[sacw] sacw dispatch #2 (4 Dec.99)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch #2
4 December, 1999
--------------------------------------
#1. Bombay citizens demand Implementation of Srikrishna Commission Report
#2. Talibanisation of Kashmir (a view from India)
#3. Bangladesh Govt Urged to create War Crimes Tribunal
--------------------------------------

#1.
December 6, 1999

CITIZENS DEMAND IMMEDIATE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JUSTICE SRIKRISHNA
COMMISSION REPORT

Memorandum to the Chief Minister,
Shri Vilasrao Deshmukh,
Government of Maharashtra
Sir,

1. Citizens of Mumbai and three dozen organisations working at the
grassroots in the city, demand the speedy implementation of the Justice
Srikrishna Commission Report.

2. The speedy implementation means the scrapping of all governmental
committees and swiftly launching criminal prosecutions against 15 police
officials and over three dozen politicians found guilty by the judge after
charge-sheets are filed against them. Appointing one more committee to look
into the report will only delay matters further.

3. We also demand prompt information on the criminal cases that had been
prematurely 'closed' by the police. As per the Judge's recommendations, the
state government was bound to re-open over 1,000 criminal cases lodged by
the survivors of the violence that had been, with dubious intent, been
'closed' down earlier.

4. Sir, we would like to know what steps the government has taken on the
prosecution of newspapers found guilty of inciting hatred and violence.

5. Serious implementation of the report also means putting into effect
immediately administrative measures to equip the law and order machinery
that was found guilty of gross negligence and bias. As citizens concerned
that such a breakdown in law and order is avoided at all costs in future,
we demand detailed information on the steps taken.

6. We also earnestly urge that the Maharashtra government abstains from the
blatantly dilatory tactics adopted by it before the Courts and files
affidavits in the public interest writ petitions filed to further expedite
this issue.

=46or citizens concerned with justice and reconciliation, we are keen to see
that the demand for the implementation of the Srikrishna report does not
get reduced to gaining political advantage or settling political scores.
Grave issues like the protection of life and security of citizens are at
stake here. Already, seven years have passed since the violent occurrences
that led to the government-appointed investigation. Justice needs to be
done. This is imperative if the faith of the people in accountable
governance is to be redeemed.

Mr. Chief Minister, Sir, nearly seven years have elapsed since the
worst-ever rupture in Mumbai's cosmopolitan ethos in December 1992 and
January 1993. For over a week December 1992 and over a fortnight in January
1993 the citizens of this megapolis were held ransom to marauding mobs as
an administration reduced to utter helplessness watched. What made matters
infinitely worse was the evidence of complacency within the officials of
the administration and the police with the criminals that boded ill for the
restoration of law and order or the punishment of the guilty.

The situation was such as to echo demands from renowned and senior civil
libertarians to the President of the union 'to send in the army.' An
eminent, retired Judge of the Mumbai High Court, summed up the situation
plainly when he said in an interview on television that, 'the streets of
Bombay resemble the streets of Nazi Germany.' This, in a nutshell summed up
the characteristics of the crimes being committed. They were not sporadic
or spontaneous but pre-planned and systematic, targeted against a section
of the citizenry. Over 1,000 persons were killed and property worth Rs.1500
crores was destroyed.

To restore public confidence in the administration and government, it was
imperative that an independent judicial inquiry into the violent incidents
be instituted, by which the guilty could be identified and punished,
administrative lapses in the law and order machinery and government could
be analysed and recommendations for their correction be made.

An inquiry under the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 is generally ordered
in 'definite matter of public importance." The fact that the government
appointed a sitting judge to conduct such an inquiry was not simply an act
of good faith but a response to the outage expressed by citizens and the
media. A citizens' investigation report, the People's Verdict published
within six months of the violence, was the first public document to detail
the crimes committed. A series of other citizen's initiatives demanding
accountability from the government continued to put pressure on the
government on the issue.

The government appointed a sitting judge of the Mumbai High Court, Justice
B.N. Srikrishna to investigate the incidents of violence. After collecting
evidence for five years, the judge submitted his report to the Maharashtra
government on February 16, 1998.

In between, two years after the communal violence that erupted, in February
1995, the political reins in Maharashtra changed and the Shiv Sena-BJP
alliance, whose prominent leaders, had been directly and indirectly
criticised for participation in the violence, assumed governance of the
state.

Within a year, in January 1996, they sought to disband the Commission of
Inquiry. From January 30, 1999 onwards-when the first dharna to express
public outrage called by over 30 Mumbai-based organisations was a huge
success-began a series of citizens' protests demanding re-instatement of
the commission of inquiry, including two public interest writ petitions.
These actions indicative of strong public concern, compelled the government
to re-instate the Commission of Inquiry in June of that year.

Even after the Judge submitted his report, the state government, was
reluctant to release it. A public meeting demanding tabling of the report
(KC College, April 19, 1998), several other public protests and a public
requisition to the Judge urging him to make his report public (May 6,
1998), again forced the then SS-BJP government to table the report on the
floor of the Maharashtra Assembly on August 6, 1998. While doing so,
however, the then chief minister rejected it saying it was "anti-Hindu".

What is the importance of the Srikrishna Commission report?

Quite apart from the recommendations of a political nature that require
firm resolve to punish the guilty offenders and two offending newspapers
that were found guilty of inciting hatred and violence, serious and
detailed recommendations were made by the Judge of an administrative nature
amounting to a drastic overhaul of the entire police machinery and their
orientation in dealing with the phenomena of communal violence.

The prosecution of 15 police officers (named by the Judge) whose conduct
revealed negligence and bias was also specifically directed.
Recommendations also included re-opening of over 1,000 criminal cases
lodged by the survivors of the violence that had been, with mala fide
motive 'closed' down earlier.

Citizens of this megapolis would like prompt and detailed information on
the steps that the government has taken on all these fronts. The report and
the implementation of the Judge's recommendations have become issues mired
in controversy and political games. But as citizens only concerned with
justice and reconciliation, we are interested in the corrective measures
that the government has taken.

=46ive public interest writ petitions filed by citizens' groups and
opposition political parties in the Mumbai High Court and three in the
Supreme Court of India, demanding that the Srikrishna Commission Report be
implemented and Action Taken Report of the Government of Maharashtra be set
aside have been pending for more than a year. Except for one affidavit
denying the mala fides that they were accused of, in one petition in the
Supreme Court, the Maharashtra government has been
conspicuous in its attempts to avoid the issue and instead, indulge in
blatantly dilatory tactics.

Our investigations have also revealed that the steps taken by the
government's legal department to ostensibly launch investigations into the
Judge's direct recommendations to prosecute policemen and re-open criminal
cases filed by citizens, have amounted to nothing short of further
maneuvers to delay the issue. Despite the rejection of the report, the
then state government did assure action on two fronts-the "A" summary cases
(labeled 'true but undetected' by the police and closed down) and
investigations into the conduct of police officers named by the Srikrishna
report and delinquent and derelict.

Two separate committees were set up to look into the two matters. But not
much progress has been made and these Committees have, on the contrary
become effective shields to the guilty preventing criminal charges to be
filed against them. Once a judicial commission recommends prosecution,
surely prosecution, not further prevarication should follow?

Between August 6, 1998 and now, over a year later, all opposition political
parties including the Congress, the RJD, the Samajwadi, the Janata Dal had
made substantial political capital demanding the report's implementation.
=46or both the Congress(I) and Sharad Pawar's NCP, the implementation of the
report was a major election issue during the recently-conducted polls.

Since a new government has assumed power in Maharashtra, the time is right
for citizens to demand comprehensive details from the government on the
issue of the implementation of the Justice Srikrishna report. Political
accountability and transparency in administration demand this.

Signatories:
Justice Suresh, Justice Dawood Iqbal Chagla, Lalit Chari, Atul Setalvad,
Yusuf Muchchala, Nilofer Bhagwat, P.A.Sebastian, Asghar Ali Engineer, J.B.
De'souza, Vijay Tendulkar, Javed Akhtar, Nikhil Wagle, Ghulam Pesh-Imam,
Pushpa Bhave, Y.D.Phadke, Nalini Pandit, Ammu Abraham, Madhav Sathe, Yogesh
Kamdar, Dolphy D'Souza, Ram Punyani, Uday Mehta, Javed Anand, Teesta
Setalvad

Organisations:

Progressive Minorities Council, Mumbai Aman Committee, Ekta, Sabrang
Communications (Communalism Combat), Committee for the Protection of
Democratic Rights (CPDR), Voice, Centre for the Study of Society and
Secularism, Women's Centre, India Centre for Human Rights, People's Union
for Civil Liberties, Mumbai Sarvodaya Mandal among others.
--------------------------
#2.
TALIBANISATION OF KASHMIR

Balraj Puri
(As told to Communalism Combat)

Post-Kargil, imported mujahideen are pedalling a Talibanised Islam in the
Valley. And succeeding in good measure, thanks to the unholy nexus between
the BJP-led government at the Centre and an unscrupulous National
Conference in the state

There has been a significant change not only in character of the movement
but in the mood of the Kashmiri people post Kargil. The reason for this
is the even deeper and greater sense of alienation and outright bitterness
among the local people- in the Valley, in Jammu and in Ladakh. As far as
militancy is concerned, there has been a sharp decline in the
Kashmiri-speaking people component among the militants. The actions of
the militants, too, signal this sharp shift. Earlier, the victims of
militants used to be civilians-soft targets. There used to be harassment
and extortion of the local population. This has stopped. Today,
post-Kargil, the attacks are directly on the army and BSF headquarters.
The militant activities are more dare devilish, more direct, more desperate
in a way. A group has emerged that calls itself Fidayeen (Lovers of God).
Unlike the activities of earlier militant groups, their targets are not
civilians but the army and security forces. There is now no extortion from
the local population, distinct attempts are being made to ingratiate them
and win their sympathy. The Kashmiri movement has, as a result, and very
unfortunately, been virtually taken over by outsiders. The Jamaat-e-Islami
has never had any faith in the Kashmiri brand of a more liberal Islam. A
more standardised version of Islam is being offered to the local
population that is completely out of sync with the region, with
Kashmiriyat, a characteristic that typified the movement before. This
weakness of the Kashmiri movement that is fast-losing its Kashmiri identity
-and, for this a variety of factors are responsible-is more than
compensated on the other side. RSS and even more extreme brands of Hindu
nationalism are gaining currency among Hindus in Jammu, as elsewhere in
the country. What are the factors responsible for this hardening of
position on both sides? The sham of the recent elections is one of the
most significant contributory factors. It is a sorry tale for any country
that is proud to call itself a democracy. Elections were far from free.
Official figures themselves reveal a fast-declining rate of voter
participation, not only among Kashmiri Muslims, but also Pandit migrants
and Jammu Hindus. What does this signify but increasing alienation? In its
report published on October 6, 1999, The Times of India revealed that the
opinion expressed by me on the recently conducted elections in the state
were shared by a team of four IAS officers sent as independent observers to
the state. I quote from their report: "Elections were neither free nor
fair but full of violence. The electorate was coerced by the security
forces to vote. The presiding officer at several polling booths
corroborated the charges of coercion made by the voters. The observers
found even minors in the queue and several mobile voters". The observers
saw matadors carrying women voters. They intercepted these matadors. The
four senior IAS officers made a demand to the EC to countermand the
elections. These demands were not even considered by the EC, while in
states like Bihar and elsewhere, more prompt action was taken. The
conduct of the election commissioner (GV Krishnamurthy) on a visit to the
state was blatantly partisan, when he commented that the "conducting of the
elections was the answer to militancy." The EC would have performed a far
more signal and patriotic service to Kashmiris, residents of Jammu and the
whole country if he had simply concentrated on ensuring that the conduct
of the elections was 'genuinely free and fair'. The boycott call by
militants and a heavy presence of the military has been a constant factor
in the state since the 1996 elections. How come then, that given these
constants in the last three elections, there has been such a sharp decline
in voting percentages this time? Look at the official figures. During the
1996 parliamentary elections, in the Srinagar city segment, 35 per cent of
the electorate voted; this was down to 30 per cent in 1998 and touched an
all-time low of 12 per cent in 1999. The story is similar for Anantnag. In
1996, 50 per cent of the voters came out; in 1998, this was down to 28 per
cent; but in 1999 the voting percentage dropped to 14 per cent. In
Baramulla, while 41 per cent of the voters came out to cast their vote in
1996; the turnout was the same in 1998, but this time it plummeted to 27
per cent.

If one goes into further detail and scrutinises figures for the Srinagar
segment that has recorded 12 per cent of voters, we see that the
Charar-e-Sharif and Badgaon segments recorded 45.50 and 45 per cent of
voting respectively while Srinagar city registered barely 3-5 per cent
votes. The extent of voter disillusionment or alienation can well be
gauged from these statistics. Jammu and Kashmir also recorded the
highest rates of invalid votes anywhere in the country; EC statistics tell
us there were 9-12 per cent invalid votes in the state. It is worth
analysing the factors responsible for such a low voting percentage and
high rate of invalid votes in the state. As stated before, the boycott
call by militants, the heavy and obtrusive army presence, the acute
disillusionment of the Kashmiri people over the Kargil episode were the
main factors. But an additional factor was the acute disillusionment of
the Hindu migrant voters in the Valley and Hindu Pandits in the Jammu
region with the BJP. This is evident from the number of Pandits who voted
for the BJP. The BJP vote in the Jammu-Poonch region fell from 7,90,000 in
1998 to 2,90,000 this time. This means that only one-third of Pandit
voters who supported the BJP last time extended their support to the same
party this time. In Udhampur, too, the Pandit vote for the BJP declined
from 5,23,000 votes in 1998 down to 1,94,000 this year. If there is such a
sharp decline of votes within one year, from a particular segment with a
particular party, what does it show? Obviously that, completely
disillusioned with the BJP, which is also the ruling party at the Centre,
Pandits have turned away from it. The BJP has led them up the garden path
with false promises. In the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir, the
percentage of Muslim voters is high. Within the Jammu region, too, 30 per
cent of the electorate is Muslim. With an open alliance between the BJP and
NC, is it really believable that seats with a high domination of Muslim
voters would so willingly back the NC's collaboration with the BJP? There
is hardly a constituency anywhere in India where Muslim votes are sizeable
in number and where they have wholeheartedly supported the BJP. So, it is
hardly believable that they would do so in Jammu and Kashmir. In short,
both the Hindus and Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir are completely
disillusioned with the ruling parties-the National Conference and the BJP.
There was blatant coercion of voters at the voting stage and subsequent
manipulation of the results. My opinion is corroborated by EC observer's
report. In the midst of all this, secular parties, particularly the main
opposition party, the Congress, that had converted secularism into a
mantra all over the country, was conspicuous in that it put up only a
nominal fight in the state. Since nothing can be expected from the
opportunistic politics and regime of Farooq Abdullah's National Conference
and the communal worldview of the BJP, secular forces within the country
must take their share of blame for the situation in Jammu and Kashmir. Why
did they betray the interests of Kashmiri Muslims, Jammu Hindus and the
migrant Pandits living in the Valley? This is not what secularism is
about. They had a wonderful opportunity during the last elections to
intervene. They not only squandered an opportunity for themselves but have
also compromised the national interest. The disillusioned local
population, both Muslim and Hindu, were looking for an alternative, a
secular outlet to channelise their protest against the unholy nexus
between the BJP and the National Conference. The National Conference was a
regional party which should have necessarily pitted itself against the
insensitive and centrist politics of the Indian state. But, today, it has
willingly been reduced to a mere tool of the BJP. It has completely lost
the raison d'=CDtre of its existence.
The Jammu Hindus, who were against Kashmiri Muslim domination, had under
certain circumstances arising out of this, supported the BJP in the past.
With the BJP shamefully allying with the NC, the raison d'=CDtre of this
support, too, has also been completely eroded. Given this state of a huge
political vacuum and accumulated discontent what happens? Like I said
before, it was the ideal situation for a secular formation with civil
liberties, human rights perspective to intervene. In its absence, the
local population has been pushed to the wall and a fresh lease of life has
been given to militant activities. Without local support, no sophisticated
weapons, no armed training can help militants succeed in any region. This
choice has, in my opinion at least, been forced on both the Kashmiri people
and the people of Jammu. In 1996, when Farooq Abdullah's National
Conference came before the people, despite his past record, the people
were willing to give him another chance. But over the past three years,
his rule has been the worst ever, extremely corrupt, allowing no avenues
or channels of protest. All this must be seen in the context of heightened
'national' and 'patriotic' interest on the territory of the state during
the Kargil conflict. The earlier 'conviction' and 'assertion' of the
Indian authorities that, after Kargil, militancy would collapse has been
disproved comprehensively. Indian arrogance and insensitivity was manifest
throughout the Kargil conflict? The Indian media, most of it, swooped
down on Kargil. But none mentioned the people of the state, the people of
Jammu and Kashmir, where the war was being fought. Little mention was made
then of the displaced persons either. This failure of the Indian media to
even cursorily look at the plight of the Kashmiri people, with an ongoing
struggle for democratic rights for decades, in my mind, constitutes a
significant omission on the part of the Indian media.
Conversely, there was a studied detachment among the local people at the
war being waged. Unlike earlier occasions, there was no enthusiasm for the
Indian army, throughout the operation, no donations for the jawans were
collected, no blood banks held here. No state government ministers, with a
few exceptions, even visited the front at the time. I had made a special
visit to Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee on this question. This visit
was an attempt to apprise the Indian political leadership with the issues
crucial to the people of the Valley, the Jammu region and Ladakh. The Shia
Muslims who live in Kargil have a continuing disenchantment and discontent
with Pakistan across the LOC, so even tactically it would have been wise of
India to address their grievances. Though I was given assurances during my
meeting with the Prime Minister, nothing has resulted. The Indian
government and the Indian people have consistently refused to address the
grievances of the state. There is the struggle for Kashmiriyat. There has
also been the expression of Jammu Hindus against Kashmiri Muslim
domination.
There has also been a movement for autonomy within the Ladakh region in
which Kargil falls. For a month or so, things were silent after Kargil.
The Pakistan-sponsored militancy movement remained silent. Local
disillusionment with Pakistan, US and UN was also simmering. Pakistan had
to do something to keep the movement alive. But what helped Pakistan
significantly was the chief minister of the state, Farooq Abdullah's
coming out in open support of the BJP. At an RSS-sponsored function, he
sang praises for the organisation and went to the extent of declaring that
"the RSS is the most patriotic organisation". The political vacuum, the
issue of acute discontent and disenchantment, during Kargil and
post-Kargil especially at election-time, was unfortunately not addressed
by any Indian political party, not even the so-called 'secular' Congress.
The biggest betrayal of the state was in fact by the 'secular' Congress, as
we can expect nothing from the BJP outside its self-declared divisive
agenda. How interested the Congress party is in reflecting the genuine
aspirations of the people of the state can be seen from the fact that the
party had one member in Parliament and another in the Assembly. It got rid
of both leaders, including Mufti Mohammed Sayeed just before the elections
simply for suggesting dialogue with the militants. Has the party
forgotten that during the last Congress government, Prime Minister
Narasimha Rao's cabinet colleague, Bhuvanesh Chaturvedi (then minister of
state in the PM's office), had, around 1995, offered unconditional talks
with militants in Kashmir? How do political parties accept a resolution of
the Kashmir issue without having such a dialogue? If the government can
talk to Naga leaders in Paris, and other people 'without conditions' why
not in Kashmir? This was the issue on which Mufti Mohammed Sayeed felt let
down and resigned, and the Congress put up a token fight during the recent
elections in the state. The failure of secular forces to give an adequate
response to the ground-level reality in Jammu and Kashmir was most visible
in the failure of established political parties and NGOs and civil
liberties groups to campaign for Saifuddin Soz who stood as an
independent. It was Soz's single vote on which the BJP's central
government had fallen. None of the national secular parties have raised a
single voice against Farooq Abdullah's support to the BJP. There has been
not a word of disapproval for this open and unprincipled collaboration.
The Congress goes to town criticising Sharad Pawar and Mulayam Singh for
their individual "hobnobbing with the BJP". But here is a leader who is
openly allying with a communal force and there are no comments, no
condemnations, no interventions from the top Congress leadership. Former
information and broadcasting minister, Pramod Mahajan was blatant about
this cosy relationship before elections were held.
On a visit to the state, when asked to comment on the prospects of the
BJP-led NDA coming to power, he said that the "six seats from Jammu and
Kashmir (all these are seats over which the National Conference had claim)
are already in the NDA basket." How can we complain against the BJP and
their agenda? Their agenda is clear and open, as is the Jamaat-e-Islami's.
But Farooq Abdullah's open support to both these ideologies has been
ignored and allowed to pass by secular parties. This is a great act of
omission on their part. There is every evidence of a serious comeback of
militancy in the state. If militants can get at the very nerve centre of
the Indian security system, the army, it means they are back. But what
needs to be emphasised is that it is out of sheer desperation that local
sentiments are being exploited like this. This is the only way they can
express their resentment and that is why there is this silent but growing
support for militant activities. The political vacuum, if unaddressed, will
be filled by extremists on both sides.
The process has been assisted by lack of secular commitment on the part of
Indians to the state. In Jammu, the BJP's failure to meet the aspiration
of the Hindu section of the population, will, soon give birth to outfits
that are more extremist than the BJP even. The local Kashmiri leadership,
too, is isolated and cannot be heard. Shabbir Shah is a leader who had
projected a more tolerant ideology but whose voice was hardly heard in
between. Soon after the recent elections, he and others were jailed by the
National Conference without any charge. Why? Personally, I am not inspired
by All-Party Hurriyat Conference, especially after they accepted the
leadership of the Jamaat-e-Islami's Syed Ali Shah Geelani, who is openly
pro-Pakistan. Yasin Mallik, who once showed so much potential as the young
and daring leader of the secular JKLF, has also fallen in with the
official Hurriyat line. None of these Kashmiri leaders, by the way,
condemned Pakistan's conduct during Kargil and that I think was a major
failure on all their part. India is obsessed with blocking the Kashmir
issue internationally, outwitting Pakistan etc. Why are we not concerned
with trying to solve problems within our control? If we regard the people
of the state as our own, why do we not espouse or display any desire to
hear their legitimate grievances and thereafter attempt solutions? I now
fear the political eclipse and redundancy of saner voices such as mine in
such a situation. Physically, too, I am vulnerable. So far, I have been
able to communicate with both sides in the dispute. But with the complete
shrinking of space for sane and secular dialogue, I fear that with
hardening, extremist stances on both sides, I will lose my space
completely. A far stronger figure, like Gandhiji, found himself redundant
in 1947 and eliminated in 1948; what chances has a far smaller man like me
under the circumstances? Just like the RSS and the BJP have assumed the
sole monopoly on the Indian point of view, the Kashmiri protest movement
has increasingly been epitomised by a Pakistani Muslim fundamentalist
flavour. On both sides, extremists have taken over. The military coup has
not helped matters but generated further confusion. A very stable and
dangerous triangle has emerged after the last elections. The three points
in the triangle are Farooq Abdullah, the BJP (driven by the extremist RSS)
and the Hurriyat (now openly supported by a pro-Pakistan, Jamaat-e-Islami).
While the three points of this triangle appear to oppose each other, they
are in fact supporting each other. Hindu communalism supports Muslim
communalism and an opportunistic National Conference makes political gain
for itself, crucially dependant as it is on both the extremes. No points
ever threaten each other; they depend on the other for their own survival.

--------------------------
#3.
December 4, 1999

Press Release

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMUNITY AND CIVIL SOCIETY URGES BANGLADESH
GOVERNMENT TO ESTABLISH WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL TO SHOW TRUE RESPECT TO THE
LEGENDARY BENGALI WOMEN LATE SUFIA KAMAL

International human rights and civil society organisation, in a recent
statement, conveyed their condolence at the death of Bangladesh's Legendary
Poet Begum Sufia Kamal.

In their communication, they said that her death is an irreparable loss of
Bangladesh, and they strongly believed that her life and work was an
inspiration to Bangladesh, also for all progressive movements of the World.
They hoped that Bangladesh and Bangladesh's citizens would continue their
support to the international community for establishing justice and peace,
which was a true and just dream of her. And help to realize one of Sufia
Kamal's Dreams.

To show true respect to the departed soul of Poet Sufia Kamal, they
strongly urge Bangladesh Government to establish War Crimes Tribunals under
the Bangladesh's Law, specifically, the International Crimes Tribunal Act
1973, as demanded by Begum Sufia Kamal. They hope that by doing so,
Bangladesh would be able to establish a positive example, which could be
followed by other nations where crime against humanity, war crimes and
genocide were conducted.

The human rights and non-government organisation which signed the
condolence message are Ms. Indai Lourdes Sajor, Director of Asian Centre
for women's Human Rights-ASCENT (Phillipines), Dr. Neloufer de Mel of Women
and Media Collective (Srilanka),David Cohen,Co-Director of Advocacy
Institute( Washington, USA), Dr. S K. Rajasingham, Senior Executive of
International Institute of Democracy and Electoral Assistant-IDEA
(Stockholm, Sweden).Takashi Kurihashi, Director of World Federalist
Movement of Japan, Eduardo Gonzalez Ceuve, Global South Co-ordinator of
Coalition for International Criminal Court (CICC-New York, USA), Tanveer
Ahmed Meer, of Sustainable Development Policy Institute-SDPI(Pakistan),
Japanese Network for the International Criminal Court (JNICC) of Japan,
INFORM of Sri Lanka, The Movement for Inter-Racial Justice and Equality
(Sri Lanka), OSCE Mission to Bosnia & Herzegovina ( Bosnia) Regional NGO
Network on Asia Pacific Decade of Person with Disability, Vahida Nainar, of
Women Caucus for Gender Justice ( New York, USA), Yuri Bogoslovosky,
Director of Glasnost Foundation, (Moscow, Russia), Nirmala Pandit, Legal
Officer for Asia, of International Commission of Jurist ( GENEVA,
Switzerland ), Sushil Khanna of Indian Institute of Management ( Calcutta,
INDIA), Farroq Tariq, General Secretary of Labour Party of Pakistan,
Tanveer Tariq, of SCOPE, Society for Conservation and Protection of
Environment (Pakistan), Russian Coalition for an International Criminal
Court, (Moscow), Ain O Salish Kendra ( Dhaka, Bangladesh), Projonmo '71 (
Dhaka, Bangladesh), Dr. Mario Gomez of Law and Society Trust ( Sri Lanka),
Saumya Uma, of Nottingham University Human Rights Alumni Association,
International Ricket Consortium, Leelangi Wanasundera of Talangama Human
Rights Organisation of Sri Lnaka, Somchai Homlaor, Secretary General, of
=46orum Asia ( Thailand), Joeni Hartanto of Indonesian Independent Children,
(Yogyakarta, Indonesia), Law Review of Dhaka University, Fayazuddin Ahmad
of Asian Network for an International Criminal Court (ANICC), Deena Nargis
of Institute of Social Studies (Women and Development ) of P The Hague (The
Netherlands), Sara Hossain of Interights ( London, UK), Legal Resources for
Social Action (LRSA) of Tamilnadu (India), , Ed Miles, Soociate Director of
Vietnam Veterans of American Foundation, (Washington DC, USA), and Muslim
Women's Research and Action Forum-MWRAF of Sri Lnaka, Dr. Ritu Dewan of
Dept of Economics, University of Bombay (Bombay, India), Dr. Vineeta Gupta,
General Secretary of Insaaf International, ( Punjab, India), Farah
Nazarali-Stranieri ,Angie Martin Public Interest Fellow of Advocacy
Institute, (Washington, D.C. USA),.Hossain Shahriar of ESDO (Dhaka.
Bangladesh).

released by:
Zaved Hasan Mahmood
Asian Network for an International Criminal Court, ANICC
United Nations Head Quarters, New York, USA

__________________________________________
SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WEB DISPATCH is an informal, independent &
non-profit citizens wire service run by South Asia Citizens Web
(http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since1996.