SACW | 2 Dec. 2003
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at mnet.fr
Tue Dec 2 06:31:10 CST 2003
SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WIRE | 2 December, 2003
From the South Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net
_______
[1] Pakistan: Don't touch the Balmiki temple! + Misapplying the blasphemy law
[2] India - Pakistan: All Quiet on World's
Highest, Coldest, Costliest Battlefield (Ranjit
Devraj)
[3] Invitation to World Social Forum
Globalization and War Assembly (@WSF Bombay)
[4] India: Speaking Volumes - The farce of the fatwa (Nilanjana S Roy)
[5] India: [Censorship in Gujarat] Not Much of a Controversy (G.P. Deshpande)
[6] India: Justice for Harmony march (Dec.6, New Delhi)
[7] India: request from film maker seeking assistance
[8] India: [ opposing the divide on the basis of
religion ] Pearls of Love Calender 2004
[9] India: Press Release ""special report" to the
Supreme Court" - Right to Food Campaign
--------------
[1]
The Daily Times
December 2, 2003
Editorial: Don't touch the Balmiki temple!
The Cantonment Board Peshawar (CBP) wants to
build a commercial plaza at the site of a temple
of the Balmiki community that has lived in
Peshawar since 1861. The community was given
notice till October 30 to vacate the place so
that the temple could be pulled down, but the
deadline passed because the defence ministry
asked the CBP to exercise restraint. The
community is called Kalabari and has 70 families
living in the condemned locality. MNA Giyan
Singh, representing the Balmikis in parliament,
has brought up the issue and asked the government
to respect the rights of the minorities. True or
not, the president of the Minority Councillors
Alliance, Parvez Iqbal, has stated that the
Peshawar cantonment authority had no title to the
property. It was owned before the partition of
1947 by one Mir Chand Khanna who had donated it
to the Balmiki community.
The 'targeted' areas are Garhi Ahata and 84-Ahata
inside the Peshawar cantonment. This has been
inhabited by the Balmiki sect which falls outside
the three castes recognised by Hinduism. In other
words, they are the untouchables that still
suffer disabilities in India and are consigned to
the role of garbage collectors. In Pakistan, too,
for a long time the Balmikis have been the
'khakrob' (sweeper) community, but with the
passage of time their status in society has
improved. In Sindh and Balochistan, their
population has decreased after 1947 but they have
always been treated well. Today their largest
settlement is in Multan where they are known as
the city's oldest community. Sociological studies
have been conducted on them and a betterment in
their circumstances has been noted by all
scholars. Needless to say, the Balmikis have done
well in Pakistan because of lack of religious
sanction to the notion of untouchability.
But let us admit it is not always easy to prosper
as a non-Muslim in Pakistan when Islam is
interpreted increasingly in an extreme and
fundamentalist way. Whenever there is a political
crisis the focus shifts to the minuscule
non-Muslim communities and some disreputable
elements of society get away with injustice and
cruelty towards the minorities that depend for
their security on the majority community. For
example, in 1992, just after the demolition of
the Babri mosque in India, a number of Hindu
temples were destroyed in Pakistan. The entire
world condemned what the Indian fanatics had done
to a Muslim monument; it also had to condemn what
the Muslims of Pakistan and Bangladesh did to the
innocent and helpless Hindu communities living
within them. When the Taliban government
destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan, the
international reaction was therefore quite
intense. One can therefore say that one big
reason why the Taliban lost international
support, among other reasons, was their wonton
destruction of the Buddhas.
It would be inadvisable to oust the Balmikis from
their dwelling in Peshawar. Even if the
cantonment board authority has the legal right to
do it, it should stay clear of demolishing the
temple. The ministry of defence has done the
right thing by stopping the cantonment authority
from going ahead with the job of building a plaza
in the area. Any other plan would have passed
muster but not a commercial structure that
actually replaces a place of worship. CBP should
spend some funds on the improvement of the
Balmiki settlement if it can, but it should not
even think of destroying a place of worship. The
global backlash will be extreme and Pakistan will
lose a lot of face just for the sake of a
commercial plaza. *
Misapplying the blasphemy law
In a town outside Lahore a Christian has been
charged with blasphemy and handed over to the
police. This must arouse concern among the
believing Muslims of Pakistan. The incident
recounted in the press went something like this.
A Christian embraced Islam and was welcomed into
the faith by the Muslim neighbours. Another
Christian, upset by the conversion, reprimanded
him severely. It is said that when the neighbours
tried to stop him, he wouldn't listen and
resorted to harsh language against the convert.
This led to a quarrel. The offending man was
handed over to the police after an FIR under the
Blasphemy Law was registered against him.
We can predict what will happen now unless
someone in authority is reasonable and far
sighted. The police will rough up the wretched
fellow because he has been condemned by the local
inhabitants even though the charge against him is
far from being proven. The case will go to the
district court. The sessions judge will find
himself under mullah pressure to hand down the
death sentence because there will be no dearth of
witnesses to the man's blasphemy. It will take
three to four years before the condemned man, if
he has any resources, will come before the High
Court on appeal. The High Court may find that his
outrage against the conversion of a
fellow-Christian was normal and human and that
there was mitigation involved in the act of
blasphemy - if there was any - under extreme
provocation. Since unfortunately the law has not
been framed well, the High Court may find some
lacuna or the other in the prosecution to let him
off the hook. This whole process will take away
at least five years away from the life of the
condemned man.
Will Chaudry Pervez Elahi, the chief minister of
the Punjab, come to the help of this ill-educated
man in particular and such illiterate people in
general who, in a fit of rage or mental
imbalance, get trapped in blasphemy cases that
are exaggerated beyond belief? Shouldn't such
cases be closed through suitable mediation before
they are registered as FIRs? *
_____
[2]
Inter Press Service
November 28, 2003
All Quiet on World's Highest, Coldest, Costliest Battlefield
Ranjit Devraj
For the first time in two decades, the big guns
have fallen silent on the world's highest,
coldest and costliest battlefield because India
and Pakistan saw the wisdom of extending the Eid
ceasefire in Kashmir this week all the way to the
Siachen glacier.
NEW DELHI, Nov 28 (IPS) - For the first time in
two decades, the big guns have fallen silent on
the world's highest, coldest and costliest
battlefield because India and Pakistan saw the
wisdom of extending the Eid ceasefire in Kashmir
this week all the way to the Siachen glacier.
Everything about Siachen runs into superlatives,
including the fact that the battle to gain
control of the glacier -- called the world's
Third Pole because of its minus 40 degrees
Celsius temperatures -- is reckoned as the
longest-running armed conflict between two
regular armies in modern times.
Estimates of the costs to both South Asian rival
countries in terms of human suffering and damage
to their national economies are staggering.
They are also a measure of the cussedness with
which the two countries, armed with nuclear
weapons since 1998, have fought each other for
well over half-a-century to gain full control
over Kashmir which now stands divided between
them.
Indian author Amitav Ghosh, well-known for his
well-researched works, writes in the book
'Countdown': ''If the money spent on the glacier
were to be divided up and handed out to the
people of India and Pakistan, every household in
both countries would be able to go out and a new
cooking stove or a bicycle.''
Cooking stoves, bicycles and other items of
ordinary daily use are coveted by the
impoverished populations of both countries that
together number 1.2 billion people --with at
least 40 percent of them living below the poverty
line and earning less than a dollar a day.
India alone spends a million dollars a day on
Siachen - a glaciated strip measuring 77
kilometres in length and three kilometres in
width - but can afford to keep the battle going
longer because of its larger and more diversified
economy.
Of the 3,500 Indian soldiers who have so far
perished on the glacier, where the real killers
are cold temperatures, rarefied air and
avalanches, fewer than a hundred have actually
have died from hostile fire. The figures for
Pakistan would be lower, but not too far
different.
Journalists visiting the glacier on regular tours
conducted by the army invariably come away awed
by the logistics of supplying the men on the
glacier with food and ammunition. This has to be
done using helicopters since no road can reach
the area.
Adding to the long list of Siachen's superlatives
is the helipad at Sonam, the world's highest at
21,000 feet.
The origins of what many have little difficulty
in also recognising as the world's 'most absurd
conflict' lies in the vague language used when
the Line of Control, which runs through Kashmir,
was first drawn up in 1949 following a brief but
inconclusive war between India and Pakistan over
what was until then the independent princely
state of Jammu and Kashmir.
When Muslim Pakistan and Hindu-majority India
were created in 1947 following the decolonisation
of a larger British India, the Indian state of
Jammu and Kashmir or now Indian-controlled
Kashmir, was not part of the deal. It was not
long before the two new countries began fighting
over it.
Pakistan took control over the Northern Areas and
what it calls Azad Kashmir, while India retained
two-thirds of the territory including Jammu,
Ladakh and the Kashmir valley. No one thought of
Siachen.
Because no Indian or Pakistani troops were
present in the geographically inhospitable
north-eastern areas beyond point NJ9842 on the
map, the ceasefire line was not demarcated on the
ground but stated by the 1949 ceasefire agreement
to run ''thence north to the glaciers'' until it
reached the Chinese border.
''Since the Siachen glacier region falls within
the undelineated territory beyond the last
defined section of the Line of Control, map
grid-point NJ 9842, Indian and Pakistani
territorial claims are based on their respective
interpretations of the vague language contained
in the 1949 and 1972 agreements,'' says a joint
study by the Pakistani scholar Samina Ahmed and
Varun Sahni, who teaches International Studies at
the Jawaharlal Nehru University here.
Released by the Cooperative Monitoring Centre,
Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque in
New Mexico, the 1998 study entitled 'Freezing the
Fighting: Military Disengagement on the Siachen
Glacier' is considered the most authoritative and
neutral one available on the subject.
According to Ahmed and Sahni, for India,
Siachen's geostrategic importance lies in the
fact that ''its control would support India's
defence of Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir against
Pakistani and/or Chinese threats''.
In Pakistan's perceptions, say the joint
researchers, ''the Siachen dispute is relevant to
the dispute with India over Kashmir, albeit
indirectly''.
The claim that Siachen is a part of Pakistan's
Northern Areas is significant because Pakistan
has since independence gradually incorporated
this within the state while, maintaining that the
Northern Areas were never under the jurisdiction
of the state of Jammu and Kashmir in undivided
India.
According to Ahmed and Sahni, the primary
objective of Pakistan's strategy ''has been to
drive the cost of occupation high enough to force
India to make concessions in any future
settlement on Siachen''.
Meanwhile, the ceasefire has encouraged proposals
to use the glacier for saner purposes than as a
battlefield, where no quarter has been given or
taken since 1984. During that year, Indian troops
were airlifted onto it, beating Pakistan in a
race to gain the commanding heights of Siachen
above 22,000 feet.
Environmentalists from both India and Pakistan
would like to see the conversion of Siachen into
a 'peace park' and undo the ecological damage
caused by heavy troop deployments on it and the
frequent firing of artillery shells.
Far from being a bleak and desolate glacier,
Siachen is a biodiversity-rich area and home to
snow leopards, brown bears and ibex that are
threatened by the activities of the human species.
In June, the World Commission on Protected Areas
(WCPA) and World Conservation Union urged India
and Pakistan to include in the normalisation
process the ''establishment of a Siachen Peace
Park to protect and restore the spectacular
landscapes which are home to many endangered
species, including the snow leopard.'' (END)
_____
[3]
World Social Forum Globalization and War Assembly
AN OPEN INVITATION TO A GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE GLOBAL ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT
16-21 January 2004 Mumbai, India
Despite the opposition of the world's majority,
the United States and its allies went on to
invade Iraq in an illegal war that has so far
killed up to 10,000 civilians and soldiers. But
while the weapons of mass destruction have not
been found, the Iraqis' resources have been put
on sale as part of a wholesale imposition of
neo-liberal economic policies. State-owned
corporations will be privatized and trade will be
liberalized through massive reductions in
tariffs. With all the official reasons now proven
to be lies, it is clear that this was a war for
oil, for market, and for empire.
Meanwhile, the endless global "war on terror"
rages on in various countries, giving the US a
pretext for its military interventions across the
globe and providing repressive governments an
excuse for clamping down on legitimate dissent.
In the face of these distressing developments, we
call on the anti-war movement to come together
and act.
We invite everyone to a general assembly of the
global anti-war movement during the World Social
Forum (WSF) 2004 this coming January 16 to 21 in
Mumbai, India.
Recognizing that confronting a global warmonger
requires an internationally coordinated strategy,
the assembly is envisioned to be the biggest and
most representative meeting of the anti-war
movement yet since the invasion of Iraq. It is
intended to be an occasion for discussing and
debating the global situation as well as for
planning and strategizing on the movement's plans
and priorities.
It will have five component events:
-the Strategy Sessions: open discussions and
debates on the movements' strategies, plans, and
priorities -Self-Organized Events: organizations
are encouraged to independently organize
conferences, workshops, seminars, testimonials,
debates, and panels on more specific anti-war
issues such as US bases, nuclear weapons,
anti-terrorist bills, regional conflicts,
Palestine, etc. -Activists' Meetings: open
meetings among anti-war activists, social
movements, NGOs, etc. in attempt to deepen the
links among them and coordinate their actions
-Closing Conference: for announcing and affirming
the movements' decisions on its plans and
priorities -Solidarity March: general march to
close the WSF with a specifically anti-war section
This anti-war general assembly is among the many
events during the WSF, the biggest annual
gathering of a growing global peace and justice
movement that's united against corporate-led
globalization and militarization and united
behind the belief that "Another World is
Possible!"
The historic February 15 mobilizations that drew
millions of people around the world, which was
first conceived during the European Social Forum
2002 and adopted as a common plan of action
during the WSF last January, showed the potential
of the global anti-war movement. This general
assembly hopes to further translate that
potential to action, to sustain the movement's
momentum, and to chart its future direction.
We hope to see you there.
In solidarity,
(Endorsers as of 20 November 2003)
All Together-Korea
Anti-War Coalition - South Africa
Asia Pacific Movement on Debt Development
Asian Peace Alliance
Asian Peace Alliance-Japan
ATTAC-Japan
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (UK)
Campaña por la Desmilitarización de las Américas (CADA)
Center for Economic Research and Social Change
Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (India)
Condi-Iraqi National Democratic Coalition
Continental Campaign Against FTAA
Corp Watch (USA)
Central Unica de los Trabajadores (CUT) (Brazil)
El Foro Social de Madrid
Focus on the Global South
Freedom from Debt Coalition
Gathering for Peace-Philippines
GENSUIKIN (Japan Congress Against A-& H-Bombs)
GENSUIKYO (Japan Council Against A and H Bombs)
Global Exchange
Globalize from Below-Korea
Hemispheric Social Alliance
Iniciativa Mexicana Contra la Guerra.
No en Nuestro Nombre
International Association of Peace Messenger Cities
International Civilian Campaign for the Protection of the Palestinian People
Italian Movements of the European Social Forum
Jubilee South KALAYAAN! (Katipunan para sa Pagpapalaya ng Sambayanan)
Philippines Korean Federation of Medical Groups for Health Rights (KFHR)
National Youth and Student Peace Coalition (USA)
Nuclear Free Philippines Coalition People's Plan Study Group (Japan)
People's Task Force for Bases Clean Up-Philippines Peace Boat (Japan)
Red Mexicana de Accion frente al Libre Comercio
Social Movements Network Solidarity (USA)
Stop the War Coalition - UK
Stop the War Coalition - Greece
The All India Peace & Solidarity Organisation (AIPSO)
The ASR Resource Centre
The Muslim Youth Movement of South Africa
The No War on Iraq Coordination-Turkey
The People's Peace Alliance (Pakistan)
The South Asian Women for Peace United for Peace and Justice - US
World Peace Council Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA) (India)
_____
[4]
Business Standard
December 02, 2003
SPEAKING VOLUMES
The farce of the fatwa
Nilanjana S Roy
The West Bengal government's ban on Taslima
Nasreen's autobiography, Dwikhandita, is history
repeating itself - as farce rather than tragedy.
The fatwa we all remember best is the Valentine's
Day edict passed on Salman Rushdie in 1989 after
he wrote The Satanic Verses. Rushdie is a writer
of tremendous power, who wields his imagination
and his curiosity as twin swords.
The ban on Satanic Verses had worldwide
repercussions: Rushdie's publishers were
threatened, his translators attacked, he went
into an exile from which he has not quite
returned to a normal life.
The charge against Satanic Verses was that
Rushdie had committed blasphemy by evoking the
life of the Prophet in certain terms; the Indian
government was one of the first to cravenly
endorse the ban, citing the fear that it might
spark off "communal tension".
Even those of us who violently opposed the ban,
arguing in favour of the freedom of the author to
write as he chose, knew that Satanic Verses was a
potential flashpoint.
The question then, for many of us, was whether it
was worth risking potential violence - wrecked by
people who certainly wouldn't rank among
Rushdie's true audience in India - in order to
uphold freedom of speech.
In my view, the government caved in. It should
have been protecting Rushdie's right to free
expression and prosecuting those who chose to
respond with acts of violence rather than
reasoned argument, instead of ducking the issue.
Taslima Nasreen is not and will never be of the
same calibre as the Rushdies of the world. But
when Rushdie wrote these lines, he may have had
in mind the rights of lesser authors as well as
those of the truly great.
"I have grown determined to prove that the art of
literature is more resilient than what menaces
it," he wrote on the tenth anniversary of the
fatwa.
"The best defence of literary freedoms lies in
their exercise, in continuing to make
untrammelled, uncowed books."
Few of us expected that the Bangladesh government
would fail to ban Nasreen's autobiography -
published in that country as Ka --given its track
record with her work.
But few of us expected the West Bengal state
government to follow the lead provided by Dhaka.
The book was already under attack: West Bengal's
intellectuals have been taken aback by Nasreen's
frankness about her sexual life.
Nasreen has pointed out that she has been just as
frank about her childhood, about the growth of
her political convictions, and she sees no reason
to veil this one aspect of her life over, given
the freedom with which she speaks of the rest.
Those who were dismayed at finding themselves
written about with devastating openness have
denounced Nasreen, or, like Syed Shamsul Haque
and Syed Hasmat Jalal, have filed defamation
suits against her.
The government's reasons for banning Dwikhandita
concern not Nasreen's depiction of her love life,
but her views on Islam.
It boils down to two pages - 49 and 50 - where
Nasreen has made comments of this nature: "The
history of Islam says that the Arabs used toŠbury
girl children and Mohammed put an end to all this
misery. However, misery I think has increasedŠ"
Why is this considered offensive?
It's a critique of Islam and specifically of the
position of women in a specific Islamic society;
since when has any religion been beyond
criticism? The state government's position is
that the passages could "incite ill-feeling"; the
band of Muslim intellectuals who wrote asking the
chief minister to do something about the book
felt that the passages in question could be used
by "mischief-makers".
In an attempt to keep its options open, the state
government has hinted that the ban might be
raised if the publishers delete the offending
sections.
Of course, what has happened is the exact
opposite of what was intended. When the Satanic
Verses was banned, it became something of a badge
of honour to own a photostatted, samizdat copy of
the book.
In Delhi's Bengali-dominated Chittaranjan Park, a
bookseller told me he'd run out of copies of
Dwikhandita because it was selling so fast; he
also offered, as inducement if I returned later,
photostatted pages of the more controversial
sections of the book.
Many newspapers have printed the controversial
sections on Islam and have paraphrased the
incidents concerning Jalal and Haque that are now
in dispute.
If the purpose of the ban is to prevent people
from reading the book - guess what? It's not
working. Instead, even those who might have
bypassed Nasreen's work on the grounds that she
can be an exceptionally tedious writer have read
at least an abridged version of what she has to
say.
Nor do I understand why a work of literature must
be held responsible for the bigoted or
irresponsible reactions it evokes in the
non-literary.
The issue when Habib Tanvir's theatre group was
under fire for enacting Ponga Pundit shouldn't
have been about the merits of the play.
It should have been about coming down hard on the
behaviour of those members of the Sangh Parivar
who disrupted performances, smashed furniture and
menaced the actors.
Similarly, the issue with Dwikhandita shouldn't
revolve around her critique of Islam, which as a
writer and a thinking human being, she is
entitled to do.
If the government isn't capable of reining in the
few miscreants who would use this or any other
suitable fodder to start riots, it's not doing
its job.
What the West Bengal government should have done
is to trust that the reading population of the
state was mature enough to make up its own mind
about the merits of Nasreen's work. We don't need
the chief minister to nanny us, to decide what we
are or aren't qualified to read.
_____
[5]
Economic and Political Weekly
November 22, 2003
OF Life, Letters and Politics
Not Much of a Controversy
Most protesters against censorship are rather
selective in their approach. They let some forms
or instances of censorship go unattacked. But
there is a further question. Can we subordinate
the question of violence arising as a reaction to
a book or a film or a play to the question of
freedom of expression? Everyone interested in the
arts and apprehensive about the state of the arts
and of freedom in the country has to pose and
answer this question.
GPD
The Gujarat Censor Board has banned a play in
Urdu on Maulana Azad by Sayeed Alam. The play was
scheduled to be performed on November 9. Going by
reports in the press the Gujarat government
Censor Board has given no specific reason
relating to the text of the play. All that it has
said is that in its view the performance of the
play in Ahmedabad was likely to lead to a big
'hungama' presumably causing some violence and
damage to human life and property. The reason
given is not very different from what the Rajiv
Gandhi government had given when it had banned
the import of Salman Rushdie's now almost
forgotten novel Satanic Verses. The show was
organised by Darpan, Mallika Sarabhai's
institution in Ahmedabad.
It is possible that it is an act of revenge as
far as the government of Gujarat is concerned. If
that is the case it is clearly indefensible.
Mallika Sarabhai is of the view that both the
case against her and now the cancellation of the
play are the consequence of her speaking out
against the atrocities during last year's riots
in Gujarat. While this might be true it is also
clear that in such an eventuality the question of
censorship would not be the primary question. It
would be a revenge play of a kind. Nothing more,
nothing less.
The censorship question would be of a different
order altogether. Censorship of plays has always
existed in western India. It was there in the
bilingual Bombay state which included both the
present-day Maharashtra and Gujarat. The
provisions in the Gujarat law today may not be
different from the law in the bilingual state.
Interestingly there has not been any
significant anti-censorship movement in the two
states. Nobody raises any voices against the law
itself until some such case surfaces. As the
Delhi-based producer-author of the play has
discovered, the moment the Censor Board concerned
raises its finger everyone remembers the
tyrannical rule of the Censor Board. As Sayeed
Alam has discovered, nobody seems to know what to
do in the circumstances. He has chosen to play up
the fact that the government of you-know-who has
banned the play. A politically correct position
to take, no doubt. But it misses the central
point inasmuch as it is not a position against
censorship. To reduce that question to party
positions is to give up the battle. Of course one
does not know if Alam even has a firm and
consistent position on the question of censorship
and whether he had taken firm positions on
similar questions. What was his position, if he
had any, on Satanic Verses for example? We do not
know.
He himself has ventured speculation as to what
the censoring authorities might have found
objectionable. They may have taken objection to
one line in the play. This line, which is in
English in an otherwise Urdu play, quotes Azad as
saying, "To a large extent Sardar Patel was
responsible for Partition". We do not know the
entire dialogue to say for certain if the
portrayal of Azad would have suffered if this
sentence had not been there. No playwright can
take a position that either he or his director
does not edit in or out a sentence or two from
the text of a play. Why is it that he did not
offer to do that?
Of course there is a matter of principle
involved. Who are these censor-people to dictate
a sentence in or out? A legitimate question. The
problem in the last analysis is that of state
censorship. The fact of the matter is that you
cannot then make an issue of a single, isolated
case without relating it to the general argument
against censorship. There is nothing that Sayeed
Alam or Mallika Sarabhai has said which is
against 'censorship'. For all one knows they do
not have a position on this. For if they had they
would have noticed that the Censor Board's
argument is not different from the one used to
rationalise the ban on Satanic Verses. Quite
frankly it is an insoluble dilemma. The censoring
authorities cannot turn a blind eye to the
possibility of angry and possibly violent
reactions to a play which cites a major leader as
saying that Sardar Patel might have been
responsible for India's partition and that too in
Gujarat. To say that it has provoked no one
elsewhere is neither here nor there. The Rajiv
Gandhi government had decided to ban Satanic
Verses under a similar view. One cannot hold the
earlier decision right and find fault with the
latter.
We call this an insoluble dilemma for two
reasons. One is that most protesters against
censorship are rather selective in their
approach. They let one form or instance of
censorship go unattacked. The case of the
above-mentioned Rushdie book is one in point.
Ultimately these arguments turn
counterproductive. We have to be extra careful
about the polemical strategies that we employ.
But there is a further question. Is it possible
to ignore the question of peace and well-being of
the people? Do we or can we subordinate the
question of violence arising as a reaction to a
book or a film or a play to the question of
freedom of expression? And why? We have not read
anything in public debates in India which even
cursorily mentions these questions, let alone
answering them. Everyone interested in the arts
and apprehensive about the state of the arts and
freedom in this country has to pose these
questions and, more important, try and answer
them.
Further, the whole question cannot be reduced to
one of the political parties one likes and does
not like. Polemics serves several purposes. We
are not sure if it is of any use in deciding
issues of art and artistic freedom. In this case
it is not even a question of polemics.
Unfortunately it is an attempt to project a
controversy where there is not much of a
controversy.
_____
[6]
Justice for Harmony march - Insaf ke Bina Aman Nahin
Friends,
Please join in large numbers in the protest march
organized by Aman Ekta Manch to mark the 11th
anniversary of the demolition of the Babri
Masjid. The theme for the march is "Justice for
Harmony" (Insaf ke Bina Aman Nahin) - to
highlight the need to bring to book the
perpetrators of the demolition of the Babri
Masjid and the pogrom in Gujarat in 2002. All
organizations are welcome to join with their
banners and posters.
The march will start at 4.00 pm on December 6th,
Saturday, at Mandi House circle (Safdar Hashmi
Marg) we will march towards India Gate, where we
will conclude with a cultural programme. All
cultural groups, singers, plays, are welcome to
bring their performances. The programme would be
more easily manageable if each performance could
be limited to not more than 20 minutes each.
We have attached a poster (English) that you can
print out, photocopy and put up wherever you want.
Please mobilise widely.
In solidarity,
Aman Ekta Manch
_____
[7]
[Message for circulation on the SACW list.]
At 2:36 PM +0530 29/11/03, S Choudhary wrote:
My name is Smita Choudhary . . .
I am researching for a proposed BBC film on conflicts. Fot that I am
looking for a Hindu-muslim marriage to be held in few months time
ideally in Gujarat or anywhere in India.
Can you pls help me find one ?
if we find a couple who will get married in next few months then we
would like to film the kind of problem they go through and the film
will go out after the marraige.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
regards
Smita Choudhary
312, Patrakar Parisar
Sector 5, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad.
tel 0091 120 2883351 res
0091 9811142825
email : smitashu at vsnl.com
_____
[8]
When the divide on the basis of religion
is becoming wider.
We need to pause and think,
need to look into our history, again -
not to find reasons to divide us further,
but to find ways to come closer.
Dhai Akshar Prem Ka
Pearls of Love
Our wall calendar 2004 brings to you the wisdom
of 15th century poet saint Kabir.
See the attachment for the design.
Book your copies now.
Good discounts and free postage for order booked till 20 December, 2003
Single Copy Rs. 25.00
Order for
Discount
Instead of
Pay only
10 calendars
10%
250.00
225.00
25 calendars
15%
625.00
530.00
50 calendars
20%
1250.00
1000.00
Fill the form & send with MO / DD in favour of Abhigam Collective.
Loknaad
2, Gargi Apt, Lad Society Road, Nehru Park,
Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015 [India]
Phone: 079 - 6753663 e-mail: abhigam at icenet.net
ORDER FORM FOR CALENDARS 2004
Name
_____________________________________________________
Address
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
Phone
________________________ Fax ______________________
e-mail
(if any) _____________________________________________
Calendars
Amount
Cheque / DD No.
Payable at
Nos. _______________________________________
Rupees ______________________________________
___________________ Dated ___________________
_____
[9]
PRESS RELEASE
Supreme Court Commissioners call for universal child care services
In a crisp and forthright "special
report" to the Supreme Court, Dr. N.C. Saxena and
Mr. S.R. Sankaran call for strict orders to
ensure that basic health and nutrition services
reach all children under the age of 6. These
children are meant to be covered by the
Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), but
the authors note that the actual coverage of ICDS
is very small - barely one fifth of the relevant
age group. The government has failed to act on an
earlier order calling for an anganwadi centre to
be provided in "every settlement". According to
the Department of Women and Child Development, a
recent request for enhanced financial allocations
was "categorically rejected" by government.
Saxena and Sankaran were appointed as
Commissioners of the Supreme Court in May 2002.
Their mandate is to monitor the implementation of
orders relating to the right to food (PUCL vs
Union of India and others, Writ Petition 196 of
2001). During the last few months, they have made
field visits to several states and kept an
extensive correspondence with state governments.
The special report deals with "the most flagrant
cases of non-compliance" with Supreme Court
orders. Examples include: (a) failure to initiate
mid-day meals in primary schools in several
states; (b) abrupt discontinuation of food
schemes such as Annapoorna; (c) failure to
disclose public records relating to food and
employment schemes.
In the light of these violations of Court orders,
the Commissioners call for immediate orders from
the Supreme Court, including:
* Universalization of the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS).
* Immediate provision of mid-day meals in all primary schools.
* Implementation of Jaya Prakash Narayan
Employment Guarantee Yojana (JPEGY) within one
month.
* No withdrawal or dilution of any food
entitlements covered by Supreme Court orders
without the approval of the Court.
* Antyodaya cards to be given to "priority
groups" (e.g. widows without support) as a matter
of right.
* All records pertaining to food- and
employment-related schemes to be available for
public scrutiny.
For the full report, see www.righttofood.com. For
further information, please contact Shonali Sen
at the Centre for Equity Studies (tel 5164 2147)
or shonalisen at hotmail.com
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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 http://www.sacw.net/ .
The complete SACW archive is available at:
http://bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/
South Asia Counter Information Project a sister
initiative, provides a partial back -up and
archive for SACW. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/sacw/
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