[sacw] sacw dispatch #1 (26 May 00)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web - Dispatch #1
26 May 2000

------------------------------------------

#1. Past, Present & Future of Left Movement in Pakistan (PART 2)
#2. Pakistan: Move for alliance of religious parties
#3. India: Police file on the Far Right leader goes missing
#4. India: Anger in Manipur
#5. India: Convention of North East Coordination committee on Human Rights
__________________________

#1.

[The below article is being posted in the dispatch in two parts. Part 1 was
posted yesterday and the Part 2 appear's in this dispatch]

[Part 2.]

PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF LEFT MOVEMENT IN PAKISTAN

By Farooq Sulehria
Member National Executive Committee Labour Party Pakistan

During this movement that went on for few months, two parallel powers
were in operation. On one hand, workers and peasants were controlling
the country. On the other hand, due to the absence of proletariat
leadership, bourgeoisie was in control of the state apparatus. The
movement had begun as a protest against the hike in price of sugar.
The students joined this protest. A student of Rawalpindi Polytechnic
College, Abdul Hameed, was shot dead in a protest demonstration. This
spark ignited the whole society. Now the proletariat joined the
movement. The workers were taking over the mills and factories,
peasantry had risen up, and strike committees had appeared controlling
the cities. In the industrial district of Faisalabad, the district
administration had to seek the permission of local Labour leader
Mukhtar Rana for the supply of goods through trucks. All censorships
had failed. Trains were carrying the revolutionary messages across the
country. Workers had invented new methods of communication. It was all
a new phenomenon. But it had not come from heavens. It was the
industrialization, exploitation and oppression widening the gulf
between rich and poor, brought this change. In the 1960s, the ruling
classes had intensified their plunder. For example in 1965, according
to Delhi-based weekly Links Ayub family's assets were estimated at Rs.
250 million. It did not include the wealth transferred abroad in
foreign banks (Links 19-5-1968).

Similarly, the 22 families owned 66 per cent of
industrial capital, 80 per cent of banking, and 97 per cent of
insurance business. In contrast, average monthly income of a
working-class family was Rs. 780.
In 1967, Railway workers were the first to take action, going on
strike. This was an important strike because of three reasons:
(1) The official union had opposed the industrial action.
( 2) The un-official union controlled by communists had also opposed
it since they were supporting 'anti-imperialist' Ayub Khan. ( 3)
Railway workers formed workers committees and started their action.
The government resorted to all kinds of repression but it had to
grant some of the demands before the strike was called off. The
working class, peasantry and students all were in total revolt. But
the left still caught up in its 'Two-stage theory', was dreaming of
Bourgeois Democratic Revolution led by progressive bourgeois.
Professor Muzafar Ahmad, a communist leader of National Awami Party
(NAP) explains the left's position in Outlook.
He said when he talked of favorable objective conditions; he in fact
did not mean objective conditions for socialism but bourgeois
democracy.

'Consciousness in Pakistan is in no way socialist therefore revolution
must pass through stages', he adds. 'We definitely need a
revolutionary party but in the next stage', he concluded.

=46ormation of Pakistan Peoples Party and Left:

The Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) was formed on September 1, 1967. Its
program was radical socialist and a communist leader, J-A Rahim, had
written its basic manifesto. Meantime, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto appeared in
political arena as a challenge to Ayub dictatorship. The communists
(both Stalinists and Maoists) were supporting the Ayub dictatorship
while Bhutto was representing the masses' feeling. Bhutto, himself a
feudal lord from Sindh, had been a foreign minister in Ayub Cabinet.
Being an intelligent bourgeois politician, he raised the slogan of
socialism and joined hands with some leftists to form the PPP. When
the Ayub dictatorship started targeting Bhutto, he became a symbol of
resistance, strengthening his popularity and his grip on the party. In
fact, PPP's popularity was a sequel to 1968-69 revolutionary
movements. Even prior to 1970s first ever-general election on adult
franchise-basis, the masses had joined this party because of its
socialist program. The Labour leaders who became powerful and strong
because of 1968's movement joined this party.

The Pakistani left as usual failed to understand the unfolding events.
They found a radical bourgeois in Bhutto and started supporting
Bhutto. Instead of organizing and launching class struggle, the left
developed working class' illusions in Bhutto and PPP. They reconciled
with feudal and capitalists in the PPP and even presented them as
leaders. Hence the PPP became a working-class party with feudal as its
leaders who used socialist sloganeering. Instead of organizing PPP on
a radical socialist program, it was organized on bourgeois democratic
basis, which led to a right wing turn by the party. It was again there
ideology that stopped left organizing PPP on revolutionary basis. The
left was working in Pakistan just in line with the foreign policy of
Moscow and Beijing.

When PPP came to power in 1972, many communists joined the government
but PPP could not bring any fundamental change save some radical
reforms. This disillusioned the working class. Proletariat took to the
streets during the period of May-Sept. 1972. The movement was
especially strong in Karachi. The government decided to crush the
movement. A demonstration of workers was fired on in Landhi, Karachi
leaving dozens dead. This angered the communists who had joined this
government. Some of them resigned in protest. Perhaps they had
forgotten the fact that capitalist governments, no matter how at times
radical they may be, always repress the proletariat. Disillusioned by
Bhutto and PPP, the left went looking for more progressive bourgeois
figures, leaving the working class, having illusions in PPP, at the
mercy of its feudal and capitalist leaders.

Left failed to offer any alternative during this period. Hence when
the disillusionment grew, it was right wing religious fanatics and
reactionary forces that became an alternative to the PPP. In 1977, a
movement began against the government spurred by economic conditions
and the US intervention. The left did not understand the nature of the
movement nor it analyzed the nature of the movement's leadership. Left
termed it a movement of democratic liberties and urged the working
class to join it.

In a statement from Hyderabad Jail on April 12, 1977 Miraj Mohammad
Khan, Sher Mohammad Marri and Ata Ullah Mengal said: "We appeal to the
workers, peasants, students, intellectuals and toiling masses to join
the ongoing peoples movement which is a movement of democratic
liberties. We believe this movement will rid our motherland of the
dictatorship." They hoped to rid 'motherland' of 'dictatorship'
through religious fundamentalists. Terming Bhutto regime as
dictatorship was correct neither socially nor politically. And the
hope of democracy from religious fanatics backed by the USA. Was even
irrational. Their illogical analysis and hopes were soon dashed to
ground when in 1977 another military dictatorship 'rid' the motherland
of Bhutto's 'dictatorship'. It was the left that suffered worst of all
during this military regime led by General Zia Ul Haq.

Left in the 1980's:

The 1980s were the years of resistance against the dictatorship. The
proletariat offered heroic resistance and an unprecedented fight back.
=46or the left it was a decade of mergers and alliances. Bhutto was
hanged in 1979 showing that bourgeois doesn't tolerate even some
reforms and imperialism can go to any length to crush the
working-class movement. Bhutto's hanging once aging popularized the
PPP and it became a symbol of resistance against dictatorship. A
united front- Movement for Restoration of Democracy (MRD) was formed.
The PPP, right wing, liberal and left all joined hands on this
platform. A united front against dictatorship is not a wrong policy
but left instead of presenting a transitional program and linking it
up with socialist program, reduced it to social democratic demands.

By this time Communist Party (Stalinist), Workers Peasant Party (MKP a
Maoist party) and Socialist Party (a Stalinist party) had some good
mass basis in different areas. But they never used this basis to
launch an independent and organized struggle. The national questions
during this period became even sharper because of ruthless oppression
of the regime in Sindh, NWFP. And Balochistan. But left failed to take
a Leninist stand on national question because Leninist stand on
national question was not Moscow's line. In 1986, Pakistan National
Party, a faction ofMKP, National Democratic Party and Awami Tehrik
merged to form Awami National Party. It was again an attempt at class
collaborationist alliance with illusions in bourgeoisie; bourgeois
nationalist leaders were the main leaders of the new party. Soon
Pakistan National Party dissociated itself from the new merger
followed by Awami Tehrik and a section of the MKP. In 1987
QaumiInqlabi Party (QIP) was formed again as a result of mergers among
different left and bourgeois nationalist parties, but after one year
it was disbanded. In 1988, Qaumi Mahaz-e-Azadi and Workers Party Awami
Jomhori Party (AJP). But hardly a few months had passed that on the
eve of 1988 general election, the merger was split. The Qaumi
Mahaz-e-Azadi led by Meraj Mohammad Khan left the party. The issue was
should AJP support Benazir or Nawaz Sharif. In1986 a new element had
entered the politics of Pakistani left- it was Struggle Group, a group
of activists who called themselves supporters of monthly Mazdoor
Jeddojuhd. The Struggle Group formed in 1980 in Netherlands, was
working on enterist policy in PPP since it was a period of fight back
for democracy and working class had many illusions in PPP. In 1986,
main leadership ended exile and returned to Pakistan, as there were
limited liberties available now under military dictatorship.

Post Soviet Union Left:

The collapse of Stalinism in Soviet Union shattered the Pakistani
left. It almost disappeared. Meantime, the military regime came to an
end following a military leaving Gen. Zia and others on board dead.
=46resh elections were held in 1988. Benazir came to power but she badly
disillusioned the working class. Disillusionment with PPP and breakup
of USSR generated hopelessness and desperation. Stalinist left in
Pakistan, as elsewhere in world, turned to social democracy. The early
1990's were a period of counter-revolutionary consciousness in
Pakistan giving birth to the rise of fundamentalism. The Struggle
Group, however, did not loose faith in the ideals of socialism. It
ended the enterist policy in view of its correct perspective that
working class would leave the PPP from now on and an alternative
should be built. To build this alternative party, it launched
Jeddojuhd Inqlabi Tehrik (JIT, Struggle Revolutionary Movement) in
1993. The JIT was a movement for the formation of a workers party by
trade union movement. In 1997, after some success, it formed the
Labour Party Pakistan. The Stalinist parties by now had shrunk to
small groups. For the sake of survival the Communist Party and MKP
merged in 1997 to form Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party (CMKP), which
again had a split recently. On June 3, 1999 another three parties
Awami Jamhoori Party, Pakistan National Party and Socialist Party
merged to form the National Workers Party (NWP). Both CMKP and NWP
still believe in Bourgeois Democratic Program while NWP has adopted a
program far from a
revolutionary program.

At present the LPP, CMKP and NWP are the three
main parties. Besides these three, there are some left groups having
no influence. However, none of the left parties has mass basis. Left
as a whole is hardly recognized as a force at present in Pakistan.
However, LPP has achieved some success since its formation in getting
semi-mass basis in interior-Sindh. There exists a big gap on the left.
The LPP is successfully filling the gap. At present it has a
membership of over 1500 but it is not a very consolidated membership.

=46uture down sizing, privatization, poverty and ever increasing
joblessness will make workers take to the streets. Left will get a big
chance to organize these radicalized masses. But at the same time
fundamentalists may appear as a big danger since they are more
organized and strong.
[The the above article is continued.... from Sacw Dispatch of 25 May 2000]
________

#2.

Khaleej Times
26 May 2000

Move for alliance of religious parties
>From our correspondent
LAHORE - Some religio-political parties are holding serious discussions on
forming an alliance as a 'viable alternative' to the two main political
parties, Pakistan Muslim League and Pakistan People's Party.
The Jamiat Ulemae Pakistan (Noorani group), the Jamiat Ulemae Islam (F) and
the Jamaate Islami are reported to be in contact and actively considering
to form an alliance. They plan to contact parties representing the Ahle
Hadith school of thought later.
It is learnt that Maulana Shah Ahmed Noorani, Pir Ijaz Hashmi (JUP),
Maulana Fazlur Rehman and Maulana Abdul Ghafoor Haidri (JUI) and Qazi
Hussain Ahmed and Liaquat Baloch (JI) recently held detailed talks on the
proposed alliance.
The willingness of the JUI (F) and the Jamaate Islami to form an alliance
is indicative of a basic shift in their policies. The JUI(F) has repeatedly
said that it has no interest in the electoral politics and would strive to
bring about a Taleban-like Islamic revolution in Pakistan.
"The JUI(F) has changed its views on quitting the politics of elections and
will now play an active role in the field as a component of the proposed
alliance," a leader privy to the talks said.
The JUP and the JUI had formed an alliance (Islamic Democratic Front) in
the past which could not survive because the JUP could not get a single
seat in the elections for which the grouping had been formed. The JUP had
also been cooperating with the PML as a result of which its central
information secretary Pir Ijaz Hashmi was appointed adviser to the prime
minister.
As for Jamaate Islami, until recently it was opposed to joining any
alliance and claimed to be capable of providing national leadership on its
own without support from any other party or group.
Efforts to gather religious parties on a single platform may also lead to
unity between the two factions of the JUP, headed by Prof Shah Faridul Haq
(as acting president in place of Maulana Shah Ahmed Noorani who has
resigned after leading the party for about 28 years) and Maulana Abdus
Sattar Khan Niazi.
Differences between Maulana Noorani and Maulana Niazi, after decades of
association as president and secretary-general of the JUP, divided the
party into two distinct factions. The faction led by Maulana Niazi stands
divided into three factions at present.
________

#3.

The Asian Age
26 May 2000

Thackeray police file goes missing
By Sujay Gupta
Mumbai, May 25
Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray seems to be acquiring more friends in the
Sharad Pawar-led NCP in Maharashtra. After getting back his beefed-up
security following a temporary withdrawal of key security officers, Mr
Thackeray has one more reason to be pleased with the present Maharashtra
government

A key file pertaining to the only criminal case still open against him for
offences committed after the Babri Masjid demolition is missing from the
Dadar police station. The 13 other cases against him for various offences
after the demolition were withdrawn by the Sena-BJP government when it came
to power in 1995.
What is surprising is that deputy chief minister Chha-gan Bhujbal has said
he "suddenly discovered" that the file was missing. This was 10 days ago.
However, till today none of the concerned departments =97 home and general
administration =97 have moved a step forward in trying to find out where the
file is.
Queries in these departments and the Dadar police station drew a complete
blank. Principal secretary (home) R.S Negi said: "I am not aware. The
matter is probably with the general administration department, which deals
with such file movements."
He added, =93If the file is missing, a new file can be created."The general
administration department officials looked blank when asked about the file.
Principal secretary Navin Kumar told The Asian Age, =93I have no knowledge
about this. The matter has not come up during any meeting."

Home department sources said Mr Bhujbal recently called for all files
pertaining to Mr Bal Thackeray, including cases which were withdrawn. It
was then found that there was only one case under Section 153, read with
Section 34, that was pending against the Shiv Sena chief.
The section pertains to creating communal disturbances and making fiery
speeches. It will be interesting to note that from the time the Democratic
=46ront government came to power in the state, it has talked of reopening th=
e
cases against Mr Thackeray.
However, apart from lipservice, no serious move has been made in this
regard. Mr Bhujbal had said sometime ago: "Even if we don=92t reopen the
cases, but merely follow the Srikrishna Commission report (where Mr
Thackeray has been indicted), we can take action against him."
However, as reported in The Asian Age earlier this week, the DF government
has not taken action even against policemen who have been indicted by the
report for committing gross human rights violations and leading violent
mobs and attacking Muslims.
In another interesting development, it appears that the NCP is under
tremendous pressure from the ruling Congress to unearth this missing file.
Since the home department is headed by an NCP minister, the Congress has
taken it upon itself to put pressure on its ally to get the file out.
Sources said the Dadar police station, where the case was registered, has
been asked to prepare a fresh dossier and get the missing file re-prepared.
When contacted, the crime inspector of the Dadar police station said: "I
just cannot discuss these things.It is too sensitive."
NCP insiders, however, have another theory. A minister of the NCP said,
"We believe that reopening cases or taking action against Bal Thackeray
will boomerang on us and he will get undue publicity. As it is his fortunes
are on the wane. So it is best not to touch his cases."
=20

________

#4.

India Express
26 May 2000
Op-Ed.

Anger in Manipur
by Sanjoy Hazarika
Nearly a month ago, an 84-year-old man and the editor of a Manipuri
newspaper were arrested in Imphal by the Manipur police for allegedly
making seditious remarks. The old man was Thounaojam Iboyaima, chief
adviser to the All-Manipur Clubs' Organisation, a non-government group that
had rallied the Meiteis, the predominant community of the Imphal Valley, in
major public rallies against any carving up of Manipur. The journalist was
N. Biren of the Nahaolgi Thoudang.
Accounts from Imphal say that the report of the meeting was published by
all newspapers but this particular one was singled out for special
treatment. The two were arrested for making these supposed statements at
Cheriaoching, outside Imphal, on April 9. The event took place five days
before the anniversary of the People Liberation Army, one of the older
militant groups of the state.
However, the judge who heard the case threw it out of court a few days ago,
declaring that newspaper reports could not be construed as primary evidence
under Indian law.
Yet, there has been barely a whisper in the metropolitan media about the
case and these two men. If it had happened in a major city of the Hindi
heartland, then the press would have been charging all over the place,
breathing righteous indignation and fire and brimstone at the government.
Nothing of the sort happened here to the shame of the "national" press. No
wonder that journalists of the Northeast also feel alienated >from the rest
of the country, not just other segments of society which face the pressure
of the security forces or the deviousness and corruption of the state.
The local press boycotted the government's activities in Manipur during
this period; a bandh was called and the Committee for the Protection of
Journalists, a New York-based organisation that speaks up for journalists
under intimidation, called for the release of both men.
As the North-East Vigil, a magazine which reports on issues related to the
Northeast, remarked: "The news, not unexpectedly, has not ruffled too many
feathers in the mainstream Indian media. Who cares for some lousy
journalist of a lousy newspaper of a lousy state in the back of beyond? The
same people who write tomes to condemn insurgency, militancy, terrorism...
cannot even spare a word to denounce the (Manipur Chief Minister) Nipamacha
Singhs of the Northeast."
It is also worth reflecting here on the issue that stirred Manipur up for
all of last month. The question of integration is critical to the Meitei
concept of Manipur and their civilisational existence. The Meiteis are an
ancient community of the Northeast and Vaishnavites by faith. Every
morning, a soothing sight awaits visitors to Imphal and other towns in the
valley as hundreds of Meiteis, freshly bathed, go to temples with sandal
paste on their foreheads and a little drop of it on the bridge of the nose.
The hills, by comparison, are populated largely by Nagas and, in some
parts, by members of the Kuki tribe as well as Paites. The latter are
distant kin of the Mizos further south but have clan connections across the
border in Myanmar. For many years, the National Socialist Council of
Nagaland (now rechristened Nagalim by this militant group), which has
sought independence from India, has also wanted to incorporate parts of
Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh into a Greater Nagaland.
This plan has drawn the fiercest opposition from the Meiteis of Manipur for
this former kingdom's traditional territorial boundaries are sought to be
changed, with the hills of the state going to this vision of a larger Naga
territory. Time after time, Manipuri leaders, from all political hues, have
warned against any deal with the NSCN (I-M) that barters away parts of
their state's land. Feelings still continue to run high in Manipur about
the way the Government of India ceded land to Burma (now Myanmar) from
Manipur, without consulting the State Government.
What the Naga leadership in exile has not understood until this day is
that, despite all its flaws, India is still a democracy. Any major decision
like the sundering of a state cannot be done without the consent of the
state's legislature, apart from the sanction of its government. New Delhi
too will tread very cautiously about signalling that it supports such a
breakup on its own without the clear approval of the concerned state.
One ran into this mental roadblock in a discussion last year with Rh.
Raising, then the "Home Minister" of the "Government of the Peoples
Republic of Nagaland." Raising declared that the Naga demands for more
territory were based on history and tradition. To which one responded by
saying that there had to be a common approach to some of these problems,
instead of viewing them through one particular periscope. Raising kept
insisting on Naga rights; it was then pointed out that it was only after
the British came at the end of the 19th century that a semblance of Naga
unity evolved until then they comprised fiercely independent tribes.
The "Republic" of the GPRN exists outside of Nagaland, in a network of
offices in South-East Asia and through the good offices of NGOs in Europe.
Of course, it continues to hold sway over the minds and hearts of many
Nagas, both in Nagaland and Manipur and has a physical presence in the Naga
hills as well with bases and offices (without the GRPN logo). Their writ
runs extensively. Thus, while the Government of India does not levy taxes
on the hill states of the Northeast, civil servants in Nagaland and Manipur
pay "taxes" from their salary to this group almost as a tradition as well
as to other insurgent groups.
To the Meiteis, the demand of the NSCN (I-M) for more territory is their
worst nightmare and they are prepared to resist. Indeed, the insurgent
groups in the plains of Manipur too are opposed to any breakup of the
state.The leaders of the Nagas, especially the charismatic General
Secretary of the NSCN (I-M), Thieungelang Muivah, now in a Thai prison on
charges of entering Thailand illegally, would do well to consider these
feelings, instead of sticking to a hardline stand. Surely, in the Northeast
of their dreams and ours Nagas, Meiteis, Kukis and Assamese and all other
communities will need to live together, instead of being constantly at one
another's throats. The latter is a tiresome, violent and embittering
process, of which everyone has had enough.
The writer is senior fellow, Centre for Policy Research
Copyright =A9 2000 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
________

#5.

26 May 2000

Dear Friends, North East Coordination Committee on Human Rights
(NECOHR) and Manab Adhikar Sangram Samiti(MASS) orgainsed a North East
Convention Against The Criminal Law Amendment Bill-1995 (Now named as POTA)
on 16 May 2000 at Guwahati in Assam. It was followed by the Martyr Parag
Kumar Das Memorial Meeting on 17 May and Second Convention of NECOHR on 15
May. Please find below the details of the programs. Lachit Bordoloi.
Secy. Gen. MASS =20
Second Convention of NECOHR
15th May 2000.
The North East Coordination committee on Human Rights (NECOHR), strongly
criticised the central government =19s proposal to enact the anti-people
Prevention of Terrorist Activities Bill. As a part of a three day programme
held >from 15th to 17th May 2000 in Chanmari, Guwahati, a seminar was
organised by NECOHR and hosted by MASS, to discuss the anatomy of the Bill
on 16th May 2000.
On the first day of the programme, NECOHR met to form a new executive
committee and discuss immediate issues that were affecting the people of
the region. The following persons were selected as new office bearers this
term:
1. Chontham Cha Surjeet: Chairma
2. Hebal A. Koloy: Vice Chairma
3. Asish Gupta: Secretary Genera
4. Dino D.G Dympep: Finance Secretar
5. Anjali Daimary: Publicity Secretar
6. Narendra Debbarma: Organising Secretar
7. James Sylliang: Organising Secretar
8. N. Homeshwar: Organising Secretary
=46urthermore, the new committee also made the following resolutions prior
to the seminar that was held the next day:
*NECOHR shall continue to protest against the conspiracy of the government
of India to enact the Criminal Law Amendment Bill, which is now known as
POTA, to curb movements that reflect the hopes of the common people. NECOHR
resolved to extend the anti-CLA/ POTA campaigns to an all-India level.
*The Convention strongly resolved to condemn the policy of the Indian
State through its organs like UCIL, for misleading the people of
Meghalaya, especially in the West Khasi Hills District, regarding the
uranium extraction which has been considered harmful.
*The Convention endorsed the view that the dichotomies created by the
Indian State, such as public and private, are untenable as long as the
third entity of the community is also provided an equivalent space to
express their position on the decisions that are being taken.
*The Convention warned the State machineries that if the laws of the land
are not followed, NECOHR will frustrate their expansionist ideas.
*The Convention recognized that the peoples rights on Uranium information
are being violated and cautioned the government machineries to increase
their sensitivities on the issue, failing which the people will witness
the widespread violations of Human Rights.
North East Convention against the Criminal Law Amendment Bill-1995 (POTA)
On 16th May 2000 the convention on the proposed Criminal Law Amendment
Bill (now called POTA) was organised at Pandit Tirthanath Sarma Sabhaghar.
It was presided over by a presidium comprising CC Surjeet, Chairman
NECOHR, Ms. Anjali Daimary, Chairperson BWJF and Bubumoni Goswami,
President MASS. The Chief Guest, Retd. Justice Mr. D.K Basu inaugurated the
convention and cautioned the gathering on the impending threat of the
possibility of this bill being enacted. This was followed by a keynote
address by Asish Gupta, Secretary General NECOHR, which outlined the
colonial antecedents of the Bill. Apurba Bhattacharya of AJYCP, Advocate
S.P Deka of All Assam Lawyers Association, noted social worker Mukul
Mahanta and advocate Bijan Mahajan addressed the gathering and outlined
their misgivings about the Bill.
The first paper of the convention was presented by Prof. N. Sanajaoba who
outlined an ethical attack on those who =18felt the need for such a Bill t=
o
fight "terrorism" =19. He made a spirited appeal to social scientists to
adhere to the legal and political distinction between acts of terrorism and
acts of national liberation. He further stated that India, being a
signatory to the ICCPR, is obliged to recognise the right to
self-determination of oppressed nationalities within its political
boundaries. Subsequently, Subhram Rajkhowa, outlined the various instances
of misuse of preventive detention by law enforcement agencies and provided
the convention with a detailed critique of the POTA bill. Advocate N.
Brajakanta of Law College, Imphal also spoke of the potential to do damage
that is built into such a Bill. Following the presentation by the experts,
questions were asked from the floor of the house. Mr. Rabiul Islam, Editor
People Today; N. Jayakumar of Committee for Disappeared People Manipur;
Suren Bora, Advocate and Hebol Koloy of BPHRO asked the panel for certain
clarifications regarding the Bill. Mr. Charan Deka, President of SAKP also
addressed the gathering. After its deliberations the convention
unanimously passed the following resolutions:
1. the proposed POT Bill 2000 is withdrawn immediately before it is placed
before the upcoming session (or any other session) of Parliament.
2. In view of the threat posed to the life of Lachit Bordoloi, Secretary
General MASS and other Human Rights activists, the State and Union
governments should seriously uphold the UN declaration for protection of
HR defenders and take immediate measures to prevent threats to the lives
of all HR defenders.3. The Government of India should take cognisance of
the legitimate aspirations of the people and address them in a genuinely
democratic manner
The Fourth Death Anniversary of Martyr Parag Kumar Das, founder-Secretary
General of Manab Adhikar Sangram Samiti (MASS) was observed at the spot
where he was assassinated in Rajgarh Road, Guwahati by MASS on 17th May
2000.
The programme commenced at 9: 00 a.m. with Ms. Anupama Das formally
opening the session by paying homage to the Martyr. Apart from the family
members of Parag Kumar Das, activists of MASS, intellectuals, journalists,
advocates and leaders of various democratic and human rights organisations
also took part in the programme to commemorate the memory of the Martyr.
At 10: 00 a. m. the Parag Das Memorial Meeting was held. Activists from
human rights organisations from Manipur, Meghalaya, Tripura, Nagaland and
other states took part in the meeting that was presided over by Bubumoni
Goswami. The meeting started with an opening address from the Martyr =19s
mother, Ms. Anupama Das. Following this, Retd. Justice Mr. D.K Basu,
Calcutta High Court, also spoke to the assembled people. Criticising the
role of the State in the assassination of Parag Das, Ajit Bhuyan, advisor
of MASS and editor of Natoon Somoy called the State to order for its role
in the dastardly repression of human rights. Sujato Bhadra of APDR (West
Bengal); Lachit Bordoloi, Secretary General MASS; Haidar Hussain, editor,
Asomiya Protidin; noted social worker Mukul Mahanta; S. Sheshaiah,
convener of All India Coordination of DR, CL and HR Organisations; Jatin
Borgohain, Secretary Asom Gana Sangram Parishad; Anjali Daimary, president
Boro Women =19s Justice Forum; CC Surjeet, Chairman, NECOHR; Debo Prosad
Borooah, ex- vice chancellor of Guwahati University; Hebal Koloy, Borok
People =19s Human Rights Organisation; Madhuram Gogoi, Secretary KASS; Jeen=
u
Borooah, President NASS; D.D.G Dympep and others addressed the gathering.
All the speakers recalled the sacrifices made by Parag Das and pledged to
carry on with the task that he left unfinished. They criticised the inept
manner in which the CBI has handled the case and thereby shielded the
killers of Parag Das. The programme ended with the lighting of the Martyr
=19s Flame at 6: 00 p. m.
The three-day programme organised by NECOHR and hosted by MASS brought
together all the leading Human Rights organisations in the North East on a
number of issues. The main threat, it was felt, was the increasing tendency
of the State to resort to anti-democratic methods to deal with genuine
social and economic problems. As a result the democratic ethos of the
region has been severely threatened by the State apparatus =19 distortion o=
f
reality. This was the shared opinion of the activists, intellectuals and
working people who had gathered under the banner of NECOHR from 15th to
17th May 2000.
______________________________________________
SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WEB DISPATCH (SACW) is an
informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service
run by South Asia Citizens Web (http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex)
since 1996. Dispatch archive from 1998 can be accessed
by joining the ACT list run by SACW. To subscribe send
a message to <act-subscribe@egroups.com>
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL