SACW | 27 June, 2003

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire   |  27 June,  2003

#1. Petition protesting the nomination of Mr. Salauddin Quader
Chowdhury as Bangladesh's nominee for the post of Secretary-General of the
Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC)
#2. Pakistan:
- Islamists ban women in ads in Pakistan metropolis (Amir Zia)
- Minorities seek CJ's suo moto intervention (Naveed Ahmad)
#3. Ayodhya & the paradox of Indian polity  (Harbans Mukhia)
#4. More loyal than the king?  (Praful Bidwai)
#5. South Asia: Winter Course on Forced Migration (Calcutta from 1 
December to 15
December 2003)


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

#1.

The following petition protesting the nomination of Mr. Salauddin Quader
Chowdhury as Bangladesh's nominee for the post of Secretary-General of the
Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) is now available on
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/saka/. The petition will later be forwarded to
Daily Star and Prothom Alo for publication in Bangladesh. Shortly
thereafter, it is expected to be to major newspapers and media outlets of
the nations of OIC.

Please read the following statement and if you feel that you agree with the
contents please visit the above mentioned web site and endorse your name to
the petition. Your endorsement is important so that an effective opposition
can be sustained resulting in the withdrawal of this unfortunate nomination.
It is hoped that by your example others will follow and the Govt of
Bangladesh will listen to our call.


STATEMENT ON BANGLADESH=92S NOMINATION OF SALAUDDIN QUADER CHOWDHURY AS
SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE ORGANIZATION OF ISLAMIC CONFERENCE (OIC)

We, the concerned citizens of Bangladesh, express our grave anxiety and deep
shock over the nomination of Mr. Salauddin Quader Chowdhury for the position
of Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC).  We
call upon the Government of the People=92s Republic of Bangladesh to
immediately withdraw the regrettable nomination of Mr. Chowdhury.

We believe that it is highly inappropriate and deeply irresponsible to
nominate Mr. Chowdhury to such a position for a variety of reasons.  Mr.
Chowdhury is tainted with the widespread allegation that he had supported
the Pakistani occupation forces during Bangladesh=92s War of National
Liberation in 1971.  He was active then as an ignominious ally of the
invading Pakistani army, which committed war crimes, crimes against
humanity, and brutal terrorism against the people of Bangladesh.

The Pakistani occupation army and its local collaborators targeted countless
unarmed civilians in violation of Geneva Conventions, international law, and
morality.  They ruthlessly and indiscriminately killed and tortured men,
women, children, minorities, intellectuals, students and teachers, writers
and artists, artisans and peasants, workers and vendors, and other Bengalis
in the name of Islam, presumably to uphold the territorial integrity of
Pakistan.  The devastating actions of the Pakistan army while making
Bangladesh rubble and a big graveyard were sadistically inhumane, barbaric,
and genocidal and invited worldwide condemnation.  Mr. Chowdhury, it has
been widely reputed, actively participated in, or had knowledge of, gruesome
activities in and around his native Chittagong district in these wanton acts
of murder, torture and in the illegal abductions and arrests of freedom
fighters and members of Bangladesh=92s minority community, and innocent
civilians.

Given Mr. Chowdhury=92s questionable antecedents, it is certainly
inappropriate, to say the least, for the Government of Bangladesh to
nominate him to the position of the Secretary-General of the OIC.
Mr.Chowdhury also has an ugly and unenviable reputation of misogyny, calling
people names, indulging in hate speech against minorities and is reputed to
have sinister connections with criminal and gangster organizations.

At a time when Bangladesh=92s people are trying to project a positive image =
of
our country, when we are trying to construct sustainable institutions of
democracy and foster a pluralist society based on the principles of
tolerance and freedom, when we are trying to accelerate the pace of the
nation=92s economic growth and progress, and when we want to attract more
investment from foreign investors and put to more efficient use our natural
and human resources, the authorities should not wreck the reputation of the
country by nominating a person like Mr. Chowdhury to a position that
requires humane qualities of compassion and generosity, compromise and
concession towards noble goals. It ruinously militates against the national
interest of the country besides being wildly contrary to all notions of
morality. As Bangladeshis we urge our compatriots and fellow- citizens to
join us in condemning this nomination and in urging the government
immediately to rescind this national infamy.

While we do not like to embarrass the Government of Bangladesh, we feel
strongly about this matter.  Thus we believe it is our duty also to inform
the citizens of member states of the OIC of Dhaka=92s malapropos nomination =
of
Mr. Chowdhury an alleged war criminal and terrorist to such an important and
internationally eminent position in which he will represent the member
states in various international forums.  The OIC is critically situated in
the affairs of the states concerned and in international relations between
the North and the South in which it plays a constructive role via mediation
towards dispute resolution, via promoting trade and cooperation, and via
providing official development assistance among member states.

Given the current high-voltage propaganda against Muslim-majority and Arab
countries, against Muslims, other non-Western religions, and various other
ethnic communities living in the West, as evinced in the recent events
relating to Iraq, it would be a profound mistake, a morally shameful move,
and a strategic failure to have a person of Mr.Chowdhury=92s dubious
reputation elevated to the position of the Secretary-General of OIC.

We believe that the OIC ought to uphold and practice the principles of
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its member states should establish
democratic institutions.  It would be a disgrace if ill advisedly the OIC
took a retrograde step and elected a controversial individual such as Mr.
Chowdhury to its highest office.  We cannot permit this to happen.  We will,
thus, collectively speak out against this nomination and intend in due
course to publish this statement in the leading journals of the member
states of OIC and call upon all civil and human rights organizations at home
and abroad to resolutely oppose Mr. Chowdhury=92s nomination as Secretary
General of the OIC.


____


#2.


Reuters
Islamists ban women in ads in Pakistan metropolis
By Amir Zia

KARACHI, June 26 - Islamists who head the council running Pakistan's 
largest city said on Thursday they had banned the unnecessary 
depiction of women in advertisements, calling the practice ''obscene 
and vulgar''
       Naimatullah Khan, mayor of Karachi, told Reuters the council 
in the metropolis of 14 million passed the law this week and planned 
to implement it soon.

       ''Our culture and values are different from the West,'' he 
said. ''We want to protect women's honour. We don't want to make 
women toys like they are in the West.''
       Khan belongs to the hardline Jamaat-e-Islami party, which led 
a similar campaign in North West Frontier Province bordering 
Afghanistan in which youths smashed billboards depicting women.
       ''It was on my initiative that the law was passed,'' Khan 
said. ''We plan to implement it soon. We will urge the people, 
advertisers, not to display obscene and vulgar billboards.''
       Jamaat-e-Islami is the main component of Muttahida 
Majlis-e-Amal, a six-party Islamic alliance that did unexpectedly 
well in October general elections on the back of opposition to the 
government's backing for the U.S.-led ''war on terror.''
       Since gaining control of North West Frontier in the polls, the 
MMA has passed a slew of hardline legislation and announced a return 
to sharia, or traditional Islamic law, leading critics to charge that 
it is trying to emulate the notorious Taliban regime overthrown in 
Afghanistan in 2001.
       The decision by the city government is likely to trigger 
confrontation with the government of Sindh province of which Karachi 
is the capital.
       Shoaib Bukhari, provincial minister for local government, said 
the Sindh administration would never allow the city government to 
destroy Karachi's image.

''FOOLISH''
       ''It is foolish,'' he said referring to the new law. ''They 
find obscenity and vulgarity in everything. It is the problem of 
their sick mindset. We will protect advertisers under the law.''
       Bukhari is a member of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, a 
coalition partner of Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali.
       Jamaat-e-Islami won local polls in Karachi in 2001 due to a 
boycott by the MQM, which normally dominates the city's politics.
       Babar Mehmood, a director of advertising firm Orient McCann, 
said the new law would damage Pakistan's image overseas and could 
also hurt foreign investment. He said advertising standards in 
Pakistan were already conservative.
       ''There is no obscenity or vulgarity in our advertisments. The 
existing laws and social pressures do not allow us to go beyond a 
certain limit.
       ''If they continue to raise such issues, multinationals will 
not just stop putting up billboards, but also stop investment. This 
whole campaign is politically motivated.''
       There have been sporadic incidents in Karachi and other major 
cities in which religious militants have blacked-out billboards 
showing women, especially those adjacent to mosques.
       Another leading advertiser said businesses and advertisers 
were already feeling threatened.
       ''Some have already stopped using women in billboards,'' he 
said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
       Saeed Ghani, a member of the city council from former premier 
Benazir Bhutto's opposition Pakistan People's Party, said 
Jamaat-e-Islami had wanted a complete ban on images of women.
       ''But we fought hard. Now the law bans 'unnecessary use of 
women in ads' and is open to debate -- it's impossible to agree 
whether women are needed or not.''

Copyright 2003 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or 
redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the 
prior written consent of Reuters.


o o o

The News International (Pakistan) 27 June 2003

Minorities seek CJ's suo moto intervention

By Naveed Ahmad

ISLAMABAD: The minorities of the country have sought a suo moto 
action by the chief justice of the Supreme Court against the 
legislation of Shariah Bill by the NWFP Assembly.

The All Pakistan Minorities Alliance (APMA), a group claiming to be 
representative of non-Muslims living in Pakistan, termed the passage 
of the Shariah Bill as 'unconstitutional, undemocratic' and in 
contradiction with the Universal Deceleration of Human Rights.

The minority alliance termed the bill "a conspiracy against the 
integrity and solidarity of the country by imposing 'Talibanisation 
in a province'. The APMA leaders believe that the legislation 
"eradicates basic human rights of minorities and women" and also 
abolishes religious freedom in the NWFP.

The alliance appealed to the CJ for intervention and suo moto action 
to stop the implementation of Shariah Bill.

The application lists some grounds for challenging the bill 
implementation as well as consequences otherwise ie

a) Shariah Bill violates the constitution which "will literally cease 
to exist in the province",

b) the country especially the NWFP will be in a state of anarchy,

c) the judicial system in the province will be in utter confusion, 
and the economy will be adversely affected and will bring about 
destruction of foreign investment.

The plea also prays, "The fundamental rights of religious minorities 
and women will be severely hampered and they will become the prime 
target of terrorism at the end of extremists who are being allowed to 
interpret the Holy Qur'aan and Sunnah according to their own thinking 
by this bill."

The alliance also maintained that Shariah Bill is also against the 
progressive thoughts, ideology and principles of the founder of the 
nation, Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

This application for suo moto follow a writ petition filed in the 
Supreme Court by an independent lawyer challenging its implementation.


_____

#3.

The Hindu
=46riday, Jun 27, 2003

Ayodhya & the paradox of Indian polity

By Harbans Mukhia

Those who understand Indian culture and history - and the VHP is not 
among them - know that extremism is completely alien to all its 
religions... It is to this history that India needs to return.

LIKE ALL paradoxes, this paradox too is absolutely breathtaking. The 
Sangh Parivar, forever on the lookout for proclaiming its 
`nationalism' with drumbeats, has made it clear from the word go that 
it would not honour any judgment of the Indian Judiciary on the 
Ayodhya dispute if it goes against the Hindus. Among the many members 
of the carefully nurtured multi-tongued Parivar, the VHP, which goes 
furthest in making claims to being more staunchly nationalist Hindu 
and Indian than the others within the Parivar or outside, is also the 
most strident in announcing its hostility to the Judiciary. It is 
followed closely by the RSS, the darling of the Prime Minister, the 
Deputy Prime Minister and many others at the helm.

The flip side of the claims to being staunch nationalists is the 
implication that no other group, least of all a community, comes 
anywhere near it in its commitment to the nation's territorial 
integrity, its culture and institutions. The Muslims in the Parivar's 
estimate top the list of those wanting in this commitment; therefore 
even killing them by the hundreds is an act of patriotism. Yet, it is 
the Muslim community's orthodox leadership that has repeatedly and 
unreservedly declared its faith in the Indian Judiciary and has 
announced its commitment to honour the verdict even if it goes 
against them. This is when none of the judges hearing the case is 
even a Muslim (not that that by itself would have altered the 
outcome) and the jurisprudence under which the case is being 
adjudicated is the secular Constitution of India and not the shariat. 
Is it easy to imagine anything with a greater irony embedded in it?

The archaeological excavations at the site have thrown up what anyone 
with the slightest sense of history would have guessed: a mixed lot 
of evidence, conclusively proving nothing. From the evidence of 
historical texts and documents it was clear long ago that sustaining 
the theory of the existence of a Ram temple demolished to build the 
Babri Masjid in 1528 would be very hard. Twenty-four historians of 
the JNU had made this very point in 1986 in a very brief, popular 
pamphlet entitled `Political Abuse of History'; the pamphlet had 
raised the issue in public and this had led to some debate in the 
newspapers. Since then several other bits of writing on the issue 
have reinforced the historians' doubts. But when have doubts and 
debates among historians ever been able to prevent politicians from 
launching forth in rath yatras if the yatras were expected to lead to 
ministerial chairs?

In some ways, the Ayodhya dispute is a good pointer to the making of 
historical `facts'. While Ayodhya itself is mentioned in medieval 
Indian texts and while a connection between Ayodhya and Ram is also 
recorded, for example in the Ain-i Akbari of the historian Abul Fazl, 
written at the end of the sixteenth century, no one in medieval India 
has spoken of the existence of a Ram temple demolished to make way 
for the Babri Masjid. Babur himself records his visit to Ayodhya 
twice on the same page in his memoirs, the Babur Nama, but does not 
mention a Ram temple nor the mosque built in his name by his general 
Mir Baqi.

Nor do later historians, some of them very dogmatic Muslims, some 
others devout Hindus. Nor indeed do poets and writers, either Hindu 
or Muslim, speak of either a Ram temple or the Babri Masjid. Not even 
Goswami Tulsi Das, Ram's greatest devotee, a resident of Ayodhya and 
almost an eye witness to the building of the masjid. Nor is there any 
record of a popular tradition growing in the region linking a 
particular site with the birth of Ram, earlier than perhaps the 
eighteenth century. For we have a court document of 1822 in the 
Persian language, submitted to the Faizabad law court by its 
superintendent, one Hafizullah, testifying that the masjid was built 
at the site of Ram janmasthan. This is the first evidence 
establishing the link. Clearly, a tradition had begun to evolve 
sometime prior to its recording. However, the document still does not 
speak of a temple, much less of a Ram temple. In the nineteenth 
century by and by the story of the existence of a temple there came 
into circulation and by the 1870s the identification of the temple 
with Ram had been established. The link between Ram temple and the 
masjid has a history of no more than 150 years behind it. It has 
nothing to do with Babur's demolition of an existing Ram temple which 
the Parivar wishes to restore to salvage the Hindus' national pride 
or at least to fetch votes. And now archaeology has put paid to 
whatever doubts might have remained on the score of historical 
records.

However, as the dispute hotted up in the late 1980s, the VHP put up 
stalls outside the precincts of the Masjid and hung garishly coloured 
tin boards with blood curdling tales, written in grammatically 
atrocious Hindi, about how every time Babur's masons sought to put a 
dome on top of the masjid it would collapse. In the end, some 
mysterious voice spoke to Babur demanding the shedding of the blood 
of a couple of lakhs of Hindus for the dome to get stabilised. This 
was duly done and hence the masjid came to be erected. The stories 
were meant for the benefit of the crowds of visitors, the potential 
kar sevaks as well contributors to the VHP funds; clearly the authors 
did not need to pitch the stories at any higher level of 
intelligence, or even grammatically correct language. History was in 
the making! Perhaps if the Parivar had fetched enough majority by 
itself in the Lok Sabha, this kind of history teaching would have 
become obligatory in the schools and colleges as well.

In the end of course it is votes that matter, not history. Since it 
is getting clear that Ayodhya wouldn't fetch votes any more - it is 
very doubtful if it did the last time either - the BJP is willing to 
become moderate and jettison the strident voices within the Parivar, 
the VHP in particular. Sibling rivalry at its worst; even so it is 
good news. For all its bluster, the VHP has no popular support as was 
evident after the arrest of two of its leading lights in Madhya 
Pradesh and Rajasthan, when not a blade of grass stirred. The bluster 
works only under the protection of state power.

Those who understand Indian culture and history - and the VHP is not 
among them - know that extremism is completely alien to all its 
religions, be it Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism or Indian 
Islam. Occasional bursts of extremist action in these religious 
communities notwithstanding, no community has a history of sustained 
support to militant ideology and consequent prolonged violence. It is 
to this history that India needs to return, not the kind that was 
inscribed on those garish tin boards at Ayodhya and which VHP leaders 
like Praveen Togadia and Ashok Singhal still seem to spew at every 
available opportunity, particularly if there are TV cameras around. 
The next time you watch a debate on the TV just watch out for the 
body language of representative participants. The paradox will hit 
you hard; it would even have been amusing if it were less tragic for 
the nation.

(The writer is Professor of Medieval History, JNU.)

_____


#4.

The Hindustan Times
=46riday, June 27, 2003  

More loyal than the king?
Praful Bidwai
  It's a sign of the great distance India has travelled that its 
government - which was long proud of its independent and non-aligned 
stand - is seriously thinking of despatching 20,000 troops to Iraq in 
aid of that country's Anglo-American occupation.

If India does send the troops, it will become the second largest 
occupying force in Iraq, greater than even Britain, America's most 
fiercely servile global ally. The 20,000 troops represent over six 
times the number of soldiers offered by the US's other Nato partners 
who supported the Iraq war (which India didn't).

Thus, Berlusconi's far-right Italian government has committed no more 
than 3,000 troops. And Poland (which will control one of the four 
military sectors in Iraq) is sending only 2,300, as is Spain. This 
disproportion is far more significant than the issue of whom Indian 
soldiers report to - the US or UN.

A weird test is being imposed on India. Quite simply, it must choose 
between morality, the preference of its own people (87 per cent of 
whom opposed Iraq's invasion) and its unanimous Parliament 
resolution, on the one hand, and the slavish acceptance of, and 
collusion with, one of the most cynically devised projects for global 
domination, on the other.

Let's not mince words. The Anglo-American occupation of Iraq is 
unjust and illegal for the same reasons and in the same measure as 
Iraq's invasion which produced it. You can't oppose the war and 
support the occupation - unless you are a morally challenged 
schizophrenic.

If you are schizophrenic, then you certainly have no right to play 
with the lives of soldiers and offer them as cannon fodder to a 
project which you were no part of, which was written in violation of 
the principles (of equity, rule of law, multilateralism and peaceful 
resolution of international disputes) which you profess, and which is 
certain to produce grave human tragedy and political mayhem in West 
Asia, aggravating resentments which fuel terrorism the world over.

Yet, the counsel of despair and cynicism that's being gratuitously 
offered to us says India faces a 'historic' choice: If it wants to 
project its power outside South Asia, this is its chance. If India 
wants to partner the US in 'stabilising' the situation in our region 
and beyond, on terms favourable to us, especially as regards 
Pakistan, its leaders must show they can break out of 'old' (read, 
independent) mindsets.

Not even Machiavelli would permit such a violent dichotomy between 
morality and politics, and sever power from its purposes, most 
important, from legitimacy. Without legitimacy, power itself becomes 
unviable.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq cannot be separated from 
systematic, conscious, deliberate fabrication of evidence, distortion 
of intelligence and manipulation of minds, all of it undertaken by 
the US and British governments over many months. Overwhelming 
evidence has emerged of all this.

States don't practise deception on this scale, nor cynically plant 
concocted stories on embedded journalists (e.g. Jessica Lynch's 
'rescue', 'toppling' of Saddam's statue or 'discovery' of mobile WMD 
labs) unless they have a larger motive.

In the present case, that has to do with destroying inconvenient 
regimes, redrawing political maps, grabbing resources and 
establishing the rule of the mightiest in a new world order - through 
sheer brigandage.

India cannot be part of this hideous, crassly imperial project 
without losing or unhinging its own political moorings. India will 
undermine itself and destroy all its political capital and goodwill 
in the Arab world by shooting and mowing down Iraqis who are fighting 
against their occupation through an increasingly organised 
resistance. Iraq's 'stabilisation' is war by another name.

By waging it, India will get sucked into a terrible morass, which 
American hamhandedness has done so much to catalyse. There may be no 
exit from the Iraqi quagmire for middle-level players like India for 
a long time and absolutely no control over the circumstances of the 
occupation.

Nor can New Delhi support the daylight robbery in progress in Iraq 
without forfeiting its own claims about rule of law and fairness in 
economic transactions. The entire $ 13 billion remaining in 
oil-for-food accounts there is being transferred to the 'Development 
=46und for Iraq' managed by Peter McPherson, of Bank of America, no 
less.

The fund is under exclusive US control and will receive all future 
proceeds from Iraqi oil sales ($ 20 billion a year) without any time 
limit. The arrangement that created it can only be changed by an 
affirmative Security Council vote (vulnerable to veto). That's how 
America will pay for Iraq's 'reconstruction' and war reparations to 
itself.

This mocks at the occupation powers' obligations under the Geneva 
Conventions - Article 55 of the Fourth Convention and Article 69 of 
the First Protocol - to pay the costs of providing food, medicine, 
shelter, etc., to occupied people during war and its aftermath. It 
also undermines international law and all principles of natural 
justice.

It won't do to argue that India shouldn't make a fuss about US 
unilateralism because it didn't consult the UN before intervening in 
Bangla-desh (1971) or Sri Lanka (1987). Bangladesh's liberation was a 
just war. The Iraq war wasn't. In 1971, one could credibly cite 
defence and economic security - not by invoking expansionist, 
aggressively defined, 'national interest'. The second intervention 
was a disaster.

If India's true national interest has something to do with universal 
moral principles, independence in policy and opposition to hegemony, 
pillage and Empire, we must categorically, and unhesitatingly, refuse 
to send troops to Iraq.


_____


#5.


26 June 2003

Dear Friends,

=46or the first time in South Asia, Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group is
organising a course on Forced Migration so that students from South Asia
need not go to other universities in Europe and United States to understand
the issues involved in forced migration and work for better care and
rehabilitation of displaced people.  We need your help in publicising the
course. The description is given below.

Warmly,
Paula Banerjee
(Course Coordinator, MCRG)

______________________________________________

Annual CRG Winter Course on Forced Migration

The Calcutta Research Group will hold in Calcutta from 1 December to 15
December 2003 the first Annual CRG Winter Course on Forced Migration. The
course is an outcome of the ongoing and past work by the Calcutta Research
Group (CRG), and other collaborating groups, institutions, scholars, and
human rights and humanitarian activists in the field of refugee studies and
the broad studies on displacement, human rights and humanitarian work for
the victims of forced displacement, and policy analysis of laws and
administrative measures in this field. The course will be special because of
its emphasis on experiences of forced displacement, creative writings on
refugee life, nature of internal displacement, critical legal analysis,
analysis of notions of vulnerability, care, risk, protection, and
settlement, and attention on gender concerns as an integral part of the
course.

The course intends to serve multiple objectives - study, training, capacity
building, and pooling of available resources in displacement studies. The
programme involves several university departments and personnel, and other
institutions working in this area. It will draw attention to the benchmark
set by national and international human rights and humanitarian laws and
principles, and the experiences of the relevant organisations and
front-ranking personnel.

In the matter of norms for selection of participants, attention will be
given to the understanding of the concept of forced migration, gender
concerns, experience of working in refugee camps and camps of the internally
displaced, institutional sponsorship, ensuring a combination of activist and
academic attributes, proper recommendations, and applicant's understanding
about possible benefits of the course, and her ideas about follow up.

Participants will have to pay registration fee, and travel scholarships will
be given on selective basis.

The following modules will be basis of the course syllabus:

=B7         Nationalisms, ethnicities, partitions, and partition-refugees
=B7         Gendered nature of forced migration, victim-hood, and
gender-justice
=B7         International regime of protection, sovereignty and the principl=
e
of responsibility, and political issues relating to regional trends in
migration in South Asia
=B7         Resource politics, environmental degradation, and forced migrati=
on
=B7         Internal displacement - causes, linkages, and responses
=B7         Ethics and practices of care and protection in South Asia

In course activities besides the writing assignments, there will be workshop
assignments, group discussions, field visit, creative sessions, review
discussions, and face-to-face sessions with resource persons experienced in
related areas.

The course will include visual studies. Short introductory notes on each
module will be sent to the participants; along with these notes, lists,
bibliographies, and other announcements will be posted. In text-based
discussions there will be a combination of classics in displacement studies
and other studies and material.

The reading material will be sent to the participants in a phased manner;
there will be lead-questions and discussion points sent along with the
material; e-groups will be formed for discussion, each participant will
write in this period a 1000 word review note on any of the material sent to
them, which will be circulated among the participants; faculty members will
be involved in the discussion; and CRG team on forced displacement studies
will facilitate the exchange of views.

Course assistants will be trained to become future course organisers. The
course assistants will be drawn from ex-participants.

Applicants must (a) have 3 years experience in the work of protection of the
victims of forced displacement, or must hold post-graduate degree in Social
Sciences or Liberal Arts, and (b) have proficiency in English. Besides
giving all necessary particulars, an application must be accompanied by an
appropriate recommendation letter and a 500-1000 word write-up on how the
programme is relevant to the applicant's work and may benefit the applicant.
Selected candidates will have to pay Rs. 2000/ each as registration fee. CRG
will bear accommodation and other course expenses for all participants, and
will offer limited number of travel grants. Applications, addressed to the
Course Coordinator, can be sent by e-mail or post, and must reach the
following address by 15 July - Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group, 5B
Mahanirban Road, Kolkata - 700029, Email: mcrg@cal.vsnl.net.in

The supporting institutions are the UNHCR, the Government of Finland, and
the Brookings Institution.


CRG team on forced displacement studies

Krishna Banerjee
Paula Banerjee
Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury
Aditi Bhaduri
Pradip K. Bose
Subhas Chakraborty
B.S. Chimni
Samir K. Das
Asha Hans
Rajesh Kharat
Ritu Menon
Ranabir Samaddar
Priyankar Upadhyay


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

SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (www.mnet.fr/aiindex).
The complete SACW archive is available at: http://sacw.insaf.net

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.