SACW | August 31 - Sept. 1, 2007 | Sri Lanka: Public letter to the President / Pakistan: Democracy is More Than Elections / India-US Nuclear Deal: non-proliferation amnesia

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | August 31 - September 
1, 2007 | Dispatch No. 2443 - Year 9

[1]  Sri Lanka: Submissions to the Presidential 
Commission of Inquiry and public on human rights 
violations
  + Public letter to the President - on 
International day of the disappeared - 30th 
August 2007
[2] Pakistan:
     (i) Democracy is Much More Than Elections (Naeem Sarfraz)
    (ii) How Pakistanis see India (Kamila Shamsie)
[3] India - US Nuclear Deal: 
    (i) The perils of non-proliferation amnesia 
(William C. Potter and Jayantha Dhanapala)
    (ii) India struggles to solve N-deal crisis (Praful Bidwai)
[4] India: Fear of Contempt (Prashant Bhushan, 
Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms)
[5] India: Nab Mumbai's guilty (Jyoti Punwani)
[6] Publication Announcement: Sites and Practices 
- an exercise in cultural pedagogy
[7] Book Review:  Trespassers will be persecuted (Vineeta Kalbag)
[8] Upcoming Events:
(i) "Beyond Partition" - A Film Screening and 
Interactive Discussion (Karachi, 1 September 2007)
(ii) Seminar On Dissent and Debate in Society (Ahmedabad, 8 September 2007)
(iii) Lecture by Bapsi Sidhwa 'History and 
Women's Rights Issues' (Texas, 11 September 2007)
(iv) Independent People's Tribunal on the Impact 
of the World Bank Group in India. (New Delhi, 
21-24 Sept 2007)

______


[1]  SRI LANKA

Civil Monitoring Commission
Free Media Movement
Law & Society Trust

FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

23 August 2007

First in a series of submissions to the 
Presidential Commission of Inquiry and public on 
human rights violations in Sri Lanka

The Law & Society Trust, in collaboration with 
four local partners including the Civil 
Monitoring Commission and the Free Media 
Movement, has compiled a working document listing 
547 persons killed and 396 persons
disappeared during the period January to June 
2007. The complete confidential document, with 
names, locations of incidents and all available 
data, has been submitted to the Presidential 
Commission of Inquiry ("the Commission") as well 
as relevant members of Government.

This public letter is the first in a series on 
the island-wide situation in relation to 
killings, missing persons and other human rights 
violations. It will be updated hereafter on a 
regular basis. Please note that this is not, nor 
is it intended to be, an exhaustive list. Though 
the Commission has been asked to look 
specifically at 16 cases,
plus the assassination of TNA MP N Raviraj, we 
note that the wording of the Commission's mandate 
- "to obtain information, investigate and inquire 
into alleged serious human rights violations 
arising since 1st August
2005" - provides an omnibus clause which permits 
consideration of cases outside of those specified 
in the mandate.

We have submitted this information to the 
Commission so that it may examine the attached 
documents and investigate these incidents. This 
is of vital importance in the absence of an 
acknowledgement of these killings
and disappearances by the government and other 
statutory bodies with a mandate for human rights 
protection in the country.

The attached analysis is based on the information 
obtained from local partners, some of whom did 
not wish to be named to ensure that they remain 
free to document violations. Wherever possible, 
this information has been cross-checked and 
verified to ensure that there is no multiple 
reporting of the same incident.

Killings

The largest proportion of people killed in the 
first six months of 2007 were Tamil - 70.7% 
across the island, as compared with 9.1% 
Sinhalese and 5.9% Muslims. The gravity of this 
situation becomes even more pronounced when 
considered against the fact that the Tamil people 
make up only 16% of the total population. Men 
were killed in much larger numbers than women – 
89.9% vs. 9.7%.

By district, Jaffna was worst affected by 
killings (23.2%), followed by Batticaloa and 
Vavuniya (21.5% and 21.3 respectively). The data 
on humanitarian workers and religious leaders 
killed reflects the overall trends in killings, 
with Tamils disproportionately affected as 
compared with Muslim and Sinhalese. Killings of 
this category of persons were highest in 
Trincomalee, during the period 1 January 2006 to 
21 August 2007. However, it is notable that 
religious leaders of three of the four main 
faiths of the island have been killed since last 
year - Father Jim Brown (August 2006), Selliah 
Parameshwaran Kurukkal (February 2007) and Ven 
Handungamuwe Nandarathna Thero (March 2007).

Disappearances

As with killings, Tamils suffered 
disproportionately from abductions - 64.6%, 
compared with 3% Sinhalese and 3% Muslims. Men 
represented nearly 98% of all missing persons.

By district, Jaffna was again worst affected by 
disappearances (49.5%). However Colombo was next 
worst affected, at 17.7%, underlining the concern 
expressed by many local NGOs at the situation 
with respect to this particular violation. Nearly 
19% of persons abducted were taken from their 
homes. The vast majority of these were in Jaffna, 
however there were a few abductions from home in 
other parts of the country. Where times were 
specified, these were for persons who disappeared 
in Jaffna, which has been under curfew since 
before January 2007. Roughly 5% of all persons 
abducted were persons abducted from home during 
curfew in Jaffna - in an area allegedly under 
government control, this points to the 
possibility of government inability or 
unwillingness to keep all its citizens safe.

It is our hope that the investigations by the 
Commission, with assistance of the IIGEP, lead to 
identification of perpetrators and prosecution, 
thereby ensuring justice to victims and their 
family members, as well as directly addressing 
the prevailing culture of impunity.

Also attached to this letter is a compilation of 
published material, where detailed information is 
not available, from reliable and credible sources 
such as the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) 
and UNICEF for the period January to June 2007 on 
killings and missing persons as well as 
recruitment of child soldiers. Killings and 
abductions of aid workers, religious leaders and 
media personnel -  the latter drawn from the Free 
Media Movement - are also covered.

As stated above, this is not intended to be an 
exhaustive list. Rather, we hope that by bringing 
together information from a range of reliable 
sources on killings, missing persons,  and other 
rights violations, this document may give readers 
some sense of the enormity and shape of the 
current human rights crisis in Sri Lanka.

Though we call on the Commission to use their 
mandate to investigate these violations, fully 
utilizing the available expertise and assistance 
of the IIGEP, in the long term we believe it is 
not ad hoc bodies such as the Commission that 
should address these violations, but statutory 
domestic human rights protection mechanisms, 
cooperating with and assisted by the 
international community, particularly the United 
Nations. In the absence of adequate and visible 
steps taken so far by domestic bodies to address 
the violations, there are clear indications that 
this trend will continue in the coming months.

o o o

30th August 2007

His Excellency the Hon. Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse
President Socialist Democratic Republic of  Sri Lanka
C/o Office of the President
Colombo

Commemoration of the International day of the disappeared - 30th August 2007

We write in solidarity and bring greetings on 
this important day commemorating the global cause 
of justice for the disappeared and their families.

We appreciate the leadership you had taken as far 
back as late 1980s to eradicate this dreaded 
phenomenon in our country, and also note the 
several steps you have initiated as the 
President, such as the one man Presidential 
Commission of Inquiry, to address the rise of 
this grave crime against humanity.

We understand that the Chairman, Mr. Tillekeratne 
has submitted the final report of the Commission 
to you. As you know, one of the worst aspects of 
a disappearance, from the point of view of the 
family, is the unending grief, due to the non 
acknowledgement of the fact that your loved ones 
have actually disappeared, leaving no trace of 
what happens to them. The publication of Justice 
Tillekeratne's report will be a step towards 
addressing this great grief and we urge you to 
and we urge you to take
immediate steps in this regard.

We also note the recent arrests of persons 
suspected of masterminding abductions in Colombo, 
but we continue to be concerned that this 
practice has not been completely eradicated in 
our country and note with dismay that according 
to the Human Rights Commission, in the first two 
weeks of August alone, 18 people disappeared and 
11 people were unlawfully killed in Jaffna. We 
expect you to continue your keen interest in this 
matter by requesting the highest level 
investigations into the alleged disappearances in 
the North East as well as rest of the country and 
by supporting all attempts at prosecuting the 
miscreants. You maybe unaware that there are many 
families of people who disappeared almost twenty 
years ago who have yet to even be given access to 
the minimum programmes that were spearheaded by 
you like the compensation programmes. Many have 
also not received justice despite participating in
the court proceedings and in many of the 
Commissions created to inquire into enforced 
disappearances. Some families experience 
difficulties in befitting from this scheme due to 
the inability to obtain a death certificates. 
Discrimination based on the region and other 
considerations such as civilian and government 
servant of the victim also remains a key concern 
for family members. Your election to the office 
of the President had raised expectations of many 
such families, and we trust that you strive to 
fulfill their just aspirations by reviving these 
programmes and systematize them so that families 
who have no hope of any justice for the wrong 
done to them may at least feel that the state 
hears their pain and remains in solidarity with 
them.

At the same time, we also request you to make 
public the unpublished sections of the report 
handed over to the then President in 2002, by the 
All Island Presidential Commission of Inquiry to 
inquire into enforced disappearances that was 
appointed in 1998, which has identified details 
of what actually happened to people who had 
disappeared and those responsible. This too, will 
go a long way in providing a sense of support and 
solidarity to family members of those who had 
disappeared. Considering that the dreaded 
phenomenon of enforced disappearances are again 
being reported on a large scale throughout the 
country, we call on you to take immediate steps 
to implement the recommendations made by the 
various Presidential Commission of Inquiries 
appointed to investigate enforced disappearances 
and the UN Working Group on Enforced and 
Involuntary Disappearances.

Further, as you are aware, one of the blocks in 
our search for justice has been the lack of 
recognition of disappearances as a crime in Sri 
Lanka and the prohibition on examination of the 
command structures and determination of criminal 
culpability of the architects of the systems that 
perpetuate these crimes in our country. Thus, we 
request you to take steps towards amending our 
Penal Code to include the crime of disappearance 
and the concept of command responsibility within 
it.

Finally, given your own personal role in pushing 
for a strong international action against 
enforced disappearances in Sri Lanka and all over 
the world, we hope that your government will 
accept the assistance offered by the 
international community to Sri Lanka, 
particularly by extending an invitation to the UN 
Working Group on Enforced Disappearances to visit 
the country and assist you and your government to 
address the large number of disappearances which 
are reported as having occurred since 2006.

In order to prevent enforced disappearances, and 
in solidarity with families of the disappeared in 
Sri Lanka and world over,  we trust that Your 
Excellency will also continue the support Sri 
Lanka extended towards the cause of international 
struggle against disappearances by taking 
immediate steps to ratify UN International 
Convention Against Enforced Disappearances.

Together in solidarity with families of the disappeared,

Association of Family Members of the Disappeared (AFMD)
Association of War Affected Women
Centre for Human Rights and Development (CHRD)
Centre for Peace and Human Rights Culture (CEPAHRC)
Centre for Peace Building and Reconciliation (Cpbr)
Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies (CHA)
Families of the Disappeared (FOD)
Free Media Movement (FMM)
INFORM Human Rights Documentation Centre
International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR)
Home for Human Rights (HHR)
Human Development Organization
Human Rights Media Resource Centre
Janasansadaya, Panadura
Law & Society Trust (LST)
Mothers and Daughters of Lanka
Muslim Informational Centre
National Christian Council of Sri Lanka – Commission for Justice and Peace
National Peace Council (NPC)
Parents of Servicemen Missing in Action
Right to Life


______



[2]  PAKISTAN:

(i)

The Nation
22 August 2007


DEMOCRACY IS MUCH MORE THAN ELECTIONS

by Naeem Sarfraz

There is a huge misconception that free and fair 
elections will lead to democracy. Nothing could 
be further from the truth. Several times in the 
last 60 years Pakistanis have gone to the polls 
with great expectations, only to have their hopes 
shattered. In theory each new Parliament was 
expected to bring about new legislation for the 
common good; and each new government expected to 
work for the security and well being of the 
masses.

Reality was different. Promises were broken. 
Morals were set aside. Fresh waves of loot and 
plunder began, with new parliamentarians at the 
forefront.  Issues of the public good received 
lip service--- education, health care, jobs, 
housing, security ---- but the lot of the common 
man got worse. To stem the rot, in stepped the 
powerful colonial establishment, represented 
initially by bureaucrats Ghulam Mohammad and 
Iskandar Mirza and later by generals Ayub, Yahya, 
Zia and Musharaff. The four generals ruled the 
country as dictators for 33 of its 60 years 
history. Tragically, each left the country in no 
better shape than before.

Each time a general took over, he claimed 
democracy had failed. He would promise to save 
the nation and then restore democracy. How naive 
such thinking proved to be. Today a general is 
desperately trying to retain power in the face of 
fierce opposition.  He would like to "manage" the 
elections or at least to cut a sweatheart "deal" 
with one or more unscrupulous political leaders 
and hold on to power. Everyone else is dreaming 
of free and fair elections and a swift return to 
democracy. But elections alone do not bring about 
democracy, no matter how fair and free. Democracy 
is a whole lot more.

Democracy is about values. It is a mindset, where 
citizens have to fight to defend their rights and 
freedoms. Democracy needs a vibrant civil 
society, conscious of its responsibilities as 
well as its power. Civil society itself is driven 
by ideas and ideals; by writers and poets. These 
thinkers and philosophers are the true custodians 
of democracy, the fountainhead of freedom. They 
blossom in a free environment, where the media 
fiercely guards its own freedom.

Democracy is also about the daily life of a 
citizen. Does the state do enough for his welfare 
and security? Is he shown respect and provided 
succor when he interacts with state 
functionaries? Or is he treated with contempt and 
intimidation by overbearing bureaucrats and 
policemen?  Is he really getting a fair deal?

In Pakistan the three pillars of democracy --- 
executive, judiciary and legislature --- have 
long been manipulated by ruthless civil and 
military leaders. But things are obviously 
changing. A handful of lawyers have suddenly 
fired the nation's imagination, cracking open the 
long-barricaded door to democracy. Indignant at 
the shameful handling of their Chief Justice, 
100,000 lawyers across Pakistan stood up to 
dictatorship. Led by the charismatic Aitzaz 
Ahsan, Hamid Khan, Munir Malik and Ali Ahmad Kurd 
they freed the Chief Justice from virtual bondage 
and elevated the judiciary to heights never seen 
before.

  A vibrant civil society, activist lawyers and a 
courageous media have unshackled the judiciary 
and taken arguably the first concrete step 
towards establishing genuine freedom in Pakistan. 
For this they have earned the everlasting 
gratitude of the nation.

The next step certainly is to ensure free and 
fair elections.  Tragically, rigging has already 
started. Imagine the audacity of the Election 
Commission which has so innocently 
disenfranchised 25 million voters. They would 
have got away with it, had it not been for the 
timely intervention of the Chief Justice. 
Bureaucrats and the intelligence agencies must 
never again be allowed to rig elections. Those 
involved in rigging must be exposed and punished. 
Concerned citizens, an alert media and a 
proactive judiciary collectively can stop 
electoral malpractices, far better than the usual 
bevy of foreign observers.

Civil society must also ensure that political 
parties do not again give tickets to known 
scoundrels, for the Presidency or for Parliament. 
(Strangely, with Presidential Elections around 
the corner, the Opposition has no candidate). 
Free and fair elections become meaningless if 
selfish leaders award party tickets to crooks. 
Indeed, the main cause of President Musharraf's 
own undoing has been his political alliance with 
known charlatans. While ensuring free elections, 
civil society must also force political parties 
to nominate clean candidates.  That will be the 
second important step towards democracy, the 
first having been unshackling of the judiciary.

But even that is not enough. The joker in the 
pack is the third pillar of the State, the 
executive. At partition we inherited an executive 
which had been trained to rule the country in the 
name of the King-Emperor. Its exclusive function 
was to keep the colony and its people totally 
subservient to the King-Emperor. Soldiers, 
policemen and bureaucrats were trained to 
ruthlessly suppress the natives and enforce the 
King's writ. Tragically this mindset has not 
changed. The civil servant is neither civil nor 
anyone's servant. From Patwari and Thanedar 
upwards the civil servant ruthlessly lords it 
over the public. He uses outmoded draconian laws 
and procedures to trample the citizen, 
shamelessly violating fundamental rights and 
human dignity, enshrined both in our religion and 
in our Constitution, in order to serve his master 
of the day.

In a democracy, civil society as guardians of 
people's rights, must work with lawyers, judges, 
the media and Parliamentarians to curb the 
excesses of a colonial bureaucracy and a 
Bonapartist military.

  But first and foremost, for democracy to 
function the military government must hand over 
power. The President has declared that his 
uniform is his second skin which he cannot shed. 
That can also be resolved. Perhaps the "Q" League 
cabinet, hugely beholden to him for his largesse, 
can promote him Field Marshal. He can then keep 
his uniform on, as Field Marshals traditionally 
do not retire, and remain Pakistan's top soldier 
for the rest of his life. In return he can 
dissolve Parliament even before 15th September. 
As there would then be no electoral college for 
Presidential elections (15 September to 15 
October) he can legally continue as President 
well into the New Year, avoiding another crises 
which otherwise will surely occur next month. 
Elections under a caretaker set-up with no 
"deals" and no rigging can follow. The people of 
Pakistan can decide their own destiny, with a new 
President, new federal and provincial 
governments, a new Army Chief, a rejuvenated 
judiciary, a free media, a chastened military, a 
humbled bureaucracy and a powerful civil society 
to face the challenges of a new Millennium. Then 
alone will democracy flourish. The alternatives 
are grim.


o o o

(ii)

Dawn
August 23, 2007

HOW PAKISTANIS SEE INDIA

by Kamila Shamsie

Whatever the consolations of India's 
inefficiency, it's impossible to ignore the fact 
that Pakistan's position in the world centres 
around its murky role in the 'war on terror' 
while India's centres around economics

Earlier this year, while in Delhi for a writers' 
conference, I met one of my compatriots from 
across the border. "It's such a relief, isn't 
it?" he said.

"Coming to India and discovering that, despite 
the hype of the past couple of years, it's still 
just another inefficient, dirty, Third World 
country like ours." The subtext was clear: a 
truly shining India would make Pakistan feel very 
dim by comparison.

But whatever the consolations of India's 
inefficiency, it's impossible to ignore the fact 
that Pakistan's position in the world centres 
around its murky role in the 'war on terror' 
while India's centres around economics.

It was not always like this. Pakistan has long 
been in the habit of feeling superior to India in 
economic terms. At the start of the `90s when I 
was taking A-level economics in Karachi, our 
teacher taught us all we needed to know about 
India's protectionist economy with the sentence: 
"The only part of Indian cars which doesn't make 
a noise is the horn."

What, then, is the impact of the reversal of 
fortunes of the past decade? For the more 
thoughtful segments of Pakistani society it is 
reason to take a critical look at the failures of 
Pakistan's policies.

Nayyara Rahman, a business student, told me she 
envies the Indians "because their growth is not 
frothy like ours; it's more sustainable, because 
it includes the wider spheres of the population, 
and not just the fringed elite".

And Ameena Saiyid, the MD of Oxford University 
Press, Pakistan, also admits to envy -- 
particularly over India's refusal to allow "its 
cows and elephants and other religious symbols 
and beliefs to impede their march to economic 
growth while we have got totally entangled in our 
burqas and beards".

But for a number of Pakistanis there remains 
doubt about whether the reversal of India's 
fortunes is real or just a giant bubble of hype. 
Columnist Amina Jilani says: "Pakistan loathes 
admitting that India might even be a growing 
power. In local idiom, we think we are both 'same 
to same'."

When I pushed another Pakistani for evidence 
that, deep down, Pakistan hasn't accepted its 
economically weaker position he responded: "The 
arms race. They test a missile, we test a 
missile." And it's true that Pakistan seems to 
have learned little from the collapse of the 
Soviet Union as it tried to keep up with 
America's defence spending.

Perhaps it's apt, in a tragic-satirical way, that 
the arms race is one of the few areas in which 
Pakistan and India's economic muscles grapple 
with each other. In most other areas the approach 
is strictly hands-off: trade with India has 
always been severely restricted. Change is under 
way, but Pakistan continues to link economic 
progress to "forward movement on all fronts", 
which everyone recognises as a reference to 
Kashmir.

There are dissenters to this "keep India out" 
view. They include film-maker Hasan Zaidi. Given 
the might of Bollywood, one might assume that he 
would be the last person to call for an opening 
up of markets (at present, Pakistani cinemas are 
banned from showing Bollywood films, although 
they are readily available on pirated DVDs).

But Zaidi points out that the Pakistan film 
industry is already in "a death spiral", that 
there's much to be gained by bringing across 
technically accomplished Indian films, and that 
India is a huge market that Pakistani film-makers 
can take advantage of.

Of course it's not just goods that have a hard 
time crossing borders. Visa restrictions mean 
that people, too, have a difficult time 
witnessing firsthand life on the other side. That 
might change when -- and if -- India's economic 
growth allows it to make the one claim that 
remains elusive: that its poverty rates are lower 
than Pakistan's.

That eventuality may well mark the point when 
Pakistan's labour force turns its eyes away from 
the Gulf and Europe to dream of earning a 
livelihood in a country where language and custom 
are not barriers. For the moment, though, India 
and Pakistan exist primarily in each other's 
imaginations, and our reactions to each other 
continue to be based on old psychological 
wounds.- Dawn/Guardian Service

______


[3]    ON THE INDO US NUCLEAR DEAL:

(i)

The Hindu
Sep 01, 2007

  THE PERILS OF NON-PROLIFERATION AMNESIA

by William C. Potter and Jayantha Dhanapala

The India-U.S. civilian nuclear deal, if endorsed 
by the NSG and the U.S. Congress, will virtually 
ensure the demise of global nuclear export 
restraints.

Indo-U.S. nuclear cooperation means different 
things to different people - a reversal of 
decades of U.S. non-proliferation policy, a 
promising new market for U.S. nuclear commerce, 
violation of the fundamental principles of the 
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and the 
prospect of a strategic partnership among vibrant 
democracies.

One thing it definitely does not mean is 
strengthened export controls. Despite efforts by 
the White House to portray the deal as a plus for 
combating the spread of nuclear weapons, the 
terms of the latest round of U.S.-Indian nuclear 
negotiations confirm the opposite conclusion. 
Repeatedly outfoxed by their Indian counterparts 
and hindered by the political unwillingness of a 
lame-duck administration to walk away from the 
negotiations, U.S. diplomats have achieved an 
embarrassing accord. If endorsed by the Nuclear 
Suppliers Group (NSG) and the U.S. Congress, it 
will virtually ensure the demise of global 
nuclear export restraints.

The next key round of deliberations on the deal 
is apt to take place this fall among the 
45-member NSG - a body that only three years ago 
was urged by President Bush to tighten export 
controls, especially in the sensitive fuel cycle 
area. Today, however, Washington has a different 
agenda that closely resembles the one Russia had 
long sought (and the U.S. had opposed) - to 
create an exception for India to standard export 
guidelines that preclude the supply of nuclear 
material and technology to states lacking 
safeguards on all of their nuclear facilities. As 
a result of this shift in U.S. policy, Russia 
already has rushed to sign new nuclear trade 
agreements with India without waiting for the NSG 
to modify its guidelines by consensus as is 
required. China also has indicated its intent to 
apply a similar exception to Pakistan, and one 
can soon imagine Australia, Belarus, France, 
South Africa, and other states citing the NSG 
precedent for India as the basis for exporting 
nuclear commodities to anyone whenever it is 
commercially or politically expedient.

What is perhaps most unusual and ominous about 
the current debate over India within the NSG is 
the extent to which economic considerations 
appear to override those involving proliferation 
even among states that are typically regarded as 
the leaders of the international 
non-proliferation community. Apparently, gone are 
the days when Australia, Canada, New Zealand, 
South Africa, Sweden, and members of the European 
Union could be counted on to lead the charge in 
support of strict adherence to non-proliferation 
treaties.

At the historic 1995 NPT Review and Extension 
Conference, which extended the Treaty 
indefinitely, NPT parties - including all members 
of the NSG - made a political commitment to 
refrain from nuclear cooperation with states 
lacking "full scope" safeguards. And yet, most of 
these states either are unaware of these 
obligations or have chosen to ignore them.
Striking dissonance

The dissonance is most striking with respect to 
Australia and South Africa - two countries that 
pride themselves on model non-proliferation 
behaviour - reflected in part by their 
ratification of nuclear-weapon-free zones in 
their respective regions, the Treaty of Raratonga 
in the South Pacific and the Pelindaba Treaty in 
Africa. Both treaties have explicit language 
prohibiting members from engaging in nuclear 
commerce with states lacking comprehensive 
safeguards, as is the case in India. And yet 
Australia and South Africa have each endorsed 
nuclear trade with India and are supportive of 
the U.S. initiative to weaken the NSG guidelines 
to allow such commerce. It is as if they believe 
they can selectively disavow inconvenient 
legally-binding obligations - a particularly 
difficult manoeuvre for Australian Foreign 
Minister Alexander Downer, who is on record as 
having acknowledged the restrictive nature of the 
Raratonga Treaty.

It remains to be seen if the current 
subordination of non-proliferation objectives to 
economic and other considerations will be a 
fleeting phenomenon or a more enduring fact of 
international politics. However, it is 
disconcerting that the decision about nuclear 
trade with India in some capitals has been made 
by officials who do not have expertise in or 
responsibility for non-proliferation matters and 
who have little regard for its proliferation 
implications. This is the case in Canada and the 
U.S., and appears to resemble the process by 
which decisions were reached in many EU 
countries, as well as other members of the NSG.

Export controls remain an imperfect but useful 
tool to curb the spread of nuclear weapons. In 
this regard, the NSG would be well advised to 
follow Florence Nightingale's guiding principle 
that "whatever else hospitals do they should not 
spread disease." Otherwise, at a time of mounting 
proliferation challenges, this body is apt to 
adopt a policy that intentionally or 
inadvertently erodes the effectiveness of one of 
the most important multilateral non-proliferation 
instruments.

(William Potter is Director of the James Martin 
Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the 
Monterey Institute of International Studies. 
Jayantha Dhanapala is a former U.N. 
Under-Secretary General for Disarmament Affairs 
and Ambassador of Sr i Lanka to the United 
States, who served as president of the 1995 NPT 
Review and Extension Conference.)

o o o

(ii)

The News
September 01, 2007

INDIA STRUGGLES TO SOLVE N-DEAL CRISIS

by Praful Bidwai

The writer, a former newspaper editor, is a 
researcher and peace and human-rights activist 
based in Delhi

As Pakistan's government makes a bid in the 
Nuclear Suppliers' Group for equal treatment with 
India in respect of civilian nuclear cooperation, 
its citizens would do well to look at India's 
experience with the nuclear deal inked with the 
United States in 2005. Domestically, this 
experience has proved remarkably unhappy and 
divisive and precipitated an eyeball-to-eyeball 
confrontation between the ruling United 
Progressive Alliance and the Left parties, whose 
support it needs for survival. The conflict over 
the "123 agreement" signed in late July came 
close to destabilising the government. Now, there 
are signs that the two sides are willing to reach 
a rapprochement.

Formally, neither has retreated from its stated 
position. Yet, both have executed shifts of 
stance. In practice, the UPA has come close to 
meeting the Left's demand that further talks on 
the deal with the International Atomic Energy 
Agency (IAEA) and the NSG be put on hold. Thus, 
Indian officials will attend the IAEA annual 
conference this month, but will only negotiate an 
inspections (safeguards) agreement with the 
agency in November. India missed the August 17 
deadline for giving notice of such talks. This 
enlarges the UPA's opportunity to negotiate an 
honourable compromise with the Left.

Equally important, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh 
has declined President Bush's invitation to a 
meeting at his Texas ranch--signalling that he 
doesn't intend to be totally servile to 
Washington despite his embarrassing praise for 
Bush as the "friendliest towards India" of all US 
presidents. The UPA also rescheduled 
Parliamentary debate to emphasise some 
commonalities with the Left The Left has lowered 
the pitch of its attacks on the UPA for "drawing 
India into the US strategic orbit". It has moved 
from warning it of serious "consequences", to 
saying it "does not want the current crisis to 
affect the government". As CPM politburo member 
Sitaram Yechury put it, the Left only demands 
that the UPA press the "pause" button, not the 
"stop"/"eject" button.

The two sides have since cautiously opened talks 
on a "mechanism" to resolve differences--a 
committee of leaders, which will discuss the 
Left's "strategic" objections to the deal and 
examine whether the "123 agreement" meets India's 
concerns about sovereign control over nuclear 
activities, raised by the Hyde Act passed in the 
US last year. The Act has two components: 
non-binding exhortations, and obligatory 
Sections. The (in)famous portions which demand 
"congruence" between India's foreign policy and 
US interests belong to the first. But the 
sections pertaining to the "right of return" (of 
nuclear equipment/material) if India tests 
nuclear weapons are binding ones.

The Left must decide if its objections to this 
second part are so fundamental as to demand the 
deal's scrapping. The Left rightly opposes 
nuclear weapons on principle. It condemned the 
1998 blasts by India and Pakistan, and has argued 
against further testing. The second part becomes 
relevant only in the extremely unlikely event of 
India conducting a nuclear test--which the Left 
would, logically, condemn. Besides, "123" 
cushions the impact of the US's "right of return" 
through multi-layered consultations.

It's one thing to oppose the nuclear deal because 
it violates the causes of disarmament, peace and 
environmentally sound energy development. It's 
quite another to do so because the deal might 
impede India's "freedom" to stockpile 
mass-destruction weapons. (Actually, it won't.) 
Any notion of sovereignty that's detached from 
the people and linked to mass-destruction weapons 
is fundamentally flawed. The question of the 
deal's strategic import is a tricky one. It's 
part of, and consummates, India's foreign and 
security policy realignment towards the US, in 
progress since 2000. The Left has every right to 
oppose this given the US's disastrous global 
role. But the realignment process cannot be 
reversed by suspending just one of its components.

Meanwhile, the deal's critics are differentiating 
themselves from one another. The traditionally 
pro-US Bharatiya Janata Party is moving from 
strong opposition to qualified support for the 
deal. LK Advani has said the BJP won't object to 
the deal if the government passes a "domestic 
Hyde Act" to ensure continuity in nuclear 
supplies. He berated the Left for its 
"anti-Americanism" and said: "--we have no 
objection to a strategic partnership with the 
US." This is a terrible comment on the BJP's 
consistency and credibility. Just three weeks 
ago, the same Advani approached the Left for 
coordinating opposition to the deal in 
parliament, and was properly snubbed. The BJP's 
slimy shift should help crystallise different 
positions within the political spectrum.

The emerging political situation is pregnant with 
possibilities. A dramatic mid-term election may 
not be the most likely possibility. No party 
wants or is ready for one. A nationwide poll by 
Outlook magazine says 63 percent of respondents 
do not want a mid-term election. Although a 
narrow majority (52 per cent) support the deal, 
an even higher 58 per cent believe Singh could 
have handled the deal-related crisis better, and 
42 per cent (including 51 per cent of urban 
respondents) say India should not operationalise 
the deal until the Left's objections have been 
met.

This should take the wind out of the sails of 
those who claim the Indian public doesn't trust 
or respect the Left, or that the deal is 
overwhelmingly popular. Indeed, as many as 44 per 
cent aren't even aware of the agreement and 61 
per cent believe it cannot be an election issue. 
However, if elections are nevertheless held in 
the near future, the outcome is unlikely to be 
radically different from the Lok Sabha's present 
composition. According to a large-sample (12,000 
respondents) survey by NDTV-GfK-MODE, the 
Congress stands to gain the most, and the BJP to 
lose the most, from a mid-term election.

The Left too is likely to lose 10 to 15 seats, 
not least because of serious infighting within 
the CPM in Kerala, but also because it won't get 
the support of many allies, as it did in 2004. 
According to this forecast, the Congress would 
win 185 seats, up from 145 in 2004. The UPA's 
total tally would only be 232 seats--about 20 
higher than in 2004 (212) The BJP is forecast to 
win 116 seats, in place of the earlier 140. The 
NDA as a whole is likely to lose more than 20 
seats of its 2004 total (180). (I personally feel 
the Congress might do better and the NDA worse.)

The Left, then, has very little to gain from an 
early election. That is a strong practical reason 
why it should not precipitate one. In any case, 
it's a safe bet that the CPM's West Bengal and 
Tripura units will be most reluctant to risk an 
early election. They performed spectacularly in 
the last state elections--the Left Front won 235 
out of 294 seats in West Bengal. They have a 
comfortable equation with the Centre, and would 
be loath to oppose it on a foreign policy issue.

If no early elections are held, as seems most 
probable, the political scenario will evolve in 
ways that largely favour left-of-centre forces, 
especially if the UPA focuses on the unorganised 
sector and agriculture. It is formulating three 
schemes for the unorganised, which are likely to 
further its aam aadmi claim. The NDA seems set 
for a hard time as the BJP's disarray continues.


______


[4]

Outlook
August 29, 2007

FEAR OF CONTEMPT

Why was a story showing judicial misconduct at 
the highest places blacked out by the entire 
mainstream media? Is it fear of contempt which 
has effectively prevented a proper exposure of 
the rot and corruption within the judiciary? 
......

by Prashant Bhushan

The recent outburst of the Chief Justice of India 
on the TV journalist who had done the sting 
operation on the "Warrants for Cash" scam in the 
courts of Gujarat has again brought to the fore 
the related issues of judicial accountability and 
the court's powers of Contempt. The TV channel 
had conducted a sting operation on officials of 
the district courts of Gujarat who were filmed 
negotiating amounts for getting warrants issued 
from the Gujarat courts. The "bribes" were paid 
and warrants were actually got issued against the 
then President of India, the Chief Justice of the 
Supreme Court, and others. The telecast was made 
after informing the Supreme Court about it. The 
Supreme Court then took serious note of the 
matter and the Gujarat High Court started a 
departmental inquiry against the judicial 
officers through whom the warrants were got 
issued. Though the judges had not bothered to 
examine the complainants before issuing the 
warrants, yet the judicial officers were 
acquitted by the High Court. It was thereafter 
that the current Chief Justice slammed the 
journalist who had carried out this operation and 
threatened to send him to jail for contempt 
unless he apologized.

The Chief Justice's outburst was widely reported 
in the media and it provoked a few critical 
comments by the media on the unjustified threat 
of contempt in this case. But the threat had its 
effect. A few days later, on 3rd August, the 
Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms, 
an organization whose patrons and members include 
such respectable figures as Justice Krishna Iyer, 
Justice Sawant, Mr. Shanti Bhushan, Admiral 
Tahiliani and others, held a press conference in 
Delhi to highlight a case of Judicial Misconduct 
at the highest places in the Indian Judiciary. 
The facts revealed and documents released in the 
Press Conference showed how the sons of a former 
Chief Justice of India had got into partnerships 
with large shopping mall and commercial complex 
developers and got into the business of 
developing commercial complexes just before their 
father called the case of sealing commercial 
establishments operating from residential areas 
to himself and thereafter passed the orders of 
sealing them. These orders created panic in the 
city, led to the sealing of lakhs of shops and 
offices, and forced many of them to find spaces 
in malls and commercial complexes, thereby 
raising their prices enormously.

Around the same time, the sons' companies were 
allotted several commercial plots of more than 6 
acres in Noida, by the Mulayam Singh/Amar Singh 
government. These plots worth over a hundred 
crores were allotted for a tenth of those prices. 
All this at a time when the judge was dealing 
with cases of Amar Singh's infamous tapes, whose 
publication by the media he went on to restrain.

Unimpeachable documents attesting to these facts 
were released at the press conference, which was 
attended by virtually the entire mainstream 
media. Yet the story of such enormous public 
interest, showing judicial misconduct at the 
highest places, was blacked out by the entire 
mainstream media, ostensibly due to fear of 
courting Contempt. And this, despite the fact 
that this was the case of a former judge and 
despite the fact that the Contempt of Courts Act 
has been recently amended to allow truth as a 
defence to a contempt action. This episode 
underlines the dread that the draconian law of 
contempt still continues to inspire in the media.

A fear which has effectively prevented a proper 
exposure of the rot within the judiciary and has 
stilled serious public discussion of what is to 
be done about corruption in the judiciary.

The judiciary is the only institution in the 
country which remains totally unaccountable. 
There is no institution with disciplinary powers 
over the judiciary. In order to provide for their 
independence, the Constitution made judges of the 
superior courts immune from removal except by 
impeachment. The Ramaswami case and subsequent 
attempts to impeach judges have demonstrated the 
total impracticality of that instrument to 
discipline judges. There has thereafter been 
persistent talk of setting up an independent 
National Judicial Commission, but it has been a 
non starter with the judiciary firmly opposing 
any outside body with disciplinary powers over 
them. However, the self disciplining mechanism 
suggested by the judiciary itself by way of an 
"In house committee" of judges to enforce a code 
of conduct nominally adopted by the judiciary in 
1999, has also been a non starter in the face of 
a reluctance on the part of judges to inquire 
into the conduct of their own brethren. That is 
one of the reasons why the Parliamentary Standing 
Committee has rejected the government's draft of 
the Judicial Inquiry amendment bill which 
proposes an "in house Judicial Council" of 
sitting judges to inquire into judicial 
misconduct. The bill would in fact make the 
removal of judges even more difficult than at 
present.

Compounding the problem further is the Supreme 
Court's decree that no judge can be investigated 
for even criminal offences without the written 
consent of the Chief Justice of India. In the 
last 16 years since that judgement, no sitting 
judge in India has been subjected to a criminal 
investigation. And not because people have not 
tried. Very recently, the previous Chief Justice 
of India refused to accord permission to register 
an FIR against the senior judge of Lucknow who 
had purchased land worth 7 Crores for 5 lacs from 
well known members of a land mafia in the name of 
his wife.

And now various High Courts have framed rules to 
make themselves virtually immune from the Right 
to Information Act. Thus many of them have fixed 
application fees of Rs. 500, instead of the usual 
10. Many say, contrary to the Act, that 
information will not be provided to those who are 
not directly affected by the information. Worst 
of all, many prohibit information on 
administrative and financial matters. Thus the 
Delhi High Court refused to give information 
about class 4 employees recruited by them, citing 
this rule.

Bringing accountability to the judiciary must be 
preceded by frank public discussion and debate. 
Unfortunately that cannot get started with the 
threat of contempt looming over people. That is 
why it has become urgent to completely overhaul 
the law of contempt.

Prashant Bhushan is an eminent public interest lawyer in the Supreme Court.



______


[5]

Times of India
14 Aug 2007

NAB MUMBAI'S GUILTY

by Jyoti Punwani

There are more than a handful of individuals who 
can provide crucial information in trying the 
accused in the January 1993 Mumbai riots. For 
instance, the person whose testimony can help try 
Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray is now social 
justice minister in Vilasrao Deshmukh's cabinet.

According to Srikrishna commission's report into 
the Mumbai riots (Vol II, Para 9.6) Chandrakant 
Handore was present when Thackeray instructed his 
cadre to retaliate. According to the testimony of 
Mahanagar reporter Yuvraj Mohite, Handore as the 
mayor had gone with him to Matoshree to get 
Thackeray to sign an appeal for peace when the 
January riots had just begun.

Mohite's testimony says that the Shiv Sena chief 
was directing the violence over the phone and to 
his lieutenants in person. After they came out, 
Mohite and his editor Nikhil Wagle asked Handore 
to report the matter to the chief minister. 
Handore was not inclined to do that. Mohite 
testified before the Srikrishna commission; 
Handore didn't. Nor did he cooperate with the 
Special Task Force (STF) set up by Maharashtra's 
home minis-ter Chhagan Bhujbal in 2000 to 
implement the Srikrishna commission report.

Handore is not the only person who would know the 
inside story on the riots. There is ex-Sena MLA 
Jaywant Parab, who is known to be close to former 
Sena strongman Narayan Rane, now revenue 
minister. Parab is co-accused with former Sena 
MLA Madhukar Sarpotdar in a case involving a 
procession taken out in December 1992 without 
police permission, in which inflammatory slogans 
were allegedly shouted and speeches made. The 
case is still on.

Then there's Eknath Gaekwad, minister of state 
for health in Deshmukh's first cabinet and now a 
Congress MP. According to one testimony before 
the commission, Gaekwad, on January 14, 1993, 
along with Sena MLA Kalidas Kolambekar, led a 
4,000-strong procession to the Antop Hill police 
station demanding the release of the three Shiv 
Sainiks arrested for killing three Muslims in a 
Maruti car. Eyewitnesses are still to be examined 
in this case.

Drowned in the clamour for reviving old and 
filing new cases against Sena lea-ders lies the 
nitty-gritty that ensures convictions: faultless 
police procedures and unquestionable evidence. 
Justice Sri-krishna wasn't going soft on the Sena 
when he recommended 'strict action' against 31 
policemen and not a single politician. He held 
Thackeray responsible for the second phase of the 
riots. The Bombay high court had found nothing 
objectionable in Thac-keray's editorials in 
Saamna during the riots and the Supreme Court had 
dismissed the appeal against this judgment. The 
only cases the commission said should be reopened 
were those police had closed. This was despite 
the evidence to arrest the rioters in the form of 
testimonies before the commission.

If the government were to implement just these 
recommendations - act against the 31 policemen, 
reopen closed cases, and compensate the families 
of missing persons - it would have done enough.

The government preferred to assess the situation 
through the eyes of the police. In 2001, when 
former commissioner of
police (ACP in 1993) R D Tyagi and his team were 
chargesheeted for murder, an outcry went up 
against ''police demoralisation''.

The government has exonerated 11 of the 31 
policemen, overlooking those who testified 
against them before the commission. Ten of them 
have been punished. The minimum punishment is a 
reprimand - for a constable indicted for handing 
over a deaf and dumb boy to a mob who killed him. 
The maximum, keeping the delinquent on the 
minimum pay scale for five years, is for a 
constable found rioting with a sword, with Sena 
corporator Milind Vaidya. Seven policemen, 
charged with murder, are now acquitted or 
discharged. Meanwhile, STF has reopened only five 
of the 1,358 cases closed by the police.

Chief minister Deshmukh has now announced the 
setting up of a 'riot cell' to look afresh at 
riot cases. This will be the third such committee 
to be manned by policemen, who will judge the 
actions of their own colleagues. Their findings 
will then be passed off as implementation of the 
report.

The writer is a political commentator.

______


[6]

Publication Announcement:

SITES AND PRACTICES: AN EXERCISE IN CULTURAL PEDAGOGY
Eds Madhusree Dutta, Smriti Nevatia  
Majlis Publication  
Rs.1000/- 
e-mail: majlis at vsnl.com


Sites and Practices: an exercise in cultural 
pedagogy is the culmination of a highly 
successful experiment in education and pedagogy 
towards practicing democracy. It is an anthology 
of lectures and exercises on cultural plurality, 
stemming out of a series of workshops held in the 
last decade.

In the mid 90s, we were still reeling under the 
impact of Babri Masjid demolition and the 
subsequent communal violence. The state of 
Maharashtra was being ruled by extreme right wing 
parties and homogenisation was the predominant 
social ambience. In this context a programme was 
schemed at creating small windows of resistance. 
Plurality was explored in every formal way:  each 
discipline of the arts was placed back-to-back 
with another one; overlappings and joints were 
studied and practices and theories were woven 
together through hands on practical exercises. 
Overwhelming support was received from practicing 
artists and intellectuals. Some of the leading 
exponents of each discipline came forward to 
contribute to the workshops. There were five such 
workshops each running for a week.

Each workshop was also designed with an adequate 
number of practical exercises. The exercises were 
participatory and three-dimensional and hence not 
description friendly. Still, we included brief 
descriptions of some of those exercises, with the 
hope of encouraging participatory activities 
within pedagogy.

Selected sections from these workshops are 
compiled in this anthology. We hope the 
publication will serve, at its best, as a model 
for cultural pedagogy and at its least, will 
document some trends of thoughts and debates that 
were dominant in the last decade. Some of the 
contributors are Arun Khopkar, Anuradha Kapur, 
Habib Tanvir, Vanraj Bhatia, Romi Khosla, Vandana 
Shiva, Urvashi Butalia,  Flavia Agnes, Prof. K. 
N. Panikkar and artist Baiju Parthan, amongst 
others.


______


[7] BOOK REVIEW:


Hindustan Times
August 14, 2007

TRESPASSERS WILL BE PERSECUTED

[Photo Caption] Phallic fallacies? Shiv lingams 
in the courtyard of the Brihadeswara Temple, 
Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu

Vineeta Kalbag, Hindustan Times
July 09, 2007

INVADING THE SACRED: AN ANALYSIS OF HINDUISM STUDIES IN AMERICA
Editors: Krishnan Ramaswamy, Antonio De Nicholas & Aditi Banerjee
Publisher: Rupa
Price: Rs 595
Pages: 598

Some weeks ago, my daughter and I found ourselves 
sitting next to three very expensively turned out 
ladies (Prada bags variety) at a beauty salon. It 
was hard to not overhear their conversation about 
the prize-worthy brother of one among them, and 
we did so with increasing amusement. He was 
apparently a very cultured gentleman, for he 
watched only foreign films and could speak only 
English. And they wished there were more like him 
in our backward India.

Now, what does this have to do with the book 
under review? Only to illustrate our attitude to 
much that is Indian, and all that is foreign. We 
hanker for the glossy West, pursue it 
relentlessly, and get very bristly when we 
suspect or perceive an absence of equal 
reciprocity from the 'outsider'. Invading the 
Sacred: An Analysis of Hinduism Studies in 
America is just such a book. It is an angry book, 
but one where the anger is neither focused nor 
fair.

What struck me first was that most of the 
contributors to the book have chosen to live and 
work in the United States, are widely published, 
and have held respected positions. For example, S 
N Balagangadhara was recently co-chair of the 
Hinduism Unit of the American Academy of 
Religion. Sankrant Sanu's protest about the Wendy 
Doniger Encarta entries on Hinduism led to their 
removal and replacement with a 20-page 
contribution on the subject by Arvind Sharma. So 
it seems counter-intuitive to claim, as the book 
does, that there is no respect for the view of 
'insiders'.

The essay by Vishal Agarwal and Kalavai Venkat 
protests that "a cursory search on WorldCat and 
other electronic catalogs shows that 
approximately 300 college and school libraries in 
North America..." have a copy of Paul 
Courtright's psychoanalytic Ganesa, Lord of 
Obstacles. However, a cursory search only on 
WorldCat shows up 86 titles by Arvind Sharma, out 
of which two randomly chosen titles, Feminism and 
World Religions and Women in World Religions, are 
available in 1,357 and 647 libraries respectively 
in just the US.

We have to acknowledge that the US is an open and 
unfettered place for study and inquiry; and that 
is why we all love to send our children to study 
in its universities. Interestingly, the US Senate 
is opening its session on July 17 with Vedic 
hymns. Catch our august parliamentarians doing 
that.

What worries me about this book is its 
motivation. Is it a scholarly treatise making a 
case for more 'insider' experts on Hinduism in 
the American academia? Is it an angry response to 
how the authors feel the American Academy of 
Religion's (AAR) Religions in South Asia (RISA) 
group's Western theories have influenced 
India-related studies? Is it an attempt to 
discredit the work of individuals like Wendy 
Doniger, Paul Courtright, Jeffrey Kripal ('Wendy 
and her children' as coined by Rajiv Malhotra)? 
Is it an attempt to discredit the Western media? 
Or is it an angry Hindu response to Christianity 
and Islam? The fact also remains that when 
authors like Sarah Caldwell (a member of RISA for 
her scholarship on Kali) are met with criticism 
from other 'outsiders' like Cynthia Humes, it is 
dismissed with a comment like: "But how seriously 
does Caldwell have to take such criticism?"

The book is very defensive where scholarship of 
Hinduism is concerned and perceives any 
counter-objections from Western scholars to the 
'insider's' critique of their work as 'attacks', 
but discounts as ineffective any similar 
objections from an 'outsider' to another 
'outsider's' scholarship. The editorial boxes 
interwoven in the essays add a more hysterical 
note with hypothetical reasoning or one-sided 
editorialising. The logic behind the book's 
illustrations - comic strips that are pretty 
damning of the 'White non-Hindu' - is also 
puzzling. These comics carry a disclaimer at the 
bottom that they bear no resemblance to any real 
person. So what is the purpose of their inclusion?

In one essay, Pandita Indrani Rampersad takes 
vehement objection to Stanley Kurtz's 
anthropological study that claims that unlike 
Western women, Hindu mothers do not use nursing 
time as an occasion to cement an emotional union 
with their child. Maybe in the community that he 
observed, the women did not have the privacy of 
space or the luxury of time to use nursing as 
bonding time. But so what? Doesn't Pandita 
Indrani's objection indicate that we too are 
judging ourselves on Western matrices? We bond 
with our children in a multitude of other ways.

The criticism in the book is aimed at 
psychoanalytic methods used to interpret some of 
our Hindu mythology. It would do well to remember 
that this is just one method of analysis of - 
myths! The psychoanalytic interpretation through 
Western eyes of Ganesa's trunk as a phallus is 
not as bizarre as the authors claim, given the 
story of Queen Maya's dream that a white elephant 
was tearing through her womb and her subsequent 
conviction that she was going to give birth to a 
boy; and indeed the Gautam Buddha was born.

The Rig Veda I.164.46 states "Ekam sat vipraha 
bahuda vadanti" or "truth is one, the sages give 
it many names". It is a noble task to familiarise 
the West with the Hindu's understanding of 
Hinduism. But it should be done with equanimity, 
and respect for the scholarship of others whose 
interpretation may not be the same as ours; and 
most certainly not by throwing eggs at them.

As you read this book, ask yourself one question 
- do you stand for artistic and creative freedom? 
If the answer is yes, then you must support 
academic freedom. Scholarly debate is only 
enriching; muzzling is dehumanising. Let us also 
not forget that the Rig Veda has been added to 
the UNESCO's heritage list.

Vineeta Kalbag is a potter and psychologist, and 
has lived overseas in several countries for many 
years.


______



[8] UPCOMING ANNOUNCEMENTS:

(i)

THE SECOND FLOOR: BEYOND PARTITION 

Oxford University Press and T2F Present "Beyond 
Partition" - A Film Screening and Interactive 
Discussion with Justice (Retired) Dr. Javid Iqbal

Documentary Screening (1 hour, 5 minutes)

Beyond Partition is a documentary film that 
reflects the views of South Asian filmmakers on 
the Partition of India and Pakistan. Renowned 
filmmakers, Gulzar and Govind Nihalani reflect on 
the communal violence they witnessed. Cinema 
veteran M.S. Sathyu and celebrated script writer 
Shama Zaidi question the very idea behind the 
division, while Pakistani filmmaker Sabiha Sumar 
focuses on other powerful forces that generated 
the demand for Pakistan.

Beyond Partition is far more than just a 
recollection of the past from the view point of 
filmmakers. Producer-Director Lalit Mohan Joshi 
has skilfully connected the past with the 
present. The film explores current issues 
including terrorism and the tensions that affect 
Hindu-Muslim relations as well as Indo-Pakistan 
disputes - a continuing legacy of Partition. A 
treat for all film lovers and media students, 
Beyond Partition depicts rare archival footage 
from India's Films Division and brings alive the 
making of landmark films like Nimai Ghosh's 
"Chhinnamool", M.S. Sathyu's "Garm Hava", Govind 
Nihalani's "Tamas", and Sabiha Sumar's "Khamosh 
Pani".

Talk and Discussion

After the film, Justice (Retired) Dr. Javid Iqbal 
will present his views on Partition and the floor 
will be opened up to questions from the audience.

Date: Saturday, 1st September, 2007

Time: 6:30 pm

Free Entry (This event has been made possible 
through the support of Oxford University Press, 
Pakistan)
Venue: The Second Floor
6-C, Prime Point Building, Phase 7, Khayaban-e-Ittehad, DHA, Karachi
Phone: 538-9273 | 0300-823-0276 | info at t2f.biz
Map: http://www.t2f.biz/location

Seats are limited and will be available on a 'first come, first served' basis.

_____

(ii)

Day Long SEMINAR ON DISSENT AND DEBATE IN SOCIETY

Date: September 8, 2007

Time: 10.00 am to 5pm

Dalal Hall, Near Paldi Charrasta, In front of Zaveri Hall, Ahmadabad

10.00-10.30- tea

Session I- 10.30-1.00

Chair: Dr Ghanshyam Shah

10.30-12.00

Speakers:
Tridip Suhrud-Associate Professor, Dhirubhai 
Ambani Institute of Information & Communication 
Technology
Ashok Vajpayee-Writer, Poet, former Joint Secretary MHRD
Rita Kothari-Associate Professor, Mudra Institute of Communication, Ahmedabad

12.00-1.00

Interactive Session

1.00-2.00: Lunch

Session II - 2.00-5.00

Chair: Gagan Sethi

2.00-3.30

Speakers:  
Hiren Gandhi-Theatre and Social Activist, Director, Darshan
Mallika Sarabhai-Artist, dancer, Director , Darpana Academy of Performing Arts

3.30-5.00

Interactive Session


Anhad
1914, Karanjwala Building
Opp Khanpur arwaza, Khanpur
Ahmedabad-380001
Tel- 25500844/ 25500772

_____

(iii)

LECTURE: HISTORY AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS ISSUES--A 
NOVELIST'S PERSPECTIVE WITH BAPSI SIDHWA
Co-Sponsored by James A. Baker III Institute Student Forum
Date:
Time:	September 11th
6:30 - 7:30 pm
Location:	Texas
Baker Institute, Baker Hall, 6100 Main Street, Houston
Cost:	Free admission

Pakistani-American novelist and playwright Bapsi 
Sidhwa offers her perspective on the politics and 
history of one of America's most important Asian 
allies. Sidhwa, who resides in Houston, is well 
known for her collaborative work with filmmaker 
Deepa Mehta, writing both the 1991 novel Cracking 
India, which is the basis for Mehta's 1998 film 
Earth, and the 2006 novel Water, based on Mehta's 
2005 film of the same name. The novel Water 
recently brought to Sidhwa Italy's prestigious 
2007 Premio Mondello award. Sidhwa's play, An 
American Brat, had its U.S. debut at Stages 
Repertory Theatre earlier this year.

_____

(iv)

Dear Friends,
Knowing your keen opposition to neo-liberal 
policies and strong concern for global justice, 
we hope that you and the networks you are 
associated with will participate in and endorse 
the Independent People's Tribunal on the Impact 
of the World Bank Group in India.
Given the need to examine the evidence of 
increasing damage, many groups have come together 
to organize a People's Tribunal on the Impact of 
the World Bank Group in India.

Please circulate this widely!
The Tribunal needs researchers, cultural 
submissions, financial support, technical 
support, media outreach and much more.

WHAT YOU CAN DO
For several years, local groups and grassroots 
organizations have been opposed to the 
intervention of multilateral agencies in India's 
economy and development. At various stages, there 
has been strong project-based opposition to the 
World Bank in different parts of the country. 
Consequently, in the last few years the Bank has 
modified its lending patterns, concentrating more 
on policy-based lending, as against project-based 
lending. The retrogressive impact of the Bank's 
intervention -- at both the project and policy 
level -- is being felt throughout the country by 
almost all marginal and impoverished sections of 
society. Given the need to examine the evidence 
of increasing damage many groups have come 
together to organize a People's Tribunal on the 
Impact of the World Bank Group in India.
The purpose behind the Tribunal is to provide a 
just forum for people who have suffered because 
of projects and policies funded or promoted by 
the World Bank Group. The process has been 
formalised through several consultations with 
groups, individuals and organizations in various 
parts of the country.
A Tribunal of this nature on the World Bank will 
be the first of its kind in India. The Tribunal 
endeavours to investigate the effects of the 
Bank's policies, not only sectorally, but also 
nationally and institutionally. Key groups, 
individuals and organizations are playing the 
roles of presenters and advisors. Panelists 
include three retired Supreme and High Court 
Indian Judges, prominent political and 
development academics such as Eric Toussaint, 
Susan George and Arundhati Roy, ex Indian Prime 
Minister V.P. Singh, and the spiritual leader 
Sivak Suvaraska. The date of the tribunal has 
been set for 21-24 September 2007. The venue is 
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
We are writing to you to:

Request your support
Endorse the process
Add a link to your website and send this letter to your listservs
Participate and attend in solidarity
Ask if you are fighting against any WB related 
projects and have any documentation, studies 
regarding the impact of WB on policies, sectors 
or projects in India

For more details on how to get involved please visit:
www.worldbanktribunal.org
worldbanktribunal list serv - please sign up!
Or write to us at: secretariat at worldbanktribunal.org

Sincerely,
World Bank Tribunal Secretariat
C/O WGT, Flat No. 14, Supreme Enclave, Mayur Vihar Phase 1, New Delhi 110 091
Contact: Deepika D'Souza: +91 98200 39557/ Harsh Dobhal: +91 98185 69021
CONVENORS
Ajayan R (Plachimada Solidarity Committee) o Ajit 
Muricken (Vikas Adhyayan Kendra) o Ambarish Rai / 
Anil Sadgopal (People's Campaign for a Common 
School System) o Anant Bhan (Sathi-CEHAT) o Anil 
Chowdry (PEACE) o Antony Bamang (Arunachal 
Citizen's Rights) o Anurag Bhargava (Jan Swasthya 
Abhiyan) o Arvind Kejriwal/Suchi Pande 
(Parivatan) o Ashok Rao (National Confederation 
of Officers Association) o Benny Kuruvilla (Focus 
on the Global South) o Bina Stanis (Chhotanagpur 
Adivasi Seva Samiti) o C H Venkatachalam (All 
India Bank Employees Association) o Chinu 
Shrinavasan / Anurag Bhargava (Jan Swasthya 
Abhiyan) o Devinder Sharma (Forum for 
Biotechnology and Food Security) o Ginny 
Srivastava (Astha) o Girish Pant (Prayas) o Goldy 
George (Dalit Mukti Morcha) o Gururaja Budhya 
(Urban Research Centre) o H Mahadevan (All India 
Trade Union Congress) o Himanshu Thakkar (South 
Asian Network on Dams, Rivers and People 
[SANDRP]) o J. John (Centre for Education and 
Communication) o Kalyani Menon-Sen (Jagori) o 
Kanchi Kohli / Manju Menon (Kalpavriksh 
Environment Action Group) o Kavita Srivastava 
(People's Union for Civil Liberties [PUCL], 
Jaipur) o Kikon (Naga Peoples' Movement for Human 
Rights) o Lenin (People's Vigilance Committee on 
Human Rights [PVCHR]) o Ranjan Solomon 
(Alternatives) o Leo Saldanha (Environment 
Support Group) o M. Vijayabhaskar (Madras 
Institute of Development Studies) o Madhumita 
Dutta / Nityanand Jayaraman (Corporate 
Accountability Desk) o Medha Patkar (Narmada 
Bachao Andolan) o Michelle Chawla (Dahanu Taluka 
Environment Welfare) o Mihir Desai (HRLN) o 
Mukhta Srivastava /Simpreet Singh/Uma Shankaran 
(National Alliance of People's Movements) o 
Narasimha Reddy o Naveen I Thomas (Community 
Health Cell) o National Fishworkers Union o 
Prafulla Samantara/Sudhir Patnaik (Lok Shakti 
Abhiyan) o Pratibha Shinde (Lok Sangharsh Morcha) 
o Rajendraavi (Lokayan) o Ramananda 
Wangkheirakpam / P T George (Intercultural 
Resources) o Sachin Jain (Vikas Samvad) o 
Shaktiman Ghosh (National Hawkers Federation) o 
Shripad Dharmadhikari (Manthan Adhyayan Kendra) o 
Smitu Kothari (Intercultural Resources) o SR 
Hiremath (National Committee for the Protection 
of Natural Resources [NCPNR]) o Subrata (National 
Institute of Public Finance and Policy) o Dr. 
Sunilam (Kisan Sangarsh Samiti) Swati Desai 
(Paryaran Surksha Samitee) o Umakant (National 
Campaign for Dalit Human Rights) o Vijay Jawandhi 
(Shetkari Sangathana) o Vinay Baindur (Citizens 
Voluntary Initiative for the City [CIVIC]) o 
Vinod Raina (Asia Pacific Movement for Debt & 
Development [APMDD] o Vincent (National Campaign 
for Dalit Human Rights) o Wilfred D'Costa (Indian 
Social Action Forum[INSAF])

ADVISORS
Prof. Amit Bhaduri (Council for Social 
development) o Angana chatterjee o Prof. Arun 
Kumar (JNU)o Biraj Patnaik o Rammanohar Reddy o 
Colin Gonsalves (HrlN) o Prof. Deepak Nayyar 
(JNU) o Esperanza Lujan (Indian law resource 
Center) o Jawed Naqvi o Karen coelho o Kavaljit 
singh (Public Interest research Centre) o Kavita 
Srivastava (PUCl, Jaipur)o Ken Fernandes o KG 
Kannabiran (PUCl) o Leo saldanha (environment 
Support Group) o Vijayabaskar o Michael Goldman o 
Mr. EAS Sharma o Nancy Alexander (Globalization 
Challenge Initiative) o Neil Tangri o Praful 
Bidwai o Prashant Bhushan o Prof. Radhika 
Balakrishnan (Marymount Manhattan College) o Dr. 
N Raghuram o Richard Mahapatra (down to earth) o 
Sanjay Parikho Shalmali Guttal (Focus on the 
Global South) o Subrata o Sudhir Patnaik (lok 
Shakti Abhiyan) oVijay Paranjype (Gomukh) Vinay 
Baindur o Ward Morehouse

ENDORSING INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS/INSTITUTIONS
AID/WATCH Australia o Anti-Privatization Alliance 
Pakistan o BanglaPraxis o Bui Van Nghi (The 
Vietnam Peace Committee) o Bretton Woods Project 
o Doctors for Iraq o Forest Peoples Programme, UK 
o Friends of the Earth International o Gender 
Action o Jubilee South o Paksitan Kissan Rabita 
Committee

For the full list of national endorsers please visit:
www.worldbanktribunal.org/endorsers.html


secretariat at worldbanktribunal.org


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

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: http://insaf.net/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/

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