SACW | 28 Aug. 2003
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at mnet.fr
Thu Aug 28 04:24:47 CDT 2003
South Asia Citizens Wire | 28 August, 2003
[1.] Pakistan-India: The unilateral way (Praful Bidwai)
[2.] Nepal:
- Nepal: Human rights monitors -- a matter of priority (Amnesty Int'l
Press Release)
- Candlelight Rallies In Nepal Kick off National Campaign To Protest
3,000 Disappearances
[3.] Press Release : A Progressive Discussion Forum on Kashmir
(People for Peace in Kashmir)
[4.] India: Sign on letter to the President of India defending
actress activist Nafisa Ali
[5.] India: Women's Group Condemns [Bombay] Blast; Calls For Peace & Justice
[6.] Book Announcement: 'The Origins and Development of the Tablighi
Jamaat (1920-2000) by Yogindar Sikand'
[7.] India: Upcoming Open Space seminars : Cultures of Politics and
the World Social Forum ...(Aug.29 on, New Delhi)
[8.] The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission :
Seeks Nominations for the 2004 Felipa Award
[9.] India: Upcoming three-day seminar 'Educating Students To Peace'
(Sept.11, Bombay)
--------------
[1.]
The News International [Pakistan] August 28, 2003
The unilateral way
Praful Bidwai
When Indian and Pakistani officials again meet in Islamabad today to
discuss the issue of restoring airline flights between their cities
and overflights through each other's airspace, they should know that
millions of people in both countries are keenly watching the progress
of their effort. On its success will depend the fate of rail links,
and more generally, mutual trade. This, in turn, will both indicate
and determine whether and how quickly India and Pakistan can convert
the symbolic extension of "the hand of friendship" by Prime Minister
Vajpayee into real, material, progress. For, it is not excluded that
they could, tragically, even fall short of immediately restoring the
pre-December 2001 status quo.
Also in full display this week is the enormous, unprecedentedly wide,
gap that now exists between Track-I and Track-II contacts between
India and Pakistan. On the heels of the spectacularly successful
visit of the 80-strong Indian delegation, including 34 MPs, to a
South Asia Free Media Association conference, and the repatriation of
young Munir, comes some more good news of citizen-level cooperation
between India and Pakistan.
Pakistani Sabiha Sumar's "Khamosh Pani" (Silent Waters) has just won
the prestigious Golden Leopard award at the Locarno film festival.
Starring in the film is Indian actress Kiron Kher, whose mother was
from Lyallpur. The film itself is about the lives of Hindu/Sikh women
kidnapped during Partition and forced into marrying Muslim men in
Pakistan.
No less significant was last week's meeting between India's
information and broadcasting Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and Jang
Group chief executive and editor-in-chief Mir Shakil Ur-Rahman to
discuss cooperation in the arts and entertainment, including
partnership with Doordarshan to distribute the Geo television
channel, and organising events like Bollywood "star nights" in
Pakistani cities.
Indian and Pakistani book publishers, meeting currently at the Delhi
Book Fair, are discussing co-publishing and the possibility of
importing books from each other, in particular children's books and
natural sciences textbooks.
All these citizen-to-citizen exchanges, marked by a tremendous amount
of goodwill, remain wholly unmatched by official-level interactions
which continue to be chilly and occasionally abusive and hostile -
fully four months after Vajpayee's April 18 speech. Thus, the
Pakistani authorities have more than once refused to provide extra
buses on the Lahore-India route to meet additional demand (eg when
groups of children go across). Indian officials continue to drag
their feet on talks on rail links resumption without prior progress
on air links. They insist on a "step-by-step approach" to improving
bilateral relations and warn against "unnecessary acceleration" of
normalisation.
Worse, the two have resumed trading charges. Pakistani foreign
ministry spokesperson Masood Khan accused India of running "55
terrorist training camps" in Kashmir for subversive activities. New
Delhi has retaliated by calling the charge "outlandish" and saying:
"It clearly shows that the Pakistani foreign ministry spokesman has a
sense of humour."
There is every likelihood that these hostile exchanges will be
transported to the United Nations, whose General Assembly meets three
weeks from now. Already, Pakistani representative Munir Akram has
written to the UN complaining of India's "aversion to talks" and
insistence on seeking concessions from Pakistan "unilaterally,
through coercive means". India has dubbed this language
"propagandistic" and "malicious" and Pakistan's protest "empty" and
"self-defeating".
If we are not to witness a relapse into the familiar but ugly pattern
of substituting downright abuse for diplomacy, our leaders must make
a clear, principled decision. They should not allow the logic of
"reciprocity" to vitiate the climate created by positive mutual
overtures between the two countries, especially at the Track-II level.
"Reciprocity" in our context means unlimited mutual retribution, and
punishing each other equally, in like measure: 'I'll be as
bloody-minded and nasty to you as you are to me'. This usually does
not apply to the "positive" part of the spectrum of exchanges, only
to the negative, hostile part.
This logic follows a Closed Loop: one unfriendly action brings on a
reciprocal reaction driven by bureaucratic cussedness and
mean-spiritedness. This in turn "provokes" yet more retaliation,
leading to a further escalation of hostility. Often, there is
"cross-retaliation", or punitive action against the adversary in an
area other than the original site of disagreement or conflict. This
makes the Closed Loop pattern even more fraught.
There is something inherently, intrinsically and dangerously wrong
with the Closed Loop. It takes the calculus of action-reaction out of
the purview of reason. It destroys any criterion of deciding what
conduct is acceptable and what is not. It means obsessively hurting
your adversary badly - even if that also hurts you. There are simply
no limits to how vicious you can get and how high you will take the
escalation. Your actions are purely externally determined, free of
all internal restraint.
We have seen this dread tit-for-tat logic in our three-and-a-half
wars, and more perilously, working through our Kashmir and nuclear
policies. But there are other examples too. For instance, both our
governments routinely hold up releasing innocent detainees - simply
because the other side might not do the same.
The Indian government recently told the Supreme Court that it has a
deliberate policy of not releasing Pakistani prisoners even after
they have served their prison term. When asked to explain why,
Additional Solicitor-General Altaf Ahmed said: "This is the only way
India can secure the freedom of its nationals languishing in jails in
Pakistan." He also said Pakistani convicts are "enemy aliens" who
have no right to be released even after the completion of their
prison terms unless both countries agree to a mutually acceptable
mode of exchange.
Clearly, what is involved here is hostage-taking, something that is
profoundly immoral, illegal and should be repugnant to any civilised
state. The Attorney-General of India has since given his opinion on
this subject, saying such "security prisoners" cannot be used as
hostages or levers for bargaining.
Soli Sorabjee says: "Such a stand is legally untenable, apart from
the adverse repercussions it will have on the image of our country
internationally". He takes the view that "if Pakistan adopts a policy
which is unconstitutional and uncivilised, we need not stoop to their
level... the government of India has to act in accordance with the
provisions of the Constitution and the law irrespective of the
behaviour of the Pakistani government."
Interestingly, Sorabjee cites Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the
Constitution, pertaining to fundamental rights. These rights are
universal. Their availability is not confined to Indian citizens.
Based on these rights, the Supreme Court has since ordered the
release of 14 Pakistani inmates of Indian jails.
The rationale at work here is clear: certain kinds of conduct on the
part of civilised states are simply unacceptable no matter what their
"provocation". They are intrinsically wrong, irrespective of the
circumstances.
This rationale has wide scope. It should reintroduce an element of
sanity and rationality among our policy-making. Following it, our
rulers should take some simple measures unilaterally,
unconditionally, no matter whether they are reciprocated or not.
Not the least of them should be the opening of airspace and
resumption of air and train links, and release of all "security
prisoners" or those detained without trial. That is the best way to
encourage decent, civilised behaviour while limiting self-inflicted
damage.
_____
[2.]
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
PRESS RELEASE
AI Index: ASA 31/027/2003 (Public)
News Service No: 199
27 August 2003
Nepal: Human rights monitors -- a matter of priority
Following reports of a break down of peace talks between the
government and representatives of the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN)
(Maoist), Amnesty International today urged both sides to set up an
independent human rights monitoring mechanism.
"Allegations of human rights abuses by both the CPN (Maoist) and the
security forces during the cease-fire has led to a souring of the
peace process," Amnesty International said. "In order to prevent an
escalation -- now talks seem to have broken down -- it is paramount
that independent monitors are deployed forthwith."
The organization has been lobbying both sides to sign a Human Rights
Accord which would give the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) a
mandate to set up five regional offices to monitor human rights with
technical assistance provided by the United Nations (UN).
Background
The government and representatives of the CPN (Maoist) called a
cease-fire on 29 January 2003. Two rounds of peace talks, with the
aim of finding a solution to the seven year conflict or "people's
war" launched by the CPN (Maoist) in February 1996, took place in
April and May 2003. The Maoists listed a round table conference, an
interim government and elections to a constituent assembly to draft a
new Constitution among their central demands.
In the lead up to a third round of peace talks in mid-August between
the government negotiating team and representatives of the CPN
(Maoist), reports of cease-fire violations by both sides to the
conflict escalated.
Amnesty International welcomed the appointment by the National Human
Rights Commission (NHRC) of a committee to investigate the alleged
extrajudicial killings of 19 people by the army in Ramechhap district
on 17 August, which it had called for in a public statement released
on 22 August. The organization was also encouraged that two further
committees had been appointed by the NHRC to investigate reports of
cease-fire violations by the Maoists in a number of different
districts. The organization called upon both parties to fully
cooperate with the NHRC.
Public Document
****************************************
Amnesty International, 1 Easton St., London WC1X 0DW. web:
http://www.amnesty.org
o o o o
Nepalis Rally for Human Rights, End to Disappearances
Advocacy Project
CANDLELIGHT RALLIES IN NEPAL KICK OFF NATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO PROTEST
3,000 DISAPPEARANCES
Kathmandu, August 26, 2003: Human rights advocates in Nepal are
launching a nation-wide campaign to protest the disappearance of
thousands of Nepalis, and halt the routine mistreatment and torture
of those detained in Nepal's jails.
The campaign was announced at a press conference on August 15, and
will kick off Wednesday (August 27) with candlelight rallies in 40 of
the 75 districts of the country. It is being organized by the
Advocacy Forum, a Nepali human rights group and member of the
Collective Campaign for Peace (COCAP), a community-based network that
is working to rebuild Nepali society in the aftermath of the Maoist
insurgency.
The Advocacy Project (AP) sent an intern, Katherine Kuo, to work with
COCAP this summer. Among her other duties, Ms. Kuo helped the
Advocacy Forum produce their brochure and carried out statistics
trainings for them, as well as running trainings for COCAP members in
the Terai region of Nepal.
The Forum has registered over 3,000 disappearances in Nepal since
2001, and Forum lawyers say that the problem intensified after the
Maoist insurgency began in 1996. Both the Maoists and the government
detained, killed, and tortured, but the abuses increased sharply
after the government declared a State of Emergency in late 2001. This
authorized the police and army to arrest and detain suspected Maoists
without going through the normal legal process. Nepal accounted for
28 of the 120 urgent inquiries that were delivered to governments in
2002 by the UN's Working Group on Disappearances.
Forum lawyers have investigated 100 disappearances in detail, but
this is exceptionally difficult because many of the kidnappings occur
in isolated rural areas which are often under Maoist control. In
addition, before obtaining a search warrant, the Forum must first
identify the location and abductors of the disappeared person -
something that is often impossible. The Forum has requested advice
from the UN.
The Forum is particularly concerned about the "structural weakness"
of Nepal's legal system, which it says opens the way to illegal
detention by the security forces, as well as torture:
"Reports of corruption, falsified documents, illegal arrests, and
prolonged detentions are common. The poor are particularly
susceptible. Detainees wait in crowded, unsanitary custody centers
far removed from public scrutiny; go days and even weeks without
bathing; and sometimes live off others' leftover food. Torture is
practiced regularly to force confessions. Victims are kicked, beaten
with all types of instruments, and sometimes electrically shocked.
Over 60% of detainees are tortured, yet few speak up out of fear of
retaliation from authorities. Women are tortured, sexually abused,
disowned by their families, and lacking in financial means to afford
legal aid."
The Forum has set five principal goals for its outreach campaign: 1)
To stop disappearances; 2) To define disappearances as a crime
against humanity and establish a high-level commission to investigate
individual cases; 3) To publish a national report, file cases against
perpetrators according to national and international laws, and try
perpetrators; 4) to clarify the status of disappeared people to their
families; and 5) to compensate victims and their families.
Forum activists plan to distribute 10,000 copies of a 2-page flier
throughout the country, and follow up with public meetings and
rallies in front of the administrative headquarters of the 40
districts.
* To contact the Forum with support, or requesting information, email
advforum at wlink.com.npFor interviews call Pradeep Wagle or Govinda
Bandi at 977 (1) 443-8799.
* To read the 2003 report of the UN working Group on Disappearances
and its conclusions on Nepal, go to:
http://tinyurl.com/l9v2/G0311318.pdf
* To read Katherine Kuo's weblogs (blogs) on her work in Nepal visit
the AP website:
http://www.advocacynet.org/cpage_view/cocap_COCAP_13_30.html
The Advocacy Project is based in Washington D.C. Phone: +1 202 332
3900; fax: +1 202 332 4600. Visit the AP web site for information
about current projects: www.advocacynet.org. For more information
please e- mail info at advocacynet.org
_____
[3.]
Press Release : A Progressive Discussion Forum on Kashmir
By People for Peace in Kashmir August 22, 2003
http://www.mindspring.com/~akhila_raman/ciis_forum_pr.htm
About 100 people attended a dynamic discussion
forum on Kashmir in Friday, organized by People for Peace
in Kashmir and Social and Cultural Anthropology Program at
California Institute of Integral Studies (CIIS) in
San Francisco. The speakers were Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy -
well known physicist and anti-nuclear activist from Pakistan,
Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai from Kashmiri American Council and
Akhila Raman - a researcher on the Kashmir Conflict.
The audience included people from various diverse groups-
Indians, Pakistanis, Kashmiri Pandits and Muslims, Americans.
This Forum was conceived as a balanced and liberal one,
striving to avoid common features present in many other
forums: Indian speakers bashing Pakistan, Pakistani
speakers bashing India and Kashmiri Pandits and Muslims
presenting the Kashmir tragedy as a tragedy to their
group alone. Instead, the speakers turned it around and
did a critical introspection of their respective sides,
presenting the tragedy to various communities as a
whole.
The Forum was introduced by Dr. Angana Chatterji,
Professor of Social and Cultural Anthropology Program
at CIIS, as one which seeks to address the concerns of
Kashmiris, India and Pakistan. She illuminated the fact
that there is one soldier for every 10 Kashmiris in the
Kashmir Valley which is seen as oppressive by the local population.
Mr. Zulfiqar Ahmad - Peace and Security Program Officer for
South Asia from Nautilus Institute at Berkeley introduced
the speakers and outlined the principles for the discussion
forum and the fact that ultimate arbiters of the dispute
should be the Kashmiri people and that any solution should
respect the syncretic Kashmiri
culture.
Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai began his speech highlighting the fact
that the long-standing Kashmir dispute had become a nuclear
flashpoint which needed an urgent solution, putting an end to
the pain and suffering of not only the majority Kashmiri Muslim
community but also the minority Kashmiri Pandit community. He
stated that a lasting solution could only be arrived if all
the three concerned parties ñ Kashmiris, India and Pakistan ñ
make sacrifices and compromises from their respective
hardline positions.
He further went on to argue as follows: (1) Kashmiri movement
was not secessionist because Kashmir did not belong to any
member nation of the UN and hence Kashmiris cannot secede from
a nation to which they had not acceded to in the first place.
(2) Kashmiri movement was not fundamentalist given their rich
tradition of Kashmiriyat- a composite cultural identity of
tolerance and communal amity (3) The movement was not a terrorist
movement but a popular freedom struggle because hundreds of
thousands of unarmed civilians marched on the streets of Srinagar
between January and May 1990 (4) The issue was not bilateral
between India and Pakistan but that Kashmiris were a legitimate
third party which needed to be included in unconditional
dialogues to resolve the dispute. He highlighted the need for
UN/US mediation given the fact that all previous bilateral
talks had failed.
Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy, who spoke next, began his speech
highlighting the role of evolutionary biology in war and
also war as a means of socialization; He highlighted the
subversive role played by Pakistan since a popular insurgency
began in the Kashmir Valley in 1989 against the repressive
Indian Rule. He recalled an interview he had with General
Musharraf in Pakistan regarding Kashmir in which he had
advised the General that it was high time Pakistan stopped
the covert war in Kashmir and stuck to its stated position
namely- providing merely ìmoral and diplomaticî support
for the freedom struggle in Kashmir.
He illuminated the role played by India as an occupation force,
with half a million soldiers brutally repressing an estimated
5 million Kashmiris in the Valley. He closed his speech
stating that (1) India must end its permanent occupation of
Kashmir. (2) Pakistan must put an end to cross-border terrorism
(3) The media in India and Pakistan must turn down the volume
of official rhetoric and play a constructive role in dispute
resolution.
Akhila Raman, the next speaker made a presentation of the
history of the Kashmir conflict and highlighted the fact
that both India and Pakistan were fighting over Kashmir like
two pugnacious landlords, trampling over the dead bodies of
tens of thousands of Kashmiris ñ half of them civilians. She
highlighted the fact that India had promised self-determination
(the will of the people shall be ascertained in a plebiscite
about the future of Kashmir) to the Kashmiris in 1947 and many
times later, which had been long denied. She also highlighted
the fact that the 1989 insurgency arose as a result of long-denied
historical grievances - denial of promised plebiscite,
consistently rigged elections and erosion of autonomy ñ and
that the popular alienation and discontent continues.
She illuminated the fact that the Kashmiri movement was not
communal, given that Kashmiri Muslims had always demonstrated
in support of the slain minorities as in the recent Nadimarg
massacre in March and that Kashmiriyat continues to flourish.
She closed the speech highlighting an ìAndorran solutionî which
could potentially work - Kashmir Valley and Azad Kashmir made
as autonomous entities with external defence and foreign affairs
controlled jointly by India and Pakistan.
The speeches were followed by a Q&A session with the audience.
Some Pandits discussed their concerns about safe return to
their ancestral homeland of the Valley, which they had been
forced to flee in a massive exodus in 1990. Another person in
the audience reiterated the fact that there were no communal
riots in Kashmir and that communal amity still flourishes and
hoped for a lasting solution. Snehal Shingavi, a Berkeley student
activist, highlighted the need for unity among the people of
Kashmir in their struggle for self-determination.
The two and a half hour program ended on a positive note
with many in the audience feeling that the discussion forum was
informative and productive. Dr. Angana Chatterji and Zulfiqar
Ahmad conducted and moderated the Forum very effectively in a
very admirable manner. Friends of South Asia and ISO, Berkeley
expressed their support for this Forum.
Photos:
http://www.mindspring.com/~akhila_raman/slide/ciis_ph_1.jpeg
http://www.mindspring.com/~akhila_raman/slide/ciis_ph_2.jpeg
Contact #: 510-649-8719
_____
[4.]
From: "shabnam hashmi" <shabhashmi at hotmail.com>
Dear Friends,
I am sure you must have followed in the press the following. We have
started collecting signatures on this letter* today on the net, sms
and telephone. It would be sent to the president on 29th and released
to the press too. Kindly get back by tomorrow late evening if you
wish to put your name on the letter.
Thanks
Shabnam Hashmi
o o o
[* TEXT OF PROPOSED LETTER FOR WHICH SIGNATURES ARE BEING GATHERED ]
The President of India
Sir,
On the event of Independence Day, the Government of Gujarat slapped
charges of inciting communal hatred (under Section 153 A of the IPC)
on social worker and senior film actress Nafisa Ali. Among the
co-accused named by the state government for abetment of her alleged
offence were two daily newspapers, Indian Express and Divya Bhaskar.
Nafisa Ali visited Gujarat on a goodwill visit from 2-4 August, 2003.
She went to Godhra, Vadodara and Ahmedabad to spread the messages of
peace and justice.
Apart from the survivors of the carnage, she met a wide range of
college students, business professionals, social workers,
intellectuals and with journalists as well. She also addressed
gathering at the Ahmedabad Management Association, Mudra Institute of
Communication, Ahmedabad and Centre for Development Communication.
In her lectures and interactions, she expressed her deep love and
regard for Gujarat, and enormous anguish and concern at the carnage
and its aftermath. She continuously emphasised the imperative to
rebuild communal harmony and trust, to defend the cultural diversity
which makes Indian civilization so rich, and to secure justice for
the survivors of the carnage.
She also made some strong comments against Chief Minister Narendra
Modi. She is quoted in the Indian Express of 5 August, 2003 to have
stated "Just like the people of Hitler's country are ashamed of him,
people will be of Modi too. Men can be good or bad, you cannot blame
an entire religion as good or bad. This isn't justice in a
democracy-the State and Centre are trying to polarize the country.
Its amazing how Narendra Modi can say that it's Pakistan behind it
all. Indeed what Britishers couldn’t do Modi has done. He's divided
people on the basis of communalism."
The government of Gujarat filed 2 FIRs against Ms Ali as prime
accused on 14th August, 2003, and the reporter and editor of Indian
Express and editor and publisher of the Gujarati daily Divya Bhaskar
for reporting. The allegation against Ms. Ali was that she was
promoting enmity between different groups and acting prejudicial to
maintenance of harmony and thereby was culpable under Section 153-A
of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
It is absurd to charge Ms. Ali of fomenting communal hatred. On the
contrary, she was courageously raising her voice for justice,
pluralism, harmony and peace.
It is deeply ominous for the survival of democracy that her words of
healing and of democratic dissent, that can by no stretch of
imagination be described as communal or inflammatory, have invited
the wrath of the state government, even as those guilty of leading
mobs for slaughter, rape and plunder walk free, and leaders like Dr.
Praveen Togadia continue to openly incite communal hatred in distant
corners of the country.
We demand the immediate withdrawal of the vengeful and malafide
charges of inciting communal hatred which have been made against
social worker Nafisa Ali by the Gujarat government. Instead, people
who actually continue to incite communal hatred should be restrained
and punished, and justice and rehabilitation ensured for the
survivors of the carnage of 2002.
Harsh Mander
Mahesh Bhatt
Shubha Mudgal
Tarun Tejpal
Usha Uthup
_____
[5.]
Statement Against Mumbai Blasts
WOMEN'S GROUP CONDEMNS BLAST; CALLS FOR PEACE & JUSTICE
The bomb blasts in Mumbai on 25th August are reprehensible acts that
must be condemned by all those who believe in the sanctity of human
life and peaceful means of expressing dissent.
We are deeply pained by such senseless acts of violence against
innocent citizens, and offer our heartfelt condolences to the
families and friends of the victims and survivors. While calling on
the government to arrest the perpetrators of this heinous act and
swiftly bring them to justice, we urge the authorities not to allow
the violence to escalate and cause further loss of life and civility.
With the carnage that followed the Godhra incident still fresh in our
minds and hearts, we hope that vigilance and a spirit of upholding
the democratic fabric will ensure that allegations of responsibility
against some Muslim groups for this incident are not used as an
opportunity to retaliate against the Muslim community as a whole, or
to promote hatred against it.
We appeal to all those who believe in secular ideals of peaceful
pluralism to take a stand on the issue and ensure that those who
perpetuate terrorism and those who benefit from it are not allowed to
succeed. We also urge the media to avoid broadcasting unverified
information, fuel the flames of hate, or give undue prominence to
irresponsible statements by political leaders who are determined to
make mileage out of this horrific crime.
In peace and solidarity,
Sadhna, Vani, Lakshmi, etc
for SAHELI WOMEN"S RESOURCE CENTRE
Above Shop Nos. 105-108
Under Defence Colony Flyover Market (South Side)
New Delhi 110 024
+91 (011) 2461 6485
<mailto:saheliwomen at hotmail.com>saheliwomen at hotmail.com
_____
[6.]
The Origins and Development of the Tablighi Jamaat (1920-2000) :
A Cross-Country Comparative Study
Author: Yoginder Sikand.
Publisher: Orient Longman, New Delhi. 2002, xii, 310 p., figs., ISBN
81-250-2298-8.
Contents: Note on transliteration. Preface. 1. Introduction. 2.
Muslim missionary activism in early twentieth century North India. 3.
Tablighi Jamaat: concepts, principles and strategies. 4. Tablighi
Jamaat in Mewat. 5. Tablighi Jamaat in Bangladesh. 6. Tablighi Jamaat
in Britain. 7. Conclusion. Sources and bibliography. Glossary.
"The Tablighi Jamaat is arguably the most widely followed movement in
the Islamic world. Emerging from the socio-economic and historical
context of the Mewat region near Delhi in the 1920s, it has now
established itself in over a hundred and fifty countries.
. . . Tablighi Jamaat, despite its importance, has received little
academic interest. Yoginder Sikand's book, the first major work by a
brilliant young scholar, examines the Tablighi Jamaat in three very
different milieux Mewat (India), Bangladesh and Britain." (jacket)
_____
[7.]
Are Other Worlds Possible ?
Cultures of Politics and the World Social Forum
Dear friends
We are very pleased to invite you to THE OPEN SPACE Seminar
Series on the
above theme, at the University of Delhi, starting this coming August 19 and
continuing through more or less every ten days till December. The World
Social Forum, initiated in Brazil in January 2001 as a challenge to the
World Economic Forum, is now widely seen as being a highly significant
initiative towards democratising economics and politics on a world scale.
The motto the WSF has coined for itself is, 'Another World Is Possible'. The
next world meeting of the Forum-protest, celebration, the positing of
alternative ways of living and being-is scheduled to be held in Mumbai
between January 16-21, 2004. The Forum is as yet hardly known in India,
especially the interesting culture of politics it promises to offer, the
culture of 'open space'. THE OPEN SPACE SERIES is being organised in two
inter-weaving streams, one 'Exploring the Forum and its politics' and the
other 'Confronting Empires : The World Social Forum'. The first stream,
alternating with the second will attempt to explore the relationship of the
Forum with the Empires that attempt to bind us, the Empires that the Forum
has decided to confront, while grappling simultaneously with the evolving
culture of politics and the 'other worlds' that the WSF promises to offer.
The second stream will deal with the structural issues the WSF has been
concerned with-economic globalisation and militarisation and war-as also
with new themes that are being added to this vocabulary-religious
fundamentalism and communalism, caste, race and patriarchy. This SERIES is
being organised by The History Society Ramjas College. The effort will be to
hold each seminar in the series in different colleges of Delhi University
and begin each discussion around 12 noon. Plays, music, book displays and
poetry may be woven into the 'Open Space' once the 'Series' is on the roll.
A reader on the issues concerning the Forum is planned and towards the end a
booklet may emerge. Lets see. We give below the proposed programme for the
series. The dates are fixed, the locations for the first two seminars are
now finalised, and the list of panellists for all the sessions is being
finalised. We hope you will definitely make it a point to join us. Please
feel free to circulate this message widely and to encourage your associates
and friends to also come. With warm greetings in welcome,
Mukul Mangalik Jai Sen Madhuresh Kumar
For further information on the World Social Forum:
World Social Forum
http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/home.asp
World Social Forum India
www.wsfindia.org
WSF India Secretariat
wsfindia at vsnl.net
European Social Forum (Paris, November 12-16 2003)
www.fse-esf.org
_____________________________________________________________________________
OPEN SPACE SERIES : PROPOSED SCHEDULE
August 29, Friday : Empire 1 : Globalisation - Questions of Capital, Labour,
and Sustainability
Venue : Seminar Room, Ramjas College, University of Delhi
(North Campus), Delhi 110 007 Expected panelists :
Praful Bidwai, journalist and commentator, New Delhi
Jean Drèze, Delhi School of Economics
Jayati Ghosh, Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru
University Mahesh Rangarajan, Fellow, Jawaharlal Nehru Museum and Library
September 9, Tuesday : The WSF and Old vs New Politics : Parties, social
movements, and civil groups
September 19, Friday : Empire 2 :
Authoritarianism, Militarisation, & Nuclearisation : Questions of War,
Peace, and Terror
September 26 or 30, Friday/Tuesday : Contested Space ? The
Forum as Space, the Forum as Movement
[. . . ] .
[ Subsequent posts will announce the other upcoming events in the schedule]
____
[8.]
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC)
Seeks Nominations for the 2004 Felipa Award
(Deadline for Nominations: October 15, 2003)
Purpose of the Award and General Guidelines
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) seeks to
honor an organization or an individual that has made significant
contributions toward securing the full enjoyment of the human rights of all
people and communities subject to discrimination or abuse on the basis of
sexual orientation or expression, gender identity or expression, and/or HIV
status, anywhere in the world.
Through this award we hope to bring about public recognition to an
organization or individual committed to the struggle for human rights. We
seek nominations for organizations and individuals from all regions of the
world and from as wide a range of communities as possible. We welcome
nominations for younger as well as more established organizations and
individuals.
The award recipient will receive a cash award. The individual award
recipient or one designated representative from an organizational award
recipient will be flown to the United States to be honored at an annual
springtime ceremony.
The Felipa Awards is named in honor of Felipa de Souza, a woman convicted
and tortured in Brazil by the Portuguese Inquisition in 1591 for having
sexual relationships with other women.
Award Criteria
In reviewing the candidates, the following criteria will be considered and
evaluated:
a) Demonstrated leadership and a record of outstanding achievements in the
field
b) Practical work in the field and in difficult circumstances
c) Demonstrated capacity to establish links and build lasting coalitions
with others struggling for human rights, gender equality, and/or social and
economic justice
d) Predominant activities in developing countries or with marginalized
communities
e) Potential impact of the award in supporting and strengthening
candidates' work in the future
A final decision regarding the award will be made by the Board of Directors
of IGLHRC in consultation with IGLHRC's International Advisory Board and
staff. The Board of Directors will release its decision in February 2004.
Nomination Process
Felipa nominations are accepted year-round.
Felipa nominations should be mailed, faxed, or emailed to the address below
before October 15, 2003 in order to qualify for the 2004 award. If you do
not receive a confirmation by November 1st, this may mean that your
nomination did not reach us in time; we will file your nomination for
consideration in the next yearly cycle.
Nominations may be made by anyone, including the candidates themselves.
We no longer accept nominations for posthumous awards.
If possible, nominations should be submitted in English, although we can
accept nominations in most languages.
All nominations must include:
1/ Full contact information for both the nominator and the candidate. This
includes: name and address and where available phone, fax, and email.
2/ A letter of nomination. This letter should not be more than 3 pages
long (about 1,500 words) and should answer the following questions:
a) Is the candidate a leader in the field and does the candidate have a
record of outstanding achievements in the field?
b) What are some examples of the candidate's practical work in the field
(particularly those carried out under difficult circumstances)?
c) Has the candidate established links and built lasting coalitions with
others struggling for human rights, gender equality, and/or social and
economic justice?
d) What proportion of candidate's work takes place among or benefits
marginalized communities and/or communities in the developing world?
e) What would be the impact of the award in supporting and strengthening
candidate's work in the future?
3/ Two letters of support
4/ For organizations, nominations must also include the mission statement
of the organization.
Nominations (either individual or organization) can also include additional
and optional supporting materials such as brochures, newsletters, newspaper
clippings, photographs, videos, or other descriptions of the candidate's work.
Deadline for nominations: October 15, 2003
Please send your nominations to:
By Mail:
Felipa Awards
IGLHRC
1375 Sutter Street, Suite 222
San Francisco, CA 94109
USA
By Fax:
Felipa Awards
IGLHRC
Fax: +1-415-561-0619
By Email: iglhrc at iglhrc.org
For more information please go to the Felipa Awards page of the IGLHRC website:
http://www.iglhrc.org/site/iglhrc/section.php?id=40
____
[9.]
TEJ-PRASARINI DON BOSCO COMMUNICATIONS
is pleased to announce
A three-day residential capacity building seminar to teach trainers the art of
'EDUCATING STUDENTS TO PEACE'
AIM OF THE COURSE:
- To help participants develop the rationale and the skills to
initiate a consistent 'Peace Education Project'.
- To train participants in the use and implementation of the manual
entitled, 'Exercises in Peace Education'.
FOR WHOM?
- This course is designed for Principals, Educators and Youth Workers
- those responsible for the educational environments for young people
between ages 5 to 17.
RESOURCE PERSON: Peter Gonsalves, author of "Exercises in Peace
Education", "We choose Peace", "Exercises in Media Education" and
editor of the 'Quality Life Education' Series.
VENUE: Tej-Prasarini Don Bosco Communications, Matunga, Mumbai 400019. [India]
DATE: September 11 (9.00 a.m.) to 13 (5.00 p.m.), 2003. Participants
can arrive on Sept. 10th after 5 p.m.
Contact: Fr. Darryl D'Souza sdb at Tej-Prasarini.
Tel: 24150680 / 24154118 / 24154106 Fax: 24145226; E-mail: tej at vsnl.com
Last day for registration: September 3, 2003
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Buzz on the perils of fundamentalist politics, on matters of peace
and democratisation in South Asia. SACW is an 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