[sacw] SACW | 28 June 02

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire Dispatch | 28 June 2002

[ INTERRUPTION NOTICE: Please note that there will be no SACW post on=20
the 29th June and the regular dispatches will remain interrupted=20
between the period 3 July - 11/12 July 2002 ]

South Asia Citizens Web:
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

South Asians Against Nukes:
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/NoNukes.html

__________________________

#1. Pakistan: Council for Islamic Ideology: our divorce from reality=20
(Khaled Ahmed )
#2. India: Censoring nuclear truths (M V Ramana)
#3. India: SAHMAT Appeal for the victims of the carnage in Gujarat
#4. India: Lies, damned lies (Bhaskar Ghose)
#5. India: The no-exit society (Praful Bidwai)
#6. India: Tehelka.com's offices searched by police (Reporters Sans Fronti=
=E8res)
#7. Indian website defends its record (BBC)
#8. India: Dr.Lakshmi Sehgal- A Symbol of Values of National Struggle=20
and Constitution:
Elect Her Even by Reviewing Earlier Stand (Medha Patkar, Narmada=20
Bachao Andolan & National Alliance of People's Movements)

__________________________

#1.

The Friday Times
June 28 - July 4, 2002

Council for Islamic Ideology: our divorce from reality

Khaled Ahmed

Photo: Dr S.M. Zaman, Chairman, Council for Islamic Ideology

Does the President try to pre-determine the outlook of the Council=20
through a careful selection of non-extremist members, as the=20
Constitution allows him, or does he prefer to coexist with the=20
extremist point of view? He could appoint Pakistani experts of=20
Islamic law with degrees from Harvard and Oxford to raise the level=20
of the Council's work. He could choose the two ex-judges mandated by=20
the Constitution from among the legal moderates. This could be done=20
to obviate the current practice of shelving the CII advice because of=20
its unpractical nature
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ccording to Nawa-e-Waqt (5 June 2002) the armed forces of Pakistan=20
sent a query to the Council for Islamic Ideology (CII) about the=20
Islamic injunctions on the keeping of beard. Khabrain reported on 8=20
June 2002 that the CII finally told the army that an officer did not=20
need permission if he wanted to keep a beard. On 7 June 2002 daily=20
Jang reported that the CII had ruled that the government should make=20
namaz compulsory for all government and private sector employees,=20
deciding to employ only those who said their prayers five times=20
daily. It also asked the government to enforce hijab on women leaving=20
only their face and hands open to view. It advised the posting of a=20
religious attach=E9 in Pakistan embassies abroad to counter the=20
materialism of western societies and save them from the breakdown of=20
the family system and obscenity. In the view of the Council this=20
preaching abroad would have good effect on Pakistan. The CII also=20
recommended that all government officers should leave their big=20
bungalows and shift into 600-yard houses. The government should=20
divide the big houses to make them small. Furniture should be austere=20
and no employee should wear anything but simple clothes.

More beards in the army: The armed forces had already relaxed their=20
hold on their personnel in step with the spread of Islamisation in=20
the country. Considering that the army is a carefully nurtured=20
microcosm of discipline not observed in civil society, the personal=20
latitude afforded by Islamisation was not a good thing to happen.=20
There was a time when the army wanted to keep its personnel=20
clean-shaven. Tablighi Jamaat's late Brigadier Inamul Haq in his=20
memoirs had recounted how in 1954 President Iskander Mirza had=20
threatened to get rid of him because he insisted on sporting his=20
flowing beard. His career became a kind of 'rebellion of the beard'=20
and was frittered away in the twilight of the army's education corps=20
till General Zia's Islamisation brought much delayed recompense and=20
he arose meteorically as the great Islamic motivator of the army.=20
Today, army has many bearded officers. In some messes, it is=20
reported, some officers also dress up in the jehadi fashion. All this=20
is an Islamist's self-expression, not always redounding to the=20
microcosm of discipline artificially developed in all the armed=20
forces of the world. The navy had no problems with the beard. Sailors=20
traditionally kept beards to save on water. But Pakistan air force=20
had a 'clean-shaven' tradition which it tried to keep up despite=20
'rebellious' insistence from among some of its officers in recent=20
times.

The CII recommendation now opens the door to the 'shariah' of the=20
beard. It stops short of making the beard compulsory, unlike the=20
Taliban who punished anyone who did not follow this 'shariah'. This=20
means that there is a difference of opinion. Allama Javed Ahmad=20
Ghamidi is an Islamic scholar of moderate views. In the May 2000=20
issue of Renaissance, he says: 'Keeping a beard is a desirable act=20
for men. The Prophets of Allah kept beards and expressed their liking=20
for them since this is from among the norms of human nature. It is an=20
expression of manliness and as such a sign which distinguishes men=20
from women. However the Prophet (SWS) did not regard keeping beards=20
as part of the Islamic "shariah". Also, it is not compulsory for men=20
to keep a beard and if a person shaves his beard he may be deprived=20
of some reward, but he is unlikely to be punished on this'. Needless=20
to say, the trend of beard-keeping in the armed forces will now=20
increase. If a bearded general fills the Pakistani citizen with fear,=20
he may be justified in feeling this fear. The 'shariah' of the beard=20
may be followed by the concept of amr and nahi which makes it=20
possible to refuse to obey orders. More bearded generals in a corps=20
commanders' meeting may scare not only Pakistanis but also the world=20
outside. The image of the Pakistan army as well as the image of=20
Pakistan may be affected by this.

Religious diplomats in our embassies: The CII's proposal of sending=20
religious diplomats will damage Pakistan's image as a moderate=20
country abroad. It may affect the country's trade relations=20
negatively after these attach=E9s try to spread whatever anti-West=20
message they would wish to spread in the capitals of their=20
appointment. Already we are finding it difficult to attract=20
investments from abroad. A former chairman of the Export Promotion=20
Bureau of Pakistan, Wajid Jawad, writing in Dawn (19 May 2001),=20
stated: 'As chairman of the Export Promotion Bureau, I once visited=20
Paris and called on the director general of industry in October 1999.=20
He told me that he had tried to arrange a big investment conference=20
for Pakistan in February 1999 where Mr Shehbaz Sharif, the then chief=20
minister of Punjab, was to come with some important ministers of the=20
federal cabinet and a big delegation of about 70 businessmen of=20
Pakistan. He told me, repeatedly shaking his head, that he had been=20
arranging such conferences for the world for the past 40 years and=20
had also held them for Pakistan because of the goodwill that existed=20
for Pakistan. He further said that he could even hold a successful=20
investment conference for a failed and rogue state like Panama. For=20
Pakistan he said he could not get even one acceptance this time. The=20
business houses said they did not want to hear the name Pakistan. I=20
asked him for the reason for this. He replied that one was the=20
'shariat bill' in the parliament and the other was the incident of an=20
honour killing in Lahore. The whole West has turned away from us. I=20
recall another incident while on a trip to Tashkent with president=20
Farooq Leghari. A lady asked me: "Will Pakistan ever be modern?"=20
Pakistan today is perceived by the West as an extremist,=20
fundamentalist and wild country.'

Columnist Irshad Haqqani writing in Jang (7 June 2002) said that,=20
because of Pakistan's internal defects and mistakes, it has to show=20
regard for the sensitivities of world powers and appear a moderate=20
state on the world stage, but unfortunately the exhibition of=20
extremism and Islami bharak (challenge) remained in vogue. In this=20
situation General Musharraf has tried to improve the image of=20
Pakistan by restricting the growing dominance of religious extremism.=20
One can agree with Mr Haqqani that, on the ground, the image of=20
Pakistan is not improving. Reviewing the above 'advice' pushed outby=20
the Council, one becomes convinced that the religious attach=E9s will=20
reinforce Pakistan's isolationist Islamic world view projected by the=20
clergy and make it difficult for the normal diplomat to pursue=20
moderate and flexible diplomacy to promote Pakistani trade. The idea=20
of interest-infected trade and loans is diametrically opposed to the=20
trend of isolationism spread by the ulema. It is difficult to imagine=20
how our missions abroad will become more effective after the=20
diplomats of an extremist view join them. In fact, our clerics are a=20
part of the problem of Pakistan's global image. How can they be its=20
solution?

CII's extremism and the Constitution: Let us take a quick look at=20
what the CII has thought and deliberated over the recent past. CII=20
announced that nikah of a girl without the permission of wali (male=20
member of family) was un-Islamic and those girls getting married of=20
their own choice should be punished under law. A verdict undoing such=20
a marriage at Lahore High Court was set aside by the Supreme Court=20
not long ago, but the CII favoured the earlier verdict. The CII=20
stated that co-education should be banned, and that all lotteries=20
like the prize bonds should be banned and the paper used for printing=20
the Quran should not be recycled. CII criticised the Supreme Court=20
for postponing the abolition of bank interest for another year. Its=20
chairman Mr S.M. Zaman said that it was not an economic issue but an=20
issue related to the Quran and the Prophet PBUH. CII had earlier=20
endorsed the destruction of Afghanistan's archaeological heritage by=20
the Taliban. CII also rejected religion minister Mahmood Ghazi's plan=20
to use zakat to allow the poor to invest in businesses by saying that=20
zakat could not be used for investment of any kind. CII ruled that=20
insurance of all kinds was against Islam and should be abolished=20
forthwith. CII came to the conclusion that soft drinks sold as=20
non-alcoholic beer were not jaez (not allowed) in Islam. The Council=20
said that any drink which is not sharab (alcohol) could not be called=20
sharab or that the name beer should not be put on it. It said=20
preparation and trade of non-alcoholic beer inside or outside=20
Pakistan was haram (prohibited). CII repeated the recommendation that=20
kalima tayyaba be inscribed on the Pakistan national flag along with=20
Allahu Akbar. CII declared that it was wrong to label jehad as a=20
defensive war alone. CII recommended to the government that it should=20
fire civil servants who did not say their namaz. CII resolved that=20
Pakistan should revert to Friday as weekly holiday for Islamic=20
blessings. CII declared that sending anyone to prison was against=20
Shariat and recommended that prison sentences be abolished.

Article 228 of the Constitution says the CII should be composed of no=20
less than 8 and no more than 20 members, one of them being a lady.=20
Since scholars from all schools of thought are mandated, the=20
President may appoint Debobandi, Ahle Hadith and Barelvi members.=20
With the passage of time, the Council has become dominated by the=20
hardline Ahle Hadith-Deobandi consensus enhanced by appointees of=20
Jamaat Islami, whose lady representative has to have two vacant=20
chairs on her sides. We don't know how the President fulfils the=20
constitutional requirement that at least four members should be=20
scholars of 15 years' standing. Does he lean to achievements in=20
'modern' research or does he reinforce the conservative outlook=20
prevalent in the seminaries? What is his method of selection? Does he=20
examine the publications authored by the members? How does he vet the=20
candidates put forward by the various religious parties? Does he=20
incline to appeasement of these parties through appointments=20
recommended by the 'affiliated' members of his bureaucracy?

Does the President try to pre-determine the outlook of the Council=20
through a careful selection of non-extremist members, as the=20
Constitution allows him, or does he prefer to coexist with the=20
extremist point of view? He could appoint Pakistani experts of=20
Islamic law with degrees from Harvard and Oxford to raise the level=20
of the Council's work. He could choose the two ex-judges mandated by=20
the Constitution from among the legal moderates. This could be done=20
to obviate the current practice of shelving the CII advice because of=20
its unpractical nature. The 'announcements' made periodically by the=20
CII are so unrealistic that one is inclined to think that the=20
President has either given no thought to the pattern of membership or=20
wants the extremist point of view to spread. The CII announcements=20
are never disavowed by the chairman of the Council although it=20
sometimes appears that members have adopted the practice of giving=20
out their own views to the press and not the agreed minutes of the=20
Council. If the dominant mood of the Council is extremist, any one=20
moderate member can be cowed into submission to the majority opinion=20
since the Constitution makes it possible for the Council to oust a=20
member through a majority negative vote. It is not known if the=20
Council has a method of making announcement and whether the chairman=20
of the Council has established the procedure of issuing a written=20
statement signed by all members including the dissident minority.

____

#2.

The Daily Times
June 27, 2002

Censoring nuclear truths

M V Ramana

Truth, they say, is the first casualty of war. But even without war, nuclea=
r
states fear the truth about what costs their nuclear paraphernalia actually
extract from their own people. Or what it could do to people, both in their
country and elsewhere.

The trend started with the United States, which developed its nuclear
weapons in secret, and did not disclose for decades the extent of damage in
Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well as the impact on people who were involved in
the nuclear fuel cycle in the US and elsewhere =96 from miners who extracte=
d
uranium all the way to soldiers who participated in military exercises whil=
e
deliberately being exposed to radioactive fallout from nuclear tests. Well
after the end of the cold war, in 1995, historians at the Smithsonian Museu=
m
in Washington were not permitted to mount an exhibit that described the
casualties due to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Other
nuclear weapon states have also followed suit in their own ways.

The latest victim of this tendency has been Jang aur Aman (War and Peace),
an epic documentary by Anand Patwardhan, one of India=92s most accomplished
filmmakers. Patwardhan has made several prize-winning documentaries on a
variety of issues ranging from the struggle in the Narmada valley to the
plight of mill workers in Bombay to the activities of the Hindu rightwing
groups. As with his other films, Jang aur Aman also won awards at this year=
=92
s Mumbai International Film Festival and the Earth Vision Global Environmen=
t
Festival in Tokyo.

A really moving film, Jang aur Aman explores the many impacts of the
acquisition of nuclear weapons by India and Pakistan. Going from one topic
to another in a somewhat non-linear fashion, Patwardhan manages to tie
together the problems faced by people living near nuclear testing and minin=
g
sites, the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the psychological numbing in
the United States with the consequent blind eye to the arguments against th=
e
bombing of the two Japanese cities and the global reach of the merchants of
death, namely arms traders. But the film is not all gloom and doom =96 it a=
lso
documents extensively the growing movement for peace both in India and in
Pakistan. One of my favourite scenes in the film was a discussion between
the filmmaker and schoolgirls in Lahore which reveals the shallowness of th=
e
oft-stated support for nuclear weapons.

Despite these prizes and ample praise from many who have seen it, the India=
n
Censor Board has so far prevented its release for public screening in India
as it is. After taking extraordinary measures to prohibit non-commercial
screenings in the interim, in particular at the Films Division of India
festival in Calcutta that featured other prize-winning films from the Mumba=
i
International Film Festival, the censor board=92s committee finally watched
the movie on June 6th and gave a list of demands for eliminating (cutting)
various shots. The scenes they objected to point to the fears of the powers
that be.

The first scene that they objected to was one involving the burning of an
Indian flag by fundamentalist groups in Pakistan. While this may seem
normal =96 authorities in most countries dislike their national flags being
burnt =96 the scene is important since it balances shots of similar jingois=
tic
actions on the Indian side. The next two scenes that were objected to
involved a dalit, a member of the lowest section of Hindu society, pointing
out that it was a high caste Brahmin who murdered Mahatma Gandhi, and a
dalit who had converted to Buddhism, objecting to the use of the term
=93Buddha is Smiling=94 as code for the message that a test of a weapon tha=
t
could kill millions had been successful. In this demand, we see an effort
not only to suppress the voices of those who have been suppressed for
centuries, but also to avoid any challenges to the Hindutva attempt at
negating contradictions and social tensions between different castes within
Hindu society.

The apprehensions of the ruling BJP combine is also clear from another
demand =96 to avoid any visuals or dialogues about the infamous Tehelka
expos=E9, which proved beyond doubts that the BJP or its allies were corrup=
t,
even in matters of national security. Given that millions of people have
seen the Tehelka video recordings, the ridiculousness of this demand is
clear. But common sense and shame are not qualities that these politicians
are known for.

Another objection is to a leading nuclear scientist saying that China is a
possible enemy against which nuclear weapons could be used, a statement mad=
e
by several political leaders, most notably defence minister George
Fernandes. Even more drastic is the diktat =96 =93Delete the entire visuals=
and
dialogues spoken by Political Leaders including Minister and Prime Minister=
=94
. That many of these shots have appeared in the state run Doordarshan and
possibly seen by hundreds of millions of people =96 many times the number w=
ho
can be expected to see Patwardhan=92s film =96 only underscores the Orwelli=
an
irony.

Thankfully the attempt to censor Patwardhan=92s film has been challenged by
many. Various prominent magazines have carried critical stories on the
events. Dozens of people have signed an online petition circulated on the
Internet. One hopes that these efforts would have some effect.

Censoring Patwardhan=92s film would be particularly unfortunate. People in
South Asia have not been exposed to images of Hiroshima or Nagasaki, of the
accident at Chernobyl or the plight of uranium miners around the world, tha=
t
throw light on the dark underbelly of the nuclear age. Without this
knowledge, they would have no basis for deciding about their future. But
most of all, it would deny people in India and Pakistan any humanistic
visions of peace that is absolutely necessary to counteract the systematic
propaganda that has been put forward by governments and hawks about the
wickedness of the =93other=94 and the need to be able to reduce them to
radioactive rubble.

_____

#3.
SAHMAT APPEAL
1. The victims of the carnage in Gujarat, to this date, survive in=20
sub-human conditions. Women and children, as always in such=20
circumstances, are the worst affected. Among the numerous problems=20
that confront them, an immediate issue is how to bring back some=20
normalcy to the lives of their children, by ensuring that they return=20
to school in the coming academic year.

In response to this urgent need, SAHMAT is collecting fixed amounts=20
of money from friends, in the form of regular monthly contributions,=20
for a period of one year. We are approaching you with the appeal to=20
contribute 12 post dated cheques each for Rs. 500/ 1000/ 1500 or more=20
( or one for the consolidated amount).

The cheques maybe made out in the name of SAHMAT who will, in turn,=20
send the contributions on a monthly basis, to organisations in=20
Gujarat , who are engaged in sponsoring children's education.

2. SAHMAT has been mobilising relief material for Gujarat and sending=20
it regularly (almost twice a month) with the help of other friends=20
and organisations. Please keep sending the material to SAHMAT office,=20
8 Vithalbhai Patel House, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-110001/ Tel- 3711276/=20
3351424/ 9810633765 ( Shabnam).

You may send and mobilise: clothes- cotton dresses for women,=20
children's clothes, sheets, durries, books and notebooks for=20
children, colours, toys, utensils, foodgrains

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

Quami Relief Committee Gujarat
DHARNA FROM 11 AM-5PM AT JANTAR MANTAR
In order to highlight the problems faced by the riot victims=20
specially in view of the governments move to close the relief camps=20
a Dharna is being organised BY QUAMI RELIEF COMMITTEE GUJARAT at=20
Jantar Mantar on 27th June 2002 from 11 am to 5 pm. Over a 100=20
victims from all over Gujarat will be participating in dharana and=20
will be available to the press persons for providing the details. The=20
following persons will be addressing the Dharna between noon and 2 pm.
His Holiness Hazrat Maulana Syed Qasim Ashraf Babasaheb, Smt. Nirmala=20
Deshpande, Prof. Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Mrs Anjolie Ela Menon, Prof.=20
Sudhir Chandra, Maulana Gulam Saiyad Ashrafi, Mufti Shabbir Ahmad and=20
Shaukatkhan Ashrafi Tyrewala.

_____

#4.

The Hindustan Times
Thursday, June 27, 2002

Lies, damned lies
Bhaskar Ghose

The doings of Narendra Modi and his officials have once again come to=20
public notice; and, as before, for acts which would shame decent=20
people. The media, both electronic and print, have reported that=20
there is a determined attempt to shut down the relief camps in=20
Gujarat, throwing the inmates out to fend for themselves. There are=20
also some reports of inducements being given to them to leave.

If this is true, then it must rank with the worst horrors of the=20
recent ethnic cleansing in that wretched state for sheer barbarity.=20
People do not willingly live in government relief camps, which are,=20
god knows, no five star resorts. Besides, human beings would always=20
prefer to live in their own homes, however modest. If they persist in=20
staying in the camps they have either no homes to go to, or they are=20
frightened of what might happen if they return. Either way, the first=20
thing that obviously has to be done is to bring back a sense of=20
confidence, or build homes that have been destroyed, before the camps=20
can be shut down.

The decision is also monumentally stupid. Did Narendra Modi - not=20
renowned for his sagacity and good sense - really think he could keep=20
it quiet, that the forcible shutting down of relief camps would not=20
become generally known? And now that it has, what excuse is he going=20
to produce for his action? Earlier he had said enough about the=20
violence in the state to mark him out as a cruel, vicious man, unfit=20
to be a jail warden, let alone the chief minister of a state. Now=20
that he has once again shown himself for the pitiless, foolish=20
creature that he is, what will he now say?

There is of course the possibility that the reports are not entirely=20
correct; that people are indeed leaving the camps, and perhaps there=20
are some groups of people who are persuading the Muslims to stay=20
back, to gain some political mileage. Perhaps, perhaps not. The point=20
is, why in the name of all that is sane and rational does this man=20
not tell us what's going on? Why is it not possible for the state=20
government to go a little beyond issuing fatuous statements and take=20
media persons to the camps, let them meet the inmates, and see for=20
themselves what the situation really is?

Why the furtiveness, the action taken secretly, as if in darkness?=20
And even if it isn't being done like that, why give the impression=20
that it is?

Modi's convenient excuse is, of course, that the media are playing=20
politics, that whatever the state government or the chief minister=20
does will be twisted and made to look evil, sinister, and communally=20
motivated. This will not wash.

The media are reporting facts: that Muslims are being stoned when=20
they try to go back to their villages, that they are in fact now=20
building their own villages, that the state is heading towards a=20
ghettoised future, with Muslims in their own villages, Hindus in=20
theirs, and, doubtless, soon the scheduled castes will be driven to=20
their own ghettos, the tribals to theirs, and true apartheid will=20
descend on the state.

Modi has obviously been reading the speeches of a gentleman called=20
A.L. Geyer who was a passionate supporter of apartheid as being good=20
for all races, and the reasons he gave would appeal to Modi and his=20
familiars; that all that is good in the state came from one race (we=20
know what that would translate into for Modi and gang) and the other=20
races (or communities) are incapable of even knowing what is good for=20
them, so they have to be told, and made to live in a way that is good=20
for everyone concerned. Is that what Modi wants in Gujarat? No? Then=20
why doesn't he say so?

Is it a fact that Muslims are not being allowed to return to their=20
villages? If it is a fact, what has Modi and his government done to=20
ensure that they can, that those who presume to decide who can live=20
where are locked up in jails till they see the error of their ways?=20
And if is not a fact, then what has he done to make this known, and=20
known convincingly, not just by making ringing speeches which no one=20
but his fawning followers believe?

It may be, just may be, that the state government is doing something=20
to help the Muslims go home and live in peace. But no one knows about=20
it, and no one believes it. Meanwhile, political parties and groups,=20
all ready to espouse causes which will further their political ends,=20
have got into the act, and assumed all kinds of virtues which they=20
accuse Modi of lacking. All this is because of the almighty mess Modi=20
has made of communicating with the public at large, apart from the=20
mess he's made of everything else.

Will he never realise that there is much more to be gained by being=20
open and frank about what has happened, and is happening in the=20
state? That is, assuming he knows what is going on, and has some=20
shreds of conscience left in him. But his actions, as seen by the=20
media, damn him for being a black-hearted man who is pitiless,=20
consumed by a hypocrisy and deceit that is compounded by his innate,=20
offensive arrogance. And in the absence of anything convincing to=20
disprove this, he must accept that it is as such a monster that he=20
will

be remembered. A monster who brought to the once peaceful, prosperous=20
state of Gujarat, unspeakable violence and hatred, in the name of a=20
religion which millions of Indians revere.

And the irony is that it could very well be that the events that=20
occurred and his role in what happened, and in the closure of the=20
relief camps, are different from the general impression one has; it=20
may be, and it may not. His folly has been in not realising that, in=20
not establishing open and frank links with the media. Had he done=20
that, it is just possible his voice would have been heard, that his=20
version would be given something other than the contempt it gets=20
today.

And while he continues with his folly, the whole country is obliged=20
to look on with horror as he orders the camps - shelters for=20
frightened victims of violence - forcibly closed down, and the=20
inmates pushed out to face whatever the future holds for them. Given=20
the fact that the purveyors of violence are still prowling around the=20
cities and villages of the state, because of the consideration showed=20
to them by Modi and his friends, one can imagine what that future=20
will be. And in the capital the leaders will find new casuistry with=20
which his action will be blindly defended.

Our leaders face Pakistan bravely enough, and are passionate about=20
Kashmir being an integral part of India. But when they so declare=20
themselves, let them remember what is happening right now in Gujarat,=20
and let them not, whatever else they do, lie to themselves. They know=20
what is going on; they know they can stop it. If they wish to be=20
consistent and seen to be so in their beliefs in basic values and=20
truths about Kashmir and the integrity of India, they need to=20
consider what they have not done, but still can do, in Gujarat.

_____

#5.

The Hindustan Times
June 28, 2002

The no-exit society
Praful Bidwai

Last week, we were told by no less a person than the foreign office=20
spokesperson that the summoning of Time magazine's Alex Perry by the=20
Foreigners Regional Registration Office had "nothing to do" with his=20
authorship of an irreverent but perfectly legitimate piece on Atal=20
Bihari Vajpayee's poor health and even poorer attention-span.

What this conveyed to the public was the opposite: the government was=20
rattled to the point of peevish, paranoid, puerile over-reaction and=20
vindictiveness towards a vulnerable journalist; that it thought=20
nothing of reducing the foreign ministry to a crude damage-control=20
operation for a particular individual; and that it would have=20
victimised Perry even more egregiously had he not had a sound legal=20
explanation of why he possesses three passport booklets instead of=20
one.

Now, we are told by the CBI spokesperson - with an equally deadpan=20
face - that Wednesday's raid on Tehelka had "nothing to do" with the=20
portal's outstanding expos=E9 of a gigantic defence scam with=20
ramifications into party-political apparatuses, nor with its editor's=20
scheduled appearance before the official inquiry commission on that=20
issue that very day.

What this tells us is that this government is brazen enough to deny=20
the stark truth of corruption in defence deals, irrefutably recorded=20
on Tehelka's video, and to reappoint George Fernandes as defence=20
minister although he has not been cleared by the inquiry. It cares=20
two hoots about democratic norms like 'constructive responsibility'.=20
Worse, it has fashioned blatant intimidation and targeted=20
victimisation of journalists into a conscious policy.

The government not only arrested Iftikhar Geelani, the Kashmir Times=20
bureau chief accredited with the Press Information Bureau - whose=20
bona fides must be duly verified by the Union home ministry before=20
being issued an identity card - on utterly incredible trumped-up=20
charges. It planted stories in the media that he confessed to having=20
received foreign slush funds - a charge the detained man can't even=20
begin to counter.

Last week, inmates of Tihar jail, where he is incarcerated in=20
judicial custody, physically assaulted Geelani. It is hard to believe=20
that this could have happened without the warders' complicity, even=20
their goading - and without discreet political encouragement.

Again, the message rang out loud and clear: criticise the NDA=20
government, try to hold it accountable to its promises, pretend you=20
live in a free society under it, but at your own peril; the danger to=20
you will be all the greater if you happen to be a Kashmiri - don't=20
forget the other Geelani (SAR), the Delhi lecturer, charged for=20
abetting the December 13 Parliament attack, no less.

It's only fair to admit this isn't the only Indian government that=20
has practised media manipulation and intimidation. Many others have,=20
most infamously under Indira Gandhi's Emergency. But none other has=20
been as overwhelmingly obsessed with whitewashing its image, with=20
suppressing, doctoring, or distorting the truth, manufacturing a=20
false sense of normality, and granting respectability to extreme=20
Right-wing exclusivist politics as the present regime. None other has=20
so consciously refined political intimidation or elevated it into an=20
art. And none has so cavalierly ignored journalists' protests - over=20
Outlook's harassment, Tehelka's victimisation, or assaults on=20
reporters in Gujarat.

On its 27th anniversary, it's tempting to call this some kind of slow=20
motion undeclared Emergency. That would be an exaggeration. But the=20
field where the similarities get disturbingly close is justice=20
delivery. During the Emergency's habeas corpus case, the high=20
judiciary failed to defend the fundamental right to life. Now, it has=20
handed out a judgment which deprives an accused of life itself - on=20
an extra-judicial confession, which is subsequently retracted.

Today's Supreme Court is the most conservative in independent India's=20
history: witness its judgments in the Narmada, Balco or Arundhati Roy=20
cases. Now, in the Devender Pal Singh case, a three-judge bench has=20
held that the extra-judicial confession in question was=20
uncorroborated, that nothing new emerged from it, and that=20
independent testimony (even police witnesses) belied it.

Yet, mysteriously, two judges sentenced Singh to death, while the=20
seniormost judge acquitted him! The mystery's key is the 'T' word.=20
Singh is an alleged 'terrorist', tried under TADA.

Such is the infective power of the media hype about terrorism, its=20
reduction solely to its non-state forms, and its privileging as the=20
only real security issue, that the most flagrant breach of elementary=20
judicial maxims ("beyond reasonable doubt" and "innocent until proved=20
guilty") can be condoned.

Indeed, the new Prevention of Terrorism Act sanctifies repugnant=20
extra-judicial confessions, which are violative of the Evidence Act=20
and of constitutional rights, and imposes unconscionable sentences.

Clearly, the room not just for dissent, but for tolerance, decency,=20
and elementary legality is shrinking. We are becoming victims of our=20
rulers' paranoias, their Hindutva prejudices, their=20
'National-Security-State' obsessions, and their bellicose, viciously=20
chauvinist grossmacht (great-power) nationalism.

The lights are going out, the exits are closing

_____

#6.

Press freedom
June 27, 2002

Reporters Sans Fronti=E8res
International Secretariat
Asia desk

5, rue Geoffroy-Marie 75009 Paris France
T=E9l : (33) 1 44 83 84 84
Fax : (33) 1 45 23 11 51
E-mail : asia@r...
Web : www.rsf.org
www.press-freedom.org

INDIA
Tehelka.com's offices searched by police

Reporters Without Borders (Reporters sans Fronti=E8res) has protested=20
about the search carried out at the head office of the web site=20
Tehelka.com. "The fact that this search was conducted on the very=20
same day that the web site's editor was due to give evidence of=20
capital importance in an enquiry into a corruption scandal shows that=20
the Central Bureau of Investigation and the government are stepping=20
up the pressure that has been exerted on the management of=20
Tehelka.com for more than a year," says Robert M=E9nard,=20
Secretary-General of the organisation. Reporters Without Borders has=20
written to Interior Minister Lal Krishna Advani calling for an end to=20
the harassment to which Tehelka.com has been subjected.

According to information obtained by the organisation, about twenty=20
officers from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) carried out a=20
search of Tehelka.com's head office in New Delhi on 26 June 2002.=20
They also searched the home of one of the web site's journalists,=20
Kumar Badal. He is accused by the CBI of having paid poachers to kill=20
and film two leopards apparently belonging to a protected species in=20
the Saharanpur jungle (in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh).=20
According to witnesses, however, the CBI has been unable to produce=20
any documents relating to this case from among those seized during=20
the search. On the other hand, officers apparently confiscated=20
documents concerning the founding of the web site, notably e-mails=20
received from Shankar Sharma, owner of First Global, who provided the=20
initial financing for the web site and who is today in prison=20
although no evidence has been produced against him.

In addition to this, the search was carried out just hours before the=20
site's editor-in-chief, Tarun Tejpal, was due to give evidence before=20
the Venkataswami Commission. This commission was set up by the=20
government to investigate a corruption scandal uncovered by the web=20
site in March 2001, which led to the resignations of Defence Minister=20
Georges Fernandes and the president of the Hindu nationalist party,=20
Bangaru Laxman. Mr Tejpal's hearing, scheduled on the same day as=20
that of the former president of the Samata party, Jaya Jaitly - who=20
is suspected of acting as an intermediary between arms dealers and=20
people close to the former Defence Minister - was in the event=20
postponed. According to Kavin Gulati, the lawyer acting on behalf of=20
the web site, the enquiry had reached a "crucial stage in the=20
cross-examining" of the witnesses, leading him to conclude that the=20
choice of the date for the search was "absolutely motivated". A CBI=20
spokesman retorted that it was a "pure coincidence".
Right from its launch, Tehelka.com has specialised in investigative=20
journalism, notably corruption cases. Since its pages have been=20
updated with articles about the arms bribery scandal, the portal has=20
been subject to harassment by government agencies and more recently=20
by the tax department.

_____

#7.

BBC News
Thursday, 27 June, 2002, 16:05 GMT 17:05 UK
Indian website defends its record
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_2070000/2070301.=
stm

_____

#8.

NARMADA BACHAO ANDOLAN - NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF PEOPLE'S MOVEMENTS
62, Mahatma Gandhi Road,
Badwani, Madhya Pradesh - 451551
Telefax: 07290-22464
Email: badwani@n... / medha@n...
__________________________________________________________________

Press Statement
New Delhi: 27.6.2002

Dr.LAKSHMI SEHGAL- A SYMBOL OF VALUES OF NATIONAL STRUGGLE AND CONSTITUTION=
:
ELECT HER EVEN BY REVIEWING EARLIER STAND

It would be a fitting tribute to Indian democracy and Constitution to elect
Captain Lakshmi Sehgal as the President of our Republic. She embodies the
finest values of our freedom struggle and of our Constitution. Her
patriotism and nationalism are beyond question, as she has been a part of
the armed struggle to free India with Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose. More tha=
n
that, she has been a voice for equality and justice for the underprivileged=
,
and has conducted her with compassion and dignity in the public life for
over a half century.

Lakshmi Sehgal knows what is meant by war; that is why she can never be a
warmonger. She also knows the difference between the war of freedom and act=
s
of terror. She is the first woman candidate for the post of President of
India. By electing her as the first citizen of this country - as
Rashtraadhyaksh and not mere Rashtra-pati, we will be honouring the
womanhood of our country. But beyond that, she will be perfect symbol
representing our national quest: secularism, equality, justice, compassion,
peace and friendship. All these qualities are of utmost importance for
India, at this juncture. The President of India has to be a person committe=
d
and just to the values but to the fundamental rights granted and the
directive principles stipulated in the Constitution and to protect the
vulnerable sections, dalits, adivasis, our working class with courage and
political action. Laxmi Sahgal gives us a hope.

We have nothing personal against Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, who may have been
an able scientist with a missionary zeal. His mission of nuclear
weaponization and the misconstrued aim of 'security' through the bomb, is
only to support and further the militarisation in oursub-continent and the
hegemonical agenda of the global nuclear club. The President of India hasto
lead the nation on deeper issues of political, social philosophy and
approaches. We beg to differ from his approach to the international policie=
s
the issues he is supposed to be a =91signal=92. We are against aggressive
nationalism - harmful for our own common people and for the other nations.
We oppose militarization and nuclearization in our region and the world. We
want the benign nationalism, based on friendship and cooperation with our
neighbours and with every country, without special allegiance to any
superpower. We are an independent nation and our real security lies in our
equal and just relations with our neigh!
bours and within our region. For us, the real science is meant for reducing
the misery, hunger and poverty. Its real test lies in expanding the vision
of human being, our horizons and strengthening the feeling of oneness.

We want a just and sustainable development policy and paradigm in our
country dictated by the aspirations, rights and needs of our own common
people - in villages, forests, sea-shore, farms and tribal hamlets, in
workplaces and schools, colleges. It is the nation of these Indians - not o=
f
the multinational-national capitalists. We want this country to be run by
the Indians- not by the NRIs and the Americans. By electing Lakshmi Sehgal,
the Indian political leaders will be sending this right signal to the
outside world - and to our own people also.

Many organizations and movements and crores of common women-men in India
want Lakshmi Sehgal as the President of India. We appeal to all the
progressive political parties and the Electoral College - the legislators
and Members of Parliament- to consider these issues and make Lakshmi Sehgal
our President, even if it is meant reviewing their earlier decision. Let us
put aside our narrow, partisan calculations and choose her as our first
citizen.

Medha Patkar
Narmada Bachao Andolan &
National Alliance of People's Movements

--=20
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since 1996.
To subscribe send a blank message to:
<act-subscribe@yahoogroups.com> / To unsubscribe send a blank
message to: <act-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
________________________________________
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.
\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|=
//\\|//|//\\|//