SACW | June 1-3, 2007

Harsh Kapoor aiindex at mnet.fr
Sun Jun 3 06:48:38 CDT 2007


South Asia Citizens Wire | June 1-3, 2007 | Dispatch No. 2414 - Year 9

[1] Sri Lanka: Halt Reckless Attacks that Victimise Civilians and 
Negotiate Responsibly (National Peace Council)
[2] Bangladesh/Canada: Reject the Appeal for Asylum of Sheikh Mujib's 
killer (Mozammel H. Khan)
[3] Amid growing political dissent, Pakistan aims to curtail live TV 
coverage  (CPJ)
[4] Southasian mea culpa - Self-criticism came more readily to our 
forebears. (Jawed Naqvi)
[5] Video: Pakistan - Judicial Crisis and the Future of Democratic Reform
[6] Full text of the Affidavit of the 'non-functioning' Chief Justice 
of Pakistan
[7] India: Counterfeit Encounters and the 'Nation' (Harsh Mander)
[8] India: Art Imitates Life (Vinay Bharat-Ram)
[9] Audio: India - M.F. Husain in the Center of India Art Controversy 
(Philip Reeves)
[10]  Press Statement by All India Secular Forum
[11] Announcements:
(i) Launch of Muktnaad: Youth Aman Karwan (Ahmedabad, 5 June 2007)
(ii) The Peaceworks human rights defenders programme (Calcutta, 18-26 
June 2007)


____


[1]

National Peace Council
of Sri Lanka
12/14 Purana Vihara Road
Colombo 6
Tel:  2818344, 2854127, 2819064
Tel/Fax:2819064
E Mail:  npc at sltnet.lk
Internet:  www.peace-srilanka.org

30.05.07

Media Release

HALT RECKLESS ATTACKS THAT VICTIMISE CIVILIANS AND NEGOTIATE RESPONSIBLY

A continuous worsening of the human security of the people 
accompanies the escalation of military operations between the 
government and LTTE. Some of the more serious incidents in recent 
weeks have included the closure of the entry points into the LTTE 
controlled Wanni area, bomb blasts that have killed civilians in 
Colombo, and the continuous assassinations, abductions and child 
recruitments.

The National Peace Council condemns the recent attack by the LTTE on 
a security force bus ina crowded suburb of Colombo on the main road 
during rush hour. The remote-controlled claymore mine killed eight 
persons, seven of them civilians, and has severely injured more than 
thirty others, most of them civilians. This attack is in a long line 
of similar attacks by both the government and LTTE that have 
victimised civilians in the north and east, and also in Colombo.

In particular, the reckless use of bombs, whether by land or air, 
that ostensibly have a military objective but which terrorise the 
civilian population is an unacceptable means of combat. Such actions 
are not in keeping with the goals of democracy, liberation and equal 
rights that the protagonists to Sri Lanka's ethnic conflict claim to 
uphold.

In the Wanni, the firing at the checkpoint of the International 
Committee of the Red Cross last week has led to the closure of the 
entry point into the LTTE-controlled territory at Omanthai. There is 
the likelihood of a humanitarian crisis developing in those areas, as 
food and other essential supplies will not be able to get through to 
the people.

LTTE fighters and government security forces are destroying the 
country's infrastructure with their bombs and artillery, and billions 
are spent on more and more hi tech weaponry. While the country's 
economy gets drained, those who benefit are the foreign arms 
manufacturing companies and their commission agents.

Ironically, the government and LTTE both claim with words that they 
are prepared to negotiate with one another. The National Peace 
Council demands that they show with deeds what they claim with their 
words. Being consistent in word and deed, thereby generating trust, 
being prepared to share power and privileges with others, and valuing 
life as the supreme value above all others, is the road to peace that 
needs to be taken.


Executive Director
On behalf of the Governing Council

______

[2]

    REJECT THE APPEAL FOR ASYLUM OF MOHIUDDIN IN CANADA

May 30, 2007
   
   Ms. Dinae Finley
   Honourable Minister of Immigration
   
   Subject: Reject the Appeal for Asylum of convicted self-confessed killer 
   
   Dear Minister,
   
   We have come to know from a report of the Toronto Star (May 30, 
2007) that the government of Canada is considering giving Asylum to a 
(once self-confessed) person by the name of Major (Retd.) Mohiuddin, 
a citizen of Bangladesh. In 1975 Mr. Mohiuddin, in cold blood, 
participated in the brutal killings of Bangabandhu (means 'friend of 
his people') Sheikh Mujubur Rahman, the then President and founding 
father of the Republic of Bangladesh including most of his family 
members, the children and the unborn. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was not 
only a great statesman, a few years ago he was adjudged the greatest 
Bengali (in both Bangladesh and India) ever born by a survey by BBC 
radio. 
   
   Trial of this heinous crime started in 1997 and it took two years 
in open court with full legal help on the part of the convicts and 
Mr. Mohiuddin was awarded death sentence, along with a dozen of his 
co-accomplices, in absentia since Mohiuddin was absconding. The case 
automatically went to the High court for review and the lower court 
verdict was upheld. The appellate division of the Supreme Court has 
yet to hear the appeal and the sentence could be carried out only if 
the Supreme Court upholds the verdict. If Mohiuddin is sent to 
Bangladesh, he will still have the opportunity to appeal and as such 
he is not going to gallows automatically.  All along, the higher 
judiciary in Bangladesh has absolutely been independent and the 
government of the day is no friend of Sheikh Hasina, the former PM 
and one of the two surviving daughters (who has been on Germany on 
the fateful night) of Mohiuddin's victims.  
   
   Canada is country where rule of law reins over the rule of tyranny; 
it is believed to be a safe haven for those struggling for upholding 
human rights and the right to life. It must not be transformed into a 
den for any convicted killer who has taken away the right of his 
fellow human souls' right to lives, in cold blood. 
   
   As a proud Canadian citizen and the convener of a Human Right group 
whose members are relentlessly working to uphold human rights around 
the Globe and Bangladesh in particular, I fervently appeal to the 
Minister to reject the appeal of Asylum of Mr. Mohiuddin outright, 
reemphasizing once again in clear term that the Canadian Society has 
no room for convicted killers and the cold blooded murderers.
   
   Sincerely,
   
   Prof. Mozammel H. Khan, Ph. D., P. Eng.
   Convener
Canadian Committee for Human Rights and Democracy in Bangladesh

______


[3]

The Committee to Protect Journalists
www.cpj.org

AMID GROWING POLITICAL DISSENT, PAKISTAN AIMS TO CURTAIL LIVE TV COVERAGE

     New York, June 1, 2007-The Committee to Protect Journalists is 
concerned about reports that the Pakistani government will seek to 
restrict live television broadcasts of anti-government demonstrations.

     The reports, from several local news outlets and sources, come as 
news outlets face increasing official pressure for covering the 
street demonstrations sparked by President Pervez Musharraf's ouster 
of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry. The judge is seeking 
reinstatement after being removed March 9 on allegations of 
misconduct. After a live national television broadcast of a Bar 
Association seminar on the issue, during which the audience chanted 
anti-army slogans, Musharraf and Information Minister Mohammad Ali 
Durrani both made critical remarks about the event and called for 
Pakistanis to respect the military.

     On Thursday, Information Minister Mohammad Ali Durrani told a 
press conference that existing regulations covering live broadcasts 
will be strictly enforced. The Nation on Friday quoted Durrani as 
saying that private TV channels must seek prior permission to cover 
sensitive live events and that Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory 
Authority rules prohibit the broadcast of programs "against the armed 
forces and judiciary."

     The Dawn daily, citing unnamed Information Ministry officials, 
reported Friday that the government "was planning to make it 
mandatory for televisions channels to seek prior permission for live 
coverage of outdoor events." The newspaper said that "if applied 
strictly, the government may restrict all live coverage, particularly 
of events like opposition rallies or events relating to the judicial 
crisis."

     "Restricting live outside broadcasts is blatant censorship that 
undermines the government's repeated claims of fostering a free 
press," said Joel Simon, CPJ's executive director. "Such censorship, 
coupled with the threats and violence directed toward journalists in 
recent months has put Pakistani media under tremendous pressure at a 
time when the country most needs a free and unfettered press."

     In a statement issued Friday, the Pakistan Federal Union of 
Journalists (PFUJ) "deplored the government decision to impose a ban 
on live coverage by private TV channels in violation of Article 19 of 
the constitution." The PFUJ said it will challenge the rulings in 
court.

     In an April 24 letter, CPJ called on Musharraf to "to reverse the 
government's recent anti-press actions and allow for greater public 
criticism of your administration in the media." In May, CPJ named 
Pakistan one of the world's worst backsliders on press freedom after 
documenting a series of anti-media incidents in 2007.

______

[4]

Himal South Asian
June 2008

SOUTHASIAN MEA CULPA
Self-criticism came more readily to our forebears.

by Jawed Naqvi

Introspection and self-absorbed bigotry have traditionally walked 
hand-in-hand in Southasia. Megalomaniac rulers, the leech-like 
priestly classes and their bete noire, the serenely divine dervishes 
representing the hoi polloi, have coexisted for centuries. Jawaharlal 
Nehru himself quoted Alberuni, the 10th-century Afghan chronicler, to 
support this lacerating critique of the Subcontinent.  For India's 
sciences, languages and its architectural splendour, Alberuni had 
unalloyed praise. About its people, though, he said: "They are 
haughty, foolishly vain, self-contained and stolid. They believe 
there is no country like theirs, no nation like theirs, no science 
like theirs, no religion like theirs." How did Nehru respond to such 
criticism, centuries later? In the Discovery of India, he describes 
Alberuni's views as "probably a correct enough description of the 
temper of the people".

Alberuni was relentless in his scrutiny of India's cultural 
demeanour, which he thought was not too dissimilar at times to any 
frog in the well. "According to their belief", Alberuni wrote, there 
is no race on earth like theirs, and no created being besides them 
have any knowledge or science like theirs whatsoever. Their 
haughtiness is such that if you tell them of any science or scholar 
in Khorasan or Persia, they will think you to be either an ignoramus 
or a liar. If, however, they had travelled and mixed with other 
nations, they would soon change their mind, for their ancestors were 
not as narrow-minded as the present generation is. It took a 
large-hearted intellectual of Nehru's stature to understand and 
accept this devastating commentary on historical India and its ruling 
elites.

  A 'foreigner' such as Alberuni should not, of course, be readily 
accepted as a stand-alone source of such a harsh evaluation of a 
people. Let us therefore turn to the home-grown Bhakti movement, in 
medieval India. Straddling the entire diversity of the Subcontinent, 
where it spread to the remotest of corners, the movement threw up an 
amazingly critical worldview. And among its foremost objectives was a 
square challenge of what the dervish-like Bhakti preachers considered 
to be an incorrigible moral decay.

  If we were to call a Hindu a 'rogue' in India today, we would risk 
starting a communal flare-up. Similarly, neither would it be 
politically wise to call a Muslim a 'pervert'. But 500 years ago, the 
saint-poet Kabir was delivering these rebukes to both communities in 
equal measure, through popular poetry. "The Hindu doesn't let you 
touch his pots and pans over claims of possible contamination, but 
you would often find him prostate at the prostitute's feet," he 
declared. "Muslims marry their cousins, eat dead animals and scream 
atop their fragile mosques as though God were deaf."

Far from being harassed or hounded by his powerful pre-Mughal 
quarries, Kabir set off a bizarre competition between Hindus and 
Muslims - both of whom he berated roundly - as each clamoured to 
claim his legacy. The seer would be lucky today not to be lynched by 
those he dared to address so acidly five centuries ago. Kabir lived 
not far from the sacred ghats of the Ganga in Benaras, where 
religious zealots recently hounded out the film crew of a movie about 
Hindu widows. That movie, Water, had later to be shot in Sri Lanka, 
and was subsequently widely lauded.

India allergy
Religious and nationalist fervour share a common characteristic: 
their followers believe that theirs is the best. There is great irony 
in this regard contained in a moving poem by Allama Iqbal, one which 
India later chose to accord the status of a national song. In the 
1930s, Iqbal wrote: "Saare jahaan se achha Hindustan hamara" (Our 
Hindustan is better than any other nation in the world). Now, if you 
were to take a fleeting poetic thought such as this to heart, hitch 
it to a newfound nuclear prowess, and you happen to be surrounded by 
countries who fear your overbearing narcissism, you would spell 
trouble for both yourself and those neighbours you seek to befriend.

This is more or less how SAARC - the brainchild of Gen Ziaur Rahman - 
was born in 1985. "To tell you frankly, we were all a little allergic 
to India, so we decided to engage it collectively," explained General 
Hossain Mohammed Ershad, who hosted the first summit in Dhaka. 
(Ershad made these remarks in a televised discussion with this writer 
in 1997.) India's army had helped to liberate Bangladesh from a 
sectarian, Punjabi-dominated West Pakistan. And yet, Dhaka chose to 
turn against its former 'benefactors' in New Delhi. Was there 
something wrong with India's body language towards Bangladesh 
following the brief honeymoon period in 1971-72, that such tension 
should arise between India and Bangladesh that today you can cut with 
a knife? It seems so, but the problem has never been publicly or 
truthfully discussed. Is Bangladesh an ungrateful neighbour? Perhaps 
both sides could use a little self-criticism?

But let us not pick on any one country. Instead, let us discuss all 
the SAARC member states, and their chemistry with each other. There 
are admittedly ethnic tensions between Bhutan and Nepal related to 
the refugee matter. There may also be some small issues pertaining to 
a trade corridor between Nepal and Bangladesh. But that is about it. 
There is no foul chemistry between these countries, much less any 
suspicion of an imminent military assault. So why is it that India 
has been viewed with such disfavour by its neighbours?

Take India's helping hand to Sri Lanka. In the 1970s, it had 
militarily bailed out Sirimavo Bandaranaike's Sinhalese-dominated 
government in the face of a Marxist revolt. It also gave moral and 
political support - including alleged military training - to Sri 
Lanka's Tamil minorities. And yet, Rajiv Gandhi was butted by a 
miffed Sinhalese soldier at an official guard of honour in Colombo, 
before being killed by a Sri Lankan Tamil woman near Madras some 
years later. It was all extremely tragic, but how do we explain this 
bristling rage from the very people one had tried to help?

Or, take India's ties with landlocked Nepal. The one lasting memory 
among the people there - despite India being the artery, a veritable 
lifeline to Kathmandu - is the image of the crippling economic 
blockade that New Delhi imposed on its northern neighbour in 1989. 
Some Nepali analysts acknowledge the culpability of the royal palace 
in forcing India's hand, but the lasting rancour in Kathmandu is 
palpably anti-Indian. Why? Was there introspection, much less any 
self-criticism, by either India or Nepal over this easily avoidable 
standoff? If there was, we have not heard of it.

A country such as Bhutan, supposed to be umbilically linked with 
India's political and diplomatic postures, finds itself occasionally 
strained by the bear hug. The tiny Maldives, whose government the 
Indian Navy saved from a certain coup in 1988, does not exactly seem 
to reciprocate the enthusiasm with which India seeks its welfare. 
About India-Pakistan ties, the less said the better. Each side bears 
such enormous and deep-rooted grudges against the other that we 
should count ourselves truly lucky that the nuclear-armed neighbours 
are currently at least talking.

  Far from making an objective and critical self-evaluation of their 
poor bilateral relations, the rhetoric from India and Pakistan has 
been marked by double standards. For example, Pakistan has often 
slammed Indian-sponsored elections in Jammu & Kashmir as 'fake', but 
has not considered making room for a credible civilian democracy in 
its own wider patch. Another example is worth recalling. India held 
up the last Kathmandu SAARC Summit because it disapproved of a 
military coup against Nawaz Sharif by General Pervez Musharraf. But 
India seemed to have forgotten that the first host of the SAARC 
summit, Gen Ershad, was himself a military dictator with blood on his 
hands. And who was the Pakistani leader at that summit shaking hands 
with Rajiv Gandhi? General Zia ul-Haq, of course, the guru of all 
coup leaders!

Meaningless jingoisms
It was Imtiaz Alam, the Pakistani founder and secretary-general of 
the South Asia Free Media Association (SAFMA, a promising platform 
for Southasian media until it began carting dubious politicians 
around for powwows at fancy holiday resorts), who once hit the nail 
directly on the head. A few days after India and Pakistan exploded 
their bombs in May 1998, Alam visited Delhi for a discussion with the 
Indian media on the road ahead. His observations at the end of the 
conference were withering: "We are here ready to concede that 
Pakistan has done horrible things in Jammu & Kashmir. We have 
fomented terrorism there. But we want the Indians also to say 'mea 
culpa'. But all we hear from them is, 'Yes, you are right, Pakistan 
has done a lot of harm to us!'"

Clearly, the media in Southasia has, for the most part, followed 
rather than challenged the accusatory stance of its jingoistic 
political leaderships. We refer derisively to American and British 
journalists in Iraq as the 'embedded media', but do we ever look at 
our own culpability in this regard? Continually and truthfully doing 
so could, little by little, work to bring about a revolutionary 
change - perhaps with regards to what Alberuni and Kabir found 
missing in our spirits.

______


[5]

Pakistan: Judicial Crisis and the Future of Democratic Reform
Date:	May 29, 2007
Time:	12:00 noon - 1:15 p.m.

Speaker(s):
Najam Sethi
Editor, Pakistan Weekly, "The Friday Times"

Shuja Nawaz
Pakistani journalist, completing the book, Crossed Swords: Pakistan 
and Its Army, for Oxford University Press

Hassan Abbas
Research Fellow, Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs,
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, and
Author of Pakistan's Drift into Extremism: Allah, the Army and 
America's War on Terror

Host(s):
Lisa Curtis
Senior Research Fellow, Asian Studies Center, The Heritage Foundation
Details:
Location: The Heritage Foundation's Lehrman Auditorium

VIEW EVENT: http://multimedia.heritage.org/content/wm/Lehrman-052907a.wvx


______


[6] [ the original and unedited text of the Affidavit of the 
'non-functioning' Chief Justice of Pakistan] 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

(Original Jurisdiction)

In Re:

Constitutional Original Petition No: ___21___ /2007

Chief Justice of Pakistan,
Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, 
Chief Justice House,
Islamabad

------------------------------------------------------------------ Petitioner
VERSUS
The President of Pakistan,
The Referring Authority,
Presidency,
Islamabad.

AND OTHERS
------------------------------------------------------------- Respondents


AFFIDAVIT OF THE PETITIONER,

MR. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry,

Chief Justice of Pakistan,


I, Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, The Chief Justice of 
Pakistan (hereinafter referred to as the "deponent") do hereby 
solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:

That the deponent has filed the titled petition in this Hon'ble Court 
under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of 
Pakistan 1973, inter alia, assailing the Reference No.43/2007 dated 
March 09, 2007; Notification No. F.1 (2)/2005.A.II dated 09-03-2007, 
whereby the deponent was illegally and unlawfully restrained to 
perform his constitutional functions as a judge of this Hon'ble Court 
and as Chief Justice of Pakistan; Order dated March 09, 2007 passed 
by the Supreme Judicial Council; Notification No.F.1(2)2005.A.II 
dated 15-03-2007 whereby the deponent was sent on compulsory leave 
with retrospective effect and the constitution and competence of the 
Supreme Judicial Council  as well as the mode and manner of the 
proceedings before the Council.

2.  This affidavit is being filed in support of the contentions, 
assertions and pleas raised in the above titled petition. The 
deponent verifies that the contents of the titled affidavit are true 
and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief and 
nothing has been concealed. In addition to the facts narrated in the 
titled petition; the deponent states that:

A. On March 09, 2007, the deponent headed Bench No.1 of this Hon'ble 
Court as Chief Justice of Pakistan and heard several cases till about 
10.30am. The Bench rose briefly and had to reassemble for the day 
except the deponent who left for the Army House, Rawalpindi to meet 
the President of Pakistan (hereinafter referred to as "Respondent")

B. The deponent arrived at Army House, Rawalpindi at about 11-30am 
along with his staff/protocol staff. The deponent was shown to a 
waiting room/visitors room. After five minutes of his arrival, the 
Respondent, wearing his Military Uniform came into the room along 
with his MS and ADC. As soon as the Respondent took his seat, a 
number of TV cameramen and photographers were also ushered into the 
room. They took several pictures and made movie footage.

C. While discussing the SAARC Law Conference, SAARC Chief Justices 
Conference and the concluding session of the Golden Jubilee ceremony 
of the Supreme Court, the Respondent said that a compliant against 
the deponent had been received by him (Respondent) from a Judge of 
the Peshawar High Court. The deponent replied that it was not based 
on true facts as his case had been decided by a two member bench and 
that attempts were being made to maliciously involve the other member 
of the Bench as well. On this the Respondent said that there are a 
few more complaints against the deponent as well. After saying so, he 
directed his staff to call the other persons.

D. On the direction of the Respondent, the 'other persons' entered 
the room. They included the Prime Minster, DG MI, DG ISI, DG IB, COS 
and another official. All officials (except DG, IB and COS) were in 
uniform.

E. The Respondent started reading from small pieces of paper with 
notes on them which he had in his hand. There was no single 
consolidated document. The allegations which were being put to the 
deponent had been taken from the contents of a notorious letter 
written by Mr. Naeem Bukhari with absolutely no substance in them. 
The deponent strongly refuted these allegations as being baseless and 
engineered to defame him personally and the judiciary as a whole. The 
deponent promptly denied the veracity and credibility of these 
allegations as well.

F. On this the Respondent said that the deponent had obtained cars 
from the Supreme Court for his family. The allegation was vehemently 
denied by the deponent. The Respondent went on to say that the 
deponent was being driven in a Mercedes, to which the deponent 
promptly replied 'here is the Prime Minister, ask him, he has sent 
the Car himself'. The PM did not reply to this answer even by 
gesture. Surprisingly the Respondent went on to say that the deponent 
had interfered in the affairs of Lahore High Court and had not 
accepted and taken heed of most of the recommendations of the Chief 
Justice of Lahore High Court.

G.  The Respondent insisted that the deponent should resign. The 
Respondent also said that in case of deponent's resignation, he (the 
Respondent) would 'accommodate' him (the deponent).  He also said in 
case of refusal to resign, the deponent will have to face the 
reference which could be a bigger embarrassment for the deponent. The 
deponent finally and more resolutely said 'I wouldn't resign and 
would face any reference since I am innocent; I have not violated any 
code of conduct or any law, rule or regulation; I believe that I am 
myself the guardian of law. I strongly believe in God who will help 
me'. This ignited the fury of the Respondent; he stood up angrily and 
left the room along with his MS, COS and the Prime Minister of 
Pakistan, saying that others would show evidence to the deponent. 
(This has now been admitted by the Respondent in his interview given 
to AAJ TV). The meeting continued for not more than 30 minutes.

H.  The DG MI, DG ISI and DG IB remained behind and continued to sit 
with the deponent. They did not show the deponent a single piece of 
evidence. In fact, no official except DG ISI had some documents with 
him but he also did not show any thing to the deponent. They, 
however, said that the deponent had secured a seat for his son in 
Bolan Medical College when the deponent was serving as a Judge of 
Balochistan High Court. They (except DG, IB) insisted that deponent 
resign while the deponent continued to assert strongly that the 
allegations were baseless and for a collateral purpose.

I. During the subsequent hours, the deponent was forced to stay in 
that room. Sometimes, all the persons would leave the deponent alone 
in that room but would not allow the deponent to leave it. It was 
obvious that the deponent was being watched by a close circuit camera 
because whenever he tried to open the door to go out, he was 
confronted by an officer who prevented the exit of the deponent; 
several times the deponent expressed the desire to leave but was told 
by military officials to stay/wait. Once the deponent was even told 
that respondent would be seeing him again. At one point, the deponent 
requested that at least his staff/protocol officer be called inside 
the room as the deponent wanted to talk to him but was told that he 
could not come inside. The deponent then requested that his 
staff/protocol officer be told to pass on the message to the 
deponent's family that he was at Army House, Rawalpindi and that his 
programme to go to Lahore had been cancelled.

J. Despite several attempts to leave the room and the Army House, the 
deponent was made to stay there on one pretext or the other. His 
request to bring his car to the porch for departure was also denied. 
After the first meeting with the Respondent which lasted for not more 
than 30 minutes, the deponent was kept there 'absolutely against his 
will' till past 5pm.

K. After 5pm, DG MI came in again and told the deponent that his car 
was outside to drive him 'home'. DG, MI came out of the room and once 
outside told the deponent, 'this is a bad day, now you are taking a 
separate way and you are informed that you have been "restrained to 
work as a judge of the Supreme Court or Chief Justice of Pakistan''.

L. When the deponent saw the car of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, he 
discovered that his car had been stripped of both the flag of 
Pakistan and the emblem flag. The staff officer of the deponent 
informed him that Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal had taken oath as Acting 
Chief Justice and it had been shown on TV. The driver also informed 
the deponent that he had been instructed not to take the deponent to 
the Supreme Court while on way to the residence of the deponent.

M.  While on the way, the deponent directed the driver to go to 
Supreme Court but an Army official prevented the deponent's car near 
the Sports Complex from proceeding further. In the meanwhile, Mr. 
Tariq Masood Yasin, SP, also appeared; He ordered the driver to come 
out of car so that he could drive the deponent and also asked the 
deponent's gunman to come out of the car as well. The deponent said 
'okay, I will not go to the Supreme Court but my driver will drive my 
car and my gunman will escort me home'. Only then, did Mr. Tariq 
Masood Yasin, SP agree to let the car be driven by deponent's driver.

N. The deponent got home at about 5.45pm and was shocked to see 
police officials and agencies personnel without uniform all over his 
residence. The deponent also discovered that landline phones had 
already been disconnected; Cell Phones, TV, Cables and DSL had been 
jammed or disconnected. The deponent and his family were completely 
cut off for several days from the outside world.

O. By 9pm, March 09, 2007, the vehicles which were in official use of 
the deponent including a Mercedes had been taken away by means of a 
lifter. Latter on, the same night, one vehicle was brought back but 
the key was not handed over to the deponent or someone on his behalf.

P. On March 10, 2007, the deponent received a 'Notice' from Supreme 
Judicial Council ("Council") whereby the deponent came to know that a 
Reference (No.43/2007) had been filed by the Respondent before the 
Council. There was also a copy of the Order passed by the Council 
whereby deponent had been restrained to function as a Judge of the 
Supreme Court and or Chief Justice of Pakistan. The copy of the 
aforesaid Reference had also been appended with the Notice with 
without any annexure or supporting documents for perusal of the 
deponent.

Q. It was also surprising for the deponent to note that the aforesaid 
reference came up for hearing on March 9, 2007 after 6pm in indecent 
haste. Two members of the Council as was evident from news published 
in daily Nawa-i-Waqt dated March 10, 2007, had been flown to 
Islamabad in special flights, from Lahore and Karachi simply to 
participate in a meeting of the Council. In fact, no meeting had been 
called by the Secretary of the Council namely Mr. Faqir Hussain. No 
one had issued either agenda for the meeting or notice thereof.

R. The Council, rather than merely scrutinizing the material, if at 
all and serving notice on the deponent (without prejudice to the 
rights and interest of the deponent as averred in the titled 
petition), went ahead and passed an order very detrimental to the 
interests of the deponent as well as the interests of the 
institution. The deponent was restrained to perform his functions as 
a Judge of the Supreme Court Judge and or Chief Justice of Pakistan.

S. The deponent further states that he had been detained along with 
his family members including his infant child of seven years from the 
evening of March 9, 2007 till March 13, 2007. The personal and 
private life of the deponent and his family suffered a great shock 
and the concept of privacy appeared as if it was an impotent word. 
The deponent could not use any vehicle since there was none. The 
deponent had to walk till the other end of the road when the police 
officer confronted him and manhandled him as has now been established 
by a judicial enquiry.

T. The Supreme Court staff attached to the deponent was reportedly 
missing and had been kept at an unknown place. An attempt was being 
made to fabricate the evidence through them by coercive means against 
the deponent. Even other employees working at the residence of the 
Deponent were taken and made to appear before some agency officials. 
They were released after 2/3 days. The grocery man was not allowed to 
go to collect grocery; he was made to wait till an agency official 
accompanied him to the market and back.

U. The chamber of the deponent was sealed and certain files laying 
therein were removed and some of them had been handed over to the ISI 
under the supervision of the newly appointed Registrar. Such an act 
was contrary to all norms and practices of judiciary. The deponent 
being the CJP was entitled to occupy his chamber along with his staff.

V. On account of deployment of heavy contingents, no one was allowed 
to meet the deponent freely, in as much as his colleagues were not 
allowed access to meet him. Even a retired judge of this Hon'ble 
Court Mr Justice (R) Munir A Sheikh was not allowed to meet the 
deponent.

W. The deponent was not all alone to suffer this agony. Even his 
children were not allowed to go to school, college and university. 
The deponent and his family members were deprived of basic amenities 
of life, i.e. medicines and Doctors, etc.

X. Even when ordered by the Council, the deponent was deprived of the 
assistance of his counsels to seek legal assistance regarding legal 
and factual issues involved in the reference. The deponent and his 
family have been made to go through a lot of mental, physical and 
emotional agony, torture and embarrassment and words could never be 
enough to properly and adequately express that.

Y. All these tactics were used to put pressure on the deponent so 
that he may tender his resignation from the office of the Chief 
Justice of Pakistan. But after March 13, 2007 when the deponent 
succeeded in establishing at least some contact with his lawyers team 
during a brief appearance before the Council and after March 16, 
2007, the on going pressure to 'resign the office' was released to 
some extent.

Z. The deponent now believes that his entire house has been bugged 
and at the Sindh House which is located right opposite the residence 
of the deponent, the officials of the agencies other than police have 
established a place therein to keep an eye on those who come and 
visit me, etc.

AA. On account of the facts stated hereinabove, the children of the 
deponents are so scared that they could not go to school or 
university. As a result thereof, one of my daughters failed to appear 
in her exams (1st year, Federal Board) whereas my other daughter who 
is a student of Bahria university is not being allowed to take her 
examination (1st semester) due to lack of attendance in internal 
studies. My younger son is also not in a position to attend his 
school because of circumstances through which I am passing.

Deponent

Verification:

Verified on oath this ___29____day of __May__2007 at Islamabad that 
the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to the best 
of my knowledge, belief and information and nothing has been 
concealed therein from this Hon'ble Court.

Deponent

______


[7]

Hindustan Times 13 June, 2007

COUNTERFEIT ENCOUNTERS AND THE 'NATION'

by Harsh Mander

The current wave of outrage in the country over the horrific murders 
by the men in khaki in Gujarat is likely to be transient, a passing 
squall. The dust that it raises will rapidly settle, and we will 
forget, in the same way as we have expelled from memory so many 
similar inequities of the recent past: the women who stripped 
themselves naked in anguish in Manipur to protest the violations of 
security forces, the staged killings of innocents as militants in 
Kashmir, the mass cremations of thousands of young men who were 
abducted by the police and later dubbed Khalistani extremists in 
Punjab in the troubled eighties, counterfeit encounter killings of 
alleged Naxalite sympathisers in backwaters of rural ferment and 
oppression for decades in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar and Chatisgarh, and 
bogus encounters of alleged terrorists in the country's capital, to 
name just a few. Even less do we even register the routine killings 
of the poorest tribals or dalits after torture and extortion in rural 
police outposts, or numerous judicial commissions of enquiry that 
testify to the open participation of men in uniform in the slaughter 
of minorities in communal riots.

The Central Bureau of Investigation, in 1996, submitted a report to 
the Supreme Court that established that in just three crematoria of 
Amritsar, as many as 2097 illegal cremations were carried out by 
security forces between 1984 and 1995.  An independent human rights 
investigation established that illegal disposal of bodies by security 
forces were not confined to three crematoria of Amritsar. 
Disappearances occurred in all districts of Punjab. In nearly 60 per 
cent of the cases, the persons who 'disappeared' was subsequently 
reported to have died in police 'encounters'. The victims included 
doctors, lawyers, journalists, students, businessmen, even government 
civil and police employees. In over 25 per cent if the cases, the 
police not only took away the victim; it also destroyed, damaged or 
confiscated family property. In an equal number, police abducted and 
killed more than one member of the same family. The police routinely 
refused to inform the victims' families, and extorted money from them.

The Supreme Court referred the matter to the National Human Rights 
Commission, and did nothing when the Commission took a minimalist 
interpretation of its ambit. After around ten years of tortuous 
proceedings, pursued resolutely by brave and devastated families of 
the victims and supported by dedicated human rights defenders like 
Indira Jaising, Ram Narayan Kumar and Ashok Agrawaal, the Commission 
refused in the end to hold any officer or agency accountable for the 
violations, and declined to investigate disappearances, 
extra-judicial executions, custodial deaths and illegal cremations 
throughout Punjab.

In Andhra Pradesh, again for a decade, a committee of concerned 
citizens convened by SR Sankaran, have tirelessly pressed for the 
deployment of moral, democratic and legal instruments to try to stem 
the unending brutal spiral of violence that has seized many 
impoverished districts of Telengana. They observe that the State 
continues to portray the Naxalite movement as a law and order 
problem, and refuses to recognise it as an expression of people's 
aspirations to a life of dignity and equality. The State response 
remains violent, including physically liquidating hundreds, mainly 
youth, in encounters. The committee finds that these 'encounter 
killings are not isolated aberrations or unintended transgressions of 
law by individual police personnel' but is in fact a deliberate 
system response of the State to crush a complex societal problem 
through indiscriminate killings. It concludes that 'encounters 
introduce terror as a component of governance and erode its very 
democratic essence'.

But there are few to heed these voices of humanity. In Gujarat, in 
response to a question from a member of the assembly, as many as 21 
encounter killings by the state police were reported between 2003 and 
2006. But the list submitted by the Gujarat government did not 
include the names of Sohrabuddin and Kauserbi, which is a grave 
breach of privilege. A deliberate murky cloud of official secrecy 
continues to cloud the numbers and circumstances of encounter deaths 
by the Gujarat State police.

However, even this limited official report again raises disturbing 
questions. Six of those killed were already in police custody, and it 
is incredible that they could possess firearms in custody to warrant 
killing by the police in self defence. In one case, the police claim 
that two policemen fired six rounds to kill a man with a dummy 
revolver. In no case was there a post mortem, or the statutory 
magisterial enquiry. There are no materials to even subsequently 
justify the inference that they were terrorists or grave offenders. 
All these facts were brought to the notice of the Supreme Court in a 
petition earlier this year by BG Verghese and lawyer Nitya 
Ramakrishnan, but the court did not find enough basis to order an 
enquiry into the encounter killings.

Each nation must strike a fine ethical and political balance between 
protecting its security and the rights of its people. In India, the 
choice of the executive, and even the judiciary, have tilted mostly 
in favour of permitting the uniformed forces to break the law of the 
land with impunity, even to kill, especially in times of perceived 
threats to national integrity - cheered along by most segments of the 
middle classes. Policemen themselves often claim that are motivated 
by a higher love for the nation. Many are, but not those who kill 
unarmed people in defiance of the law of the land. KPS Gill, who led 
the security forces in Punjab in the decisive 'bullet for bullet' 
bloody combat against militancy of the late 1980s, describes his 
forces as men who 'fight and die for India' and 'who risked their 
lives in defence of the State'. The disgraced Gujarat police officer 
Vanjara also fashions his encounter killings as 'deshbhakti' 
(patriotism), and claims that with his arrest, 'the battle lines are 
drawn', presumably in his war against the Muslim community, which is 
of course viciously demonised as terrorists implacably unfaithful to 
their motherland. LK Advani as the Union Home Minister in 2001 
announced in Punjab that his government was 'contemplating steps to 
provide legal protection and relief to the personnel of the security 
forces facing prosecution for alleged excesses during anti-insurgency 
operations' in Punjab, Kashmir and the north-east.

A faked killing is not an aberration of a few runaway miscreant 
police officers; it is an integral if shadowy element of the system 
itself, one in which the State eliminates people outside the process 
of the law, as an instrument to tame civic dissent. These bullets 
indeed crush with State terror and lawlessness, the weakest and most 
disenfranchised of our people, particularly if they are restive - 
religious and ethnic minorities, dalits and tribal people, 
agricultural workers and slum dwellers. These are the very people who 
are excluded from that 'nation' which the trigger-happy police forces 
claim to defend.   
We may forget and move on, but for those loved ones were felled by 
furtive bullets fired by agents of a democratic State that functions 
lawlessly, there will be no closure or healing. They may never have 
even seen the bodies of their loved ones, and the dead have no 
opportunity to defend their honour. It is only truth, however ugly, 
told with unflinching honesty, which would heal their unassuaged 
agony. For this to happen, the leaders, the courts and the people of 
this land need to stand tall on the side of justice. No State is 
genuinely secure of foundations of injustice.


______


[8]


The Times of India
31 May, 2007

ART IMITATES LIFE

by Vinay Bharat-Ram

Why should I defend M F Husain? By doing so I am defending my own 
identity as an Indian and Hindu. The controversies raised by his 
detractors over his paintings being "obscene" are laughable.

To make such a claim on the basis of Hindu sentiments is deeply 
offensive, not only to Hindus of this generation but also to our 
ancestors.

I draw attention to Konark and Khajuraho, albeit with some 
trepidation. What if some misguided representatives of the sangh 
parivar or their ilk would set out to destroy these priceless 
heritage sites much in the same manner as the Taliban destroyed the 
Bamiyan Buddhas?

The depiction of sensuality in modern works of art pales in 
comparison to the sculptural splendour of male and female poses 
depicted in both Konark and Khajuraho, the former being the temple of 
the Sun God and the latter built around the temples of Shiva, 
Lakshmana and other gods and goddesses.

One of the universal symbols of Hindus is the Shivling positioned on 
Parvati's yoni, which has been the object of worship for centuries.

There is perhaps no more explicit propitiation of a phallic symbol in 
any culture. If we go to the temple of Kamakhya, we would witness 
Hindus worshipping Parvati's genitals.

Not only that, the red liquid that pours from the deity is applied on 
the foreheads of worshippers. We have the venerable Kamasutra which 
has for ages been regarded as a handbook of erotic pleasure.

Husain has drawn criticism for his portrayal of Bharat Mata in the 
nude, never mind that the Goddess Kali is always shown without 
clothes.

I would say that in this case obscenity lies in the eye of the 
beholder. I see her breasts as symbolic of nurturing the infants of 
the land and her fertility, that of populating Bharat with sons and 
daughters.

Husain has celebrated Bharat Mata no differently than i would worship 
the Shivling as representing procreation.

If we were to explore this theme further, we would come across 
explicit poetic descriptions of the love-making of Radha and Krishna 
in Jayadeva's Geet Govind, not to mention the long passages on 
foreplay.

Likewise, one could quote endless romantic passages about Shiva and 
Parvati from Kalidasa's Kumara Sambhavam, as well as shlokas 
describing Goddess Saraswati's breasts.

Our culture is ancient and arguably not without its blemishes such as 
the caste system and the once prevalent practice of sati.

At another level, however, it has prided itself on its inclusiveness 
and plurality. Vedantic and Puranic beliefs, for example, do not 
converge; yet they coexist.

There is no single revealed truth in the Vedas. In fact, they talk 
about a perpetual search for the truth.

The Puranas, on the other hand, give us innumerable gods and 
goddesses to worship while they seldom connect with the Vedas.

Together, they range from the worldly to the other-worldly without 
imposing any single body of beliefs. Our ancient tracts, in fact, 
also include treatises on atheism.

Furthermore, as Amartya Sen says, India has had a long tradition of 
critical reasoning and public deliberation not only in science, 
mathematics and philosophy but also in various forms of artistic 
expression.

Unsurprisingly, therefore, different religions flourished here and 
different art forms have found freedom of expression.

It is sad, indeed, that 60 years after political independence we seem 
to be heading towards cultural bondage.

We see Hindu culture being hijacked by a set of unlettered youth 
whose patron saints are some frustrated old men with their own 
political agendas.

In the name of hurting Hindu sentiment, for example, somebody kicked 
up a row about Shilpa Shetty being kissed by Richard Gere.

A highly regarded young artist at the fine arts faculty of M S 
University was imprisoned for having painted some objectionable 
pictures, which also led to the suspension of the head of the 
department.

If we go back a little in time, Deepa Mehta's shooting of the film 
Water in Varanasi was abandoned because some hooligans, no doubt with 
state support, claimed that Hindu culture was being shown in a poor 
light.

There were objections to a kissing scene in Dhoom-II, starring 
Aishwarya Rai and Hrithik Roshan, forgetting that in far more prudish 
times in the 1930s kissing in films was not found to be objectionable.

The latest uproar over Vasundhara Raje Scindia, chief minister of 
Rajasthan, being portrayed as Goddess Annapurna in a poster which has 
ostensibly hurt Hindu sentiment.

What about the thousands of Ramleelas every year in which ordinary 
people dress up as Lord Ram, Hanuman and Sita? The list of atrocities 
committed on society in the name of moral policing is a long one.

It is ironical that it is all in the name of protecting Hindu 
culture. The truth is that we have acquiesced in the rape of our 
culture, allowing motivated forces to talk down to us about 
protecting Hindu values.

How dare any group try to miniaturise a gloriously inclusive 
civilisation to fit its constrained mindset and then impose it on us 
with the use of muscle power?

Let confrontation take the form of informed debate, as has been our 
tradition since the first millennium BCE. Is the Hindu Taliban too 
cowardly to choose that path?

The writer is CMD, DCM Group.

______


[9]

M.F. HUSAIN IN THE CENTER OF INDIA ART CONTROVERSY
by Philip Reeves

Broadcast on National Public Radio in the US on May 29, 2007. 
Interviews with Husain, Rajeev Dhavan, Ram Rahman, Parul Dave 
Mukherjee and Shubha Mudgal singing her protest, Anjolie Ela Menon 
speaking at the Delhi protest.

Listen to the broadcast:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10438377

______


[10]

All India Secular Forum
[2 June 2007]

STATEMENT

All India Secular Forum strongly condemns the action of the 
Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Margao, Goa, banning lecture organised 
by the Citizen's Initiative for Communal Harmony (CICH) in 
association with the Goan Ramnath Kare Law College in Margao on May 
24 th 2007. The lecture was on "Communal Threats To Secular Democracy 
In India" by the General Secretary of All India Secular Forum Prof. 
Ram Puniyani and well known activist working for peace and communal 
harmony. The SDM acted upon a letter from one citizen Shivanand 
Karapurkar apprehending social tension in view of the lecture. The 
letter was also addressed to the Election Commission taking advantage 
of the forthcoming elections in Goa. The Chief Election Commissioner 
later admitted that the action of the SDM was wrong but refused to 
take any action against him. The SDM's action will only embolden the 
communal forces which do not have people's support but cleverly 
manipulate state machinery to subvert democratic rights of the people 
who had gathered to listen to the lecture. We laud the courage of the 
management of Kare Law College who, inspite of severe pressure from 
fundamentalist forces in Margao to cancel the lecture, opted to 
pursue the agenda of peace and harmony .

The incident shows that the civil servants, including the police are 
either communalised or always take a path of least resistance, even 
if that be against the rule books and against the Constitutional 
Values. Our fragile democracy is vulnerable communal and 
fundamentalist forces and we require robust civil liberties movement 
to make such police officers and civil servants accountable to law.

All India Secular Forum calls upon all the democratic forces to 
strongly condemn the curbs placed on the free speech at the instance 
of communal forces who swear in the name of the Constitution to be 
able to form the government and subvert the Constitutional values. 
All India Secular Forum also calls upon the people of Goa to defeat 
the communal and anti-democratic communal forces, viz. the Sangh 
Parivar.

All India Secular Forum
C/o. Centre for Study of Society and Secularism
602 & 603 Silver Star, Prabhat Colony Rd., Behind BEST Bus Depo, Santacruz (E),
Mumbai: - 400 055.
E-mail: <mailto:csss at mtnl.net.in>csss at mtnl.net.in


______



[11] ANNOUNCEMENTS:

(i)


Dear Friends,

We invite you to the flag off ceremony of

Muktnaad: Youth Aman Karwan

on June 5, 2007 at 11am

Behavarioul Science Centre ( BSC)

Xavier's College Campus, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad

Exhibition and performance of Street Play: H...Sa

Three Youth Aman Karwans will leave Ahmedabad on 5th afternoon and 
would travel across Gujarat covering all 25 districts doing close to 
1000 performances over the the next three months. In all these 1000 
locations they will hold discussions, debate on various 
issues,perform, screen films, put up exhibitions and also locate new 
young people to join the movement for restoring democracy .

Please do join us.

Shabnam Hashmi
ANHAD
Tel-25500844/ 25500772

PS:- This is an invitation to attend which is going to many media 
friends too, please donot file any stories . We request you to cover 
the actual flag off and write after you have seen the programme.

______

(ii)

In The Rights Direction
The Peaceworks human rights defenders programme

A human rights workshop at SWAYAM, 9/2B Deodar Street, 
Calcutta-700019 conducted by human rights lawyers Oishik Sircar and 
Debolina Dutta.

The PEACEWORKS Human Rights Development programme is an initiative to 
work with young people to train them and to create a collective of 
human rights defenders.
It is a process of capacity building and sensitizing young volunteers 
through interactive workshops and films on gender, sexuality, 
globalization, and law, to enable them to understand with precision, 
conceptual issues concerning social justice.
	 
WORKSHOP FROM
18 JUNE TO 26 JUNE

ELIGIBILITY: AGE 18 AND ABOVE
REGISTRATION FEE: RS 1000
SEATS: 20
LAST DATE FOR
REGISTRATION: 10 JUNE

CONTACT:
SEAGULL ARTS AND MEDIA RESOURCE CENTRE
36C, S.P. MUKHERJEE ROAD,
CALCUTTA-700029
PHONE: 24556942/43

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

Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), 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.




More information about the SACW mailing list