SACW | 12-13 March 2004
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at mnet.fr
Fri Mar 12 21:11:04 CST 2004
South Asia Citizens Wire | 12-13 March, 2004
via: www.sacw.net
[1] Is this the Bangladesh we wanted? (Zafar Sobhan)
[2] Fifth Orientation Course in South Asian Peace Studies
[3] India: Book review - Buffalo Soldier (Soma Wadhwa)
[4] India Book Review - Hindutva Agenda of Hindi Press (Yogi Sikand)
[5] India: People's Tribunal on Prevention of
Terrorism Act (POTA and other security
legislation)
(March 13 to 14, 2004, New Delhi)
[6] UK: Women and Hindutva - Confronting the violence of fascism in India
Discussion Meeting (13 March 2004, London)
--------------
[1]
The Daily Star
March 08, 2004
Editorial
Is this the Bangladesh we wanted?
Zafar Sobhan
Is this the Bangladesh we wanted? Eminent writer
and freethinker Humayun Azad famously posed this
question to us all, and as he lies in CMH slowly
after being viciously attacked with butcher's
knives by unknown assailants at the Bangla
Academy during its annual book fair, this seems a
fair time to ask the question again.
March 26 is just around the corner. Independence
day. This is the date when we take an annual
national reckoning, when we look back over the
years since the liberation war and see where we
have come to and what we have achieved.
Few people looking at Bangladesh today would
conclude that the country we see before us is the
one that we wanted. Few would argue that this is
the country that we dreamed of creating. The
brave new world we envisioned on March 26, 1971
remains a distant hope. The best we can say is
that we have achieved some modest goals, we have
much to be proud of, and things could have been
and have been far worse.
But if we are being honest, we would have to
concede that Bangladesh today is a bitter
disappointment to our ideals.
There are so many ways in which the reality of
our existence falls short of what we had hoped
for -- economically, politically, educationally
-- you name it. But the attack on Prof. Azad
highlights the fact that, above all, what we lack
in Bangladesh are basic freedoms. The freedom to
express one's opinions, the freedom to dissent,
to argue, to criticise. The freedom from fear.
Did we dream of a country where iconoclastic and
freethinking writers can be attacked and left for
dead merely for articulating a provocative
opinion that threatens a powerful constituency?
Is this the Bangladesh we wanted?
I am assuming that for most of us, the answer is
no. So, the question is, if this isn't the
Bangladesh we wanted, how did we get here, and
what can we do to create a Bangladesh more in
line with our ideals?
Let us use the attack on Prof. Azad as a starting point.
Right now, we cannot say with any level of
certainty who carried out the attack on Prof.
Azad. Perhaps we will never know for sure. But
does this mean that if the authorities never
manage to find the perpetrators of the attack,
that we will have to draw a curtain around the
matter and consider it closed until further
notice?
I don't believe so. Even in the absence of
concrete evidence, I think it is fairly clear who
was behind the attack on Prof. Azad. We merely
need to look at who his enemies are and who would
want him silenced.
The writer's wife, Latifa Kohinoor has little
doubt as to who is to blame. According to her, an
extremist group had threatened Prof. Azad with
death following the launch of his latest work,
Pak Sar Zamin Saad Baad in November.
"Fundamentalists have done this," she is on
record as saying, "Who else would do this? You
know an MP even spat venom at him in parliament."
Indeed, on December 12, religious extremists
addressing a mammoth demonstration at Baitul
Mukarram Mosque demanded the arrest and trial of
Prof. Azad, and on January 25, a Jamaat MP
demanded the introduction of a blasphemy act in
parliament to block the publication of books such
as Prof. Azad's new work.
"Why didn't you take security measures to protect
him after such an outrage in parliament?" Ms.
Kohinoor asked the authorities after her husband
had been attacked.
So, does this mean that Prof. Azad was attacked
by Jamaat or IOJ cadres? The truth is that right
now it is impossible to say who attacked him.
Only after a thorough investigation and trial
will we know who specifically is to blame.
But one thing that is certain is that the climate
for the attack on Prof. Azad was created and
fostered by the incitement against him by the
more mainstream religious parties.
The more power that these groups are able to
muster, the more emboldened will be the more
fanatical extremists in our midst, and the more
likely it is that attacks such as the one on
Prof. Azad will occur.
It's a simple calculation. If we don't want this
kind of thing to happen, then we shouldn't
empower extremists.
Every time the government makes a concession to
their political agenda, the extremists are
emboldened. Every time the government indicates
that attacks on minorities will not be punished,
the extremists are emboldened. Every time they
are able to check the rights and freedoms of
women with impunity, the extremists are
emboldened. Every time the more mainstream
religious parties win more seats in parliament
and their leaders are appointed to cabinet
positions and ministries, the extremists are
emboldened.
The end result of people like this being
empowered and emboldened is incidents such as the
attack on Prof. Azad. There is a direct
connection between our tolerance of extremists,
and the courage they have to commit the most
heinous of crimes in the name of their beliefs.
The more mainstream religious parties have 17
seats in parliament and control key cabinet
portfolios due to the BNP's readiness to take
them on as coalition partners. Not only that, but
as recently as January, when the government
banned all Ahmadiyya publications, the government
indicated its willingness to bow down to the
agenda of the religious parties within the ruling
coalition.
Does it come as any surprise that in this climate
that the more radical extremists feel that
someone like Prof. Azad is fair game?
So who is to blame? The short but disturbing
answer is that it is we who are to blame. All
those who helped put the religious parties into
high office and thereby emboldened the more
fanatical elements in the country share the blame
for what has been wrought.
And I am not talking just about the people who
voted for the religious parties. I am talking
also about those who voted for their alliance
partners in full knowledge of who would be given
prominent cabinet positions in a four-party
alliance government.
It is all very well to shed crocodile tears for
Humayun Azad, but those who do so should look in
the mirror and ask themselves how we got to this
position in the first place. The point is that
most of us are shocked and appalled by the attack
on Prof. Azad, but at the same time do not
acknowledge our own complicity in such matters.
There is a contradiction here that needs to be
examined.
If we do not each take upon ourselves the
personal responsibility to do everything we can
to remove extremists from public life and counter
them at every opportunity then we too are
accomplices to the actions of their more
fanatical counterparts. If we sit idly and do
nothing as they grow in power and influence and
boldness then we can expect much more of the same.
Is this the Bangladesh we wanted? After what
happened to Prof. Azad on February 27, we can't
ever say that we haven't been warned.
Zafar Sobhan is an Assistant Editor of The Daily Star.
_____
[2]
Fifth Orientation Course in South Asian Peace Studies
Applications are invited for the Fifth South
Asian Human Rights and Peace Studies Orientation
Course of the South Asia Forum for Human Rights
(SAFHR) to be held in Kathmandu, Nepal. The
course has two components - distance education in
human rights and peace from July 1 to August 31,
and a direct orientation course in peace studies
to be held in Kathmandu from 5 September to 20
September, 2004. The course is intended for peace
and human rights activists, media persons,
researchers, academics studies, and policy makers.
Registration fee for South Asian participants is
US $ 100 (or its equivalent in Nepali Rupee) and
participants from outside the region US $ 400.
Participants will have to look for their own
funding for travel. SAFHR will assist deserving
participants from South Asia to obtain travel
supports from other donor agencies. Select course
material for the selected candidates will be
provided by SAFHR. Board and lodging is also
provided. The age limit for participation is (35)
years. Women, human rights and peace activists
from conflict areas are particularly encouraged
to apply. Applications must reach Peace Studies
Desk in the South Asia Forum for Human Rights
(3/23, Shree Durbar Tole, Patan Dhoka, Lalitpur,
Kathamndu, Nepal; GPO Box 12855, Tel:
977-1-5541026; Fax: 5527852, E-mail
peacestudies at safhr.org by 15 April 2004.
Applications by fax or e-mail will be valid.
Applications will have to be supported by full
particulars, 1000-word summary of the relevance
of the course to the work of the participant, and
names of two referees whose recommendations
should reach independently SAFHR peace studies
desk. In selection of candidates the 1000-word
summary will be accorded importance. Applicants
are encouraged to visit SAFHR's website,
www.safhr.org for information about the course.
Language of the course is english and proficiency
in English is essential. The course will be
participatory, will involve fieldwork,
audio-visual studies, interactive sessions,
participants' workshops, public lectures and
presentation by participants. Frontline activists
and researchers on human rights, peace and
reconciliation will share their knowledge and
experience with participants towards developing
an enriched collective understanding of issues of
justice and peace in South Asia.
_____
[3]
Outlook [India]
Mar 15, 2004
REVIEW
Buffalo Soldier
Yet another ferocious indictment of Hindu
Brahminism by author and activist in the
Dalit-Bahujan movement Kancha Ilaiah.
SOMA WADHWA
BUFFALO NATIONALISM: A CRITIQUE OF SPIRITUAL FASCISM
by Kancha Ilaiah
SAMYA
RS 200; PAGES: 200
Yet another ferocious indictment of Hindu
Brahminism by author and activist in the
Dalit-Bahujan movement Kancha Ilaiah. Devoted to
"all those who have suffered apartheid,
untouchability, casteism, patriarchy and brutal
atrocities because of spiritual fascism...."
There's no doubting what to expect from Buffalo
Nationalism, a collection of Ilaiah's published
articles in newspapers over the years. Especially
for those familiar with Ilaiah's earlier works.
Despite his predictability, though, Ilaiah's
writing has a fervour and intellectual rigour
that makes this book an engaging read. It pushes
one into taking note of Ilaiah's perspective on
what has gone into making India an unjust nation
for the Dalit-Bahujans. The cow, not the buffalo,
Ilaiah argues, is worshipped. Because, though
both give milk, the cow is white, as were the
Aryans ("Brahmins are basically Aryans"). So, it
made sense for the Aryans to spin a philosophy
around "white being good", and black, the colour
of the Dravidians (and the "low castes"), being
bad.
The discourse in Buffalo Nationalism attempts to
reverse this philosophy: "...we need to change
the philosophy of caste, colour, language, land,
animals, birds, food and so on. We must deploy
symbols that have opposite and corrective
meanings, ideology and philosophy to that of
Hindu Brahminism. That's where the survival of
the nation lies." Hence, the case for Buffalo
Nationalism.
And the arguments don't stop here. Ilaiah's
vision of an equal world includes more palpable
issues for the Dalit-Bahujans: the right to
conversion, the need to be taught English,
reservations in education and employment. He
cites a personal example: "Given the unwritten
laws of patronage and access that determine who
gets a job in our institutions, my first class
MA, subsequent MPhil and several publications in
all-India journals would not have brought me a
job but for reservation." Read on to be
persuaded, or not.
_____
[4]
Book Review
Hindutva Agenda of Hindi Press
Name of the Book: Press and Prejudice
Author: Vidya Bhushan Rawat
Publisher: Institute of Objective Studies, New Delhi
<manzoor at ndf.scvl.net.in>
Year of Publishing: 203
Price: Rs. 130, Pages: 187
ISBN: 81-85-220-58-15
Reviewed by: Yoginder Sikand
Hindi newspapers, taken together, have a
multi-million readership in India today. Yet,
their role in shaping public opinion is often
overlooked. While some Hindi papers are known for
their balanced reporting, the vast majority, as
this incisive book shows, are notorious for their
blatantly pro-Hindutva leanings, not even making
a pretence of secularism, as in the case of many
of their English counterparts. In fact, as Rawat
indicates, the Hindi media has played a central
role in promoting Hindutva, spreading anti-Muslim
hatred and further entrenching prejudices against
other marginalized groups such as Dalits,
Backward Castes, and Tribals.
This book, based on a content analysis of several
leading Hindi papers, focuses on the
deeply-rooted biases of the Hindi media in its
representation of various communities. Rawat
notes that, despite notable exceptions, most
Hindi newspapers are now avid promoters of
'upper' caste Hindu interests, thinly camouflaged
under the guise of Hindutva. In recent years,
several papers have switched from being somewhat
even-handed in their approach to religious
questions to unabashedly supporting a range of
'Hindu' causes. Hindi papers are today providing
much more coverage to Hindu religious festivals
and all types of 'god-men' than ever before. All
this works to create a more conducive atmosphere
for the fascist political project of the Hindutva
camp.
This process of the overt Hinduisation of most of
the Hindi press has gone hand-in-hand with a
concerted effort by large sections of the Hindi
media, now heavily infiltrated by Hindutva
supporters, to actively promote hatred against
Muslims by circulating baseless rumours and
misleading propaganda. Muslims have come to be
represented as 'enemies' of India, as evil
terrorists conspiring with outside forces to
destabilise the country.
The history of Islam and the Muslim presence in
India are deliberately distorted to create the
impression that Muslims and Islam are synonymous
with violence and bloodshed. Muslim institutions,
such as mosques, madrasas and colleges, are
routinely branded as 'anti-national', and,
contrary to all available evidence, Muslims are
portrayed as an unfairly 'pampered' community.
Such vicious propaganda, Rawat shows, prepares
the ground for violent attacks on Muslims.
Numerous Hindi newspapers give greatly distorted
accounts of 'communal' riots, apportioning the
blame entirely on Muslims, overlooking the role
of Hindu communal organizations, local
politicians and the police. During such
incidents, several papers deliberately present
Muslims as the culprits in order to justify
further violent attacks on the community, even
when Muslims are actually victims and the
greatest sufferers, in most cases.
The deeply rooted anti-Muslim bias of large
sections of the Hindi media, Rawat agues, must be
seen in the broader context of the readership,
patronage and ownership patterns of Hindi
newspapers. Large industrialists own most of
these, and many of them are staunch RSS
supporters. Some politicians have large stakes in
these newspapers, while most newspaper owners
have political links. Aware of the power of the
press, many political parties have even nominated
media magnates as members of parliament. This
nexus between politicians, industrialists and
newspaper owners explains, to a large extent, why
much of the Hindi press is so blatantly
anti-Muslim, for it appears to serve the
interests of all three groups. Adding to this,
Rawat says, is the fact that many employees of
newspapers are not trained journalists at all.
Many of them are local goons, who use their
access to newspapers to promote their own
political agendas. Obviously, they too have a
vested interest in communal politics. Further,
many lower ranking journalists apparently find
their chances of promotion blocked if they refuse
to toe the line of their editors who ardently
support the Hindutva cause. This works to stifle
dissent and to perpetuate existing communal,
particularly anti-Muslim, prejudices in the press.
Providing a fairly representative overview of the
Hindi press, Rawat argues for the need for
regular monitoring of the media in order to
promote a professional and truly secular ethos.
While this suggestion is indeed useful, perhaps
much bolder steps than that are required if
communal prejudices in the press are to be
countered. Of particular importance here, and
this is something that Rawat perhaps
inadvertently forgets to suggest, is the need for
more Muslims, Dalits, tribals and Backward Castes
to take to journalism as a career, and also to
start newspapers of their own which could compete
with existing papers. Given the overwhelmingly
'upper' caste background of Hindi (as well as
English) journalists today, and the fact that
Hindutva supporters already have such a strong
presence in the media, it would be naïve to
imagine that the existing press could somehow be
convinced to suddenly turn secular. What is
needed, therefore, is an alternate Hindi media,
controlled by marginalized communities and
reflecting their own voices.
This book is probably the first on the subject,
and so, despite its numerical grammatical errors
and, at times, somewhat clumsy language, it
serves a valuable purpose. Readers searching for
a comprehensive study might be a little
disappointed, for while it sets out to uncover
the communal prejudices in the Hindi press, it
focuses almost entirely on the representation of
Muslims in the Hindi media. Rawat mentions, but
only in passing, the deeply entrenched
Brahminical bias in the press, reflected, for
instance, in how other marginalized communities,
such as Dalits and tribals, are portrayed. As can
be expected, this is not very different from the
ways in which Muslims are depicted. And that,
once again, is explained by the overwhelmingly
'upper' caste control of the Indian media, a fact
that is well known but rarely openly broached in
the media itself.
_____
[5]
People's Tribunal on Prevention of Terrorism Act
(POTA and other security legislations
March 13 to 14, 2004
New Delhi, India
Background:
Post 9/11, many countries have brought in
legislation to counter terrorism and strengthen
national security. Experiences with the Terrorist
and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act,
(TADA) and similar legislation show that
'security' legislation grant authorities sweeping
powers, lending themselves to misuse and
restriction of basic rights.
In India, the Prevention of Terrorism Act, (POTA)
is currently applied in 10 states, but most
states also have 'special' Acts with similar
provisions. In the past two years, POTA has been
used inter alia to suppress people's movements,
human rights defenders and civil liberties
organizations.
In view of the Supreme Court judgment upholding
the constitutionality of POTA, and the increasing
use of other security legislation in all parts of
the country, it is important to document POTA
cases in the country and, in the process, make a
strong case for the repeal of the Act. While
amendments have been brought in with the
Prevention of Terrorism (Amendment) Act, 2003 and
a Central Review Committee has been constituted,
we believe that for victims’ voices to be heard,
more sincere efforts are necessary.
The legislation has been used against juveniles,
old people, members of minority communities,
political opponents and those struggling for
socio-economic rights. In Jharkhand and Tamil
Nadu, minors have been arrested under this act;
in Gujarat, innocent persons have been arrested
under POTA and the legislation has been used to
detain persons for non-terrorist offences; in
Uttar Pradesh those struggling for land rights
have been charged under POTA.
To document cases of gross misuse and to
highlight the extent of rights violations, a
People's Tribunal is being in New Delhi. The
Tribunal will hear depositions from victims and
their families, and also expert depositions by
eminent lawyers, jurists, academics and activists.
Tribunal objectives:
Examine the implementation of the Prevention of
Terrorism Act (POTA) and other central security
legislation in India.
Record depositions of people who have borne the
impact of anti-terrorism legislation in India
particularly members of minority communities, the
poor and those struggling for land rights and
social justice.
Discuss and analyse through expert depositions
the need and applicability of security
legislations and the impact on human rights and
civil liberties.
Panel members:
Mr. Ram Jethmalani
Fmr. Union Law Minister, Government of India
Advocate, Supreme Court of India
Justice H. Suresh
Retd. Judge, Mumbai High Court
Justice D.K. Basu
Retd. Judge, Kolkata High Court
Mr. K.G. Kannabiran
President, People’s Union for Civil Liberties
Ms. Mohini Giri
Fmr. Chairperson, National Commission for Women
Ms. Syeda Hameed
Fmr. Member National Commission for Women
Mr. V.R. Laxminarayanan
Fmr. DGP, Government of Tamil Nadu
Mr. Praful Bidwai
Journalist
Arundhati Roy
Writer
Organizing Committee:
Colin Gonsalves, Henri Tiphagne, Mihir Desai, Teesta Setalvad, Prakash Louis.
Endorsing organizations and individuals:
Human Rights Law Network
People’s Watch – Tamil Nadu
India Centre for Human Rights and Law
Communalism Combat
POTA Virodhi Jan Morcha
Janhit
Action Aid (Gujarat)
PUCL Ranchi unit
UP Agrarian Reform & Labour Rights Campaign Committee
People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR)
Amnesty International (India)
Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam
Lawyers for Human Rights International (Punjab)
Draft Programme:
(While all the speakers mentioned below have
confirmed, the format and timing may be revised)
Day 1 - Saturday, 13 March 2004
9:00 – 9:15
Introductory remarks
Colin Gonsalves
9:15 – 11:15
Tamil Nadu
Testimonials by affected persons
Expert testimony
Adv. Chandru
Adv. Shanmuga Sundaram, MP (Rajya Sabha)
11:15 – 1:15
Jharkhand
Testimonials by affected persons
Expert testimony
Netari Rawani
Ashok Jha
1:15 – 2:00
Break for Lunch
2:00 – 3:30
Panel I
Uttar Pradesh
- Testimonials by affected persons
- Expert testimony: Adv. Ajay Roma
Panel II
Jammu & Kashmir
- Testimonials by affected persons
- Expert testimony: Parvez Imroz
3:30 - 5:00
Panel I
Delhi
- Testimonials by affected persons
- Expert testimony:
Ashok Agrwaal
Nitya Ramakrishnan
V.K. Ohri
R.M. Tufail
PUDR
Amnesty, India
Panel II
Andhra Pradesh
- Testimonials by affected persons
- Expert testimony: Adv. Balagopal
Adv. Mahadevan
Adv. Vanaja
5:00 - 6:30
Panel I
Punjab (TADA)
- Testimonials by affected persons
- Expert testimony: A.S. Chahal
Arunjeev Singh Walia
Panel II
Manipur (AFSPA)
- Testimonials by affected persons
- Expert testimony: Adv. Rakesh
6:30 – 7:15 Closing remarks
Justice D.K. Basu
Ms. Sayeda Hamid
Teesta Setalvad
Day 2 – Sunday, 14 March 2004
9:00 – 9:30
Introductory remarks
Mr. Laxminaryanan
Mr. K.G. Kannabiran
Mr. Henri Tiphagne
9:30 – 11:30
Gujarat
Testimonials by affected persons
.Expert testimony
Adv. Mukul Sinha
Adv. Hasan Zakia
11:30 – 1:30
Maharashtra (3 confirmed)
Testimonials by affected persons
Expert testimony
Adv. Majeed Memon
1:30 – 2:30
Break for Lunch
3:30 – 5:30
Presentation
Mr. Ram Jethmalani
Justice Suresh
Mohini Giri
Arundhati Roy
Praful Bidwai
Discussion and Release of the Preliminary Report
5:30 – 5:45
Concluding remarks
Mihir Desai
Note:
Names of the persons arrested under POTA and the
names of their family members who will depose
have not been included in this invite.
The Panel will also participate in a video
conference on International Security Legislation
with:
Michael Ratner & Barbara Olshansky (Centre for Constitutional Rights)
Amnesty International, UK (to confirm)
Venue:
Indian Social Institute
10, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi - 110 003
Ph : 011 - 24622379, 24625015, 24694602, 24611745
For more information on the Tribunal:
Conference Secretariat
c/o Preeti Verma
65, Masjid Road
Jungpura, New Delhi 110 014
Telephone : 91-22-24324501
E-mail at: hrlndel at vsnl.net
_____
[6]
WOMEN AND HINDUTVA
confronting the violence of fascism in India
Discussion Meeting in International Women's Week
Saturday 13 March 2004,
SOAS,Room G2
Thornhaugh Street, Russell Square, London WC1
2.30pm
All Welcome
Two years after the genocidal attacks on the Muslim community
in Gujarat in which women were targeted for horrific
violence, we are holding this meeting to expose the different
aspects of the Hindu right's 'war on women', and discuss how
we can build support for those who are resisting. As the BJP
and its allies launch an aggressive election campaign across
India we will be looking at how fascism has taken hold and
the struggles ahead.
Speakers include:
Manali Desai (Forum of Indian Leftists, USA): Violence
against women in Gujarat
Savita Bhanot (Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies) : Hindutva
and gender - the British experience
South Asia Solidarity Group: What fascism means for women
Plus screening of extracts from Gujarat: a laboratory of
Hindu rashtra; and Ayodhya to Varanasi - prayers for peace, 2
recent films on Hindutva directed by Suma Josson.
Copies of 'Threatened Existence - a feminist analysis of the
Gujarat genocide' the recent report of the International
Initiative for Justice in Gujarat will also be
available.Details: South Asia Solidarity Group
sasg at southasiasolidarity.org tel. 020 7267 0923
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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.sacw.net/
The complete SACW archive is available at:
bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/
See also associated site: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org
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