SACW | 22 Sept. 2003

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire  |  22 September,  2003

[1] Pakistan:  On Sexism in Textbooks (Omar R. Quraishi)
[2] What's in a flag? (Sarmila Bose)
[3]  India: Batting for the BJP  (Amulya Ganguli)
[4] BJP goes off the track by renewing its temple agenda  (Kuldip Nayar)
[5] India: Limited and dangerous proposals to reform the criminal 
justice system
  (Amnesty International)
[6] India - Gujarat: The truth is out  (editorial,
[7]  India: Muslims Must Understand [ Letter to  India Abroad]  (Kaleem Kawaja)


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

[1.]

Dawn, 21 September 2003
Education


Misogynist readings
By Omar R. Quraishi

Most of the textbooks formulated by the curriculum wing of the 
ministry of education and prescribed by the provincial textbook 
boards are not known for their quality or content. Replete with 
typographical errors, historical and factual inaccuracies and 
downright bad language, they hardly, if ever, engage students. Quite 
a bit has been written about this aspect concerning textbooks in 
Pakistan.
However, bad as they are in terms that they hardly play any 
substantial role in opening the minds of the students who use them, 
the texts reinforce the strongly patriarchal (some would say even 
misogynist) strain that runs through much of Pakistani society. Women 
are usually shown in textbooks in subservient and highly traditional 
roles, and students given the impression that the women are worthy of 
respect most when they adhere to their traditional roles of 
mother/housewife or home-maker.
That this has happened at a time when women seem to be making their 
presence felt in the white-collar workplace, and in fields as 
prominent as the media, just goes to show the level of mediocrity and 
myopia found among those who write and produce textbooks in Pakistan. 
In fact, according to researchers Aamna Mattu and Neelam Hussain, 
much of this gender bias and stereotyping found in textbooks today 
has its roots in the 1959 Report of the Commission on National 
Education (Gender Biases and Stereotypes in School Texts).
Upon a random analysis (random because this would make the 
conclusions drawn from the survey more representative and hence more 
credible) of textbooks prescribed by the Punjab Textbook Board (the 
researchers said that for reasons of space only English textbooks for 
classes VII to X were anaylzed), they came to the following 
conclusions:
1. That those who make the textbooks feel statements and 
pronouncements by government officials and others in positions of 
authority regarding women's rights and ending gender discrimination 
are "purely rhetorical and need not be taken seriously".
2. That "patriarchal percepts of femininity and masculinity are so 
deeply rooted" that they prevent even those involved in educational 
policymaking and planning to look at their own attitudes towards such 
issues with any degree of self-reflection.
3. That those who write such textbooks fail to see the connection 
with the negative images and stereotypical representation of women in 
their texts and the impact these representation have on the 
perceptions of people in society. Either that, or despite knowing 
this to be clearly the case, they willfully portray women in roles 
that perpetuate such negative stereotypes, thereby inadvertently 
showing their own bias against women.
The report of the 1959 commission stressed the formulation of 
"national character" and according to the researchers reinforced the 
existing class divisions and gender bias in society. What is even 
more disturbing is that 44 years have passed since this report was 
drawn up and in that time no one in any government or education 
ministry has bothered to revise it or re-examine it. The result is 
that many of its conclusions - thoroughly obsolete, outdated and if 
fact retrogressive - continue to dictate the education curriculum.
The report makes some rather controversial assertions. One is that 
certain individuals in society are "naturally more talented, 
intelligent and capable of abstract and conceptual thinking and 
creativity, while others are naturally more prone to mechanical rule 
following". Now, some people would say that perhaps this isn't 
entirely all that untrue but the 1959 report links this divergent 
natural abilities with people's occupations and their place in the 
economy. It says that those who perform "manual, concrete and lower 
order tasks which do not require much thinking or conceptualization, 
but are based on repetitive actions, rote memorization and constant 
drill or practice" cannot be talented, creative or capable of 
intelligent discourse.
This illogical and patronizing approach is found in the report's view 
of female education. As Mattu and Hussain point out, "clear-cut 
gender roles are emphasized". Women should acquire those skills which 
will "ensure domestic bliss" and these are needle work, home craft, 
embroidery and (in the report's own words) "other suitable work of an 
artistic kind". These kinds of images showed up repeatedly in the 
textbooks that were analyzed. Clearly, the reference to women 
pursuing embroidery or other home-based work implies that women from 
upper-income backgrounds are being talked about since those from poor 
backgrounds in the rural areas would be too busy working in the 
fields while their counterparts in the cities would be employed as 
domestic servants.
The development and eventual establishment of home economics colleges 
in Pakistan during the 1960s is seen by the researchers as a way of 
the traditionalists conceding - but only cosmetically - to the 
demands of the more progressive elements of society. Quite rightly, 
it is pointed out that the evolution of home economics colleges 
allowed the demand for girls' education to be satisfied but in a way 
that those who now came forward to acquire education did so within 
boundaries set by essentially a patriarchal state. In describing the 
aims of this subject, the 1959 report said that it would "provide a 
young woman with the knowledge and skills and attitudes that will 
help her to be a more intelligent and effective wife and mother and 
improve the health, happiness and general well-being of her family". 
(But what about her own health, happiness and general well-being?)
Now, to the representations of women in today's textbooks, especially 
English books for classes VII to X. One book for class VII students 
had a lesson 'Family Relations'. As can be expected from the title of 
this lesson, its primary objective is to tell students the role 
played by each member in a family unit. After marriage a woman's is 
identified only by reference to her husband (which in fact happens 
all the time, to the extent that sometimes people don't even know the 
woman's actual name). The researchers fault such lessons on several 
counts.
Firstly, they teach female students that the only role for them later 
in life worthy of emulation is to become a mother. Now, there is 
nothing wrong in advocating that per se but to present that as the 
only viable option for a woman to acquire and command respect is not 
only ethically wrong it is empirically untrue. Those who write such 
lessons for textbooks also perhaps forget that the prefix 'Mrs.' is 
not really used anymore, the preference now being 'Ms.', and this is 
now the norm in most workplaces and means of communication. 'Family 
Relations' was found to be highly boring, repetitious and, as is the 
case with so many English textbooks, had bad English and grammar. 
Unfortunately, the education ministry's curriculum wings seems to 
have not realized that using a sermonizing and lecturing approach to 
students, couched in repetitious and badly worded sentences, is not 
the best of ways to engage young students towards learning. This is 
not to say that one is advocating that a story on family 
relationships should take the other extreme and condone, say, 
children rebelling against their parents. However, it does not have 
to be in the form of a boring sermon and could instead highlight the 
responsibility, understanding, warmth, friendship and poignancy that 
is a part of family life.
Another story, 'Going on Holiday' is analyzed. It too has its share 
of bad grammar and ends up reinforcing gender stereotypes. The 
decision to go on holiday is made by the husband, and his wife is 
only too happy to go along, and ends up making tea for everyone. The 
brother engages in a plausibly positive activity like flying a kite 
but his sister "whinges, complains and makes silly requests".
References to women who did well in history, other than Fatima 
Jinnah, are few. Even normal activities like swimming or working as 
an air stewardess seems to be reserved, the researchers say, only for 
women who are non-Pakistani and non-Muslim. This is because most of 
the textbooks had names like Mary or Mrs Brown for someone who could 
swim or who worked as an airhostess. This subconsciously implies that 
Pakistani girls (a) should not be expected to know how to swim and 
(b) should not really aspire to work as airhostesses.
Even cursory references to men and women seem to follow a strictly 
stereoptypical/gender-biased pattern. For example, men are usually 
referred to in active or heroic roles while women are always 
portrayed as submissive and accepting of whatever the man, or 
society, tells her. Men work in factories, men fight as soldiers, 
while women wash clothes, make tea or comb their hair. This, Mattu 
and Hussain point out, conveniently ignores the fact that men can 
also comb their hair, wash their own clothes and have been known to 
make tea.
Other than, as some detractors might say, sounding academic and a bit 
too nit-pickish, Aamna Mattu and Neelum Hussain make an important 
point in their conclusion. Such textbooks perpetuate the negative 
image of women in Pakistani society and play a larger than generally 
perceived role in the discrimination and bias that they face in their 
daily lives. The male and the female students who are exposed to them 
both grow up thinking that the "men alone have the right and the 
capacity for decision-making not only for themselves" but also for 
women.
And this is why violence, coercion and arbitrary use of force is so 
rampant in Pakistani society against women, especially those women 
who try to break out from the traditional mould prescribed for them 
by society. Such textbooks only reinforce commonly held views that 
women should not venture out of the house alone or should not sit on 
the roof of their homes and talk to a male neighbour or to a male 
acquaintance walking by in the street (both of which have often been 
cited as valid motives for murdering daughters, sisters or even 
mothers by men involved in so-called honour-killings).
One way of doing away with such retrogressive and archaic thinking 
would be if the ministry of education took the initiative to rewrite 
primary and secondary school textbooks to remove their deep-seated 
gender biases. This is crucial because what individuals learn and 
read early on in life, especially in school, usually leaves a lasting 
impression.


______


[2.]

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_22-9-2003_pg3_4
The Daily Times [Pakistan] September 22, 2003

What's in a flag?

Sarmila Bose

An Indian lady of my acquaintance who harbours profound prejudice 
against Muslims in general and Pakistanis in particular told her 
husband that her ideal man was Imran Khan - a common occurrence I 
suspect
This year around Independence Day public notices from the government 
of India instructed the populace on the 'do's' and 'don'ts' of the 
national flag. Following litigation by a citizen, Indians are at last 
allowed to display their national flag, a common occurrence in the 
United States, but the world's largest democracy clearly has no 
confidence in what its people might actually do with this national 
symbol.
The flag cannot be draped over anything, for example - except coffins 
of soldiers, I suppose. It cannot be worn as clothing - maybe this 
warning is due to the incident in which a female Indian designer wore 
the national flag as a skimpy dress. That was valiant of her, as the 
flag is so over-burdened with symbolism that it is difficult to make 
a tasteful dress out of it. I mean, what on earth does one do with 
the 'Ashok chakra'! Yet white sarees with saffron and green borders 
have been around for years and no one objected. American and British 
flags are routinely worn on clothing. Would the guardians of proper 
patriotic conduct object to the increasingly common practice of the 
national flag being painted on the faces of its citizens? Or a 
patriotically positioned tattoo?
If so much is made to ride on the 'right' symbols of patriotism, 
inevitably, the 'wrong' symbols cannot be far behind. Terrorist 
outrage in Mumbai has been followed by the swift arrest of the 
alleged culprits and the death in a police 'encounter' of the alleged 
mastermind. It reminds one of an earlier incident when Indian 
security forces shot dead two dreaded militants allegedly involved in 
an attack on the American Center in Calcutta in which several 
policemen were killed. Both the dead men were described as Pakistani 
- dreaded and dead militants in India are presumed to be Pakistani 
these days, unless proven otherwise later, if anyone bothers to do 
that.
They also often carry diaries on their persons, which give details of 
their dastardly deeds. And they tend to carry mobile phones, those 
must-have accessories of modern life, seemingly inseparable from 
murderous extremists as well. These reveal incriminating calls to 
mysterious puppeteers across the border. At least such is the 
breathless reportage every time such an incident occurs, and they do 
seem to occur with disquieting frequency.
It makes one wonder if extremist frenzy makes dreaded militants lose 
sight of the most elementary steps to cover their tracks, or whether 
being a terrorist zealot goes hand in hand in the first place with 
being 'analytically challenged'. In the American Center case, 
according to the authorities one of the dreaded and dead Pakistanis 
confessed his own name and address, his companion's name and address 
and admitted to conducting the attack before succumbing to his 
grievous injuries.
The very next day a man was arrested in Calcutta and charged with 
being a key conspirator in the American Center attack. All manner of 
incriminating evidence was allegedly found in his home and in the 
apartment used by the militants. Media reports said the findings 
included photos of Osama bin Laden. Of course, by then it would have 
been difficult to find any household that was completely free of the 
image of Osama in some form. However, worse was to come. A week later 
a second search of the suspect's home allegedly yielded - horror of 
horrors - a Pakistani flag, which was 'seized' by the police. It 
appeared to have been overlooked in the earlier 'search and seizure'.
In the trial now in progress of all the apprehended suspects 
including this hoarder of incriminating 'anti-national' symbols, the 
'seized' Pakistani flag has duly made its appearance as part of the 
evidence produced by the prosecution. At that point in the 
proceedings the accused protested from the dock that he had had no 
such thing in his possession. He charges the police with planting the 
flag in order to paint him a 'traitor' in the eyes of the public.
Be that as it may, the inclusion of an allegedly Pakistani flag found 
in a private home in India as evidence in a terrorism case poses an 
awkward dilemma for this writer. For if the police turned up at my 
house they would find a Pakistani flag there too! They would not have 
to 'search' for it really, as the Pakistani flag is prominently 
displayed on the mantelpiece in the living room! There it is among 
all the other South Asian flags, the stars and stripes, the Union 
Jack, the Irish tricolour and a clutch of other national flags 
diligently acquired from the United Nations. I had certainly had no 
idea that the possession of a neighbouring country's flag might 
constitute a cognisable offence in India!
To make matters worse, my children are fans of 'Junoon'. They are 
particularly keen on a catchy tune called 'Jazba-e-junoon' and have 
been known to dance riotously to blaring renditions of 'Pakistan hai 
hamara, Pakistan hai tumhara, kabhi na bhulo'. This item, I found 
later, is missing in the 'Junoon' albums available in India. One 
concerned relative did suggest to me that I might want to keep the 
volume down, in case the neighbours shopped us and the children got 
hauled off under POTA. Mercifully the children have moved on to a 
folksong called 'Pocha-kaka' - 'Rotten Uncle' - in the East Bengali 
dialect by the Bengali band 'Bhoomi', about a man who would not come 
home from the river until he had caught a fish.
To return to the 'offending' Pakistani flag - I wonder what would 
happen if a person accused of terrorist offences in India were found 
to be in possession of the British flag, or the Japanese one, or how 
about the Saudi flag (along with those pictures of Osama). Does one 
have to keep one's voice down to sing the beautiful song by 
Rabindranath Tagore, 'Amar Sonar Bangla' - 'My golden Bengal' - in 
the Bengali folk style called 'baul', because it is now the national 
anthem of Bangladesh? What about the flags of all the other countries 
of the world? Clearly none is estimated to have the impact of the 
Pakistani one. Is it an offence to possess an Indian flag in Pakistan?
India seems to be riven in contradictions regarding all symbols 
Pakistani. Indians appear to love Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan and Abida 
Parveen. An Indian lady of my acquaintance who harbours profound 
prejudice against Muslims in general and Pakistanis in particular 
told her husband on her wedding night that her ideal man was Imran 
Khan - a common occurrence I suspect for Indian men foolish enough to 
ask! I pointed out that Imran Khan was both Muslim and Pakistani, but 
the lady waved me away. Clearly Imran Khan was Imran Khan!
Nor is he the only Pakistani cricketer with subcontinental appeal. A 
few months back I was sitting in Dubai airport, exhausted, waiting 
for the connection to Lahore at an unearthly hour, when a tall man 
with a most spectacular torso came and sat down right opposite me. 
Glancing up I recognised the familiar face of Wasim Akram. I must 
confess that my travel-weariness vanished in an instant and I was 
able to get through the last leg of the journey in a refreshed state 
of mind! No wonder that while Wasim Akram cannot play cricket in 
India, his smiling image can be plastered all over Indian billboards 
in advertisements.
Still, in a 'borderless world' full of resurgent militant 
nationalism, narrow-minded little 'patriot acts' seem to be sprouting 
all over the place. Flags, emblems, colours, melodies; will they all 
be divided up and loaded with meanings in black and white, or will 
they be swept away by the cross-border currents of global 
citizenship? If the alleged possession of a Pakistani flag in India 
can be endowed with the connotation of treacherous villainy, what 
might be the infinite ways of falling afoul of the official 
guidelines on the Indian tricolour?

Sarmila Bose is Assistant Editor, Ananda Bazar Patrika, India & 
Visiting Scholar, Elliott School of International Affairs, George 
Washington University

______


[3.]

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/printedition/220903/detIDE01.shtml
The Hindustan Times [India]  September 22, 2003
  	 
Batting for the BJP
Amulya Ganguli

  For several years now, the BBC's Mark Tully has provided indirect 
support to the BJP's Hindutva cause. His contention, as reiterated in 
a new TV documentary, Hindu Nation, is that secularism is unsuitable 
for India. The reason: it is a doctrine which keeps religion out of 
public life, an attempt which is bound to fail - and has failed - in 
a country as "deeply religious" as India. Hence, the Congress's 
decline and the BJP's rise.

The first flaw in this thesis is how does one distinguish between a 
deeply religious and a less religious country and then claim that 
secularism will only succeed in the latter? Second, the Congress did 
not fail because it espoused secularism. It failed because the 
party's name had become synonymous with corruption. Its long years in 
power had made the party rotten inside. Nothing showed the 
degeneration better than the identification in the public mind of the 
ubiquitous Gandhi cap worn by Congressmen with blackmarketeers.

If, of all the parties, the BJP has been able to cash in on the 
tarnishing of the Congress's image, it is, first, because of the 
Sangh parivar's organisational spread, which enabled the party to use 
the services of the RSS, the VHP and other fraternal units in its 
campaign. Second, the BJP was quite uninhibited in its exploitation 
of communal sentiments to sway public opinion. It has not even been 
averse to using riots to win votes, as Gujarat has shown.

However, at the national level, its present strength in the Lok Sabha 
is probably the highest it will ever get. All indications are that it 
will not reach this figure of 182 in the 2004 election. It is clear, 
then, that the BJP's use of religion in a "deeply religious" country 
hasn't been a runaway success.

The reason why the BJP has fallen well short of a majority in 
Parliament is the nature of an average Indian's religious feelings. 
Unlike the West, especially Europe, where overt religiosity is on the 
decline - an aspect of life which may have distorted Tully's thinking 
- an Indian is almost aggressively religious in the matter of 
visiting temples or mosques or churches or gurdwaras.

The BJP made the mistake, however, of interpreting such religious 
sentiments in communal terms. The party believed that if you are a 
religious-minded Hindu, you will be anti-Muslim as well. The BJP also 
tried to buttress this mistaken belief by demonising the Muslims by 
blaming their ancestors for breaking temples and the present 
generation for terrorism.

But the innate tolerance of the Hindus, as also the respect with 
which they regard all religions, have frustrated the BJP's pernicious 
efforts. Tully vaguely acknowledges this when he pleads for tolerance 
in public life, but he has been a victim of the other trap of 
mistaking a Hindu's reverence for his own religion as animosity for 
the religions of others.

Misperception is not his only failing. His belief that a highly 
religious country cannot afford secularism is fundamentally flawed. 
What he is saying is that such a country can only have a theocratic 
government. What he ignores is that secularism - the separation of 
church and State - is as fundamental a tenet of modern governance as 
the 'one man, one vote' rule. Without secularism, every democracy 
will become a victim of endless strife because no country is 
mono-religious.

To say that secularism is unsuitable for a religious-minded country 
is like saying, like Ayub Khan, that democracy is unsuitable for a 
hot country. If Tully's argument is accepted, then it was wrong for 
the US authorities to have removed the granite block with the Ten 
Commandments inscribed on it from the premises of the Alabama Supreme 
Court because the "deeply religious" people of Alabama were against 
its removal.

But a secular State could not allow the block to remain on government 
property. It could be installed in a private park or a private home 
or a private institution. But the government could not have anything 
to do with it because it represented one religion in a country of 
many faiths. Hence the absence of devotional music on the 
audio-visual media in India which Tully bemoans.

The separation of church and State is an even greater necessity in 
India than in the US because India is a country with 4,635 
communities, 325 languages and 24 scripts.

It is the birthplace of four major religions - Hinduism, Buddhism, 
Sikhism and Jainism - not to mention the animistic cults of tribals, 
and is home to Islam, Christianity and Zoroastrianism. If devotional 
music is to be played on radio and television, even one-line hymns 
will take up a good part of the morning unless only bhajans are sung, 
as the BJP will want.

It is the height of absurdity, therefore, to claim that secularism is 
unsuitable for India - and blame Nehru for it, as Gurcharan Das of 
India Unbound fame does in the documentary. It is Nehru's and 
Gandhi's insistence on secularism and pluralism which has saved 
India. If they had followed the Sangh parivar's prescription of 
cultural nationalism - one country, one people, one culture - where 
culture means the Hindu way of life, India would have been torn apart.

We can see what would have happened if India followed such sectarian 
policies from the events in our neighbourhood. Pakistan broke up 
because its dominant western wing tried to impose Urdu on East 
Pakistan, which the Bengalis resisted. Even the oneness of their 
religion could not save the Pakistanis from the split. Sri Lanka is 
embroiled in a civil war because of the majoritarian policies 
followed by the Sinhalas who tried to foist their language and 
religion (Buddhism) on the Tamil-speaking Hindus of the north. Even 
the fraternity of Hinduism and Buddhism did not prevent the rupture.

All over the world, from the Balkans to Northern Ireland to the 
African continent, sectarian policies in the form of establishing the 
primacy of a religion or a race or a language have led to bloodshed. 
In India, the wisdom of Gandhi and Nehru, and in South Africa of 
Nelson Mandela, have ensured that their countries will remain united. 
And the basis of that unity is what Mandela said on the occasion of 
his becoming the president of a multiracial South Africa: "Never, 
never and never again shall it be that this beautiful land will 
experience the oppression of one by another."

Secularism and pluralism go hand in hand. If a multicultural society 
such as India's is to survive, the government has to abide by secular 
principles so that no religion is given pride of place. All religions 
will have equal status. This was Nehru's single-most important 
contribution to make India survive the trauma of partition, carried 
out on the basis of religion. If the RSS types had been in positions 
of power at the time, India's fate would have been something like 
Rwanda's, with our own Hutus and Tutsis trying to exterminate one 
another.

______


[4]


Gulf News [UAE] September 20, 2003

Kuldip Nayar: BJP goes off the track by renewing its temple agenda

Whether history repeats itself or not, it comes back full circle to 
memories long familiar to people. Some 12 years ago, the Bhartiya 
Janata Party (BJP) started a 'rath yatra' (chariot journey) to 
polarise the society in north India. It generated passions which 
ultimately made the crowds pull down the Babri Masjid. Never since 
partition had there been so many killings as in the wake of the 
'yatra'.

Blessed by the RSS, the BJP is back to its destructive best. It has 
renewed its old agenda: an agitation to build a temple at Ayodhya 
without awaiting the court's decision on ownership. This may be yet 
another exercise in whipping up religious sentiments and stir Hindus 
and Muslims, all with pernicious results.

When Indian Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani led the 'yatra' he was 
the BJP president. Today, even when he is India's deputy prime 
minister, he has attended the RSS-BJP meeting to finalise the 
campaign to build the temple. The first brick is the booklet which 
the BJP has printed on the Ram temple. Advani has contributed two 
articles to the booklet while under house arrest after the demolition 
of the Babri Masjid in 1992.

Whether the two articles would incite communal passions or not is 
debatable. But the pertinent question is: why should the No.2 in the 
government be associating himself with extremists and 
fundamentalists, who look like re-igniting the mandir-masjid 
controversy that may throw northern India into a communal cauldron?

It is clear that the BJP wants to bring the temple issue on to the 
centrestage for its Hindutva agenda which it believes sells. But 
should the country's deputy prime minister be a part of it? He has 
sworn loyalty to the constitution which is based on the country's 
ethos of secularism. Is he not violating legal obligations even if he 
does not bother about the morality aspect?

Advani also behaves in an irresponsible manner when he says the 
Archaeological Survey of India's report on excavations at Ayodhya has 
"strengthened" the case for a temple on the disputed land. The court, 
which ordered the excavations, is yet to give its judgment. His 
observation could tantamount to influencing the verdict.

It is obvious that the BJP has felt it necessary to bring the temple 
issue to the fore even before the end of the National Democratic 
Alliance (NDA) rule. The BJP had given an undertaking to the 
constituents that the party would keep the temple question aside 
while the NDA was in power. The alliance still has one year to go. 
There is seemingly no danger to the government. It comfortably sailed 
through the no-confidence motion only last month.

What it indicates is that the BJP is worried over the Lok Sabha 
election which is one year hence. Maybe, the split with the Bahujan 
Samaj Party (BSP) has hastened the thinking. The BJP was depending on 
the BSP to get its votes, averaging 15 to 20 per cent, in the Lok 
Sabha polls, and before that in the state assembly elections in 
Delhi, Chattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan scheduled for this 
November.

With political calculations going awry, the fall back on the tried 
temple issue was a natural option. Even otherwise, the BJP had little 
choice when the RSS, its mentor, told it to make up with the Vishwa 
Hindu Parishad (VHP) which was hell bent on duplicating Gujarat by 
polluting the atmosphere in the name of the temple.

The party does not seem to realise that Gujarat Chief Minister 
Narendra Modi has become a millstone around its neck. In fact, the 
observation by the Chief Justice of India that he had no faith in the 
Modi government or its prosecuting machinery to get justice for the 
victims has sent shock waves throughout the country. Some of the 
Hindu intelligentsia, which was with the BJP on building the temple, 
has felt so horrified over the Chief Justice's remarks that it is 
distancing itself from the BJP.

The party would have served its cause better if it had asked Modi to 
resign. Defence Minister George Fernandes, who is the blue-eyed boy 
of the RSS, has naturally said that Modi was not obliged to resign 
legally. This is true. But there is something called morality which 
George forgot long ago. What else is 'raj dharma' (calls of 
governance), the words used by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee 
after the carnage in Gujarat? The Chief Justice used the same words 
while chiding Modi.

Vajpayee, who used the words 'raj dharma', is conspicuous by his 
silence. His assurance at Chennai that India will not go communal is 
correct because the country may not stay united in the absence of 
pluralism. But shouldn't the prime minister do something to 
strengthen the ethos of secularism? He should assert himself to stop 
at least the BJP from reopening such issues which may rip society 
apart.

Sticking to Modi on the one hand and reopening the mandir issue on 
the other may create fire and fury. But such a scenario does not help 
the nation. At a time when fundamentalists and terrorists want to 
destabilise the country, the BJP's approach should have been to 
create an atmosphere of consensus. When it says that the mandir issue 
can be settled either by the court's verdict or through negotiations 
between Hindus and Muslims, then why threaten with an agitation?

The problem with the BJP is that it has no issue other than the 
communal divide it wants to pursue. Some in the party probably 
realise the lessening returns. Still their mind does not go beyond 
Hindutva.

In fact, this is the sum total of the BJP's achievements during its 
five-year rule at the centre. Apart from communalism, it has 
distinguished itself in two other fields - corruption and nepotism. 
There have never been so many scams as there did during Vajpayee's 
rule. And anyone who had anything to do with the RSS has been well 
rewarded.

One does not know what the BJP can do to retrieve the situation in 
Gujarat. But it can possibly solve the mandir problem. The Muslim 
community may well be inclined to offer the site of the Babri Masjid 
to the government provided there is a constitutional amendment to let 
religious places remain as they were when India won freedom on August 
15, 1947.

It means that the RSS must honour the mosques at Mathura and 
Varanasi. But then what happens to its Hindutva agenda?

______


[5.]

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
PRESS RELEASE

AI Index:	ASA 20/026/2003 (Public)
News Service No:	217
19 September 2003

India: Limited and dangerous proposals to reform the criminal justice system

There is no doubt that reforms of the criminal justice system in 
India are long overdue, but the recommendations made recently by a 
government-appointed Committee represent an extremely narrow 
interpretation of the problems which ail the system and a set of 
solutions which ignore fundamental human rights safeguards, Amnesty 
International said today.

In a report commenting on recommendations made by the Malimath 
Committee to the government in April this year, Amnesty International 
has highlighted the fact that they ignore international human rights 
standards which establish a framework for human rights protection 
within criminal justice systems throughout the world, and also fails 
to address a vast range of important concerns about the current 
functioning of the criminal justice system in India.

"The discriminatory functioning of the criminal justice system has 
not been properly addressed. Instead, the Committee's proposals risk 
further discrimination and miscarriages of justice".

Six days ago the Supreme Court of India severely criticised the state 
government of Gujarat for failing to provide justice to victims of 
communal violence which took place there in 2002. It also pointed to 
the possibility of collusion between the Government and the 
prosecution in subverting the cause of justice. The Committee's 
proposed reforms do not address such situations which involve 
institutional discrimination and bias.

The report in particular identifies recommendations which Amnesty 
International believes will increase the risk of torture for those in 
police detention, severely weakening safeguards for fair trial and 
reduce legal protections for women.

For the full text of the report, please go to:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/india/document.do?id=ECA716A364699C8980256DA40052B2C9

______


[6.]

Editorial , The Hindustan Times, September 22, 2003

The truth is out

  The culpability of the Narendra Modi government is being exposed 
with every new revelation before the Supreme Court in the Best Bakery 
case.

The latest is the police admission that they acted deaf and dumb when 
the witnesses were being intimidated - or 'won over' by the accused, 
as the state's director-general of police has told the apex court. 
The phrase is interesting, for it suggests a victory for the accused, 
who were none other than the criminal elements who burnt down the 
bakery, killing 14 people. And this 'victory' of the criminals would 
not have been possible but for the tacit police acquiescence in the 
brow-beating of the hapless victims.

The police's dubious role has also been revealed by the DGP's 
confession that the police commissioner of Vadodara had told him 
about how the witnesses were being 'won over', but neither of the two 
officials took any step to protect them. This failure is all the more 
reprehensible because the police authorities had assured the National 
Human Rights Commission about providing such protection. It is not 
difficult to understand why the police remained silent spectators 
while the witnesses were being threatened. As a commentator, who is a 
Gujarati, has recently written, the state is currently being held 
hostage by criminal elements owing allegiance to the Sangh parivar.

After these revelations, it is now easier to believe in the 
allegations made at the time of the riots that the police were told 
by their political bosses not to be too energetic in controlling the 
outbreak. Just as they turned a blind eye to the intimidation of the 
witnesses, they were also immune to the pleas of the victims during 
the riots. With each passing day, therefore, the complicity of the 
Modi government in the pogrom is becoming clear. But for the 
institutional probes, such as those conducted by the NHRC and the 
judiciary, the state government would not have been brought to book 
for its disgraceful acts of omission and commission. There is still a 
long way to go to bring justice to the victims, especially when the 
Modi administration has been acting as a stumbling block. But at 
least a beginning has been made.

_____


[7.]

The following letter was published in India Abroad, September 19, 2003:


MUSLIMS MUST UNDERSTAND..............


In the last decade a significant number of moderate Hindus in India 
have started supporting the anti-secular and anti-minority groups who 
want to transform India into a theocratic Hindu nation.  That bodes 
ill for the nation.

The situation calls for an introspection by Muslims, India's largest 
minority community.

Muslims should put themselves in the shoes of these newly converted 
Hinduttava forces.  They should put themselves in their minds, their 
eyes and souls.  From that vantage point, they should look at 
happenings in India and at their own community. They 
should understand why these moderate Hindus have changed.

Several things added together have caused much damage. Muslims should 
understand that terrorism in Kashmir is heavily bleeding the secular 
ethos of India.

The fact that over the last decade a large number of Kashmiri Hindus 
have been driven out of Kashmir, and many of them killed has had a 
tremendous impact on the basic thinking of middleclass educated 
Hindus.

Terrorism in the heartland has left many Hindus insecure and angry.

Loudspeakers outside of mosques broadcast prayers early in the 
morning, and late at night, which has created revulsion in the minds 
of educated Hindus.

The Students Islamic Movement of India, Shahi Imam Bukhari,  the 
fanatics in Coimbatore and Maharashtra, the calls for Jihad and the 
distribution of inflamatory posters have enraged middleclass Hindus.

Minor issues like a few Muslims leaders opposing the singing of Vande 
Matram on national occassions is adding fuel to fire.

Even though these instances are less than 1% of what happens in the 
Muslim community in India, the pro-Hinduttava forces take note of 
each of them and blow each of them out of proportion.  The situation 
gets aggravated because moderate and secular Muslims,who are in 
majority, do not get involved in their community's civic affairs.

To reverse the trend of educated, moderate Hindus  joining the 
Hinduttava forces, the Muslim community has to address the 
frustrations of Hindus who do not see the grievous harm, like the 
Gujarat sectarian violence of last year, that it is causing.

The Indian Muslim intellegentia must get involved in their 
communiuty's affairs.  They should be more vocal in condemning 
these terrible happenings, in confronting and isolating the small 
number of extremists in their community.

Kaleem Kawaja
Washington DC.

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

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.

--