SACW | 24-25 Apr 2006 | Nepal's Revolt for Democracy; Sri Lanka: violence rising; India: Sex abuse - sex rights, Begum Akhtar, Pakistan: Karafilm - Call for Entries

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | 24-25 April, 2006 | Dispatch No. 2240

[1]  Nepal's Popular Revolt for Democracy:
   (i) The Triumph of the People (Tapan Bose)
   (ii) This is no rah-rah revolt (Tariq Ali)
   (iii) Standing behind the despot on the wrong side of history (Isabel Hilton)
   (iv) Statement In Solidarity With The Democratic Uprising In Nepal
[2]  Sri Lanka: Government Must Respond to 
Anti-Tamil Violence (Human Rights Watch)
[3]  India: Still A Matter of Shame -  sexual 
abuse does not address sexual rights (Tarunabh 
Khaitan)
[4]  Book Review: Memories of [Begum] Akhtar by Partha Chatterjee
[5]  Pakistan: Karafilm Festival - Call for Entries

___

[1]  

NEPAL: THE TRIUMPH OF THE PEOPLE

The people of Nepal have triumphed. Last night 
(April 24, 2006) Nepal's dictator, King Gyanendra 
gave in to their demands. Bowing to the pressure 
of the mass movement the king declared his 
acceptance of the roadmap to peace drawn up by 
the Seven Party Alliance and the Maoists. He 
proclaimed the reinstatement of the parliament 
which was dissolved on May 22, 2004. He called, 
upon "the Seven Party Alliance to bear the 
responsibility of taking the nation on the path 
to national unity and prosperityŠ"
Till the early hours of this morning Nepalese 
people were dancing and singing. I doubt if any 
one slept at all. Now they are out on the streets 
again to celebrate the victory. The leaders of 
the Seven Party Alliance were meeting in the 
house of G. P. Koirala this morning. Thousands of 
vigilant pro-democracy activists patiently waited 
outside to hear what the leaders would decide. It 
was a replay of the same scene of April 22, when 
the people had gathered outside Koirala's house 
to tell the leaders to reject the king's 
invitation to name a Prime Minister. Today they 
were to make sure that the leaders did not 
deviate from the roadmap drawn up by the 12 Point 
Agreement.
The leaders of the Seven Party Alliance did not 
disappoint the people. At the conclusion of the 
meeting they informed the people who were waiting 
outside that  "The announcement of Constituent 
Assembly elections will be the main agenda of the 
reinstated parliament," Calling on the Maoists to 
support the revived parliament the Seven Party 
Alliance has reiterated their commitment to the 
12 point agreement. The Alliance spokesperson 
added, "The people will take their decision 
through constituent assembly elections."
The Seven Party Alliance should recognize that 
this is not the "Parliament" of the old. It is a 
revolutionary stage erected on the sacrifice of 
the masses. This stage is painted with the blood 
of the martyrs. Those who will sit on this stage 
must be aware that they have been put on the 
pedestal by the toiling masses of Nepal to fulfil 
the unfinished task of the revolution.  A 
movement that the Maoists of Nepal began with 
guns has been transformed into a peaceful mass 
movement for social and economic justice, 
political freedom and a true democratic polity. 
The people who made the sacrifice are waiting for 
justice.
The seven political parties must make a public 
pledge today. They must pledge to work together 
as a united group, shunning their partisan 
identities. The "Interim Government" that they 
will form has its mandate from the people and it 
is to the people that they must remain 
answerable. The monarchy of Nepal has been 
consigned to history.
We salute the people of Nepal.

Tapan Kumar Bose
South Asia Forum for Human Rights
Kathmandu
12.30 P.M. April 25, 2006

o o o

The Guardian
April 25, 2006

THIS IS NO RAH-RAH REVOLT
Nepalese have lost their fear of repression and 
are making a genuine, old-fashioned revolution

Tariq Ali

There is something refreshingly old-fashioned 
taking place in the Himalayan kingdom of Nepal: a 
genuine revolution. In recognition of this, the 
US has told citizens except for "essential 
diplomats" to leave the country, usually a good 
sign. Since April 6, Nepal has been paralysed by 
a general strike called by the political parties 
and backed by Maoist guerrillas. Hundreds of 
thousands are out on the streets - several have 
been shot dead and more than 200 wounded. A 
curfew is in force and the army has been given 
shoot-to-kill orders.

But the people have lost their fear and it is 
this that makes them invincible. If a single 
platoon refuses to obey orders, the Bastille will 
fall and the palace will be stormed. Another 
crowned head will fall very soon. A caretaker 
government will organise free elections to a 
constituent assembly, and this will determine the 
future shape of the country.

The lawyers, journalists, students and the poor 
demonstrating in Kathmandu also know that if they 
are massacred, the armed guerrillas who control 
80% of the countryside will take the country. 
This is not one of those carefully orchestrated 
"orange" affairs with its mass-produced placards, 
rah-rah gals and giant PR firms to aid media 
coverage, so loved by the "international 
community". Nor does the turbulence have anything 
to do with religion. What is taking place in 
Nepal is different: it is the culmination of 
decades of social, cultural and economic 
oppression. This is an old story. Nepal's 
upper-caste Hindu rulers have institutionalised 
ancient customs to preserve their own privileges. 
Only last year was the custom of locking up 
menstruating women in cowsheds declared illegal.

The Nepalese monarchy, established more than two 
centuries ago, has held the country in an iron 
grip, usually by entering into alliances with 
dominant powers - Britain, the US and, lately, 
India - and keeping them supplied with cheap 
mercenaries. It is a two-way trade and ever since 
the declaration of the "war on terror", the 
corrupt and brutal royal apparatus has been 
supplied with weaponry by its friends: 20,000 
M-16 rifles from Washington, 20,000 rifles from 
Delhi and 100 helicopters from London. Meanwhile, 
half the country's 28 million people have no 
access to electricity or running water, let alone 
healthcare and education, according to the UN.

In 2005, King Gyanendra suspended all civil 
liberties and outlawed politics. To deal with a 
problem that was essentially structural, but 
which in the global context of neoliberalism 
could not be solved through state intervention, 
he decided on mass repression: physical attacks 
on the poor, concerted attempts to stamp out 
dissident political organisations and blanket 
social repression. The chronicle of shootings, 
beatings, imprisonments, purges and provocations 
is staggering. The sheer ferocity of his assault 
took the tiny middle class by surprise and 
isolated the politicians.

Will the triumvirate - the US, the EU and the UN 
security council - try to keep the king in power? 
If it does, it will have to add Kathmandu to a 
growing list of disasters. Recent newspaper 
editorials indicate that the west fears the 
disease may spread to neighbouring India. A 
top-level summit between the Naxalites and civil 
servants after the defeat of the BJP government 
revealed a remarkably pragmatic Maoist 
leadership: all it wanted was for the government 
to implement the constitution and pledges 
contained in successive Congress manifestos.

What the uprising in Nepal reveals is that while 
democracy is being hollowed out in the west, it 
means more than regular elections to many people 
in the other continents. The Nepalese want a 
republic and an end to the systemic poverty that 
breeds violence and to achieve these moderate 
demands they are making a revolution.

· Tariq Ali is an editor of New Left Review

o o o

The Guardian
April 24, 2006

STANDING BEHIND THE DESPOT ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY

Only democracy can end the crisis in Nepal, but the US, EU and India
back the king and his attempts to crush the Maoist uprising

Isabel Hilton

In the rapidly moving crisis in Nepal, a few 
lines are clear. King Gyanendra, with the 
desperation of the failing despot, tosses a small 
concession from his leaking boat. On the streets, 
the democracy movement reacts with contempt and a 
renewed determination to be rid of him. In the 
hills, the Maoists watch, alert for signs of 
betrayal by the seven political parties with whom 
they signed an agreement last November to push 
for a constituent assembly and a democratic 
constitution. Nepal - the world's only Hindu 
kingdom, with a population of 28 million people - 
is on the edge of a collapse, with far-reaching 
implications for the entire region. And in the 
shadows, the external powers, India, the US, 
China and Europe, are pulling strings, trying to 
exert leverage on this complex situation. So far, 
their intervention has been inglorious.
In India there is a growing outcry at the part 
played by the prime minister and his special 
envoy, Karan Singh. Dr Singh was not an 
accidental choice. The son of the last maharajah 
of Kashmir, he had to flee his own royal palace 
as a boy. His wife is a member of the Rana 
family, until 1960 Nepal's corrupt and despotic 
hereditary prime ministers. And her niece, 
Devyani Rana, is the woman for whom Nepal's crown 
prince massacred most of his family in 2002.
Dr Singh was sent to talk sense to a king intent 
on hiding from the anger of his people behind the 
guns of the Royal Nepal Army.  Gyanendra's Friday 
night statement, in which he offered to hand over 
some power to a prime minister and council of 
ministers, was the result. He did not apologise 
for his power grab last February, or the 
brutality of his armed forces. Nor did he offer 
to restore parliament or give up his control of 
the army, and he made no mention of a constituent 
assembly. Gyanendra offered, in short, a return 
to the situation of late last year, when, having 
dismissed parliament, he ruled through an 
executive whom he could dismiss at will.
India brokered the November agreement between the 
Maoists and the democratic opposition, so it came 
as a surprise when Dr Singh and the Indian prime 
minister immediately welcomed the king's move. In 
Kathmandu, the ambassadors of the US, Sweden, 
France, Britain and Germany went to the home of 
Girija Prasad Koirala, president of the Nepali 
Congress party, to try to persuade the leaders of 
the seven-party alliance to accept. As the 
ambassadors cajoled the politicians inside, 
thousands of protesters outside chanted their 
opposition.
The democratic leaders did not accept, 
recognising that the deal would leave them 
powerless but facing renewed hostilities from the 
Maoists in a war that, as all serious observers 
agree, cannot be won on the battlefield. 
Accepting it would have ended all hope of a 
political settlement of the decade-long war, 
which has claimed more than 13,000 lives. It was 
a blueprint for greater bloodshed.
In the Duwakot armed police barracks, where they 
languish in detention for defying the king's ban 
on peaceful demonstrations, a group of 20 eminent 
civil society leaders issued a powerful rebuttal 
of the ambassadors' position. In a letter 
smuggled out of their prison, the group, who 
include one of Nepal's most distinguished editors 
and two of the framers of Nepal's 1990 
constitution, wrote:
"[We] believe that your governments' welcoming 
response to Friday's address by King Gyanendra 
was based on a misperception of Nepali political 
reality and a misreading of the address itself 
... Your reaction has needlessly delayed a 
peaceful transition in the country at a critical 
hour, when millions of Nepalis are on the streets 
agitating for an immediate return to democracy. 
This show of people's solidarity ... deserves 
more respect than has been accorded by the 
international community."
The king's offer, they argued, would return Nepal 
to a state in which the king could dismiss the 
prime minister the next time the mood seized him. 
That, they said, would not be long coming: "We 
appeal to your excellencies to also recall the 
many times that the royal palace
has played the game of deception with you, and to 
introspect whether King Gyanendra, retaining all 
the powers as head of state not
responsible to a legislature, will allow any 
forthcoming government to act independently. Your 
attitude seems to be 'the king has given
this much, take it and make the best of it.' "
Why did India and the ambassadors get it so 
wrong? The king, as one of India's leading 
journalists wrote, is a despot on the wrong side 
of history. But there is one external power that 
does believe in a military solution to Nepal's 
Maoist uprising. After Gyanendra seized power, a 
procession of US "security experts" visited Nepal 
to urge the king and the army to step up the war. 
Many Indian commentators see in the Indian prime 
minister's apparent change of tack the results of 
the new strategic partnership between the US and 
India, in which the US will give India nuclear 
cooperation and India will become a US ally in 
Asia and the "war on terror".
The newspaper Asian Age yesterday reported that 
"informed sources" said the Indian government 
"was acting along with the US that has also been 
very keen to isolate the Maoists and retain the 
king as a constitutional monarch". In Nepal, 
activists told the newspaper that New Delhi "must 
learn to listen to the people of Nepal instead of 
working out secret deals with the king and the 
Americans". It is a message that the EU would do 
well to heed. There is one way out of Nepal's 
crisis: the king must go and a full democracy 
that includes the Maoists must be established.

o o o

(v)

  URGENT ATTENTION            URGENT ATTENTION

Dear Friends,
As you are aware, the situation in Nepal has 
become horrendous and the King has belittled the 
struggles of the Nepali people by the token 
gesture of offering an individual oriented, 
undemocratic solution to the issue. The Human 
Rights situation in Kathmandu, with the Royal 
Nepal Army targeting protesting civilians with 
'shoot-at-sight', has become the worst in the 
history of the Himalayan country.
We, the concerned friends, are worried about the 
situation and feel that it is high-time that 
citizens from other parts of South Asia, 
especially India, need to raise their voice in 
support of the people's struggle for democracy in 
Nepal.
In this hour of crisis, we request you to kindly 
join us for a meeting to discuss the situation 
and plan adequate political action in Delhi and 
other South Asian cities.
The meeting will be held at the Constitution Club 
Lawns , (VP House Compound), Rafi Marg (Opposite 
INS Building and near Krishi Bhawan), New Delhi 
at 5 pm on Tuesday, the 25th April 2006.

Kindly do join us tomorrow and in future actionŠ

With regards,

Ravi Hemadri, Ram Narayan Kumar, Ashok Agrwaal, Haris
Kidwai, Saurabh Bhattacharjee, Shahid Fiaz, Deep
Ranjani, Tapan Bose, Vijayan MJ & other friends

N.B. A draft statement, of solidarity to the people of Nepal, is copied below.

   IN SOLIDARITY WITH THE DEMOCRATIC UPRISING IN NEPAL

The compromise proposed by King Gyanendra of 
Nepal on Friday, April 21st evening, which 
envisages his continuance as a constitutional 
monarch, is a last-ditch attempt to perpetuate 
the old order. It will not satisfy the demand for 
the establishment of a true democracy in the 
country, for the fulfillment of which the nation 
has risen in a spontaneous and mass revolt.
We must recall that the pledge to go in for an 
elected Constituent Assembly had first been made 
through the Interim Government of Nepal Act, 
1951, proclaimed by King Tribhuvan in February 
1951. After a long period of democratic struggle, 
the political parties led by the Nepali Congress 
formed a coalition government in April 1990 and 
worked out yet another compromise with the 
palace. Their failure to elect a Constituent 
Assembly vitiated the promise of democracy. The 
vitiation resulted in the declaration of a 
People's War in February 1996. After a long 
period of State repression and political 
violence, all the democratic forces in the 
country are once again united on the core demand 
for an elected Constituent Assembly.
The latest proposal of king Gyanendra to go back 
to the old order, after all the violence and 
turmoil the country has been through, appears to 
be senseless in not taking cognizance of the 
aspiration of the Nepali people to be masters of 
their own destiny. It is also bereft of any 
pragmatic value. As the inexorable effervescence 
of democratic uprising in the country 
demonstrates, the monarchical tyranny in the 
country does not fulfill even the minimal 
criterion of an effective regime with at least 
some semblance of legitimacy. Not only are the 
people of Nepal out on the streets, even the 
government officials, in growing numbers, appear 
to have joined the democratic uprising. It must 
also be pointed out that the international law 
forbids external interventions that go against 
the political will of a sovereign people.  The 
consequences of any attempt to stem the tide of 
democratic uprising in the country with brutal 
force or political subterfuge can only be tragic 
and politically volatile.  

The international community of nations and the 
civil society, especially in South Asia, have an 
obligation to try to avert the repression of 
Nepal's democratic will through violence. It is 
their duty to recognize and support the arduous 
and peaceful struggle of the people of Nepal to 
attain a framework of rule of law that 
democratizes all important positions of authority 
within the State. The procedures and the politics 
of the constitutional process can vary but they 
cannot develop without respect for the idea of 
the sovereignty of people; the current state of 
democratic uprising being a powerful assertion of 
it. 
The struggle of the Nepali people to attain a 
democratic framework of rule of law has been 
going on for long. It has survived myriad 
betrayals and impediments since November 1950 
when India first intervened to actively support 
the demands for a democratic constitution, 
fundamental rights, free and fair elections and 
brokered a compromise between the feudal and 
democratic forces. King Gyanendra terminated the 
incomplete experiment of democratic transition 
initiated by his brother in April 1990 by 
usurping all executive powers of State through a 
proclamation of Emergency made by him on 1 
February 2005. Despite the reign of brutal 
military repression unleashed by the State, 
people of Nepal, in urban areas and more 
significantly in the countryside, have once again 
risen in massive numbers to defy tyranny and 
totalitarianism. Hundreds of thousands of people 
are disregarding the curfew, shoot at sight 
orders, killing, bludgeoning, torture and 
imprisonment to defy the monarchic tyranny and to 
demand true democracy and the rule of law. Yet, 
the international community of States has done 
little to support the democratic struggle. On the 
contrary, it has helped prop up the illegal 
regime with military hardware and political 
support, which it has been using implacably to 
defeat the democratic upsurge. This must stop. 
Nepal is in the danger of descending deeper into 
the world of violent anarchy, with irrevocable 
consequences for the stability and security of 
entire South Asia, unless the governments and the 
people of all the countries in the region speak 
in one voice against the current regression of 
the monarchic tyranny to its medieval mould. 
We are here to extend our support and solidarity. 
We appeal to the international community of 
States and the civil society in the region and 
outside to ensure that the extraordinary 
phenomenon of democratic uprising in the country 
in evidence today is not thwarted once again with 
repression, violence, political ruse and 
strategic manipulations.


-----

[2] 

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/04/25/slanka13262.htm

SRI LANKA: GOVERNMENT MUST RESPOND TO ANTI-TAMIL VIOLENCE
Security Forces Stand by During Mob Attacks in Trincomalee

(New York, April 25, 2006) - The Sri Lankan government has failed to
respond adequately to recent attacks by armed groups on ethnic Tamils and
their homes and businesses in Sri Lanka's eastern Trincomalee district,
Human Rights Watch said today.

Police and other security forces reportedly stood by as Tamils were
attacked on April 12 after an alleged Tamil Tiger bomb at a Trincomalee
market killed five persons. Witnesses said that within 15 minutes
approximately 100-150 ethnic Sinhalese men armed with clubs and long
knives attacked Tamil businesses and homes in Trincomalee town and
district. Sri Lankan human rights organizations reported that attacks from
April 12 to 16 left at least 20 civilians dead (including seven women),
among them Tamils, Muslims and Sinhalese. Some 75 persons needed hospital
attention for injuries.

"The failure of the security forces in Trincomalee to protect the Tamil
population should raise alarm bells at the highest levels of government,"
said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The government has
a responsibility to protect all Sri Lankans, no matter whether they are
Tamil, Muslim or Sinhalese."

Human Rights Watch called on the government to ensure a prompt,
independent and impartial commission of inquiry into the violence and the
security forces' response, with powers to recommend prosecution and
compensation.

The attacks destroyed some 100 homes and left more than 3,000 people
homeless. According to the Trincomalee chamber of commerce, 32 businesses
and shops were damaged, destroyed or looted.

Police and armed forces stood by while the burning and killing occurred,
waiting from 45 to 90 minutes before taking action. The alarm bell at the
Hatton National Bank reportedly rang for two hours without response, while
a policeman reportedly told a security guard at the Bank of Ceylon not to
resist intruders.

President Mahinda Rajapakse's response to the violence has been grossly
inadequate. According to media reports, President Rajapakse sent
high-ranking security officials and other senior officials to Trincomalee
in the days following the reprisal attacks. However, Human Rights Watch is
unaware of any strong public statements by the president or direct steps
to increase security in the district. Some persons displaced by the
violence reportedly did not receive emergency government assistance for
four days.

"Given continuing ceasefire violations and rising ethnic tensions,
communal violence could spiral out of control unless there is a swift and
strong government response," said Adams. "Yet in the days since mobs began
targeting Tamils in Trincomalee for arson and murder, President Rajapakse
has taken no decisive action."

Human Rights Watch said that to bring the perpetrators to justice and to
demonstrate to Tamils and others that it is committed to equality under
the law, the government should ensure a prompt, independent and impartial
commission of inquiry into the violence and the response and behavior of
the police and armed forces before, during, and after the incident. The
commission, which should have at least one international member to
reassure the public of its impartiality, should have powers to recommend
prosecution and compensation.

Human Rights Watch also called for the prompt re-establishment of a fully
functional Human Rights Commission to provide the necessary monitoring and
leadership expected from this body since the outbreak of violence in
Trincomalee.

The organization also called on Sri Lankan authorities to improve security
in Trincomalee district, particularly for vulnerable populations, and to
facilitate greater communication and cooperation among the government and
civil society groups, including Tamil, Sinhalese and Muslim organizations.
Human Rights Watch repeated its call to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam (the Tamil Tigers) to end all attacks on civilians.

___

[3] 

The Telegraph
April 24, 2006

STILL A MATTER OF SHAME
The new bill to protect children from sexual abuse does not address
the issue of the sexual rights of a child, writes Tarunabh Khaitan

Together apart

The bill, on the whole, is a welcome measure. Section 377 of the
Indian Penal Code, which has been used until now to prosecute cases
of child sexual abuse, is thoroughly inadequate and makes no
distinction between consensual and non-consensual sex. Nor does it
give children the special treatment that they deserve. It is
primarily a homophobic provision, mainly targeted against gay men,
and its 'utility' in prosecuting such cases is incidental, inadequate
and problematic. It symbolizes the Indian reticence on issues
concerning sex in general and child abuse in particular . While there
is widespread acknowledgement that child sexual abuse is rampant, we
choose to sweep it under the carpet rather than talk about it. Even
the attitude of parents is usually to cover up the issue and blame
the child, rather than confront the offender. Thus, a separate
legislation covering child sexual abuse was long overdue.

Even if we assume that this proposed legislation will be accompanied
by the repeal of section 377 of the IPC, which would have lost its
residual legitimacy to exist on the statute book, the offences
against children bill will create yet another provision which can be
used to harass and penalize teenagers for victimless crimes, only to
serve public morality.

Let us consider a child aged 15 years, who has consensual sex with
another child aged 17 years. Under this legislation, the 17-year-old
would have committed a crime against the 15-year-old. If both of the
children involved are under 16 years of age, technically they are
both guilty of sexual assault, since neither of them is capable of
giving a valid consent in the eyes of the law.

The importance of protecting children from sexual abuse by adults
cannot be over emphasized. However, to criminalize children under a
legislation ostensibly meant to protect them solely on the basis of a
prudish denial of child sexuality is simply moral policing. As Peter
Tatchell puts it, "the question is not whether children should have
sex but whether we should criminalize them for doing so."

The hypocrisy of the law-makers is apparent when one compares this
law with the age at which children can be held responsible for
committing a crime. Under section 82 of the IPC, only a child up to
seven years of age is incapable in the eyes of the law of committing
an offence. Section 83 of the IPC recognizes that a child above seven
years of age but below twelve years is capable of committing a crime
if she/he has "attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge
of the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion."
Children above the age of twelve are treated at par with adults in
their ability to commit an offence. Therefore, a 13-year-old can be
held responsible for committing a murder and even rape, but is
incapable of giving consent for sex with another person of the same
age! This legal fiction is not only illogical but also unrealistic.

What is the alternative? Can't the same doubts be raised for any
arbitrarily determined minimum age of consent? The answer may lie in
a flexible standard, as adopted under Swiss law. It fixes the minimum
age of consent at fourteen years, but clearly provides that no child
under the age of fourteen can be held criminally responsible for such
behaviour. It further provides that if the child is over the age of
fourteen, then she/he is not criminally responsible if the difference
between his/her age and that of the other person involved is not more
than three years. Therefore, a three-pronged approach is adopted
under Swiss law: all adult-child sexual relationships are
criminalized; no child aged below the age of consent can be
criminalized; for those children older than the minimum age of
consent, no criminal liability is imposed if the difference in age
between the young people involved is not more than three years. This
is a flexible standard, which allows a sexual relationship between a
14-year-old and a 17- year-old, but not with anyone older than that.

Germany and Israel also have comparable flexible standards. This
flexible standard is more realistic inasmuch as it acknowledges child
sexuality without criminalizing it or turning a blind eye towards it.
A further safeguard should include an express defence of a "mistake
of age of consent" if the victim is close to the age of consent and
the accused honestly believed that she/he was of the age of consent.
Further, in other borderline cases, where the difference between the
two people was four years instead of three, the law should provide
clear guidelines to the judge to refer the young people involved to
counselling on safe-sex and pregnancy rather than imprisoning or
fining them.

The shame culture that exists in India on every sexual issue has led
to an ethos where everything is fine as long as we don't have to talk
about it. This shame transforms into guilt, plaguing the family
members, community and ultimately the child. Every effort is made to
deny the abuse, and in the process, deny the sexual rights of the
child. The proposed legislation only reaffirms this social attitude
instead of challenging it.

The worst sufferers of this new legislation would be homeless
children who live on the streets and on railway platforms. With the
privacy of a roof denied to them, it is difficult for them to hide
their sexual encounters from the prejudiced eyes of the police who
are ever willing to pick up these children on the slightest pretext.
We are only making the most vulnerable of India's children even more
vulnerable at the hands of the state authorities who have a
well-documented history of abusing homeless children.

This child's right over his or her body includes not only the right
not to be violated by an adult but also the right to sexual
experimentation with peers. Criminalizing sexual contact between
children is the ostrich-like solution where we hide from the problems
we don't want to confront.

A more mature and reasonable response will be to ensure that the
children understand that they are in control over their bodies and
are empowered with the tools to act responsibly. Compulsory sex
education in schools would be a good first step. Not filling up our
badly-managed and already over-burdened juvenile homes with more
children, that too for having consensual sex with other children,
might be an equally good follow up measure.

____


[4] 

Literary Review / The Hindu
April 02, 2006

BIOGRAPHY

Memories of Akhtar

by Partha Chatterjee

The narrative does not follow a chronology and 
relies on a free association of recollections.

Begum Akhtar: The Story Of My Ammi, Shanti 
Hiranand, Viva Books Pvt. Ltd., 2005, p. 168, 
price not stated.


BEGUM AKHTAR (1914 - 1974), who shot to fame in 
her late teens as Akhtari Bai Faizabadi, was the 
last of the tawaifs or singing courtesans who had 
captured the imagination of the public since 
Mirza Haadi Ruswa published Umrao Jaan Adaa, said 
to be the first Urdu novel, in the late 1890s. 
Umrao Jaan, the eponymous heroine, was a rebel in 
a calcified society and Begum Akhtar, a reluctant 
victim in an essentially feudal one, which 
retained its character despite the two World Wars 
and the Partition of India in 1947.

Full of praise

Shanti Hiranand, her senior-most pupil, has 
written her biography, which is full of 
panegyrics. It is a matter of no small surprise 
that she, a staid, Gandhian daughter of a Lucknow 
businessman, was at all allowed to learn vocal 
music from the mercurial, sensual Akhtari who had 
only a few years ago married the barrister 
Ishtiaq Ahmed Abbasi, a widower and a Nawab from 
Kakori, Uttar Pradesh. The marriage no doubt gave 
her the respectability she craved for and access 
to high society as the wife of an aristocrat and 
not a paid entertainer. She had made with aplomb 
the transition from the mujra, patronised 
exclusively by the moneyed male aristocracy and 
the business class, to the democratic concert 
stage. The private soirees she graced 
post-marriage were attended by listeners from 
both the sexes.

She became the most successful Hindustani light 
classical singer of her times, leaving behind 
Badi Moti Bai and Rasoolan Bai who lacked the 
necessary resources to escape from the sapping 
feudal milieu of Benares. Siddheswari (Bai) Devi 
was the one who did but had not the guile to 
flourish in the hypocritical middle class India 
that claimed to be at one with the modern world.

Magnetic personality

Those who had known or even seen and heard Begum 
Akhtar would vouch for her magnetic personality. 
She was not conventionally beautiful and in 
middle age looked ravaged. But her smile and the 
tantalising, changing light in her eyes made her 
desirable to every discerning male. She retained 
this quality of sensuousness till her last 
breath, as she did in her singing.

The author's own temperament veers towards stodgy 
middle class respectability, which prevents her 
from being a really perceptive biographer. 
However, her sincerity is beyond question. The 
narrative does not follow a chronology and relies 
on a free association of memories. Dates do not 
figure with any degree of consistency in it. 
Shantiji has relied on the skills of her pupil 
Neeta Gupta to tell her story. But that does not 
in any way diminish her effort; to be sure, every 
incident, every idea in print is Shantiji's.

There are, however, a few acts of omission in the 
book. Reading it, one would believe that she was 
the only pupil of Begum Akhtar's who stuck with 
her through thick and thin and that the others 
came and went. She is gracious enough to 
acknowledge Anjali Banerjee who became Begum 
Akhtar's pupil in 1954 and was the only other 
Gandabandh Shagird. There is no mention of Rita 
Ganguly (Kothari) who had learned for three years 
and featured on camera with Begum Akhtar as did 
Anjali Banerjee when Sudesh Issar made a 
documentary on the great vocalist for the Films 
Division of India. Also forgotten is Deepti Bose, 
the most gifted of all the pupils, of whom Begum 
Akhtar said, "yeh tum sab se aage nikal jayegi" 
(she will surpass all of you). What a pity she 
had to give up singing due to purely material 
reasons!

Errors of perception

Shantiji's craving for respectability often leads 
her into error. She thinks that certain incidents 
which occurred in her teacher's life are 
detrimental to her posthumous reputation. Taking 
a long view of events and people, it is quite 
unimportant really to know whether Shammo was 
Begum Akhtar's niece or daughter by a 
Maharashtrian Raja. Similarly, does it really 
matter if her protégé Madan Mohan, brilliant 
music director of Hindi films in the 1950s and 
60s was her lover? Influence his music she did. 
Listen to his ghazal compositions, particularly 
those sung by Lata Mangeshkar or Talat Mahmood, 
and you will hear Begum Akhtar's echo. Just as 
her renderings have clearly discernable traces of 
K.L. Saigal, peerless creator of the modern 
raga-based ghazal.

There is regrettably too little about Begum 
Akhtar's music in the text though there is 
mention of her singing style and what constituted 
it. Highly talented younger contemporaries like 
Shoba Gurtu and Nirmala Aroon could have been 
mentioned to give some idea of the light 
classical music scene in India in the 1950s, 60s 
and 70s, when connoisseurs were still in 
existence and corporate sponsorship and its 
attendant vice, philistinism, not swamped the 
Hindustani music scene.

____


[5]  


******   CALL FOR ENTRIES ******

The 6th KaraFilm Festival - the Karachi 
International Film Festival 2006 - is now 
accepting submissions of feature films, 
documentaries and short films. The deadline for 
submissions is August 15, 2006. Selection 
decisions will be made by the end of September. 
Submissions of screener VHS tapes or DVDs must be 
accompanied by a fully filled out and signed 
Entry Form (downloadable from our website), at 
least 2 stills from the film and a director's 
headshot. Incomplete submissions may be rejected.

Please ensure that all submissions packages are 
clearly marked with "For Festival Purposes Only, 
No Commercial Value."

Films may have been originally created in the 
following formats: 35mm, 16mm, DigiBeta, DV, Beta 
SP. Final screening formats include 35mm and 16mm 
(feature films only), DV or Beta SP. If your film 
is selected, the master must reach us by November 
1.

For more information on how to submit and 
requirements, please visit the KaraFilm website 
www.karafilmfest.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/

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.