[sacw] SACW #1 | 21 August 02

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire #1 | 21 August 2002

__________________________

#1. Partition: Why Shy Away From Debate? (Dr. Iftikhar H. Malik)
#2. Retributive Justice (Sumanta Banerjee )
#3. British Asians call for accountability on human rights in India
+ Statement from the participants of "Indian Independence? Healing The Woun=
ds"
A Conference on Human rights and Minorities in India
#4. India Pakistan Arms Race & Militarisation Watch (IPARMW) # 87
20 August 2002

__________________________

#1.

PARTITION: WHY SHY AWAY FROM DEBATE?
(Dr. Iftikhar H. Malik)
Both India and Pakistan are celebrating the 55th anniversary=20
of their independence. While India, confronted with the Hindutva=20
unilateralism, may try to reaffirm a unitary form of nationalism,=20
Pakistanis would attempt to reiterate the historicity of Pakistan.=20
Even after almost six decades of their statehood, these neighbours=20
are still engaged in an undiminished and immensely dangerous=20
othering, and from official parlance to the textbooks, both continue=20
negating each other's arguments for sovereignty. To countless=20
Pakistanis, India is totally Hindu with all the abominable and=20
derogatory characteristics, whereas to their Indian counterparts,=20
Pakistan is a fundamentalist Muslim threat and a vivisection of a=20
once united India. Within these claims and counter claims-all being=20
made in a total vacuum due to lack of any mutual Indo-Pakistani=20
contacts for so long-one may tend to forget the fact that neither the=20
de-Indianisation of Pakistan is fruitful for its inhabitants nor the=20
demolition of Indo-Muslim culture offers any panacea to India's=20
plural challenges. Both the peoples must be helped and guided towards=20
a process of an inclusive appropriation instead of an abrasive=20
rejection.
Within this conflict paradigm it is easily forgotten that more than=20
mere independence, decolonisation all over the world has been taking=20
place in the wake of and through partition, though in each case it=20
has been unique and often painful. This article looks at South Asian=20
Partition within its complex historiographical and human perspectives=20
underlining the need to revisit the subject by historians and others=20
in a more holistic and interpretive way away from sterile, routine,=20
repetitive, and, in some cases, dangerous accounts.
Irrespective of the factors and forces=20
spawning decolonisation, partition as a deimperialising process, is=20
rooted in the contemporary, post-Columbian parlance of modernity. The=20
Papal arbitration between Spain and Portugal over the delimitation of=20
the `New World' may be considered its beginning in a modern sense=20
followed by the U.S.- Canadian demarcations in North America. In=20
1921, the partition of Ireland resulted in the emergence of a=20
predominantly Catholic Republic in the south leaving Ulster in the=20
north as a contentious issue not only between the=20
Protestants/Loyalists and Catholics/Republicans but also between the=20
United Kingdom and the Irish Republic. Like Kashmir and Palestine, it=20
keeps on taking its toll on all sides. The partition(s) of the=20
Ottoman Empire in all the three continents over the last two=20
centuries, the demarcation of arbitrary boundaries in the Middle East=20
by the Mandatory powers (Palestine, Cyprus) and such other=20
`partitions' of similar ethnic communities and adjacent territories=20
(Kurds, for instance) have engendered several regional and global=20
conflicts which, according to reasonable accounts, cost 150 millions=20
deaths in the nineteenth century and 180 million in the twentieth.=20
The scores of contemporary conflicts including those in South Asia,=20
to some extent, are rooted in such arbitrary decisions, where the=20
receding colonial hierarchy made hasty decisions or did not fully=20
think through their long-term ramifications. In the same manner, the=20
nationalist elite failed to rectify these legacies and by simply=20
subscribing to irredentist and unitary nationalisms, have rather=20
exacerbated the miseries of their populaces directly affected through=20
these early and arbitrary territorial divisions. The most recent=20
partitions have taken place within the Balkans where the Bosnians and=20
Kosovars have been the worst affectees. A visit to Sarajevo,=20
Srebrenica, Mostar, Zagreb, Belgrade and Ahimici-right in the heart=20
of Europe-sends shivers through the spine.
Like the parceling of Central Asia during the Great Game,=20
within South Asia, partition as a process of territorial delimitation=20
to suit the imperial and administrative measures was often put into=20
force. The Durand Line of 1895 or the delimitation of Sino-Indian=20
borders-with all their respective ambiguities and arbitrariness -are=20
important case studies. The `separation' of the Frontier from Punjab=20
in 1901 and subsequently its designation as a separate province,=20
evolution of the various tribal agencies under a patronising system=20
and then the partition of Bengal in 1905 are some of the earliest=20
examples of this politico-administrative engineering under the Raj.=20
Irrespective of their usefulness or contentious nature, such=20
arrangements including the separation of Sindh from Bombay in 1935-6=20
were momentous decisions, which only a powerful Raj could undertake.=20
It is amazing to see how the imperial boundaries have remained=20
sacrosanct even so long after independence. Political analysts=20
believe that it is just in handful cases that the boundaries have=20
shifted and that too either due to external factors or simply by=20
voluntary surrender. In the 1990s, boundaries changed due to the=20
dissolution of the Soviet Empire and the voluntary bifurcation of=20
Czechoslovakia though the erstwhile demarcations of these=20
`territories' became the new international frontiers. The post-1947=20
partition of the Indian Punjab following the evolution of several=20
states within India on ethno-lingual basis has been no less a=20
momentous process undertaken during the recent times, and likewise=20
the agonising and military-led mismanaged partition of Pakistan in=20
1971. It is quite intriguing to note how independent states, using=20
symbolism and all their resources, try to jealously protect these=20
boundaries and the entire nation-building effort turns subservient to=20
the essentialisation of territorial sanctity. Without suggesting any=20
conspiracy factor or other such presumptuous generalisation, one can=20
merely opine that partition as a process of decolonisation and of=20
nation-engineering needs revisiting by scholars, which sadly has not=20
been the case so far at least in Pakistan!
The Indian nationalist/secular historians-the pioneers of modern=20
historiography-while offering a counterpoise to the imperial premise=20
of `giving' independence to the colonies interpreted Partition as a=20
major trauma masterminded through an imperial misdemeanour. To their=20
Pakistani counterparts, Partition has been simply independence with=20
all the accompanying sacrifices, yet consolidating a territory-based=20
cultural unity. Both the interpretations have been sadly simplistic=20
and lack substantive understanding and only beef up the=20
irreconciliability of the Indo-Pak discord. The total break-up of=20
mutual communication between the neighbours-against the wishes of=20
their leaders such as Jinnah and Gandhi-- and then the sheer emphasis=20
on differences: secularism versus Islam, or democracy versus military=20
dictatorship-did not allow a much-needed and conducive discourse.=20
Both the states and their henchmen have based their cases on mutual=20
denials-one of the greatest ironies of our times.
Ishtiaq H. Qureshi and other `pioneers', in consonance with the=20
official project of nationalising Pakistan, always emphasised the=20
inevitability of Pakistan. They presented Pakistan as an old nation=20
seeking a territorial definition. The Muslim nationhood was viewed=20
within the rise of Islam in the region, though a few laudatory=20
remarks were also reserved for the Indus Valley Civilisation.The loss=20
of Muslim political power under the Later Mughals amidst the growing=20
Company's rule, the post-1857 regenerative efforts such as by Sir=20
Syed and so on were offered as the formative stages towards quest for=20
Pakistan or what Francis Robinson called `the Muslim separatism'. The=20
centrality of the Aligarh, the preeminence of the Urdu-speaking=20
elite, Khilafat's politicisation of Muslims in this part of India and=20
then the guidance of Allama Iqbal and the Quaid's statesmanship=20
became the essential phases and familiar stages of this discourse.=20
This Grand Narrative of Pakistan, at the expense of class, regional,=20
gender, economic, social or countless other factors and forces {for=20
instance, Christians in Punjab!} especially in the areas making=20
Pakistan, has been essentialised and officialised to an extent that=20
any alternative discourse or argument becomes a heresy. Even a known=20
historian like KK Aziz, indignant of shoddy historical details, has=20
unreservedly subscribed to this High History based on episodic=20
details. Not a single senior historian has ever tried to understand=20
the regional roots of Pakistan or has attempted an unbiased and=20
relocative perspective on leaders like Badshah Khan, G, M. Syed, H.S.=20
Suhrawardy, Fazl-i-Husain, A. K. Azad; instead the Quaid has been=20
used as a demolition man to deconstruct these ethno-regional leaders.=20
Sadly, even after half a century, they are the Others in our=20
historiography.
While Mushirul Hasan and a few other Indian Muslims have tried to=20
remind their readers of the identity crisis especially confronted by=20
Muslims `left behind'; in Pakistan, the weak nature of Humanities and=20
especially of historical research hindered any alternative=20
interpretations. Aziz Ahmed's pioneering contributions in=20
intellectual history have been carried on but only by Rafiuddin Ahmed=20
and Farzana Sheikh, Bangladeshi expatriates in the West. Some=20
liberal, leftist historians such as Mubarak Ali have, over the years,=20
tried to look at economic, social and other societal trajectories but=20
the conformist historians keep on rehashing the dead discourse of the=20
Grand Narrative. Lifeless and uninspiring volumes on the Quaid and=20
Pakistan movement abound but nobody including the new generation=20
students bother to look at them. Works by a few expatriate scholars=20
remain usually unacknowledged as a `no-go area'. Self-imposed=20
parametres abound though some Urdu works like on the Anjumans in=20
Punjab and such other regional histories totally owing to individual=20
efforts offer some fresh air. Overall, an engaging historical=20
discourse is absent from the corridors of the universities or other=20
big-name research institutions. Most of our current historians like=20
our political scientists are simply rehashing narratives or compiling=20
published documents without any effort to engage themselves in the=20
mainstream debate. On the other hand, imperial school of history has=20
been followed by the Cambridge school, leftist interpretations and,=20
of course, subaltern studies. Historians in India and the West are=20
focusing on ethno-regional studies, gender issues, peasants, tribals,=20
environment, class formation, and such other realms of historical=20
discourse. The purpose-oriented workshops, scholarly journals,=20
internet discussion groups and informal moots are the features of=20
this exciting tradition where both teaching and research benefit and=20
a younger generation of historians is inducted into a=20
self-actualising profession.
In Pakistan, a few scholars such as Tariq Rahman have made important=20
contributions though most of the interactive efforts including=20
networking have yet to be undertaken. The scholars on Pakistani=20
Chairs abroad have, in several cases, not fully utilised their=20
potentials and institutional facilities to operate as agents and=20
interlocutors of such a tradition. An ironic characterisation of=20
these highly expensive Chairs is `a wonderful pension scheme without=20
much ado'. Teaching, researching, publications, conferencing and=20
research supervisions are largely absent from their remit.
The works on Partition or independence in reference to Pakistan are=20
mostly in literary areas, which are well known to an Urdu reader. The=20
studies like those of Urvashi Buttalia (based on the memories of=20
Partition women sufferers) or of Gyan Panday (recently published by=20
Cambridge University Press) are quite important contributions and=20
guiding light for Pakistani and Bangladeshi historians. While=20
reviewing Gyan's laudable effort along with Sunil Khilnani of=20
Birkbeck College, Isabel Hilton, a well-known author and a good=20
friend, wondered about the lack of historical debate in Pakistan.=20
This was on the BBC Radio 3 a few months back and my answer was not=20
different from what I am positing here. The studies by Ian Talbot,=20
David Gilmartin, Sarah Ansari, Barrington Moore, Taj Hashmi and such=20
other historians have established a strong tradition of regional=20
histories that may be further expanded in the country. Ayesha Jalal's=20
research has also started to take aboard new, formative and equally=20
significant issues of ideology and identity, absent from her early=20
works. A few recent studies in Pakistan on women or groups such as=20
Khaksars or Red Shirts are a noteworthy trend yet there is urgency=20
for rigorous theorisation, comparative analysis and innovative=20
thesis. In addition to Punjab, other regions and communities equally=20
require serious scholarly attention and our official institutions and=20
historians should not be afraid of any challenging discourse. On the=20
contrary, it may add to the confidence and profile of the scholarly=20
debate, away from an essentialised verdict that has already proven=20
fruitless. In other words, history from below could be an exciting=20
terrain, independent of a dull, repetitive Grand Narrative.
In 1997, in a number of conferences on South Asia at Bath, London=20
and Copenhagen, Partition remained the major moot point. The=20
comparison between Punjab and Bengal, the post-1947 historiography=20
and `voices from below' were the focal points--some of these works=20
have since been published by the OUP, Karachi. However, there is a=20
greater need to develop small, purpose-built workshops and=20
conferences on such academic issues to encourage young historians to=20
debate these crucial issues. Pakistan is a fully-fledged, sovereign=20
nation and its regimes must trust its academics and intellectuals.=20
Unnecessary curbs on their research such as a no-contact policy=20
vis-a-vis India should be replaced by more confident and=20
forward-looking measures in the larger national interest. Refocusing=20
of issues and new interpretations even challenging some long-held=20
truths should not be frowned upon in the name of a shallow=20
conformity. The faculties should have short-term and long-term=20
research and teaching plans, and the courses should be often=20
radically revised with new books, IT input, fresher assessment=20
strategies, participatory teaching and latest research techniques.=20
University teaching should be through competitive processes and=20
endowed with enviable emoluments so that the best brains could join=20
the profession. The preservation of regional archives and local=20
history projects need to be inducted in league with the research=20
institutes and academia so that the nation could explore its archival=20
resourcefulness and related potentials.
Dr. Malik is an Oxford-based academic and a Fellow of the Royal=20
Historical Society, UK. Author of several books and research papers,=20
his forthcoming volume, Islam and Modernity, is being published by=20
Pluto Press.=20=20
--22 Worcester Place, Oxford, OX1 2JW.
H: 01865-554507 i.malik@b...

_____

#2.

EPW
August 10, 2002
Commentary

Retributive Justice

Given the fate of the survivors of the 1984 Congress-led anti-Sikh=20
carnage, who are still awaiting the judicial punishment of the=20
guilty, it is no surprise that the first judicial verdict on the=20
Gujarat riots has acquitted all accused. The list of those denied=20
retributive justice in India runs long and is growing day by day.

Sumanta Banerjee

The first judicial verdict delivered in the Gujarat riots so far, by=20
a joint district and sessions court, has acquitted all those accused=20
of setting fire to Muslim shops in Panchmahals district soon after=20
the Godhra incident. This should not come as a surprise. Criminals in=20
India, with the right political connections and enough financial=20
resources, may raise a stink among the public when they enter one end=20
of the revolving doors of our courts, but they come out from the=20
other end smelling sweet. Champions of the efficiency of the=20
Indian judicial system may blame me for making a biased observation=20
on the basis of a single case - the lower court verdict on the=20
Panchmahals arson. But there are too many such cases all around us.=20
The way the accused are acquitted by the courts, whether in Gujarat=20
or any other part of the country, compels us to come to the sad=20
conclusion that the judiciary in India today has indeed assumed the=20
classic image of justice - blind-folded ! But in what direction are=20
its scales tipping?

Judging by the fate of the survivors of the 1984 Congress-led=20
anti-Sikh carnage, who are still awaiting the judicial punishment of=20
the guilty (some among whom are important leaders of the Congress=20
Party - which is shedding tears today over the BJP-led massacre of=20
Muslims in Gujarat), one can predict that the victims of the Gujarat=20
carnage can hope no better a future. Litigations to get the guilty=20
punished are not only time-consuming and cumbersome, but also=20
financially expensive - a prospect that few among the victims of such=20
carnages can afford to sustain in their lifetime, since the majority=20
among them are poor.

The list of those denied retributive justice in India runs long, and=20
is growing day by day. There are the recent victims of the Gujarat=20
carnage of 2002; the widows and orphans left by the anti-Sikh=20
massacre of 1984; the permanently disabled survivors of the Bhopal=20
gas tragedy; the parents of hundreds of innocent young Kashmiri men=20
killed by security forces; sons and daughters of innumerable Muslim=20
families murdered in the communal riots that had plagued this country=20
ever since independence; the dalit women, raped and their men killed,=20
by the upper caste landlords in the villages of India. And now, even=20
in cities, ordinary middle class men and women are being killed by=20
trigger-happy policemen, who may suspect them to be criminals. The=20
latest instance is that of the killing of Sonali Bose, a medical=20
student of Agra who was shot dead by the UP police in Mathura on the=20
night of July 16 as she was coming back to her hostel in a car driven=20
by a male colleague. The cops suspected! that the car was being=20
driven by a criminal.

Lest I be accused again of being biased and swayed by the single case=20
of a mistaken identity that led to Sonali Bose ' s killing, let me=20
quote a few more cases from UP alone which will show that it is not=20
an isolated instance, but a regular pastime indulged in by the UP=20
police. In January 2000, Smita Bhaduri, a BCom student was killed by=20
the Meerut police, who mistook her for a gangster! Curiously enough,=20
like Sonali, Smita was also returning home in a car with a male=20
class-mate after attending tuition classes. One wonders whether these=20
cops, enjoying perks which apparently include their right to rape=20
women with impunity, feel irritated whenever they see them with other=20
men. In Smita ' s case, the guilty policemen were simply suspended,=20
and till date they remain in that position - continuing to draw part=20
of their salary, and escaping punishment which is due to them under=20
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. In the latest case of Sonali '=20
s murder also, the culpr! its have been merely placed under=20
suspension. Between April last year and February this year, in a=20
similar fashion, the UP police gunned down at least eight more=20
innocent people, including two children - suspecting them of being=20
either Naxalites or militants. It was later found out that they were=20
victims of ' mistaken identity ' (The Times of India, July 22). But=20
will the policemen who killed them, pay for their mistakes?

While the cops in the cities and villages, the paramilitary forces in=20
Kashmir and the north-east, and the goons of the ruling parties in=20
every state, go on a killing spree, the judiciary pleads its=20
helplessness in punishing them even when brought to its notice, by=20
citing factors like legal loopholes in the prosecution ' s case,=20
sketchy chargesheets prepared by the police, lack of evidence, last=20
minute withdrawal of witnesses who turn hostile, etc. All these are=20
true. But behind these apparently careless lapses, there looms large=20
a far more ominous picture - the cold and calculating manipulations=20
done by our investigating and prosecuting agencies, from the centre=20
down to the state and district levels. These agencies, being=20
totally subservient to the ruling parties, deliberately botch up=20
their cases whenever there is political pressure on them to go easy=20
on certain criminals whom they are pursuing. They can resort to acts=20
of both omission and commission in order to subvert their own cases=20
to please their political bosses. They can fail to produce (or even=20
destroy) the necessary evidence, or dilute the charges against the=20
guilty who enjoy the protection of the ruling party, or threaten the=20
witnesses with dire consequences if they do not retract their=20
evidences. I have personally seen, during our efforts to identify the=20
culprits of the 1984 massacre of Sikhs in Delhi, how the victims=20
spontaneously came out with evidence and signed affidavits. But soon=20
after, being threatened by the police and their Congress bosses, they=20
were ultimately forced to withdraw their complaints and disown the=20
affidavits. I cannot blame them, since neither the courts nor the=20
administration provide! d them with any protection.

The way the prosecution is handling things in Gujarat is no=20
different. For instance, the two burnt compartments of the Sabarmati=20
Express train at Godhra which can yield crucial forensic evidence for=20
any investigation into the genocide that followed, were not even=20
sealed by the police following the incident. A team of human rights=20
activists visiting the spot in early April - more than a month after=20
the Godhra incident - described the state of one of the compartments:=20
" People were free to walk into the compartment, put in and remove=20
things as they please ". The team members then added: " Judging by=20
the conversation of the policemen who showed us the way there, the=20
burnt compartment is also rapidly becoming a pilgrimage site and=20
could be used to incite further tension. We saw two pictures of Hindu=20
gods carefully placed side by side on a seat, with only the edges=20
burnt, and a slightly burnt Hanuman chalisa just near the entrance. "=20
According to the team, b! oth these items were " at variance with=20
the state of the rest of the burnt bogey " (report by the People ' s=20
Union for Democratic Rights, Delhi, May 2002). Even when building=20
up cases against the guilty - and that also forced to do under=20
pressure from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and other=20
bodies - the Gujarat police are diluting the charges to give them the=20
benefit of doubt. For instance, the chargesheet against those accused=20
of killing the former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri along with 38 others in=20
the gruesome Gulbarg Society arson case, says that the mob " got=20
violent and attacked the locality " after " the firing by Jafri on=20
members of the mob " - an allegation wh ich is yet to be proved, and=20
is countered by the evidence that Jafri much earlier, sensing=20
trouble, had rung up the senior police bosses asking for protection,=20
which was refused. Thus, the police chargesheets against the=20
criminals are heavily loaded against the victims - making them appear=20
as those who provoked the crimes.

The criminals never get punished, whether they are gangsters on the=20
payroll of politicians, or men in uniform on the payroll of the=20
state. Like the UP police, the central paramilitary and security=20
forces have earned enough notoriety for killing innocent people, and=20
yet their members who are guilty of the crimes remain scot-free. To=20
give one revealing instance, on October 22, 1993, the BSF ' s 74=20
battalion opened fire on a large crowd of unarmed protesters in=20
Bijbehara in Kashmir, killing 37 persons. Following pressures from=20
human rights groups and strictures by the NHRC, some of the BSF=20
personnel were charged with murder. But in a trial in camera, the=20
General Security Force Court acquitted them. The NHRC was denied=20
access to the transcripts of the trial. So much for New Delhi ' s=20
tall claims to democratic rights and transparency in judicial=20
proceedings! In places like Kashmir, the armed minions of the=20
state have an official justification for their indulgence in=20
indiscriminate killings of ordinary citizens. It is the sacrosanct '=20
mantra ' of ' national security ' , which mesmerises the Indian=20
public into believing that the Kashmiri Muslims they are killing are=20
all Pakistani terrorists. Soon after the killing of Sikhs in=20
Chittisingpora in Anantanag in Kashmir on March 22, 2000, we were=20
told that our troops had identified the killers as Pakistani=20
terrorists, and on March 25 they claimed to have shot down five of=20
them. Our patriotic citizens gloated over our achievement. But even=20
at that time, the local people identified the victims as their own=20
relatives who had nothing to do with either Pakistan or terrorism. In=20
a nefarious attempt to muffle their protests, the local=20
administration fudged DNA samples - but was exposed later when the=20
Central Forensic Science Laboratory carried out fresh tests on the=20
bodies of ! the victims and compared them with their relatives, which=20
proved that they were indeed local villagers. It is more than two=20
years now, but despite the exposure, have the guilty been brought to=20
book?

One can go on listing and identifying the criminals - whether those=20
in uniform, or those without. The aftermath of their crimes follows a=20
fairly well-established pattern. The perpetrators who commit the=20
crimes are rarely charged - or even when they are, they manage to=20
free themselves. The men who give the orders are never named. The=20
politicians who hatch the plots are never called to account. Instead,=20
all attempts are made by prominent leaders to exempt them from=20
punishment, when they advise the survivors to ' forget and forgive '=20
, like the Kanchi Shankaracharya holding forth on Gujarat: "=8A people=20
should forget all that had happened and try to get on with life,=20
loving each other " (The Indian Express, June 27). In other words,=20
the victims are being asked to waive their right to seek punishment=20
for those who killed their own ones, maimed them, burnt their homes=20
and destroyed their livelihood for ever. But how do the victims=20
feel? Do their loud outcry for retribution, their demand for the=20
penalisation of the guilty, gradually fade away into pathetic appeals=20
for relief and rehabilitation, and desperate efforts to survive=20
somehow by compromises with the killers of their kith and kin? Or, do=20
they explode? When they do explode - in reprisals against the police=20
and security forces, in the madness of bomb blasts that=20
indiscriminately kill innocent citizens, in acts of revenge=20
meticulously aided and abetted by vested interests like the ISI - we=20
quite rightly condemn them as terrorism. Individual or group=20
terrorism is no substitute for mass movements seeking redressing of=20
grievances of the victimised. But what happens when such redressing=20
is blocked by the state itself?

It is this heinous politics of terrorist retaliation which takes=20
over. But then, the Indian state has been asking for it - thanks to=20
the terrorism practised by its own minions, and its refusal to=20
provide retributive justice for the victims of thatterrorism.

They all await justice.=20=20=20

______

#3.

British Asians call for accountability on human rights in India

British Asians called for accountability from the government of India=20
and speedy justice for victims of human rights violations in Gujarat.=20
Meeting in London on India 's Independence Day (August 15th), they=20
resolved to form a coalition of Non Resident Indians to work for=20
peace, the protection of the rights of all communities, freedom of=20
conscience and the re-building of civil society. The coalition will=20
take steps to monitor democracy, constitutional safeguards for=20
minorities and protection of human rights in South Asia.

"Human rights are not the gift of the government", said Lord Meghnad=20
Desai of the London School of Economics. "they inhere in individual=20
citizens." Every country needs a 'health check' on its human rights=20
record.

India 's successful, vibrant democracy stands at a defining moment,=20
said Harsh Mander, Director of ActionAid India. The response of=20
Indians and those concerned for India, around the world, will shape=20
the future of democracy and development there.

The conference unequivocally condemned all forms of sectarian=20
violence and resolved to encourage the growth of multi-religious,=20
multi-cultural groups that will work together to address these issues.

Ram Gidoomal CBE, chairing the conference on behalf of a group of NRI=20
business and professional people, and funded by Hindus, Muslims,=20
Sikhs and Christians, explained why he had got involved:

"I am challenged by the words of Martin Niemoller who said:
They came for the Communists and I didn't object because I was not a Commun=
ist.
They came for the Socialists and I didn't object because I was not a Social=
ist.
They came for the Union Leaders and I didn't object because I was not=20
a Labour leader.
They came for the Jews and I didn't object because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to object."

The purpose of the conference, he said, was not to apportion blame=20
but to seek ways forward and hear all views. White ribbons were worn=20
by all as a symbol of peace. The conference began with a moment's=20
silence in memory of all victims of communal violence - including=20
Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Dalits, Christians and others.

"We must move forward from this tragedy of Gujarat" said Sir Gulam=20
Noon, a prominent businessman and Muslim community leader. "There is=20
so much that we can do together. The problem of the Babri Masjid will=20
not go away: Muslims should re-visit it and accommodate our Hindu=20
brothers" he added.

Maja Daruwala, director of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative=20
in Delhi, pointed out that this can only happen if there is=20
accountability NOW and speedy justice.

Dr Prem Sharma, a leading member of the British Asian community,=20
called for transparency by the government and proposed an=20
international conference in New Delhi to bring together religious and=20
other leaders and take the message of reconciliation and=20
understanding out to local communities.

The conference was moved by Gopal Menon's documentary of the Gujarat=20
tragedy, as well as by a series of 30 second STOP THE HATRED TV=20
messages featuring prominent media and sports personalities, brought=20
by Shrikumar Poddar of the Vaishnava Center for Enlightenment and the=20
Center for South Asian Studies in Michigan. He shared news of=20
initiatives in the USA and a Sadbhavana Peace and Harmony Mission of=20
NRIs to Gujarat and New Delhi in September.

Ram Narayan Kumar, a human rights activist, and John Dayal,=20
journalist, both from New Delhi, expressed their concern for the=20
erosion of democratic rights and the continuing encroachment of the=20
state on its citizens.

There was vigorous exchange of views from many directions. The=20
majority of the over 120 present affirmed their support for the=20
recommendations of the conference committee (see below).

For further information contact South Asian Development Partnership -=20
020 8770 9717
email - 100126.3641@c...

o o o o

INDIAN INDEPENDENCE? HEALING THE WOUNDS
A Conference on Human rights and Minorities in India

August 15th, 2002

Gandhi Hall, Indian YMCA, Fitzroy Square, London, W1T 6AQ

We, the undersigned, who met at this conference, make the following stateme=
nt:

We acknowledge with shame and anguish the sectarian violence of the=20
past 6 months in Gujarat, which also symbolises the communal violence=20
that has occurred at many different times and places in the last 55=20
years. It has shaken the very foundations of our democracy. What has=20
happened can never be justified.

We stand at a defining moment in the history of India. Our responses,=20
as individuals and communities deeply concerned for India, will shape=20
the future of democracy and development there. We therefore condemn=20
unequivocally all forms of communalism, from whichever side it comes,=20
and all those who use violence as a means of expression. We express=20
our sympathy and solidarity with all the victims of violence, from=20
all backgrounds.

We re-affirm our commitment to the core values of the Indian=20
constitution, which ensures for each citizen and community justice,=20
equality, non-discrimination and secularism.

The causes of the recent violence are deep and complex. There are=20
cultural, social, economic, political and moral factors. We recognise=20
the need for analysis, reflection and soul-searching, so that they=20
can be dealt with.

We are concerned at the role of the state and its organs in the=20
recent violence. The state and central governments, particularly the=20
political leaders, the administration and the police, have undeniably=20
failed to protect the constitutional rights of citizens and ensure=20
their safety and security. We are also concerned at some aspects of=20
media coverage and the failure of many citizens and organisations to=20
respond adequately. We recognise the dangers to democracy, freedom,=20
equality under the law, and inter-communal harmony, unless these=20
trends are checked and people, at all levels, are made immediately=20
accountable.

We re-affirm the right of all to follow their conscience in matters=20
of political and religious belief and practice, with freedom to=20
choose and propagate their beliefs. We also recognise the limits of=20
that freedom. We oppose any use of force or coercion to impose our=20
will on others or pressurise them. This applies to people of all=20
communities, however large or small.

We seek an India in which all Indians, of all cultural, ethnic,=20
religious and other backgrounds are equally accepted, in which all=20
Indians are committed to peace and justice, to truth and equality, to=20
the principles of our democratic and secular state. This will be an=20
India which all Indians can own with pride and in which they can=20
build up a common sense of national belonging.

We gladly acknowledge the outstanding contribution of certain=20
individuals, organisations and agencies that have intervened with=20
great courage, honesty and personal sacrifice.

In order to strengthen all such efforts and re-build our civil=20
society with strong institutions and values, both at the local and=20
national level, we commit ourselves to encourage the growth of=20
multi-religious and multi-cultural organisations and forums, where=20
people of different backgrounds work together, communicate and build=20
relationships that enable them to address issues and transcend=20
differences.
Recommendations

To the government of India

1. We call for accountability
Peace is built on justice. None of the perpetrators of injustice have=20
been punished. The government must ensure, in keeping with its=20
constitutional imperative, that violators of the law are identified=20
and brought to justice speedily. It must also give assistance to=20
those who seek justice.

2. We call for transparency and openness
The violation of the human rights of any citizen is not just an=20
internal matter. As a member of the international community and a=20
signatory of Human Rights Charters and Conventions, the government=20
must not block those seeking to establish the truth, especially the=20
human rights agencies. A democracy has nothing to hide. If wrong has=20
been done - by whoever it may be - they need to face justice.

3. We call for freedom for the media
We call for inquiry into the roles of the media, the State=20
intelligence and counter-insurgency agencies in spawning and=20
exacerbating the atmosphere of religious intolerance, sectarian=20
strife, fundamentalism and terrorism.

We also call on the media to stimulate genuine discussion by=20
reporting impartially and by highlighting positive steps.

4. We call for economic regeneration
We deplore the calls for economic boycotts of people on a communal or=20
caste basis. We urge practical steps by the government and business=20
leaders, both in India and internationally, for economic=20
regeneration, particularly among victimised or minority communities.

To the Diaspora

5. Establishing a coalition
We will work for the establishment of a coalition of NRIs who will=20
work together for peace, justice, the protection of the rights of all=20
communities (large and small), freedom of conscience and the=20
re-building of civil society.

We recommend the coalition to take steps to constitute a Commission=20
to monitor democracy, constitutional safeguards for minorities and=20
protection of human rights in South Asia. The Commission should=20
include internationally renowned scholars, constitutional experts,=20
leaders of human rights agencies and peace activists.

6. Encouraging local groups
We will encourage local groups, from different communities, to meet=20
and discuss these issues, both in India and the Diaspora, as steps=20
towards the re-building of civil society.

As a step towards this we propose a conference of NGOs in India,=20
which will be addressed by leaders from the different religious=20
communities and from the government. This conference should be at the=20
highest level and we should seek sponsorship from the United Nations.=20
>From this the message can be taken out to local communities, in=20
cities, towns and villages.

7. Giving generously and responsibly
We urge Diaspora Indians and others to give generously to agencies=20
that work for peace, justice and economic and educational=20
regeneration. But they must also check how funds are used and ensure=20
that they are not used to foster hatred and communal difference, or=20
to recruit, train and support militants who are encouraged to use=20
violence against other communities.

To all

8. Strengthening minority communities
We urge the leaders of minority communities to take steps to=20
encourage education, economic enterprise and involvement in the life=20
of the nation, so as to maximise opportunities for development. They=20
need also to examine the causes of economic and educational=20
backwardness, where it exists.

9. Peace in South Asia
Justice and security are based on peace. We call for steps towards=20
peace in the South Asian region, for confidence-building measures,=20
and a commitment to work to the ultimate goal of a nuclear-free South=20
Asia.

_____

#4.

India Pakistan Arms Race & Militarisation Watch (IPARMW) # 87
20 August 2002

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IPARMW/message/98

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

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.
\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|=
//\\|//|