SACW | 26 July, 2003
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at mnet.fr
Sat Jul 26 04:25:07 CDT 2003
South Asia Citizens Wire | 26 July, 2003
[1.] Pakistan: Slay the sectarian dragon! (Masooda Bano)
[2.] Pakistan - India: Brides cross borders without visas (Iftikhar Gilani)
[3.] The Brothers Sahni - Bhisham and Balraj were of a band joined in
social commitment (Ashok Mitra)
[4.] India: Uniform Civil Code
- Why I support the Uniform Civil Code (Tariq Ansari)
- AIDWA hails SC remark
- Common Unease (Edit, the Telegraph)
- Bleeding heart, jerking knee (Shekhar Gupta)
[5.] A comment on Ananya Kabir's 'Partition of 1947..' (Pritam Singh)
[6.] An Evening with Tarun Tejpal (New York City, July 28, 2003)
[7.] Seeking refuge from refuge-seekers - Leafing through a book
edited by Ranabir Samaddar on Indian policy on refugees since 1947
(Anjana Rajan)
- Refugees and the State - Practices of Asylum and Care in India,
1947-2000 Edited by: Ranabir Samaddar
[8.] Special issue of 'Satyashodhak Prabodhan' from Pune, India
--------------
[1.]
The News International [Pakistan]
July 25, 2003
Slay the sectarian dragon!
Masooda Bano
In hardly a fortnight, the horror and shock of fifty Shias killed
while inside a mosque in Quetta is already ebbing down. Like most
traumatic experiences in Pakistan, after the initial shock and grief,
that passive acceptance seems to have set in that these events are a
sad fact of life in a country where state machinery remains
uncommitted and incompetent to address these problems. But, pressure
has to be built on the state to make more strategic and planned
interventions in controlling the menace of sectarian violence in
Pakistan that is dividing the society, making life of citizens
insecure, bringing a bad name to Islam, and further marring Pakistani
image in the western world. There is increasing need for public, or
call it "civil society", to play an active role in creating pressure
on the state to address the root causes of this problem and to say
that this violence in the name of Islam has to end. Side by side
people need to take measures at public level to restrain this
violence.
Since the eighties Pakistan has been seeing a steady rise in
sectarian violence. Within two decades the phenomenon has
demonstrated itself with such frequency that it seems that it is here
to stay. But, despite the moral, economic, emotional and religious
stress it creates for the Pakistani citizenry, the various
governments have failed to put enough energy into controlling this
menace. Increasingly, the feeling that the state gives is that to
control the sectarian violence is beyond its capacity.
An incidence of sectarian violence is followed by much hue and cry by
the state about extremist sectarian groups, but instead of
controlling these groups, the hue and cry lasts only temporarily and
ends by further reinforcing the power of these groups in the public
mind. It is time to stop and question why the state, especially which
is currently in the hand of a General and is thus capable of taking
strong military action if need be against any violent groups, is
failing to curb this violence. In order to unravel this problem, it
will help to see the standard reaction of Pakistani governments to
these incidences of sectarian violence.
An incidence of sectarian violence is followed by four main actions
by Pakistani government. One, immediately statements are made that
the opposing sectarian groups (Sunni groups in case of attack on
Shias, and Shia groups in case of attacks on Sunnis) are responsible
for these attacks. Rather than each incidence being investigated to
its depth, after the initial attention of the first week, it is added
to the long list of sectarian attacks. Two, depending on the severity
of the incidence, measured by the number of people dead, some
government officials, who are no more or less accountable than the
state structure as a whole for that particular incidence, are either
dismissed, suspended, or forced to hand in resignation.
Three, the top executives of the country starts to hint at possible
Indian involvement in the event without providing any proof of it.
Four, the issue of foreign funding of these rival groups is
highlighted to show that it is not entirely a domestic issue for
which the Pakistani state should take all responsibility but is a
consequence of divide between Shias and Sunnis at the global level.
Theories about how Saudi government funds Sunni groups, and Iranian
government funds Shia groups are part of any guess talk on issue of
sectarian violence in Pakistan.
But, government attention to such events seems extremely temporary
lasting only till the time that the media actively covers the issue
which normally is not more than three to four days. After that the
state seems to forget the event and rarely are the true culprits ever
caught. The cycle of sectarian violence continues unchecked. There is
no denying that sectarian violence is a very complex issue, and it is
not simple to identify what exactly is driving it. Religiously
fanaticism, financial or political gains for certain groups or
individuals, external involvement, poverty, all can be contributing
factors to it. But, what is important to remember is that while it is
a complex issue to solve, it is not at the same time impossible.
There are solutions available for every thing provided individuals or
nations are committed to solving the root causes of the problem.
If the extremist religious groups are responsible for all horrific
events, then what is stopping the state from completely clamping down
on these groups? Why can military, police, and intelligence not use
all its force to eliminate these groups? If these groups are willing
to kill thousands of innocent people in the name of Islam then why
can't the state kill them as part of its duty to protect its
citizens, and retain the integrity of the country?
Similarly, if these groups are gaining strength by getting money from
external sources, then why is the state not actively trying to
control the flow of such money? We are always begging international
development agencies for dollars, can't we request some international
help in monitoring the flow of money from external sources to these
groups which are threatening the peace of this country. It might not
be possible to fully control the flow of finances but putting in
stringent checks can at least make the process much more difficult.
Sectarian violence is not an easy issue to handle but at the same
time it is not impossible either. It is important to emphasise this
as that determines the approach a society takes towards a given
issue. If the state starts giving the impression that the problem is
too big to handle then it will never solve the problem because the
morale goes down and not enough energies are put in the issue. On the
other hand if a job is started with the belief that it can be
achieved, then a different momentum takes over and success becomes
much more attainable. Sectarian violence is one of those issues in
Pakistan where what is lacking is the commitment and the drive on the
part of the state to tackle the issue.
There is a major need for public to play a much more active role in
solving this problem. People have to start putting pressure on the
state to make this issue its top priority. Public marches,
demonstrations, letters to top executives, articles in the media, all
can be used to create this pressure. NGOs can also build a forum to
demand solution of this problem and monitor whether the government is
actually doing something to solve the problem. Also, there is
critical need for a scientific study to be carried out to understand
the various factors that are actually behind this violence. Social
science has a major role to play here. If the government is failing
to carry out such a study, why should not some NGOs and think tanks
carry out in depth analysis of the root causes of this problem?
Finally, the head of various religious organisations, which are not
extremist and they are the majority, should come together and
undertake a public drive to cleanse the society of the tensions
between the various religious sects. If there are extremist religious
groups killing each other, the genuine religious organisations should
undertake a similarly aggressive drive asking for an end for this
violence in the name of Islam. Much can be done; what is needed is a
mindset that this absurdity has to end.
_____
[2.]
The Daily Times [Pakistan]
July 26, 2003
Brides cross borders without visas
By Iftikhar Gilani
NEW DELHI: For years people living near the borders of Jammu and
Kashmir, and Rajasthan sectors have been violating Indian and
Pakistani visa restrictions despite wavering relations between the
two countries.
Rajasthan police recently found that the people in the border areas
were even exchanging brides across the border. Police sources said at
least eight Pakistani brides are living in the border district of
Jaisalmer alone. Till the onset of disturbances in Jammu and Kashmir,
young women used to walk across the Line of Control (LoC),
particularly in Jammu sector, without fear, but these family contacts
have almost stopped since shelling and exchange of mortars between
troops became a daily affair. A border resident told a visiting
Indian reporter in Jaisalmer, "life has been like this in the desert
since Pakistan came into existence. Marriage parties will continue to
come and go on either side of the border no matter what the relations
are between the two countries and despite stricter visa controls."
Sources said marriage parties were said to have been exchanging
visits secretly since partition. This exchange of brides was
highlighted when a local daily in Rajasthan reported the arrest of
Sumaira, the Pakistani daughter-in-law of Badhu Khan of Asutar Bandha
village in Jaisalmer. Sumaira was arrested on Wednesday under Section
14 of the Foreigners Act. The newspaper said, "The police and
intelligence detectives in Jaisalmer arrested Sumaira living
illegally in the Devikot area of the district."
_____
[3.]
The Telegraph [India]
July 25, 2003
THE BROTHERS SAHNI
- Bhisham and Balraj were of a band joined in social commitment
CUTTING CORNERS ASHOK MITRA
Hindi unfortunately is not a patch on Urdu. Munshi Premchand, whose
early education was in a madrasah, knew it. He wrote his first novel
in Urdu. But he was in a dilemma: the lie of the linguistic land was
such that were he to aim at a broader reach for his social
commentary, a cross-over to Hindi was called for. Premchand took the
plunge: Hindi's gain was Urdu's loss.
The dilemma has not been resolved through the decades of the 20th
century. Both the grandeur and the languor of Urdu continue to be
alien to Hindi. Perhaps, given a sufficiently long interregnum, this
gap in quality between the two languages will be bridged. That is in
the lap of the future though. Meanwhile, we can only express our
private laments. It was not Bhisham Sahni's fault that the sweep of
his creations falls somewhat short of Sadat Hasan Manto's. It is
entirely possible that by the time we arrive toward the middle of the
present century, Manto would be recognized as the great writer he
was. Bhisham Sahni will not be that fortunate, because of the
happenstance of his choosing Hindi as his medium. Both were keen to
explore the lower depths of human existence: Manto chose the
particular; Sahni opted for the general. This should have won Bhisham
Sahni more laurels than he did. Hindi held him back.
In Lahore in the late Thirties and the Forties, the bright
generations emerging out of the Government College were as felicitous
in Urdu as in Hindi, and probably in English too. Something else made
them much more than a loose flock; they had their band of camaraderie
in social commitment. The purity of the dream the tidings of the
Russian Revolution helped to weave together was still uncontaminated.
Few of the obituaries on Bhisham Sahni have bothered to mention that
he was the sibling of Balraj Sahni. The brothers were, right from
their callow youth, fiercely determined to change the face of
society. They shared their enthusiasm with near-contemporaries like
Mazhar Ali Khan, and Faiz Ahmed Faiz, the left-over Bukharis, Inder
and Satish Gujral, Romesh Thapar and Romesh Chandra - and the two
charmers, Raj Malhotra (later Thapar) and Litto Rai (later Ghosh),
who broke countless hearts. Lahore was in ferment in those years.
The Government College crowd would occasionally drop in at Sharada
Ukil's studio, take seriously to dramatics, and, what do you know,
since Madhu Bose, shooting a film with Khyber Pass as the locale, had
chosen Lahore as his base camp, Sadhana Bose bewitched the Government
College boys and girls, cinematography was very much in the air. And
the sprawling college lawns produced not only a cricketer of the
calibre of Abdal Hafiz Kardar, but also those two elegant
ace-servers, Sohanlal and S.L.R. Sawhney.
Through time, ideology gets diluted, or at least it goes through
mutations. What however guided the fate of the young Lahore
luminaries more grievously was the Partition. It split the country,
split the magisterial province of Punjab and left in its train gory
deaths and indescribable savagery. It was impossible for the seekers
after social revolution as they envisaged it to get over the trauma
of the Partition for the rest of their lives. Each was affected in
his or her individual way. For some, the felt hurt was much more
intense than in the case of some others. Manto, who did not belong to
the sophisticated Government College fraternity, could never get over
it. He wrote, spasmodically, on the immense human tragedy the
Partition was, shuffled for a number of years between Lahore and
Bombay, finally drank himself to death.
Bhisham Sahni was more practical. He could analyse the Partition as
the parting kick administered by imperialism. The fight against
imperialism was never removed from his agenda, nor the urge to usher
in social and economic equality. Initially trying his hand at
playwriting, he soon migrated to short stories and novels. The elder
brother, Balraj, shared the same convictions: he however migrated to
a different medium, films. The brothers had a common focal point.
They hated cant and, while they made money, they did not feel the
least inhibited to make fun of the moneyed lot.
In due course, Bhisham acquired amongst Hindi writers the same
stature as, for instance, Nirmal Verma attained subsequently, even
though the latter perhaps has had a greater share of state honours.
That did not bother Bhisham Sahni. For his generosity was of a
breathtaking character.
Legacy always matters. For Manto, the lineage to Kishan Chander, some
years senior to him, is unmistakable: there is the same cynicism, but
Manto's self-mockery would not have received Kishan Chander's
approval. In the case of Bhisham Sahni, the commanding influence was
of course Premchand's. A misfortune of our times, the language
Premchand and Bhisham Sahni had chosen for themselves is being
hijacked by the parivar for its nefarious purposes. Should it succeed
in its manoeuvring, Hindi literature would experience a further
set-back. The works of both Premchand and Sahni would nonetheless
endure, even if as samizdat stuff, hopefully to be reclaimed for
posterity once the season of crudity was over.
Bhisham Sahni was much more than the author of Tamas or Amritsar Aa
Gaya, just as Balraj Sahni is much more than the protesting hero of
the searing tragedy, Do Bigha Zameen. They were, let it be
reiterated, an integral part of the heritage bequeathed by Lahore
Government College. This heritage has been rendered into smithereens
by the travails of history.
But some of it lingers in rarefied circles in India and Pakistan:
decency, fellow-feeling, sensitivity for aesthetics, abhorrence of
sectarian communalism, empathy with the underdog. Music, painting,
acting, film-making, editing, participation in active politics, et
al, were facets of the mode and manners that tradition taught. One
became successful in life, one built palatial houses, one climbed
from one pinnacle of power and glory to the next higher one, but the
decency and the social conscience did not go away. Most of the Lahore
Government College crowd retained - those still living retain - the
grace which the college ambience imbued them with and the philosophy
of neighbourliness that was an inevitable part of it.
This was perhaps bound to happen. In recollections, the two brothers,
Balraj and Bhisham, tended to be hyphenated. It was always the
Balraj-Bhisham duo, so much so that, even as these lines are being
written, it is difficult to be precise which brother it was who was
invited by the Jawaharlal Nehru University decades ago to give its
annual convocation address. That was an ecstatic experience. It was a
different kind of address, no written script, the Sahni who spoke to
the girls and boys and the assembled glitterati spoke extempore, but
he spoke from the heart. And he chose issues which usually escape the
entrapment of university syllabi, but are basic to the culture of
living: he spoke about commitment and social activism.
Come to think of it, it does not matter even if one's memory has gone
awry, whether the person addressing the convocation was actually
Balraj, not Bhisham, or it was the other way round. For while the
brothers preferred different media, they spoke the same language, the
language which enables one to get on the same wave-length with
ordinary men and women. The endeavour does not always succeed, the
wavelengths fail to meet, the nobi-lity of the effort still deserves
accolade.
The Sahni brothers belonged to that group of effort-makers. One
brother bid adieu years ago, the other one bowed out only this month.
It is a sad, but fair, assumption that neither departure means
anything to the generation currently thronging the corridors of the
country's universities; they have other preoccupations, for instance,
H1B visas and slashed immigration quotas.
_____
[4.]
Mid Day [Bombay, India]
July 25, 2003
Why I support the Uniform Civil Code
By: Tariq Ansari
The Supreme Court has once again set the cat amongst the pigeons on
the matter of a Common Civil Code. Gloating and breast beating has
commenced on all sides of the politico-social spectrum. As an Indian
Muslim I would like very much to be heard.
Let's get some ridiculous myths out of the way first:
Myth 1: All Muslims are opposed to a Common Civil Code.
Clearly, this is not the case. I am one who is not, as are many others.
Myth 2: The Muslim Personal Law gives Muslims some great benefits
that are being withheld from non-Muslims.
Nothing can be further from the truth. The personal law only gives
Muslims the right to be governed by Shariah principles in the
personal matters of marriage, inheritance, property rights and
religious observance. Commercial and criminal law is the same for all
Indians.
So why do I support a common law for all Indians in civil matters?
For four very good reasons.
There are at least six schools of jurisprudence among Muslims, four
among Sunnis and two among Shias. The Indian Muslim Personal Law is a
curious amalgam of principles from different schools, but most
particularly the Hanafi branch of Sunni legal belief.
While most Indian Muslims are from this sect, our so-called Muslim
Personal Law does not cover large numbers of Muslims, who prefer
their own interpretation of Shariah law. Therefore, this is hardly in
conformity with pure Quranic practice, as the more extreme elements
among the Muslim clergy would have us believe.
I believe the most important demand that Muslims should make in
secular India is that we are treated equally. That we have equal
rights and opportunities as all other Indians and that the State will
afford us the same protection of our rights and property as it would
Hindus. I do not believe Muslims can make that demand when at the
same time we want to be treated differently in matters of personal
law. This is an unreconcilable inconsistency.
At least half of all Muslims are badly served by the Muslim Personal
Law. Triple talaq, no rights to maintenance (thank you, Rajiv
Gandhi!) and subordinate rights of inheritance are all examples of
how my Muslim sisters labour under an unfair and, dare I say it,
unIslamic set of regulations. I have a daughter and if she should
want to marry a Muslim it will be under the Special Marriages Act,
thank you very much.
This ridiculous Muslim Personal Law is a convenient stick for Hindu
communalists to beat Muslims with. Giving us the right to be governed
by our own personal law gives them the right to claim that we are
some kind of privileged minority with a suspect commitment to the
Indian Republic. Take away the law and deprive Pravin Togadia of the
stick.
However, I would also like to raise two very specific and critical
qualifications to my support of the Supreme Court mention. We cannot
move towards a Common Civil Code without absolute clarity on these
matters:
Understand and do something about the fundamental reasons why Indian
Muslims cling to their own Personal Law. Deep within the psyche of
the Mussalman is a fear of disenfranchisement, of complete loss of
identity and marginalisation within Indian society.
Every time you burn homes in Gujarat, every time you treat Urdu as an
alien tongue, every time a Muslim boy loses a job opportunity thanks
to discrimination and every time Mr Togadia hints darkly at 'the
enemy within,' you compound the siege mentality.
When everything is taken away, goes the ghetto belief, let us cling
tightly to what we are. The Muslim Personal Law, sadly, has become
one of the symbols of identity, an identity under threat.
A Common Civil Code must imply that ALL citizens are covered under
the same laws on civil and commercial matters.
Let us dismantle at the same time, special privileges under the Hindu
United Family provisions as also any special laws governing the
personal affairs of Christians, Parsis, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs
as well as other groups like the Nairs of Kerala who follow the
principles of matrilineal descent.
Do away not only with Muslim Personal Law but also other laws on the
statute books that grant legal sanctity to unique practices of the
diverse communities of India.
As an Indian Muslim I wholeheartedly support the idea of a Common
Civil Code. It is a fair and equitable Directive Principle of the
Constitution of India. Let us, however, understand this matter in its
entirety, away from the hysterical jubilation and frantic wailing of
communalists on both sides.
One people. One law.
Yes, for sure!
o o o
The Hindu, July 25, 2003
AIDWA hails SC remark
By Our Staff Correspondent
NEW DELHI JULY 24. The All India Democratic Women's Association
(AIDWA) has welcomed the Supreme Court suggestion of a common civil
code in the country.
The AIDWA general secretary, Brinda Karat, said today that the apex
court recommendations to the Government to implement a common civil
code resurrects an issue that in the current political context has
become an instrument to further the narrow agendas of a communal
platform directed against the minority communities.
Uniformity between laws is surely a goal that all societies must
strive for, but if it becomes an imposition through coercion, as it
will, then it will have disastrous effects on national integration,
she said.
"For women of all communities the issue is not so much uniformity of
law but gender equality within laws. Personal laws of all communities
without exception whether Hindu, Muslim, Christian or any other,
include the most discriminatory clauses against women. But instead of
redressing these issues, women's rights are becoming a pawn in the
hands of the fundamentalists of all communities, who block such
reform,'' Ms. Karat said.
o o o
The Telegraph
July 25, 2003
Editorial
COMMON UNEASE
It never seems the right time to talk about the uniform civil code.
Yet not only is it one of the directive principles of the
Constitution, but in practice too the dominance of the personal law
in matters of marriage, succession and property among different
religious communities creates unjustifiable inequities that cannot be
corrected without the application of a common civil law. It is not
surprising that the Supreme Court has suggested that a UCC be
formulated, while ruling on a provision of the Indian Succession Act
which imposes restrictions on Christians wishing to bequeath property
to charitable institutions. This is not the first time the court has
asked for a common civil code, but it is certainly the first time
that it has framed its argument in such clear-cut terms. According to
the court, Article 25 and 26, guaranteeing freedom of conscience and
free profession, practice and propagation of religion and the freedom
to manage religious affairs, are in no way undermined by Article 44,
which asks for a uniform civil code.
The Supreme Court has taken care to clarify the idea that links and
divides the provisions. Matters relating to marriage, succession and
similar matters cannot be brought under a provision guaranteeing
religious freedom, hence Article 25 and Article 44 are mutually
exclusive. What the court has tried to do is to distinguish firmly
between the civil and the religious in a "civilized society", and
indicate that such a distinction is inscribed in the Constitution
itself. It is true that the Constitution is rather tentative in this
as in certain other sensitive matters, relying perhaps on the
interpretation of a later age according to its needs. But the secular
spirit is best expressed in this set of provisions, and it is this
that the court has enlarged on.
As usual, the reaction in political circles is mixed, an evasive
combination of caution, righteousness, concern for minority
sentiments - vote bank, that is - and blatant elation from groups
better kept out of the debate. For the Bharatiya Janata Party, this
is all to the good; the UCC had been on its initial programme. Time
and experience have sobered the party somewhat, else it would have
displayed its elation openly too. Now it has decided to persuade its
allies and opposition. Unfortunately, the murmuring opposition
parties have a point. The distrust of the minorities towards the
Hindutva forces has grown to such an extent during the BJP-led
regime, that any talk of a UCC will inevitably raise hackles. That is
why even the women's organizations, which feel strongly that personal
laws are most damaging to women, are careful about "imposition" of a
common code. The change, many feel, must come from within the
communities themselves. Triumphalism from the Hindutvawallahs will
just hinder the process. But the Vishwa Hindu Parishad is already
gloating, with one of its slick arguments ready to hand: if the
minority community wants to abide by the court verdict in the case of
Ayodhya, it should do the same in the case of a UCC. But all these
bear auguries of ultimate inaction. That is what is most tragic: with
care, ceaseless dialogue and determination, the way to a common civil
code can still be forged.
o o o
The Indian Express
July 26, 2003
http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=28312
By stubbornly rejecting a uniform civil code, the Congress and
whatever's left of the liberals are ceding the civil rights agenda to
the loony right
Bleeding heart, jerking knee
Shekhar Gupta
In the normal course, the Supreme Court would make news if it came up
with a radically new interpretation of the Constitution. This is an
unusual occasion when it - in this case, the chief justice himself -
has made headlines for merely re-stating one of the directive
principles of the Constitution.
Chief Justice Khare's passing observation (obiter dicta) and regret
over the state's inability to bring in a uniform civil code has
caused such a commotion in Parliament and elsewhere. With a mere
passing observation the chief justice has, perhaps unintentionally,
revived the old debate on a uniform civil code for all communities.
The saffronites see in these remarks a vindication of a principle
they have been forced to put on the back-burner in the coalition
situation. The Congress is confused, as usual. And the Left, quite
predictably, is irritated, accusing the higher judiciary of getting
involved in too many things.
Only politics as confused as India's could have produced a situation
so loaded with contradictions. What did the founding fathers (mostly
Congressmen of one ideological shade or another) have in their minds
when they enshrined this directive principle in the Constitution?
These were after all the same wise men who made secularism one of the
central pillars of our republic. It could not have been their
intention to plant the seed of some awful anti-minorities idea in the
same august document. As with other directive principles, they were
only saying they thought these things are desirable for India but
because the time is not ripe, or perhaps because political discourse
is too immature yet, they were happy to be patient- meanwhile let us
all work together to create the environment where these 'ideals'
could be achieved.
A plain reading of the Constitution, simple analytical commentaries
on it in school textbooks (even of the pre-Murli Manohar Joshi
vintage) would tell you the founding fathers had seen it not as a sop
to the Hindu right then opposing the reformist Hindu Code Bill. They
had seen it as a modernising, empowering, civil rights issue.
The Constitution was written by people who were liberal, and
imaginative enough a half century ago to appreciate the secular
ideal. These were not communalists or pseudo-secularists and they saw
the problems in a republic, that constitutionally celebrated
diversity, with each community following its own set of personal laws.
First, this was always going to cause heartburn as each community saw
the others deriving undue benefits from its own peculiar set of laws
of marriage, family and inheritance. The Hindu men, for example,
would grudge the Muslims their four wives or easy, one-sided divorce,
the Muslims and Christians would resent the privilege the rich among
the majority gave themselves by way of the HUF (Hindu Undivided
Family) status, which allowed them to have two income tax accounts.
Second, and more importantly, they saw, in the continuation of so
many archaic, religion and tradition-based family laws a system
inherently unfair to women and, at any given point of time, to the
weaker member of a family.
Even Nehru never really repudiated the idea of a common civil code.
He said, repeatedly - and often in the context of the debate on the
Hindu Code Bill - that it was necessary to reform the Hindu personal
laws first, and then bother about the minorities.
You'd wonder how his own view on a common personal law would have
evolved had he, or Nehruvian politics, survived a little bit longer.
Could it be that, rather than cede this agenda entirely to the
saffron right, he would have actually followed the "directive" of the
Constitution and worked towards building a genuine, probably
de-polarised national consensus on essentially an issue of
modernisation and reform of family laws and women's rights?
As with much else, it would be tempting to blame the saffronites in
this case too for distorting the debate. After all when Pravin
Togadia talks of reforming Muslim personal law or improving the fate
of Muslim women or when Narendra Modi teaches them virtues of family
planning while hundreds of those who killed and raped Muslims and
burnt their houses walk free, they are not really advancing any great
ideas of the founding fathers.
But so unimaginative and intellectually bankrupt are the Congress and
whatever's left of the liberal Left that they have ceded, what should
have been a civil rights agenda aimed at bringing equity and fairness
to all, particularly women, to this loony right. It is probably
because of the short-sighted and vote-oriented way that Indira Gandhi
structured her post-1969 politics that the Congress psyched itself
into painting the very idea of the common personal law in deep
saffron.
Opposing it then became the cornerstone of its policy of appeasing
Muslim clerics who, it believed, controlled the minority votes for
ever. It paid in the short run. But it also led Rajiv Gandhi into
making what must rank among the four or five greatest political
blunders made in independent India.
Not only did he reverse through legislation the Supreme Court's
liberal, landmark judgement in the Shah Bano case, he also threw to
the wolves the man with the most liberal, modern, and genuinely
Muslim voice in his party. That was just after poor Arif Mohammed
Khan had made such a stirring speech in Parliament in defence of the
judgement that both, the right and the liberals, hailed it as one of
the most articulate expressions of the modern - and changing - Muslim
mind.
The rest is history, and it is still in the making. With that one
silly step Rajiv ultimately lost his party both the Muslim and the
Hindu votes in the Hindi heartland. He panicked when he saw the
disaster and compounded it by trying to please the Hindus by
re-opening the Ayodhya issue with an election-eve shilanyas. This
left the Muslims furious and Hindus, obviously, confused and
wondering as to who, among the Rajiv-Buta Singh Congress and the Real
McCoy. The choice was obvious: the BJP.
See the reversal of fortunes. Then, Rajiv Gandhi reversed a liberal
Supreme Court judgement to strike a blow for communalism on both
sides. This made the Ayodhya-Babri issue the monster it is now. Now
the same Congress and the liberal Left want the same Supreme Court to
somehow solve Ayodhya for them. One would imagine Chief Justice Khare
- and his brother judges - should have more to complain about than
merely the non-implementation of a common personal law.
[...].
______
[5.]
A comment on Ananya Kabir's 'Partition of 1947..'
Pritam Singh
This is a brief comment on Ananya Kabir's article 'Partition of 1947:
The Necessity of Anti-Sentimentalism' published in the SACW bulletin
of July 23, 2003.
It is a well written piece and I enjoyed reading it. I will confine
myself to commenting on only one generalisation she makes regarding
post-partition Punjabs and Bengals where I differ with her. Kabir
writes," After all, the history and politics of 'thrice-partitioned'
Bengal present a picture dramatically divergent from post-Partition
Punjab.Š. the successful post-Partition integration of Punjab on both
sides of the border can be contrasted with Bengal's decline in South
Asia, with West Bengal and East Pakistan having been marginalized
vis-_-vis their respective political centres-that, in the case of
West Bengal, can be seen as part of the North-East's decline." This
broad generalisation glosses over hugely significant differences
between the West Punjab's relations with the Centre in Pakistan and
the East Punjab's differences with the Centre in India in the
post-1947 period. It also suggests that the East Punjab has been
successfully integrated with the Centre in India and tries to
contrast this with the marginalisation of W Bengal vis-à-vis the
Centre.
Let me first deal with the differences between the two Punjabs in
their relation with their respective Centre. West Punjab in Pakistan
occupies a position of over-whelming dominance in the political power
structure of the country. Punjabis in Pakistan are a majority
linguistic-ethnic group to such an extent that it would not be wrong
to say that they equate Punjab with Pakistan. Some critics of the
Punjabi domination in Pakistan have characterised this as
"Punjabisation of Pakistan" (See Yunus Samad, 'Pakistan or
Punjabistan: Crisis of National Identity", International Journal of
Punjab Studies, Vol.2 No.1, January-June, 1995, pp23-42). This
Punjabi domination in Pakistan does not mean, however, that it has
led to the development of Punjabi language, literature and identity
in Pakistani Punjab. On the contrary, Punjabi elites' identification
with the ideology of Pakistan has had an adverse impact on the
development of Punjabi language and identity in Pakistan. Punjabi
language and identity has been systematically ignored and repressed
in the language and cultural policy of the Pakistani state. The
dominant Punjabi elite's worry that highlighting its linguistic and
regional identity would legitimise and encourage other linguistic and
regional identities in Pakistan, has led this elite to disown its own
language and regional identity. Protecting its power interests in
Pakistan demands that this elite harps only on the over-arching
ideology of Pakistani nationalism at the cost of regional identities
including its own Punjabi identity.This elite's conflict with Bengali
nationalism which eventually led to the creation of Bangladesh was
borne out of this logic of the power structure in Pakistan. It is
the same logic which pits this Punjabi elite against the Sindhi,
Balauchi and Pathan identities in Pakistan.
Compared with the dominant place of West Punjab in Pakistan, the East
Punjab in India is a tiny state (in area and population) in
comparison with the majority of the other states in India. The
over-played success of the Green Revolution in Punjab hides various
levels of marginality of Punjab in India. Punjab is an
insignificant player in the dynamics of power politics at the Centre.
It sends only 13 members to the Lok Sabha i.e. less than even Assam
(14). Far from being successfully integrated with the Centre, it is
one state which has had a continuous history of troubled relationship
with the Centre. It was the last state where the nationally agreed
policy of demarcating states on the basis of language was implemented
( as late as in 1966) after a series of very long and bitter
agitations. The scale of human rights violations in Punjab between
1980 and 1995 has no parallel in the history of post-1947 India.
Punjab has had the highest frequency of imposition of
Central/President's Rule in comparison with the other states of India
and it has remained under the Central rule for the longest period of
time in comparison with the other Indian states.
My highlighting of the troubled relationship between Punjab and the
Centre is not meant to suggest that West Bengal and the some other
North Eastern States are any better in their relationship with the
Centre. My purpose is to point out that Punjab has not been
successfully integrated with the Centre in India. The reasons behind
this troubled relationship between Punjab and the Centre in India are
located primarily in the political project of the Centre to build one
unified Indian nationalism by repressing the emergence of multiple
nationalisms in the various non-Hindi linguistic regions of India.
I wish to reiterate at the end that I enjoyed reading the well
written piece by Ananya Kabir but her observations on Punjab vs
Centre needed to be corrected.
o o o
[ Ananya Kabir's article 'Partition of 1947: The Necessity of
Anti-Sentimentalism' which was carried in SACW 23 July, 2003,
originally appeared at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uttorshuri/message/881 ]
______
[6.]
SAJA NY Presents An Evening with Tarun Tejpal, Founder
and Editor of Tehelka.com
Monday, July 28, 2003
at Maharaja Restaurant, 44th Street, between 2nd & 3rd
Avenues
6.30 Reception
7.00-8.30 talk and q&a
$5 for SAJA members
$7 for non-SAJA members
Tarul Tejpal, the founder of Tehelka.com, and a guest
at a previous SAJA convention is visiting the US to
raise funds for his next venture -- a public interest
national newspaper Tehelka on the Weekend.Ý The
newspaper will be launched in India in October.Ý Tarun
and his team has gathered an impressive list of
advisors in India -- Kuldip Nayyar, Mahashweta Devi,
Mark Tully, Ram Jethmalani, Swami Agnivesh, Shyam
Benegal, Sir V.S. Naipaul, Alyque Padamsee, Mallika
Sarabhai, Mahesh Bhatt, Kapil Sibal, Julio Ribeiro.
Tarun will speak to the SAJA NY Chapter about his
future plans and current status of the Tehelka.com
controversy.
______
[7.]
The Hindu [India] July 10, 2003
Seeking refuge from refuge-seekers
Leafing through a book edited by Ranabir Samaddar on Indian policy on
refugees since 1947, ANJANA RAJAN finds how Delhi is treating its
migrant population, whether all of them are refugees and whether
definitions make a difference... .
FROM THE wounded souls of Partition to the Tibetan influx of 1959,
the Bangladeshi refugees of 1971 to the economic migrants who
continually sneak across India's porous borders, from the Sri Lankan
Tamils fleeing the civil war to the displaced persons from all the
troubled areas within India, the city of Delhi has played host to
these and more categories of refuge seekers over the past half
century of Indian Independence. Ranabir Samaddar, editor of "Refugees
and the State: Practices of Asylum and Care in India, 1947-2000", a
Sage publication that was released in New Delhi recently, points out
that although every group has its own causes and characteristics, and
the magnitude of the crisis may vary, they are all "a vulnerable
group of foreigners forced to flee to another country, who are in
need of protection by another Government."
The book, with essays by Paula Banerjee, Samir Kumar Das, Ritu Menon,
Subir Bhaumik, K.C. Saha and others, covers the major refugee
influxes to India since Independence with case studies illustrating
Government responses and policies. Delhi, like other major metros,
daily attracts hundreds of job seekers abandoning their peaceful
village existence for life in the big city. The Indians have legal
rights to do so, but those from neighbouring countries often slip in
without papers. Delhi is used to huge slum clusters of Bangladeshi
settlers - providing domestic and blue collar services to residents -
and though they are seekers of refuge from the poverty of their past
life, the technical term for them is not refugee but economic
migrant. Samaddar - a prolific author on refugee issues, human and
minority rights and peace in South Asia, founder-member of the
Calcutta Research Group, founding editor of "Refugee Watch" and
Director of the Peace Studies Programme of the South Asia Forum for
Human Rights, whose books include "The Marginal Nation - Trans-border
Migration from Bangladesh to India" and "A Biography of the Indian
Nation, 1947-1997" among others - clarifies the definitions: "The
economic migrant is one who migrates due to economic reasons
primarily," while "the asylum seeker is one who seeks asylum, for
political reasons such as threat to life, torture, political
discrimination, deprivation of liberty, of political and civil
rights, etc. The asylum seeker seeks refuge. There is international
law governing conditions of seeking and granting refuge; the refugee
cannot be pushed back or thrown out, etc. This is a huge subject of
critical importance, because the law governing the refugees is by
nature international, relates to both human rights and
humanitarianism."
Another category, displaced persons, "are forcibly displaced -
internally displaced, or transborder migrants under conditions of
duress. Again, there are international principles enjoining upon
states to ensure rights of the internally displaced persons." While
the law holds these technical differences as sacrosanct, he adds: "In
reality the forced population flow is mixed and massive, which makes
these differences increasingly fruitless. The economic and the
political, mixed nature of violence, internal and international flow,
human rights and humanitarian protection - these instances of
transgression and crossing of boundaries must be seen from the point
of justice and not primarily through legal categories, which are
considered as holy cows." While he says, "by and large, a combination
of care and power rules the norms of hospitality," of the Indian
Government, it "has no clear-cut policy on these; ambiguity is the
mark of its policy.
IT HAS treated sometimes leniently the shelter seekers, at times it
has treated the illegal immigrants harshly. Indian policy towards the
asylum seekers is guided by acts relating to foreigners, citizenship,
and passport, and not by a policy on the refugees. India is not a
signatory to the 1951 Convention. Indian courts have tried to include
human rights norms in judging on the asylum seekers' right to seek
shelter and the duty of the Indian state to give shelter."
The observations of a Delhi Police official whose work includes
deporting illegal Bangladeshi migrants fall in line with Samaddar's
remarks. "These days there has been an increase in the efforts to
catch illegal migrants. There are midnight raids and the suspects are
taken to the area police station for verification of their identity.
If their relations or others come to vouch for their being Indian
citizens they are let off. We send back only those who voluntarily
admit they came here illegally. There are pending writ petitions
pleading that they are Indian citizens. In such cases, or if all
members of a family that came together are not present there, we have
to release them. Also, pregnant women, sick persons or drug addicts
are not sent back. There are strict rules from the FRRO - the office
that deals with the verification and registration of foreigners - and
politicians pressurise us with Parliament questions, accusing us of
forcibly deporting bonafide Indian Bengalis. Actually the Government
spends a lot on these people. The train ticket costs Rs.400 - this
apart from their daily upkeep at the Seva Sadan, Shahzadabad where
they stay till departure. A whole bogie of the train is booked for
them. 60 are taken per batch, and Delhi police provides over 25
escorts including at least two women constables or head constables
from each district. There are two or three trains a week these days.
From my district alone since January, 900 illegal immigrants have
been deported."
The irony, says this official, is that these deportees often return
"by the same train as us, bringing a few more with them". This is due
to corruption among the border security forces of both countries.
Also, "they have become wise to our methods, and families split up
across the city at night to avoid being caught together in the
raids". With a see-saw battle between humane philosophy and selfish
nationalism, political hawks and vote bank opportunists, as also
between pragmatic town planning and the lure of a cheap illegal
workforce, it seems Delhi's refuge seeking population - legal,
illegal, ideological, political or economic - will continue to exist
as it always has, in a state whose only certainty is its uncertainty.
o o o
Refugees and the State
Practices of Asylum and Care in India, 1947-2000
Edited by:
Ranabir Samaddar South Asia Forum for Human Rights, Kathmandu, Nepal
Description:
This book is a collection of eleven chronicles on the practices of
asylum and refugee protection in India over the last fifty years.
Written by specialists in the field of law, administration, history,
feminist studies and political science, this volume is simultaneously
a political, legal, institutional and ethical history concerning
hospitality, care and protection. The book highlights the
contradictions between these virtues and the manner in which state
power is organised and exercised in post-colonial India.
Fundamentally, it is a study on the link between care and power.
Table of Contents:
Introduction: Power and Care Ranabir Samaddar
Building the New Indian State
Aliens in a Colonial World Paula Banerjee
Samir K Das
State Response to the Refugee Crisis
Relief and Rehabilitation in the East
Birth of Social Security Commitments Ritu Menon
What Happened in the West
The Returnees and the Refugees Subir Bhaummik
Migration from Burma
The Genocide of 1971 and the Refugee Influx in the East K C Saha
Uprooted Twice Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury
Refugees from the Chittagong Hill Tracts
Gainers of a Stalemate Rajesh Kharat
The Tibetans in India
Sheltering Civilians and Warriors V Suryanarayan
Entanglements in the South
Refugee Women and Children Asha Hans
Need for Protection and Care
Paradoxes of the International Regime of Care Sarbani Sen
The Role of the UNHCR in India
Status of Refugees in India B S Chimni
Strategic Ambiguity
Hardcover : 0761997296
List Price: $54.95
Publisher: Sage Publications Pvt. LtdPub Date: 09/2003
Pages: 496
Subject Areas:
-Sociology of Migration
-South Asia Studies
______
[8.]
Dear friends,
Let me introduce myself , my name is Bashir Mujavar. We are in the
publication of the Marathi literature books from last 15 years .
This year we are launching a Marathi Diwali yearly issue
'Satyashodhak Prabodhan'.
This issue contains the writeups, stories, poems by well-known authors from
Maharashtra. We believe in the thinking of Mahatma Gandhiji, Mahatma
Phule, Rajashree
Shahu Maharaj, Dr. B. Ambedkar and so many other ..
Some of the special issues included in this issue are
1. 'Communilisam & Socialists in India' by Bhai Vaidya .
2. 'Hindu - Muslim Question'
by Rajendra Vohra.
3. 'Muslims and Global Polity' by
Afagan Ebrahim.
4. 'Freedom of Women at Global Level' by Razia Patel.
5. 'Necessity of Dalit & Muslim Unity To Fight Brahmanical Dominance'
by Kishor Jadhav.
6. 'Special Report on Sheshrao More's book Muslim Manacha Shodh'
by Basharat Ahamad.
7. 'Movements of Non Brahmins against Brahminism' by Rajendra Kumbhar.
8. 'Muslims in India after Freedom' by
Fakruddin Bannur.
9. 'Saint Tukaram & Charvak'
by Dr .A. H. Salunkhe.
10. 'Blind Faith (Andhashradha)' by
Dr. Narendra Dabholkar.
11. 'Babari Masjid to Gujarat Carnage' by Suhas Kulkarni
12. 'Ascent & Descent of Muslim Progressive Movements'
by Anwar Rajan.
13. ' Third Front or Alliance with Congress to fight Communalism' by Dr.
Kumar Saptarshi.
14. 'Mahatma Phule's Thoughts & present Situation' by Hari Narake.
15. 'On Mahatma Phules Drama Tisare Ratna' by Dr. Vilas Kale.
16. 'On Narmada Movment' by Medha Patakar
17. 'Maharshtrian Folk Arts Reality & Propaganda' by Ramanath Chavan.
18. 'Mahatma Gandhi'
by Pannalal
Surana .
19. 'Reservations for Open Classes' by
Vilas Sonawane.
20. 'On Drama' by
Raj Kazi ,
21. 'On Cinema'
by Banda Yadnopavit,
Stories By
1. H. M . Marathe.
2. Rajan Gavas.
3. Mallika Amarshaikh.
4. R.A. Nelekar.
5. Bharati Pande.
6. B. L. Mahabal.
7. Pratibha Ranade.
8. Shubhda Gogate.
9. G.K. Ainapure.
10 Mandakini Bhradhwaj.
11. Vilas Phadke.
12. Bashir Mujavar.
Poems By
Gangadhar Mahambare, Ilahi Jamadar, Nilima Mangave, D.K . Shaikh,
Ashwini Ghongade, Data Halasagikar, Data Hagavane, Baba Attar,
Shakil Jafari , Manohar Sonawane, Fatima Mujavar, Tukaram Patil,
Rajendra Sonawane.
Catoons by
Mangesh Tendulkar, Shiraj Mujavar, Vaijnath Dulange.
[...].
In case of any enquiry please do not hesitate to contact us.
Thanking you.
Yours truly,
Bahir Mujavar. (Editor)
Satyashodhak Prabodhan
2, Park View, 129/130, Near Sadhu Vaswani Garden,
Pimpri, Pune, Maharashtra, India , 411017.
Ph. 020- 7451930.
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service
run since 1998 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.
More information about the Sacw
mailing list