SACW | 21 March 2004

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire   |  21 March,  2004
via:  www.sacw.net

[1] Pakistan: Debating education reform - II (A H Nayyar)
[2] Pakistan: Cobwebs in the mind (Beena Sarwar)
[3] India: Texts, Lies and Politics (Editorial, The Telegraph)
[4] India: Book Review - The Bounds Of Citizenship (Dilip Simeon)
[5] India: Summary Critique of Court Judgements 
in the Four Cases Relating To Glorification of 
Sati
[6] People's Initiative to defeat BJP in elections 2004


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

[1]

The News International [Pakistan]
March 20, 2004

Debating education reform - II

A H Nayyar

Shireen Mazari's criticism (March 10, 2004) of 
our report on the state of curriculum and 
textbooks and the need for urgent reform has many 
shortcomings. The report is entitled "The Subtle 
Subversion: The State of Curricula and Text-books 
in Pakistan - Urdu, English, Social Studies and 
Civics" and is available in full from the 
Sustainable Policy

Development Institute (SDPI), in Islamabad (and 
on the web at www.sdpi.org). As one of the 
coordinators and authors of the report, I would 
like to address her general criticism and some of 
her specific comments in detail.

Ms Mazari questions why we did the study and its 
timing. She sees it as part of a grand 
conspiracy. Our report is a detailed presentation 
of much that is wrong with the teaching of Urdu, 
English, Social Studies/Pakistan Studies, and 
Civics in our public schools. In addition to 
serious pedagogical problems, we have pointed out 
the systematic inclusion of material that creates 
hate towards peoples of other nations and faiths, 
distorts history by offering a false narrative, 
creates gender bias, violates the fundamental 
rights of minorities guaranteed by the 
constitution of the country, glorifies 
militarism, and repeatedly urges students to 
militancy by misusing the Islamic concepts of 
jihad and shahadat. These are not things that can 
be ignored by any Pakistani concerned about the 
future of our country.

As to it's timing, we agree this work should have 
been done much earlier, by experienced 
educationists, particularly social scientists. 
They should have voiced their dissent at the 
damage being done by the mainstream education 
system. Of course, there have been important 
exceptions, like the historians K K Aziz and 
Mubarak Ali, and social scientists Rubina Saigol 
and Tariq Rehman. Others either chose to remain 
silent spectators of this subversion of the 
nation's future or, worse, contributed to the 
problem. It would be more useful to ask those 
that were silent or complicit to explain 
themselves.

Mazari's criticism shows not just malice towards 
its authors, but it seems she made only a cursory 
study of the report and the subjects with which 
it deals (she calls it a "limited look") and her 
presentation of the report is not intellectually 
honest. The last of these is most important since 
it misleads the readers of her article about the 
report.

Mazari has in several places misrepresented the 
contents of our report. For example, she says 
that the report objects to children being taught 
to say Asalam o Alaikum or Bismillah. This is 
misleading because she conceals the context. The 
report was, in fact, explaining how in the public 
schools religious minorities are made to 
compulsorily learn the Qur'an and Islamic 
rituals, and that this is a violation of their 
fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution.

Let me explain. There is an integrated curriculum 
for classes I to III. To lessen the burden on 
young children, various disciplines are 
integrated into one textbook and it is compulsory 
reading for every child. This means that every 
child must study Islamiat, whatever its faith. 
All children are forced to memorize Qur'anic 
suras, the Kalimas, and to learn Islamic rituals 
like namaz and wuzu (prayers and ablutions) and 
saying Bismillah before meals, etc. This 
requirement violates a fundamental right of 
non-Muslim students. The point made in the report 
is that we are imposing Muslim majoritarianism on 
the children of our non-Muslim citizens. By being 
so insensitive to their religious identity, and 
showing no respect for our religious differences, 
we risk alienating them from a shared sense of 
Pakistani nationhood.

Turning to another point, Mazari admits that "Of 
course, there is no doubt that some of the texts 
do denigrate Hindus ..". But this by itself is a 
gross understatement. She ought to have read the 
report in detail to see that the curricula and 
textbooks do more than just "denigrate" Hindus. 
Blind to the fact that there are Hindu citizens 
of Pakistan, and the elementary notion that the 
faiths and identities of all people everywhere 
should be treated with respect, the curriculum 
documents prescribe and textbooks teach an 
outrageous and irrational hatred against Hindus.

Take for example the following excerpt from the 
Urdu textbook for class VI published by the 
Punjab Textbook Board in March 2002. The title of 
the story is Dushman Hawabaz". It is about a 
captured Indian pilot (necessarily a Hindu 
because all Indians are painted as Hindus) who is 
treated kindly by his captors. The pilot, in the 
words of the book, recalls that: "He [as a Hindu] 
had only been taught never to have pity on 
Muslims, to always bother the neighbouring 
Muslims, to weaken them to the extent that they 
forget about freedom, and that it was better to 
finish the enemy off. He remembered that the 
Hindus tried to please their goddess Kali by 
slaughtering innocent people of other faiths at 
her feet..."

By no definition is this mere denigration. It is 
pure and simple creation of hate. And, this is 
just one of many specific quotations from the 
curriculum and textbooks given in the report. Now 
imagine a Pakistani Hindu student being forced to 
read this text. How can this not offend and 
alienate the child from our society and the 
country. Who would disagree that this amounts to 
subverting the society from within? Our report 
derives the title "The Subtle Subversion" from 
this realization.

Let me turn finally to one last example. Mazari 
picked up and misused a sentence from our chapter 
on Muslims and Hindus in India prior to 
independence. She presents it in her article as 
evidence of our distortion of history and lack of 
patriotism. She says: "As for History, if it is 
distorted in the prevailing curricula, authors 
Nayyar and Salim want to rectify the situation 
with a new set of distortions. For instance, they 
would reject the historical fact presented in the 
Social Studies textbook for Class VI published by 
the Punjab Textbook Board, Lahore (January 2002), 
which states the following:" The enmity shown by 
Hindus and the Congress after the partition of 
Bengal made Muslim leaders to think to form a 
political party. They wanted to raise a voice for 
the safeguard of the interests of the Muslims and 
convey their feelings to the British Government." 
She then goes on to say: It is clear that there 
is nothing erroneous in the factual part of the 
statement at all. So why would the authors object 
to many statements like this one relating to the 
Pakistan Movement, unless they wish to decry the 
Movement itself." A reader of your newspaper, who 
has not read our report, could be deceived by 
this gross intellectual dishonesty. The fact is 
that nowhere in the report do we question the 
factual character of the above quote from the 
book.

We need a serious national debate about the 
growing violence, intolerance and religious 
sectarianism in our country. The authors and 
contributors to our report believe these dangers 
flow in large part from problems in our education 
system. Our children are being educated in a way 
that makes them susceptible to sectarianism and 
extremism, making them intolerant and violent as 
they grow up. We need to think and discuss what 
kind of education and what kind of values to 
offer our children. We hope our report has helped 
take this discussion a step further. We hope that 
others will join in. But any debate must be 
honest and informed and open if it is to lead to 
a shared understanding of our problems and their 
solutions.

The writer teaches Physics at Quaid-i-Azam 
University, Islamabad, and is also a visiting 
fellow at the Sustainable Development Policy 
Institute.

_____


[2]

The News International [Pakistan]
March 21, 2004

Cobwebs in the mind

Beena Sarwar

What are we to make of the President's stated 
commitment to women's rights, as articulated on 
several occasions, most recently at his much 
applauded address to a women's convention in 
Islamabad on Saturday - even as the departments 
and institutions of the country he heads, appear 
stubbornly determined to denigrate these very 
rights?

Take the Federal Curriculum Wing, currently in 
the thick of an ongoing controversy regarding 
textbook reform in the country. There has been 
much debate on how Pakistani textbooks foment 
hatred and bigotry against non-Muslims, 
particularly against India. How the textbooks do 
this has been well documented in the publication 
The Subtle Subversion: The State of Curricula and 
Textbooks in Pakistan, published by the 
Sustainable Development Policy Institute in 
Islamabad last year.

This report is currently the subject of a heated 
debate between those who find bigotry and hate 
being propagated not just the madrassah level but 
also through government school textbooks, and 
those who think that there is no problem with 
these textbooks.

Let us, for the moment, fall in with the second 
category, ignore the numerous examples cited in 
the Subversion study, and conclude that Pakistani 
textbooks actually promote the values of communal 
and religious harmony, and include no hate 
material whatsoever.

But how do they fare on gender issues? Even here, 
to present a positive picture we would have to 
disregard the study's chapter 'Gender Biases and 
Stereotypes in School Texts'. We would have to 
dismiss the chapter authors' claims that the 
producers of Pakistani textbooks 'are actively 
resistant to the idea of women's rights and 
believe in the preservation of the status quo'.

Their citation of the 1959 Report of the 
Commission on National Education would also need 
to be discarded, since they say it views women 
not as individuals and equal citizens in their 
own right, but only as wives and mothers, 
ignoring all the other categories. Without going 
into the merits of the argument about women's 
status beyond wifehood and motherhood, we could 
say that 1959 was a long time ago.

Do later textbooks reflect the increasing 
participation of women in the public and 
professional spheres over the years? The Gender 
Biases chapter says not. Leave aside its 
examination of how school texts perpetuated 
gender biases under the Zia regime - a 1985 study 
found that girls were shown most often in passive 
roles, enforcing traditional stereotypes - after 
all, it's been over 15 years since Gen Zia left 
us and 'democracy' was 'restored'.

Moving on to more recent times, let us also 
discard the Gender Biases chapter conclusion that 
matters have not improved and that a 'gender 
biased division of roles is woven into almost all 
the exercises and stories in these books, thus we 
have constant references to men performing active 
and/or heroic roles and women engaged in passive, 
often frippery activities' But in that case, can 
someone please explain the Federal Curriculum 
Wing's refusal to incorporate the late journalist 
Najma Babar's article 'Madam Chairman, Sir', in a 
proposed Class Ten English textbook submitted by 
the Sindh Textbook Board?

To give some background on this baffling bit of 
censorship, the Sindh Education Department under 
the committed educationist Prof. Anita Ghulam 
Ali, commissioned senior English language 
teaching (ELT) experts to formulate new English 
language textbooks for Classes 8-12 - part of an 
effort to update a course that has not changed in 
over forty years.

The new textbooks include material that would 
make the learning of English more interesting, 
accessible and friendly for Pakistani students, 
most of whom struggle with it as a foreign and a 
second language.

The Sindh Textbook Board duly sent the new 
proposed textbooks for approval to the Federal 
Curriculum Wing. However, the Curriculum Wing 
rejected much of the new material and provided a 
list of topics that the new English textbooks 
should include - like drug abuse, traffic rules, 
festivals of Pakistan and so on - topics that are 
certain to excite the students' imaginations and 
get them interested in learning? At the same 
time, they also want classics like Shakespeare 
and Jane Austen included in these textbooks. 
Brilliant though the works of both writers is, 
their appropriateness for young non-native 
speakers of English is questionable.

But it is the material that was removed from 
these proposed English textbooks that should 
particularly concern those fighting for a 
curriculum that promotes the values of equality, 
peace, religious harmony and gender rights.

Among the pieces to get axed was Najma Babar's 
'Madam Chairman, Sir', in which she describes how 
her husband got the children ready for school and 
looked after them, in the days when she had a job 
and he didn't. Also axed was Dina Wadia's essay 
remembering her august father the Quaid-e-Azam, 
the satirical poem 'Mrs Lorris Died of Being 
Cleanî', the short play, 'Never on a Wednesday' 
and an essay on the Bermuda Triangle, as well as 
a poem by Khalil Jibran.

Why these pieces should have been removed when 
their inclusion was recommended by ELT experts, 
is unclear. What is clear is that major overhauls 
are required - not just in the curriculum wing, 
but also in the minds of those running it.

_____



[3]

The Telegraph [ India]
March 21, 2004
Editorial

TEXTS, LIES AND POLITICS

Falsification is an art which totalitarian 
regimes practise shamelessly. Josef Stalin 
completely obliterated Leon Trotsky from the 
history of the Bolshevik Revolution. Adolf 
Hitler, to legitimize the Final Solution, 
perpetuated a string of lies about the Jews. 
Those who see the Bharatiya Janata Party as the 
harbinger of fascism in India will not be 
surprised by the demand of Mr Gopinath Munde, the 
president of the BJP in Maharashtra. Mr Munde 
announced that Discovery of India should be 
banned because in it, Jawaharlal Nehru, according 
to Mr Munde, called Shivaji a bandit. While the 
demand to ban a book smacks of authoritarianism, 
this particular claim of Mr Munde is ridiculous 
in content and mischievous in intent. The simple 
fact is that Nehru wrote no such thing. He 
described Shivaji as an outstanding guerrilla 
leader who was a thorn in the side of the Mughal 
administration in the Deccan. In fact, Nehru 
noted the contribution of Shivaji towards the 
consolidation of Hindu nationalism. Mr Munde has 
obviously never opened Discovery of India to read 
what Nehru had actually written. If he has 
checked out the book and then made the demand, he 
is guilty of deliberate falsehood. Mr Munde is 
either an ignoramus or a deliberate and 
unscrupulous fabricator.

There is no need to be kind to Mr Munde. He has 
done the damage he had intended. The Shiv Sena 
and other Maratha jingoists will not stop to 
establish the veracity of Mr Munde's statement. 
They will go on a rampage, which is all they are 
good at. Mr Munde wanted to whip up anger against 
the Congress. The result can only be violent. His 
statement should also be seen in the context of 
similar lies uttered by the BJP and sections of 
the sangh parivar. Ideologues of Hindutva have a 
long tradition of distorting history and of 
taking quotations out of context. Muslims and 
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi have both been victims 
of such distortions. Nehru is a new name on the 
list. Other figures on the sangh parivar 
hate-list - the historian, Romila Thapar, is a 
well-known example - frequently have their 
writings distorted. The BJP and the ideological 
family to which it belongs obviously believe that 
to lie and to distort in order to calumniate an 
enemy are not matters of serious consequence. 
This only highlights the moral vacuum in which 
they operate: a vacuum that enables the spread of 
lies, the incitement to violence and murder as so 
many steps to the goal of a Hindu rashtra.

Quite distinct from the peddling of untruth, 
there is a more profound issue involved here. 
Nehru in his book had expressed his opinions on 
various individuals and subjects. All his 
opinions need not be shared by everybody, and 
indeed they should not be. But this is not 
sufficient ground for calling for a ban on 
Nehru's book. Such a demand is frequently voiced 
in India. In West Bengal, supporters of Subhas 
Chandra Bose burnt copies of the Ananda Bazar 
Patrika because the newspaper had published 
extracts from Bose's letters to his wife. The 
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute was 
vandalized because it had been thanked by a 
scholar in his critical study of Shivaji. And now 
comes Mr Munde's ridiculous demand. It is India's 
immaturity and misfortune that are manifest in 
this kind of extreme touchiness about icons.


_____


[4]

Outlook [ India]
Mar 29, 2004
REVIEW

The Bounds Of Citizenship
A hint at the need for a different paradigm to 
the debate, but no exit routes yet
DILIP SIMEON

WILL SECULAR INDIA SURVIVE?
by Mushirul Hasan
IMPRINTONE
RS 800; PAGES: 399

This collection of political essays by eminent 
academics is edited by a historian who was 
himself a target of fanatics some years ago. Its 
contents provide much food for thought in the 
attempt to answer the question.

Martha Nussbaum's essay argues against a special 
status to any single religious establishment in a 
constitutional order. She draws parallels between 
intolerance in colonial America and tendencies in 
contemporary India.
Whilst recognising the protections which India's 
Constitution bestows on minorities, she draws 
attention to the vulnerability of fundamental 
rights and the Constitution to executive 
encroachment; the exemption of personal laws from 
the scrutiny of fundamental rights; and the 
undemocratic structure within religious 
communities. On the civil code, she suggests a 
consistent protection of fundamental rights 
across a range of personal laws as a way out.

Neera Chandhoke argues forcefully that the 
defence of secularism be refocused around the 
constitutional order; that secularism be located 
within the principle of democratic equality, she 
cites the need to protect vulnerable sections 
within minorities.

Zoya Hasan provides significant data on the 
ethnic matrices of social inequality and 
political under-representation. She emphasises 
the need for Muslims to situate these questions 
within "opportunities and constraints they share 
with others". The editor's essay on Muslim 
educational systems is a valuable introduction to 
a controversial subject. Dipankar Gupta has a 
provocative piece on the psycho-social roots of 
terrorism, stressing in particular the 
ramifications of humiliation.

Radhika Desai's essay analyses caste undertones 
in communal politics and the novelty of political 
functions that take the form of 'traditional' 
caste identities. Satish Saberwal conducts a 
sociological exploration into the trajectories 
followed by community consciousness in its 
journey towards identity politics. Amrita Basu 
and Srirupa Roy dissect Gujarat in 2002, paying 
attention to the erosion of boundaries between 
civil society and the state. They provide strong 
arguments for those who discern a creeping 
criminalisation of the Indian state, but also 
want to understand the reasons behind the 
popularity of communal politics. Hasan Suroor's 
is a moving account of his experiences as a 
journalist, who gets cast for a role despite the 
fact that his Muslim identity means little more 
to him than a name and "some cultural baggage". 
There are articles on recent developments in 
Indian politics; the Minorities Commission; and 
an essay about encounters with identity in the 
era of Babri Masjid, Gujarat, and 9/11.

The book's underlying theme is minority rights, 
specifically, the "Hindu-Muslim" question. Hasan 
writes, "...whether Indian secularism can survive 
in any meaningful sense... will depend on how 
religious minorities can share power and 
privilege...". This formulation needs to be 
rethought. It is possible for a tyrannical state 
to adopt a secular ideology. Kamal Ataturk was 
secular, but hardly democratic. The book could 
have provided readers with more ideas in that 
direction. Is it secularism that is under threat 
or the rule of law, and citizenship? Could a case 
be argued for a constitutional breakdown at the 
level of the Union engineered by the ruling class 
itself? Zoya Hasan points to the intensified 
effort to "draw the boundaries of citizenship on 
the basis of religion". But the critique of this 
communal demography cannot succeed by using the 
same conceptual language.

There are entities in the social firmament other 
than 'Hindus' and 'Muslims'. Women are the 
largest minority, to begin with. Millions of 
'informal' labourers are denied voting rights 
because of their frequent absence from place of 
residence during elections. Certain judicial 
pronouncements on strikes indicate a conviction 
that workers are not members of society. Why has 
labour been occluded from secular discourse? The 
judicial conscience suffers amnesia when Article 
21 is suspended for certain citizens in certain 
places; is not the preservation of the criminal 
justice system crucial to the fate of democracy 
(and secularism)? Hasan's critique of the BJP's 
intellectual agenda points to the 
instrumentalisation of education, and use of 
history as propaganda. Such criticisms could also 
be made of left-wing politics. Many factors have 
contributed to the globally rampant right-wing. 
Might the fractious practices of the left-wing 
have something to do with it? Much honest 
reflection is called for, historical as well as 
ethical.

The book leaves the reader with a sense of things 
left unsaid and areas unexplored. This is not to 
detract from its worth. It suggests approaches 
that could break fresh ground in answering the 
question that is its title.

_____



[5]

[  Women's groups had a demonstration in Jaipur, 
on 3rd March on the basis of the demands spelt 
out below - Ammu Abraham, Women's Centre,Bombay.]

o o o

SUMMARY CRITIQUE OF THE COURT JUDGEMENTS IN THE 
FOUR CASES RELATING TO GLORIFICATION OF SATI

Case nos. 1/87, 2/87, 3/87, 6/87

Special Court Sati Prevention and Session Court, Jaipur

Name of Judge: Shiv Singh Chauhan

Date of Judgement : 31st January, 2004


On the 31st of January 2004 the Special Court on 
Sati Prevention cum Sessions Court in Jaipur 
acquitted all the eleven accused in four of the 
22 cases on glorification of Sati that were filed 
16 years ago in 1987. Those acquitted included 
former minister and vice President of the 
Rajasthan BJP Rajasthan Singh Rathore, former 
Bharatiya Yuva Morcha President and the nephew of 
Vice President Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, Pratap 
Singh Khachariawas, President of the Rajput Maha 
Sabha, Narendra Singh Rajawat, former IAS officer 
Onkar Singh and Advocate Ram Singh Manohar. The 
judgement came as a big blow to the various 
movements struggling for emancipation of women 
from the centuries old shackles of inhuman 
traditions and practices.

Women's groups in Rajasthan have studied the 
judgement and feel that they are full of loop 
holes. Since the day of the acquittal these 
groups have been demanding that the Government of 
Rajasthan act immediately, give justice a chance 
and therefore appeal in the Rajasthan High Court. 
Inspite of building pressure through the media 
and publicly agitating on the streets and writing 
letters to the Chief Minister, she has not 
responded.

On the 5th of February, 2004 women's groups in 
Rajasthan protested outside the Rajasthan State 
Assembly. In spite of 250 women being outside the 
Assembly gates for more than six hours the Chief 
Minster did not respond. Following which women's 
groups sent a large number of letters to the 
Chief Minister but the Government has not shown 
signs of either listening to us or meeting us.

Women's groups have decided not to give up their 
demands. The  present mobilization is one more 
step in the direction of being heard.

The Background and the sixteen year old court journey

On the 4th of September, 1987, eighteen year old 
Roop Kanwar of Deorala, District Sikar lost her 
husband Maal Singh. Before afternoon she was 
forced to climb on her husband's funeral pyre and 
was burnt alive in the presence of the whole 
village, in the name of having attained Satihood. 
For Rajasthan this was not the first incident of 
widow burning in the name of Sati since 
independence. It was the 26th such incident. The 
only difference this time was that women's groups 
were on the streets agitating and trying to 
prevent the open violation of law, first through 
the murder of the widow and then by glorifying 
this act in the name of Sati. When the Government 
openly let thousands of people break the law and 
glorify the murder in the name of Sati worship, 
the women's groups moved the Rajasthan High Court 
and got it to stop this act. The women's  groups 
then forced the Government to bring in the 
Rajasthan Sati Prevention Ordinance, 1987 by the 
1st of October and later the Central Government 
to bring in the Commission of Sati Prevention 
Act, 1987. The law thus made punishable any 
activity that could be termed as glorification in 
the name of Sati.

In spite of the law against glorification being 
in place in the State, in the districts and 
cities of Jaipur, Alwar, Sikar. there was open 
violation of the law and a large number of 
rallies with naked swords, chanting slogans in 
praise of Sati and Roop Kanwar were seen in these 
places. Twenty two cases were filed by the 
Rajasthan police in these districts under the 
Rajasthan Sati Prevention ordinance, 1987. By 
November the police had filed the charge sheets 
in these 22 matters. The accused challenged these 
charge sheets in the Rajasthan High Court who 
dismissed the charge sheets by December, 1987. 
The Government of Rajasthan then challenged the 
High Court judgement and moved to the Supreme 
Court. The matter came up in front of the Supreme 
Court in 1991.who finally reversed the Rajasthan 
High Court judgement in these cases in January 
2003 and sent them back for trial to Jaipur.

It was only by June 2003 that trial began in the 
Jaipur special Sati court. The first judge of 
this special Sati court was taken ill and after 
his untimely demise a second judge called Shiv 
Singh Chauhan. was appointed. In January 2004 the 
trial moved with great speed and the matter was 
concluded by 31st January, acquitting all the 
accused in four of the 22 cases that underwent 
trial.

This was not new. In the matter of the murder of 
Roop Kanwar, all the accused were acquitted in 
1996 by a lower in Neem-ka-thana in Sikar 
district. Although the then Government of 
Rajasthan filed an appeal promptly, which was 
admitted in the Rajasthan High Court soon after. 
But even though eight years have passed the 
appeal is yet to come up for hearing in the High 
Court.

The major concern for us is that if the 
Government of Rajasthan does not appeal in the 
Rajasthan High Court against these acquittals in 
cases of glorification of Sati then there will be 
no chance of justice in the future in these 
cases, which will be a set back for all 
progressive movements.

The Summary Critique of the Judgement.

The Judgment of the Special Court (Sati 
Prevention), Jaipur pronounced on 31/1/2004 
acquitting all the accused charged for glorifying 
the practice of Sati in four of the cases out of 
twenty two are full of lacunae. The four 
judgments, which are more or less identical, 
clearly reflect the same outdated mentality, not 
only in approach but appreciation of evidence as 
well as interpretation of law. One cannot help 
sensing a certain kind of perverse motivation 
while going through the text of the judgments.

Misinterpretation of the provision defining glorification of Sati

The most glaring problem with this judgement is 
the way in which the court has interpreted the 
provisions defining "glorification" of Sati 
practice! in Section 2 (B). and punishable under 
section 5 of the Rajasthan Ordinance of 1987. It 
does not require any legal acumen to see that the 
offence of glorification is an independent 
offence in itself. The definition is general and 
wide and is not dependent on any particular 
incident. The definition reads as under:

"By 'glorification' as far as the practice of 
Sati is concerned, it includes amongst other 
things, to organize any function or procession 
with regard to Sati or to create any Trust or 
collect funds or to perpetuate. the glory or 
memory of the person committing Sati or to build 
any temple for the purpose."

The intention of this provision is clear. The 
mention of a particular person is only in the 
later part of the definition while the former 
part is general and not related to any particular 
person or incident. Moreover when it says that " 
it includes amongst other things ", it means that 
the succeeding sentences are not exhaustive. They 
are only inclusive. However the court has 
unabashedly interpreted it to mean that the 
offence of glorification must be in relation to a 
particular incident. Therefore first the incident 
has to be proved in order to hold the accused 
guilty, for the offence of glorification in 
relation to that incident. This itself makes the 
approach of the court, as perverse and 
unacceptable. it may be pointed out that in many 
other cases also when the Supreme Court or 'the 
Rajasthan High Court have issued directions with 
regard to preventing Melas at Rani Sati Mandir 
etc., they have never required that first the 
incident of Sati must be proved.

Misinterpretation of the Supreme Court Judgement

The Sati Court has also misinterpreted the 
judgment of Rajasthan High Court and Supreme 
Court given in the same matter in 1987 and 2003 
respectively. When the Supreme Court had remanded 
the case back to the trial court, it clearly 
meant that the complete decision of. the 
Rajasthan High Court was quashed and therefore 
all the matters in the case including offences 
under section 5 as well as 6 of the Ordinance 
were open for trial by the Sati Court. However, 
the Sati Court started on the premise that the 
Rajasthan High court had already given judgment 
with regards to Section 6 and on this logic 
offence under section 6 were not worthy of trial. 
But the Court continues to discuss the evidence 
and declares that the offence was not made out. 
But it is for every one to see that the court was 
acting under a predetermined approach.

Defining Sati : An act outside the jurisdiction of the court.

The same prejudice is evident when the court 
proceeds to give irrelevant arguments, 
particularly while considering the definition  f 
Sati, it says that "Sati" means a woman being 
virtuous, having strong character, completely 
devoted towards her husband and having a 
relationship with only one man during her whole 
life. The judgement has also referred to the 
mythological character of Sita and Anusuya 
addressing them as Sati and on this basis he has 
argued that if with this meaning one refers to 
Sita or Anusuya he cannot be called guilty of 
glorifying Sati. Such an argument is completely 
irrelevant and exposes the mindset of the court 
and is not connected with the legal definition of 
practice of Sati. When in these cases the accused 
were hailing Roop Kanwar as Sati and raising 
slogans in her honour, it was clearly an offence 
of glorifying Sati Practice in the legal sense of 
the term. They were not honouring Sita or Anusuya 
but were glorifying the burning of Roop Kanwar 
alive on her husband's funeral pyre.

Not taking cognizance of the testimonies of the 
policemen who deposed, hostile witnesses and 
other documentary evidence

It further seems that the Court was determined to 
find fault with every aspect of the case 
including the facts, evidence, documentary or 
oral and smash it altogether. That is why though 
it was neither necessary nor legally tenable to 
go into the facts with regard to the offence of 
glorification, when once the court has held that 
the offence of glorification cannot be made out 
without first proving the particular incident for 
which there was no evidence, it still did so.

It is well settled by the various decision of 
Supreme Court and Rajasthan High Court that the 
deposition of police witnesses cannot be 
discarded only on the ground that they are police 
men. However in these cases the court has refused 
to rely on the statements of those policemen who 
have consistently supported the prosecution case. 
It was done only on the ground that they are 
police men, working under the Investigation 
Officer and being a policemen they are supposed 
to be expert witnesses. This part of the judgment 
is completely irrational. The court has even 
adversely commented upon the Investigating 
Officers simply on the untenable ground that he 
was also the one who communicated first 
information about the incident and then also 
became investigation officer.

The law for appreciation of evidence says that 
even hostile witnesses must not be discarded 
completely. That evidence has to be scrutinized 
but in this case the court has not at all cared 
to look in their evidence.

At one place strangely the court has gone against 
the well settled principle that "ignorance of law 
is no excuse". The Court has clearly opined that 
unless it is not proved that the person was aware 
of the law, he is not liable to be punished. This 
argument may be somewhat relevant (but not 
completely) with regard to the offence under 
section 6 (3) of the Ordinance but it seems that 
the court applied this interpretation with regard 
to other offences as well.

There is a published document, a pamphlet. A bare 
reading of this pamphlet is suffice to convince 
even a layman that it was meant to glorify not 
only Roop Kanwar's incident but the practice of 
Sati as well. However the court has refused to 
consider it saying that the prosecution has not 
specifically pointed out and argued about the 
portion which it considers amounting to be 
offence of glorification.

Further when the court refers to the document 
(Ex. P.S.) containing words that Roop Kanwar by 
becoming Sati had served "Hindutva", it says that 
these words  may amount  to glorification but 
then again the court brushes it aside by saying 
that it could only be considered so, if Roop 
Kanwar's Sati incident was proved. Thus by the 
logic of the court if a book is published 
glorifying the Sati Practice by telling a story 
of an imaginary character, it will not amount to 
an offence unless the glorification activity 
relates to any real incident. Clearly the 
approach of the court was topsy-turvy.

Lapses of the Prosecution

It also seems that the prosecution itself was 
either half-hearted or was deliberately helping 
the accused persons. It is clear that the 
prosecution was not interested in building a 
strong case which would help the court to punish 
the guilty. Similarly the charge sheets that were 
filed within a month of the various glorification 
incidents in 1987 was an act of mere tokenism to 
assuage the movements that were demanding justice 
in these cases.

Some of the glaring loopholes in the 
investigation and in the charge sheets filed are 
as under:

1.         Though the offence of glorification is 
an independent offence, still when the offence 
was related to Roop Kanwar's matter it was 
incumbent upon the prosecution to produce 
material  about it for the purpose of laying 
solid foundation  and to give back-ground of the 
offence. Strangely nothing was done with regard 
to this aspect which shows utter callousness on 
the part of the prosecution.

2.         The notification issued by a District 
Magistrate was neither produced nor any cogent 
evidence was produced to prove its publication.

3.         The First Information Report was sent 
to the Court after three days without any 
explanation and this FIR also did not contain the 
names of the accused. ( the  FIR is sent in 24 
hours of it being filed ).

4.         The District Magistrate who issued the 
Notification was also not produced as a witness.

5.         In spite of the Judgment of the 
Rajasthan High Court no extra efforts were taken 
by the Prosecution to produce material and 
evidence with regard to the offence under section 
6(3) of the Ordinance. The judgment of the High 
Court should have altered the prosecution as to 
what  material was required and when the matter 
was remanded by the Supreme Court for retrial it 
was the opportunity for the prosecution to cover 
that weakness which was  not done.

6.         The photographs which were taken at 
the time of the public meeting were not proved 
according to legal requirements.

7.         The concerned witnesses were also not 
produced to prove the news items and photos 
published in the news papers.

8.         Though the speeches in the public 
meeting were tape recorded still the tapes were 
neither produced with the Challan nor they were 
proved according to the legal requirement when 
ultimately  they were made available to the Court.

9.         The transcript of the tape recording 
was also not proved by the person who did it.

10.       The statement under section 161 were also recorded after much delay.

11.       That identification parade was also not 
held for the purpose of identifying the accused 
by the witnesses.

12.       That the Public Relation Officer and 
employee of the Radio Station were produced as 
witnesses but without any official record.

13.       That it is not understandable as to why 
the assembly of people in all these cases was not 
declared unlawful even when the District 
Magistrate had accused Notification under section 
6(3) of the Ordinance.

14.       That perhaps this is one of the rarest 
cases where high ranking officers responsible for 
law and order turned hostile. They include Add. 
District Magistrate, Sub Divisional Magistrate, 
Sub Inspector, Asst. Sub Inspector and other 
police men also. The State Govt. had not  taken 
any action against them. This itself is enough to 
erode the faith of the public in the intention 
and capability of the law and order machinery and 
the State government.

15.       The judgment shows that even at the 
time of final arguments, the prosecution did not 
present its points well neither on the factual 
nor on the legal aspect of the case.

Our demands to the Chief Minster of Rajasthan

1. We feel on that the basis of the above facts 
the Government of Rajasthan must file an appeal 
in the Rajasthan High Court. The limitation 
period will finish on 30th April and thus the 
appeal must be filed in this time frame.

2. We also feel that action needs to be taken 
against all those official witnesses who turned 
hostile. Some of them are Nar Hari Sharma (ADM), 
Gyan Prakash Shukla (SDM Amer), Shukam chand (ADM 
Neem Ka Thana ), Madho Lal ( police photographer 
), Bhoop Singh (ASI), Nathu Singh (Head Constable 
), Noor Mohammed ( RAS), Nathu Ram ( ASI ), 
Prabhu Dayal (SI, Behror ) Ram Niwas( RPS, SHO 
Adarsh Nagar ), Satish Kumar ( Bhilwara SHO), 
Sawar Mal ( constable), Chagan lal (SHO, Nagar 
Nigam, Jaipur), Prabhu Singh (SI, Patan Sikar ).

3. We also feel that the 18 other cases that are 
undergoing trial need to be conducted not with 
just one PP but a support group of legal experts. 
Thus a committee needs to be constituted to lead 
the prosecution with strength.

Please be in touch with us for more information.

We are,

Women's Rehabilitation Group, Rajasthan 
University Women's Association, National 
Federation of Indian women, All India Democratic 
Women's Association, All India Progressive 
women's Association, Mahila Prakoshta- All India 
State Government Employees Association, National 
Muslim Women's Welfare Society, People's Union 
for Civil Liberties, Vividha - Women's 
Documentation and Resource Centre, Bharat Gyan 
Vigyan Samiti, Academy of Socio Legal Studies, 
Vishakha-Women's Group for Education and 
Research, Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan, 
Rajasthan Mazdoor Kisan Morcha, Urmul network, 
Maila Jan Adhikar Samiti (Ajmer), Sasvika Ajmer, 
Sathin Karamchari Sangh, Janwadi Lekhak Sangh, 
Jan Vichar Manch.Lok Adhikar network.

on behalf of the Mahila Atyachar Virodhi Jan Andolan, Rajasthan

Contact Addresses: c/o Kavita Srivastava & Renuka 
Pamecha, 76 Shanti Niketan Colony,Kisan Marg, 
Jaipur[...], Nisha Sidhu, c/o Kumaranand Hall, 
Jaipur. [...] Laad Kumari Jain & Bina Agrawal, 
c/o Shakti Stambh, B-182, Mangal 
Marg,Jaipur-302015[...]

_____


[6]
People's Initiative to defeat BJP in elections 2004

Academicians, writers and activists met at VP 
House on 19 March to consider the initiation of a 
citizens' campaign to defeat the BJP which has 
benefitted electorally because of divided secular 
vote. The following issues were discussed in the 
meeting:

THE CONTEXT

The 2004 Election is perhaps the most significant 
ever in view of the grave danger to the very 
economic, political and cultural fabric of India. 
A BJP victory will enable the RSS to further 
consolidate its position and control over the 
nation. It is the responsibility of the 
democratic sections of the intelligentsia to 
resist this outcome.

The RSS has implemented its programme via the NDA 
government because of the electoral gains made by 
the BJP in the last two general elections. The 
division of the secular vote has contributed 
significantly to these gains in many 
constituencies. In fact, the BJP itself has not 
got more than 24% of the popular vote. In those 
areas where secular vote is again likely to be 
divided, a peoples' initiative is urgently needed.

The INITIATIVE

It was felt that the initiative can be planned at 
two levels - national, and at the constituency 
(even segment of constituency) level.

At the national level, the target to be 
challenged is the RSS - its character, 
organisation and mode of activity being 
subversive both of the Indian constitution and 
democracy. Signature campaigns, media inputs in 
national and regional papers and magazines, and 
posters etc.

Campaign could be initiated with a Press 
conference on March 30, the anniversary of the 
1920 campaign against British imperialism which 
in Delhi saw an unprecedented hindu-muslim unity.

At the constituency level, immediately the 
electoral arithmetic is to be gone into so that 
constituencies where an intervention can be 
successful in bringing about `unity from below' 
to ensure anti-BJP vote is consolidated behind 
specific candidates and the BJP is defeated.

It was felt that local activists and groups, and 
persons of influence in the community/ areas 
should be identified in the selected 
constituencies. Sections most affected by the 
communal agenda of the RSS/ Sangh parivar, and by 
the WTO-dictated economic policies of the 
government (minorities, dalits, tribals, rural/ 
urban poor, lower middle class) should be 
identified and focused on.

Supply of material to the regional media, 
exposure of the BJP/RSS will also help in 
stemming the de-moralisation of local activists, 
communities and provide talking points to 
challenge the disinformation campaign of the 
Sangh Parivar. The meeting was hopeful that 
similar initiatives could be taken up in other 
parts of the country.

MEETING TO FINALISE INITIAL PHASE OF THE 
PROGRAMME WILL BE HELD ON 23 MARCH, 2004 AT 8 
VITHALBHAI PATEL HOUSE, RAFI MARG AT 5 P.M.

PLEASE MAKE THE EFFORT TO ATTEND.

NIRMALANGSHU MUKHERJI, MADHU PRASAD, ANIL NAURIA, 
NANDITA NARAIN, JAVED NAQUI, ZAHOOR SIDDIQUI, 
V.K. TRIPATHI AND OTHERS.



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

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/

South Asia Counter Information Project a sister 
initiative, provides a partial back -up and 
archive for SACW:  snipurl.com/sacip
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.

--