorical announcement, with no ambiguity about it. At least, it was assumed there was no ambiguity about it: a grievously wrong thing had taken place, the government was sorry it could not prevent its occurrence. It had, however, resolved to set right the wrong that had been done and decided to arrange the reconstruction of the mosque on its original foundation. Those who listened to the prime minister took it for granted that the restoration of the mosque at its original site would happen as early as possible, perhaps in the course of the next couple of years, certainly not at the fag end of a century or a millennium.

The pledge the prime minister of the day made has not been implemented till now. But it has not been repudiated by any succeeding regime either. The executive authority within the framework of a parliamentary democracy is supposed to be a continuum; unless a particular commitment made by a previous government has been formally rescinded or amended by a succeeding one, it remains an official commitment. Quite a few changes in the political complexion of the regime in New Delhi have, of course, taken place since December, 1992. The Congress was not in power between 1996 and 2004. A rainbow coalition was in charge for a while during this period, and was followed by a regime led by the Bharatiya Janata Party. For the past five years and a half, though, the Congress has been back in government. It has dispatched P.V. Narasimha Rao to posthumous oblivion, but no record exists to show that the pledge he made on behalf of the Congress government was ever publicly disavowed by the party.

Some bigots might have thought otherwise, the prime minister’s statement was, however, accorded a quiet but firm welcome at the time. Sections of the BJP leadership were struck by awe realizing the implications of the dastardly act perpetrated by their acolytes. None of them openly protested against the government decision to have the mosque re-built, nor was any dissonance voiced from any other quarters. It has nonetheless been an astounding display of forgetfulness. Debate still continues over the assignment of responsibility for the outrage. The investigating judge’s damp squib of a report has given a new lease of life to that debate. But it is an impressive republic of silence as far as the question of arranging the reconstruction of the mosque is concerned, talk of building a Ram temple on the site is sought to be kept alive instead.

Excitement is caused every now and then over the supposed breach of this or that parliamentary privilege. If a minister makes a promise on the floor of the House and fails to carry it out, it is taken to be a breach of the privileges of Parliament. That apart, any outsider who in any manner dishonours or disparages Parliament is considered to be guilty of breach of privilege and is liable to be charged with contempt of the House. Should not there be scope for a similar breach of privilege where the government makes a commitment to the nation and does nothing about it subsequently?

We, however, exist in a realm of fakery. Politics has been reduced to an artefact of simulated amnesia. Politicians and political parties can get away by pretending that they have managed to forget the pledge P.V. Narasimha Rao as prime minister had made to the nation. Or that pledge, it will perhaps be suggested, was made by a flustered prime minister of a cornered government in a state of half confusion and half contrition. He could not possibly have meant it, or even if he had meant it at that particular moment, second thoughts made him realize the necessity of discretion, for any initiative to implement that commitment might have enormously combustible consequences. It might generate social tension of the same magnitude as the demolition of the mosque had given rise to. Politicians and political parties of practically all hues have evidently gone along with this judgement. Many amongst them would even feign surprise that such a pledge was ever made.

Honouring the commitment the government undertook on that dismal evening more than 17 years ago is evidently not ‘politically feasible’. The BJP would be scandalized if the proposal to rebuild the mosque were to be revived; the party is still — even if only nominally — determined to build a Ram mandir on that site. The Indian National Congress would scamper away with fright if reminded of the promise made by its own prime minister; there is, after all, a substantial overlap between its constituency and that of the BJP. Even politicians of other species, who take pride in flaunting their secular credentials, have chosen to remain silent on the issue. They will not actively campaign for the restoration of the mosque because they hate the idea of igniting a fresh controversy. They will grant the moral case for rebuilding the Babri mosque where it once was. Even then, they will prefer to let the sleeping dog lie. In the recent parliamentary debate, not one member cared to suggest that the foremost imperative action for the government to take is to help restore the mosque on its original foundation.

India, its Constitution asserts, is a socialist republic. Nobody loses sleep over that huge joke. The Constitution also claims India to be a secular republic. It is however a soft variety of secularism, the republic is secular to the extent ‘practical’ politics permits it to be so. Not merely that those who claim to defend the Constitution lack the courage of their conviction, the conviction itself, have no illusion, is greatly wobbly.

Goa Bomber linked to three hindutva organisations

2009-12-20T23:02:00.000+05:30

Besides Sanatan Sanstha, Goa Bombers also liked with two other Hinduva organisations Dharma Prachar Sabha and Hindu Dharma Prathisthan

Times of India

Goa blast: Malgonda Patil linked to two more Hindu organizations

Source: PTI 17 December 2009, 12:32pm IST

PANAJI: Goa home ministry has said that Malgonda Patil, prime accused in the Margao blast, was also a managing trustee of two more Hindu organizations besides his association with Sanatan Sanstha.

The names of these two Hindu organisations --Dharma Prachar Sabha and Hindu Dharma Prathisthan -- had surfaced publicly for the first time since October 16, when a blast triggered panic in the commercial town of Margao in South Goa.

The record furnished on the floor of the House during the ongoing state Legislative Assembly session has confirmed Patil's links to these two institutions.

Patil (28), a native of Sangli in Maharashtra, till date was known only for his links with Sanatan Sanstha, a right-wing Hindu organisation operating from Ramnathi village of Goa.

Patil died when the bomb he had planned to plant triggered prematurely.

Yogesh Patil (29), a Goan native, also died in the blast, which occurred on Diwali eve and was a part of larger conspiracy to trigger serial explosions in the state.

Home minister Ravi Naik in a statement in the floor of the House said that gelatin sticks, detonators and timer circuits were used to set off the explosion.

He said that immediately after the blast, chief minister Digamber Kamat, alongwith Fatorda constituency Legislator Damodar Naik, visited the spot.

bharat ptrika

2009-12-20T21:34:00.005+05:30

A lie does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become lie because nobody sees it... Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position... First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,then they fight you, then only you win.

-Mahatma Gandhi

It is easier to travel downstream with the flow and even a Corpse can do! but, to swim against... to be Alive and Active!
Here is few hungering salmons, swimming along the mid sea of world wide web.
FISH, NOT SATISFIED WITH THE STATUS QUO; with being fed half-truths from the sarroundings. Fish, wanting to go back to the truth, trying to ferret the niche of truth from the depth and to spread...
It is simpler and more energy efficient to let the strength of the flow of water propel you than for you to expend the necessary energy and determination to swim against the flow.
The salmon run every year and We are fascinated by the determination and energy expended by these fish to swim to their goal,the spawning areas. Along the way they encounter many hazards and barriers: bear, birds of prey and other carnivores waiting to devour them,dams and other obstacles blocking their way, or even an over-abundance (or lack) of water-flow along the way that threatens to keep them from their goal.
Who the SALMON ?
When the whole world says: " it is... " they Do Not forget/lazy/fear to ask "Why it is...?"
When every one accept, thoughtlessly... No! they do not often reject. but, deliberately approach the probabilities!
When every one likes the rich and deceptive voice for peace... they like to shout for justice, regardless of where it will take them in their journey
Often, like a juggler, they might not be on the stage. but, work always behind... silently!

Are you that kind of fish - swimming against the stream?
If you are, here we are!
It's not an easy walk; but is certainly a fulfilling one!
Come, swim with us...
Contact: bharatpatrika@gmail.com

An Independent Review of Democracy and Governance in Karnataka

2009-12-19T22:18:00.000+05:30

On the 18th December 2009, Justice Santosh Hegde released the summary report on Democracy and Governance in Karnataka (period June 2008-November 2009) at the Press Club.

Full pdf documentt at:

http://www.dakshindia.org/

Click to download

Daksh 2009 Review of the Karnataka Govt (English Version - pdf )

A New Dress for the Hindu Right -- Will the RSS drop the Khakhi Shorts?

2009-12-14T08:12:00.000+05:30

The RSS, which trained the killer of Mahatma Gandhi, spokesman told The Times that it hoped to devise a new uniform by March.

“It is universally accepted that there can be nothing more boring and unattractive than their present attire ... What designers will have to pay attention to is how to make it trendy, smart and ‘cool’.”

Hindu nationalists drop their baggy shorts
by Jeremy Page in Delhi

From: The Times, December 12, 2009

For more than eight decades, members of India’s largest Hindu nationalist organisation have identified themselves with a distinctive military-style uniform consisting of long baggy shorts, a white shirt and a black cloth cap.

Followers of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh can still be seen wearing the uniform, modelled on that of British colonial police, as they perform ritual early morning exercises in public parks and squares across India.

Now, 84 years after its foundation, the RSS has finally given in to the demands of modern India and decided to renounce its uniform. Ravi Bansal, a RSS spokesman, told The Times that it hoped to devise a new uniform by March.

The move is the latest attempt by India’s beleaguered Hindu nationalists to overhaul their image after a year in which its main political wing, the Bharatiya Janata Party, was trounced in a general election. Analysts say that the movement — which campaigns to rid India of the legacies of foreign invasions and establish a pure Hindu state — is struggling to appeal to young people, especially the urban middle classes.

So, as well as deciding to change its uniform, the RSS has also introduced evening meetings as an alternative to its traditional morning exercises to cater for busy middle-class professionals.

It has organised special forums for supporters in the technology hubs of Bangalore and Hyderabad. It is also allowing married couples to take a more prominent role in the organisation, although its leadership still consists entirely of celibate males, known as pracharaks.

Some RSS veterans say that the uniform change is a step too far and betrays the legacy of K. B. Hedgewar, who founded the movement in 1925 and introduced the uniform a year later to encourage discipline.

Critics are happy to see the end of a uniform that they say was inspired partly by the European fascist movements of the 1920s. The RSS, which trained the killer of Mahatma Gandhi, has been banned three times for inciting violence and is still often accused of fomenting ethnic and religious hatred.

The question now is whether the movement can agree on a design for the eight million members it claims.

Sadanand Menon, a popular columnist, said: “It is universally accepted that there can be nothing more boring and unattractive than their present attire ... What designers will have to pay attention to is how to make it trendy, smart and ‘cool’.”

Hidden facets to the Babri Masjid episode also implicate others

2009-12-12T22:43:00.000+05:30

There are hidden facets to the sorry episode of the Babri Masjid that also implicate others

SINNERS IN DISGUISE

by Jyotirmaya Sharma

Mail Today, 10 December 2009

THE LIBERHAN Report can be excused for its longwinded vacuity as also the time it took to see the light of day. But the more hilarious aspect of the aftermath of the tabling of the report is the manner in which politicians of various persuasions have reacted to it. All of them have come up with their own version of the truth. In Indian politics, truth never prevails, but all that prevails is true.

In a mature democracy, it would have been the norm for the BJP to accept that they participated in a criminal act that vitiated public life and divided people.

Equally so, the Congress ought to have apologised to the country for P. V. Narasimha Rao’s inept handling of the entire situation.

Mulayam Singh ought to have kept silent in Parliament, if only because he was, until recently, extolling the virtues of a certain Kalyan Singh. The Left too ought to have toned down its self- righteous bluster, especially after their cosy understanding with the BJP recently in trying to bring down the UPA government over the issue of the nuclear deal. “ In the congregation of the righteous”, said a poet, “ the sinners are well- disguised: do not seek to count them”.

Opportunity

For the BJP and certain of its leaders, the Liberhan report seems like a godgiven opportunity to revive its ever- dwindling fortunes. Just as their conception of Hindutva is stuck in an imaginary past, so are their political calculations. They hope to revive the irrational mobilisation of the rath yatra and karseva movements, if only to rectify their rockbottom status in the arena of Uttar Pradesh politics.

Even if their hope of a revival on the lines of the Ayodhya movement clashes with pictures of Narendra Modi in denims, they would love to live under the fatal illusion that they have the moral and intellectual wherewithal to merge and resolve all such contradictions.

The spectacle of Rajnath Singh thundering about the existence of a Ram Temple in the past and the assurance of a temple in the future weeks before he is to be given the marching orders by the RSS in favour of a man whose sole claim to fame is building flyovers is all too delicious for the ordinary spectator. After all, flyovers for the BJP are the new temples of their conception of modern India.

In all this, the RSS presents a picture that is a strange mixture of bravado, innocence and lack of contrition. They have been consistent in stating that they have no regrets about the demolition of the Babri Mosque.

But they are equally consistent in saying that a spontaneous surge of karsevaks resulted in the felling of what has been known as the disputed structure. This theory of spontaneity and popular sentiment has served the RSS and the Sangh Parivar well over the years in their systematic attempts at subverting democracy, the rule of law and the Indian Constitution.

One just has to remember the rhetoric at all levels within the Sangh Parivar in justifying the post- Godhra riots and the systematic killing of Muslims to know that this is a familiar tool in their kit of medieval barbarity. The only consolation that the Sangh Parivar has is that even the Congress borrowed the same set of rhetorical devices in order to justify the massacre of innocent Sikhs in 1984 and continues to condone similar acts by not acting on the findings of the Srikrishna Report concerning the 1992- 93 riots in Bombay.

Is there, then, a difference between the Sangh Parivar and the Congress? The difference is a small, but significant one. The Congress condones similar acts of violence for political expediency and does so with cynical impunity. The Sangh Parivar indulges in acts of organised violence in the name of God, Hinduism, cultural pride and with the express purpose of destroying a plurality of the ideas of India.

In keeping the mandirmasjid issue alive, the RSS also has a different agenda. It hopes to alienate Muslims to an extent by which it becomes untenable for them to exist as first- class citizens in India, and, thereby, foist its limited, shortsighted and dangerous idea of a Hindu nation.

Logic

A few examples would suffice. The former RSS sarsanghchalak , K. P Sudarshan, wrote a pamphlet published in 2000 called ‘ Sangh ki saphalta ka rahasya’ ( The Secret of the Sangh’s Success). He writes that when Indira Gandhi visited Afghanistan and wanted to lay a wreath at the tombstone of Babur, the Afghans had to clean the place overnight. The tombstone was in a state of acute disrepair. Sudarshan cites an official in the Prime Minister’s party asking the caretaker of the cemetery about Babur’s tomb and its sorry state.

The caretaker is supposed to have replied that they did not care because Babur was no Afghan.

Sudarshan goes on to say that it is unfortunate that many Indian Muslims still connect themselves to Babur. He goes on to explain how the structure that was demolished was on purpose designated as Babri Mosque, and they created futile anger in the country upon its demolition.

Sudarshan’s amnesia makes him forget that if his story of the Afghan caretaker of the cemetery is a desirable one, then the Sangh ought not to have screamed and shouted as much as it did when the Bamiyan Buddhas were blown away by dynamite sticks. After all, the Buddha was no Afghan either! But Sudarshan’s perverse creativity in rewriting history reaches hitherto unscaled heights when he dismisses the historical veracity of a structure that is a few hundred years old, but argues that the existence of a Ram Temple at the very spot was historically true and incontrovertible.

Irony

But there is one other gem in Sudarshan’s pamphlet.

He quotes a fax sent to Narasimha Rao on 10 December 1992 by a senior leader from Maharashtra.

Sudarshan says that this leader advised Rao not to ban the RSS in the aftermath of the demolition of the Babri mosque because Balasaheb Deoras was a friend of the Congress government.

Deoras wanted the government to survive for five years and was not in favour of frequently bringing governments down.

This unnamed Maharashtra leader warns Rao that if the Sangh was banned, a section of the Sangh sympathetic to Rao’s government would turn hostile.

Despite this advice, the Sangh was banned. It would do us all a lot of good if Sudarshan could release the copy of that fax to the Indian people now and expose this senior Maharashtra leader.

But nothing of this sort is likely to happen. The irony is that all those associated with this act of mob violence and vandalism will go scot- free. In the case of L. K. Advani, like the proverbial cat with nine lives, he will probably see a revival in his political fortunes and his political ambitions. In the meantime, the RSS will go on with its business of sullying Indian public life in a manner only it can and has perfected over the years. History, perhaps, will forgive those karsevaks , but it will scarcely condone the likes of Advani for being complicit in the RSS’s agenda of the diminution of what India is all about.

The writer teaches politics in University of Hyderabad

No religious structures on public land, rules Supreme Court.

2009-12-12T05:31:00.000+05:30

“The court is going to be very strict on this ban, even if it gives rise to a law and order problem. We are making it abundantly clear that any fresh construction is banned ” - SC

by Krishnadas Rajagopal
Indian Express Posted: Tuesday, Dec 08, 2009 at 0326 hrs New Delhi:

Stating that state government cannot let “personal faith” eat up public space for fear of provoking religious sentiments, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday that no new constructions of “temples, mosques, churches and gurdwaras will be allowed on public parks, public streets and public spaces.”

“The court is going to be very strict on this ban, even if it gives rise to a law and order problem. We are making it abundantly clear that any fresh construction is banned,” ruled the Bench led by Justices Dalveer Bhandari and A K Patnaik.

“Non-compliance with the order, whatever be the problem within a state, you (state government concerned) will be in great difficulty,” the Bench cautioned a battery of standing counsel representing various state governments.

The Bench also passed a sweeping order that no courts in the country will entertain any complaints against the apex court’s ban, thus closing all avenues for protests by religious groups or private individuals. “Regarding the gravity of the matter, we direct that no order which is inconsistent with our order of ban be passed,” the court ruled.

“Chief Secretaries must ensure total compliance of our orders, any breach will be viewed seriously by this court,” warned the Bench. The fate of the existing unauthorised structures will be decided on a “case to case basis” by the state governments.

Today’s order follows an earlier ruling passed on September 29, when the apex court had banned construction of unauthorised religious places of worships on public land. The Bench passed the order after finding that the states had hardly taken any action to implement the ban.

The Bench has asked Chief Secretaries to either file affidavits within six weeks swearing that the ban has been implemented in every district of their state, or be present in court with an explanation.

Rights Activists Attacked And Refused Access Tribal Zone in Orissa

2009-12-11T17:16:00.000+05:30

All india women fact-finding team attacked and refused entry to narayanpatna; Express concern over state’s response and cordoning off of tribals.

Press releaset
10 December 2009, Bhubaneswar

At 8.30 a.m. on 9 December 2009, eleven of us (nine women and two men including the driver) left Parvatipuram (in Andhra Pradesh) for Narayanpatna (in Koraout district of Orissa) to investigate the incident of police firing on 20 November 2009 and the atrocities on adivasi women in the villages as reported of Bhaliaput, Bikrampur, Basanput and Palaput. The collector of Koraput was informed on 7 December 2009 about the visit by an all-women fact-finding team to the area. As we were on our way, we were stopped by police in front of Narayanpatna Police Station. At the police station, we gave a list of names of members in the team with our addresses and mobile-phone numbers; the driver showed his license and car registration and insurance papers. Inside the compound of the thana, there were a large number of persons in civilian clothes; upon asking we were informed that these were special police forces. None of the people in uniform (we assume they were policemen) had any name tags. We asked one policeman how many police were there in this area, and he said more than 2000 police.

We also noticed that around 50 villagers (adivasis) were squatting inside the compound; again upon asking we were told by the policemen that they were members of the Chasi Mulia Adivasi Sangh and have “surrendered” to the police.

We wanted to meet the Officer-in-Charge of the thana and although he was sitting in the office we were told that he was busy, and he would only meet us in the evening.

By this time, the crowd of the so-called plain-clothed police was getting restless. We heard people commenting saying: "Ek firing kya ho raha, ab aa rahen hain. Jab hamarey gaon jal rahe the, to kahaan the?" (When our villages were being burnt, where were they? Now they show up after the firing!). Several policemen were also making very hostile remarks.

Meanwhile, a mob of more than 200 persons, who were visibly not tribals or ordinary villagers, had already gathered outside the thana gates and several policersons kept on telling us that people here might do anything to our vehicle and to us and they would not be responsible. In this situation, we told them that we would return. But, as we tried to step out of the thana, the mob surrounded us, prevented the vehicle from leaving, smashed the back window. Our driver was cordoned off and was being questioned in a very hostile manner and being threatened. The mob continued to abuse the women team members in extremely foul language and derogatory manner. At this point, one policeman in plain clothes who was taking pictures of our team members on his mobile phone said to the mob, ‘Maro inko!’ (Beat them up!). That is when the 200-plus mob surged ahead. The driver was being slapped repeatedly. Madhumita and 75-year old Kusum Karnik tried to intervene and that is when one man went for Madhumita’s throat. When she moved to save herself, her jaw was injured. Kusum was hurt too.

Rumita Kundu was verbally abused inside the police station. One man crudely said that all these women had come to sleep with the men there. Mamata Dash was hit on her back, and abused. All this happened right outside the police station premises and in the presence of a large police force! In fact, one of the police man shouted, “all the policemen come inside the police station, let the people do whatever they want to do with them.”

The driver was the one who was assaulted the most; and we did all we could to extricate him and board our vehicle. By this time, the vehicle was broken; the rear windscreen was smashed. With great difficulty, we left the area driving towards Bandhugaon. We were followed by young men on bikes. Somewhere between Bandhugaon Police Station and the village itself, we were stopped by two police men in plainclothes and they took away the driver’s license and papers. As he was enquiring, about 20 people gathered there. We somehow were able to get the driver’s papers back and proceed, some young men on motorcycle followed us and hit the driver from the window. We were completely shaken and traumatized by then.

From there, we proceeded to Kattulpetta. Even before we got to this village, news seemed to have reached them about our visit. A road blockade had already been organized, with a bullock cart blocking the road. The people there, again all non-tribals, pulled out the driver and started assaulting him. They tried to pull down another male colleague of ours, Mr Purnachandra Sahu and tried to beat him up. We intervened, and that’s when Kusum Karnik, the 75-year old activist, was hit on her head, which has left a lump there. We were there for more than 15 minutes. More violence. More damage to the vehicle. More slaps for the driver. They were threatening to burn our vehicle.

By this time, the two plainclothed "policemen" who had taken our names in Bandhugaon reached there and ordered the youth to disperse. We have later come to know that in all these villages, young men have been appointed as special police officers (SPO).

All along our way back right up to the Andhra Pradesh border it seemed evident that the police was in communication with these young men who stopped and man-handled us at all these three points.

We reached Bondapalli, the border village within Andhra Pradesh. Almost in no time, a jeep load of Andhra Pradesh police along with another jeep of heavily armed special force in civilian clothes arrived on the scene. They demanded to know who we were. We were treated more like criminals than victims, and our vehicle was searched. For the third time we gave all our names and other details to the police. Only after Madhumita spoke to the SP of Vijayanagaram district, we were allowed to go. The police version is that they were acting on confidential information from Orissa police that anti-social elements had entered Andhra.

Our experience with armed youth and police has left us clearly terrified, and has left us with many questions as to how Indian democracy is functioning. We are deeply concerned that if an All India Fact-Finding Team of Women can be treated with such intimidation, violence, and indignity in the very presence of police force, what would be the kind of atrocities committed on tribal people in Narayanpatna who have been completely cordoned off by the police. The whole area seems to be under siege. This particular incident really highlights that the State does not want an independent enquiry into the incident that occurred on 20 November 2009 and the long-standing grievances of the tribals in the area.

Our concerns

The scenario of terror that we witnessed, and were subject to shows the kind of tense situation prevailing in the Narayanpatna area post 20 November 2009 police firings in Narayanpatna.
There is no access for people to get in and out of the villages in Narayanpatna, with all routes blocked by police and goon to whom the police do not even try to control.
There is no way to get information about what is happening inside, and no means of verifying the very disturbing accounts we are getting about abuses, molestations and violence against adivasi people.
The number of plainclothesmen who claimed they were police, and the comfort with which people outside the Narayanpatna police station were interacting with the police, and reacting to one policeman’s instruction to beat us up, suggests that there may be some truth to reports that there is a Salwa Judum style Shanthi Samiti in this area as well. This may either be sponsored or working in close complicity with the police and state.
If the fact-finding team of prominent women has been treated with such violence, it is clear that there is absolutely no room for dissent inside the villages.
All the people who attacked us were non-tribals.

Our demands

The police officer in-charge of the Narayanpatna Police Station be immediately suspended
The connection between the mob attack at various points and the police be investigated
The SP of Koraput should immediately be suspended who seem to be supervising the terror being unleashed on the adivasis and independent teams coming to the area
Independent fact-finding teams should be allowed inside the region to investigate the situation prevailing there
As a first step towards normalizing the situation, the cordoning off of the area should immediately ceased
The Government should constitute a high-level independent enquiry into the police-firing incident at Narayanpatna and the long standing grievances of the tribals in the region

Sincerely,

Sudha Bhardwaj, Advocate, PUCL – Chhattisgarh

Madhumita Dutta, The Other Media, Chennai

Shweta Narayan, The Other Media Chennai

Mamata Dash, National Forum for Forest People and Forest Workers, Delhi

Durga, Chhattisgarh Mahila Adhikar Manch, Chhattisgarh

Pramila, Muktigami Mahila Sangathan, Bhubaneshwar

Kusum Karnik, Adivasi Ekjuta Sangathana, Pune

Rumita Kundu, Campaign Against Violence on Women, Orissa

Ramani, Progressive Organisation of Women, Paravatipuram

Purnachandra Sahu, All India Kisan Mazdoor Sangh, Pravatipuram

Prashant Bhushan responds to contempt of court notice by India’s supreme court

2009-12-10T00:13:00.000+05:30

“In my view, out of the last 16 to 17 Chief Justices, half have been corrupt. I can’t prove this, though we had evidence against Punchhi, Anand, and Sabharwal on the basis of which we sought their impeachment” - Supreme Court senior advocate Prashant Bhushan

[Full text of the affidavit filed by senior advocate Prashant Bhushan in response to the notice of contempt issued by the Supreme Court of India for his interview to Tehelka news magazine levelling corruption charges against judges. ]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 10 OF 2009
IN I.A. NO. 1374, 1474, 2134 OF 2007
IN WRIT PETITION (c ) NO. 202 OF 1995
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMICUS CURIAE …PETITIONER
VERSUS
PRASHANT BHUSHAN & ANOTHER …RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT IN REPLY ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT NO.1

I, Prashant Bhushan s/o Shri Shanti Bhushan, r/o B-16, Sector 14, Noida, do hereby solemnly state and affirm as under:

1. That I am the first Respondent in this Contempt Petition and am fully acquainted with the facts of this case. I have read and understood the contents of the Contempt Petition filed by Shri Harish Salve in his capacity as Amicus Curiae and my reply to it is as under:

2. From the report in Tehelka, which is relied upon as the basis of the alleged contempt, reliance has been placed on the following sentences: Firstly,

This could have been better phrased, but, by the word corrupt, I meant, “of doubtful integrity".

The second part of the interview relied upon is my answer to the question as to whether there were other ways in which judicial corruption manifests itself. In response to which I had said: “There are so many---“. Here again, when I said, “There are so many”, it was only with reference to non financial behaviour, or other kinds of conflict of interest or misconduct by judges. It is in this context that my answer to the question should be understood.

3. I have been involved in the Campaign for Judicial Accountability since 1991 when the impeachment proceedings began against Justice V. Ramaswami. Since then, I have been an active member of the Committee on Judicial Accountability and subsequently the Convenor of the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms which was set up in early 2007. It has been my understanding at least since 1991, and even prior to that, that there has been considerable corruption in the higher judiciary, the main reason for which has been the lack of credible mechanisms for securing accountability of the higher judiciary. The focus of our Campaign for Judicial Accountability, therefore, has been to generate public opinion for putting in place credible legal institutions and mechanisms for investigating complaints against judges and for holding judges committing misconduct to account. I, along with my colleagues in the Campaign, have always held the view that an independent full time National Judicial Commission should be created for a transparent method for selecting and appointing judges of the higher judiciary, as well as for investigating complaints against them. Copies of some of the resolutions passed in the National Conventions on Judicial Accountability organised by our Committee on Judicial Accountability between 1991 and 2003 to this effect, are collectively annexed hereto as Annexure-A which would attest to these publicly stated perceptions.

4. Our campaign has also repeatedly highlighted the fact that the lack of accountability in the higher judiciary is not only on account of the lack of a credible mechanism for investigating complaints against judges, but also by the virtual prevention of criminal investigation of judges by the Veeraswami judgement. This lack of accountability is further accentuated by the takeover of the power of appointing judges by the judiciary through the SCAORA judgement (Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Association vs. UOI, (1993) 4 SCC 441). Appointments by the judiciary after this judgement have often been made arbitrarily and with complete lack of transparency. Even after the passage of the Right to Information Act, the Supreme Court has refused to share any information with the public about the manner in which judges have been selected for appointment and transfers. It has gone to the extent of filing Special Leave Petition directly to the Supreme Court against orders of the Central Information Commission asking the Court to disclose information about the manner of selection and appointment of judges. On top of all this, contempt powers have also often been sought to be used to silence outspoken criticism and public exposure of corruption in the judiciary. The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms has taken up all these issues of judicial accountability and has made constructive suggestions for the legal and constitutional changes required to redress these problems.

In order to build public opinion to bring the required constitutional and other legal changes for securing judicial accountability, it is necessary to freely and frankly discuss the existing state of affairs including the existing state of corruption in the judiciary, including the higher judiciary. In fact, the problem of judicial accountability or rather the lack of it, is mainly with the higher judiciary since the lower judiciary is accountable to the High courts. It has been our perception that corruption in the higher judiciary is not and would not be substantially lower than that in the lower judiciary, since in that case, the High courts would take serious steps to curb corruption in the lower judiciary which can be curbed if the High courts have the will to do it. The recent Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam is a stark illustration of some of the reasons why the higher judiciary is benignly tolerant of corruption in the lower judiciary.

5. Due to my personal observations during more than 26 years that I have been practicing in the Supreme Court and in the Delhi High Court, and also because of my close involvement in the Campaign for Judicial Accountability for the last 20 years or so, I have become aware of a good deal of corruption that has prevailed in the courts in which I have practiced as well as in other parts of the country. In order to develop a perception of corruption in the judiciary in general and particularly in the court where one practices, one does not need to have actual documentary evidence of corruption. This perception is formed on the basis of various kinds of circumstantial evidence surrounding judicial and administrative acts of judges which one learns from ones own experience as well as from the experience of other responsible and reliable lawyers and observers, apart from occasional documentary evidence. Documentary evidence about corruption in the higher judiciary is rarely and only fortuitously obtained, since all investigation into such corruption is prohibited except by the written permission of the Chief Justice of India. However, as one of the active members of the Campaign for Judicial Accountability, I have also had the occasion to examine, sift through, and deal with a large volume of documentary evidence which discloses what in my view must be called acts of judicial corruption. I would like to clarify, however, that financial corruption is by no means the only kind of corruption prevalent in the judiciary, and whenever I use the word “corruption” in relation to the judiciary, it is not used in the narrow sense of financial corruption by way of taking direct bribes, but in a more general sense of anything which corrupts or influences by extraneous considerations, the judicial process. Thus, I regard the act of a judge who decides the cases of a political party or sits in a Commission of Enquiry involving that political party and thereafter, after retirement, gets elected to the Parliament, on the ticket of a political party, as an act of corruption. Similarly, if a judge hears and decides the case of a person, who is so friendly with the judge that his grand daughter’s wedding is held in the judge’s official residence, it ought to be regarded as a case of corruption of the judicial process. So also the judicial acts of a Judge who takes up cases (even part heard cases) of a particular company during vacations to decide in their favour by convoluted reasoning would be clear indicators of corruption of the judicial process. Thus, when asked as to what made me get involved in this Campaign for Judicial Accountability, I referred to my experience with the Judiciary, and in this spirit I said that it was my perception that roughly half of the last 16/17 chief justices have been corrupt. That is my honest and bonafide perception. It is a belief formed on the basis of direct and circumstantial evidence about judicial acts and other acts, as well as on the basis of information gathered from other responsible lawyers and judges including former Chief Justices of India.

6. Such an expression of honest and bonafide opinion about my perception of corruption at the very top of the judiciary cannot be regarded as Contempt of Court. If it were to be so regarded, it would stifle free speech and would constitute an unreasonable restriction on Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution. It is the essence of a democracy that all institutions, including the judiciary, function for the citizens and the people of this country, and they have every right to freely and fairly discuss the state of affairs within any institution, and build public opinion in order to reform the institutions. This is what I have always believed, and have, therefore, always freely and frankly expressed my honest views about the state of affairs within the judiciary and what needs to be done to remedy them.

7. It may not be out of place to point out that several responsible observers of the court including former chief justices have publicly and privately voiced their views about the extent of corruption prevailing in the higher judiciary. Newspaper reports of the views expressed by some of the judges including former Chief Justices such as Justice Bharucha are annexed hereto as Annexure-B. The fact that there will be difference in the perception among different persons about the extent and level of corruption prevalent in the judiciary would not make any difference to the question of whether expression of such views amounts to Contempt. In fact, Transparency International, a respected global anti-corruption institution, has also done global as well as national surveys of corruption perception within various institutions in the country including the judiciary, which also showed the judiciary to be perceived by the people as among the most corrupt institutions in the country. Copy of the relevant pages of the report of the Transparency International is annexed hereto as Annexure-C.

8. In this context, it is pertinent to remember the words of Lord Denning in R Vs. Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Ex parte Blackburn (1968) 2 All England Reporter, Page 319, where while dealing with a particularly harsh criticism of the Court of Appeal by Mr. Quintin Hogg, he observed as follows:

“This is the first case, so far as I know, where this court has been called on to consider an allegation of contempt against itself. It is a jurisdiction which undoubtedly belongs to us, but which we will most sparingly exercise: more particularly as we ourselves have an interest in the matter. Let me say at once that we will never use this jurisdiction as a means to uphold our own dignity. That must rest on surer foundations. Nor will we use it to suppress those who speak against us. We do not fear criticism, nor do we resent it. For, there is something far more important at stake. It is no less than freedom of speech itself. It is the right of every man, in Parliament or out of it, in the Press or over the broadcast to make fair comment, even outspoken comment, on matters of public interest.”

It is the application of this doctrine enunciated by Lord Denning that the Contempt of Court jurisdiction of “scandalizing the court or lowering the authority of the court” gradually fell into disuse in UK.

9. It is a mistaken notion to think that the authority or dignity of the courts can be maintained by using the contempt of court jurisdiction to punish and thus stifle public criticism, however harsh, of the judiciary, or even public discussion of the perception of the extent or levels of corruption prevailing in the judiciary, be they at the apex of the judiciary. The dignity, authority and public confidence in the courts or judges cannot be maintained by seeking to silence outspoken criticism or even outspoken expression of perception of corruption in the judiciary. That confidence is maintained by the public perception of the actions of the judiciary and the conduct of its judges, and whether they are perceived to be generally just, fair and in public interest. The public perception of the conduct of the judiciary and its judges is built on the basis of observation over a long period of time and by the shared perception of a large number of people. Any wild accusation or allegations by irresponsible persons or disgruntled litigants are dismissed by the people with the contempt that they deserve. It is only when persons, who are generally perceived to be responsible, are voicing opinion and criticism which is perceived by the public to be responsible and based on facts and circumstances which are relevant, that such opinion or criticism is taken seriously by the people and is going to affect their perception about the judiciary. This is exactly how it should be in a democracy. Any attempt to use contempt of court jurisdiction to silence such voices of criticism or dissent or such airing of corruption perception by such people, would cause far greater damage to the image, the public perception of, and public confidence in the judiciary. It would in fact lead people to suspect that things are more seriously amiss in the judiciary than even they had suspected, and it will engender great resentment and even contempt for the judiciary. Such actions would have exactly the opposite effect of what law of Contempt seeks to prevent.

This is also obvious from the backlash that has followed two of the most celebrated cases of contempt recently. The sentencing of Arundhati Roy for contempt, for merely saying in her reply affidavit (in response to another contempt petition, in which the notice was finally discharged) that for the court to have issued contempt notice on an ex-facie absurd petition showed a disquieting inclination on the part of the court to stifle criticism and muzzle dissent, led to such a backlash that it only succeeded in lowering the image of the Supreme Court in the eyes of the people. Similarly, the sentencing of the journalists of Midday for having written well-documented investigative stories about Justice Sabharwal, a former Chief Justice of India who heard and passed orders for sealing of commercial properties, which had the effect of benefiting his own sons who were in partnership with shopping mall and commercial complex developers, also outraged civil society and the media. The result of the use of the contempt power against these journalists was again to heighten suspicion about corruption in the judiciary. These actions have contributed in no small measure to a drastic increase of the perception of corruption in the judiciary in the eyes of civil society. This has also been accentuated by the eruption of corruption scandals about the judiciary in quick succession recently. The recent judicial scandals involving Justice Soumitra Sen of Calcutta, the Ghaziabad Provident fund scam, the cash at judges door scam at Chandigarh, and the case of Justice Dinakaran, among others have been given a lot of publicity by the media recently. The resentment caused by the use of or threatened use of the contempt power to stifle outspoken comment (as in the Arundhati Roy case) or to silence the exposure of corruption (as in the Midday case), have contributed in no small measure to the increasingly widespread and outspoken coverage of judicial scandals in the media.

In conclusion on this issue, I wish to state that what I have stated about corruption at the apex of the judiciary is what I honestly believe to be true and have said so with a full sense of responsibility. I have not said anything which is at variance with my bonafide belief. Even Mr. Salve has not accused me of making false statements in this regard.

10. Regarding the Vedanta-Sterlite matter, it may be stated at the outset that this question and my answer was in the context of “other kinds of corruption of the judicial process different from bribe taking or financial corruption”. This is why in my response, I have clarified what exactly I meant by “corruption” in this case. If some people have understood my response to the question to mean that I have accused Justice Kapadia of financial corruption, that would be wrong and most unfortunate, for that was certainly not what I meant or intended to say. Justice Kapadia is widely perceived to be a judge of financial integrity and I have no reason to doubt that perception. However, I do believe that Justice Kapadia acted improperly by hearing a matter involving very large financial stakes of a company and proceeding to pass orders on it, while he had shares in the company in whose favour he passed those orders. However, I may not have been impelled to say what I did, if I did not feel that quite apart from the impropriety of Justice Kapadia having heard and passed orders in the case of a company in which he held shares, the orders that he passed were quite extraordinary and totally unwarranted.

11. Consider the orders which were passed, and the facts and circumstances in which they were passed. Sterlite Industries had transferred an Alumina Refinery Project to be built at Lanjigarh, Orissa to its subsidiary company M/s Vedanta Alumina Limited (VAL). Environmental clearance for this Refinery had been granted by the Ministry of Environment and Forest. On 12th May 2005, at the instance of Shri Harish Salve, Amicus Curiae in the case, the Court asked the Centrally Empowered Committee (CEC) of the Court, which is the court’s own expert body to examine this clearance and give its report within eight weeks. The Committee gave a detailed report in September 2005. The CEC in its report, observed that the environmental clearance for the Refinery had been fraudulently obtained by Vedanta without disclosing that the Refinery Project was linked to the mining project. In this Project, the Alumina Refinery required the diversion of 58.93 hectares of forest land for the Refinery and 672.018 hectares of forest land for the mining. After examining the matter in great depth, the CEC concluded that the refinery and the mining projects in this place would destroy the forests, the wildlife, the water sources, and the lives and livelihoods of thousands of a rare and vanishing species of tribals living in this area. The CEC finally recommended:

“32. The CEC is of the considered view that the use of the forest land in an ecologically sensitive area like the Niyamgiri Hills should not be permitted. The casual approach, the lackadaisical manner and the haste with which the entire issue of forests and environmental clearance for the alumina refinery project has been dealt with smacks of undue favour/leniency and does not inspire confidence with regard to the willingness and resolve of both the State Government and the MoEF to deal with such matters keeping in view the ultimate goal of national and public interest. In the instant case had a proper study been conducted before embarking on a project of this nature and magnitude involving massive investment, the objections to the project from environmental/ecological/ forest angle would have become known in the beginning itself and in all probability the project would have been abandoned at this site.

33. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances brought out in the preceding paragraphs it is recommended that this Hon’ble Court may consider revoking the environmental clearance dated 22.9.2004 granted by the MoEF for setting up of the Alumina Refinery Plant by M/s and directing them to stop further work on the project. This project may only be reconsidered after an alternative bauxite mine site is identified."

The CEC also noted that Vedanta started construction on the Alumina Refinery in violation of the guidelines of the MoEF even prior to obtaining forest clearance for the forest land to be diverted for the Refinery. A copy of the CEC’s report is annexed as Annexure D.

12. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 26th October 2007, before the Forest Bench, the Bench, virtually without discussing the CEC report, and without even allowing Mr. Sanjay Parikh, who was appearing for the tribals in a connected Writ Petition challenging the environmental clearance to the Project, to make submissions on the various objections to the project, straightaway proceeded to discuss the terms on which the mining should be allowed to be carried on!

Eventually, after hearing the Counsel for Vedanta, the Orissa Mining Corporation (which was to be a partner of Vedanta in the mining), the State of Orissa (which had granted the mining lease and permission to set up the Refinery Project to Vedanta) and the Counsel for the Ministry of Environment and Forest (which had granted environmental clearance for the Alumina Refinery) and briefly the Junior Amicus, Shri Uday Lalit, the court reserved the judgment. It proceeded to pronounce its order on 23th November 2007, which is authored by Justice Kapadia. In this judgment, it is stated that since Vedanta Resources, UK, the holding company of Vedanta Alumina Ltd., had been blacklisted by Norway for non-compliance of labour laws and human rights, it would not be proper to give this Project to Vedanta Alumina Ltd. However, the judgment proceeds to grant liberty to Sterlite Industries Limited, which is noted in the judgment to be the holding company of VAL, to make an application for this Project! It is astounding as to how the court could even consider granting liberty to apply for this Project to a related company owned and controlled by the same holding company i.e. Vedanta Resources Ltd. UK, which is blacklisted and thus not considered fit to receive any concession by the court. If one subsidiary (VAL) was disqualified on this basis, surely the other subsidiary, Sterlite would also be disqualified on the same logic. Moreover, the court almost totally glosses over the very detailed report of the CEC about the seriously adverse environmental and social impacts of the Project and after merely noting the CEC’s conclusions, goes on to talk about the poverty of the local people living in Lanjigarh including the tribal people. In the words of the court,

“CEC has objected to the grant of clearance as sought by M/s VAL on the ground inter alia that the refinery is totally dependent on the mining of bauxite from Niyamgiri Hills, Lanjigarh, which is the only vital wildlife habitat, part of which constitutes elephant corridor and also on the ground that the said project, including the mining area, would obstruct the proposed wildlife sanctuary and the residence of tribes like Dongria Kandha. According to CEC, Niyamgiri Hills would be vitally affected if mining is allowed in the above area as Niyamgiri Hills is an important water source for two rivers. According to CEC, the project would also destroy flora and fauna of the entire region and it would result in soil erosion. According to CEC, use of forestland in an ecologically sensitive area like Niyamgiri Hills should not be permitted.”

“On the other side, we have a picture of abject poverty in which the local people are living in Lanjigarh Tehsil including the tribal people. There is no proper housing. There are ho hospitals. There are no schools and people are living in extremely poor conditions which is not in dispute.

“Indian economy for last couple of years has been growing at the rate of 8 to 9% of GDP. It is a remarkable achievement. However, accelerated growth rate of GDP does not provide inclusive growth. Keeping in mind the two extremes, this court thought of balancing development vis-à-vis protection of wildlife ecology and environment in view of the principle of Sustainable Development.”

Thus, without discussing and overruling the serious objections of the court’s own expert body of the Project on the forests, the environment, on water, on the lives of tribals and the wild life, in fact, rather cruelly using the poverty of the tribals as an argument to further impoverish them, the court just brushed them aside with the now clichéd rhetoric of providing “inclusive growth.” This when the local tribals who ought to be credited with the intelligence to be the best judges of their own welfare, had been and continue to be totally opposed to the refinery as well as the mining and had filed a detailed Writ Petition against it. The court refused to even consider the writ petition. Worse still, though the issue before the court was only regarding the clearance for diversion of the 58.943 Hectares of forest land for the Alumina Refinery, the court in the next order of 8th August 2008 proceeded to grant clearance for the diversion of 606.749 hectares of forest land for the bauxite mining of the Niyamgiri Hills! This is even before the government had granted environmental clearance or forest clearance for the diversion of the forest in the matter of the bauxite mines. Copies of the courts orders dated 23/11/07 and 8/8/08 are collectively annexed as Annexure E.

13. It was under these circumstances, coupled with the fact that Justice Kapadia had shares in Sterlite, that I made my comments. It may be noted that there were many observers present in the court in the hearing on 26th October 2007 and many e-mails were contemporaneously sent detailing the proceedings. A copy of the detailed note sent the very next day by Mr. Felix Padel, a highly respected social anthropologist working in Orissa for the last several decades and another detailed contemporaneous report by another responsible observer present in court that day about the hearing that they witnessed on 26th October 2007 are collectively annexed hereto as Annexure-F. These are only two of the several detailed reports of the hearing that I had seen and heard when I made my comments on this case.

14. Regarding the issue of Code of Conduct of Judges and the fact that Justice Kapadia had disclosed his shareholding in Sterlite, and since nobody objected, his continuing to hear the case was in accordance with the Code of Conduct and, therefore, not objectionable, I beg to differ. Firstly, Justice Kapadia’s disclosure about his shareholding in Sterlite came only on 26th October 2007, though he had been hearing this case at least from 2005 onwards. Secondly, the disclosure of his shareholding was casually made in the context of Sterlite being a listed company as opposed to Vedanta which is a non-listed company. According to several observers who were present at the hearing, no one expressly was asked and no one expressly said that they had no objections to his continuing to hear the matter. In fact, at the stage at which Justice Kapadia had disclosed his shareholding in Sterlite, the effective party before the court was Vendanta. Sterlite came back into the matter only after the order of 23rd November 2007 where the order itself permitted Sterlite to make an application.

15. Moreover, the only counsel who could have objected and who had an adverse interest to Vedanta in the matter was Mr. Sanjay Parekh who was appearing in a connected Writ Petition on behalf of the tribals. However, he was not permitted to even argue his case, and was told in no uncertain terms that he would not be heard, since the Amicus was good enough to represent the tribals. All the other counsel present i.e. of Vedanta, Orissa Mining Corporation (which was in partnership with Vedanta for the mining), State of Orissa (which had granted the lease) and the Ministry of Environment and Forest (which had granted environmental clearance for the Project) had a common interest. Moreover, the senior Amicus in this case, Mr. Harish Salve, already had a retainer from Vedanta and it was left to Mr. Uday Lalit, the junior Amicus to object or not to object to Justice Kapadia’s continuing to hear the case. The fact that Mr Uday Lalit did not object in no way excuses Justice Kapadia’s non recusal in the matter.

16. It is well settled in India as well as internationally that any Judge who has the slightest pecuniary interest in a case must automatically recuse himself from hearing the case. Shareholding in a company, particularly in a case where the order would have enormous impact on the financial status and thus share values of that company as in the case of Vedanta/Sterlite, is certainly a pecuniary interest.

In Manak Chand Vs. Dr. Premchand, (AIR 1957 SC 425), the Supreme Court held that, “It is obvious that pecuniary interest, howsoever small, it may be in the subject matter of the proceedings, would wholly disqualify a member from acting as a judge”. While saying this, the Supreme Court has followed a long line of English decisions starting with Dimes Vs. Grand Junction Canal, (1852 3 HLC 759) where the judgement of the Lord Chancellor who decided the case of a company while he had shares in the company, was set aside by the House of Lords, observing, “This will be a lesson to all inferior tribunals to take care not only that in their decrees they are not influenced by their personal interest, but to avoid the appearance of labouring under such influence.” It has thereafter been consistently held in a long line of English cases that “the least pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the litigation will disqualify any person from acting as a judge” (R Vs. Farrant, 1987 QB 58), (R Vs. Rand, 1866 LR 1, QB 230), (R Vs. Myer 1875 1 QBD 173).

H.M. Seervai has also authoritatively pronounced on this principle in his Constitutional Law of India, where he says:

“Least pecuniary interest in the subject of the litigation will disqualify any person from acting as a judge: the pecuniary interest may be so small that no one will think it likely to produce bias in a judge, e.g. if a judge held shares worth five pounds in a company with a capital of five million; where pecuniary interest exists, the law does not allow any further inquiry as to whether or not the mind was actually biased by the pecuniary interest; the rule applies to judge of the highest tribunal as it does to tribunals and bodies of persons obliged to act judicially or quasi-judicially”.

The basis for this principle is a higher principle which has been clearly stated by Justice Venkatachalaiah in Ranjit Thakur v. UOI and Ors. AIR 1987 SC2386

“The test of real likelihood of bias is whether a reasonable person, in possession of relevant information, would have thought that bias was likely. A judgment which is the result of bias or want of impartiality is a nullity and the trial "coram non-judice".

“As to the tests of the likelihood of bias what is relevant is the reasonableness of the apprehension in that regard in the mind of the party. The proper approach for the judge is not to look at his own mind and ask himself, however, honestly, "Am I biased?" but to look at the mind of the party before him.”

The principle of automatic recusal if a judge holds shares in the company is the norm in the US as well. Quite recently, 4 judges of the US Supreme Court recused themselves (due to their shareholding) from a case filed by 50 companies that did business in apartheid era South Africa leading to the automatic affirmation of the lower court’s judgement. A copy of the New York Times report to that effect is annexed as Annexure G.

17. In these circumstances, in my opinion, the Code of Conduct which was internally adopted by the courts, does not provide an adequate justification to Justice Kapadia to continue to hear the case. The consent of lawyers is not a safe basis for deciding whether one should recuse oneself from a case. Most lawyers who appear before a judge every day would be reluctant to ask a judge to recuse himself from a case, even if they feel that there is a serious conflict of interest. This is because asking a judge to recuse himself seems like an expression of no confidence in the ability of the judge to rise above his personal interest. That is why, after this controversy arose, most judges have come to accept that the Code of Conduct does not provide the correct guide for recusal in such matters. Judges should automatically recuse themselves from hearing the cases of those companies in which they hold shares. Recognizing this fact, after this controversy, many judges including Justice Kapadia have recused from hearing cases where they had shares, despite the lawyers saying that they had no objection. Newspaper reports to this effect are annexed as Annexure H.

18. In these circumstances, my comment on Justice Kapadia’s role in the Vedanta-Sterlite matter is a legitimate opinion which I am entitled to express.

19. There is however another important aspect of this contempt petition and the manner in which it has been initiated. This Contempt Petition has been filed by a person who has repeatedly misused his position as Amicus Curiae and has taken briefs/retainers to appear for various private parties in matters in which he has been appearing as Amicus Curiae as well. In the case of Vedanta/Sterlite which is the subject matter of this complaint against me, Shri Salve first appeared as Amicus in this matter, and then took a retainer from Vedanta/Sterlite, after which he asked Shri Udai Lalit to appear as Amicus in the case. For a person who is Amicus and who has not only appeared as Amicus in a matter involving a particular party, to subsequently accept a brief or retainer on behalf of that party, in my view amounts to professional misconduct. Once he has been appointed Amicus in a matter by the Court, he has no business to accept a brief or retainer on behalf of a private party in the same matter. In fact, in my view, in either case, whether he took retainer on behalf of a private party after appearing as Amicus in the same matter or appeared as amicus though he was holding retainer of a private party in the same matter amounts to serious professional misconduct. Even in this application, he has misled the court by consciously concealing his retainership and connection with Vedanta/Sterlite, once again misusing his position as Amicus. For this reason alone, this application filed by him should not be entertained. In fact the Court should discharge him as Amicus in the matter. Copies of the orders showing Shri Salve was appearing as Amicus and the newspaper report showing his retainership with Vedanta-Sterlite are collectively annexed hereto as Annexure-I

20. This is however not the only instance where Shri Salve has misused his position and accepted a brief of a private party in cases where he is also acting as Amicus. He was Amicus in the forest matter when the issue of the Delhi Ridge and constructions of hotels/shopping malls on the Ridge came up before the Forest Bench. He still chose to take up a brief of M/s Unison Hotels which involved construction on 92 hectares of forest land on the Ridge. Subsequently, in another Writ Petition of Mr. Santosh Bhartiya challenging the construction by Unison Hotels (now called the Grand Hyatt Hotel) on the Delhi Ridge, Shri Salve appeared again in the matter, this time for the DDA. Copies of orders in the aforementioned cases related to Vasant Kunj Ridge area and the officer report dated 06.12.06 in Ridge Bachao Case are collectively annexed hereto as Annexure-J.

21. In the case of the construction of statues in the Noida Park, Shri Salve appeared as Amicus, though he had already been appearing on behalf of the UP Government in the same or connected matters involving construction of statues at the Noida Park and at other places. (Writ Petition No. 266 of 2009, Ravi Kant & Another Vs. State of U.P.). Copies of the orders in the two cases showing Shri Salve appearing as Amicus in the Noida Park matter and on behalf of the State of UP in Ravi Kant’s case involving the same park as well as the relevant pages of the petition of Ravi Kant’s case, are collectively annexed hereto as Annexure-K.

22. However, these are not isolated instances of professional misconduct on the part of Shri Salve, who has chosen to style himself as Amicus Curiae in this Contempt Petition. In a large number of cases, Shri Salve has accepted briefs/retainers from one party and thereafter gone on to appear on behalf of the other party by just returning the retainer despite the protest of the opposite party. Some instances of these cases are the case of K.K. Birla Vs. Lodha and the case of Lilavati Hospital (Charu Kishore Mehta vs. Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta M. Trust & ors., SLP (C ) No.4911/2007). Copies of the correspondence between Shri Birla and Shri Salve published in Shri Birla’s autobiography to this effect are collectively annexed hereto as Annexure-L. Copy of the order of 26/3/07 and a copy of a newspaper report regarding Shri Fali Nariman’s public expression of outrage at Shri Salve’s totally unprofessional behaviour in the Lilavati Hospital matter where after being briefed by one party, he chose to appear for the opposite party is annexed hereto as Annexure-M.

23. I have been constrained to point out these instances of professional misconduct of Shri Salve in this context because he has repeatedly misused his position as Amicus and involved himself in conflict of interest situations which has influenced the course of justice.

Deponent

Verification:

I the deponent above named do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this the 7th day of December 2009.
Deponent

Liberhan Commission: Painful wait for Justice

2009-12-08T23:40:00.000+05:30

Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao was famously having the afternoon siesta when the Babri was being demolished and he covered his inaction by putting the blame on Kalyan Singh. Immediately he promised that Babri will be restored at the same spot. It all raises the question of political morality. How the actors in the tragic act have been taking stances according the political necessities. How they regard that public memory is short and they can wriggle out of their crimes by mere play of words

By Ram Puniyani

Liberhan commission submitted its four volume report to the Government on 30 of June 2009. It might have been one of the longest times taken by any commission. Liberhan’s claim that the report got delayed due to non cooperation of leaders involved may have some truth as one knows Kalyan Singh avoided appearing before the commission for long time, and so was the attitude of many of those alleged for demolition. Still all the hearings were complete by 2004. Did it take 5 long years to write the report? Such a long delay in the report coming out, defeats half the purpose of the same. One of the minor reasons of delay has also been the differences in the approach of Justice Liberhan and its chief counsel Anupam Gupta. Gupta after he interrogated Advani, Justice Liberhan allrently told him to apologize to Advani for being harsh. While Gupta maintains that Justice Liberhan had been soft on Advani, despite his role of the chief mobilizer for demolition.

One awaits the report to be tabled and see what the commission has to say about things which have been reported in the media and seen on the TV by most. One also await to see the attitude of this Government towards this commission, is it going to be forthright objectivity or dictated by political exigencies. That apart, since the report was submitted some of the accused have been hiding for cover, and some others are saying that since already 17 years have lapsed how the report can be meaningful, if at all? Some of them have questioned the timing of the report.

To expect that those involved in demolition will own up the crime and honestly confess to that is something not to be expected. Still Uma Bharati was honest enough to say that “I definitely wanted Ram temple to come up (in Ayodhya) and I definitely wanted that building (Babri Mosque) to come down but not in that manner. But I am not going to apologize. I am ready to be hanged for it.” It was the same Uma Bharti, who along with Sadhvi Ritambhra was exhorting the Kar Sevaks by saying, Ek Dhakka Aur Do: Babri Masjid Tod do”. (Give one more push, break the Babri mosque) She also expressed her joy after the demolition by hugging another accused, Murli Manohar Joshi who was sharing dais with her. Amongst others who shared the dais, when the demolition work was in progress, were Lal Krishna Advani, Ashok Singhal and ex- RSS chief K. Sudarshan himself.

How do people respond to the crime after executing it, is a matter of great variance. Same Murli Manohar Joshi, who before the demolition had said told his followers "…demolish the masjid, nature of Kar Seva will be determined by Sants and not by courts/demolition is prerequisite for temple building", in the hearing of the commission he said that “With all humility, I say that the incident was never remotely conceived by us”. This despite the fact that Vinay Katiyar, the then Bajrang Dal chief had asserted that "Masjid will be demolished and debris will be thrown in river Sarayu". During the deposition he distracted form the main issue and doubted the need of commission and said that Ram Lalla is the owner of the place. While Lal Krishna Advani had stated the Kar Seva will done with Bricks and shovels, kar sevaks are not going to Ayodhya to sing Bhajan and Kirtans, later he declared that the day of demolition was the saddest day of his life. Which is the real Advani is difficult to say.

K.Sudarshan, who later became RSS Sarsnghchalak, stated that he heard Nirmala Deshpande saying that Mosque fell due to the explosion inside. Nirmala Deshpande disowned the statement. Kalyan Singh takes the cake as for as turn arounds are concerned. Before the demolition he committed to National Integration Council and through a sworn affidavit to Supreme Court, that he will protect the mosque. When demolition began he did not deploy 20000 central forces stationed barely 10 minutes from the place. Later he was imprisoned for a day and he proudly justified his inaction in the path of Ram Temple. He filed a 300 page affidavit, taking a line, which was in accordance with his the then Party’s line, stating that it was a spontaneous act by uncontrollable Kar Sevaks. With his problems beginning with BJP, he hit out at A.B.Vajpayee, Advani and Joshi saying Babri was destroyed on the instructions of senior BJP leaders.

The then Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao was famously having the afternoon siesta when the Babri was being demolished and he covered his inaction by putting the blame on Kalyan Singh. Immediately he promised that Babri will be restored at the same spot.

It all raises the question of political morality. How the actors in the tragic act have been taking stances according the political necessities. How they regard that public memory is short and they can wriggle out of their crimes by mere play of words.

And now with report on the table of the Congress Government can one expect justice? The experience so far is far from optimistic. Congress weighs the issues on the scale of political advantages or otherwise. On one hand it tries to put a show that it will do justice and when the crunch time comes one finds it wanting in resolve to stand firmly for secularism and justice. Political calculations have been its guiding load stones. So even now one is not sure about the real justice coming through after 17 long years of wait.

BJP on its part is a divided house. It has used the Ram Temple agitation and the consequent demolition and the violence for politically strengthening itself. It is around this agitation, demolition and violence that it came to occupy the major position on the political scene in India. Now having been in power and having seen that Lord Ram cannot eternally help it to keep coming to power, some of its major leaders have been rethinking the political line to be adopted. What one sees around is the total opportunism for the sake of power. They realize the necessities of such issues to be in power, they also see that beyond a point it can be counter productive. Now it’s up to them to keep adopting double standards or to come to adopt democratic issues as their political base. Can BJP shift away from such issues and take up the issues of the poor and downtrodden? This is a million-vote question. This is also a question related to the goals of its political father, the RSS. How does RSS evaluate its future role in Indian political chessboard? Indications are RSS will stick to Hindutva and Ram temple type of issues, come what may. One only hopes in despair that people concerned have honesty to own up their acts and face the legal consequences for their commitments!

The Babri Masjid demolition was symptom of a larger breakdown

2009-12-08T17:10:00.000+05:30

The Babri Masjid demolition was symptom of a larger breakdown but Indians have rejected agendas of hate

by Mahesh Rangarajan
Mail Today, 7 December 2009

THE RUMPUS over the report of the MS Liberhan commission will occupy centre- stage in the coming weeks. Much of the debate has focused on what the Sangh Parivar and its associate outfits did or did not do on that fateful day. There has been equal emphasis and rightly so on how the then Congress government in New Delhi failed to act in time to prevent the demolition.

But these issues, vital as they are, do not help answer a pricklier question. What is it about the political contours of India in the decade prior to the demolition that led to the virtually unchallenged assault not so much on a mosque but on the very idea of the rule of law in this open manner? Ayodhya on 6th December 1992 was a challenge to the idea of India as a country founded on respect for law as a means to settle disputes.

In common with other extremist movements and currents of whatever creed or community, stripe of colour, the movement sought to remake political India. The movement to demolish the mosque — make no mistake that is what it was — succeeded in its first task.

It played, most of all its prime spokesman LK Advani did, on the sense of “Hindu hurt” and “Hindu pride”. The rath yatra of 1990 involved more than a fringe and struck a chord in many with no previous sympathies with his party or faction.

‘Hum Mandir wahin banayenge’, the twin slogan of a temple and on that very spot, gave the Hindutva idea a wider base than any symbol in its decades long past

Backdrop

Many factors fuelled its rise. Terrorism in Punjab gave Congress the handle to play on Hindu sentiment.

Insurgency in Kashmir seemed poised to prise the Valley away from India.

Economic crises of 1989- 91 set the stage for middle class angst with the older economic order. The defeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan also looked like signal that religion based politics was the wave of the future.

Yet, in the first set of byelections held after the demolition, a new combine of Mulayam and Kanshi Ram trounced the party. A year after the tragic event, the coalition of the Backward Class and Dalit parties actually came to power.

Party workers chanted another slogan and no one could stop them from doing so. ‘ Mile Mulayam Kanshi Ram, Hava main ud jaye Jai Shri Ram.’ The joint forces of the two leaders of the lower social orders would rout those rallying behind the temple movement. The latter, it might be pointed out, dissipated in energy and focus after the demolition.

It was almost as if in being a success, it sowed the seeds of its own downfall.

There is little doubt it was the failure of centrist politics that enabled the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and then its political partner to mount such a successful mobilisation. Few of the major parties come out in flying colours.

The Congress government facilitated the cause at every key stage, right from opening the locks of the masjid till the foundation ceremony in November 1989. Its challenger VP Singh, despite his old roots in the Lal Bahadur Shastri era, preferred to ally with rather than oppose in a principled manner the politics of Advani.

And, as a prescient observer noted at the time, the meeting of the National Integration Council in Madras in November 1992 did little to strengthen the PM’s hands. It simply said it stood by whatever he felt was necessary. In other words they washed their hands of the case and let him face the music. It may have been good party politics but it did not serve the country.

Congress

Yet, it is the decade of the Eighties, a time of Congress dominance in the polity, that saw the ground slip under the pluralist cause. Not just once and not merely in one arena of political life, the country’s oldest party played the communal card. Indians might divide but if enough could vote for it, the party saw no reason not to play the role of agent and handmaiden to sectarianism.

This was in contrast to its record in the past. The early years of independence now under increasing historical scrutiny saw leaders divided on a host of issues unify in containing sectarian currents that could undermine a fragile unity. Both Nehru and Patel were one on using state machinery to ban Hindu extremist groups after Gandhiji’s assassination.

It was Home Minister Sardar Patel and not Nehru who saw to it that the dispute at Ayodhya was frozen and locks placed on the structure. It was the breaking of the locks on magisterial order in 1986 that was a symbol of the Congress’ wafer thin commitment to pluralism.

The magistrate claimed ‘ heavens will not fall’. He was right. It was hell that broke loose.

The backdrop to the opening of the locks lay in a steady and unremitting retreat of the forces of law and order when riots and massacres occurred especially in north India. Aligarh, Moradabad, Hashimpura and Maliana set the stage for Delhi 1984 and the post demolition massacres.

In this, there was a sharp contrast with the long Nehru and early Indira periods.

It is true that the Congress since its return to power in 2004 and well before that has taken note of this record. Distancing itself from the Rao period is easy, given that he does not figure in its pantheon of icons. And there is little reason to doubt the demolition was for him a colossal failure.

But to go further and make pluralism more than mere slogan, justice is a must. Justice has to come in the form of criminal proceedings against those who broke the law. In this respect, the Liberhan report does little to show the way.

Harmony

It also requires deeper attention to the kinds of social fissures and educational droughts that underlie tensions. The Sachar Report did a first class job in pointing the way forward in the latter regard.

Unlike in the time the demolition took place, the larger situation bodes well for such sustained efforts at giving peace a firm foundation.

The appeal of militant Islamism is on the wane in the Valley; terrorism in Punjab has given way to the routine of party based democracy. Even the special powers of the armed forces are being scrutinised afresh with curbs on the anvil. Identity politics has given way to daal and roti based issues.

The demolition was a symptom of a larger breakdown of the political order.

It is a tribute to the maturity of the Indian voter that hate agendas have been short lived and unable to effect larger changes in the body politic. But the task of creating the basis for harmony is still an unfinished one. It is a pity that the Liberhan Commission did not do more to aid this historic endeavour.

The writer teaches history in Delhi University

Concerned Citizens of Gujarat for Prosecution of architect of demolition of Babri

2009-12-07T06:04:00.000+05:30

Justice delayed is justice denied. However, even after this long wait those indicted by the Commission’s findings are , duly prosecuted and punished, it will be a great , though belated service to our wounded nation and it’s torn secular fabric.

Movement for Secular Democracy
C/o Narmad- Meghani Library, Natraj Railway Crossing, Meethakhali, Ahmedabad- 380006
Ph.No- 079 26404418

Date- 5-12-09
MEMORANDUM

Subject- Concerned Citizens of Gujarat for Prosecution of architect of demolition Of Babri

To,
Mr. Manmohan Singh,
The Prime Minister of India,
New Delhi.

Sir,

After 17 long years and over 4000 hearings Justice Liberhan has submitted his report on the demolition of Babri Masjid and it has been placed on the table of the House of the Parliament The report has named 68 important figures responsible for the demolition. It is a matter of concern that as there is no specific measures mentioned in the Action Taken Report(ATR) which was placed before the house of Parliament has encouraged the architects of demolition of Babri to vilify the atmosphere of the country taking advantage of the non prosecution.

The central thrust of the report expose the shameless betrayal and desecration of the Constitution and it’s basic Principles by the major ruling parties and cannot be ignored or put aside by legal squabbling and finding some loop holes here and there.

As they say justice delayed is justice denied. However, even after this long wait those indicted by the Commission’s findings are , duly prosecuted and punished, it will be a great , though belated service to our wounded nation and it’s torn secular fabric.

We the concerned citizens of Gujarat urge you to take immediate steps in this regard and hand over the case to CBI and open Fast track Courts with out delay to bring a logical end to years long judicial feud.

Thanking You

Yours

Prakash N. Shah,

Convener,
Movement for Secular Democracy

Date- 5-12-09
The Signatures of the concerned leading citizens

Mr. Chunibhai Vaidya
Ms. Ilaben Pathak
Ms. Mallika Sarabhai
Mr. Girish Patel
Mr. Mukul Sinha
Dr. J. Bandukwala
Mr. Gautam Thaker
Mr. Rajni Dave
Mr. Indukumar Jani
Mr. Uttam Parmar
Fr. Cedrik Prakash
Mr. Harinesh Pandya
Mr. Digant Oza
Mr. Manishi Jani
Mr. Dhiru Mistry
Mr. Mansoor Saleri
Mr. Rohit Shukla
Mr. Jagdish Shah
Ms. Saroop Dhruv
Mr. Hiren Gandhi
Mr. Chinu Shrinivasan
Mr. Dankesh Oza
Mr. Mahadev Vidrohi
Mr. Dilip Chandulal
Mr. Johannes Manjrekar
Mr. Bharat Mehta
Ms. Renu Khanna
Mr. Poonjabhai A. Patel
Mr. Ratilal Desai
Mr. Chandrakant Nai
Mr. Ratilal Dave
Mr. Chandrakant M. Trivedi
Mr. Omprakash Giri
Mr. Bharatsinh Zala
Mr. Ganpatbhai Rathod
Mr. Amrish Patel
Mr. Prafull Desai
Mr. Rahul Mehta
Mr. Pravin Pandya
Mr. Ashok Gupta
Mr. Soukat Ali Indori
Mr. Ishaq Chinwala
Mr. Vinod Pandya
Mr. Babubhai Desai
Mr. Kishorebhai Desai
Mr. Jagdish Patel
Ms. Damayantiben Parekh
Ms. Meenakshi Joshi
Mr. Jayesh Patel
Mr. Tapan Dasgupta
Mr. Mukesh Semwal
Ms. Bharti Parmar
Mr. Bhavik Raja
Mr. Satyendra Singh
Mr. Dwarikanath Rath

Copy -
Mr. P.Chidambaram,
Union Home Minister of India, New Delhi.

A New Political Party of the Hindu Right Announced

2009-12-06T20:10:00.000+05:30

Kalyan Singh claimed that in future, he would work for strengthening the BJP, for Hindutva and for the construction of the Ram temple at Ayodhya

Kalyan to float own party
The Indian Express 5 December 2009
Express news service - Saturday , Dec 05, 2009 at 0329 hrs Lucknow:

With the BJP leadership cold to his overtures, former Uttar Pradesh chief minister Kalyan Singh has decided to float a new political party which will “espouse the ideology of Hindutva, cultural nationalism, social justice, social harmony and development”.Singh said this on Thursday after a meeting with his supporters from central and eastern UP. On November 28, he had organised a similar meeting for supporters from Western UP in Delhi.

“The name and other details of the party will be decided later,” Singh said. “After the registration of the party with the Election Commission, I will go for a darshan of Ram Lalla at Ayodhya. The dates will be announced a week in advance so that all those who wish to accompany me may do so.”

At the fag end of 1999, after resigning from the BJP, Singh had floated the Rashtriya Kranti Party. This outfit was merged with the BJP in December 2003, after his patch-up with the party ahead of the 2004 Lok Sabha polls. Last January, Singh left the BJP a second time after accusing it of repeatedly humiliating him.

On November 15, while announcing that he was parting ways with the SP, he said quitting the BJP was his “biggest mistake”.

He claimed that in future, he would work for strengthening the BJP, for Hindutva and for the construction of the Ram temple at Ayodhya.

The BJP’s top leadership, however, is not enthused about accepting Singh in its fold in view of its past experience with him.

Remembering Ayodhya at 29, Ferozshah Road on 6th December New Delhi

2009-12-06T03:20:00.000+05:30

Release
Remembering Ayodhya at 29, Ferozshah Road on 6th December New Delhi

· Hum Sab Ayoudhya Exhibition
· Release of Ayodhya Poster
· Release of 2010 Anti-communal Calender
· Release of Ayodhya-A collection of articles
· Film Screening Naseem dir. Saeed Mirza
· Music Madangopal Singh

Join Us

Remembering Ayodhya

December 6th, 2009, Sunday, 3 PM onwards

SAHMAT invites you to an interactive afternoon with key journalist and photographer eyewitnesses to the Babri Masjid demolition. Also present will be historians who have been in the forefront of the debates around Ayodhya. SAHMAT’s interventions on the Ayodhya issue have been ongoing and a major part of its activities. SAHMAT is re-issuing its classic Ayodhya poster/broadsheet from 1993 as well as remounting Hum Sab Ayodhya, its famous exhibition from 1993, attacked by the Sangh Parivar, which became the center of an 8 year court case. A new collection of essays written during that period and edited by Sukumar Muralidharan, will be released. SAHMAT’s 2010 calendar highlighting 21 years of its anti-communal actions will also be released. Films will be screened and there will be singing and poetry too. In the aftermath of the release of the long-awaited Liberhan report there will be a discussion on its import. All the books on the historical and archaeological debates around Ayodhya will be on display and also for sale.

We invite you to join us.

29 Ferozeshah Road, New Delhi, near Rabindra Bhavan, Mandi House. Tel: 2338 1276, 2307 0787

Ayodhya 1992: Who are the guilty? - Editorial Communalism Compat

2009-12-05T23:05:00.000+05:30

Editorial Communalism Compat
December 2009

What can one say about the wisdom of a judge who damages his own case before his verdict concerning others! After 17 long years and eight crore rupees of public money Justice Manmohan Singh Liberhan has delivered to the country an over 1,000 page report on the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition that is full of howlers. According to the Liberhan Commission report, Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated on January 31, 1948. Names of the same persons are spelt differently in different places; designations too are mixed up on occasions. Looks like the learned judge could not be bothered with reading his own report before placing it before the nation.

Not surprisingly, those indicted, and rightly so, have latched on to the howlers to dismiss the entire report as lacking credibility. But though Justice Liberhan’s callousness is indefensible, his report remains an evidence-backed damnation of those who took the Indian Republic to the brink in December 1992. Not only was the Babri Mosque demolished in full public view on December 6, it also created the communal climate that made possible the pogrom against Mumbai’s Muslims in December 1992-January 1993 and the Muslims of Gujarat 10 years later.

Reading the report is like watching a horror film with an unfolding evil plot, step-by-step. Until 1983 when the VHP decided to jump on to the bandwagon, the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi dispute remained a local issue that agitated some residents of Ayodhya… and Faizabad district at most. By 1989, however, a multitude of ordinary Hindus from across the country had been transformed into a frenzied mob that converged on Ayodhya again and again with a single object: construction of a Ram Mandir on the very spot where the Babri Masjid had stood for a few hundred years. Mission demolition on December 6, 1992 was the logical culmination and climax of a hate-driven agenda.

If the criminal intent of the various constituents of the sangh parivar and its ally the Shiv Sena was public knowledge the contribution of the report lies in establishing in great detail how a malevolent intent was translated into malicious action in such a short period as the institutions of State sworn to protect constitutional values and provisions – Union government, Parliament, the Supreme Court of India, the governor of Uttar Pradesh – stood as "helpless" spectators while corresponding institutions and individuals with similar obligations at the state level – chief minister Kalyan Singh, his cabinet, senior to top level civil servants and police officers – acted instead as the private army of a campaign brimming with contempt for the rule of law. If the Liberhan report provides us overwhelming evidence of the acts of commission of those guilty of the criminal act, far more damning is the evidence it marshals against those whose acts of omission made it possible.

It has been the plea of the BJP and the RSS ever since December 1992 that mosque demolition was never on their agenda. To puncture this claim, Justice Liberhan asks a simple question: why then were tens of thousands of kar sevaks mobilised to descend in Ayodhya repeatedly, indoctrinated with incendiary slogans till a very large number of individuals had turned into a hate-filled frenzied mob, straining at the leash? Justice Liberhan does not buy the innocence plea.

From the evidence gathered before the commission it was more than apparent well before December 6 that the plan for that day was anything but a "symbolic kar seva". What’s more, the report points out that much of this information was already in the public domain. By December 2, if not earlier, it was so easy to anticipate the climax of this dance of the macabre on December 6. Why then did the Union government, the Allahabad High Court, the Congress-appointed governor of UP, the Supreme Court of India not intervene?

Justice Liberhan seems over-eager to give the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao (and the Congress party?) a clean cheat. "In 1992, the central government had been blinded and handicapped by the inaction of its own agent (governor) in the state and by the unfathomable trust the Supreme Court placed in the paper declarations of the sangh parivar". But he is not so sparing with other agents of State. Here are his parting words: "the intransigent stance of the High Court of Uttar Pradesh, the obdurate attitude of the governor (of UP), the inexplicable irresponsibility of the Supreme Court’s observer (sent to Ayodhya) and the short-sightedness of the Supreme Court itself are fascinating and complex stories, the depths of which I must not plumb... (But) historians, journalists and jurists may – and should – explore these dimensions and tell these untold stories for the benefit of the current and unborn generations".

In short, the Liberhan Commission tells us that our constitutional edifice today stands on shaky pillars – legislature, executive, judiciary – of State. Unless the System addresses the rot within and secures its porous borders from pretentious infiltrators, there’s little hope of meeting the challenge from without.

We reproduce in this issue excerpts from the Liberhan Commission’s Report with a few obvious corrections and clarifications.

Ayodhya 1992

Excerpts from the Report of the
Liberhan Ayodhya Commission of Inquiry

Editorial

Who are the guilty?

Chapter 1

Introduction (pdf)

Chapter 4

Sequence of Events (pdf)

Chapter 5

The Administration (pdf)

Chapter 14

Conclusions (pdf)

Chapter 15

Recommendations (pdf)

Independent Report on Mass Graves in Indian-administered Kashmir

2009-12-05T22:55:00.000+05:30

Evudences for 2,700 unknown, unmarked, and mass graves, containing 2,943+ bodies, across 55 villages in Bandipora, Baramulla, and Kupwara districts of Kashmir, based on applied research conducted between November 2006-November 2009

by International People’s Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Kashmir (IPTK)
At a press conference on Wednesday, December 02, 2009, in Srinagar, Kashmir.
Report, photographs, video clips available at: www.kashmirprocess.org
For pdf report Click here

Findings

The graveyards investigated by IPTK entomb bodies of those murdered in encounter and fake encounter killings between 1990-2009. These graves include bodies of extrajudicial, summary, and arbitrary executions, as well as massacres committed by the Indian military and paramilitary forces.

Of these graves, 2,373 (87.9 percent) were unnamed. Of these graves, 154 contained two bodies each and 23 contained more than two cadavers. Within these 23 graves, the number of bodies ranged from 3 to 17.

A mass grave may be identified as containing more than one, and usually unidentified, human cadaver. Scholars refer to mass graves as resulting from crimes against humanity, war crimes, or genocide. If the intent of a mass grave is to execute death with impunity, with intent to kill more than one, and to forge an unremitting representation of death, then, to that extent, the graves in Bandipora, Baramulla, and Kupwara are part of a collective burial by India’s military and paramilitary, creating a landscape of "mass burial."

Post-death, the bodies of the victims were routinely handled by military and paramilitary personnel, including the local police. The bodies were then brought to the "secret graveyards" primarily by personnel of the Jammu and Kashmir Police. The graves were constructed by local gravediggers and caretakers, buried individually when possible, and specifically not en mass, in keeping with Islamic religious sensibilities.

The graves, with few exceptions, hold bodies of men. Violence against civilian men has expanded spaces for enacting violence against women. Women have been forced to disproportionately assume the task of caregiving to disintegrated families and undertake the work of seeking justice following disappearances and deaths. These graveyards have been placed next to fields, schools, and homes, largely on community land, and their affect on the local community is daunting.

The Indian Armed Forces and the Jammu and Kashmir Police routinely claim the dead buried in unknown and unmarked graves to be "foreign militants/terrorists." They claim that the dead were unidentified foreign or Kashmiri militants killed while infiltrating across the border areas into Kashmir or travelling from Kashmir into Pakistan to seek arms training. Official state discourse conflates cross-border militancy with present nonviolent struggles by local Kashmiri groups for political and territorial self-determination, portraying local resistance as "terrorist" activity.

Exhumation and identification have not occurred in sizeable cases. Where they have been undertaken, in various instances, "encounter" killings across Kashmir have, in fact, been authenticated as "fake encounter" killings. In instances where, post-burial, bodies have been identified, two methods have been used prevalently. These are 1. Exhumation; and 2. Identification through the use of photographs.

The report also examines 50 alleged "encounter" killings by Indian security forces in numerous districts in Kashmir. Of these persons, 39 were of Muslim descent; 4 were of Hindu descent; 7 were not determined. Of these cases, 49 were labelled militants/foreign insurgents by security forces and one body that was drowned. Of these, following investigations, 47 were found killed in fake encounters and one was identifiable as a local militant.

IPTK has been able to study only partial areas within 3 of 10 districts in Kashmir, and our findings and very preliminary evidence point to the severity of existing conditions. If independent investigations were to be undertaken in all 10 districts, it is reasonable to assume that the 8,000+ enforced disappearances since 1989 would correlate with the number of bodies in unknown, unmarked, and mass graves.

Allegations

The methodical and planned use of killing and violence in Indian-administered Kashmir constitutes crimes against humanity in the context of an ongoing conflict. The Indian state’s governance of Indian-administered Kashmir requires the use of discipline and death as techniques of social control. Discipline is affected through military presence, surveillance, punishment, and fear. Death is disbursed through "extrajudicial" means and those authorized by law. These techniques of rule are used to kill, and create fear of not just death but of murder.

Mass and intensified extrajudicial killings have been part of a sustained and widespread offensive by the military and paramilitary institutions of the Indian state against civilians of Jammu and Kashmir. IPTK asks that the evidence put forward in this report be examined, verified, and reframed as relevant by credible, independent, and international bodies, and that international institutions ask that the Government of India comply with such investigations.

We note that the international community and institutions have not examined the supposition of crimes against humanity in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. We note that the United Nations and its member states have remained ineffective in containing and halting the adverse consequences of the Indians state’s militarization in Kashmir.

We ask that evidence from unknown, unmarked, and mass graves in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir be used to seek justice, through the sentencing of criminals and other judicial and social processes. As well, the existence of these graves, and how they came to be, may be understood as indicative of the effects and issue of militarization, and the issues pertaining to militarization itself must be addressed seriously and expeditiously.

The violences of militarization in Indian-administered Kashmir, between 1989-2009, have resulted in 70,000+ deaths, including through extrajudicial or "fake encounter" executions, custodial brutality, and other means. In the enduring conflict, 6, 67,000 military and paramilitary personnel continue to act with impunity to regulate movement, law, and order across Kashmir. The Indian state itself, through its legal, political, and military actions, has demonstrated the existence of a state of continuing conflict within Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir.

Queries may be directed to:
Khurram Parvez
E-mail: kparvez@kashmirprocess.org
Phone: +91.194.2482820
Mobile: +91.9419013553

BURIED EVIDENCE is authored by Angana P. Chatterji, Parvez Imroz, Gautam Navlakha, Zahir-Ud-Din, Mihir Desai, and Khurram Parvez.

[Dr. Angana P. Chatterji is Convener IPTK and Professor, Anthropology, California Institute of Integral Studies.
Advocate Parvez Imroz is Convener IPTK and Founder, Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society.
Gautam Navlakha is Convener IPTK and Editorial Consultant, Economic and Political Weekly.
Zahir-Ud-Din is Convener IPTK and Vice-President, Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society.
is Legal Counsel IPTK and Lawyer, Mumbai High Court and Supreme Court of India.
is Liaison IPTK and Programme Coordinator, Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society.]

"Replace 26/11 Trial Judge" - International Association of People’s Lawyers

2009-12-03T23:53:00.000+05:30

It was unfair and uncalled for that Adv.Kazmi was removed from the case and asked to leave the court premises. Was he a criminal who posed a threat to the judge and the court? Kasab’s trial is a public trial which necessarily means a trial to which the general public have access. Arbitrariness is not one of the virtues of the Indian justice system

International Association of People’s Lawyers
Oudergracht, 3511 AP Utrecht,
Netherlands.
2nd December 2009

26 / 11 trial judge, Tahilyani, be replaced

What transpired on 26th, 27th and 28th November 2009 in the court of Additional Judge Mr. Tahilyani of Bombay Session Court hearing what is commonly called the “26 / 11 trial” has not gone well with the basic principles of the criminal justice system which India inherited from the British.

The Article 22 of the Constitution is categorical that no accused “shall be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice”. The peculiarity of this case, however, made it impossible for Ajmal Kasab to exercise this right and to have a legal practitioner to defend him, let alone a legal practitioner of his own choice. Hence, the state intervened, as is the practice, and provided him with a legal counsel. And that is how Abbas Kazmi came to defend Kasab.

As a defence counsel, Kazmi had an independent status. He could not have been dismissed on the ground that he opposed the prosecution’s application to short-cut the trial by tendering evidence of prosecution witnesses on affidavit. This episode has vitiated the trial of Ajmal Kasab. Justice should not only be done, but also be seen to have been done.

It was unfair and uncalled for that Kazmi was removed from the case and asked to leave the court premises. Was he a criminal who posed a threat to the judge and the court? Kasab’s trial is a public trial which necessarily means a trial to which the general public have access. Arbitrariness is not one of the virtues of the Indian justice system.

Several of the 340 affidavits submitted by the prosecution in the court constituted evidence not only in appearance, but also in substance. They did not fall under Section 296 of Criminal Procedure Code. Abbas Kazmi has a legal and moral obligation to raise the issue and debate it in the open court. How could this disqualify him to be a defence counsel?

What happened in Mumbai on 26th November 2008 had arrested the attention of the world. The trial and verdict of Kasab’s case will come under the watchful eyes of the international media. This has serious implications for the Indian judicial system. It is in the interest of justice and fairness and the good name of the Indian judicial system that Judge Tahilyani is replaced with a new judge. This is not just one of the million cases pending in India. This is a unique case. It calls for special attention and treatment.

P.A. Sebastian,
Chairperson – International Association of People’s Lawyers.

India: The cycle of violence

2009-11-29T05:50:00.000+05:30

The shameless impunity of the power fuels the cycle of hatred that endangers India. Which is why it is essential to implement the recommendations of enquiry commissions, however late they may be.

by Antara Dev Sen
Deccan Chronicle, 26 November, 2009

It has been exactly a year since the horrific terror attacks in Mumbai that killed at least 170 and wounded the entire nation. Never again, we roar in desperate anger. The guilty must be punished, we scream. And a year later we have Force One, a special counter-terror unit on the lines of the National Security Guard, in place in Mumbai. The trial of Kasab goes on, the exasperating dialogue continues with Pakistan about “proof” and its tangible and philosophical dimensions. Meanwhile, we have also embarked on the Headley chase.

The 26/11 attacks were certainly the most dramatic in our recent history — especially since they played for almost three days on live television, and happened largely in luxury hotels, shocking the privileged classes into the realisation that they too are vulnerable. But the attacks were in no way an isolated event — these belonged to a larger terrorscape that took shape over two decades as sectarian polarisation laid us open to hate attacks and counterattacks and plunged us into a murderous cycle of violence. And this week we are revisiting perhaps the biggest fountainhead of that religious polarisation, with the Liberhan Commission’s report being tabled in Parliament.

Almost 17 years ago to the week, the Babri Masjid was demolished by Hindutva forces with the blessings of the Bharatiya Janata Party leadership. The ground had been prepared by L.K. Advani’s rath yatra in 1990 and with the destruction of the mosque, the dominance of politicised Hindutva over other religions, as well as over certain constitutional guarantees, was established. “The state had become a willing ally and co-conspirator in the joint common enterprise to announce the revival of a rabid breed of Hindutva, by demolishing the structure they had denounced as a symbol of Islam”, states the report. And it took 17 long years just to place before the country the facts of the event as found by this enquiry commission set up 10 days after the demolition on December 6, 1992.

Such a long wait just for the facts defies the very purpose of an enquiry and the hope of justice. Several of the accused are now dead. And the rest may never be punished. For with every passing year we have lost eyewitnesses, individual memory, official documents and trust in the secular fabric of India. With every passing year the polarisation between Hindus and Muslims has hardened, making us more vulnerable to terrorism both from within the country and beyond its borders. Once the cycle of violence is established, any spark can set off the next attack.

Especially when there is no justice in sight. What passes as spontaneous fury is usually a response to the spectacular failure of governance and law. The Mumbai riots in the aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition left at least 1,000 dead and almost 3,000 wounded in two phases of bloodshed. Then the retaliatory bomb blasts in March 1993 killed another 300 and left about 1,000 wounded. The Srikrishna Commission’s report on the 1992-93 Mumbai riots still remains unimplemented and the guilty remain unpunished.

This shameless impunity of the powerful fuels the cycle of hatred that endangers India. Which is why it is essential to implement the recommendations of enquiry commissions, however late they may be.

Justice Liberhan’s report mentions the guilty in clear and precise terms, holding 68 people individually culpable. We need proper action against them, at least against those still alive. It is criminal to spend crores of the taxpayers’ money on a report if its recommendations are not implemented.

But the report gives recommendations beyond its mandate. And this, I believe, was most important. There is hardly anything in the report about the day’s events that we — except perhaps the post-Babri generation — did not know. The report vindicates those truths that were in danger of being erased by organised lies.

And it also points out other things that we know, but still need to see in official recommendations. Like, it hits out against the cosy nexus between politicians, the police, bureaucrats and other power-mongers: “The nexus between the politicians, religious leaders, civil servants and the police officers should be disrupted and rooted out”. It suggests police reform, which has been identified repeatedly by commissions and individuals as the primary step to improve both security and governance.

The report also comes down heavily on the misuse of religion for political gain. It suggests a “separate law providing exemplary punishment for misuse of religion, caste, etc for political gains” — and the government has accepted the recommendation. The government is thinking of the Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, and will set up special courts, they said. And it promised to expedite the hearing of three cases registered in connection with the Babri Masjid demolition.

In the same thread of thought, Justice Liberhan’s report suggests that the Election Commission must ensure that any complaint by any Indian citizen about “attempts to misuse religious sentiments” for the sake of votes would be dealt with immediately and could result in the candidate’s disqualification. It has also recommended that members of the civil and police services are periodically screened to “identify and weed out the communal or biased elements”.

Curiously, it has also asked for a body to regulate media with a permanent tribunal, in the lines of the Medical Council or the Bar Council. Given that neither the councils mentioned have managed to contain either corruption or negligence among the members of their respective professions, I am not sure that this will have much effect. But the report does mention the very important role played by the media in reporting the truth, braving considerable danger and harassment by the Hindutva fanatics.

In short, Justice Liberhan has indeed offered a rather comprehensive and balanced report. Let’s hope it will not go the way of the Srikrishna Commission report — tucked away and forgotten. For unlike other enquiry commissions, the Liberhan Commission investigated the original sin — the demolition of the Babri Masjid that is till today the reference point of all incidents of sectarian strife and any violence that may have sectarian elements.

What happened on December 6, 1992 made India less safe. And by not punishing the guilty we have continued to make India more dangerous for us all. At least now that we have a formal report and recommendations, hopefully the government will take appropriate action. The guilty need to be punished, the flaws in the system need to be corrected if we really want a safer and more secure India.

* Antara Dev Sen is editor of The Little Magazine.

Telegraph Report on Intelligence official in Sahmat net

2009-11-29T05:12:00.000+05:30

TelegraphIndia 12 Sept, 2009

‘Spy’ who got caught- Intelligence official in Sahmat net

ANANYA SENGUPTA

New Delhi, Sept. 12: A “spy” sat staring at his polished shoes locked up in the small office of cultural group Sahmat for almost an hour today, after hamhanded snooping blew his cover and gave a telling insight into the working of the Intelligence Bureau.
“I am an FCRA (foreign contribution regulation) official and am here on official duty,” Praveen Sharma (name changed) insisted, fidgeting with his phone.
But Rajendra Prasad, the Sahmat member he had first approached with the introduction and a long list of queries, was not buying this any more. He had called police.
Sahmat, set up in January 1989 after actor, poet and political and street theatre activist Safdar Hashmi was killed performing a play 20km from Delhi, brings together a cross-section of people to defend democracy and freedom of expression.
In white T-shirt and grey pants, the bespectacled Sharma had walked into its office posing as an FCRA official under the home ministry.
“He wanted to know every detail of the organisation, and I gave it to him. I didn’t even ask for his identity card. He initially started with who the members of the organisation were and also details of the kind of work we do. He asked me if Sahmat took foreign funds for their work, and when I said no, he said if I was offered, would I take it? I had no problems answering those questions,” Prasad said.
Then he named two people, who he said were connected with the Maharashtra blasts, and asked me if I knew them. I realised he was asking me if our group had connections with terrorists. That’s what made me suspicious. I asked for his identity card and he just flashed some card at me. I asked him which blasts he was talking about, and he couldn’t even answer that,” the Sahmat member said.
Soon, Sharma had been locked up and the police called.
“It’s the recent blasts in Maharashtra,” Sharma said in answer to this correspondent’s question as he tried to contact his bosses.
So where was his office? Sharma didn’t remember.
When the police arrived, the mystery was solved. “He is with the Intelligence Bureau and it was his mistake that he barged into Sahmat’s office and intimidated them. Sahmat can officially register a case if they want,” the Parliament Street SHO, Vijay Chandel, said before the police took him away.
It is not uncommon for officials of the Intelligence Bureau, the country’s internal spy agency, to make discreet enquiries about organisations. But to go about it as Sharma did provides a clue perhaps to the intelligence failures blamed for blast after blast.
“What’s completely unacceptable is that at the time of the incident, there were two artistes in the room — young women, one from Pakistan and the other a Bangladeshi, who are in the country for an international art workshop. He made such a fuss about their nationalities that they ran away from the spot,” said photographer Ram Rahman.

Myths about Urdu

2009-11-29T02:33:00.000+05:30

Urdu means different things to different people. It is only by separating the myth from reality that we can appreciate its true nature.

by Tariq Rahman
dawn.com, 26 November 2009

‘Modern Hindi was created by weeding out Persian and Arabic words and using only the Devanagari script for writing. These new languages, Sanskritised Hindi and Persianised Urdu, drifted apart from each other and still serve as identity markers for Hindu and Muslim nationalism in South Asia.’

Pick up any Urdu textbook and the chances are that it will endorse the following myths: (a) the term ‘Urdu’ means military camp. Our language is called ‘Urdu’ because it was created in the army camps of the Mughals especially during the reign of Shah Jahan; (b) Urdu is a mixed language (khitchri zubaan); © Urdu is a Muslim language.

Now let us deal with these myths one by one.

All the histories in Persian about medieval India use the Turkish word ‘Urdu’ (which means ‘camp’ in original Turkish) for ‘city’. The word is not used in the original Turkish meaning in Indian sources in Persian for the most part. Sometimes the terms ‘Urdu-i-mualla’ and ‘Urdu-i-badshahi’ are also used. During Shah Jahan’s time, Urdu-i-mualla referred to the language spoken in the city of Shahjahanabad (Delhi).

The language we now call Urdu has an ancestor referred to as Hindvi and Hindi in most medieval Persian sources. In Gujrat, however, the language is called Gujri and sometimes Gujrati. In the Deccan it is called Dakani and around the Delhi area it is also called Dehlavi. During the 18th century the word ‘Rekhta’ was also used for it.

Meanwhile the British, and also some other outsiders, call it Indostan, Moors and then Hindustani. In fact, the name ‘Hindustani’ was used so much by the British that both Muslim and Hindu scholars often used it themselves for their common heritage during the 1930s and 1940s.

Syed Sulaiman Nadwi and some other thinkers who wanted Hindu-Muslim unity in British India even suggested that the term ‘Urdu’ be abandoned in favour of ‘Hindustani’ because the former conjured up the image of a military conquest and war whereas the latter had no such symbolic baggage.

The word ‘Urdu’ is a contraction of the phrase ‘zubaan-i-Urdu-i-mualla’ (i.e. the language of the exalted city) which came to be used during the late 18th century. It is, in fact, the most recent name for a language which certainly existed even in the 13th century. There are words and sentences which we can recognise even today in the malfuzat (sayings) and tazkiras (biographies) as well as other records of that period. They refer to the language used in the marketplace, songs, conversation and in homes. The military reference does not exist though the language must have been used among soldiers also.

It was certainly used in religious circles because even in far-off Kaniguram in Waziristan, a religious reformer called Bayazid Ansari wrote a book called Khairul Bayan in 1560 which has over 16 lines in this language which the author calls Hindi.

Now for the myth that Urdu is a mixture of other languages. If a language is really a mixture it is called pidgin which is nobody’s mother tongue and a reduced language. It may become a creole when it is developed and becomes somebody’s mother tongue.

Urdu’s ancestor — call it what you will — existed in India (probably in the vicinity of Delhi) as a full language. Words of Persian and Arabic origin crept into it. This was not because of military activities but ordinary everyday interaction.

This is a natural process and modern English came about in exactly this manner. That is why about half the vocabulary of English is from Latin and Greek via Norman French. But English is not called a ‘mixed language’ so why should Urdu be stigmatised as such?

If one starts calling languages mixed in the sense that there was no base for them and words from different languages combined then Urdu is not that kind of product. Urdu is mixed in the same way that English is: it has absorbed words from many languages. The third myth that Urdu is a Muslim language is more problematic. For about 500 years of its existence nobody called it Urdu. It was called Hindi and had many words of Sanskrit origin as do other texts — until the 18th century.

Then a language reform movement initiated by Muslim poets (Hatim, Mirza Mazhar, Nasikh’s students etc) threw out certain words from the corpus of the language. Among them were words like chinta (worry), prem (love), sundar (beautiful) etc. The movement was actually an attempt to create a linguistic marker for the cultural elite which was mostly Muslim. However, instead of being merely a class movement it became a religious one. Thus, Urdu was imbued with distinctive Perso-Arabic cultural content and served as an identity symbol for the Muslims of India.

In the same way, after 1802, modern Hindi was created by weeding out Persian and Arabic words and using only the Devanagari script for writing. These new languages — Sanskritised Hindi and Persianised Urdu — drifted apart from each other and still serve as identity markers for Hindu and Muslim nationalism in South Asia.

During the Pakistan Movement, Urdu became a symbol of the identity of South Asia’s Muslims. It was invested with emotional force and Maulvi Abdul Haq, who used to term it a composite language while in India, started calling it the mainstay of Muslim separatism.

Similarly, Sanskritised Hindi became the symbol of the attempt to eliminate the share of Muslims in Indian culture. This political gulf between the two sister languages remains to this day — although at the spoken level, Urdu and Hindi remain the same language as all Indians who watch Pakistani dramas and all Pakistanis who watch Hindi movies will testify.

However, while Pakistani Muslims insist that Urdu is a Muslim language, the Muslims of India refer to it as a composite language. This is because it is in the political interests of Pakistani Muslims to emphasise the differences between themselves and the Indians while the opposite is in the political interests of Indian Muslims.

In short, Urdu means different things to different people. It is only by separating the myth from reality that we can appreciate its true nature.

Full text of the Liberhan Ayodhya Commission of Enquiry Commission Report

2009-11-28T20:48:00.000+05:30

This is the full text of the 1029-page report of the Liberhan Commission, which was tabled in Parliament on Nov. 24, 2009.

Liberhan Commission Report (FullReport); Click to Download from The Hindu Archive Single file (PDF) - 80 mb

To facilitate easier downloads, the report is available in five parts below (in PDF):

http://beta.thehindu.com/multimedia/archive/00014/Liberhan_Report_Part_14078a.pdf: Liberhan Report - Part 1 (22.6 Mb)

http://beta.thehindu.com/multimedia/archive/00014/Liberhan_Report_Part_14079a.pdf

Liberhan Report - Part 2 (21.2 Mb)

http://beta.thehindu.com/multimedia/archive/00014/Liberhan_Report_Part_14080a.pdf

Liberhan Report - Part 3 (22.7 Mb)

http://beta.thehindu.com/multimedia/archive/00014/Liberhan_Report_Part_14081a.pdf: Liberhan Report Part 4

http://imc-usa.org/files/Liberhan_Report_Annexures.pdf: Liberhan Report - (Annexures)

Act Now on The Liberhan Commission Report - ANHAD

2009-11-27T02:29:00.000+05:30

It was essentially an attack on Indian constitution & the plural-democratic fabric of the nation. And from there it began the process of erosion of secular-democratic values

Wednesday 25 November 2009,
ANHAD (Act Now for Harmony and Democracy) Release

The Liberhan Commission have brought to our attention once again the real forces behind one of the biggest tragedies of Independent India. It has now become clear from Liberhan Commission’s work that the demolition was not an act of spontaneous anger as claimed by the communal forces. It was a well planned crime coordinated by RSS and executed by different progeny of RSS. The political leaders, some of whom were trying to hide behind different shields stand completely exposed as far as there role in the demolition was concerned. In this meticulously planned attack leaders line Vajpayee, Advani, Joshi, Kalyan Singh etc. played their part assigned by their controller the, RSS.

Whatever be the motives of the leak, which it self may be a planned one by some political forces, it is once again clear that rather than debating the issue, mulling over the truth coming out, BJP adopted its usual method of disrupting the proceedings of Lok Sabha. It does not believe in proper discussion so every such time it resorts to the mayhem and the discussion is avoided. What becomes transparently clear is that the whole top leadership of ’BJP and company’ was involved and RSS, the organization expert in making the things opaque from public, had undertaken the demolition for political goals. RSS did go on to bring immense suffering to the nation through this demolition. In addition the mask of Vajpayee as the moderate political person also stands torn apart and the scheming, calculating politician, behind the mask stands exposed. Incidentally on 5th December Vajpayee did give some hint about the happenings of the next day.

The government needs to take this report with utmost seriousness as the demolition was not just a destruction of age old mosque, and archeological treasure of the country, but this act was essentially an attack on Indian constitution. It was also an attack on the plural-democratic fabric of the nation. It became a turning point of sorts, which changed the direction of politics and society in the adverse direction. Tragically this paved the way for communal forces to come to the center stage of the politics, this led to massive communal violence in Mumbai, Bhopal, Surat and other places, leading to the loss of over two thousand innocent people and the loss of over 10000 crores of social wealth. It demonized the minority community and began the process of erosion of secular-democratic values. Tragically this led to relegation of minorities to the status of second class citizens. It gave political muscles to the divisive forces, forces which have no faith in the values of Indian Constitution.

While the society at large needs to condemn the ideology of perpetrators of this act once again, it is also time to recapitulate that this was the same ideology which killed the father of Nation Mahatma Gandhi. While at social level we need to resolve to strengthen the values of Freedom movement and comprehensively reject the divisive politics being propagated by RSS and its progeny, it is also time that the demonization of minorities which got triggered due to this demolition needs to be fought against.

We fervently appeal to the Government to take urgent steps to punish the guilty of the demolition and the consequences which followed. Government must act with full strength and forthrightness to take political and legal steps against the culprits to ensure that the law of the land prevails and guilty are punished without any fear. Be it RSS top brass, be it BJP top leadership, starting from Vajpayee Advani to Joshi and other, be it the VHP leaders or the Bajrang Dal leaders, law must catch up with these criminals.

We demand

An urgent legal action against those indicted in the Liberhan Commission report.
We urge upon government to undo the damage done by communal forces to our mixed culture, to ensure the promotion of values of communal amity and national integration.
We also call upon the Government to reach the message of plural values to the society through different communication channels.

ANHAD (Act Now for Harmony and Democracy)
23, CANNING LANE
NEW DELHI-110001
www.anhadin.com

Like we have Islamists, are there Brahminists too?

2009-11-24T20:39:00.000+05:30

Mushrif a former DIG of Maharashtra police accounts in his book "Who killed Karkare?" Karkare’s death on the first night of the gunbattle with terrorists hints at the possibility that the secular Brahmin had big enemies among Brahminist supremacists. It reads though more like an instinctive conjecture than a well-grounded thesis.

by Jawed Naqvi
Dawn, 23 November 2009

S.M. Mushrif may have thrown up an important question which he believes will almost certainly be killed by the media.

He describes Hemant Karkare as a noble Brahmin and his detractors as Brahminists. It seems that Mushrif, a former DIG of Maharashtra police, admired Karkare for his avowed secularism like most Indian Muslims would swear by Pandit Nehru.

Nehru was a Kashmiri Brahmin who detested the obscurantist nationalism of those Brahmins who belonged to the RSS stable from Maharashtra.

The battle-lines between secular Brahmins, represented by Karkare, the fallen anti-terror police chief who was killed in last November’s terror attack in Mumbai, and Brahminist supremacists whom he was moving to neutralise, thus goes back a long way in history.

The Indian political class of all religions including their caste categories is essentially lined up behind these two opposite types of Brahmins – secularists and supremacists.

At least this is what Mushrif’s book about Karkare’s mysterious death suggests in its core thesis.

Mushrif’s account of Karkare’s death on the first night of the gunbattle with terrorists hints at the possibility that the secular Brahmin had big enemies among Brahminist supremacists. It reads though more like an instinctive conjecture than a well-grounded thesis.

The book ‘Who killed Karkare? The real face of terrorism in India’ accuses the all powerful Intelligence Bureau (IB) of representing Brahminist lobbies. And it says that India’s external spy agency RAW is relatively free of Brahminist influence.

This is a serious observation and it has come from someone who was once part of the system at a fairly high level. Should there be a debate at least about the character of these agencies, all the more because of the clout they seem to wield in the shaping of India’s national consciousness.

The Americans lionise the CIA and the FBI but they also keep very close tabs on what their agencies are up to. Revelations on Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib were examples of a healthy check placed on runaway and usually misplaced nationalist zeal.

Even in the Pakistani media, the ISI and other powerful state institutions are often put under public scrutiny. In the Indian media these institutions are either not discussed, or if they are treated like holy cows.

Mushrif has broken new ground by becoming the rare high-ranking police officer to put a sharp focus on an un-discussed subject. It is another matter that the book sounds a bit shrill in expressing its concerns, and there will be criticism, if the claims are not altogether ignored and hidden from public gaze.

Mushrif goes into history to make his point. Right or wrong, I believe it needs to be discussed, criticised but certainly not ignored.

According to Mushrif, the first pre-planned Hindu-Muslim riot was caused by Maharashtrian Brahminists of Pune in 1893. They did so to divert the attention of common Hindus from the reformist movement of Jyotiba Phule and others, which was sweeping the region in the last half of the 19th century. Is this a valid view that needs to be studied?

Mushrif lists 48 incidents connected with ‘terrorism of Brahminist organisations,’ As many as 35 were located in Maharashtra. ‘Though in some of the cases, common Hindu youths appear to be involved, a detailed enquiry into them would reveal that the Brahminists have been their masterminds.’

Mushrif says a recent conspiracy unearthed by Karkare to destabilise India’s constitutionally established democratic republic and to form a Brahminist Rashtra was hatched in Maharashtra and most of the accused persons, including the main alleged conspirator, Lt Col Purohit, were Maharashtrian Brahminists, as distinct from secular Brahmins.

Mushrif believes that Abhinav Bharat, an extremist group being investigated by Karkare when he was killed, was ‘the fountain of inspiration’ for anti-India terrorism. Its national president was Himani Savarkar ‘a staunch Brahminist and daughter-in-law of V.D. Savarkar’s brother, who hails from Maharashtra’.

Doubts are raised in the book about attacks blamed on Muslims. Mushrif thinks these were false flag attacks staged by Brahminists.

‘The Ahmedabad bomb blast and Surat unexploded bombs case of July 2008 had a Maharashtra connection, as the emails received by some TV channels minutes before the blasts were traced to New Mumbai. The vehicles used for the blasts were stolen from New Mumbai and passed through Talasari toll post in Thane district of Maharashtra, presumably by tampering the CCTV cameras installed at all the toll posts. Some of the unexploded bombs were found wrapped in Marathi newspapers.’

Mushrif’s accusations seem to be superficial but they are too serious to be ignored. That includes his claim that ‘the Brahminists in Maharashtra managed to give the investigation a totally different twist with the help of their brethren in the IB.’

Taking up a controversial encounter killing of two young alleged terrorists in the so-called Batla House raid in a Muslim locality in Delhi last year, Mushrif says the SIM cards of mobile phones found with the killed men were traced to Aurangabad district of Maharashtra.

‘The SIM cards were also found to have been used by the terrorists to contact somebody in Aurangabad. However, only a superficial enquiry has been made into the matter and no action has been taken against the real masterminds. If probed deep and taken to its logical end, it would expose a Brahminist connection.’

Clearly Mushrif would gain by writing with more care and he does lose valuable points by making charges that will be difficult to prove.

Mushrif quotes another incident to make the Brahminist link. ‘In the Kanpur explosion of August 2008, Maharashtra connections have been disclosed. In this case, two Bajrang Dal activists (Rajiv Mishra and Bhupinder Singh) had died while making explosive devices. The investigation revealed that they had plans for massive explosions in the minority-dominated Ferozabad, and that they had frequently called up on two mobile phones in Mumbai since two months before the blast. But the police have not yet been able to identify the persons concerned, apparently under the Brahminist-dominated IB.’

About the Mumbai attack of November 26, last year, Mushrif raises a key doubt. ‘During the Mumbai terror attack of 26/11, the mobile phones used by the terrorists who wreaked havoc at the CST Station have been traced to Satara District of Maharashtra. In whoevers’ name the SIM cards may stand, an in-depth investigation would lead the trail to Brahminist organisations and their leaders. But this matter has been frozen by the IB and the Crime Branch in Mumbai, for obvious reasons.’

The trouble with Mushrif’s book is that it is not so ‘obvious’ that he is essentially right on all his claims. But that could hardly be a reason to not take his perspective with a degree of seriousness that a fair fight against terrorism deserves.

25th Anniversary Bhopal Gas Tragedy 1984, 3 December 2009

2009-11-21T06:26:00.000+05:30

Bhopal gas tragedy occurred on the night of 02/03 December 1984. However, neither the Government of India nor the Government of Madhya Pradesh seems to have drawn appropriate lessons from the gruesome tragedy. Instead, they have been pursuing such reckless policies that have the potential to create Bhopal-type situations at several places across the country

Invitation and appeal for funds

by Bhopal Gas Peedith Mahila Udyog Saghathan
Thursday 19 November 2009,

The 25 anniversary of the Bhopal gas tragedy, which occurred on the night of 02/03 December 1984, will be observed from 01 to 03 December 2009. However, neither the Government of India nor the Government of Madhya Pradesh seems to have drawn appropriate lessons from the gruesome tragedy. Instead, they have been pursuing such reckless policies that have the potential to create Bhopal-type situations at several places across the country. In fact, millions of citizens across the country have since been exposed to a verity of toxic substances at their place of work as well as from exposure to other hazardous materials that have been released into the environment by multinational companies and local industries.

It will not be exaggeration to say that these companies have been emboldened to act in such thoughtless manner because no action has been initiated against the culprits involved in the Bhopal gas tragedy in the last 25 years and there is no sign that any action would be initiated against them in the near future. Especially, the multinational companies seem to have drawn the inference that they can destroy the health and environment of this country without fear of being punished or ever held accountable in any way for their outrageous actions.

Even 25 years after the Bhopal disaster:

The culprits responsible for the crime are yet to be punished.
The gas-victims have not been awarded just compensation.
6000 gas-victims continue to seek medical treatment for disaster-related ailments.
Scores of gas-victims continue to die due to lack of proper medical treatment.
Government’s financial rehabilitation program has almost come to an end.
No provision to provide pension to thousands of widows of gas-victims, orphans and other handicapped.
Under environmental rehabilitation programme, the Government has failed to provide safe drinking water, toilets or clean environment to the needy gas-victims.
Large quantities of toxic materials lying in and around the Carbide plant and toxic waste discharged into the Solar Evaporation Pond has leached into the ground and contaminated thousands of tones of soil and ground water near the plant in approximately 5 sq. km of area.
The plan for a memorial for the victims of the of tragedy is still on paper.

Even after 25 years, Bhopal is the worst example of black deeds of multinational companies and government’s irresponsibility towards citizens. For many of the gas-victims, the situation is not very different from the day of tragedy. Till date, neither proper compensation has been awarded nor have appropriate arrangements been made for their treatment and rehabilitation. More than 25 thousand gas victims have apparently died so far due to the toxic effects of the gases while more than three lakh victims have been issued health cards to enable them to get continuous treatment for various disaster-related ailments. Instead of attempting to medically, economically and socially rehabilitate the gas victims, the Central and State governments are working against their own people and defending the interests of Union Carbide.

Moreover, the 1989 Bhopal Settlement between the Union of India and Union Carbide was based on assumption that only 3000 gas-victims had died in the tragedy and another 1,02,000 had suffered injuries in varying degree. However, the Claims Courts established by the Welfare Commissioner, Bhopal, has determined that there were in all 574,367 gas-victims including dead, which effectively meant that the magnitude of the dead and injured was at least FIVE times more than what was assumed at the time of the Settlement.

Criminal cases against Union Carbide and its accused officials are proceeding at a snail’s space and it is still before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal. Medical, economical and social rehabilitation work undertaken by the State and Central governments have been inadequate and far below the requirements.

Due to all these reasons BGPMUS has been continuously fighting for justice for the gas-victims for past 24 years. We are engaged in agitational work and as well as legal struggle in association with the Bhopal Gas Peedith Sangharsh Sahyog Samiti (BGPSSS) from the Supreme Court to the District Court. Now the legal struggle for enhancing compensation by a factor of FIVE has shifted to the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur. BGPMUS needs at least Rupees Two Lakhs to organize 25 anniversary program and to carry on the legal struggle for justice.

BGPMUS, therefore, not only invites you to participate in the commemorative programme on the 25 anniversary of the Bhopal Gas Tragedy from 01 t0 03 December 2009 but also appeals to you for financial contributions to help us carry on our struggle.

You can help us by sending a bank draft or by sending a money order to the following address:

Abdul Jabbar
Convener,
Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Udhyog Sangathan
51, Rajendra Nagar,
Bhopal — 462010
Telefax: 0755 2748688, 2730241
Email : swabhimankandra@rediff.com
Mobile: 9406511720

25th Anniversary Program:
01.12.09: Poster / Photo Exhibition 02.12.09: A full day Seminar organized by Jan Sangharsh
Morcha on Terror of Multinational Companies at
Yadgar Shahjahani Park, Bhopal. 03. 12.09: A public meeting at 11 am at Yadgar Shahjahani Park (In front of Sultania Zanana Hospital)

Invading the Secular Space

2009-11-15T23:47:00.000+05:30

The 'living God' Satya Sai Baba got invited by the Maharashtra Chief Minister designate, Ashok Chavan to his official residence for blessings. There are many charges of sexual abuse by Sai baba. Magician of fame P.C. Sarkar also said his miracles have nothing to do with divinity but are mere magical tricks!

By Ram Puniyani
13/11/2009

Satya Sai Baba of Puthaparthi in his recent tour of Mumbai (Nov. 2009) was invited by the Maharashtra Chief Minister designate, Ashok Chavan to his official residence, Varsha, for blessing the house and for the associated puja (invocation). When criticsed for inviting the Holy Guru to his official residence he said that since he is a devotee of the Baba from last many decades it is a privilege for him. There are many other news items where state functionaries mark their presence for the programs of Gurus and Babas (God men).

As far as Satya Sai Baba is concerned he is regarded as the living God by his devotees, while he himself claims to be the reincarnation of Sai Baba of Shirdi. This Sai Baba is also a miracle person and a spiritual Guru. His miracles have been exposed by the Rationalist Associations and his trick of producing Gold chain was brought up in the court, as production of gold is illegal. This case was not pursued for various reasons. There are many charges of sexual abuse by Sai baba. Magician of fame P.C. Sarkar also said his miracles have nothing to do with divinity but are mere magical tricks.

Use of official residence for such functions is in total violation of the secular constitution of the country where religion is a private matter of the individual and state functionaries can’t wear their religion on their sleeves in official capacity and in official places. Contrary to that norm, lately this norm is known more for its violation than by adherence to it. Gone are the days of Nehru when he could stand up and snub such actions by whosoever it is in the official capacity. Of course, Gandhi, Father of the nation and Nehru the architect of Indian state were no devotees of any Baba or Guru. Over a period of time such principles have been violated with impunity. Uma Bharati during her brief tenure as the Chief Minister ship of Madhya Pradesh converted her official residence in to a Gaushala (Cow shed) with saffron robed Sadhus forming the main residents of her official residence.

India has quite a broad fare of God men. There are Gurus, Sants, Maharajs, Acharyas and Purohits (clergy) in the main. Their role has been changing over a period of time. Last three decades seem to be the time of their major glory, with their presence in all spheres in a very dominating way. Their number has also proliferated immensely and while some of these are big players, Sri Sri Ravishankar, Baba Ramdeo, Asaram Bapu to name the few. There are hundreds of them scattered in each state. Many of them are working in close tandem with Hindu right, Swami Assmanand, Late Swami Laxmananad Sarswati, Narendra Mahraj etc. These are the one’s who have created their own niche with different techniques, while Shankarachayas, are associated with the Mutts coming from historical times, the Akshrdham chain is also not very old a tradition. The Pramukh swamis (Chief Guru) of these temples wield enormous clout. One recalls Anand Marg came up during the decade of seventies and not much is hearing of that now.

Overall religiosity has been on the upswing and not many are protesting the promotion of blind faith by many such God men. The rational thought and movement is on the back foot and political leadership, social leaders, of many hues are bending over backwards to please these Babas, some of whom are also dispensing health and some of them claim to be looking into the crystal ball of future.

There is an interesting correlation between the coming up of adverse effects of globalization, rise in the anxieties and deprivations and the current dominance of God men. Many an interesting observations about these God men are there, the major one being the rise in alienation in last three decades along with the rising religiosity in the social space. Many a remarkable studies on this phenomenon are coming forth. One such is by a US based Indian scholar of repute, Meera Nanda. In her book, The God Market, she makes very profound observations. She points out that this rising religiosity is manifested in boom in pilgrimages and newer rituals. Some old rituals are becoming more rooted and popular. She sees a nexus between state-temple-corporate complexes also. Secular institutions of Nehru era are being replaced by boosting demand and supply of God market.

A new Hindu religiosity is getting deeply rooted in everyday life, in public and private spheres. The distinction between private and public sphere is getting eroded as the case of Sai Baba in Maharashtra Chief Ministers official bungalow shows. Hindu rituals and symbols are becoming part of state functions; Hinduism de facto is becoming state religion. Hindu religiosity is becoming part of national pride with the aspiration of becoming a superpower. She observes a trend of increased religiosity. In India there are 2.5 million places of worship but only 1.5 million schools and barely 75000 hospitals. Half of 230 million tourist trips every year are for religious pilgrimage. Akshardham temple acquired 100 acres of land at throw away price. Sri Sri Ravishanker’s Art of Living Ashram in banglore has 99 acres of land leased from Karnataka Government. Gujarat Govt. gifted 85 acres of land to establish privately run rishikul in Porbander. Most significantly Nanda argues that the new culture of political Hinduism is triumphalist and intolerant, while asserting to be recognized as a tolerant religion. While claiming to have a higher tolerance, its intolerance is leading to violence against minorities.

It is because of this that even if the BJP may not be the ruling party, the political class and other sections of state apparatus have subtly accepted Hindu religiosity and the consequent politics as the official one, and so the justice for victims of religious violence eludes them. The question is, can the struggle for justice for weaker sections also incorporate a cultural-religious battle against the blind religiosity and proactive efforts initiated to promote rational thought.

After Babri Demolition and Bombay's Riots - bitter battle for those who have sought a legalcourse of action

2009-11-15T23:14:00.000+05:30

It has been 17 years since the Babri Masjid was demolished and Mumbai witnessed its worst communal carnage. It has been a bitter battle for those who have sought a legal course of action.

The long and winding road
by Meena Menon
The Hindu, 5 November 2009

— THE HINDU PHOTO ARCHIVES
RIOTERS HAVE NO RELIGION: A family tries to pick up what is left of the worst communal carnage Mumbai witnessed in the aftermath of the masjid demolition.

For Mukim Mumtaz Sheikh, 37, the Liberhan Commission and its report are not going to make any sense. He confessed to being too scared to testify before the Srikrishna Commission which investigated the communal riots in Mumbai after the Babri Masjid was demolished on December 6, 1992. He has no regrets as he believes that the people who testified before the Commission did not get justice in any case.

Mukim is a survivor in more ways than one. He has vivid memories of the riots in which his father died of suffocation and he barely escaped death. He has taken to photography recently and can be seen at all important political functions, a digital camera hanging around his neck. He has rods in his hand and it is difficult for him to drive. Mukim, who has studied till the tenth standard, was wary of his writing skills but now he runs his own paper, “Hindustan ki Awaz.” He is married with three children and has got on with life.

Slightly built, with wide eyes, he unravels a long and rather complicated story. In the second phase of riots in January 1993, chased by a mob he and his father ran across rooftops and seeing some of his neighbours in the mob, he extended his hand for help. What he got instead was an arm broken in three places. The mob robbed his watch, stripped off his shirt and dragged him to the main road and beat him up. When he regained consciousness, he does not know after how long, he found himself in what must have been a septic tank. His father was below him shouting for help. Soon his cries ceased. Some 30 hours later Mukim was rescued by a policeman, with whom he stays in touch in gratitude.
Promise not kept

He still has friends from his old locality. He is fond of his old home and he believes that rioters have no religion. He has left justice to Allah. It has been 17 years since the Babri Masjid was demolished and Mumbai witnessed its worst communal carnage which killed nearly a 1,000 people. While the ruling Congress-Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) keeps promising to implement the Srikrishna Commission report, there is every evidence to the contrary.

Unlike Mukim, Farooq Mapkar, a security guard who was injured in police firing at Hari Masjid on January 10, 1993, testified before the Srikrishna Commission. Seven people were killed when police barged into the mosque and fired. Mapkar’s is a long quest for justice which has still not ended. He was accused by the police of rioting and fought a case since 1993. He was only acquitted of all charges in February 2009. However, his persistence led to the first information report against the policemen being filed on 28 August 2006, 13 years after the offence.

Last year the Bombay High Court ordered a CBI inquiry into the Hari Masjid firing. While the State government had agreed to hand over the case to the CBI, the agency contended that it was not in a position to take it up because it was already overburdened with cases, among other reasons. Justices R.S. Mohite and F.I. Rebello of the Bombay High Court in their order of December 18, 2008, meticulously overruled the CBI objections and said that it is a primary duty of the State to ensure that no community should be left with the feeing that they have no forum to address their grievance or a feeling that the law is not uniformly applied to all its citizens. “We find that the action taken so far in this case is a matter of concern and requires urgent redressal,” the court said.

As the inquiry was in progress, in a surprising turn of events, on August 28, the Maharashtra government moved the Supreme Court and asked for a stay on the CBI investigation. The State contended that it had carried out a departmental inquiry against Nikhil Kapse, the policeman who was involved in the firing at Hari Masjid, and said the firing was not an indiscriminatory act. The apex court stayed the CBI investigation. For activists and lawyers fighting for Mapkar this was a final nail in the coffin. The Srikrishna Commission held that Kapse’s role in the entire incident was condemnable and he is guilty not only of unjustified firing but also of inhuman and brutal behaviour.

There are several petitions pending in the Supreme Court regarding the riots and one of them filed by lawyer Shakeel Ahmed relates to the involvement of 31 policemen named by Justice (retd) Srikrishna in his report. It has been a long and bitter battle for those who have sought a legal course of action. Advocate Yusuf Muchhala who has fought several cases, is quite convinced that the government is certainly not going to do anything about justice. Even the media has failed to keep the issue alive in the public consciousness.

While Mapkar has approached the Supreme Court, there was another setback. The Bombay High Court upheld a lower court order as just and legal and cleared the former Mumbai Joint Police Commissioner (crime), R.D. Tyagi, and eight other policemen accused of forcibly entering and killing nine people in another case, the Suleiman Usman Bakery firing, on January 9, 1993. This case was examined by Justice (retd) Srikrishna and he said, “the Commission is of the view that the story of the police does not inspire credence.”

Justice Mridula Bhatkar’s order of October 16 upheld that the trial judge has rightly observed that the firing in the Bakery was unnecessary. “Indeed it was a cruel and atrocious act on the part of the police. In the case of the communal riots, a humane and sensitive approach is expected,” she says. “However, it should be within the legal framework. Howsoever be the serious or heinous offence, an innocent cannot be put to trial,” the order continues. The court held there is no sufficient evidence against Tyagi and others that they either had common intention to murder the inmates in the Bakery or have committed or abetted the offence of criminal trespass.

The State government in 2001 had filed a case against 18 policemen, but nine of them, including Tyagi were discharged in 2003 by the trial court. Despite promises, the government did not appeal against the discharge. It was left to another victim of firing, Noorul Huda Maqbool Ahmed, a madrasa teacher near the bakery. It is now his turn again to approach the Supreme Court.

Lamb Allies with Wolf: Kerala Christian Group and VHP join Hands against illusory Love Jihad

2009-11-11T22:41:00.000+05:30

It must be a real ingenuity of Sangh Parivar to rope in the Kerala Bishops Council to fight against the Love-Jihad, a word coined by their propaganda mill, a word which combines two words and converts them in to a tool to torment the lovers, in case the boy happens to be a Muslim and the girl a non Muslim. It is the latest tool to launch attack against Muslim minorities

By Ram Puniyani

08/11/2009

At a point of time there was a slogan by RSS combine, Pehle Kasai Phir Isai (First the Muslims then the Christians). And lo and behold that was the pattern of communal violence. First it began against Muslims and in the decade of 1990s Christians were also put on the chopping block. It must be a real ingenuity of RSS combine, popularly called Sangh Parivar to rope in the Kerala Bishops Council to fight against the Love-Jihad, a word coined by their propaganda mill, a word which combines two words and converts them in to a tool to torment the lovers, in case the boy happens to be a Muslim and the girl a non Muslim. It is the latest tool to launch attack against Muslim minorities.

The level of communalization of society and institutions can be gauzed from the fact that this ‘love-Jihad’ was taken to be something real not only by a section of society but also by the High courts. In its ruling the Karnataka High court, in the case of Sijalraj and Azghar, said that the facts had “national ramifications… concern security, besides the question of unlawful trafficking of women,”! So it ordered the Director-General and Inspector-General of Police to hold a thorough investigation into to ‘love jihad’. Pending that, the girl was asked to stay with her parents. Nothing can be more illegal and influenced by the propaganda prevailing in the society. How can the court ask the adult married girl to separate from her husband just because the disapproving parents have complained against the choice of husband made by her, a citizen of the country?

In a similar case earlier the Kerala High court while hearing the appeal from two parents passed a similar order. Two Hindu girls had eloped and got converted to Islam and planned to get married. The court stated that this marriage of girls to Muslims smacks of a systematic plan, related to trafficking of Hindu women. Kerala court also ordered the Police authorities to investigate this phenomenon. The police investigation showed that there is no such phenomenon as Love Jihad. The Karnataka state PUCL enraged by the decision of the court to send the girl to her parents is planning to knock the doors of Supreme Court.

The propaganda began by organizations like Shri Ram Sene etc. They spread the word that over 4000 Hindu girls have been lured into conversions. The propaganda was that the Muslim youth are receiving money to lure Hindu-Christian girls to convert them to Islam. As per this propaganda the Muslim youth are given a brief to lure the girls for which, they are provided with a lakh of rupees to buy mobile and a two wheeler. They are made to pretend to fall in love, to elope, to convert the girl to marry and to produce four children. This concoction has been aggressively propagated through various mechanisms.

This laughable, figment of imagination spread like wild fire and frightened the parents. Shri Ram Sene associates helped couple of girl’s parents to go to court. In one such case the girl was made to stay with her parents by the court order. The trajectory of many of these girls who initially state about their love for the boy and voluntary conversion, changes after they are forced to stay with here parents. Under a sort of emotional blackmail, some girls give in and later say that they were brain washed, shown a Jihadi CD and what not.

We have witnessed such inhuman acts in the form of propaganda in Gujarat in the wake of carnage, that Muslim boys are luring Adivasi girls. There Babu Bajarangi, who was also a major participant in carnage, formed a goon-gang. This gang attacked couples and forced them to separate if they belonged to different religions. All this is presented as defense of religion! We have the case of Rijwan Ur Rehman where Priyanka Todi, daughter of an affluent and powerful business magnate also turned around under emotional blackmail from parents and relatives. Later Rijwan Ur Rehman was forced to commit suicide. In all such cases the role of police, state machinery, has been totally against the spirit and provisions of law, the protectors of law acting to support the things totally against the law.

Such campaigns against inter-religion, inter-caste marriages are not only against the spirit of national integration they also aim to control the lives of girls in the patriarchal mode. In addition the bogey against a minority is whipped up to aid the divisive politics. It is a double bonus for divisive politics. Since in patriarchal norms women are regarded as property of man and are made to live in the control structure defined by men, such an issue rouses high emotions. Communal politics targets to subjugate Muslims and to promote patriarchal norms. And for achieving this they have succeeded in roping in another victim minority to ally in the communal project. It kills so many birds in one stone.

The committed social organizations have a long list of issues related to women. In Kerala in particular the psychological problems of women are immense. Women all around are victims of gender discrimination. The social organizations falling under the trap in the name of Love Jihad need to wake up and address the real issues of women rather than becoming an ally in a communal project.

It is a pity that the courts rather than clamping on Khap Panchayats, which are taking arbitrary decisions to separate the couples marrying in the same gotra, rather than clamping on Shri Ram Sene’s and Babu Bajrangis, they are snubbing the girls for their choices and letting the anti Muslim tirade grow through another of a make believe myth, a falsity with dangerous portents.

One recalls that it was during the freedom movement, that different communities started interacting more and inter-religion, inter-caste, inter-region marriages started taking place. These are the cement for Indian nationalism. The propagators of Religion based nationalism, any way are against the Secular Indian Nation so this one more fabrication to intimidate the society!

Maoism’s other side

2009-11-11T20:36:00.001+05:30

The Maoist comrades view all their actions as part of a revolutionary war. Blast after blast, Firings after firings... Is it true that Naxalite brutality is only an aberration?

by Dilip Simeon
'Hindustan Times, November 09, 2009

There are crimes of passion and crimes of logic.
— Albert Camus

Spokesmen of Maoist extremism have recently expressed regret for beheading a police officer and explained their actions as a defence of the oppressed. Their comrades’ brutality, they say, is an aberration. They cite instances of state violence to justify actions they claim are undertaken in self-defence. There is more to this than meets the eye. Maoist theory holds that India is a semi-colonial polity with a bogus constitution that must be overthrown by armed force. The comrades view all their actions as part of a revolutionary war. Their foundational documents declare armed struggle to be “the highest and main form of struggle” and the “people’s army” its main organisation. In war, morality is suspended and limits cast aside. War also results in something the Pentagon calls “collateral damage”. Is it true that Naxalite brutality is only an aberration?

On August 15, 2004, the Maoists killed nine persons in Andhra Pradesh, including a legislator, a driver and a municipal worker. On August 14, 2005, Saleema, 52, a cook in a mid-day kitchen in Karimnagar was beaten to death by Maoists for being a “police informer.” This was the second woman killed by them in a fortnight. A former Naxalite, Bhukya Padma, 18, was hacked to death in Marimadla village on July 30. On September 12, 2005, they slit the throats of 17 villagers in Belwadari village in Giridih. Landmine blasts in February 2006 killed 26 tribals and injured 50 in Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. The victims were returning from religious festivals, and some from anti-Naxalite rallies. Another blast on March 25 killed 13 persons.

Some of these killings may be incorrectly reported, some carried out by local cadre on their own. But the comrades clearly believe in political assassination. Moreover, the decisions to kill are taken in a shadowy realm wherein the fault of the victim is decided by whim. Truth and falsehood are dispensed with because the Party Is Always Right. Their targets have no chance of appealing for mercy, and no one will be punished for collateral damage. And all this is justified because the Maoists are at war — a circular argument, because whether or not we are at war is another whim.

But there is an elephant in India’s drawing room. Maoists openly defy the Constitution, which they say is a mask for a brutal order. Are not our mainstream parties equally contemptuous of the law? Why did the NDA regime try and do away with Schedule 5 of the Constitution that protects tribal lands from encroachment? Why is it still being violated? Is there not prima-facie evidence of politicians’ involvement in massacres in Delhi and Gujarat in 1984 and 2002? Why haven’t they been brought to justice? In 1987, 40 Muslims of Meerut were killed in custody. Why did the case take 18 years to come to court? The BJP and the Congress both supported the private army named Salwa Judum with disastrous consequences for Chhattisgarh’s population. Even the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court criticised the States’ recklessness. In 2007 the West Bengal government despatched an illegal armed force to crush its opponents in Nandigram. India’s rulers regularly protect criminals, and part of the public is complicit in this. Policemen in dereliction of duty get promoted. Mass murderers are hailed as heroes. Why are we addicted to double-standard?

Those who believe in virtuous murder are today calling upon the democratic conscience. Does democracy include the right to kill? Our left-extremists have changed the world for the worse. Along with right-wing radicals, they ground their arguments on passionate rhetoric and a claim to superior knowledge. Fighters for justice have become judge and executioner rolled into one — in a word, pure tyrants. Every killing launches yet another cycle of trauma and revenge. Will Francis Induvar’s son ever dream of becoming a socialist? Should not socialists hold themselves to a higher standard than the system they oppose?

Symbolism counts for a lot in Indian politics. If the Maoist party is interested in negotiations, I suggest a demand that will expose the hypocritical nature of our polity: ask the government to remove the portrait of VD Savarkar from the Central Hall of Parliament, placed there in 2003. If it cannot do that, ask it to place Charu Mazumdar’s portrait alongside. Why not? Both were extreme patriots. Both believed in political assassination, both hated Gandhi and both insisted that the end justifies the means.

My suggestion will meet with indignation. But the deep link between these two currents of extremism is the unutterable truth of Indian history. Hindutva is the Maoism of the elite. In 1969, an ultra-leftist Hindi writer penned a diatribe titled Gandhi Benakaab that praised Godse as a true son of India. In 42 years of activity, Naxalites hardly ever confronted the communalists; although to be fair, one ultra-left group in Punjab did combat the Khalistanis. The assassination of a VHP Swami in Kandhamal in August 2008 is the only example. The Maoists owned the crime, but the Sangh parivar vented its wrath upon Christian villagers. Thousands were displaced and over 30 were killed. The comrades were unwilling or unable to prevent the carnage.

Savarkar’s acolyte Nathuram Godse murdered Mahatma Gandhi. In 1969, the Justice Kapur Commission concluded that the conspiracy was hatched by Savarkar and his group. Sardar Patel said as much to Nehru in February 1948. If Savarkar deserves to be honoured by the Nation, so does Charu. Since the government is unlikely to accept either option, we may finally come to a debate about why one kind of political murder is anti-national, while the other is patriotic virtue.

Dilip Simeon is a Delhi-based historian

Your Ad Here

Nowhere To Hide

2009-11-11T02:47:00.000+05:30

Corporate connections with bureaucrats are now under a new scanner

by SHANTANU GUHA RAY
Tehelka Magazine

THE MILLS of God, it’s said, grind slowly — though nothing as slow as those of the Indian justice system. But when the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) takes note of something, its pace is fortunately faster. Troubled by the charges and counter-charges between the Ambani brothers, the PMO has directed the Intelligence Bureau (IB) to track what it calls increasing corporate interface with bureaucrats of various ministries.
“The charges have been far too many,” a senior PMO official told TEHELKA, referring to the recent trading of charges between the ministry of petroleum and natural gas (read Minister Murli Deora) and Anil Dhirubhai Ambani, who blamed the former for intentionally and deliberately misleading the PMO on the vexed issue of pricing of KG-basin gas. “The PMO has sought comments from the oil ministry,” the official further said.
Senior PMO officials say Prime Minister Manhohan Singh is personally keen to clean up the stables and has said such checks by the IB should not be restricted to the petroleum ministry, but spread across other crucial ministries like telecom, commerce and railways. What prompted this? Crucial to the decision was a series of letters the PMO received from various members of Parliament who said corporate interfacing with bureaucrats was becoming a problem. “The favourite route of the bureaucrats now is to work as consultants with the private sector, because they have to follow the mandatory two year cooling period,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
While the PMO awaits a detailed report from the IB, initial notes offered by the bureau have hinted at two senior petroleum ministry bureaucrats — Sunjoy Joshi and Swami Singh — joining Reliance Industries (RIL) after handling crucial government decisions for the company. “One [Swami] works as a consultant for RIL while the other [Sunjoy] is associated with Observer Research Foundation, a RIL-funded think tank,” says former Advocate General of India Virendra Bhatia, adding: “It is important to look into these issues.”
The Left MPs had recently raised the issue of increasing corporate influence in the ministries and how bureaucrats were routinely flouting government norms to switch to the private sector almost immediately after retirement. “They have an insight no one has and it could benefit the corporate sector. We, the Left parties, have raised this issue with the government,” says Sudhakar Reddy, Communist Party of India general secretary, who has been demanding a totally transparent bureaucracy.

Reddy further clarified that the move to petition the government was not to cause a roadblock to any interaction between ministries and the private sector, but to have a transparent regime so that a situation like the KG-basin crisis does not occur again. “For example, the government has announced plans for road shows to attract investment in the latest round of NELP. Wouldn’t it be an embarrassment if an investor flags an issue involving a top bureaucrat?”
So, while Ambani v/s Ambani grinds its way through the Supreme Court, the PMO has asked the IB to submit its report by the end of next month. Once that happens, it’s crunch time: will there be any action taken? No one knows that. The PMO is grinding fast, but will it also grind exceedingly small? •

WRITER’S EMAIL:
shantanu@tehelka.com
From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 6, Issue 33, Dated August 22, 2009