SACW | 16-17 May 2004

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire   |  16-17 May,  2004
via:  www.sacw.net

[1] Bangladesh: Ahmadiyya persecution picks up speed (edit, The Daily Star)
[2] Pakistan:  Why can't Gen Musharraf put his 
social vision into practice? (Edit., The Daily 
Times)
[3] India: Election Results 2004 (C. M. Naim)
[4] India: What have Our People Said? (Anuradha M. Chenoy)
[5] India: From Sonia To Sonia Plus (Bharat Bhushan)
[6] India: An Appeal from the progressive intelligentsia to left parties
[7] India: Letter to the editor  (Mukul Dube)
[8] India:  Kashmir citizens report on the recent elections

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

[1]

The Daily Star [Bangladesh]
May 16, 2004
Editorial

AHMADIYYA PERSECUTION PICKS UP SPEED

Official inaction contributes to insecurity
Last month, anti-Ahmadiyya zealots, with the 
police virtually cooperating, took it upon 
themselves to storm the Ahmadiyya mosque in 
Nakhalpara to remove any books that they deemed 
unlawful under the government's January order 
banning all Ahmadiyya publications. This month it 
has been the ransacking and looting of Ahmadiyya 
homes in four villages in Rangpur. In addition to 
the attacks on their homes, the Ahmadiyya 
communities have been isolated and ostracised in 
their villages. Ahmadiyya children cannot attend 
school and the adults cannot go to the market for 
fear of reprisal.

The most disturbing aspect of this renewed 
violence against the Ahmadiyya community has been 
the indifference of the local authorities to 
their plight. Not only did the local police take 
no steps to stop the ransacking of their homes, 
and have done nothing to reinstate Ahmadiyyas as 
full members of the community in the affected 
villages, the local police claim to know nothing 
of the attacks. Ahmadiyya community leaders 
contend that the police refused to record any 
case when the complaint was taken to them.

When the authorities, whose duty it is to protect 
every person within their jurisdiction, are 
unwilling to take steps to safeguard a threatened 
community, then they must be considered just as 
culpable as those who actually commit the 
violence. The disgraceful dereliction of their 
duty to protect the minority community renders 
the local Rangpur police complicit in the 
atrocities.

It is bad enough that the government caved in to 
its extremist allies and banned Ahmadiyya 
publications, thereby emboldening the 
anti-Ahmadiyya zealots and further marginalising 
the community. We reiterate our call for the 
unconstitutional ban to be lifted. But, at the 
very least, and without delay, the government 
must commit to ensuring the safety of the 
Ahmadiyya community from any kind of attacks that 
it is suffering in Rangpur.


_____



[2]


The Daily Times [ Pakistan]
May 17, 2004

  WHY CAN'T GEN MUSHARRAF PUT HIS SOCIAL VISION INTO PRACTICE?

General Pervez Musharraf has spoken. He wants 
parliament to take up the matter of honour 
killings and pass laws against the practise. He 
said so in Islamabad two days ago at the 
Convention on Sensitisation and Adoption of Human 
Rights Standards in Pakistan. President General 
Musharraf also recommended that laws already in 
force in relation to blasphemy and Hudood should 
be suitably amended to remove some of the 
malpractices attached to them. In this context, 
he has announced the establishment of an 
independent National Human Rights Commission to 
scrutinise human rights standards in the country 
and recommend reforms accordingly.
General Musharraf also claimed a number of 
personal achievements in the area of human 
rights. He said that under his rule the 
minorities and women saw their lot improved. He 
argued that due to his personal vision, and the 
fact that he was in unchallenged authority, the 
minorities were able to 'freely' profess their 
religion and maintain their religious 
institutions. He said he gave Pakistan joint 
electorates and empowered women by reserving 
seats for them in parliament and allotting 33 
percent of the seats for them in local 
government. He noted another plus in the police 
reform law that replaced in 2002 the 'colonial' 
Police Act of 1861.
The crux of the message from General Musharraf is 
this: "I have 'enlightened' vision but it is my 
uniform that has facilitated the implementation 
of that vision". Needless to say, the implication 
is that prior to his rule (and after the 2002 
elections) the vision was lacking and that 
democracy stood in the way of its implementation.
We will not cavil with the right direction he 
gave to governance after 1999 even if it was 
under pressure from a changing world-scene. In 
fact we would like to recall that our support to 
General Musharraf sprang from a positive 
assessment of his intent to take Pakistan away 
from the path of bigotry and intolerance. But we 
must add here that even then we attached blame 
for the Dark Ages in Pakistan, not to democracy, 
but to the paramountcy of the civil-military 
establishment in the country and its 'vision' of 
jihad abroad and consequent 'Talibanisation' at 
home.
We still believe that 'President' General 
Musharraf has not adequately lived up to the 
vision of 'General' Musharraf. We believe that he 
has confused his own political survival and 
longevity with that of a proper vision for the 
country. His early liberal measures were taken 
when he faced outward and wanted the world to 
believe that the army was no longer running jihad 
and training non-state warriors who committed 
terrorism. But at home his social reforms remain 
half-hearted. For example, his use of the word 
'freely' in respect of the freedom of religious 
practice of the minorities is literally wrong 
because he has not corrected the mistake made in 
the Objectives Resolution when it was made a part 
of the Constitution by General Ziaul Haq. The 
Resolution omits 'freely' without formal 
notification and could have been set right. Today 
the minorities cannot claim that they are allowed 
'free' practice of religion by the Constitution.
The observation made by 'President' Musharraf on 
the joint electorate system is also not correct. 
Everyone, including Christians, can vote together 
but not the Ahmedi community. This community has 
been first apostatised, then disenfranchised 
through separate electorates. But he has done 
nothing to correct this maltreatment. In fact, 
the persecution of the Ahmedis happens more 
frequently under the Blasphemy Law. General 
Musharraf now wants parliament to look into the 
misuse of this law. But why couldn't he have done 
it himself by decree? After all he had the vision 
and his uniform gave him the power to implement 
that vision. We are therefore inclined to believe 
that President Musharraf used his 'vision' to 
garner international and domestic liberal and 
modern support, but was in fact using this 
strategy as a 'liberal reform' card.
We know that what he really wanted done he pushed 
through with great gusto. He wanted the LFO 
incorporated into the constitution. There were 
many hurdles but he overcame them resolutely. He 
wanted the NSC in place. There was opposition to 
the idea, even from his own hand picked prime 
minister. But he railroaded his way through. On 
the Similarly, the seminaries were crying out for 
reform. But he has shied away from touching them 
despite the fact that they remain unacceptable 
nurseries of jihadi terrorism. Both the UN 
committee that monitors the Security Council 
resolution 1373, and the European Union, have 
expressed their disappointment over his 
'ambiguity' vis-à-vis the 'madrasas'. Meanwhile, 
the Brussels-based think-tank, International 
Crisis Group (ICG), that advises the EU, has been 
condemned by the new religion minister, Ijazul 
Haq, in Daily 'Insaf' (14 May 2004) which 
reported him as saying that when he saw the 
report by the ICG he 'at once tore it up and 
threw it in the dustbin because it was a pack of 
lies (jhoot ka pulanda) about the seminaries in 
Pakistan'. But Haq Jr could not have been given a 
more inappropriate ministry to run. In many ways, 
the militant seminaries are a direct offshoot of 
the policies of his father Zia ul Haq in the 
1980s and it would be foolish to imagine that the 
son will undo the work of his father.
President General Musharraf is increasingly being 
described as "a man of half measures". This means 
he is losing credibility at home and abroad. The 
world knows that whatever he really wants to do 
he is able to do with great efficiency. He can 
throw a law overboard if he thinks he has to 
imprison an outspoken rival or throw someone out 
of the country in defiance of the judiciary. He 
can get parliament to amend the constitution and 
the Muslim League to unite. Why then can't he put 
his social vision into practise? *


_____


[3]

ELECTION RESULTS 2004

C. M. Naim

As we draw satisfaction from the results of the Lok
Sabha elections in India I feel that some clear
thinking may also be in order. The most satisfying
aspect is that they took place and in hugely orderly
fashionóonly four constituencies will require
re-polling. Also, the quotient of violence, we gather,
was not as high as was feared. Indians everywhere have
every reason to be happy and proud on that account.
(Incidentally, the elections are likely to have cost
to the Indian state much more than the Rs. 9 billion
that they cost in 1999.) We can also take pride in the
fact that the estimated turnout of voters was 58% as a
national average; in many constituencies it went as
high as 80%. (However, the national average was about
2% less compared to the 1999 elections.)

For many of us it is more the case of schadenfreude .
We rejoice at the BJPís grief. The Parivar will not
rule the roost in Delhi, and that is all that matters.
Perhaps it does. But letís be sure why we think that.
Do we expect the INC+ coalition to make any drastic
change in the current economic policies? Were they not
set in motion by an INC government?
Will the national politics become more ësecularí or
less caste/religion-directed? Hardly likely. No more
ëGujaratsí? Perhaps. But letís remember the terrible
events at Bhagalpur, Bombay, Bhiwandi, Ahmedabad,
Meerut and so many other places. What justice was done
in those cases by the various INC governments. And
letís certainly not forget the anti-Sikh pogrom in
Delhi in 1984. (Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar are
again among the winners, unless Iím mistaken.)
Secularism? The Imam of Jama Masjid and the Muslim
Personal Law Board gained importance only due to the
INC; and again it was the INC that was in power and
gave its not quite so tacit approval when the Babri
Mosque was demolished. Iím afraid, both in omission
and comission, the INC does not present a very
reassuring record.
It might be claimed that the INC has changed, that it
is a ënewí party now under the leadership of a new
leader. A look at its internal politics and structure
will quickly destroy any such assumption. It is still
a party that has not had any intra-party elections for
perhaps four decades. It still has all its decsions
made by a small coterie of peopleómost of whom
representing no constituency and owing their position
only to their personal ties to the partyís current
leader.

Letís look at the incoming INC from another
perspective. It set up 417 candidates. (One of the
constituencies it didnít contest was Lucknow where Mr.
Vajpeyi won by the same margin as in 1999.) Of these
417, 50 candidates were of the age between 25 and 40
(11.9%), 111 between the ages of 41 and 55 (46.8%), 51
between 56 and 70 (21.5%), and 27 over 70 in age
(6.47%). The figures for BJP, with 364 candidates, are
as follows:
45 (12.3%); 187 (51.3%); 103 (28.2%); and 29 (7.96%).
In other words, 63% of the BJP candidates were under
the age of 55, while the new improved INC had only 57%
of its candidates from that age group. (As opposed to
these grand parties, the two smaller parties now
trying to flex their muscles at the national level,
the BSP (Mayawati) and the SP (Mulayam Singh) show
much greater inclusion of people tryly representing
the present population of India. Of the BSPís 435
candidates, 343 (78%) were below the age of 55, and of
the SPís 237 candidates, 183 (77%).
Also sadly, of the 539 winners, only 44 (8%) are
women. It may be remembered that more than
fifty-percent of all elegible  female voters cast
their votes in every election. It may be instructive
to see how many female candidates were nominated by
the INC under the guidance of Sonia Gandhi.

According to the preleminary analyses of the Election
Commission of India, the BJP ran 364 candidates; 138
won; and the party received 22% of the votes. The INC
put up 417 candidates; 145 won; and the party received
26.69% of the votes. More or less it is the same
picture as previously. Meanwhile, taken as a whole, of
the ënationalí partiesí 1351 candidates, 364 (26.94%)
won; while of the ëstateí partiesí 812 candidates, 156
(19.21%) won. The difference  of only 8% shows where
the change is occuring.  That has been the dominant
trend in the past few elections and is likely to
become more dominant. It was more the defeat of TDP on
local issues than any defeat of the BJP on national
matters that has made possible the new INC+ coalition
to claim powerófor how long?óat the center. After all,
in both Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, the BJP has
clearly built on its strength, almost wiping out other
national parties, and, under the circumstances, has
not done too badly in Gujarat either.


_____


[4]


Economic Times [India]
15 May, 2004

WHAT HAVE OUR PEOPLE SAID?
Anuradha M. Chenoy


   The election results have come as a surprise to 
all. The pre-poll and exit poll results that 
predicted a hung parliament and the NDA as the 
front runner have added to the shock and awe. The 
losses suffered by the BJP and NDA and the gains 
made by the Congress and its allies who are to 
form the government with the support of the 
largest Left ever tell multiple stories that need 
to be taken seriously. The overall results 
reflect the diversity of Indian opinion, the 
reality of its plurality, the political literacy 
of its masses and the strength of its democracy. 
It also shows that the natural centre of gravity 
of Indian politics will always come back to the 
centre.

To deconstruct the mandate, the largest chunk 
shows that it supports secular politics.  A 
government that sits back and watches communal 
carnage as in Gujarat; allows state institutions 
including the police and judiciary to be 
communally biased; parades the chief minister 
that the highest court of the land indicts and 
calls the modern day Nero as its election mascot, 
cannot make gains nationally. Not just the 
minorities but the people as a whole will not 
tolerate this. Even Kashi, Mathura and Ayodhya 
have rejected Hindutva politics.

The days when the minorities could be manipulated 
by a promise of maulvi teachers for Madrassas or 
special perks to a few of their elite as token 
goodies to appease the rest are gone.  When 
textbooks are manipulated and the autonomy of 
teachers curbed, the younger generation will 
rebel. This was evident in the vote in Uttar 
Pradesh where the SP, BSP and the Congress made 
gains at the expense of the BJP. Even in Kashmir, 
where people yearning for peace were grateful for 
the initiative for talks with the Hurriyat 
Conference, secularism came first. And as for the 
revival of the Congress in Gujarat, even here, 
the protection racket that CM Modi offered by 
constructing the image of a threatened majority 
did not sell.

People vote to ensure their own future. When 
inequality between the rich and poor increases 
drastically; when the elite is seen to be 
seceding from its commitment to the poor; when 
the gap between a starving rural India, the urban 
poor and shining urban elite becomes so 
conspicuous, people will vote for the opposition, 
especially when aligned with the Left. The truth 
is that large numbers of people have been 
completely left out by the kind of reform agenda 
of the NDA government. A reform that sees the 
rise of a few billionaires, sale of valuable and 
profit -making public assets, unlimited imported 
goods might make the rich feel good, but the 
middle class feels increasingly marginalized and 
the poor are completely left out of the 
processes. This is why the swing away from the 
great modernizers of Andhra Pradesh and even 
Karnataka, both states that saw the phenomenon of 
farmer suicides. Ordinary people do not deny 
reform or even liberalization, they only want a 
slice of it.

When people live in democracies they become 
increasingly aware of their rights. When a chief 
minister like Jayalalitha, who came with such a 
mandate, indiscriminately used POTA against 
political rivals, was imperious in manner, 
ruthless against lakhs of government employees, 
both reforms and human rights became an issue. 
Politicians tend to underestimate the sense of 
justice that ordinary people have.

Where people witness clean governance like 
Orissa, where reforms have taken place with some 
touch of humanity; where the chief minister is 
seen by the people as their sympathizer for all 
five years, and not just election time, an excuse 
called 'anti-incumbency' does not prevail. This 
is especially so for West Bengal and Tripura, 
where the rural poor were given some respite 
because of land reform, where the poor are 
allowed to vote and do not need caste links to 
ensure protection. These hopes brought the Left 
back to power in Kerala too.

Was it all caste base alliances that worked in 
Bihar? Only the upper castes would think so. The 
people here want development too, but not at the 
cost of their lives. Minorities here do not have 
to fear riots, the lower castes have been 
protected by the state from their traditional 
exploiters, the middle castes have been 
empowered, and the Dalits have kept to this 
alliance as Ram Bilas Paswan joined the Laloo 
Prasad bandwagon. The state of things here might 
enrage the sensibilities of the middle class, but 
then they are the minority voters in this region.

States where the BJP and NDA held their own like 
Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh had 
only six months ago rejected the Congress for 
reasons of unsatisfactory performance. These 
states made the BJP complacent. They believed in 
their own myth of India shining. Just as these 
states shocked the Congress into a set of clever 
and humble alliances.

The attempt to focus the election on two single 
leaders, as if it was a presidential rather than 
a parliamentary election did not work. Making a 
personality cult around the former prime minister 
where he was likened to Jawaharlal Nehru, 
unmindful of either his RSS base or the long term 
agenda of his party showed the shocking lack of 
knowledge of the history of this country. 
Similarly, demonizing the leader of the Congress 
party as an 'outsider' or the 'other' and 
therefore alien was hardly in accordance to what 
the Indian Constitution or ethos says about 
citizenship. Add to this the hope for change and 
progress and the conjuncture produces a vote for 
change.

There is thus no single story to this election. 
But there is one clear thread. People of this 
country need a government that recognizes 
difference; that respects diversity; that does 
not impose one religion or ideology; that is 
inclusive; gives them equity and ensures rights. 
The only way to do this is to ensure that 
democratic, liberal and constitutional 
institutions are strengthened and revitalized. Or 
we will have yet more shocks.

                                                              -----
Anuradha M. Chenoy, Professor, School of International Studies, JNU


______


[5]


The Telegraph
  May 17, 2004

FROM SONIA TO SONIA PLUS
- Understanding why it won would show the Congress what to address
twenty-twenty bharat bhushan

In direct contact
It is a tribute to the inclusive traditions of 
India that Sonia Gandhi has been propelled to the 
position where she can be the prime minister of 
India. Yet having to prove her Indianness every 
inch of the way may well become a major handicap 
for her.

Her detractors are unlikely to give up her 
"foreign origin" issue and would continue to 
agitate around it. It is this single issue that 
would be used to judge her competence each step 
of her way.

Sound political judgment comes with experience 
and Sonia Gandhi lacks the necessary political 
experience. Her aloofness will not give her the 
same kind of access to information as politicians 
who have had greater interaction with the people 
can have. Her children cannot be her only windows 
on the world. Nor can genuflecting Congressmen 
suddenly evolve spines and do this for her.

Her foremost challenge, therefore, would be to 
create around her a team of politicians and 
officials who would be self-effacing, competent 
and not afraid of voicing critical opinion. If 
they are sycophantic, her fate will be same as of 
those who came to believe that India was shining.

Her success or failure would also be judged on 
how successfully she thwarts attempts to tear the 
Indian social fabric asunder. There can be little 
doubt that a Bharatiya Janata Party in retreat is 
likely to create more social tensions than when 
it was expanding its political frontiers by being 
in power. The BJP is likely to be held captive by 
the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh as never before. 
Sonia Gandhi, therefore, must design both 
tactical and strategic ways of dealing with the 
possibilities of heightened social tension.

Internal security and attempts at destroying 
social harmony are, therefore, going to be major 
challenges for the new government. If Bombay, 
Ahmedabad and Delhi start erupting again with 
terrorist violence, those waiting in the wings to 
communalize the situation will jump in to do so. 
Sonia Gandhi will need a strong home minister who 
can keep these tensions in check, especially in 
the BJP-run states that are likely to defy her 
authority.

There are some blemishes that a society must 
neither forgive nor forget. The Israelis are 
still bringing to book those responsible for the 
Holocaust. Narendra Modi's pogrom in Gujarat was 
an unprecedented event in the history of 
independent India and the collective sin of the 
state in perpetrating it and then protecting the 
guilty has to be expiated.

The foremost task of the new home minister, 
therefore, should be to send Narendra Modi and 
his acolytes where they belong. After thorough 
investigation, conspiracy cases should be 
registered forthwith against the high and mighty 
in the state government who not only hunted with 
the hounds in the riots of 2002 but also 
unleashed them in the first place. Unless there 
is swift punishment for the perpetrators of the 
Gujarat riots, Sonia Gandhi can rest assured that 
she would not be taken seriously either by the 
sangh parivar or by those who have voted her to 
power.

Sonia Gandhi's "foreign origin" must not haunt 
her in dealing with Pakistan. She should take the 
bull by the horns. On assuming office, she should 
pick up the phone to General Pervez Musharraf and 
boldly express India's desire to resolve all 
outstanding issues.

She must not let her desire to project her 
nationalism come in the way of national interest 
by becoming hawkish in her Pakistan policy. But 
she cannot afford to be too dovish either and 
must deal with Islamabad from a position of 
strength. The Pakistani establishment suffers 
from a blackmailing mindset and refuses to give 
up the tap on terrorist activities in its attempt 
to control the engagement with India. In order 
not to become susceptible to Islamabad's 
blackmail, deterrent capabilities have to be 
developed and maintained to counter cross-border 
terrorism. These capabilities must normally 
remain dormant. However, Islamabad should know 
that a blast in Mumbai could potentially trigger 
a bigger one in Karachi so that it desists from 
choosing that option.

Most importantly, however, Sonia Gandhi has to 
understand why she won and why the BJP lost these 
elections. Both the decimation of the BJP and the 
consequent recovery of the Congress were 
unexpected. That the intelligentsia did not 
foresee such a result is understandable. It has 
always had a penchant for living in a 
make-believe India of its imagination - one that 
is shining, is taken seriously by the world and 
where reality is expected to fit the image.

Even the BJP did not expect such a verdict 
because there is complete disconnect today 
between political parties and the Indian people. 
However, so generalized is this phenomenon that 
the same thing can happen to the Congress and the 
other political parties in the future.

The institutions of democratic governance - 
whether of Parliament, judiciary, the bureaucracy 
or the police - have declined precipitously. None 
of these facilitate the interaction of ordinary 
folk with the institutions of the state. The 
judiciary, the bureaucracy and the police cannot 
be changed directly by the people. Their anger 
then is directed against the failure of the 
political parties to redress the situation. It 
expresses itself as anti-incumbency when they 
exasperatedly vote out their political 
representatives.

To address this crisis of governance, the new 
government needs to identify, isolate and then 
professionalize the management of the core issues 
of concern to the poor of this country. Rajiv 
Gandhi launched technology missions and thanks to 
his vision and that of the much-maligned Sam 
Pitroda, there is widespread telecom connectivity 
in the country today. If rural roads, education 
of the girl-child, power generation, water 
supply, health and employment, for example, are 
the core issues (there may be others) then they 
should be pushed with a missionary zeal - getting 
rid of the bureaucracy and handing over their 
planning and execution to young professionals 
with fire in their belly.

Lastly, Sonia Gandhi's challenge will be to 
rejuvenate the Congress to once again make it a 
two-way channel of communication between the 
people and the state. It is the only national 
party that has sympathizers, perhaps dormant but 
still present in every village of this country. 
They have to be politically legitimized and 
re-awakened. They must have a role in candidate 
selection not only in panchayat and municipal 
elections but also in the assembly and Lok Sabha 
polls. Unless Congress workers become 
stakeholders in the processes of political power, 
candidature for elections will be purchased 
through sleaze, money or dynastic right.

India is going through a youth bulge - nearly 70 
per cent of its population is below 35 years of 
age. The Congress must tap this storehouse of 
talent. The Congress should ensure that the 
transition of party leadership to this generation 
begins and this does not necessarily mean to the 
children of known Congress leaders alone.

These youngsters can then begin organizing people 
at the grassroots around identities that are 
larger than caste identities. If the Congress is 
to make inroads into the caste-ridden states of 
north India, then the organizing principle of the 
party and its front organizations has to be one 
that is larger than caste. Casteism or 
caste-based allies can be used to fight 
communalism only in the short-run.



______



[6]

Shabnam Hashmi and Prof Rizwan Qaiser today [16 
May 2004] met Prakash Karat and AB Bardhan and 
submitted the following appeal on behalf of 
approx 200 prominent artists, intellectuals from 
across India.


To Comrade Harkishan Surjeet / Comrade AB Bardhan 
and the Central Committee and Polit Bureau 
members of the CPM and the CPI


AN APPEAL

In recovering the secular democratic voice of the 
nation the force on the left have performed a 
very positive and constructive role. The left has 
provided the ideological and organisational 
direction and leadership to the struggle against 
the policies and programmes persued by the 
pro-imperialist government headed by the BJP. 
That in the verdict of the people the left has 
been assigned a decisive role has to be read as a 
reflection of this political reality. How the 
left should perform their role is likely to 
generate debate and discussion and naturally 
there would be different view points as well. Yet 
there cannot be two opinions that it should 
shoulder the responsibility provided by the 
people, in order to defeat the communal and 
pro-imperialist forces. How best it could be 
achieved is the question before the left today, 
in the wake of the electoral verdict of the 
people.

We consider that this is a historical juncture, 
which calls for creative and constructive 
initiative from the left. It involves first an 
entirely new direction to economic development by 
rejecting the very concept of development 
advocated by the forces of globalisation and 
secondly by dismantling the ideological structure 
created by communalism.

The left can undertake the task only as a part of 
the government and not by supporting it from 
outside. The latter, is we may say so, is a 
negative approach, which the people are likely to 
interpret as shirking the responsibility. To 
usher in changes on secular and democratic lines 
the left has to use the possible access to power, 
even if there are certain political risks 
involved in it. The responsibility of providing 
such leadership rests on the left possibly not 
likely to be persued by others as sincerely, as 
effectively that the left would do. After all the 
quality of the life of the people in West Bengal 
and Kerela would not have been possible without 
the left wielding power. Let not the left, 
therefore, feel shy of sharing power at the 
centre, instead assume a role the people expect 
them to fulfil as is evident from the electoral 
result.

We therefore hope that the members of the Central 
Committee and the Polit Bureau of the CPM and the 
CPI would take a decision about participating in 
the secular democratic alliance in consonance 
with the trust and the confidence imposed upon 
them by the people of the country.


A K Hangal- Mumbai-Actor
Abdul Hamid Mir-Kashmir- businessman
Achin Vinaik-Delhi
Aditi Mangaldas-Delhi-dancer
Aditya Mukherjee- Delhi-Professor
Aditya Nigam-Delhi- social activist
Ali Jawed- Delhi-writer
Altaf Badafshi- Kashmir-political activist
Amaresh Mishra- Mumbai-journalist
Ameeta Mulla Wattal-Delhi-Principal Springdales School, educationist
Anand- Delhi-National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights
Anand Patwardhan- Mumbai- Documentary maker
Anil Chowdhry-Delhi- social activist
Anil Sadgopal- Delhi-professor
Anjali Monterio- Mumbai- filmmaker, professor TISS
Anjum Rajabali- Mumbai-script writer
Anuradha Kapoor- Delhi-theatre
Apoorvanand-Delhi-social activist
Aradhna Vikram Singh
Arjun Dangle- Mumbai- writer
Arjun Dev- Delhi-professor
Aruna Ratnam- Chennai-director education UNICEF
Arvind Adarkar
Arvind Krishnaswami- Mumbai- social activist, economist
Asghar Ali Engineer- Mumbai- social activist
Ashok Vajpayee- Delhi-writer
Atul Tiwari- Mumbai-theatre
Aziz Mirza- Mumbai-Director
Baba Azmi- Mumbai-camera film
Baba Kashmira Singh-Punjab
Baba Bhagat Singh Bilga-Punjab- 98 years
Badri Raina- Delhi-professor
Bashir Ahmad Wani-Kashmir- business
Bhagat Singh Malik- Haryana- Advocate
Bhanu Bharti-Delhi-theatre
Bharat Bhatt- Gujarat
Bhushan Oza-Gujarat- Advocate
Bipan Chandra-Delhi- Professor, Historian
BK Bawa-Hyderabad-Retired IAS
Boman Irani- Mumbai- film actor
Cedric Prakash-Gujarat- Director Prashant
Chandita Mukherjee- Mumbai- documentary filmmaker
Chandrasekhar Rao- Hyderabad-constitutional expert
Colin Gonsalves –Delhi-Human Rights Law Network
Darshan Pundit- Uttranchal- Sarokar-social activist
Deepa Gahlot- Mumbai- journalist/ film critic
Digant Oza-Gujarat- Journalist
DR Chowdharay-Haryana- Professor
Fakhruddin Mohd. Dr-Hyderabad- NESCO
Feroz Chandra- Mumbai- journalist
G Narsingh Rao-Hyderabad-filmmaker
Gagan Sethi-Gujarat- Director Janvikas
Ganesh Devi- Gujarat- write and tribal rights activist
Gauhar Raza-Delhi- documentary filmmaker, poet
Ghyasuddin Babu Khan- Huderabad- United Economic Forum
Girish Mishra- Delhi-professor
GK Arora- Delhi- ex IAS
Gopal Menon- Kerala- documentary filmmaker
Govind Nihalani- Mumbai-theatre/ films
GS Bhalla- Delhi-economist
Gulam Rasool Dar- Kashmir- social activist
Habib Tanveer- Bhopal- Theatre
Hanif Lakdawala-Gujarat-Activist
Harsh Mander- Delhi-writer/ activist
Indu Kumar Jani-Gujarat- Journalist
Irfan Habib-Aligarh-Professor
Jagjit Singh Anand-Punjab- journalist
Javed Akhtar- Mumbai- Poet/ lyricist
Javed Anand - Mumbai-Journalist-Editor Communalism Combat
Javed Naqvi-Delhi- Journalist
Javed Siddiqui- Mumbai-
Jitendra Bhatia- Mumbai- writer
Jitendra Raghuvanshi-Agra-General Secretary IPTA
John Dayal-Delhi- Journalist
Jutice Krishna Iyer
K. N. Pannikar                - Kerala- Historian
K. Stalin-Gujarat- documentary filmmaker
Kalyani MJ- Mumbai-
Kamal Lodaiya- Chennai-scientist
Kamleshwar- Delhi-writer
Kavita Srivastava- Rajasthan-PUCL
Keerti Jain-Delhi-Delhi-theatre
KG Kannabiran- Hyderabad- PUCL
KM Shrimali-Delhi-Historian
Kodand Ram Reddy- Hyderabad-trade unionist
KP Jai Shankar-- Mumbai- filmmaker. Tiss prof
Krishna Kumar-Delhi-Professor/ educationist
Kultar Singh-Haryana- Advocate
Kunwar Narain- Delhi-poet/ writer
Madhu Prasad- Delhi-
Mahaveer Sharma- Haryana- Advocate
Mahesh Bhatt- Mumbai- Director Cinema
Mahmood Bin Mohd- Hyderabad-Fornmer IPS
Manarjena- Orissa-Dalit Activist
Mandal Dr.-Hyderabad- social activist
Manjul Sinha- Mumbai- theatre
Manjula Sen- Mumbai-senior journalist
Martin Mackwan- Gujarat- Director Navsarjan- Dalit Human Rights activist
Mehtab Bamjee- Hyderabad- Scientist
Milan Luthria- Mumbai- film director
Mimroh- Jaipur- Centre for Dalit Human Rights
Mohan Rao
Mohiuddin Sofi- Kashmir- writer
Monica Habib- Bhopal-Theatre
Mridula Mukherjee-Delhi-Professor
MS Sathyu- Mumbai-Director Cinema
Mujib Ahmad Kant-Kashmir-writer
Mukul Dube- Delhi- writer
Nadira Zaheer Babbar- Mumbai-Theatre Director/ actress
Nafisa Ali-Delhi- Activist
Namwar Singh- Delhi- writer
Nand Kishore Acharya- Rajasthan- writer/ theatre
Nandita Das-Delhi- Actress
Nasser-Chennai- Filmactor
Neelam Jajodia-Mumbai
Neerja Gopal Jayal-Delhi-professor
Nirmal Jajodia-Mumbai
Nirmala Deshpande- Delhi-writer/ social activist
Nirmalangshu Mukherjee-Delhi-professor
Nishtha Jain-Mumbai- filmmaker
Nivedita Menon-Delhi- academician, social activist
Pankaj Singh-Delhi-poet
Papa Pritam Singh- Punjab-publisher, journalist
Parthiv Shah-Delhi- Designer
Paul Divakar-Hyderabad- National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights
Pawan Rana-Uttranchal- Sarokar-on behalf of 10,000 members across Uttranchal
PC Joshi-Delhi-
Pir Khalid- Kashmir-political activist
PK Das- Mumbai-social activist
Pm Bhargava-Hyderabad-scientist
Pooh Sayani- Mumbai- model/ ad filmmaker
Prabhash Joshi-Delhi-Journalist, Editor
Praful Bidwai-Delhi-Journalist
Prakash- Kerala-Dalit movement
Prakash Louis-Delhi-Director Indian Social Institute
Pralaya Kanungo-Delhi-professor
Prasoon Pandey- Mumbai- ad filmmaker
Preeti Bhat- Mumbai- activist
Pritham K chakravarty-Chennai-theatre
Purshottam Agarwal-Delhi- writer, political commentator
Purshottam Badoni-Uttranchal- Sarokar-social activist
Rahul Jalali-Delhi- Journalist
Rajat Datta-Delhi-academician
Rajendra Yadav-Delhi-journalist, writer
Rajit Kapur- Mumbai- actor- national award winner actor
Rajni Bakshi- Mumbai- Journalist
Rakesh Sharma- Mumbai- Documentary filmmaker
Ram Puniyani- Mumbai- Professor/ activist
Rizwan Qaiser- Delhi- Professor
Rooprekha Verma- Lucknow- Ex Vice Chancellor Lucknow University
S.Irfan Habib- Delhi- scientist
Saeed Mirza- Mumbai-Director Cinema
Salim Khan-Kashmir-actor
Sana Ullah- Kashmir- writer
SanaUlla Bhat-Kashmir- political activist
Sandeep Pandey-Delhi-social activist
Santok Singh Dhir-Punjab-poet, writer
Saumya Joshi and the whole team of Fade in Theatre- Gujarat- Theatre Director
Shabana Azmi- Mumbai- Actress
Shabnam Hashmi-Delhi-Political Activist
Shama Zaidi- Mumbai-writer
Shaukat Kaifi- Mumbai-Theatre/ film actress
Sheba George- Gujarat-Activist
Sheela Bhalla-Delhi-
Shireen Moosvi-Aligarh-Professor
Shyam Benegal-Mumbai-film director
SK Thorat- Delhi-Director, Indian Institute of Dalit Studies
Smriti Navatia- Mumbai-
Sudha Arora- Mumbai- Journalist/ writer
Sudhir Sharma- Haryana-Advocate
Suhasini Mulay- Mumbai- cinema
Sukumar Ozhikode
Sumbul- physician
Sumit Chakravarty-Delhi-editor
Sumit Sarkar Professor
Sunanda Sen- Delhi-economist
Surendra Kumar- Haryana- Professor
Surjit Pattar-Punjab-poet
Syeda Hamid-Delhi- Ex Chairperson Women’s Commission
Tanika Sarkar
Tanika Sarkar Professor
Tanuja Chandra- Mumbai-film director
Tanvi Azmi- Mumbai-actress
Tariq Meer- Kashmir- businessman
Tarun Tejpal-Delhi- Journalist
Teesta Seetalwad- Mumbai-Journalist-Editor Communalism Combat
Uma Gurbux Singh-Punjab-social activist
UR Anantamurthy- Bangalore-writer
Urvashi Butalia- Delhi-writer/ publisher
Venkatesh Chakravarty-Chennai-film critic
Vidya Rao-Delhi- singer
Vidya Shah-Delhi- Singer
Vijay Pratap- Delhi-social activist
Vimal Thorat- Delhi- National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights
Vinay Kumar- Dalit Bahujan Front
Vinay Shukla- Mumbai- writer/ director
Vincent- Hyderabad-National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights
Vipin Sharma- Mumbai- television
Vivan Sundaram-Delhi- artist
VP Dutt-Delhi-professor
Waryam Sandhu-Punjab-writer
Yashpal Prof-Delhi-Scientist
Zahir Ali khan- Hyderabad- Editor , journalist
Zahoor Siddiqui-Delhi- professor
Zoya Hasan-Delhi-professor



For any queries contact
Shabnam Hashmi
[Anhad]
4, Windsor Place, New Delhi-110001 [India]


o o o o

[See News report on tthe appeal]

The Hindu
May 17, 2004

LETTER PUSH FOR PARTICIPATION

New Delhi, May 16 (PTI): Muslim organisations and 
personalities from different walks of life made a 
strong appeal to the Left to participate in the 
Congress-led government as the parties continued 
deliberations.

More than 200 Left-leaning intellectuals, 
including journalists Tarun Tejpal and Praful 
Bidwai and social activists Shabana Azmi and 
Habib Tanveer, appealed to the CPM and CPI to be 
a part of the government instead of lending 
support from outside.

"There is a need to reject the concept of 
development advocated by the forces of 
globalisation and dismantle the ideological 
structure created by communalism," they said in 
letters to CPM general secretary Harkishen Singh 
Surjeet and his CPI counterpart, A.B. Bardhan.

"The Left can undertake this task only as a part 
of the government and not by supporting it from 
outside. The latter is a negative approach which 
the people are likely to interpret as shirking 
responsibility," they said.

Among the signatories were social activist Asghar 
Ali Engineer, theatre and film personalities A.K. 
Hangal, Anand Patwardhan, Baba Azmi, Nandita Das, 
Govind Nihalani, historian K.. Pannikar, writer 
Namwar Singh and scientist Prof. Yashpal.

As the CPM central committee met to discuss the 
issue, representatives of the Muslim Women Forum 
descended on the CPM headquarters demanding the 
party's participation.

"Communal forces have been dislodged from the 
government. This is a chance not to be missed. We 
want Left parties to be a part of the 
Congress-led government so that a check is 
maintained on the biggest partner of the 
coalition," forum founder-member Sayeeda Hameed 
said.

After the meeting ended for the day, the forum 
members accosted every senior leader to convey 
their point of view.

Surjeet assured that their demands would be 
considered, while Brinda Karat, a central 
committee member, promised the CPM would do 
everything to keep the RSS and the BJP at bay.

"We will keep your sentiments in mind and take a 
decision that best serves this purpose," Karat 
said.


______



[7]


D-504 Purvasha
Mayur Vihar 1
Delhi 110091

16 May 2004

Dear Editor,

While the election results were coming in, Ms. Sushma Swaraj
told a TV channel that she was too great a democrat to put
hurdles in Ms. Sonia Gandhi's way if the voters' verdict
was in favour of Ms. Gandhi. In now announcing her proposed
resignation from the Rajya Sabha, she shows a remarkable
flexibility of approach where principles are concerned. Blessed
to have a True Indian like her, need we submit to the eternal
shame of having our country headed by one who is Indian only by
nationality?

Mukul Dube

_______


[8]

Jammu & Kashmir
Coalition of Civil Society
The Bund Amira Kadal, Srinagar - 190001, Jammu and Kashmir


The two teams for election monitoring conducted 
by Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society 
(JKCCS) for the third phase of the parliamentary 
polls on May 5 visited 37 polling stations in the 
assembly segments of Pulwama, Shopian, Pahalgam, 
Anantnag, Bijbehara, Homshalibug, Tral and 
Pampore. The following is an interim report of 
the finding of the teams.

The teams observed very low voting in most of the 
booths and the hartal call had an overwhelming 
response in the two districts of Anantnag and 
Pulwama. The members of minority communities too 
boycotted the elections in many parts of the twin 
districts. Wherever some voting had been 
recorded, there were complaints of coercion by 
the security forces.

At Arwani in Bijbehara, as late as 2 pm only one 
vote had been cast out of 2295 votes. In 
Bijbehara itself, the home town of chief minister 
Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, in the polling station No. 
22 F one vote out of 1146 had been polled by 2.50 
pm. In Tral, there was zero voting in the five 
booths visited by the team around 2. pm. Only in 
Divar (No. 20) we found that five votes had been 
cast.

At Sherabad and Awantipora polling stations in 
Pulwama, there was nil voting out of 646 and 946 
votes respectively by 3 pm.  It was only in two 
booths, namely Bijbehara 18 B and Badroo in 
Homshalibug that at 2 pm three figure voting had 
been registered. Of the two, there were serious 
complaints of force by the security forces in 
Badroo.

In fact, we heard serious complaints that BSF and 
the Rashtriya Rifles soldiers had made 
announcement from mosques and shrines directing 
people to come out and vote. This was during the 
two days before the date of polling. And on 
Wednesday morning, the forces went from 
door-to-door pulling people out and herding them 
to the booths. This complaint was repeated in 
some parts of Pahalgam, Aishmuqam, Kadipora, 
Badroo, Pinglana, Arhama, Shirmal, Arigam, 
Pinjoora and Sherabad.

The uniform complaint was that the forces took 
away the I-cards of people and asked them to 
collect them only after casting their ballot. At 
Kadipora Syed Sahib, one Ghulam Nabi Ganai 
alleged the forces had dragged him out of the 
mosque while he was offering prayers. At Shirmal, 
Bashir Ahmed (45), an employee in Public Health 
Engineering Department, said he was brought out 
of his home to vote by the troops despite being 
ill. In the same village, the CCS team noticed a 
RR trooper taking some youth to the polling 
station. Not surprisingly then, 29 votes had been 
polled in the village by 10.40 am. The coercion 
complaint was even admitted by National 
Conference agent Mumtaz Ahmed Malik who justified 
it saying "Army has to bring them otherwise 
nobody is willing to vote."

Like the previous two phases, electoral 
irregularities were observed in many parts of 
Anantnag and Pulwama district. We noticed the 
presiding officers allowing the people to vote 
even without producing the I-cards. However, the 
officers said they were permitting the voters "if 
they can identify their name, address and age 
correctly." Though this appears to be done out of 
"sympathy" it in fact facilitates the coercive 
tactics that is snatching of the cards by the 
soldiers.

The CCS teams were intercepted by groups of 
people at many places who questioned the 
meaningfulness of the elections in the context of 
the Kashmir dispute. "We had many elections in 
the past but the Kashmir issue is lingering. 
Elections cannot solve our problem," a lecturer 
in Tral town said. "India and Pakistan must show 
sincerity to resolve the issue once and for all."

At most places people were angry for were being 
forced by the security forces to vote against 
their will. But at Aishmuqam in Pahalgam, people 
said: "The BSF which is urging us to vote will go 
after the polls and the voters will have to face 
the wrath of the militants who have put posters 
asking us to boycott the elections."

However, the overwhelming impression we got was 
of voluntary boycott. We believe that polling 
would have been even less than the official 
figure of 16 per cent if the coercion by the 
armed forces had not been there. In Tral, for 
instance, there was neither any complaint of 
threats from militants nor the presence of armed 
forces and the polling was almost nil.

The CCS reiterates that coercion by the armed 
forces or acts of violence by the militants such 
as throwing of grenades at polling stations are 
not conducive to the free expression of the 
peoples' will. It is only in the absence of such 
coercive tactics that the people will be able to 
express themselves freely.


   President
Parvez Imroz




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

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.

--