SACW | 6 Feb 2005
sacw
aiindex at mnet.fr
Sat Feb 5 20:01:03 CST 2005
South Asia Citizens Wire | 6 Feb., 2005
via: www.sacw.net
[1] Pakistan:
(i) Obscurant prescriptions (editorial, Dawn)
(ii) Rewriting the History of Pakistan (Pervez
Amirali Hoodbhoy and Abdul Hameed Nayyar)
[2] Nepal:
(i) Royal Takeover in Nepal: Drastic and Ill-Advised (Kanak Mani Dixit)
(ii) News digest by Sara Shneiderman and Mark Turin
(iii) King rolls back 15 years of press freedom
gains in four days (Press Release, RSF)
(iv) Trade Unionists Call For Restoration of Democracy In Nepal
[3] Bangladesh:
(i) We, The Citizens of Bangladesh Demand
Security . . .A statement by 72 Women
(ii) Appeal to Overseas Bangladesh Communities (Asma Kibria)
[4] India: Urgent Press Release 'state-sponsored
violence against indigenous and dalit peoples in
Orissa'
[5] UK: Charity Commission into the fundraising
activities of Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (press
Advisory by Awaaz South Asia)
[6] India: Acceptance Statement: National Award
for Best Non-Feature film (Anand Patwardhan)
--------------
[1]
Dawn, 5 February 2005
Editorial
OBSCURANT PRESCRIPTIONS
Thursday saw the tabling of two private bills in
the Frontier assembly by a Muttahida
Majlis-i-Amal member seeking a ban on music and
dance, and advertisements featuring women at all
public places.
As defined in the bills, public places include
educational institutions and entertainment
houses, and even private homes where the public
may be admitted to enjoy music or dance, with or
without a payment.
If adopted by a simple majority, the bills will
make such activities non bailable offences
carrying a punishment of up to five years and a
fine of up to Rs10,000. The opposition parties in
the assembly were quick to reject the bills,
terming them an attempt at Talibanization of the
province.
It is not clear whether these extremist views on
music and the featuring of women in
advertisements, as expressed by the MPA in
question, are shared by his party's government in
the province.
Much harm has been done to society by similar
obscurantist ideas and bans imposed on visual and
performing arts in the past. It is hard to see
how music programmes and advertisements that are
perfectly acceptable to the public in all the
four provinces should now be considered as
crossing the threshold of morality in one
province.
The people of the Frontier deserve better in
terms of development that they badly need in
various socio-economic sectors, including health,
education, employment, etc.
Breach of public morality in cultural activities,
as seen by a misguided few with a narrow view of
what religion allows and it prohibits, is the
least of public priorities.
The holding of music concerts and other social
activities in educational institutions and
recreational spots can only have a healthy effect
on society. The MMA government would do well to
distance itself from the self-righteous views
expressed by the MPA in question.
o o o o o
(ii)
www.sacw.net. | February 6, 2005
REWRITING THE HISTORY OF PAKISTAN
by Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy and Abdul Hameed Nayyar
(From: Islam, Politics and the State: The
Pakistan Experience, Asghar Khan (ed.) Zed Books,
London, 1985, pp. 164-177.)
URL: www.sacw.net/HateEducation/1985HoodbhoyNayyar06022005.html
______
[2]
[Nepal]
(i)
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:22 PM
ROYAL TAKEOVER IN NEPAL: DRASTIC AND ILL-ADVISED
By Kanak Mani Dixit
When King Gyanendra sacked the prime minister and began direct rule on 1
February 2005, he said he did so under a constitutional provision which
enjoins the monarchy to uphold and protect the Constitution. While he
repeated many times in the royal address his commitment to constitutional
monarchy and multiparty rule, the king's drastic action on Tuesday went
patently against those principles. Firstly, he was taking over as executive
monarch on the basis of a personal decision. Secondly, the royal address was
replete with castigating references to political parties, who are the
intermediaries for pluralism and democratic practice anywhere in the world.
King Gyanendra's antipathy towards the political parties is well known and
has been often-expressed, but by sidelining them completely and planning to
rule as well as reign, the king has removed a buffer between himself and the
rough and tumble of politics. To that extent, he has taken a great risk and
put the institution of monarchy in the line of fire. Clearly, the king
believes that the risk is worth taking. Which brings us to the matter of
whether Narayanhiti Royal Palace has a trump card vis-à-vis the raging
Maoist insurgency. If such is indeed the case and there is rapid movement
towards tranquility, with the insurgents being routed or laying down arms,
the royal palace may be able to overcome the turbulence it has introduced
into the Nepali polity. Peace and an end to
the insurgency would put the monarchy back on the pedestal as a respected
institution, but everything depends on how soon that would happen. At one
time, the Maoists did announce that they would negotiate only with Prime
Minister Deuba's 'master', so are we to hope that now with the king directly
in-charge the Maoists will extend a hand? We can hope.
Further, the Royal Nepal Army's fight against the highly motivated and
increasingly brutal insurgents thus far has been lackluster. Will the royal
palace's direct control of national affairs mean that the military will now
put up a spirited fight, and also that its human rights record will improve
from current levels? We will have to see.
What is clear is that this has been a radical step exposing the institution
of kingship to flak, when other approaches could have been tried. Such as
using the inherent powers of kingship to cajole the political parties to
work together and put up a political front against the insurgents. But the
king's deeply held feelings towards the parties seems to have blocked off
this avenue towards resolution. The calls made since King Gyanendra took
over informally in October 2002 for an all-party government or revival of
the Third Parliament, all of which would have provided political challenge
to the Maoists on their home ground, are now for naught.
King Gyanendra's announcement of a takeover for 'up to three years'
provides a long window in which Nepal's highly successful experiment with
democracy of the last dozen years may be eroded. Unless there is a rapid
move towards resolution of the insurgency, it is also likely that the
Maoists will try to make common cause with the political parties. Although
it is not likely that the above-ground parties will go with the insurgents
as long as they hold on to the gun, it is certain that the royal action
will add strength to the insurgents' demand for a king-less republican
constitution and government, a call that has been taken up with alacrity
lately by many politicians.
It is inexplicable how the royal palace plans to attend to the criticism
that is bound to erupt in the domestic political arena as well as in the
international community. In castigating the political parties, King
Gyanendra preferred to hark back to the Parliament dissolved three years
ago, while keeping silent over interim period and rule through
palace-appointed prime ministers. This is the period when the peace and
security of the country's populace plummeted more than previously.
In the speech, King Gyanendra highlighted the great contribution of the
Shah dynasty to the creation of the nation and ventured that he was speaking
for the 'janabhawana', i.e. the Nepali people's feelings. While it is true
that the desire for peace overwhelms all other political desires among the
people, the question arises whether the royal takeover was the proper way to
address the 'chahana' (desires). Rather than remonstrate at the political
parties' inability to work together and opt for the takeover, it would have
been a much more popular and realistic move for the king to have used his
prerogative as head-of-state to bring the bickering parties together at this
critical juncture.
In the end, unless King Gyanendra is able to come up with the trump card of
peace vis-a-vis the Maoists in the near term, one can conclude that his
unprecedented action of the First of February has exposed the historically
significant institution of Nepal's monarchy to the vissictitudes of
day-to-day politics and power play. Did the Nepali monarchy deserve this at
this late a date in history?
Endnote: As I write this on Tuesday evening, the significant political
leaders are all under house arrest, the media (press, television, radio) is
under censorship, the fundamental freedoms have been suspended, a state of
emergency has been announced, telephones (landlines and cellular) as well as
Internet are down, and the Tribhuvan International Airport is closed.
o o o o o
(ii)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sara Beth Shneiderman <ss364 at cornell.edu>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 22:58:47 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [INSN] news digest from Kathmandu, Friday, Feb 4, 2005, 11am
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal
Date: Friday, February 4, 2005
[This brief news digest was prepared by Sara Shneiderman and Mark Turin,
researchers from Cornell and Cambridge universities, who are currently
based in Nepal. Due to the ongoing communications blackout and widespread
censorship in effect, little information about Nepal is getting out. We
are sending this email out through a secure V-SAT link from a foreign
mission in Kathmandu. Please disseminate this news digest widely to
friends of Nepal, to media outlets and to politicians in your own country
who may be willing to express their condemnation of the King's action. We
will continue to send brief updates as often as we can until
communications are restored.]
At 10am on Tuesday, February 1, 2005, Nepal's King Gyanendra gave a
televised address in which he sacked the country's coalition government,
dissolved the ministries and suspended fundamental rights under a State of
Emergency. Citing Article 127 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal,
1990, the King constituted a council of ministers under his own
chairmanship.
During his 40-minute speech to the nation, he heaped scorn upon Nepal's
political parties for allegedly destroying the country's infrastructure.
According to the King, despite having had adequate opportunities to
resolve the state's ongoing conflict with Maoist insurgents, or call an
election, the political parties had failed the people of Nepal. Laying
claim to the glorious history of the Shah dynasty, Gyanendra stressed the
age-old relationship between King and subjects and promised to restore
multi-party democracy within three years.
As the speech came to a close around 10:40am, all fixed and mobile
telephone lines were cut, and non-satellite internet connections were down
by the end of the day. By noon, the Kathmandu Valley was effectively
sealed off from the rest of Nepal and the outside world: Tribhuvan
International Airport was closed, with all incoming flights diverted
elsewhere, and the main road arteries out of the Valley were blocked by
security forces.
Despite these draconian measures, the city was calm, with most shops
remaining open through the end of the business day. There were rumours of
a curfew, which sent schoolchildren scurrying home in the mid-afternoon,
but these were unfounded. Armed security forces in riot gear were deployed
across the city, and there was little obvious protest against the King's
move.
Many citizens said they were relieved that the King had taken control,
stating that there was no other way out of the political stalemate that
has crippled the country for the last several months. To them, Gyanendra's
move was a brave risk, which would either see the King's previously mixed
reputation cleared, or destroyed once and for all. There were also many
sceptical voices, who feared a return to Panchayat era secrecy and the
repeal of liberties hard-won over the last fourteen years of democratic
process.
By Tuesday evening, there was no sign of communications returning, and
people gathered what information they could from their colleagues,
neighbours and friends. In discussions with Nepali journalists and
academics, foreigners in official and diplomatic positions in Kathmandu,
conflict monitoring groups and the media, we learned that the leaders of
major political parties, trade unions and student organisations were under
house arrest or taken to one of six major detention centres around the
valley. Captains and majors of the Royal Nepal Army were stationed in the
editorial offices of all national dailies in order to censor the morning
editions before they were put to bed.
On Wednesday, many of the foreign missions based in Kathmandu issued
statements. They had been taken by surprise by the royal-military coup,
and the United Nations, Unites States, United Kingdom, the Council of the
European Union and India all expressed varying degrees of strongly-worded
concern. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that he would not
attend the SAARC summit scheduled for the coming week in Bangladesh as a
vote of protest against 'political turmoil' in the region. Only China was
reported to have accepted the King's power grab without critique, stating
that it would not pass judgement on Nepal's internal affairs. Prachanda,
Chairman of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), issued a passionate
statement dated February 1 condemning the King's action and calling upon
'pro-people forces' in the country to join with the Maoists to topple the
monarchy and build a republic. The Maoists reiterated their call for a
three-day national strike, which had predated the royal proclamation.
Judging by the traffic on the streets on Thursday morning, the Maoist call
was not heeded, which many saw as an indication of King Gyanendra's
influence over the populace and iron grip over the nation's capital.
Outside of Kathmandu, the Maoist strike was apparently observed. Reports
started to trickle in from the rest of the country, thanks to limited road
travel in private vehicles and a brief reprieve in the communications
blackout (landlines were turned on for one to two hours each evening, but
internet servers, cellular phones and international lines remain blocked).
Specific events reported by reliable sources include a student
demonstration at Prithvi Narayan Campus in Pokhara which was fired on by a
military helicopter gunship leaving several protestors badly injured if
not dead; the blocking of all FM radio broadcasts outside of Kathmandu and
the instruction to those broadcasting in Kathmandu to play only
entertainment-oriented programmes; the BBC FM station recently established
in Kathmandu being forbidden from broadcasting the news in Nepali; the
closure of news stands outside of the Valley; and a 72-hour blockade on
long-distance public bus travel in and out of Kathmandu.
As of writing on Friday morning, the communications network remains down.
Journalists and human rights activists are concerned that they will be the
next targets for arrest now that most political leaders have been muted.
It remains to be seen how wide the web of detentions will be, but there is
a sense of powerlessness and foreboding for the future among those who
have previously expressed criticism of the state in any way.
o o o o o
(iii)
Reporters Sans Frontières
5 rue Geoffroy Marie
75009 Paris, France
Reporters Without Borders
Press Release
4 February 2005
NEPAL: KING ROLLS BACK 15 YEARS OF PRESS FREEDOM GAINS IN FOUR DAYS
Reporters Without Borders voiced outrage today at
the drastic manner in which King Gyanendra and
his army have wiped out the press freedom gains
of the past 15 years, along with other democratic
gains, since the coup d'etat on 1 February.
The state news media and ten privately-owned
media have been put under direct military
control. Dozens of news media have been closed in
the provinces. The authorities have banned any
negative reporting about the regime for six
months. Dozens of journalists are pursued by the
security forces, including the president of the
Federation of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ). And
foreign news media correspondents are being
prevented from working freely.
"By criminalizing the right to inform and by
bringing a vibrant and courageous independent
press to its knees, the king is responsible for
the most important setback to freedom in 15
years," Reporters Without Borders said, voicing
support for the FNJ's call for demonstrations to
defend Nepalese democracy.
The press freedom organization said it urged the
international community to freeze aid to the
Nepalese government immediately. The aid should
be conditioned on respect for basic freedoms
including freedom of expression, it said.
Reporters Without Borders has identified King
Gyanendra as a predator of press freedom for the
past three years. He has defended the abuses
which eight UN experts described as extremely
serious in 2004, above all because of the
increase in torture and detention in undisclosed
locations. Some 400 journalists were arrested or
imprisoned by the security forces in 2004.
Nepal has been cut off from the world since 1
February. The few reports getting out indicate a
very severe clampdown on both state and
privately-owned media. Military are in charge of
censoring state TV programmes. Army officers have
moved into the offices of the main
privately-owned newspapers, including the daily
Kantipur. The premises of the weekly Janaastha,
known for criticising the monarchy, were overrun
on 1 February by around 20 soldiers who
sequestered the journalists there for the first
24 hours. An officer has stayed to censor reports.
Kantipur's famous editorialist, Khagendra
Sangraula, who is known for his criticism of the
palace, has been detained in an army barracks in
Kathmandu.
The work of the few foreign press correspondents
has been blocked. The news agency Reuters said
hotel owners have refused to let foreign TV crews
install their satellite dishes on hotel roofs.
The military police briefly detained about 10
Nepalese and foreign journalists today,
confiscating equipment. They included the
correspondents of the Associated Press, who were
covering the arrests of some 50 Congress Party
activists.
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
said FNJ president Tara Nath Dahal had been in
hiding since the security forces tried to arrest
him at his home. The FNJ had condemned what it
called a "coup d'etat against democracy" and
called on journalists to fight with courage and
determination to guarantee the right of the
Nepalese people to news and information.
The IFJ said the military has imposed censorship
throughout the country. All the media were closed
down in the central town of Pokhara, where the
army fired on a crowd of students. "You can no
longer publish news, that is the responsibility
of the newspapers in Kathmandu," an officer
reportedly told a Pokhara journalist.
All of Nepal's community radio stations have been
closed, while the oldest community station, Radio
Sagarmatha, is now controlled by the army. News
programmes have been banned. The military ordered
two FM radio stations and four local newspapers
to close in the western district of Rupandehi.
o o o o o
(iv)
3 February 2005
TRADE UNIONISTS CALL FOR RESTORATION OF DEMOCRACY IN NEPAL
At a meeting of journalist trade unionists in
Bangalore, India, organised by the International
Federation of Journalists (IFJ), representatives
and office bearers of the All India Newspaper
Employees’ Federation, the Indian Journalists’
Union and the National Union of Journalists,
India expressed their deep concern about recent
events in Nepal and called upon the King to
immediately restore multi party democracy and
ensure the safety of media workers in Nepal.
In sacking his government overnight the Nepalese
King has abolished democracy and induced tyranny
on the Nepalese people. All phone lines and
Internet communication have been cut off, and
there is fear for the safety of all Nepalese,
including the many journalists there. According
to information received soon after the coup
d’etat, one of the first acts of the King after
the take-over was to summon all newspaper editors
to the palace. They were told that from now on,
all publications would be vetted.
The IFJ has documented Nepal's grim history of
violating human rights and oppressing freedom of
expression. More than 100 journalists were
arrested during the previous state of emergency
and many of them were tortured.
Trade unionists gathered at Bangalore urged the
governments in South Asia to apply pressure on
the King of Nepal to re-instate democracy and
human rights, and urged the King to ensure the
free passage and safety of all journalists and
their access to communication lines and
information.
All India Newspaper Employees Federation
Indian Journalists’ Union
National Union of Journalists, India
Bangalore, India
3 February 2005
Laxmi Murthy
Tolerance Prize Coordinator (South Asia)
International Federation of Journalists, New Delhi
378/37 NOIDA,
U.P. 201 303, India
______
[3] [Bangladesh]
(i)
www.sacw.net | February 6, 2005
URL: www.sacw.net/Bangladesh/72women06022005.html
[A statement issued by 74 women in Dhaka, on 30
January, 2005 following the assassination of Shah
A M S Kibria and five members of his audience
(Abul Hossain, Farid, Manjurul Huda Manju, Siddiq
Ali, Abdur Rahim) in a grenade attack on a public
meeting in Habiganj, Sylhet, Bangladesh. ]
WE, THE CITIZENS OF BANGLADESH DEMAND SECURITY. . .
The latest in a series of bomb attacks occurred on 27 January 2005 at
an Awami League public meeting in Habiganj, Sylhet. In this attack
Shah A M S Kibria, member of Parliament, internationally renowned
economist, freedom-fighter, language movement activist, member of
Awami League's Presidium, the former Finance Minister and 5 others (
Abul Hossain, Farid, Manjurul Huda Manju, Siddiq Ali, Abdur Rahim)
were killed. According to newspaper reports, nearly a hundred persons
were injured. The targeted killing of a high-ranking leader of a large
political party has shocked people at large. Citizens are now fearful
that bomb attacks may occur in the most unsuspecting of public places.
They are also distrustful because of the administration's failure to
take action against the perpetrators of previous bomb attacks, or to
take adequate security measures. The situation is leading to
increasing desperation, and encourages criminality and violence. We
think the present situation is highly dangerous for the nation as it
signals an absolute breakdown of political and social morals.
In the last 5 years, from March 1999 to January 2005, over 140 persons
have been killed in 21 bomb and grenade attacks. These attacks have
targeted political public meetings, cultural activities, including
theatre performances (Jatra and Baul singing), and even homes of
political or cultural activists. We do not think that these incidents
are unconnected; on the contrary, they appear to be systematic and
well planned. This is why these incidents of bomb and grenade attacks
are very alarming. We are concerned with the administration's failure
to prevent these attacks, to carry out proper investigations, to make
public investigation reports or to bring the perpetrators to justice.
What is most alarming is the inefficiency, incapability and lack of a
clear political will on the part of the government to stem the tide of
political violence.
Information available from different news sources - government and
private - reveals that after these bomb or grenade attacks,
investigations have remained inconclusive, evidence has been
destroyed, enquiry commission reports have not been made public and
perpetrators have not been caught. Instead a few arrests made on
grounds of suspicion have been a source of harassment, and only once
has the accused been charge-sheeted. So far no trial has been held.
The inquiry reports that were published after the grenade attack on
the Bangla New Year celebrations in 2001 at Ramna, Dhaka, (which
killed 10 persons including 1 woman) and the bomb attack on a large
Awami League rally on 21 August, (which killed Ivy Rehman and 20
others including 4 women) were incomplete and lacking in credibility.
After each such incident the Prime Minister, Cabinet members and
high-ranking officials promised to bring the culprits to justice.
These promises ring hollow to the citizens of Bangladesh, as
successive grenade attacks and bomb explosions have led to the killing
of Ahsanullah Master, a member of Parliament from Ghazipur and a
popular Awami League leader, several well-respected journalists, such
as Manik Shaha and Humayun Kabir and political activists.
In the name of quelling terror attacks and law enforcement, officially
commissioned forces such as RAB, Cheeta, Cobra and the police have
killed alleged suspects in custody, without giving them the benefit of
a trial, and referred to their deaths as "crossfire" killings,. There
has been no enquiry into the causes of these "crossfire killings". On
the other hand, the administration has remained passive in the face of
the vigilantist killings (of 20 persons) and torture perpetrated by
Siddiqul Islam aka Bangla Bhai's and his gang in the name of
suppressing Shorbohara members. Bangla Bhai remains at large inspite
of an order of arrest from the Prime Minister reported in the media in
2004. Several ministers and relevant police officials have dismissed
Bangla Bhai as a figment of media imagination despite clear evidence
to the contrary.
Irresponsibe acts by those in the highest seats of government and the
lack of sincere, committed, and sustained measures for law enforcement
has created tremendous insecurity for citizens and is a cause for
deep social unrest. The growing tendency to extra-judicial killings
has created an alarming deterioration in the law-and-order situation.
It has curtailed citizensâ*™ rights to freedom of political
participation and cultural activities. We demand an end to this
situation. We also demand that the administration take immediate steps
to ensure security for all public and private functions, political and
cultural activities (such as the traditional Jatra), and women's
sports (wrestling, swimming, football), and to create an environment
for the practice of citizen's rights.
We grieve for each life that has been lost, for each life that has
been maimed or injured. At the same time, we condemn the terror
attacks in the strongest possible language.
We demand:
- an independent and transparent investigation into each bomb blast
and grenade attack (free of government intervention);
- medical care for those injured in such attacks and compensation for
their families;
- the culprits be identified, and tried and that those found guilty be
duly punished
- steps be taken to improve the law and order situation,
- that newly constituted forces stop using methods that are leading to
custodial deaths or other forms of torture in the name of law enforcement,
- that measures be taken to reinstate public faith in the law, courts,
judicial system and in public institutions
- an environment conducive to the performance of cultural activities
(Jatra, Baul singing), to women's sports events (wrestling, swimming,
football).
(Coalition of Outraged Women
Join us in a silent procession to protest bomb attacks, on 2 February,
2005 at 3 pm starting from Muktangan to Shahid Minar )
Signatories:
1. Hena Das
2. Laila Kabir
3. Ayesha Khanam
4. Farida Akhter
5. Shirin Akhtar
6. Hasina Akhter
7. Shamim Akhter
8. Shahin Akhter
1. Prof Nasrin Ahmed
10. Khursheed Erfan Ahmed
11. Rubina Ahmed
12. Rehnuma Ahmed
13. Nahar Ahmed
14. Hasina Ahmed
15. Aasha Mehreen Amin
16. Dr Sonia Amin
17. Rabiya Sultana Anju
18. Advocate Salma Ali
19. Shaheen Anam
20. Fatema Sannaiya Ansari
21. Nasima Akhter Banu
22. Supriya Bari
23. Suraiya Begum
24. Maleka Begum
25. Bilkis Nahar Biju
26. Kanak Chapa Chakma
27. Ila Chanda
28. Rekha Chowdhury
29. Protiti Debi
30. Aroma Dutt
31. Nina Goswami
32. Dr Sadeka Halim
33. Mita Haq
34. Adv. Sigma Huda
35. Minu Haque
36. Adv. Rezwana Hasan
37. Sara Hossain
38. Dr Hameeda Hossain
39. Fatema Hussain
40. Tasmima Hussain
41. Naseema Islam
42. Salma Jebin
43. Nargis Jaffar
44. Rounaq Jahan
45. Roushan Jahan
46. Shamshunahar Joshna
47. Umme Hasan Jhulmul
48. Shirin Kabir
49. Joshna Kabir
50. Sultana Kamal
51. Saeeda Kamal
52. Saeeda Gulrukh Kamal
53. Khaleda Khatoon
54. Khushi Kabir
55. Dr Naila Khan
56. Dr Nasreen Khondker
57. Iti Koro
58. Hameeda Akhter Laily
59. Mahbuba Akhter Lipi
60. Tayyaba Lipi
61. Shirin Banu Mithil
62. Dil Monwara Monnu
63. Munira Murshid Munni
64. Shukla Pal
65. Roushan Jahan Parveen
66. Ferdausi Priyobarshini
67. Faustina Pereira
68. Malika Perveen
69. Shahrukh Rahman
70. Shamshunahar Rahman Rose
71. Roqaiya Rafiq
72. Fahmida Rakhi
73. Dr Makhduma Nargis Ratna
74. Rasheda Begum Rekha
75. Afroza Haq Rina
76. Adv Sultana Akhter Ruby
77. Zafreen Sattar
78. Mina Sarkar
79. Masuda Akhtar Shefali
80. Hajera Sultana
81. Shimul Yusuf
82. Sara Zaker
83. Fareha Zeba
o o o o o
(ii)
Appeal to Overseas Bangladesh Communities
by Mrs. Asma Kibria [February 5, 2005, Dhaka]
URL:www.sacw.net/Bangladesh/AsmaKibria05022005.html
_______
[4]
URGENT PRESS RELEASE
New Delhi, 1st February 2005: Protesting against
the state-sponsored violence against indigenous
and dalit peoples in Orissa to facilitate the
entry of mining companies into bauxite rich
forest lands, members of Orissa-based struggle
group Prakrutik Sampada Surakshya Parishad
(PSSP), alongwith New Delhi-based youth and human
rights activists, writers and intellectuals today
submitted a memorandum to the Resident
Commissioner of Orissa after a peaceful
demonstration in front of the Orissa Bhavan in
New Delhi this morning. Organizations present
included PSSP, AIPRF, Samajwadi Jan Parishad,
PUDR, Saheli, Sandhaan, Jagori, DSU, The Other
Media, Mehnatkash Mazdoor Morcha and others. The
memorandum demanded the immediate and
unconditional release of 18 PSSP members who have
been illegally arrested since December 2004 and
to stop the human rights abuses by the state
police on the villagers around Kashipur who have
been for years peacefully resisted the moves by
bauxite mining consortium Utkal Alumina
International Ltd (UAIL) to take over their land
and forests for a 100% export oriented alumina
mining and refinery project.
The Rs 4500 crore UAIL is a joint venture of
Indian company HINDALCO (55% share) and Canadian
company ALCAN (45%). TATA, HYDRO (Norwegian) and
ALCOA (America) who were earlier part of the
venture, were forced to withdraw from the project
due to the mass struggle and opposition by the
villagers. The project will source bauxite from a
195 million ton deposit in Baphli Mali, a sacred
hill for the adivasis. The promoters also plan to
set up an alumina refinery near Kucheipadar,
from where it will be exported. At the
refinery's capacity of consuming 9 million tones
of bauxite per year, the Baphlimali deposit will
be exhausted within two decades.
The mines and refinery are slotted to come up in
adivasi-majority areas that are protected by the
Fifth Schedule of the Constitution. The Fifth
Schedule guarantees the right of land to
adivasis, and prohibits the transfer of these
lands to non-tribals for any purpose. "The
Government of Orissa is in the hands of the
mining companies. Since early December, the
Government has unleashed a reign of terror in the
villages near the proposed mining project, and is
keen on evicting the people at gun-point," said
Rabi Shankar of PSSP.
On November 25, 2004 Orissa Chief Minister Naveen
Patnaik was quoted as saying that anti-mining
struggles will be firmly dealt with. From late
November, villages that are protesting the Utkal
Alumina project proposed on their lands have
been under siege by the police.
On December 1st , 2004, the state police launched
a brutal lathi charge on 400 adivasis, mostly
women, who had gathered to protest the
inauguration of a road to a proposed
bauxite-mining site in Baphlimali owned by ALCAN.
As a result, 16 people were critically injured
and three women were beaten unconscious. Since
this incident, platoons of armed police with
firing orders have occupied Kucheipadar
village-the center of the adivasi struggle.
Eighteen activists of PSSP, the umbrella
organization of adivasis spearheading the
struggle against bauxite mining have been picked
up from their villages mostly in the night in
separate incidents and are now in jail without
access to bail.
"This is not the first time that adivasis of
Kashipur are facing such state repression and
police brutality," said Rabi Shankar. On December
16, 2000, three adivasis were killed in Kashipur
when police fired on unarmed villagers associated
with the people's struggle against bauxite
mining. Following international outrage at the
incident, one of UAIL's original stakeholders,
Norsk Hydro of Norway, withdrew from the project
in a move that clearly implicated both the UAIL
and the Orissa government.
The situation in rest of Orissa is not very
different. As many as five bauxite mining and
alumina projects are in the pipeline, covering 5
blocks of 3 districts - Kashipur ( Rayagada
district) , Luxmipur and Dasamantpur ( Koraput),
Lanjigada and Thuamulrampur (Kalahandi). Sterlite
is proposed to source bauxite from Sasubohu mali
of Kashipur block. Larson and Tubro from
Sijimali and Kutrumali ( Kashipur block), Birla
from Kodinga Mali ( Luxmipur block) and Vedanta
from Niyamgiri and Khandual mali of Kalahandi
district.
"The total investment in the Orissa bauxite
projects is to the tune of Rs 20,000 crores.
Taking into consideration the present price of
even just UAIL, the joint venture will reap a
profit of at least Rs 2,88,000 crore during the
22-23 years of the project life, whereas the
government will get Rs. 1300-1400 crores as
royalty during that period. And the adivasis and
dalits of these villages will get state
repression, and a lifetime of misery and slum
life," added Ranjana Padhi of Saheli Women's
Resource Centre, Delhi, a group supporting the
Kashipur peoples' struggle.
The group has also appealed to the PMO office and
the SC/ST for the release of the 18 people. For
more information, contact: Ranjana Padhi; Harish
Dhawan <kashipursolidarityindelhi at yahoo.com>
_______
[5]
AWAAZ - SOUTH ASIA WATCH LIMITED, LONDON, UK [www.awaazsaw.org]
A UK-based South Asian secular network committed to challenging all
forms of religious hatred and violence
Contacts: contact at awaazsaw.org
3 February 2005
PRESS ADVISORY
IMMEDIATE
A DECEPTION EXPOSED - BUT A CRUCIAL OPPORTUNITY WASTED
The report by the Charity Commission into the fundraising activities of
Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (HSS, charity number 267309) still leaves many
questions hanging about the charity's connections with extremist and
violent groups in India.
The inquiry acknowledged a number of points first made by Awaaz - South
Asia Watch's report last year [1]. The most disturbing fact is that the
charity and its two other operating arms in the UK (Sewa International)
and India (Sewa Bharati), have failed to provide audited accounts of how
the money raised for the Gujarat earthquake appeal was spent in India.
The Charity Commission also admits that it was unable to establish for
itself how the funds were used in India, as they were not granted visas
by the then BJP-headed Indian government.
Awaaz believes the British public will be alarmed that HSS has been
unable to provide audited accounts for how money donated in good faith
to victims of the earthquake was actually spent abroad.
The money that was raised by Sewa International, the UK 'service' arm of
the HSS, was given to Sewa Bharati in India, the report confirms. Sewa
Bharati is known to be a key front organization for the Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). The RSS has long been involved and implicated
in anti-minority violence and hatred. Similarly, Sewa Bharati has been
involved in violent and hate-driven activities in Madhya Pradesh and
elsewhere in India.
The Charity Commission's inquiry corroborates Awaaz's claim that Sewa
International failed to consistently and clearly identify its link with
the HSS. The Commission says that on some appeal literature, the HSS
registered number was quoted, but the name of the charity was not.
Awaaz also welcomes the advice by the Charity Commission that:
* Sewa International must fully declare its association with HSS in
all its promotional, campaign and fundraising material. Awaaz believes
that in its recent Asian tsunami appeals, Sewa International UK
continues to fall well short of this key threshold of public
transparency and accountability.
* Charities operating internationally have a range of duties and
obligations regarding good accounting practice, accounting transparency
and accounting records, including good practice in producing audited
accounts relating to expenditure abroad.
While welcoming the report, Awaaz feels that it does not go far enough.
Awaaz believes it represents a wasted opportunity to bring to light the
ways and means used by violent fundamentalist organizations abroad to
raise funds from the UK public without the public being made aware of
the nature of the organizations hiding behind charitable fundraising.
* By limiting its inquiry, without legitimate reason, solely to the
Gujarat Earthquake Appeal, the Charity Commission failed to address the
nature of the RSS/HSS, and the consistent support and fundraising
undertaken by HSS/Sewa International UK over several decades for
violent, extremist and hate-promoting organizations in India. Sewa
International UK is a fundraising front for RSS organizations in India;
the HSS is a branch of the RSS in the UK. The allegiance of both
organizations is to the secretive paramilitary cult of the RSS and its
family of organizations. Sewa International / HSS has raised funds for
organizations such as the Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram that have been involved
in large-scale anti-minority violence in Gujarat (during the carnage
there in 2002) and elsewhere.
* Even within this limited remit (the Gujarat earthquake funds), the
Charity Commission failed to investigate and report on several serious
allegations that it was fully aware of: that all the Gujarat earthquake
money was given to Sewa Bharati, a key RSS front organization; that Sewa
Bharati branches in Madhya Pradesh and elsewhere have an extensive,
publicly documented track record of anti-minority violence and hatred,
including allegations of bomb making in Madhya Pradesh; that all the
money raised from the British public for 'Schools Project 2' (some £1.3
million) was for building sectarian, highly controversial RSS schools
and not directly for earthquake relief; that money from 'Schools Project
2' was sent to organizations that are known in Gujarat (Lok Kalyan
Trust) or elsewhere (Jankalyan Samiti) to be involved or implicated in
serious violence and hatred.
* The Charity Commission claims that HSS / Sewa International UK had
taken steps to ensure funds were applied in accordance with the
earthquake appeal. This claim is based on a document presented by
supporters of Sewa International UK (none of whom provided evidence of
Sewa Bharati's accounts.) Yet the Charity Commission report also states
that it has been unable to establish how the funds were utilised in
India. It further states that no audited accounts from Sewa Bharati
Gujarat were received. These findings are inconsistent and are a cause
for considerable concern.
* Another investigation [1] into the use of Gujarat earthquake funds
by Sewa International UK was produced by Awaaz, a small unfunded
organization with comparatively few resources. This showed that Sewa
International UK misled the British public about the number of villages
it claimed it was rebuilding, and that it did not disclose to the
British public information about the extensive funds that it received
for the six villages from state governments in India. This report also
showed the extensive promotion of the RSS, its ideology and its leaders
that went along with Sewa International UK's earthquake-related efforts.
* The Charity Commission report accepts that there is only an
ideological commonality between the HSS UK and the RSS. We are concerned
that this claim does not affect the credibility of the Charity
Commission, since the Commission might be widely seen as one of few
organizations in existence that does not seem to know that the HSS UK
and Sewa International UK are RSS outfits. The RSS openly states that
HSS UK is its branch and Sewa International is its project. The
extensive evidence of the RSS's direction, guidance, involvement in and
support of its UK organizations, and the extensive and active working
links between the RSS and the HSS UK are amply documented [1]. These
associations have also been widely publicised in the Indian and UK press
/ media.
Sewa International / HSS UK's intimate and extensive links with the RSS
are more important than ever to expose given the devastating Asian
tsunami and the remarkable groundswell of British public sympathy for
and generosity towards the victims. For its tsunami-related fundraising
in the UK the RSS has relied virtually exclusively on Sewa International
UK. And yet again, HSS / Sewa International UK are up to their tricks in
their tsunami fundraising campaigns. This has included failing to
disclose that they are fundraising virtually entirely for RSS
organizations in Tamil Nadu and elsewhere in India, including
organizations linked to violence and hate.
Awaaz calls on the Charity Commission to open fresh, thorough and
competent investigations into the ideological and political links
between the HSS / Sewa International UK, the VHP UK, the Kalyan Ashram
Trust UK (all registered charities) and the RSS and its family of
organizations.
[ENDS]
NOTES
[1]. The Awaaz report is available from www.awaazsaw.org/ibf. The report
is titled: In Bad Faith? British Charity and Hindu Extremism, published
by Awaaz - South Asia Watch Ltd, London, 2004, ISBN 0 9547174 0 6.
[2] The Charity Commission's report can be accessed here:
http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/investigations/inquiryreports/hss.asp
[3]. The RSS, the 'National Volunteers' Corps', was formed in 1926 and
is dedicated to turning India from a secular, democratic,
multi-religious nation into an authoritarian anti-minority 'Hindu
nation'. It has a large family of closely allied organisations operating
in India and abroad. The founders and key leaders of the RSS were
strongly inspired by Fascist Italy and vocally supported Nazi Germany,
including Nazi policies towards German-Jews. The ideology of the RSS is
'Hindutva', a belief that India only belongs to Hindus who 'share the
blood' of 'Vedic-Aryans' and who consider India as their 'holyland'. M.
K. Gandhi was murdered by an RSS supporter.
[4]. Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh UK is the British branch of the RSS. Sewa
International UK is its 'service project' and is the British fundraising
arm for RSS front organisations in India.
________
[6]
Acceptance Statement: National Award for Best Non-Feature film
Two years ago our film "War and Peace" was
refused a censor certificate. The Bombay High
Court finally ruled that the film could be shown
without cuts. Next we fought so that
documentaries in the video format could become
eligible for national awards. Our fight does not
end here. The filmmaking community wants to
ensure that censor certificates are no longer
required for national awards and film festivals.
In a country like India divided by class, caste
and gender, the democratic rights of weaker
sections continue to be compromised. And yet it
will be foolish to ignore the moments in time
when our democracy begins to live up to its name.
"War and Peace" is a critique of nuclear weapons
in India and abroad. The Honourable President who
is giving this national award is one of the
architects of India's nuclear policy! This may
be a delicious irony but it is also a welcome
signifier of democracy.
Our next effort will be to get the film telecast
on national television and encourage debate on
what exactly constitutes national security, what
is considered to be good science, and what
constitutes patriotism. Is it love for a piece of
land that could well become radio-active for
millions of years, or love for the people who
live and die on this land.
I thank the many who helped to make and show the
film and accept this award on behalf of all those
in our subcontinent who are fighting for
democracy, communal harmony, de-militarization
and peace.
Anand Patwardhan Feb 2, 2005
Contact: <anandpat at vsnl.com>
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Buzz on the perils of fundamentalist politics, on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit
citizens wire service run since 1998 by South
Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
SACW archive is available at: bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/
Sister initiatives :
South Asia Counter Information Project : snipurl.com/sacip
South Asians Against Nukes: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org
Communalism Watch: communalism.blogspot.com/
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