SACW | 12 Feb 2005
sacw
aiindex at mnet.fr
Sat Feb 12 04:56:57 CST 2005
South Asia Citizens Wire | 12 Feb., 2005
via: www.sacw.net
[1] SAHR demands Nepal's return to democratic rule
[2] SAARC and the Nepal coup (Praful Bidwai)
[3] Pakistan Women's struggle: one step forward, one step back (Farzana Bari)
[4] Kashmir: Dismantling walls of hatred -
Ajoka's 'Bullah' has shown the way (Editorial,
Kashmir Times)
[5] India: Riots '84: the truth (Editorial, Indian Express)
[6] India: The Bare Life of S.A.R. Geelani, Ph.D (Ananya Vajpeyi)
[7] India - Karnataka: Ban on communal organisations demanded
[8] India: Sins of The Secularists {According To
A Bishop} (Rajendra K. Sail)
--------------
[1]
www.sacw.net | February 12, 2005
URL: www.sacw.net/hrights/sahr_nepal11feb05.html
SAHR DEMANDS NEPAL'S RETURN TO DEMOCRATIC RULE.
11 February, 2005 [Released on 12 February 2005]
LAHORE: the office-holders and Bureau members of
South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR) have
demanded immediate withdrawal of measures
announced by the King of Nepal on February 1, and
revival of constitutional rule in the kingdom.
The chain of events since Feb 1 in Nepal, as the
government was dismissed by King Gyanedra, a
state of emergency imposed, basic rights
suspended and hundreds arrested, can only be
condemned in strongest terms. The fall out of the
outrageous action taken by the King will not be
limited to Nepal. It will inevitably affect the
rights of the people of the whole of South Asia
and will, among other things embolden forces of
authoritarianism and intolerance in the region.
There is no doubt in anyone's mind that the
situation the King has mentioned in
justification of his arbitrary fiat was a product
of diverse factors prominent among them being
the role of the palace itself.
SAHR condemns reversal of the movement towards
democracy in the kingdom, and the return to
absolute rule. The denial of basic freedoms, such
as the right to information, the right to
assemble to demand their rights and the right to
privacy cannot be countenanced on any pretext.
The fate of the many hundreds arbitrarily
arrested after the putsch is a further cause for
concern. Those held include members of the ousted
government, political workers and rights
activists. The stringent curbs on the Press mean
that it has been impossible to discover details
about the places where the detainees are held, or
their welfare. Most of the people have been left
without any means to even convey their anxieties
to the outside world. It is quite clear that the
step by the palace has made an end to the
insurgency much less likely than before.
The prevailing situation can only aggravate
frustrations already present in the country as
evident in the unanimous opposition to the King's
decrees by all schools of thought in Nepal. SAHR
demands immediate withdrawal of Feb 1 measures,
restoration of democratic order in Nepal, and the
grant of permission to human rights defenders to
freely monitor events in the country.
The statement has been issued by
I K. Gujral, Chairperson, Asma Jahangir,
Co-Chairperson; Bureau members from Bangladesh,
India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka-Farah Kabir;
Hameeda Hossain; Mahfuz Anam; Sigma Huda; Subrata
Chowdhury; Kamala Bhasin; Kuldip Nayyar; Nirmala
Deshpande; Syeda Hameed; Devendra Raj Panday;
Mohammado Siddiqui; Keshab Mathema; Fakhruddin
G. Ebrahim; I. A. Rehman; Sairah Irshad Khan;
Damaris Wickremesekara; J. C. Weliamuna;
Sathivale Balakrishnan; and Sithie Tiruchelvam.
Released by
Asma Jahangir
______
[2]
The News International
February 12, 2005
SAARC AND THE NEPAL COUP
All South Asians must oppose the King's
usurpation of power in Nepal -- despite India's
unilateral cancellation of the Dhaka summit
by Praful Bidwai
The writer is a Delhi-based researcher, peace and
human rights activist, and former newspaper editor
King Gyanendra's dismissal of Sher Bahadur
Deuba's government has divided not just Nepali
society, but all of South Asia too. India has
deplored the move and scuttled the Dhaka SAARC
Summit. Pakistan has taken a "neutral" position,
saying Islamabad "strictly adheres to principles
of non-intervention and non-interference in the
internal affairs of states."
It's easy enough to criticise India for making
SAARC a hostage to a bilateral dispute. Rather
than scuttle the summit, Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh should have attended it and yet refused to
shake hands with the King. Yet, all of us South
Asians too have a stake in demanding the
restoration of democracy in Nepal. At issue is
the probable collapse of the Nepali state, with
enormous consequences for our region.
The logic of the King's action should be clear:
it spells a grave crisis which will vitiate South
Asia's social and political climate. Neutrality
in the face of this danger risks legitimising
absolutist power and further de-democratising
governance in our region.
Recent developments have destroyed the hope that
King Gyanendra would substantially relax the
draconian restrictions he imposed on the freedoms
of expression, political activity and movement.
The executive monarch has now banned criticism of
the security forces, whether "made directly, or
indirectly" and threatened to seize property
whenever "necessary". Communications in Nepal
remain under strict surveillance and the press
under censorship even as political leaders escape
to India to evade detention.
Evidently, strong criticism of the coup by the
United Nations, the major Western Powers and
India hasn't yet had much impact. This might
appear strange considering that Nepal's monarch
rules-shakily-one of the world's 10 poorest
countries, and that his writ doesn't run in
two-thirds of Nepal's 75 districts, where the
Maoists hold sway.
But King Gyandendra has probably had tacit
support from a major power. Or else, he wouldn't
have ignored repeated warnings against dismissing
Mr Deuba. That Power is almost certainly China.
On January 21, the monarch closed down the Dalai
Lama's offices in Nepal. Beijing lavished praise
on him for doing this. China refused to deplore
the coup. This means the King is probably playing
"the China Card". (Nepal also plays the "India
Card" when that suits it.)
This is a high-risk gamble. It's unlikely that
Chinese support alone would see King Gyanendra
through his impending troubles. Beijing could
dump him just as easily as it backed him-as in
the early 1990s.
The King has risked an even more reckless
domestic gamble. He has removed the buffer
between himself and an increasingly restive
population, putting himself in the line of fire.
From now on, he won't have the luxury of blaming
political parties for the nation's growing
problems. His actions will probably further
aggravate Nepal's multiple crises of governance
and erode his authority and credibility.
The King is now spurring Nepal's parliamentary
parties and the Maoists into a joint opposition
to demand restoration of democratic freedoms. The
opposition is becoming coherent.
Since the dismissal of the first Deuba government
in 2002, mainstream political leaders have
increasingly veered around to demanding a
quasi-republican Constitution. They include
leaders from the Koirala and Deuba factions of
the Nepali Congress, the Communist Party (United
Marxist-Leninist), the Ekta Mashal, and the
Sadbhavana Party.
The King has miscalculated badly. The Nepali
people have tasted freedom for 15 years-and like
it. They clearly prefer multi-party democracy to
monarchy. An August-September 2003 survey by
Tribhuvan University shows that 62 percent of
Nepalis say "democracy is always preferable to
any other form of government." 78 percent favour
either a limited monarchy or its abolition. Only
22 percent want an executive monarchy.
The King's rule by proxy since October 2002 has
produced unpopular results. No wonder, 91 percent
of all Nepalis want either a new Constitution or
amendments to the existing Constitution. The
Maoists' demand for a round-table conference, an
interim government and a Constituent Assembly is
likely to gather popular and political-party
support. The Shah dynasty's future could be in
jeopardy.
The King is making awkward overtures to the
Maoists by inviting them to talks. They will
probably reject this offer, especially after the
February 8 helicopter raids on them. They now
regard the King as an absolutist "national
betrayer," who wants to take Nepal back to the
15th century!
A precondition for talks between the Palace and
any representatives of the Nepali people is the
release of political leaders, and restoration of
civil liberties. The King must be firmly told
this by the whole world, in particular, by all
SAARC members.
India has a special role here given its unique
relationship with Nepal. India and Nepal have
innumerable family links and an open border
permitting the free movement of people and goods.
Nepalis can join India's armed forces-where over
30,000 Nepalis serve-and rise to the highest
levels. They can also join India's civil services.
Many Nepalis would feel let down if India doesn't
pressure the King to restore freedom. It goes
without saying that New Delhi must be sensitive
to Nepali sensibilities about India's
overwhelming presence. The Nepalis resent India's
perceived past political "interference" and its
proposals for the construction of dams on common
rivers. They recall India's blockade of 1988 with
particular anguish. That's why they keep their
clocks 15 minutes apart from Indian Standard
Time-a sign of independence!
Having said that, all other South Asian states
too must appreciate that the Royal coup will
accelerate the collapse of the Nepali state. It's
in the interest of this region's peoples and
states that Nepal shouldn't become a hotbed of
disaffection and extremism, which can spread
across South Asia's fragile borders. To start
with, Nepal's neighbours should stop supplying
arms to the Royal Nepal Army and direct aid to
the government (as distinct from NGOs delivering
services to the people). Arms to Nepal are liable
to be used against domestic insurgents and
peaceful civilians.
The King must be dissuaded from pursuing a
military solution to the Maoist insurgency. The
78,000-strong RNA has proved incapable of
defeating it although the Maoists only have 3,000
modern guns.
The Maoists use questionable, indeed deplorable,
methods. But they are not terrorists. They have
support in the countryside, itself a cesspool of
unaddressed grievances and unredeemed injustices.
These iniquities can only be addressed through
land reform, minimum needs programmes in health
and education, and a sweeping drive against
corruption. All South Asian governments must
encourage reconciliation through a dialogue with
the entire opposition, including the Maoists.
We shouldn't expect much help from the US in this
regard. The US sabotaged talks with the Maoists
by putting them on the "terrorist" list (April
2003). Earlier too, Washington's "tough"
post-9/11 militarist posture had a negative
impact in Nepal and derailed talks. The US
recently trained the RNA's personnel and supplied
it sophisticated armaments. India too did the
same thanks to its fear that Nepali Maoists would
forge links with domestic Naxalites. This
preoccupation was especially strong under the
Vajpayee-Advani dispensation.
This must change. If we South Asians nurture
democratic sensibilities, we must express
solidarity with the Nepalis and prevent their
nation's collapse into absolutism and chaos.
______
[3]
The News International
February 12, 2005
FEBRUARY 12: PAKISTAN WOMEN'S DAY
Women's struggle: one step forward, one step back
by Dr. Farzana Bari
Women across the country commemorate February 12
as Pakistan Women's Day, in remembrance of the
state's brutality against women who in Lahore in
1983 to protest against the Law of Evidence,
which reduces the status of a woman witness to
half that of a male witness. The police attacked
peaceful demonstrators who wanted to present a
memorandum to the Chief Justice of Pakistan at
the High Court building. The state's patriarchal
and anti-women character was exposed in the way
the police beat and dragged woman protestors
before arresting them.
This day has become a symbol of the women's
resistance movement. However, more than two
decades later, discriminatory laws like the
Hudood Ordinance, the Laws of Evidence, and Qisas
and Diyat promulgated by Zia-ul-Haq as part of
his political project of 'Islamisation' continue
to shape the lives of Pakistani women. The
discriminatory nature of these laws as well as
their legal anomalies are well documented, but no
government, civil or military, has had the
courage to repeal them, due to the threat of a
backlash from the religious lobby.
Two self-proclaimed liberal regimes, Benazir
Bhutto's and Pervez Musharraf's, set up
commissions to review these laws; both the
Inquiry Commission (1997) and the National
Commission on the Status of Women (2003) strongly
recommended that these laws be repealed due to
the anomalies they contain and because rather
than providing justice, they have contributed to
actually promoting injustice. But neither Ms
Bhutto nor Gen. Musharraf did anything to
implement the recommendations of their own
commissions, that are gathering dust in
government offices.
Women's rights and human rights organizations
have consistently highlighted the negative social
and legal impact of these laws, especially on
women. Enlightened Muslim scholars such as Javeed
Ghamdi, Dr. Farooq Ahmed and Dr. Riffat Hassan
agree that there is nothing Islamic about these
laws.
The women's rights movement's consistent demand
for the repeal of these laws has pushed the issue
to the forefront, but it has not become the focus
of the present government's agenda of
"enlightened moderation". It is interesting to
analyse how the military governments of Gen. Zia
and Gen. Musharraf used women to achieve
political legitimacy for their own military
takeovers. The former introduced discriminatory
laws against women for his political agenda of
"Islamisation" while the latter reserved 33
percent seats for women in the local government
and 17 percent in the national and provincial
assemblies and the Senate to prove his
government's liberal face.
Pakistan ranks overall 120th (but 64th in gender-
empowerment measures) out of 177 countries in the
UNDP gender-related development index (GDI). The
pace of development of social indicators,
particularly for women, is among the slowest in
South Asia. The never-ending play between women
and the patriarchal establishment means that
women take one step back whenever they take a
step forward, thus going round in circles,
instead of moving forward.
For example, the success of women's groups in
drawing public attention to the increasing
violence against women, especially "honour
killing," was a major step forward. They had been
pointing out the misuse of the Qisas and Diyat
law that allows compensation, forgiveness and
out-of-court settlements, enabling the victims'
families to 'forgive' murderers, who in cases of
'honour killings' are often the victim's
relatives. This led to recognition of the need to
introduce a law on 'honour killing'. However,
when this bill was passed it retained the
objectionable provision. Sadly, the Musharraf
government decided to moderate its enlightened
moderation and passed a toothless bill, which
will fail to protect women. Yet the government
makes political gains by claiming that it has
introduced a bill against 'honour killings'. This
is a step back for the women's movement.
Similarly, the reservation of women's seats in
the local governments and parliament was another
step forward. Their presence and visibility had
an enormous impact and was truly the beginning of
a silent revolution. However, the proposed
amendments in the local government ordinance that
include reducing the number of seats from 21 to
13 at the union council level will reverse the
change and negatively impact the process of
democratisation. It will also affect the
marginalised sections of society, such as
peasants and workers.
The government is trying to create a smokescreen
by claiming that this amendment does not affect
women as the women's 33 percent representation
will be maintained in the local governments.
However, this amendment means that the six
women's seats at union councils will be reduced
to three. The overall impact in terms of numbers
will be huge, from 40,000 to 20,000 women
councillors in the local governments. This will
be further reduced if the government decides to
enlarge some of the constituencies as part of the
amendment package.
Furthermore, the rape of a lady doctor in Sui,
and government response exposes the structural
and cultural misogyny of our society and state
institutions. The state's criminal silence is
compounded by its not arresting the alleged
rapists who are apparently highly influential.
The last straw was the verdict of the 'jirga'
that declared the rape victim as a 'kari'.
All this shows that the women's struggle in
Pakistan may have come a long way, but it still
has miles to go.
The writer is acting director, Centre for Women's
Studies, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.
______
[4]
Kashmir Times
February 12, 2005
Editorial
DISMANTLING WALLS OF HATRED
AJOKA'S 'BULLAH' HAS SHOWN THE WAY
Recently when a premier theatre group of Pakistan
Ajoka performed "Bullah" in the winter capital
[Jammu], the underlying essence of the play not
just easily struck the emotional chords of
audiences of varied hues, but also won an
overwhelming admiration. Reason was not too far
to seek. The play, reliving the time
characterized by internecine conflicts, upheaval,
religious, civic strife and political chaos,
effortlessly allowed everyone, in this part of
turbulent state, to get identify with its very
contemporary theme. Mystic saint Bullah, the
protagonist of the play, embodied hope and
humanism for audience in the present milieu,
fraught with bigotry and hatred. Obviously, this
call for love, peace and an indictment against
intolerance, violence and abhorrence, presently
gripping not just the state or country but the
entire sub-continent, is the need of the hour.
The vigorous efforts of some pragmatic souls made
the mysticism of the spiritual soul, who overawed
the generations with his soulful poetry and
poignant philosophy, to prevail upon the walls of
hatred and prejudices in this part of the state.
These efforts were significant particularly in
wake of the fact that this was a historic
beginning of cultural exchange from across the
border in this so far "forbidden zone". As the
illustrious director of the play Madeeha Gouhar,
herself, had maintained that this particular play
was chosen to perform in the winter capital of
the state for two specific reasons. One for its
contemporary theme and the relevance of the
message contained therein and secondly because
Jammu too once enjoyed the reputation of land of
Sufis. Not only Jammu, but, the entire state, for
long, carried the traditions of Sufism, which
taught that only true religion in the world is
humanity. However, this was unfortunate that as
the time rolled by, everyone forgot this message
of eternal peace, amity and brotherhood. Ditto
was about the people across the border,
notwithstanding that we shared similar culture
and heritage. We, ourselves, allowed "invisible"
walls of hatred and prejudices to grow and
parochial interests to dominate us. But then, it
is never too late to mend and begin. One just
hopes that imbibing the true spirit of the play,
which underlined the verdict of history that only
the emotions of love and compassion are
everlasting and the violence only begets
violence, we will unitedly make efforts to
dismantle the walls of hatred, thus allowing the
sanity to prevail upon.
______
[5]
Indian Express
February 12, 2005
Editorial
RIOTS '84: THE TRUTH
THE CONGRESS GOVERNMENT MUST PLACE THE NANAVATI REPORT IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE
The victims of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots have been
victimised twice by the Indian State. Whoever may
have been responsible for the riots, the state
failed to give the victims protection in any
substantial measure. But their tragedy was
compounded by the state's failure to bring the
perpetrators of those gruesome crimes to justice.
Very few convictions have been handed down in
proportion to the scale of the horrors inflicted
on that fateful day. The Ranganath Mishra
Commission was given so narrow a mandate, that it
was unlikely to produce justice. The Nanavati
Commission has finally submitted its report. Yet
the state continues to repeat its pattern of
evasion and procrastination. Although the home
minister has suggested that the Report will be
made public at some point, the hesitation in
doing so instantly, does not speak well. The
report must be made public immediately. The
victims of the riots deserve at least this much
good faith effort on their behalf. And it is a
travesty that in a democracy, making public
reports on such vital issues is a matter of
executive discretion.
The contents of the report can be judged only
when it is made fully public. There is something
of an oddity in the fact that the home minister
has been exercising his discretion already in
discussing the report with the Congress
president, Sonia Gandhi. Whether or not, or to
what extent, Congress politicians are indicted in
the report remains to be seen. But there is
something of a conflict of interest at work in
the whole situation. The very party, whose
members are the object of the Report, will now
exercise the discretion to make it public. The
only way to maintain propriety in such a
situation would have been to make the report
public instantly.
The rest of the political class should also rise
above narrow partisanship in the way it uses the
report. Political parties should demand that the
report be made public. They should, if need be,
press for more investigations. But they should
not lose the larger objective in sight. The point
should not be to score facile political points,
but to earnestly strive for truth and justice.
They ought to remember that it is not the
Congress party that is on trial. The whole nation
is on trial on every measure of moral decency. Do
we care about the victims? Are our institutions
sources of justice? Does the state protect its
minorities? How can we ensure that the horrors of
1984 do not re-surface as they have, indeed, done
in Gujarat? The Nanavati Commission may not have
all the answers. It may not even be convincing.
But we owe it to the victims; we owe it to
ourselves as a nation, to discuss these matters
in full measure. Make the report public.
______
[6]
Outlook
Web | Feb 11, 2005
THE BARE LIFE OF S.A.R. GEELANI, Ph.D
What we need to understand urgently is that if
Geelani is grievously wounded (no matter who
aimed the barrel of a gun at him), it is our
freedom that lies bleeding at the door.
by Ananya Vajpeyi
Once again, Syed Abdul Rahman Geelani meets,
before his time, in an only half unexpected
fashion, his old friend Death. The good
professor, having been sent home after the
reversal of a death-sentence, was shot at five
times outside his lawyer's residence on the night
of February 08, 2004. For over three years now,
there has been a massive legal and civic campaign
to assert his innocence and protest his wrongful
implication in a conspiracy to blow-up the
Parliament House on December 13, 2001.
What is the meaning of the person of S.A.R
Geelani in the political life of our nation? Who
is this man, and why does death stalk him in the
guise of an antagonistic and ruthless state?
But even on the verge of acquittal by the highest
court of the land, the right to live, and to live
freely and safely under the rule of law, has
eluded this hapless individual.
Geelani was suspected of being part of a plot to
attack the Indian legislature for reasons that
had nothing to do with his overt or covert
political
activity: he was of Kashmiri origin and in
contact with relatives still living in the
Valley, he was a Muslim in the regime of a
BJP-led coalition government, and he taught
Arabic at a college in Delhi. Once he had been
arrested under the draconian Prevention of
Terrorism Act (POTA), every effort was made to
frame him as a terrorist. He was tortured in
police custody, treated as fair game by hostile
fellow-prisoners, pronounced guilty in a media
trial that was based on prejudice rather than
truth, and given the death-penalty.
His release at the last minute came as the result
of a powerful case fought relentlessly by his
legal team, under the leadership of, among
others, Nandita Haksar, who has made it her
mission to defend the human rights and civil
liberties of those falsely accused of being
enemies of the state. Shattered by custodial
abuse, but nevertheless
This is a man who is the most vulnerable denizen
of the political community, because his absolute
vulnerability is the condition for the absolute
power of the ruler.
eloquent in his call for justice and his defence
of democracy, Geelani walked free only to have
bullets pumped into his stomach a few months
later.
What is the meaning of the person of S.A.R
Geelani in the political life of our nation? Who
is this man, and why does death stalk him in the
guise of an antagonistic and ruthless state? Does
his nightmarish encounter with the
criminal-justice system and with police power
reveal to us, in the most alarming way possible,
our own exposure as citizens of India, to
violence at the hands of the very forces that are
supposed to guard our life and guarantee our
liberty? What is at stake for all of us, every
single person the member of some minority or
other, in the life and death of this young
academic, the father of two small children, a
teacher of language and literature, an inhabitant
of the city of Delhi - this man who is ordinary
in every way, and yet singled-out for
extermination?
The contemporary Italian philosopher, Giorgio
Agamben has written in a manner that is both
intellectually persuasive and ethically pressing,
about a figure found in ancient Roman law called
the homo sacer. This is a man who is the most
vulnerable denizen of the political community,
because his absolute vulnerability is the
condition for the absolute power of the ruler.
The homo sacer is placed under a ban - that is to
say, he is banished from the company of other
men, and at the same time abandoned by the legal
and juridical order. This state of banishment and
abandonment renders the life of the homo sacer
less than the politically-defined and
legally-protected life of a citizen: he is
reduced to what Agamben calls "bare life" or
"naked life". In this state, which lies outside
the realms of both politics and the law, the homo
sacer may be killed, without any entailment in
the form of punishment or reward, by anyone who
wishes.
The killing of this person is neither a crime
(for no law is broken), nor a sacrifice (for no
ritual is fulfilled).The ban excludes him from
both human law, which governs the sphere of
political activity, and divine law, which governs
the sphere of religious activity. The life of the
homo sacer is less than a life; consequently, it
can be extinguished with impunity..
Agamben delves deep into the political and
philosophical treatises of ancient Rome to
understand this strange figure because he finds,
within the murderous space of the Nazi
concentration camp, the same utter abandonment /
banishment that does not make sense in the
inclusive framework of modern citizenship.
If the state cannot kill him (because the
judiciary curbs the absolute power of the state
even as Geelani is stepping up to the hangman's
noose), then it turns out that actually anyone
can kill him...
The denizen of a camp is not only less than a
citizen, but s/he has no recourse to man or God,
to human help or divine intervention. The life of
a camp-inmate has no legal or scared value
attached to it - it can be ended without any
pretence of due process, and equally without any
justification as to the ritual purposes of such
killing. In a camp a human being's
life is precisely and only his potential to be
killed. This is why Hitler could speak of the
extermination of Jews "as lice". Thus every
person in Auschwitz, according to Agamben, is a
homo sacer: neither a criminal, nor a sacrificial
victim, and yet consigned to death. The sovereign
power of the Nazi state is predicated on the
reduction of the Jew to bare life. Primo Levi,
the Holocaust survivor, described his fellows in
the Nazi lager as though they were the living
dead.
Consider this startling fact: S.A.R Geelani is
the homo sacer of the Indian state, which seeks
to bolster its fragile sovereignty by
sequestering this man, chosen at random, from
every discourse of law, justice, politics or
religion, and killing him, plain and simple,
because it can.
If the state cannot kill him (because the
judiciary curbs the absolute power of the state
even as Geelani is stepping up to the hangman's
noose), then it turns out that actually anyone
can kill him, because he is marked by the fatal
ban: here is one who is cast away from the
community of men and evicted from the shelter of
the law;
This time he has barely escaped with his life,
but the message is loud and clear: if we are not
careful about the state of our freedom, then we
will be reduced to bare life.
to take the life of this man does not amount to homicide.
Why has Geelani become a dead man walking? He has
not committed any crime. He has no discernible
political ambition vis-à-vis his home state and
its problems with India - the furthest he has
gone taking any kind of public stand has been in
speaking out against atrocities in Kashmir, as a
human rights activist. He was not chosen by any
Pakistani jihadi group to be their martyr, nor
was he designated by any separatist outfit to be
their suicide bomber in the December 13 attack.
He has never sought to identify himself as a
Muslim in any politically meaningful way
whatsoever, leave aside by asserting his
religious identity in a manner that might
reasonably be construed as a challenge, an
affront, an offence or a threat to a secular
nation. He does not represent any terrorist
organization, Indian or foreign, nor has he lent
himself as a mouthpiece to any political party in
this country.
What Geelani does represent, unfortunately for
him, is the capacity inherent in all of us to be
killed - not just by the powers-that-be, but by
anyone who decides to take the law into his own
hands - the moment the armour of citizenship
falls away from us. Back in 2001, in the
immediate aftermath of 9/11 public paranoia ran
high, and the Parliament attack was promptly
dubbed "12/13". Yet even at that time, the danger
to our Parliament - and to the free and fair
nation it supposedly stands for - came not from
some plot that Geelani might have hatched (but in
fact did not hatch) with others out to undermine
Indian democracy, but rather, from the state's
own zeal to get Geelani, at whatever cost,
regardless of his innocence.
Today it is not possible or desirable to
speculate about who made an outright attempt on
Geelani's life during the shoot-out near Ms
Haksar's South Delhi residence. The point is not
that this or that individual or agency tried to
assassinate him, but rather, that through the
deplorable sequence of events that has befallen
this man over the last three years, he
effectively has been rendered less than a
citizen, and deprived of his fundamental rights,
his legal protections, and his proper place in
the body politic. What we need to understand so
urgently is that if Geelani is grievously wounded
(no matter who aimed the barrel of a gun at him),
it is our freedom that lies bleeding at the door.
This time he has barely escaped with his life,
but the message is loud and clear: if we are not
careful about the state of our freedom, then we
will be reduced to bare life.
And that is only a gunshot away from death.
(Ananya Vajpeyi is with the Centre for Law and
Governance, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New
Delhi.)
______
[7]
The Hindu
February 12, 2005
BAN ON COMMUNAL ORGANISATIONS DEMANDED
By Our Special Correspondent
GULBARGA, FEB. 11. The Karnataka Souhardha Vedike
today demanded that the State Government ban
organisations propagating communalism, such as
the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the Vishwa
Hindu Parishad, the Bajrang Dal, and the Akhil
Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad, to prevent further
division of people on communal lines and protect
the integrity of the country.
Addressing a press conference here, the conveners
of the vedike, Shankarayya Ghanti, Shoukat Ali
Alur, Basawaraj Sulibhavi, Peer Bhasha, and
Shyamsunder Joshi, said that the vedhike has
decided to step up its campaign against communal
forces and create awareness among the people
about "the designs of these organisations" by
taking out a padayatra from different parts of
the State on May 20 and converge at
Kudalasanghama in Bagalkot district for a rally
on June 20.
Demands
The padayatra has been organised to pressure the
Government to enact special legislations to
control communal forces, constitute special
forces to tackle communal violence, demand the
constitution of a legislature committee to study
communal clashes in the State, and demand a white
paper on the action taken to prevent the
recurrence of communal clashes in sensitive areas.
Responsibility
The vedike also demanded that the Government hold
the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of
Police of a particular area responsible if
communal violence takes place in the district.
The vedike will urge the Government to introduce
lessons on communal amity in first to seventh
standard textbooks.
Mr. Ghanti said that one each team will leave
from Gulbarga, Raichur, Bidar, Bellary, and
Koppal, two teams from Mysore and the Bombay
Karnataka region on May 20 and reach
Kudalasangama to participate in the State level
rally on June 20.
_______
[8]
[10 Feb 2005]
SINS OF THE SECULARISTS (ACCORDING TO A BISHOP)
By Rajendra K. Sail*
A Bishop of the Church of North India (CNI) has
banned yet another Christian Organisation from
using the premises and facilities of an
Institution under his domain called the Gass
Memorial Centre (GMC) in Raipur of Chhattisgarh,
a YMCA-type of an outfit which provides for
Conference & Commercial facilities to all and
sundry. Presently a Jewellery Sale is on for the
past one month! From Rotary Club to Caste-based
organisations, all are given the usage of its
premises without even the whimper of a
questioning. Even Church denominations quite
contradictory to the faith and order of the CNI
are permitted to use its premises for regular
worship services. Its Football Ground is given to
wide variety of activities besides games and
sports. Two years ago, the Fire-crackers shops
were put up during Deepavali, although the social
wing of the CNI has been raising the issue of
boycott of firecrackers as the industry employs
child and bonded labourers. Very often, there
have been protest
s about the limitless commercial usage of the GMC
facilities and premises that hinder the main
objective of witness & service of the Church.
But, then the democratic traditions of protest
have no longer any effect on those who lord it
over their domain, be it Churches or its
institution or its people!
What then was the sin of the Raipur Churches
Development & Relief Committee (RCDRC) - a
grass-roots level ecumenical organisation with a
unique history of 30 years of involvement in
social action and reflection?
The RCDRC's contribution to the society include
release and rehabilitation of over 4000 bonded
labourers, setting up of 25 evening schools
called SAHODAYA for child labourers, and 80
non-formal educational centres called NAWA ANJOR
for village adolescent girls, anti-liquor
campaign with women in the forefront,
technical-cum-social education for rural
dropouts, live-inexperience to theology students
and priests providing interaction between
ideology & theology, exposure to rural realities
for urban youth and students through a popular
programme called GAON CHALO, etc. etc. The RCDRC
won the WORLD HUMAN RIGHTS CONGRESS AWARD in the
year 2002 for its exemplary experiments in
preserving and promoting human rights.
_____________________________________________________________
* The writer is a Christian social activist,
associated with people's movement in
Chhattisgarh. He is not only a member of the
Church of North India, but has served in various
capacities in prestigious Christian
organisations, including the NCCI, CISRS, SCMI,
YMCA, CCA & WCC. He is the founder of the Indian
Social Action Forum (INSAF), a national forum
bringing together some 550 social action groups,
social movements and intellectuals to resist
globalization, combat communalism and defend
democracy, and has held various positions in it
like Working President & General Secretary.
Presently he is the State President of the
People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL),
Chhattisgarh, a national human rights
organisation founded by Lok Nayak Jay Prakash
Narain during Emergency in India in 1976.
The RCDRC had organized a Citizen's Convention
for Building A Secular India on 29th & 30th
January, 2005, in which about 250 delegates
participated including progressive Church
leaders, social activists and academics from
Chhattisgarh & Madhya Pradesh. The co-organizers
are the Chhattisgarh Christian Council and PEACE
TRUST.
The leaders at the Citizen's Convention included
Teesta Setalvad, Editor, Communalism Combat,
whose bold and courageous stand in seeking
justice for the victims of Gujarat Genocide is
exemplary; Dr. John Dayal, President of All India
Christian Union, a senior journalist and a
Catholic lay-leader who has stood for the rights
of the downtrodden since the days of Emergency
Rule in India; Abdul Jabbar Khan of Bhopal Gas
Pidit Mahila Udyog Sangathan, who has come to be
recognized as the undisputed leader of the
struggles of the victims of Bhopal Gas Tragedy in
1984 seeking justice and relief; Dr. Gnana
Robinson of PEACE TRUST, Kanyakumari, a world
renowned theologian, who was the Principle of two
prestigious colleges in India i.e. United
Theological College, Bangalore and the Tamilnadu
Theological Seminary, Madurai; Dr. Rev. Satish C
Gyan, a Theologian who has come to be recognized
for promoting inter-faith dialogue and developing
indigenous forms of worship. All of them delibe
rated on the Threats and Challenges posed by the
fascist forces in the country. The sole objective
of the Convention was to chalk out strategy and
agenda for strengthening secular-democratic
polity in the country, with specific reference to
Chhattisgarh & Madhya Pradesh.
As expected, the Sangh Parviar attacked the bold
statements of these leaders, and charged the
organizers for attacking the Hindutva ideology
and agenda with ulterior motives. Both Teesta and
John Dayal were targeted for their statements!
One such newspaper report is reproduced below,
translated into English from the original Hindi:
"CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES ARE SPREADING MYTHS - AGRAWAL"
"The All India Christian Council President, Dr.
John Dayal, speaking at the Nagrik Sadbhawna
Sammelan organized at the Gass Memorial Centre,
Raipur has spread misinformation about the
Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram, Jashpur that it was
involved in creating terror in the region, this
is totally false. Because, Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram
is a social service organisation doing social
work in the forest areas, and because of the
awakening created in Jashpur area along with that
in Chhattisgarh due to the social work of Vanvasi
Ahsram, Christian missionaries can not openly
carry on their conversion activities. Confused by
this, the Christian Missionaries are spreading
myths in the society, and sowing the seeds of
hatred among the peace loving society in
Chhattisgarh. The said above statements have been
made by the Chairman of Vanvasi Nivas Samiti,
Gopal Krishna Agrawal. He said that in Nagrik
Sammelan, the manner in which Dr. John Dayal and
the so-called human rights activist Teesta
Seetalvad
did not utter a single word against the
ultra-leftists who were creating obstacles in the
development of Chhattisgarh, have given
encouragement to naxalism and conversion. Today
when the self-respecting vanvasi in Chhattisgarh
was getting awakened to his identity, the
manipulations by missionaries have openly come to
the fore. And therefore, the unrest of some of
these so-called fake organisations for humanity
has been understood by the public. Influenced by
the social work and awareness building programmes
carried out by the Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram and Ekal
Schools, the people of Chhattisgarh is ready to
provide its active support, then these
organisations instead of doing creative work are
spreading the seeds of hatred. This has become
clear from the name of the organizers and
organisations that were present and actively
participated in the programme conducted
yesterday."
(Translation of the news as appeared in
the Hari-Bhoomi daily dated 31st January 2005 at
Raipur)
Such threats from the Sangh Parivar published in
a section of the Press led to a discussion in the
Bishop's House at Jabalpur, his head quarters,
who concluded that there was grave danger to the
Church & Christian population if organizations
like the RCDRC & Chhattisgarh Christian Council
were allowed to utilize its premises for such
Conventions, that too with leaders like Teesta
Seetalvad, John Dayal and Abdul Jabbar, who were
on the hit list of the Sangh Parivar!
Therefore, they said that in order to protect the
Church & Christian Community, more so its
institutions like the Gass Memorial Centre, entry
of organisations like the RCDRC be banned. The
logic of the Bishop was simple! If there were no
such provocative programmes conducted in its
premises by these secularists, the Church and
Christian community would be safe!
So, a letter was hurriedly issued to the RCDRC,
the very next day after the conclusion of the
Citizen's Convention. It reads as follows:
"This is to regretfully inform you that you shall
not be granted henceforth permission to use the
facilities of the Gass Memorial Centre. This has
been directed by the Chairman, Gass Memorial
Centre telephonically. Which please note."
( From a Letter issued by Mr. C Tevares,
Director, Gass Memorial Centre, Raipur on 31st
January 2005.)
This Bishop in this case is The Rt. Rev. Dr. P C
Singh, who claims to have its upbringing in the
ecumenical organisations like the Student
Christian Movement of India (SCMI), and is
presently the Chairman of the MP Christian
Council, a state unit of the National Council of
Churches in India (NCCI). Both these
organisations are considered to be progressive
and liberal, more often than not conducting
similar programmes, with more or less similar
leaders providing the necessary inputs for debate
and discussion on the concern of the Church
against the growing threats from the forces of
communalism.
But then Bishops are more becoming recognized for
their contradictory behaviour - gap between
rhetoric and reality! So, one can not single out
Bishop Singh, and blame him for such a parochial
security-conscious reaction!
During the Citizen's Convention, Dr. John Dayal,
who is also the President of the All India
Catholic Union - a lay people's official forum in
the Catholic Church in India - shared his
frustration with the Catholic Bishop's Conference
of India (CBCI). He spoke of similar threat
perceptions of the Bishops and Church leaders in
Gujarat. According to John Dayal, a delegation of
Catholic Church Leaders from Gujarat expressed
concern at the continuing bold statements and
actions of secular activists like Fr. Cedric
Prakash against the fascist regime of Narendra
Modi, who were putting Christian community to
grave dangers. Fr. Cedric Prakash has
single-handedly and without fear continued to
fight the might of the fascist regime of Narendra
Modi, and has played a prominent role in
providing support to various NGOs and Social
Activists like Teesta Seetalvad, to make their
contribution in justice and relief works in
Gujarat. But, the logic of the Church leaders
from Gujarat was that "n
ow there was peace and tranquillity in Gujarat,
and Muslims were not under attack any more. Thus,
any form of criticism of the Sangh Praivar and
its various outfits by the Christian leaders was
unwarranted and, on the contrary,
counter-productive." Some of these concerned
Church leaders shared the friendly advice with
veiled threats from their Hindu neighbours that
if Christians did not stop parrying in the
Gujarat genocide, they would face similar fate as
that of Hindus in Gujarat after Godhra! According
to them "the wisdom was in keeping quiet in the
midst of communal violence, remaining indifferent
to the crimes committed against humanity, so long
as Christians were spared". So the logic of the
wise was that you should not take a courageous
Christ-like stand, who suffered on the Cross, if
the lives and property (here they mean Christian
institutions) of your fellow-believers could be
protected by remaining silent and indifferent!
What's more is that the organizers i.e. RCDRC
conducted a SARVDHARMA PRATHNA AVAM ARADHNA SABHA
on 30th January 2005, which is the martyrdom day
of Mahatma Gandhi, inviting religious heads from
Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, and Budhism to participate
in this All Religious Prayer Meeting for Peace &
Harmony on this auspicious day. It was led by
widely respected Theologian and Priest, Dr. Rev.
Satish C Gyan, who is recognized also for his
unique contribution to indigenous worship
services, incorporating forms from other
religious faiths into Christian Worship,
including recital of mantras, singing of bhajans,
scripture reading, etc. New forms and order of
Worship formulated and practised by Dr. Gyan have
not only been published recently by the Christian
Conference of Asia (an ecumenical movement that
brings together protestant Churches in Asian
countries) but widely used cutting across
denominational lines.
The printed rules of the GMC do not permit in its
premises the prayers and worship by any other
religion than Christians. Therefore, the obvious
excuse by the managers: How then the RCDRC
organized such a prayer programme?
The opponents of such a programme refer to the
burning of the GMC by a mob way back on 27th
August 1957 under similar circumstances, when the
then Director of GMC had refused to permit the
pooja of Sarasvati in a Theatre Programme
organized by the Rang Manch, a renowned Cultural
Group in Chhattisgarh! Rumours were then spread
that the then Director, Dr. G B Singh, defiled
the statue of Sarasvati and used abusive language
against the organizers. During the mob attack on
GMC, police fired killing a student named Krishna
Kumar. The present KK Road is named after him.
So, the GMC authorities, with Bishop Singh as its
Chairman, found a convenient excuse in banning
the RCDRC from the GMC quoting from this
incident. So, the argument runs like: 'That the
All Religious Prayer Meeting organized on the
Gandhiji's Death Anniversary this year may have
had some such sensitive substance, which could
have then provided a spark flaring up into a
flame in an already surcharged communal
atmosphere in the State of Chhattisgarh.'
What is noteworthy is the fact that the CNI and
all other main-line Churches in India, under the
patronage of the world ecumenical organisations
like the World Council of Churches (WCC) and the
Christian Conference of Asia (CCA), etc., have
been projecting inter-faith dialogue as one of
the sure means to promote harmony and peace in
pluralistic societies. And, All Religious Prayer
Meetings are an in-thing since the 60's in the
ecumenical world. Leaders of various religious
faiths and of no faith are a regular visitor to
such national and international conferences and
discourses!
What baffled some of the secularists more was
that a similar Fatwa was issued by the Bishop P C
Singh to Dr. Satish C Gyan, who received it in
his capacity as the Secretary of the Chhattisgarh
Christian Council, one of the co-organisers of
the Citizen's Convention! Interpreted verbally,
the letter means that Bishop has imposed a ban on
these organisations --- RCDRC & CCC - without
even recording the reasons, not to speak of
giving them a chance to be heard. Remember the
Rowllat Act imposed by the British Empire in
India, in the wake of freedom struggles, which
became the father of all Black Laws in India,
ranging from MISA during Emergency Rule in 1975
to the recent POTA! The foundation of the
draconian law was laid down on three precepts of
the Colonial power, which lorded over us for 200
years: Appeal Nahin, Waqil Nahin, Daleel Nahin!
(No provision for Appeal, No Defence, No
Lawyer!). Can you not see the similarities here!
Therefore, it is not surprising that the Bishop
and his coterie acted in such an irrational and
hasty manner banning two of the most prestigious
organisations having contributed to the social
and ecumenical ministry in the region!
After all, experience has taught us that the
Church leadership has either been over-protective
about its properties, which includes the people
in the pew or it has responded to majority
communalism with its own brand of minority
communalism.
Remember the NCCI initiating nay actually
entering into a so-called "dialogue" with the
Sangh Parivar, which turned out to be a
"monologue", where the Sangha Sar Sanchalak, K K
Sudarshan gave a lesson to the Church dignitaries
about how to practice Christianity in Indian (nay
Hindu) context, and how to run their affairs! A
few present during the meeting narrated the
pathetic position of the giants of the leaders in
the Churches in India, when Sudarshan virtually
scolded them like a school teacher! And, lo and
behold, the roaring lions of the mission
compounds were meowing like cats in front of the
Sangh Sar Sanchalak, whose mentor M. S. Golwalkar
had long ago declared 'Christians' along with
'Muslims' & 'Communists' as the enemies of the
Hindu Rasthra! (please refer to Golwalkar's book
entitled: "We or our Nationhood Defined"). It is
not for nothing that the Sangh Parivar has begun
to target the "secularists" as the 'fourth enemy'
of Hindu Rashtra! But, then many Church lea
ders have not read Veer Damodar Savarkar's famous
book called: "Hindutva -- Who is A Hindu?" in the
year 1923, which became and still remains the
basic text defining this political concept. And,
hardly know anything about the strategies of the
fascists like Adolf Hitler, the main source of
inspiration for Rashtriya Swam Sevak Sangh(RSS).
They only know how to pay lip-service to the
famous poem of Martin Niemoller.
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
(by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945)
Martin Niemoller was an outspoken advocate for
accepting the burden of collective guilt for
World War II as a means of atonement for the
suffering that the German nation (through the
Nazis) had caused before and during WW II. A
priest in Nazi Germany, arrested in 1937 on the
direct orders of Hitler, the Fascist Dictator, he
was held at the Sachsenhausen and Dachau
concentration camps, until the end of World War
II. Near the end of the war, he narrowly escaped
execution.
After the war, Niemoller emerged from prison to
preach the words as summed up in his poem
reproduced above. He was instrumental in
producing the "Stuttgart Confession of Guilt", in
which the German Protestant churches formally
accepted guilt for their complicity in allowing
the suffering which Hitler's reign caused to
occur. In 1961, he was elected as one of the six
presidents of the World Council of Churches, the
ecumenical body of the Protestant faiths.
Those Church leaders, who are not tired of
reciting the above famous words of Martin
Niemoller, do not know that he also declared that
he "would rather burn his church to the ground,
than to preach the Nazi trinity of 'race, blood,
and soil'."
God Save the Bishop!
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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