SACW | Oct. 19-22, 2007 | Pakistan at war / Communal Propaganda in Goa / Disappeared in Sri Lanka
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at mnet.fr
Sun Oct 21 20:47:25 CDT 2007
South Asia Citizens Wire | October 19-22, 2007 |
Dispatch No. 2462 - Year 10 running
[1] Pakistan: It is our war (Pervez Hoodbhoy)
[2] Pakistan: Feminist's initiate discussion around a 'Citizen's Charter
[3] India: Communal Propaganda in Goa
(i) Pointing Fingers At Fascists - Right to Free
Speech is not Absolute (Jason Fernandes)
(ii) The Politics of Hate (Vidyadhar Gadgil)
[4] India: Time to Deliver Justice for Atrocities
in Punjab (Human Rights Watch / Ensaaf)
[5] Burma - India: Glass Palace Prison (Sagari Chhabra)
[6] Book Review: Violence, Memories and
Peace-building: A citizen report on minorities in
India and Pakistan
[7] India: Open Letter To Vanashakti On Forest
Rights Act (Campaign for Survival and Dignity)
[8] Announcements:
(i) On TV: The Many Faces of Madness a film by
Amar Kanwar (on NDTV, 21 Oct 2007)
(ii) Meeting With Survivors of Mumbai Riots and
Activists (New Delhi, October 23, 2007)
(iii) Gathering of the families of the
disappeared in Sri Lanka (Comombo, October 27,
2007)
(iv) Film screening Ragni Kidvai's documentary
'Bindiya Chamkay Gi', (Karachi, 27 October 2007)
+ evening of English poetry renditions by Salman
Kureshi and Shireen Haroun ((Karachi, 28 October
2007)
______
[1]
Dawn
October 21, 2007
IT IS OUR WAR
by Pervez Hoodbhoy
THE war in Pakistan's tribal areas is being
fought by Pakistan's army under America's gun and
on its orders. Many innocents have tragically
died from bombardment from the skies. Therefore,
not surprisingly, Pakistanis are angry and most
feel it is not their war.
But Pakistan, for its own sake, urgently needs to
battle the flames of religious fanaticism lest
they consume the rest of the country. This must,
however, be done in a manner that is intelligent
and principled.
Few Pakistanis have spoken out against the rising
tide of fanatical militancy. Even the horrific
mass murder of joyous citizens by two suicide
bombers during Benazir Bhutto's triumphal return
has not led to a full-throated condemnation of
extremism.
Normally vocal, urban, educated Pakistanis -
whose values and lifestyles make them eligible
for slaughter by Taliban standards - are
remarkably silent. Do we believe it cannot really
happen to us? Are we unwilling to speak because
the threat has cloaked itself in the name of
religion? Or, are we blinded to the danger by the
conviction that the war against the jihadis is
America's war?
No one can doubt that there is a creeping
Talibanisation of Pakistan's society and economy.
The signs are everywhere. The Taliban have taken
control in many tribal areas, forcing local
government officials to flee. As happened in
Afghanistan, the Taliban are now the law. A
widely available Taliban-made video shows the
bodies of common criminals and bandits dangling
from electricity poles in the town of Miramshah,
the administrative headquarters of North
Waziristan. Girls' schools have been closed.
Barbers have been told: shave and die.
Traditional folk musicians have fled. Polio
vaccinations have been declared haram.
Unvaccinated children are under threat from polio
and other diseases because doctors and health
workers are being killed.
Taliban vice-and-virtue squads enforce the
Sharia, checking, among other things, the length
of beards, whether shalwars are worn at an
appropriate height above the ankles, and the
attendance of individuals in the mosques. Even
our history is being attacked, as fanatics trying
to emulate their Afghan Taliban brothers
attempted to destroy the 2,000-year-old statue of
the Buddha in Swat, surely one of the greatest
historical monuments in our country. Not
surprisingly, tourism in Swat and the Northern
Areas has come to a dead halt.
Much of the responsibility lies with the
government, which is seen as insincere. Everyone
knows that military generals, politicians and
incendiary mullahs have been symbiotically linked
to Pakistan's politics for decades. Jihadist
groups, aimed against India, have long operated
with the state's knowledge and support. These
alliances have helped various power groups attain
their respective goals.
Nations win wars only when there is a clear
rallying cause. While the army high command has
committed men to battle, and lost well over a
thousand of them, they have not told the nation
what these men are fighting for. Nor has the
enemy yet been given a name - they are merely
termed 'miscreants'. There is also well-founded
suspicion of government motives. Since the
Taliban were Pakistan's creation, and firmly
supported by its intelligence agencies,
Pakistanis know that the U-turn would not have
happened but for America.
The state is also seen as inept. As in the Lal
Masjid episode, the government initially refused
to identify the enemy. It finally had to do so
when the militants went on the rampage. But,
instead of acting decisively, the government
sought appeasement - a move that made it look
weak. When appeasement failed - as it certainly
had to - there was a massive use of force leaving
large numbers of innocents dead. A situation that
could have been dealt with by using minimal force
was allowed to fester until it eventually
exploded.
The Taliban have won victory after victory
because the army leadership has not reacted as it
should have. In another country, the beheadings
and mutilation of soldiers' bodies would have led
to an uproar which that government could have
used to drum up support for its subsequent
actions. Recall that in 2006, the capture of just
two Israeli soldiers by the Hezbollah had been
the casus belli for the invasion of Lebanon.
But the capture of nearly 300 Pakistani soldiers
led only to public scorn, not sympathy.
Initially, an attempt was made to deny that any
soldiers had been kidnapped or had surrendered.
This soon had to be abandoned. Then, several
weeks later, after the BBC interviewed the
military officers in the Taliban's captivity,
General Musharraf criticised the officers for
having surrendered and said that they had behaved
unprofessionally.The Taliban have executed three
of the soldiers, released a few, and kept most of
the rest. The captors say that the army is not
interested in having the remaining men back
because they are poor people, not from the
officer class. This propaganda resonates
powerfully with the ordinary soldier.
The demoralisation in the ranks can only be
imagined. A once-proud army stands isolated in
the war. It is rightly blamed for the collateral
deaths of non-combatants, but it is receiving
none of the support it deserves from the public
for stemming the tide of primitive religious
extremism.
The government is not to be blamed alone. The
private media, including the so-called 'free'
private television channels known for their
so-called openness, studiously avoid meaningful
discussions on religious extremism. Although
there are endless discussions on the wheeling and
dealing of succession politics, the enormous
damage to the country's social and economic
fabric receives scant attention.
This does not mean that the Pakistani public has
succumbed to extremism. An overwhelming majority
of Pakistan's citizens do not want harsh
strictures imposed on their personal liberties.
They do not want enslavement of their women,
their forced confinement in the burqa, or for
them to be denied the right to education.
Instead, they want a decent life for themselves
and their children. They disapprove of Islam
being used as a cover for tribal primitivism. But
there is little protest.
We must understand this. Why is there no mass
movement to confront the extremist Taliban of
Miramhah and Waziristan, or the
violence-preaching extremist mullah in Mingora,
Lahore or Islamabad? This is because ordinary
people lack the means and institutions to
understand, organise, and express their values
and aspirations. We do not yet have the
democratic institutions that can give politics
meaning for ordinary people. Depoliticising the
country over the decades has led to paying this
heavy price.
To fight and win the war against the Taliban,
Pakistan will need to mobilise both its people
and the state. The notion of a power-sharing
agreement is a non-starter; the spectacular
failures of earlier agreements should be a
lesson. Instead, the government should help
create public consensus through open forum
discussions, proceed faster on infrastructure
development in the tribal areas, and make
judicious use of military force. This is every
Pakistani's war, not just the army's, and it will
have to be fought even if America packs up and
goes away.
It may yet be possible to roll back the Islamist
laws and institutions that have corroded our
society for over 30 years and to defeat our
self-proclaimed holy warriors. But this can only
happen if our leaders win the trust of the
citizens. To do this, political parties,
government officials, and yes, even the generals,
will have to embrace democracy, in word and deed.
This will ultimately determine whether we become
a respectable member of the comity of states, or
a pariah extremist state that breeds
export-quality terrorism.
The writer teaches at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.
______
[2] [received via Beena Sarwar]
DISCUSSION AROUND A 'CITIZEN'S CHARTER':
* After May 12, WAF members had talked to
affected families. They took the initiative to
set up the Womens Commission for Peace (which
includes Nasir Aslam Zahid, Majida Rizvi &
others). They are working on 'Pur Aman Karachi'
(Peace Karachi).
* Re: the draft 'citizen's charter' - The idea
was to use it as a tool for political discussion,
awareness raising and pressuring the government
and political parties - it could be an evolving
document, drawing on previous such efforts
initiated by WAF, HRCP & others.
* The draft was not discussed beyond the first
point because it was pointed out that the
Constitution itself is a citizens' charter - the
1973 Constitution, not the mutilated version that
has developed since. The text is available on the
web -
http://www.pakistanconstitution-law.com/theconst_1973.asp
Also, the basic principle of the Constitution is
federalism, which has been ignored by all
governments, contributing to the present crisis.
* There is a need to clarify the linkages between
non-democratic rule and the issues people face.
The system needs to be changed.
A drafting committee will further work on the
draft below in light of this discussion. The next
meeting - Saturday, Oct 27, 4.00 pm, at The
Second Floor (6-C, Prime Point Building,
Khayaban-e-Ittehad, Phase 7, DHA, Karachi -75500)
For the draft and some feedback, see below.
Please feel free to pass this on to others who
may be interested
thanks
beena
o o o
WAF Draft Citizens Charter
Initial outline for CITIZEN's CHARTER to be put
up to the civil society for feedback and
consensus.
1- Restoration of a democratic order based on adult franchise.
The armed forces should go back to their rightful
duty of defending the national sovereignty.
2- Freedom of media and all forms of
expression, a right provided by our constitution,
should be fully implemented.
3- Equality before law of all citizens
irrespective of sex, cast, creed and religion.
4- No one is above accountability. The NOR
is a disgrace to the nation and should be
repealed.
5- A caretaker government and independent
election commission to be established to ensure
fair and free elections.
6- Judiciary is a strong pillar of a
democratic system. It should be strengthened.
7- All political parties and groups should
be deweaponised effectively, to create an
enabling environment for the peaceful transition
of power.
8- The common man is crushed under the
weight of rising inflation and price hike. It
calls for immediate relief measures.
9- Independent Citizens' boards, with powers
to check and curtail price hike and hording,
should be established.
10- The state is responsible to provide
health, education, employment and civic amenities
to its citizens. The national planning and budget
allocations should reflect the priority of
citizens needs.
Some feedback received via email re: clause 4:
"The only clause with a specific demand is the
one about the NRO being a disgrace to the nation.
Interesting choice in singling something out. How
about the 8th Amendment and 17th Amendment (that
indemnified all crimes committed by Zia's and
Musharraf's regimes respectively), or the terms
of reference of NAB that exempt mullahs, judges,
and military officers from its remit, or
Musharraf's public indemnification of MQM for May
12, and of Captain Hammad for the rape of Shazia
Khalid, or the withdrawal of cases against PPP
patriots and PML-Q leaders, or the refusal to
submit any financial matters pertaining to the
military to outside scrutiny in the first
instance?"
______
[3]
Gomantak Times
19 October 2007
POINTING FINGERS AT FASCISTS
Right to Free Speech is not Absolute
by Jason Fernandes
A fortnight ago I had occasion to visit and write
about an exhibition at the Kala Academy that, in
my opinion, amounted to trying to create a
genocidal Gujarat-like situation in Goa.
Subsequent to its publication the essay was
'commented' on by the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti-
the organizers of the exhibition, and a few
others. The more substantial of the criticisms
against the column accused me of being Fascist
and preventing a peaceful organization from
exercising their right to speech. This particular
criticism is an interesting one to respond to
since it is this single argument that often
underlies a number of contentious issues.
Thanks to the Constitution of India, the right to
the freedom of speech and expression is the
fundamental right of every Indian. And yet, this
right is not an absolute right allowing us to say
and express everything that we think and feel.
The same Article that guarantees us this
fundamental right also places restrictions on
this right. We may not exercise this right to
speech and expression if it threatens to, among
other things, impinge on public order or act as
incitement to an offence. It was my opinion that
the exhibition in exhorting Hindus (and Hindus
alone) to hate Muslims and view every single one
of them as a potential terrorist was clearly
exceeding the rights under the Constitution and
entering into the realm of hate-speech. There can
be no fundamental right to hate-speech. To allow
for hate-speech under the Right to Speech and
Expression is to make a fetish of this Right to
the point of its loosing its meaning. In fact it
would be a fascist tendency that would argue that
it has a right to hate-speech, allowing me to
turn around and ask my accusers if they and not I
are more worthy of the label they award me.
The criticisms also accused me of being a
Hindu-hater for asking that their exhibition be
banned. Nothing could be further from the truth;
on the contrary most of my best friends are
Hindu! The exhibition purported a concern for the
situation for the Hindus in Kashmir, and truly
there is reason to be concerned for the daily
violence and bloodshed in Kashmir. It is true
that a number of Hindu families have been forced
to leave the valley and this is not just tragic
but condemnable. But this is not a Hindu tragedy
alone since it is also Muslim families and those
of other religions that have been forced to leave
the valley thanks to the frenzy of violence that
engulfs Kashmir. To ignore this dimension of the
problem is not to solve the problem, but to only
compound it. Any solution to Kashmir must
necessarily ensure that all these affected groups
are returned in peace to their homeland. The
violence in Kashmir is one that should concern
any individual not just Hindus. It is the appeal
to Hindus alone, thereby excluding others from
even expressing concern, or denying their
possibility for concern- as indeed is what my
critics are doing to me- is what is disturbing
about the exhibition and its organizers. What is
disturbing about the appeal to a 'Hindu'
consciousness is that it is based on the denial
of all other identities- gender, caste, region,
syncretic- and the recollection of historical
wrongs that are sought to be redressed in the
present. Thus, it wasn't surprising that
responses to the column dragged up the issue of
the Inquisition and the destruction of temples in
Goa. In doing so, once more the issue was
constructed as only a Hindu issue. What these
critics forget is that the primary target of the
Inquisition was those persons who became Catholic
and whose lives subjected to greater stricture
than those who managed to retain, through
negotiation with the Portuguese state, their
religion. This historical recollection of wrongs
then, is only a partial recollection, and it is
this partiality that we must question to realize
that there is something deeply problematic with
the construction of a 'Hindu' consciousness.
The problem of 'Hindu' consciousness is not a
unique problem though; it shares more in common
with fundamentalist and radical Islam and
Christianity that it realizes. Which is why, when
we are called to contest Islamic radicalism and
the manner in which these radicals begin to
define Islam, we are similarly called on to
contest Hindutva proponents who seek to tells us
that they know Hinduism better than us, and
Christian fundamentalists who pervert the
religion in their bid for State power.
Hindu-Muslim-Sikh- Isai, Sab hain bhai-bhai, went
a now forgotten nationalist slogan. It appears
that the moment to forge the Brotherhood anew is
upon us as the fight with these dark fascist
forces looms large on our horizon.
(Comments are welcomed at www.dervishnotes.blogspot.com)
o o o
(ii)
Navhind Times, 21 October 2007
THE POLITICS OF HATE
by Vidyadhar Gadgil
Freedom of Expression, Hate Speech, and the Government Response
Freedom of expression has been an issue that has
been much in the public eye of late. At the
national level, we have had two major cases of
artists - M.F. Hussain and Taslima Nasrin - who
have been attacked by religious fundamentalists
(the former by the Hindu variety and the latter
by the Muslim version) for 'hurting religious
sentiments'.
Goa too has been witnessing a heated public
debate on the issue of freedom of expression over
the Hindu Janjagruti Sammelan-FACT (Foundation
Against Continuing Terrorism) exhibition at the
Kala Academy which concluded on 2nd October,
Gandhi Jayanti. Secular, human rights groups and
ordinary citizens have been questioning the
government patronage extended to the exhibition,
and even demanding that the government step in
forthwith to stop it, arguing that it is covered
under the 'hate speech' exception. The
Constitution, under Article 19, guarantees the
right to freedom of expression, but this freedom
is not absolute. As with other provisions related
to various freedoms in Article 19, 'reasonable
restrictions' can be imposed upon this right. In
this article, we will look at three examples -
the screening of Rakesh Sharma's 'Final
Solution', Prof. Puniyani's public talk and the
FACT exhibition - all dealing with the phenomenon
of communal violence. How are we to distinguish
between them and decide what stand to take on
each? And how do we understand the government
response to them, both singly and taken as a
whole, in the context of this constitutional
provision?
This exhibition, which is based on photographs by
the Frenchman Francois Gautier, has been touring
the hinterland of Goa for some months now and has
been the centrepiece of a major communal
mobilisation by the Hindutva forces. When the
exhibition was on at the Kala Academy, volunteers
would entice you inside, telling you to come and
see the atrocities being perpetrated by violent
Muslims against innocent Hindus. The photographs
depicted mutilated corpses and other scenes of
violence. Was this used to warn us of the
dangers of communal violence? No, the captions
and posters were inflammatory and invited the
viewer to further violence. To quote just one
example, "If you are a Hindu, and your blood does
not boil when you see this, then you are not a
true Hindu." The whole purpose of the exhibition
appeared to be to create a deep, visceral hatred
among Hindus towards Muslims. There were jeeps
going round Panjim, with megaphone-wielding
volunteers exhorting Hindus to come see the
exhibition, understand the threat against them,
and unite to defend the faith. There were clips
promoting this film running on Goan cable
channels showing 'Hindu self-defence squads'.
Defence against what and whom? Is this relevant
in the Goan context; in fact, is it not actively
seeking to create a problem where none exists?
As for Francois Gautier, the photographer, we all
know his history as a cheerleader of the Hindu
right and as a person who denigrated ex-President
Narayan as an 'untouchable'.
As we have seen, the right to freedom of speech
and expression is not absolute - the state may
impose reasonable restrictions upon it 'in the
interest of public order, security of State,
decency or morality'. Are we then to argue that
no depiction or analysis of communal violence be
permitted? If we demand that the FACT exhibition
be stopped, are we saying that all depiction of
communal violence be banned? Two other recent
cases from Goa relating to freedom of expression
in relation to depiction and analysis of communal
violence are instructive in this regard.
It is well established in Indian law that it is
not the actual portrayal but the framing and the
intent that is to be invoked when imposing
restrictions. Rakesh Sharma's film 'Final
Solution' is a study of the gruesome communal
violence directed against Muslims in Gujarat in
2002. Through meticulous documentation of events
and detailed interviews with some of the dramatis
personae, the film projects itself as a 'study of
the politics of hate'. The director claims that
"Final Solution is anti-hate/violence as those
who forget history are condemned to relive it."
When the film was screened widely in Goa in
August 2006, with the director in attendance,
there were protests from some sections of the
Hindu right, asking that they be stopped.
The film was denied a certificate by the Censor
Board (during the NDA regime) for several months.
It was only after a sustained public campaign
that the ban was finally lifted and a censor
certificate issued in October 2004. The film has
subsequently gone on to win a plethora of
national and international awards and has been
feted as one of the most powerful statements
against the politics of hate and violence made in
recent times. Answering questions after a
well-attended public screening in Panjim in
August 2006, Sharma agreed that the film does
depict communal violence and records communal
speeches, but argued that all this is framed in a
context which argues against these phenomena. He
went on to say, "Months of filming in Gujarat
showed me how viciously communal propaganda can
pollute the public mind - hatred of the other is
now common sense. Communal violence scars not
only its victims but also its perpetrators,
leaving deep wounds in society which can take
centuries to heal. If we take this path, we are
in danger of becoming a society of psychopaths."
The last of our three cases from Goa around this
theme was a talk by Prof. Puniyani on the subject
'Communal Threats to Secular Democracy in India'
in May 2007. Prof. Ram Puniyani has been a
sustained campaigner against communal politics
for some time. He argues that communal politics,
whether claiming support from Hinduism, Islam, or
Christianity, is essentially the same. It does
not concern itself with the moral aspect of
religion, which is similar across all religions,
but with identity politics. It tries to build
political constituencies by claiming support from
religion and employs violent means towards this
end. In an interview given in Goa in August 2007,
when asked where he thinks India is heading in
respect of communal violence, he replied, "I
think we are at the critical path. We can either
choose the path of destruction due to communalism
or we have to realise the dangers of it and thus
bring back the values of the freedom movement."
Now let us examine the way the Government of Goa
reacted in each of these cases. The government
did not extend any support to Rakesh Sharma's
film. Human rights groups in Goa organised the
screenings in non-governmental public spaces. By
no word or gesture did the government express any
support to its anti-hate message. It could
perhaps be argued that this is not the job of the
government. But why then was the FACT exhibition,
which is clearly communal hate speech and
propaganda, allowed on the premises of the Kala
Academy? This is the premier public space of Goa,
which is chaired by a committee headed by the
current Speaker and ex-Chief Minister, Pratapsinh
Rane. The Chief Minister, Digambar Kamat, saw fit
to visit this exhibition. There has been no
attempt to curb the communal propaganda taking
place in Goa under the pretext of mobilising the
masses to view this exhibition.
Fine. That means the Goa government permits
freedom of speech, with no exceptions? But in the
case of Prof. Ram Puniyani's talk, the
administration stepped in to stop his public talk
on the basis of a complaint made by some members
of the VHP. By no stretch of the imagination can
Prof. Puniyani be described as a person indulging
in communal propaganda - in fact, he devotes all
his time to combating it. Yet the government
banned the talk. The Chief Election Commissioner,
N. Gopalaswami, commented at the time that that
"this action on the part of the SDM was wrong."
In the context of these three cases, one would
have to accept that the behaviour of the
government is, to say the very least,
inconsistent. But a more in-depth analysis
indicates something far more disturbing. The
government, in the case of the screenings of
'Final Solution', sees no need to support
anti-hate messages arguing for peace and harmony.
Not content with that, in the case of Dr.
Puniyani, it actually bans such messages. And in
a final travesty, in the case of the FACT
exhibition it actively connives with hate speech,
enabling its spread by providing it with
government space to disseminate its virulent
messages.
Goa is still peaceful and harmonious, but
communal agendas have entered so deeply into the
psyche of our political class that we no longer
need a 'communal' government to be in power to
advance the agenda of hate and violence; our
'secular' government does the job perfectly well.
In terms of actual action on the ground, such
labels are becoming meaningless; all are now the
same. V.D. Savarkar and Mohammad Ali Jinnah
(atheists both, but masters at using religion for
political purposes) can rest in peace -
irrespective of who is in power in Goa, their
poisonous legacy is in safe hands.
______
[4]
Human Rights Watch - Press Release
INDIA: TIME TO DELIVER JUSTICE FOR ATROCITIES IN PUNJAB
Investigate and Prosecute Perpetrators of 'Disappearances' and Killings
(Delhi, October 18, 2007) - The Indian government
must take concrete steps to hold accountable
members of its security forces who killed,
"disappeared," and tortured thousands of Sikhs
during its counterinsurgency campaign in the
Punjab, Human Rights Watch and Ensaaf said in a
new report released today.
In order to end the institutional defects that
foster impunity in Punjab and elsewhere in the
country, the government should take new legal and
practical steps, including the establishment of a
commission of inquiry, a special prosecutor's
office, and an extensive reparations program.
The 123-page report, "Protecting the Killers: A
Policy of Impunity in Punjab, India," examines
the challenges faced by victims and their
relatives in pursuing legal avenues for
accountability for the human rights abuses
perpetrated during the government's
counterinsurgency campaign. The report describes
the impunity enjoyed by officials responsible for
violations and the near total failure of India's
judicial and state institutions, from the
National Human Rights Commission to the Central
Bureau of Investigation (CBI), to provide justice
for victims' families.
Beginning in the 1980s, Sikh separatists in
Punjab committed serious human rights abuses,
including the massacre of civilians, attacks upon
Hindu minorities in the state, and indiscriminate
bomb attacks in crowded places. In its
counterinsurgency operations in Punjab from 1984
to 1995, Indian security forces committed serious
human rights abuses against tens of thousands of
Sikhs. None of the key architects of this
counterinsurgency strategy who bear substantial
responsibility for these atrocities have been
brought to justice.
"Impunity in India has been rampant in Punjab,
where security forces committed large-scale human
rights violations without any accountability,"
said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights
Watch. "No one disputes that the militants were
guilty of numerous human rights abuses, but the
government should have acted within the law
instead of sanctioning the killing,
'disappearance,' and torture of individuals
accused of supporting the militants."
A key case discussed in detail in the report is
the Punjab "mass cremations case," in which the
security services are implicated in thousands of
killings and secret cremations throughout Punjab
to hide the evidence of wrongdoing. The case is
currently before the National Human Rights
Commission, a body specially empowered by the
Supreme Court to address this case. However, the
commission has narrowed its efforts to merely
establishing the identity of the individuals who
were secretly cremated in three crematoria in
just one district of Punjab. It has rejected
cases from other districts and has ignored the
intentional violations of human rights
perpetrated by India's security forces. For more
than a decade, the commission has failed to
independently investigate a single case and
explicitly refuses to identify any responsible
officials.
"The National Human Rights Commission has
inexplicably failed in its duties to investigate
and establish exactly what happened in Punjab,"
said Adams. "We still hold out hope that it will
change course and bring justice to victims and
their families."
The report discusses the case of Jaswant Singh
Khalra, a leading human rights defender in Punjab
who was abducted and then murdered in October
1995 by government officials after being held in
illegal detention for almost two months. Despite
credible eyewitness testimony that police chief
KPS Gill was directly involved in interrogating
Khalra in illegal detention just days prior to
Khalra's murder, the Central Bureau of
Investigation has thus far refused to investigate
or prosecute Gill. In September 2006, Khalra's
widow, Paramjit Kaur, filed a petition in the
Punjab & Haryana High Court calling on the CBI to
take action against Gill. More than a year later,
she is still waiting for a hearing on the merits.
"Delivering justice in Punjab could set
precedents throughout India for the redress of
mass state crimes and superior responsibility,"
said Jaskaran Kaur, co-director of Ensaaf.
"Indians and the rest of the world are watching
to see if the current Indian government can
muster the political will to do the right thing.
It if fails, then the only conclusion that can be
reached is that the state's institutions cannot
or will not take on the security establishment.
This has grave implications for Indian
democracy."
Victims and their families seeking justice face
severe challenges, including prolonged trials,
biased prosecutors, an unresponsive judiciary,
police intimidation and harassment of witnesses,
and the failure to charge senior government
officials despite evidence of their role in the
abuses.
Tarlochan Singh described the hurdles he has
faced in his now 18-year struggle before Indian
courts for justice for the killing of his son,
Kulwinder Singh:
"I used to receive threatening phone calls.
The caller would say that they had killed
thousands of boys and thrown them into canals,
and they would also do that to Kulwinder Singh's
wife, kid, or me and my wife...
"The trial has been proceeding ... with
very little evidence being recorded at each
hearing, and with two to three months between
hearings. During this time, key witnesses have
died."
After Mohinder Singh's son Jugraj Singh was
killed in an alleged faked armed encounter
between security forces and separatists in
January 1995, he pursued numerous avenues of
justice. He brought his case before the Punjab &
Haryana High Court and the CBI Special Court, but
no police officer was charged. A CBI
investigation found that Jugraj Singh had been
killed and cremated by the police. However, 11
years and a few inquiry reports later, the CBI
court ended Mohinder Singh's pursuit for
accountability by dismissing his case in 2006.
Mohinder Singh describes his interactions with
the CBI:
"On one occasion when [the officer] from
the CBI came to my house, he told me that I
wasn't going to get anything out of this. Not
justice and not even compensation. He further
said that: 'I see you running around pursuing
your case. But you shouldn't get into a
confrontation with the police. You have to live
here and they can pick you up at any time.' He
was indirectly threatening me."
Human Rights Watch and Ensaaf expressed concern
that the Indian government continues to cite the
counterinsurgency operations in Punjab as a model
for preserving national integrity.
"The government's illegal and inhuman policies in
the name of security have allowed a culture of
impunity to prevail that has brutalized its
police and security forces," said Kaur.
The report suggests a comprehensive framework to
address the institutionalized impunity that has
prevented accountability in Punjab. The detailed
recommendations include establishing a commission
of inquiry, a special prosecutor's office, and an
extensive reparations program.
"The Indian government needs to send a clear
message to its security services, courts,
prosecutors, and civil servants that it neither
tolerates nor condones gross human rights
violations under any circumstances," said Adams.
"This requires a comprehensive and credible
process of accountability that delivers truth,
justice, and reparations to its victims, who
demand nothing more than their rights guaranteed
by India's constitution and international law."
______
[5]
Hindustan Times
19 October 2007
GLASS PALACE PRISON
by Sagari Chhabra
I had the privilege of living a few houses away
from Aung San Suu Kyi on University Avenue by
Inya Lake, for several months. The sole reason
for choosing my residence was I was hoping to
meet or atleast get a glimpse of the most famous
political prisoner and proponent of non-violence,
alive. On her sixty second birthday Aung San Suu
Kyi had spent a total of eleven years, ten months
and twenty seven days under house arrest, with
short spells in which she was allowed to meet the
people. On one such occasion, she visited the
office of the United Nations High Commission for
Refugees in Yangon. The office then headed by
Rajiv Kapur, had a poster; "A refugee would love
to have your problems'. Suu Kyi looked at the
poster poignantly and shook her head "no one
would like to have my problems' she told him.
Indeed after her party, the National League of
Democracy won almost eighty per cent of the
votes in the last elections, the military regime
responded by imprisoning her and almost all her
supporters. The spy and surveillance system was
so intricately entrenched that I found the
land-lord of the inn on University Avenue,
copiously reading my diaries, eves-dropping on my
conversation and reporting my activities to the
regime, which resulted in my permit of stay not
being extended.
Everywhere I travelled, I had to have a liason
officer accompanying my research trips. At
Ziawaddy the door banged at eight pm. "Who is
it?" I asked alarmed. The voice informed me that
I had to report to the police station along with
my Burmese liason officer to record our visit.
"If you neglect to do this, you will be
imprisoned" and I know many Burmese who have
been. This rule of informing the police if you
stay overnight elsewhere, is in force to squash
any underground activity for democracy. Enroute
from the famed glass palace of Mandalay to Maymeo
I came across a huge construction site. I was
curious because I had hardly seen any new
economic activity in Burma with economic
sanctions from the West in force. I clicked
photographs and then asked the guard; "What are
you building?" "A prison" replied the armed
guard, blandly.
During my travels through the breathtakingly
beautiful country; green with tropical forests
and gold with pagodas in every village, I met the
most deeply spiritual and gentle people in the
world. The Burmese feed and clothe monks who have
the highest position in the Buddhist hierarchy,
which they believe earns them merit. These monks
led the recent demonstrations, but the military
brutalized them, raiding monasteries across the
country, savaging and arresting thousands of
monks and lay people. While the Indian government
is practicising a 'look east' policy, let me
share with you the shame and horror I felt, on
seeing so many people of Indian origin living
without citizenship of Burma. Being without
citizenship implies that they cannot hold a
proper job, buy or sell property or even travel
within Burma without permission. Some of them
were members of Netaji's Indian National Army
or those who fought for the freedom of India.
Official figures indicate that there are over
400,000 people of Indian origin, without
citizenship. Surely India should look after the
interests of its own people by obtaining their
basic rights?
I also tried to bring the matter to the attention
of Kedar Nath who I was told was the head of the
Arya Samaj in Burma. We talked on the telephone
and agreed to meet in a week's time, but within
that period he was dead. He was only sixty two
and had been imprisoned in a Burmese jail for
four years on the charge of 'having given a
letter to a monk to take to India', my sources
said. The conditions in jail were so pathetic
that his health deteriorated and while he was
released, he died soon after. This is the plight
of many socially and politically active people
within Burma. The pictures that are emerging are
only the tip of the ice-berg.
While India maintains a 'look east' policy, the
north-east states are victim to the golden
triangle - drug-running that originates from
Burma into India. In desperation, India is even
resorting to a 'harm minimisation' programme;
which is distributing free needles so that the
young are protected from HIV. The fact is,
profits of drugs are what the Burmese militia use
to build safe havens in the West, where they will
eventually retreat once democracy returns to
Burma, before long.
Burma has been isolated for too long and while
India soft-peddles its approach, claiming that
the generals help us in 'Operation Golden Bird'
to control insurgency in the north-east; the
truth is, the generals enjoy giving the
insurgents a safe haven in Burma while unleashing
a 'joint-operation' as an eye-wash. Absolute and
brute power has been wielded to keep some of the
most spiritual, gentle and compassionate people
in the world oppressed; but the question is for
how long? International opinion will have to
build up to release Aung San Suu Kyi and the
Burmese people from the prison-house that the
militia has created out of Burma.
* Award-winning film-maker & writer
<sagari.chhabra[AT]gmail.com>
______
[6] BOOK REVIEW
Dawn
21 October 2007
Book and Authors
THE QUEST FOR PEACE
Reviewed by Habib R. Sulemani
Until recently, non-Muslim Pakistanis, known as
religious minorities, were somewhat totally out
of the national mainstream. Politically they had
a separate electoral system and from textbooks to
everyday-life, they would 'softly' complain about
discriminations being served to them.
But after 9/11, the president accelerated his
social reforms of 'enlightened moderation' due to
emerging global pressure. Due to the reforms many
religious minorities are gradually gaining
confidence and they no longer consider themselves
condemned second-class citizens of the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan. They are now feeling the
zest to play an active social rule in the
Muslim-dominated country in a pluralistic way.
Violence, Memories and Peace-building: A citizen
report on minorities in India and Pakistan is an
effort to reinstate that a religious minority in
India is the majority in Pakistan and vice versa
- and religious minorities have the same
difficulties on either side of the boarder and
they must be addressed seriously.
The report is also an effort to highlight the
positive social role of the minorities during the
violent partition when almost one million people
were killed on the basis of their faith. During
that violent time many Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims
were thirsty for each others' blood - yet there
were people in all communities who had faith in
humanity at large and they saved the lives of
many from other religious groups. They also
helped many migrants reach their destinations and
some even sacrificed their own lives and
properties for the cause.
The report is divided into ten major sections
along with three supplementary parts and an
introduction. The first section deals with the
colonial face of India and states that despite
the political strife and mutual friction, the
ancient Indian state was a centre of different
religions and cultures, which coexisted for
centuries. But the British Raj divided the people
into 'majority' and 'minority' groups to keep
itself in power. This section also traces the
history of Christians, Parsis and the
Theosophical Society in South Asia and highlights
their philanthropic services.
The second section is about minorities in
Pakistan after the partition. According to which
the founding party, the Pakistan Muslim League,
had been divided into two groups - Prime Minister
Liaquat Ali Khan led those who were insisting on
observing Islamic principles in the new country
while Finance Minister Ghulam Mohammad led the
secular group. The report explains how an Urdu
newspaper (Nawa-i-Waqat) started a campaign
against the liberal ideas of the founding father,
Quaid-i-Azam, who was championing the rights of
religious minorities in the new country.
There are so many stories and eyewitness accounts
of Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians and Parsis,
which make the reader believe that humanity has
no religion, cast or creed.
This section also traces the history of early
militancy in the country with the emergence of
Maulana Shabbir Ahmed Usmani and Maulana Zafar
Ali Khan's organisation Sarfaroshaan-i-Islam -
aimed to 'conquer East Punjab and unfurl
Pakistan's flag on Delhi's Red Fort.'
Memories of partition, violence, trauma, hope and
harmony are the subjects of the next two
sections. The compilers have gathered stories of
love, generosity, hope and peace from people of
different faiths from across the border. There
are so many stories and eyewitness accounts of
Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians and Parsis,
which make the reader believe that humanity has
no religion, cast or creed. These real-life
stories and events give one hope for the
emergence of a peaceful South Asian region.
Kalyan Singh's story is an example of the
centuries-old traditional Hindu-Muslim tolerance
in the region. During the 1969 riots in
Ahmedabad, Gujarat, Hindu gangs raided an area of
the city where 35 Muslim houses were scattered
among 120 Hindu houses in the neighbourhoods.
When asked to identify the Muslim houses, the
Hindus of the area refused and the gangs resorted
to setting all the houses in the neighbourhood on
fire out of frustration. When a resident of the
area, Mr Singh, was later asked: 'Why did you let
your property worth two lakhs be reduced to
ashes?' he answered: 'They [Muslims] are like our
kith and kin, and we address them as uncles and
cousins. If we had allowed their places to be
burnt down - with what face would we have gone to
our Maker?'
Political and constitutional activism among
minorities in Pakistan and India has been
discussed in sections six and seven.
Contributions of minorities to both countries are
the topic of the next two sections and the tenth
section is about the 'hateful images' portrayed
in school curriculums, which alleges that
successive governments in Pakistan have used
textbooks for propagating their 'biased outlook'
towards history, politics, society and religion.
The outcome is an intolerant and prejudiced
generation which is the reason for the nation's
backwardness.
Finally, the researchers have provided
peace-building measures and recommendations for
both Pakistan and India. References and a
selected bibliography are also available. Despite
some narrative, editing and compilation flaws
this is a unique report with stunning pictures,
memories, historical events and human sentiments.
It is neither a typical research paper, nor a
historical account written in the traditional way
- rather it is a report of the common people, by
the people and for the people. It looks at
history from the public's vantage point.
The bitterness, rivalry and enmity of decades in
the subcontinent will not change over night but
such reports and other peace-building measures at
every level would increase the pace of
reconciliation. The report is a must-read for all
those who are interested in the region's history
and politics. It is also useful reference
material for researchers, scholars and media
personnel.
Violence, Memories and Peace-building: A citizen
report on minorities in India and Pakistan
Compiled and edited by Ahmad Salim, Nosheen D'souza and Leonard D'souza
South Asian Research & Resource Centre (SARRC), Islamabad
264pp. Price not listed
______
[7]
Dear all,
Please find attached and pasted below an open
letter to an organisation called Vanashakti,
which has recently been running TV advertisements
and a web site attacking the Forest Rights Act
and spreading various myths about it. Please
give this letter as wide circulation and coverage
as possible; we would be grateful if it could be
posted on websites as well.
Campaign for Survival and Dignity
CAMPAIGN FOR SURVIVAL AND DIGNITY
National Convenor: Pradip Prabhu, 3, Yezdeh
Behram, Kati, Malyan, Dahanu Rd. 401602.
Delhi Contact: Q-1 Hauz Khas Enclave, New Delhi
110 016. Ph: 9968293978, 26569023.
OPEN LETTER TO VANASHAKTI ON FOREST RIGHTS ACT
Dear Vanashakti,
We are a federation of tribal and forest
dwellers' organisations working in eleven States.
A key focus of the work of our organisations for
many years has been the fight for legal
recognition of forest rights. We have differences
with the Forest Rights Act's final form, but we
cannot endorse your attack on it.
You claim that:
- this Act is a conspiracy to distribute forest land to tribals;
- it will destroy forests, leading to floods, droughts, etc;
- it amounts to "keeping tribals in the forest", contrary to their "welfare."
Every one of these claims has no basis. For this
Act has nothing to do with distributing forest
land, it does not gift land to every adivasi
family, and it certainly does not "keep tribals
in the forest." Attacking it through distortions
and untruths does nothing to reinforce forest
protection, and a great deal to undermine it.
For, while claiming to want "people to be
involved", in fact you are fiercely defending a
system whose purpose is precisely to keep forest
management as closed, non-participatory and
unaccountable as possible. You yourselves are
entirely non-transparent, nowhere disclosing who
is funding what is certainly a very expensive TV
ad campaign. Meanwhile, the industries and
officials are laughing all the way to the bank.
Contrary to your claims, the Forest Rights Act is
no scheme hatched by selfish politicians. Rather,
it is a part of a struggle that is actually over
a century old. The Indian Forest Act, 1927,
India's main forest law, was created to serve the
British need for timber. It sought to override
customary rights and forest management systems by
declaring forests state property and exploiting
their timber. The law says that, at the time a
"forest" is declared, a single official (the
Forest Settlement Officer) is to enquire into and
"settle" the land and forest rights people had in
that area. These all-powerful officials
unsurprisingly either did nothing or recorded
only the rights of powerful communities.
Those who lost in this process - mostly but not
all adivasis - lost quite literally everything.
Deemed "encroachers", their entire lives became a
legal twilight zone. At any time anything can be
taken away; your land, your livelihood, your
money and, if you resist, your freedom. The
forest guard is king, and, as the Warli adivasis
say, is interested only in daru, kombdi and baiko
- liquor, chickens and women. It is no accident
that adivasis are the poorest community in India.
Moreover, it is not only people who lost. The
very purpose of the Forest Acts was to convert
forests into the property of a colonial
department; and when you convert an ecosystem
into someone's property, there will always be
stronger claims to that property than
conservation. To destroy a forest today requires
nothing more than either a bribe to the local
forest officer or an application to a committee
in Delhi. The results include:
- the loss of more than 90% of India's grasslands
to commercial Forest Department plantations;
- the destruction of five lakh hectares of forest
in the past five years alone for mines, dams and
industrial projects;
- clearing of millions of hectares of forest for
monoculture plantations by the Forest Department;
- recent proposals to privatise "degraded" forest
lands for private companies' timber plantations.
For more than a century people have fought this
regime. The forest laws triggered some of the
biggest uprisings of the freedom struggle. Recent
decades have seen the growth of what the Tiger
Task Force called the "war within": political,
physical, and now even armed conflict spreading
throughout India's forest areas. And in every
case where projects have wreaked environmental
havoc, it is the people whose habitats are
affected who have fought them. In these fights,
their major weakness has been their lack of
rights.
This is the system that Vanashakti is now
defending. Dismissing this whole struggle as
"votebank" politics is itself callous; but your
literature goes on to distort the entire Act and
its purpose. The Act is accused of "distributing
four hectares of forest land to every tribal
family", which it certainly does not (please see
sections 4(3), 4(6) and 3(1)(a)) - it recognises
land already under cultivation on December 13th,
2005, up to a maximum of four hectares. If a
claimant was cultivating half an acre on that
date, they get title to that half an acre alone;
if they are cultivating 5 hectares, they get
title to 4 hectares; and if they are cultivating
nothing, they get nothing. The law provides a
three step procedure for recording rights of ST's
and those who have lived in the forest for three
generations, a procedure with many opportunities
for intervening against false claims.
Moreover, you ignore or undermine the best steps
forward in this Act. A good example is section 5,
which empowers communities to also protect
forests. This will be a weapon for those who - as
in Dewas District in MP; in Gudalur in the
Nilgiris; in Lanjigarh in Orissa; and countless
other forest areas- face jail, torture and
killings when fighting for the forests that are
so central to their culture and their
livelihoods. This provision is a key step towards
democratizing forest management. Yet you accuse
it of removing protection from forests, entirely
ignoring the fact that the section doesn't
withdraw any of the existing laws or the powers
of the government, a fact further emphasised by
section 13.
Finally, we are forced to point out your
incredibly undemocratic method of campaigning.
Vanashakti remained silent throughout two years
of heated public debate, public comment periods
and a Joint Parliamentary Committee which heard
more than 100 oral testimonies and received
hundreds of written submissions. Now, you attack
the law through TV ads - a medium that by
definition is inaccessible to the oppressed and
opposed to their interests. No TV ads are ever
made, by Vanashakti or anyone else, attacking
Vedanta for their destruction of forests in
Orissa; or Reliance for their intense effort to
seize forests for SEZs; or the Tatas for their
brutal repression of opposition. Nor would such
ads be run if they were in fact made. This kind
of "activism" works only when its targets are not
the powerful.
We do not ask that you agree with us, or that you
support us. We ask only that you cease this
campaign of falsehoods and open a dialogue on
your concerns; a good starting point would be to
state where the funds for these TV ads are coming
from. There is plenty of room for forest dwellers
and those who care about forests to come
together, and we have many common battles ahead.
But none of that is possible if urban
conservationists cannot respect our lives, our
livelihoods and our dignity.
Sincerely,
On behalf of the Convening Collective
Campaign for Survival and Dignity
______
[8] Announcements:
(i)
THE MANY FACES OF MADNESS
a film by Amar Kanwar
will be screening on NDTV 24x7
in their new documentary series, Documentary 24x7
on Thursday, October 18 at 9.30 pm.
to be repeated on Sunday, Oct 21 at 1.30 pm
The Many Faces of Madness emerges from the
reality of ecological destruction in India. The
film travels through different parts of the
country, revealing glimpses of traditional water
harvesting systems, mining and chemical
pollution, community forest protection,
displacement, deforestation, bio-piracy and
coastal ecosystems. This award winning film
brings people face to face with the intensity and
impact of globalization and industrialization and
passionately pleads for wisdom while facing these
challenges.
For feedback write to:
<mailto:documentary24x7 at ndtv.com> documentary24x7 at ndtv.com
--
(ii)
MEETING WITH SURVIVORS OF MUMBAI RIOTS and ACTIVISTS
on IMPLEMENTATION OF SRIKRISHNA COMMITTEE REPORT
Dear friends and comrades,
· The petition challenging the
implementation of the findings of the Srikrishna
Committee Report is scheduled to come up for
hearing in the Supreme Court on Oct 30, 2007.
· A team from Mumbai is arriving in
Delhi to share with us all the status of the case
and the continuing struggle of the survivors of
the Mumbai 92 --93 riots and meet other national
bodies in the capital, including the press.
· The team consists of Shakil Ahmed,
Farooque Mhapkar, Hasina Khan and Sandhya
Gokhale.
On 16th February 1998, Justice B.N.Srikrishna
submitted the report on Mumbai Riots, December
92-January 93.
The three main sections of the report recommend:
Action against 31 policemen ( these are
named in the report) Reinvestigation of the
closed cases - 60 % of all the riot cases are
closed, a total of 1358 cases. Compensation
for the families of those missing since the
riots. Many governments have come and gone in
Maharashtra but no one has made a single attempt
to implement any of the recommendations given by
this report. As a consequence, the people who
suffered in these riots have got no justice at
all even after 15 years of the barbaric assault
on their lives, livelihoods, families and
belongings.
Therefore, it is important we meet and discuss
and mobilise attention around the scheduled
Supreme Court hearing.
We have organised a meeting that will be addressed by the team from Mumbai.
Please attend the meeting and also help us
invite everyone you know and are in touch with
for this very important meeting.
Date: Tuesday, 23rd October 2007
Time: 5 - 7pm
Venue: Indian Social Institute, 10 Institutional Area, Lodhi Road
Looking forward to your presence and active participation,
Jaya, Beenu, Khurshid, Manshi, Apoorva, Vani, Ranjana & Vijayan
On behalf of Sama, Saheli, Anhad, Nirantar,
ISD, ISI-Delhi, Delhi Forum, and many others.
--
(iii)
FAMILIES OF THE DISAPPEARED IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Neelan Tiruchelvam Trust, Law & Society Trust,
INFORM, CPD, Civil Monitoring Commission,
Association for Disabled Ex-Service Personnel,
Right to Life and the MEEPURA newspaper
invite you to
Gathering of the families of the disappeared
No 555, Colombo Road, Katunayake
9.00am to 12.00pm
followed by meeting 2 to 5pm
**Agenda attached**
DISAPPEARANCES ARE A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. DON'T LET THEM HAPPEN AGAIN.
The disappearances which started with the war and
spread to the South in 1989 are now prevalent in
both the North and the South. They should be
prevented. Therefore, we graciously invite you /
your organization to a gathering that would act
collectively to bring these disappearances to an
end.
October 27th
October 27th 1989 was the day that Free Trade
Zone worker Ranjith was shot and burnt at
Raddoluwa junction. The killing of his legal
advisor and the FTZ workers who disappeared
during that time are also commemorated on that
day. This commemoration began on October 27th
1991 and has been held annually at Raddoluwa. A
memorial monument displaying the photographs of
these victims has been erected at this place.
This is the 17th year that this function is being
held.
This monument is a common commemoration site for
all those who have disappeared. October 27th is a
day to commemorate the disappeared, to remember
them, to mourn and remember those who have
disappeared.
Many opposition politicians attended this event
in the past. Some now hold important positions in
Government. His Excellency the President, in his
capacity as the leader of the opposition,
attended this event at one point in time.
However, disappearances are occurring again even
in the South. This commemoration is in itself
insufficient to change this situation.
We have identified you as a person free from
racial and religious bias, someone who is opposed
to forced disappearances and advocates the
importance of human rights.
Despite our various sacrifices and interventions
we have not been able to improve the human rights
situation in the country.
So we ask you
If you and your organization are willing to think
and discuss the various strategies that can be
employed to address the issue of these
disappearances and take responsibility to
collectively address this issue?
We invite you to use the October 27th event to address disappearances.
Please reserve this date and participate in this
event, and encourage other members of your
organization to participate in this event...
Gathering of the families of the disappeared
No 555, Colombo Road, Katunayake
Families of the Disappeared in collaboration with:
Neelan Tiruchelvam Trust, Law & Society Trust,
INFORM, CPD, Civil Monitoring Commission,
Association for Disabled Ex-Service Personnel,
Right to Life and the MEEPURA newspaper.
Vasantha- 031 4870308, 071 6586843
Sheila- 0777 287359
Erantha- 031 2221604
The event will be held 9.00am to 12.00pm on
Saturday 27th October 2007 at the monument in
Seeduwa where a religious ceremony and a
demonstration will be held. In afternoon between
2.00 p.m. and 6.00 p.m. a convention on this
issue will be held at the YMCA hall in
Katunayake. We invite you/ your organization to
actively participate in this event.
--
(iv)
CINEMA FOR CHANGE: BINDIYA CHAMKAY GI
Join us at T2F for a screening of Bindiya Chamkay
Gi, a short documentary-narrative about Bindiya,
an outspoken member of the Khwaja Siraa (Hijra)
community in Karachi. The film traces a day in
her life and talks about the legal, social, and
cultural challenges that her community faces in
present-day Pakistan.
Ragni Kidvai, the Director/Producer and Bindiya
will be present during the screening and the Q&A
session.
Date: Saturday, 27th October 2007
Time: 7:00 pm
Minimum Donation: Whatever you like
In Their Own Voice: Salman Kureshi & Shireen Haroun
Join us at T2F for an evening of English poetry
renditions by Salman Kureshi and Shireen Haroun.
Salman Kureshi is an accomplished English
language Pakistani poet. A marketing consultant
by profession, Salman's works have been published
by the Oxford University Press. He has also
edited several anthologies of poetry.
Shireen Haroun's is a multi-dimensional
personality. She has practiced law, taught ballet
and is currently teaching students the joys of
English Literature. Published by the Pakistan
Academy of Letters and the Alhamra Literary
Review, her poetry is both simple and thought
provoking.
Date: Sunday, 28th October 2007
Time: 6:30 pm
Minimum Donation: Rs. 100
Venue: The Second Floor
6-C, Prime Point Building, Phase 7, Khayaban-e-Ittehad, DHA, Karachi
Phone: 538-9273 | 0300-823-0276 | <mailto:info at t2f.biz>info at t2f.biz
Map: <http://www.t2f.biz/location>http://www.t2f.biz/location
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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.
More information about the SACW
mailing list