[sacw] SACW | 27 March 03
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex@mnet.fr
Thu, 27 Mar 2003 04:04:47 +0100
South Asia Citizens Wire | 27 March, 2003
#1. Nepal's war babies (Durga Pokhrel)
#2. Nepal: From Battle of Arms to Battle of Ideas (Gautam Navlakha)
#3. The contemporary relevance of Bhagat Singh (M V Ramana)
#4. Press Statement from organizations of survivors of the December '84
Union Carbide disaster in Bhopal
#5. India: Cows, Citizens and The State - A Central ban on cow
slaughter would be caving in to fundamentalism (Pratap Bhanu Mehta)
#6. Condemn killings of innocent people in Kashmir - Press Release
(Pakistan India Peoples' Forum for Peace & Democracy [India Chapter])
#7. Massacre of Kashmiri Pandits (Statement by concerned Indian citizens)
#8. A Public Statement re Massacre in Kashmir (South Asian Network
for Secularism and Democracy and International South Asia Forum)
#9. India: Rage against the dying of the light (Syeda Saiyidain Hameed)
#10. India: Time to accelerate the peace process in Kashmir (Kuldip Nayar)
--------------
#1.
Nepali Times, 21-27 March 2003
Nepal's war babies
Love in the time of war: legacy of seven years of conflict.
Durga Pokhrel
Sita is a pretty 25-year-old woman with lovely honey-hazel eyes. Her
husband is a police guard at a jail in western Nepal who left her to
elope with a Maoist prisoner. Sita came to the National Commission
for Women last week with her two children to seek help. "Once they
have children, he will abandon her just like he left me," says Sita.
During the last seven years, we have heard harrowing tales of people
killed and orphaned by the insurgency. But not much about babies born
from relationships between security forces, Maoists and local women.
After a recent tour of the midwest, it is clear that Nepal's problem
of war babies is similar to the Amerasian children left behind in
Vietnam.
In Bardia alone at least 300 security forces personnel have eloped in
"gandharbha bibaha" with local girls. The young women don't seem to
want to know whether the men are already married, nor do our sipais
reveal their existing marital status. The lucky ones are picked up by
unmarried soldiers. But, even then, the problem with this kind of
marriage is that they can neither register with the local
authorities-which in most cases are non-existent or
non-functional-nor can they have a traditional marriage.
Then, there's always the sudden surprise when the girls wake up one
morning to find that their secret lovers have been transferred during
the night sans consorte. Some of the women are pregnant when left
behind, and have no idea where their husbands have gone. Uma in
Dadeldhura married a member of the Armed Police Force, but he left
suddenly one day. "I don't know where he has been transferred to,"
Uma says, "all I know is that he had a police cut, was sturdy and
muscular and the dates he was posted here." She has his name, at
least the name he told her, and there is no other identity she can
use to chase him through the police bureaucracy. Surprisingly, it was
Uma's mother who encouraged her to date the paramilitary officer.
Uma's mother says, "Poor policeman, nobody of his here, chhori was
kind to him." Mother even vacated the house to facilitate things. And
for Uma, one thing just led to another.
Many women of various ages in towns across western Nepal express
sympathy for men in uniform. They did not care who they were, it was
almost as if they fell in love with the camouflage fatigues. In
Rolpa, a woman shopkeeper says she believes that in times of crisis
it is her duty to support the soldiers. "We have to be friendly and
loving to men in uniform to boost their morale," she says. If the
women are willing, it seems natural that the men-lonely, afraid and
homesick-fall for their affection.
However, there are many cases of abandoned and pregnant women, and
mothers left behind with their babies. It's the same old story: as
long as the girl doesn't get pregnant, the relationship seems secure
and romantic.
Even if abandoned, the woman has the hope that her soldier will
return. But if she is pregnant or already has her baby, and the
"husband" is nowhere to be seen, she faces stigmatisation and becomes
a pariah in the village.
There is no official count of how many abandoned women and babies
there are throughout our war zones, but on a brief recent visit we
estimated hundreds in each district. Women there want this issue to
be included in the agenda for the peace process. It is clear that
even if the combatants on both sides could not control the sexuality
of their personnel, they have to own up to the fact and take
responsibility for looking after the women and children.
Sources have told us there are several senior police officers who
have married second or third wives while posted in the districts.
Affected wives have approached the National Commission for Women to
prepare stricter legislation so women will think twice before
marrying an already-married officer.
Some Maoist sources have also approached the commission to
investigate cases of alleged rape and pregnancies of women prisoners
while in army or police custody. After an investigation, the
commission found no cases of rape-related pregnancy, but human rights
activists say that Maoist women who have been raped or made pregnant
had not been imprisoned. In one tarai and one hill district, two
Maoist girls revealed to us that they had been raped by their own
comrades.
In Kailali, Devi had been brutally and repeatedly raped while in
military custody and then disappeared. Devi's parents think she is
dead. These cases need to be investigated, perpetrators identified
and punished. Otherwise, there is a great danger we will have yet
another set of war victims: brutalised women, heart-broken girls with
fatherless children. This will be another category of Nepali women
needing psychological and legal counselling and welfare support.
(Dr Durga Pokhrel is the chairperson of the National Commission for
Women who recently returned from a tour of the western districts. The
names of women have been changed to protect their identity.)
_____
#2.
The Economic and Political Weekly
March 15, 2003
Commentary
Nepal: From Battle of Arms to Battle of Ideas
The ceasefire has been welcomed by the people and the Maoists'
sincerity is demonstrated by the fact of the large-scale
mobilisation taking place in support of an elected constituent
assembly. How patient all the other parties concerned will be with
the process of dialogue is dependent on the various foreign
influences that Nepal has always been vulnerable to, not least
of which derives from New Delhi.
Gautam Navlakha
The ceasefire and the announcement of resumption of talks between the
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists) and the royalist government which
controls the Royal Nepal Army (RNA) caught most observers unaware. A
public debate is now on in Nepal discussing the prospects and
consequences of constituent assembly (CA). Indeed even the political
parties who until recently were dismissive of this demand have toned
down their opposition to the CA. It took a civil war and the
resultant military stalemate to drive home the point that elections
to the CA would provide a meeting ground between the warring parties
and as such it was a sensible proposal.
The reality of Nepal was that conditions of dual power existed there,
with the RNA in control of district headquarters and the Maoists in
control of the rest, in nearly half of the territory. The Royal Nepal
Army had failed to make much headway against the People's Guerrilla
Army despite receiving arms and training and support from
India,US,UK, Belgium, etc. India supplied its INSAS rifles at heavy
discount of nearly 70 per cent and trained officers and soldiers in
various army run counter-insurgency schools. The US sent 3000 of M16
A2 rifles and expects to send another 2000 soon. Belguim too sent a
first batch of 500 (out of 5500) Minimi machine guns. The US also
sent 49 US soldiers to help the RNA in its military operations
against the Maoists.
The Maoists enjoy popular support and have grown rapidly between
1995-2003, and their demand for a round table conference comprising
all political parties and the king, setting up of an interim
government, elections to the constituent assembly and for the CA to
debate and decide on the issue of republic or constitutional
monarchy, are eminently democratic demands. Indeed even observers
opposed to the CPN (Maoists) admit that there is broad support for
this demand from virtually all sections of the Nepalese society as
well as from important sections within the main political parties.
The fact that the two parties, NC and UML-CPN were unable to mount a
campaign against the usurpation of power by the king had much to do
with their nervousness about losing out to the Maoists in any contest
for popular mandate over the issue of CA. Besides, in the last six
decades Nepal has had five constitutions promulgated by the king. The
last one was promulgated in 1990 when a committee set up by the king
framed a constitution. The failure of all these further enhanced the
demand for a democratic framing of the constitution by holding
elections and then allowing the representatives of the people to
debate and frame a constitution. Thus the oldest demand of the
democracy movement in Nepal has acquired greater salience in the wake
of the civil war.
What compelled the king to compromise with the Maoists and not the
political parties? Simply the ground reality that Maoists with their
armed might were a formidable force. The fact that Maoists arsenal
came mainly from looting government armouries gave this an added
edge. Interestingly, the Indian foreign secretary told a Paris
audience on December 17, 2002 that, "western countries should also be
careful about extending excessive military assistance to Nepal in
order to avoid increase in the lethality of the internal conflict and
leakage of arms to Maoists". As is obvious these warnings were
ignored by US and Belgium governments (not insignificantly Belgium
government violated its own guidelines that bar the government from
exporting weapons to any side engaged in a civil strife). Thus
without their participation a compromise between the king and the
political parties would not be popular. Besides by keeping Maoists
out of the political process and letting the war carry on would open
the door for international machinations with unpredictable outcome.
This was something that even ardent royalists out of a sense of
patriotism could not dismiss. Besides more than year's military
operations made no dent on the military might of the Maoists while
the atrocities committed by the RNA brought them much opprobrium. The
various steps taken by the king (the exclusive control over all
appointments to the upper echelons of the civil (joint secretary and
above) and military (major and above) bureaucracy and who through an
ordinance even robbed the parliament of the authority to approve the
budget for the royal household) had also only lent substance to the
view that an autocratic monarchy had usurped power. Thus the Nepalese
government's attempts to project itself as upholder of multiparty
democracy and constitutional monarchy did not make headway.
Conversely, the argument of political parties who had rejected
Maoists calls for convening a new CA appeared feeble in the face of
the reality that confirmed that the 1990 constitution left RNA
control with the king and post-emergency the king divested elected
representatives of power to appoint senior officials in civil and
military bureaucracy. The most shameful aspect was the support twice
extended to the emergency by the UML-CPN. Thus the statusquoist
stance of the political parties (to work within the 1990
constitution) became a reflection of their self-imposed irrelevance.
What rescued them from this was the ceasefire which offers them an
opportunity to rise above their penchant for shortcuts to form the
government.
On the other hand the Maoists claim that there were national
compulsions that brought about this ceasefire. Perhaps the fact that
they were able to withstand the onslaught of the RNA but unable to
protect the civilians from the attacks mounted by the RNA, played an
important role. True even the Maoists were guilty of several crimes
but even the Amnesty International report shows that the bulk of the
atrocities were committed by the RNA. No rebel army can survive
without the support of the people. The suffering of civilians would
have cut into its support base, and made it vulnerbale to attacks by
lethal weapons and a campaign to discredit it, even if this would
have made the government more unpopular. Furthermore, fear of Nepal
becoming a hotbed of international conspiracy as well as contention
and of Nepal tumbling down an economic and social abyss was very
real. A prolonged confrontation held out the threat of driving people
to destitution. By seizing the opportunity offered to them the
Maoists have improved their chances of being able to convince the
Nepalese society that unless Nepali people themselves democratically
resolve the matter, their country could become a zone of superpower
machination and intrigue. It was this that became an overriding
concern.
Even today there are no guarantees that talks will succeed. There
remain suspicions about each other that is not entirely inexplicable.
However, the Maoists have announced a five-member team to be headed
by Baburam Bhattarai while the government has not taken any step to
announce its team. There appears to be many imponderables. The apex
court's orders to release six alleged Maoists have been flouted
showing that there are many in the administration that are thwarting
efforts to pave the way for dialogue. Maoists fear that dialogue may
be an attempt for government forces to consolidate themselves (the
arms supplies continue, military training continues and
counter-insurgency advisors from US are now spread all over Nepal)
and liquidate the top leadership of Maoists. Far too many busybodies
from the arrogant US assisted by Britain to the Indian government
which claims that Nepal is the "breeding ground of Naxalism" will
fish in troubled waters to prevent the Maoists from emerging as the
pre-eminent political force in Nepal or use the discredited king
Gyanendra to play the spoilsport. It is significant that the Indian
prime minister chose the conference of chief ministers recently to
allege that "terrorists of Nepal and Bangladesh are now being used by
the ISI to pursue its anti-India agenda". By characterising Maoists
as terrorists and to accuse them of being hand in glove with the ISI
is meant to stoke fears for exerting pressure on the royalist
dispensation. Both the Indian and British (as proxy for US)
governments have let it be known that multipatrty democracy and
constitutional monarchy should be non-negotiable items. The RPP too
echoes the proposition that even if CA is convened what should be
beyond discussion is multi-party democracy and constitutional
monarchy. Such pre-conditions would defeat the very idea of a
constitutional assembly which by nature is meant to discuss every
aspect of the state structure. And if they are convinced that this
has popular backing they have no reason to fear the CA endorsing
this. However, it is significant that both Nepali Congress and the
UML-CPN have powerful sections within their fold who advocate the
convening of CA without any pre-condition. The main political parties
too are adopting a wait and watch approach. While they appear to
welcome ceasefire and resumption of talks and are open to the
proposal to convene a CA they are also raising procedural issues. For
instance, the Koirala-led NC has said that any decision arrived at
the round table conference must be approved by the representatives of
the people, i e, the dissolved house has to be revived. Thus the
see-saw battle is far from over. However, the fact that prospects of
talks with the Maoists has been welcomed by the people testifies to
the public mood. Whoever thinks that people's sentiments can be
dismissed in this day and age should take note of the mass meetings
that are being held by the Maoists all over Nepal to mobilise support
for convening an elected CA. Politics of manipulations and armed
suppression, in contrast, appear amoral and unscrupulous.
Unfortunately for Nepal its dependence on India is huge and the
Indian government has always behaved as an overbearing power. For
long India's ruling class both in government and in opposition have
considered Nepal to be their own backyard occupying a strategic place
vis-a-vis China. The desire to be the pre-eminent power in the region
saw its clearest manifestation in dealing with Sikkim, Bhutan and
Nepal, in that order. So much so that in 1985 when the Indian
government imposed economic embargo against the landlocked country
claiming that Nepal's purchase of small arms from China violated the
terms of the 1950 treaty, barring the much maligned naxalites, all
the other parties supported the Indian government's bullying ways.
Lately, the Indian government had been engaged in an exercise to
bring the king and the political parties, especially the Nepal
Congress (Koirala) and UML-CPN to compromise and carry on with the
military suppression of the Maoists. This was one reason the two
parties despite much bluff and bluster remained passive bystanders to
the usurpation of power by the king first through the emergency, then
through dissolution of parliament. They were vulnerable to Indian
'persuasion' to treat the Maoists as the main enemy and not the king
because these parties fear losing much of their mandate to the
Maoists. That is also the source of strength of the Maoists who are
widely seen as becoming the biggest beneficiary if elections to a
constituent assembly take place.
Under the present NDA government India's policy on Nepal has acquired
an ideological dimension too; guided by fear of the Maoists of Nepal
and Indian 'Left wing extremists' carving a corridor linking their
movements all the way from the Dandkaranya to the Himalayas. LK
Advani warned that the government has "an integrated combat
programmed to get rid of the trouble once and for all". Only time
will show the worth of such claims. The manner in which they were
caught unawares by the developments there shows that the Indian
national security apparatus is victim of its own rhetoric.
The tepid response of the Indian government is also understandable
because it seals the fate of the attempts by the Indian government
for a patch up between the king and the political parties to confront
the Maoists. In contrast the US administration which has emerged as
yet another actor on the scene through its assistant secretary of
state Christina Rocca made known its concern at the failure of the
war against the Maoists as well as claimed that given the military
stalemate on the ground, dialogue was the only way out. It also made
the astonishing claim that US military supplies to Nepal were meant
to persuade 'rebels' to negotiate.
Rather than work to avoid war and avert Nepal becoming a centre for
US machinations against India and China an ideologically blinkered
Indian government therefore sought to help bring about a compromise
with the political parties and simultaneously engaged in crushing
militarily the Maoists. By backing the king, whom until June 2000,
the Indian security apparatus accused of being in cahoots with the
ISI, and supporting the military campaign unleashed by him, the
Indian government had already taken sides in a civil war. Indeed much
before anyone else declared the Maoists to be terrorists it was the
Indian government that labelled them thus and cracked down on social
organisations for their alleged links to the Maoists and deported
nearly a hundred alleged Maoists to Nepal.
It restores legitimacy to the claim that movements that use force to
fight oppression and exploitation can initiate as well as respond to
genuine efforts to reach a democratic solution. It shows that it is
pre-mature to claim that armed struggle is either passe or a thing of
the past. Indeed talks between the government of India and the
NSCN(IM) shows that any government that reaches a stage of military
stalemate in an unequal battle knows that negotiated settlement
becomes the only way out to break the logjam. Sure there is a
pre-condition that unless a movement has a programme and vision of
the future it will not enjoy popular support which alone is the basis
of its strength. Remove that and they crumble. Therefore, unlike
communal fascists of Lashkar and Jaish with their penchant for
committing horrors a movement even one like Hizbul Mujahideen in J
and K shows repeated willingness to reach negotiated resolution.
_____
#3.
The Daily Times (Lahore)
March 27, 2003
Op-ed.
The contemporary relevance of Bhagat Singh
M V Ramana
During his short life, Bhagat Singh spanned a variety of political
positions, from Gandhian nationalism to revolutionary terrorism to
Marxism. Though he was accused of, and is sometimes praised for,
being a terrorist, he clarifies, "I am not a terrorist and I never
was"
This week, 72 years ago, Bhagat Singh and two of his comrades were
hanged by the colonial British government. Only 23 years old at the
time of his death, Bhagat's popularity is said to have rivalled that
of Mahatma Gandhi. Though much of the attention paid to Bhagat Singh
has focused on his use of violence and his heroic patriotism, his
real significance lies in his opposition to the exploitation of "the
labour of the common people". To him it mattered "little whether
these exploiters are purely British capitalists, or British and
Indians in alliance, or even purely Indians." Also important was his
opposition to communalism and the use of religion as a means of
bondage.
Bhagat Singh was part of a substantial militant tradition within the
independence movement. Ajit Singh, Bhagat's uncle, was a leader in
the Ghadar party. Set up in the early 1910s by Punjabi immigrants on
the west coast of North America, the Ghadar militants wanted to
overthrow British rule in India by armed revolt. The Ghadar movement
deepened the nationalist consciousness by carrying the critique of
colonialism developed by intellectuals to the masses, both in India
and among the immigrant community; its methods of struggle emphasised
secularism, democracy and egalitarianism.
Bhagat Singh, like many in his generation, became involved in the
freedom struggle through participation in the Non-Cooperation
movement launched by the Congress in 1920. The suspension of the
movement in 1922 following an attack on a police station in Chauri
Chaura led to widespread disenchantment and the exploration of
alternatives, in particular revolutionary means.
In September 1928, several of these young revolutionaries came
together in Delhi, and formed the Hindustan Socialist Republican
Association (HSRA). The rationale for adopting socialism as an
official goal is in their manifesto: "socialism... alone can lead to
the establishment of complete independence and the removal of
all-social distinctions and privileges."
The HSRA's time for action came soon after. In April 1929, the
British government introduced two bills to repress the labour
movement, the Trade Disputes Bill that would effectively ban strikes,
and the Public Safety Bill, which gave the police sweeping powers of
preventive detention. The HSRA decided that these bills were to be
opposed and on April 8, 1929, following the passing of the Trade
Disputes Bill, Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt threw two bombs in
the Legislative Assembly. The bombs were deliberately targeted at
empty benches so that no one would be hurt. In Bhagat's own words,
the bomb throwing was intended to "register our protest on behalf of
those who had no other means left to give expression to their
heart-rending agony. Our sole purpose was 'to make the deaf hear' and
to give the heedless a timely warning."
Over and above the protest, there was a deeper reason for the HSRA's
resort to bomb throwing. Though the HSRA did not favour individual
violence and was well aware of the need to politicise the masses in
order to further the revolution, their means for doing so were
limited and time was short. They therefore resorted to "propaganda by
deed", in the hope that this would result in the recruitment of a
large cadre, and to use the courts as a stage for publicly
propagating their ideas.
Accordingly Bhagat Singh and his comrades would enter the court
shouting Inquilab Zindabad (Long live the Revolution) and Down with
Imperialism. When the court asked him what he meant by revolution,
Bhagat Singh replied: "By 'Revolution' we mean that the present order
of things, which is based on manifest injustice, must change.
Producers or labourers, in spite of being the most necessary element
of society, are robbed by their exploiters of the fruits of their
labour and deprived of their elementary rights. The peasant who grows
corn for all, starves with his family, the weaver who supplies the
world market with textile fabrics, has not enough to cover his own
and his children's bodies, masons, smiths and carpenters who raise
magnificent palaces, live like pariahs in the slums. The capitalists
and exploiters, the parasites of society, squander millions on their
whims... A radical change, therefore, is necessary and it is the duty
of those who realize it to reorganize society on the socialistic
basis."
This is quite different from the way the word Inquilab is used in
Bollywood movies where the word is used as a vague term for a crusade
against poverty. I mention this partly because there are six films on
the life of Bhagat Singh, including four last year and all but the
one starring Ajay Devgan do little justice to the true politics of
the leader.
During his short life, Bhagat Singh spanned a variety of political
positions, from Gandhian nationalism to revolutionary terrorism to
Marxism. Though he was accused of, and is sometimes praised for,
being a terrorist, he clarifies, "I am not a terrorist and I never
was, except perhaps in the beginning of my revolutionary career. And
I am convinced that we cannot gain anything through these methods."
Elsewhere, Bhagat Singh has clarified that as he involved himself in
deep study of history and politics, "the romance of the violent
methods alone which was so prominent amongst our predecessors, was
replaced by serious ideas... Use of force justifiable when resorted
to as a matter of terrible necessity: non-violence as policy
indispensable for all mass movements."
It is not Bhagat Singh's use of violence, if it can be called that,
which was of significance. Rather, as Bipan Chandra et al point out
in their authoritative India's Struggle for Independence, Bhagat
Singh "understood, more clearly than many of his contemporaries, the
danger that communalism posed to the nation and the national
movement. He often told his audience that communalism was as big an
enemy as colonialism." Today, as we are faced with the simultaneous
onslaught of communal politics, global capitalism and American
imperialism, the relevance of Bhagat Singh's ideas can scarcely be
overstated.
M V Ramana is a physicist and research staff member at Princeton
University's Program on Science and Global Security and co-editor of
Prisoners of the Nuclear Dream
_____
#4.
From: Sambhavna <sambavna@sancharnet.in>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:07:13 +0530
Bhopal Gas Peedit Nirashrit Pension Bhogi Sangharsh Morcha
Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Karmchari Stationery Sangh
Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Udyog Sangathan
Bhopal Group for Information and Action
March 25, 2003
Press Statement
At a press conference today, organizations of survivors of the December '84
Union Carbide disaster in Bhopal announced that they will appeal the recent
dismissal of their class action suit in the USA within the next 20 days.
Leaders of three survivors' organizations and their supporters strongly
condemned the March 20th decision of Judge Keenan of the Federal District
Court in New York calling it a "glaring instance of juridical
prejudice". They expressed hope that the Appellate Court will remedy the
"travesty of justice" caused by Judge Keenan's decision.
The class action suit seeking damages for violations of international human
rights law and environmental contamination was filed by the three
survivors' organizations and two support groups in November 1999. Judge
Keenan first dismissed the entire case in August 2000, on grounds that the
February 1989 settlement discharged all liabilities of Union Carbide.
Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal to the U.S. Second Circuit Court of
Appeals which reversed Judge Keenan's order and acknowledged that the
damages to the health of the people caused by soil and water contamination,
as well as the claims for clean-up and medical monitoring of 20,000
affected people, were outside the scope of the 1989 settlement. The Second
Circuit reprimanded Judge Keenan for not properly considering these
environmental claims and sent the case back to him for reconsideration of
these matters.
In his recent decision, Judge Keenan dismissed the suit for a second time
on grounds that too much time had passed between knowledge of the injury
caused by the soil and water contamination and the filing of the lawsuit in
1999. The decision also stated that the survivors' organizations lacked
standing to bring claims on behalf of their members, and finally, concluded
that ordering clean-up and medical monitoring would be impossible to
implement in Bhopal because of its remote location from the U.S. court.
Mr. Himanshu Rajan Sharma, New York based attorney for the plaintiffs
organizations, who also addressed the press conference, criticized the
decision on several legal grounds. According to him the decision
erroneously applied a 3-year time limitation of New York law. "In fact,
under New York law, the plaintiffs' claims for damages as a result of
environmental contamination cannot be time-barred because the injuries are
continuous or ongoing in nature" he said. Also, according to Mr. Sharma,
because Union Carbide actively withheld its knowledge of the widespread
environmental contamination of soil and water caused by its plant in
Bhopal, the 3-year limitation does not apply. Actually, Judge Keenan's
decision recognizes this fact, but absolves Union Carbide by suggesting
that the corporation did not make false statements to the public, but only
withheld information.
On the issue of US Court's supposed inability to enforce its judgment in a
distant place such as Bhopal, Mr. Sharma pointed out that the United States
Supreme Court has always held that a court has jurisdiction to order such
relief from any defendant that is present before it, regardless of where
the relief is implemented. In one American case, U.S. courts ordered a
defendant corporation to clean up contaminated land in Honduras. The
Second Circuit Court of Appeals, to which plaintiffs will appeal, has also
previously recognized the authority of U.S. courts to order defendants
Texaco Corporation to undertake clean-up in Ecuador.
Finally, Mr. Sharma added that the decision was legally unsupportable in
its conclusion that the Bhopal survivors' organizations lack standing to
bring claims on behalf of their members. In class action lawsuit, it is
well-established that organizations may function as representatives of the
broader class.
The organizations announced that they will continue to raise the critical
humanitarian issues of Bhopal both in legal fora as well as in the court of
international public opinion.
Balakrishna Namdeo Rashida BiAbdul JabbarSatinath Sarangi
PresidentPresidentConvenorMember
Gas Peedit Nirashrit Pension Bhogi Sangharsh Morcha, Bhopal Bhopal Gas
Peedit Mahila Stationery Karmachari SanghBhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Udyog
SangathanBhopal Group for Information and Action
_____
#5.
The Telegraph (Calcutta), March 27, 2003
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1030327/asp/opinion/story_1756828.asp
COWS, CITIZENS AND THE STATE
- A Central ban on cow slaughter would be caving in to fundamentalism
Pratap Bhanu Mehta
The author is professor of philosophy and of law and governance,
Jawaharlal Nehru University
As the dynamics of politics makes it almost inevitable that the
precedent set by some states in banning cow slaughter will gain
momentum, this sensitive issue raises questions of the highest moral,
political and constitutional delicacy. Although they should be of no
consequence for the purposes of public reason, the shamelessness of
our times obliges anyone writing on these issues to come clean on
their personal beliefs. This author shares many of the high
sentiments associated with the cow: I have been a vegetarian all my
life and would probably prefer to live in a world where animal
slaughter was not as thoughtless and ubiquitous as it currently is.
If I were to inadvertently eat meat, I would probably, like most
Hindus, experience more angst if I came to know I had eaten beef. I
think enhancement of cattle wealth is a good value for society to
hold. I can even see the logic in Gandhi's claim that revering cows
might be a good manifestation of a commitment of reverence towards
all life. In short: I can see why the sacredness of cows ought to be
of value. But I don't think acknowledging its sacredness, or even the
fact that it is associated with the sentiments of a vast majority, is
sufficient reason for banning cow slaughter.
There are many reasons why the fact that even the majority might
regard the cow as sacred does not give sufficient argument for the
state to ban cow slaughter. First, we have to admit, that the banning
of cow slaughter is a partisan religious argument. There is a lot
more integrity to an argument that would ban all animal slaughter on
some principled ground concerning the interests of animals. But no
society in human history has even come close to accepting that
proposition. If we are therefore singling the cow out for protection,
it can be only be because treating the cow as sacred is part of
particular religious traditions. But that fact alone should put into
doubt the legitimacy of using state power to impose a ban.
We could admit that we are in no position to really take seriously
the reverence for all life forms literally. But that should not be an
argument against taking one small step in this direction by
protecting cows. This argument is disingenuous on two counts. First,
the claim of reverence towards all life forms is difficult to take in
anything other than a rhetorical manner. No one, even all the pious
Jains I know, seriously professes it. That reverence would involve
changing the basis of civilization to an extent unimaginable.
And second, it is downright duplicitous to suggest that the choice of
a cow as the animal to protect is motivated by a reverence for all
life. It is, in the context of our lifestyles and other beliefs,
nothing but an expression of a religious identity. Is it an accident
that we are talking just about cows? We have all the rights to
express this identity, spend as much on serving cows as we want, buy
out every cow that is a candidate for slaughter. We have a right to
appeal to others to voluntarily desist from cow slaughter or to
abstain from beef. What we do not have the right to do is enforce
this identity using the coercive power of the state.
We need to make a couple of things gracelessly clear. The fact that
the religious sentiments of a community are at stake is not a
sufficient argument to squelch the project of creating a free and
equal society. If I accept a ban on cow slaughter I will have nothing
to say to many members of the Muslim personal law board who continue
to appeal to religious sentiments to deny many of their own
constituents the right to equal citizenship. I will not be able to
say anything when people demand a ban on artistic creativity in the
name of community sentiment. I will not be able to say anything to
those who resist freedom and equality in the name of identity,
ideology or religion. Accepting a ban on cow slaughter is accepting
the fact that religious sentiment is sufficient warrant to invoke
state power. That is a frightening prospect. Whatever its function as
a short term palliative, in the long run it will jeopardize liberty
and justice alike.
Second, living with difference requires a reluctance to use state
power even in the service of many values that one thinks are of the
highest importance. For one thing, the applications of state power,
in some instances, diminish the moral worth of the action at stake.
It is one thing to conscientiously recognize the value of cows; it is
another to simply think we have fulfilled our moral duties on the
cheap by getting the state to ban cow slaughter. Given the character
of the parties that are yelping the loudest on behalf of the ban, it
is hard not to associate the demand for banning cow slaughter with an
insidious moral hypocrisy. It is very unlikely that what is at stake
in the current demands is the interests of a cow as a being, rather
than as a symbol of identity. If we were serious about the interests
of the cow we would probably be better off ridding this country of
the scourge of plastic bags that kills more cows than we care to
admit. Gandhi was right in thinking that go raksha smacks too much of
pride; we could instead concentrate on go seva, which does not
necessarily require the interposition of state power.
Living with difference requires a recognition that not all the things
that we hold sacred are universally held to be such. All calls for
state power being used on behalf of that sacred value ought to take
cognizance of this fact. A closed society, or a fundamentalist one,
is distinguished by just this feature: it takes religious sacredness
to be a sufficient argument to invoke state power, independent of
considerations of individual liberty or what it means to treat
citizens as equal.
We ought to protect not just the rights of those who do not share our
beliefs; if someone feels alienated enough from their own traditions
to lapse into eating beef, they also have the right to do so. And
frankly, given the rank brutality of so much Hindu society towards
many of its own members it is difficult to think that what we are
witnessing is a sudden outpouring of genuine morality. Given the
political ascendancy of Hindutva, determined to recast this nation on
the basis of a politics of resentment, it is also difficult to think
that we are also witnessing an outpouring of genuine piety.
Gandhi was right in thinking "there is no service or protection of
the cow in trying to save her by force". The invocation of state
power does just that. If we value the cow as sacred, we ought to do
the utmost for its welfare, mindful of one simple fact: that some
individuals may not share our views. To call for a Central ban on cow
slaughter is to cave in to fundamentalism. At the very least, leave
the matter to the states. And in this point in our history, drawing
the distinction between fundamentalism and civilization, between
individual rights and collective narcissism, between values freely
professed and coercively imposed is probably our most important
political obligation. Bans, of any kind, based on religious
sentiments negate that obligation.
_____
#6.
Pakistan India Peoples' Forum for Peace & Democracy (India Chapter)
Press Release
25th March 2003
Condemn killings of innocent people in Kashmir
The Pakistan India Peoples' Forum for Peace and Democracy condemn the
barbaric incident whereby alleged militant groups have killed 24
innocent people belonging to the Kashmiri Pandit community. As per
media reports, the dead include 11 women, 2 children and 9 male
adults.
Triggered by religious fundamentalism, incidents like this hamper all
attempts to bring peace back to the blood-ridden Kashmir Valley.
Incidents like these are not only attempted at sabotaging the peace
initiatives in Kashmir, but also are aimed at maligning the secular
and harmonious fabric of Kashmir. We condemn all such attempts at
terrorising the people or any section of it, by armed groups or
individuals.
In this hour of grief, we join the families of those killed and
injured in the incident at NADIMARG in South Kashmir. We request the
Kashmir state government to institute a high-level enquiry into the
incident bringing to book all those who committed this inhuman act.
We call upon all peace loving people of Kashmir and rest of India to
refrain from any act of violence, which will further worsen the
present turmoil existing in the state.
We strongly believe that such attempts at disrupting initiatives for
peace will not succeed and that the people of Kashmir will not
tolerate any violation of the right to life of all citizens.
On Behalf of PIPFPD,
Admiral Ramdas Sushil Khanna
Chairperson, India Chapter G. Secretary
_____
#7.
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 08:24:09 +0000
From: "Gadar Heritage Foundation"
Massacre of Kashmiri Pandits
We are shocked and horrified by the news of the inhuman and
unconscionable massacre of 24 innocent Kashmiri Pandit children,
women and men in Pulwama district of Kashmiri Valley late last night.
We condemn this ghastly killing of defenceless people in the
strongest possible terms.
The cowards behind the latest outrage are unlikely to identify
themselves. But there can be do doubt that the latest massacre is a
desperate bid by those eager to communalise the Kashmir issue to
sabotage any effort towards ensuring the return of the Kashmiri
Pandits to their homes.
Our hearts go out to the survivors of the carnage in particular, and
the Kashmiri Pandit community in general, the overwhelming majority
of whom have been condemned to live the life of refugees in their own
country because of Pakistan-aided terrorism in the Valley. We demand
an urgent review of the security arrangements for Kashmiri Pandits
throughout the Valley and immediate and adequate compensation for the
families of those killed by the J&K government.
The J&K chief minister Mufti Mohammed Sayeed has called it "[an]
unpardonable crime by militants to derail the peace process initiated
in J&K by the coalition government." He has also said he has asked
the security forces to launch a massive manhunt and bring the killers
to the book for "these gun-wielding militants deserve no mercy."
However, we also demand a thorough investigation in the security
lapses that turned the vulnerable Kashmiri Pandits into easy targets
of mass murderers who pretend to be serving lofty causes.
Signatories:
Javed Anand (Co-editor, Communalism Combat, Mumbai)
Teesta Setalvad (Co-editor, Communalism Combat, Mumbai)
Javed Akhtar (Poet and Lyricist)
Shabana Azmi, (Rajya Sabha MP, social activist and actress).
Dr. Agni Shekhar (Panun Kashmir)
Askok Pandit (Panun Kashmir)
Mahesh Bhatt, Film director
Farooque Shaikh, films, theatre and TV personality
Nikhil Wagle, Editor, Apla Mahanagar
Sajid Rashid, Editor, Hindi Mahanagar
Hasan Kamal, Lyricist and Columnist
Gulam Mohamed Peshimam,Businessman
Sushobha Barve, Social Activist
Javed Siddiqui, Writer
Aslam Parvaiz, Advertising
Farrukh S. Waris, Educationist
Syed Firoz Ashraf, Social Activist
Yacoob Rahee, Writer, Social Activist
Fazal Shaad, Social Activist
Abdulkader Mukadam, Columnist, Social Activist
Khan Ahmed Ali, Social Activist
Vaqar Kadvi, Social Activist
Shamim Tariq, Social Activist
Salem bin Razak, Social Activist
Muqaddar Hameed, Writer
Khan Ayub, Social Activist
Salim Alware, Social Activist
_____
#8.
A Public Statement
March 25, 2003
A cowardly, yet horrendously brutal, killing of innocent people has
shattered the Kashmir Valley again.
In the nightly hours of March 23, twenty-four men, women and children
were gunned down by unknown attackers in the village of Nadimarg
(Pulwama). The victims were all Hindu Pandits of Kashmir.
We in SANSAD (South Asian Network for Secularism and Democracy) and
in INSAF (International South Asia Forum) utterly condemn this savage
act, this crime against humanity.
When members of any particular community are subjected to brutal
killings - whether they are Sikhs in Punjab, Christians, Dalits,
Tribals and Muslims in Gujarat and elsewhere, the fragile secular and
democratic make-up of the Indian society goes through another
challenging test.
For over twelve years now, the people of Kahmir have been subjected
to a never-ending vortex of violence. The entire people have been
turned into helpless victims of the terror inflicted by the
contending forces, while their genuine aspirations for peace,
dignity, and democratic rights of self-determination remain crushed.
It is very unfortunate that every time there is some movement toward
normalization of social relations, some movement toward peace in the
entire region, it becomes disrupted by such wanton and melicious acts
of interruption. It is obvious that there are vested interests who do
not want the Kashmir problem to be solved.
That the secular and harmonious aspects of the Kashmiri society have
yet not been destroyed is indicated by the manner in which the entire
community in the village of Nadimarg came together to mourn the
deaths of the innocents. Muslim men and women wiped their own tears
and those of the survivors of the Hindu families.
''We don't believe this could happen here,'' said Khatija Bano, a
Muslim housewife. ''I am shocked. Why will anybody kill these poor
people? They had nothing to do with anything. They were struggling
like all of us for two meals a day here in this far off village,''
she said. ''They had not left the village because they had always
felt safe here. It is their home like it is our home''.
It is noteworthy that all the Muslim, Christian, Sikh and the
democratic/secular organizations have strongly condemned this ghastly
act, and have demanded from the Government of India and of Jammu and
kashmir to find the culprits, and to take the necessary steps in
bringing security and a sense of dignity to all the people in Jammu
and Kashmir.
We in SANSAD and INSAF join these voices of sanity, and of goodwill.
Hari Sharma
president, SANSAD (South Asian Network for Secularism and Democracy)
president, INSAF (International South Asia Forum)
residence: 8027 Government Road, Burnaby, BC, Canada, V5A 2E1
______
#9.
The Hindu (Chennai), March 27, 2003
Rage against the dying of the light
By Syeda Saiyidain Hameed
It was Dylan Thomas who said, "Do not go gentle into the good night/
Rage, rage against the dying of the light." On Tuesday evening, some
of us, ordinary citizens and concerned people of Delhi raged. We
stood on Sansad Marg, across the road from Park Hotel, in solidarity
with the Kashmiri Pandits whose families had been gunned down in
Nadimarg village in Pulwama district of south Kashmir.[...].
http://www.hindu.com/stories/2003032702221200.htm
______
#10.
The Hindu (Chennai), March 27, 2003
Time to accelerate peace process
By Kuldip Nayar
http://www.hindu.com/stories/2003032703541100.htm
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (www.mnet.fr/aiindex).
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.
--