SACW | June 7-8, 2008 / Pakistan: Peace with the Fascist Taliban? / New Nepal / India: Hyper Nationalism and 'national security' / Freedom of Press
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at gmail.com
Sat Jun 7 20:29:30 CDT 2008
South Asia Citizens Wire | June 7-8 , 2008 |
Dispatch No. 2520 - Year 10 running
[1] Bangladesh: On a Bumpy Road to Elections (Farid Bakht)
[2] Hyper Nationalism and India's 'national
security' industry: Democracy paying the price
for anti terror laws and machinery
(i) Importance of mending our fences (Editorial, Daily Mirror)
(ii) And then there's always Bangladesh (Naeem Mohaiemen)
(iii) The Intimate Enemy (Ajay K. Mehra)
(iv) Sustaining violence and impunity - 50
Years of Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958
[3] Terror in Pakistan : Democrats Should Think
Twice Before Making Peace with the Fascist Taliban
(i) The Killing Fields Are Spreading (Irfan Husain)
(ii) A mini-Taliban state in making (Muddassir Rizvi)
[4] End of Hindu Rashtra : Birth of A New Nepal (Subhash Gatade)
[5] India: Minorities & judges (Noorani)
[6] India: Freedom of Press at Risk in Gujarat
and Maharashtra - declarations by concerned
citizens and editorials
(i) Report on Citizens and Media Persons
Solidarity Meeting in Ahmedabad Against Sedition
Charge on Times of India
(ii) Statement by journalists and concerned
citizens following assault on Kumar Ketkar the
Bombay based newspaper editor
(iii) Here They Go Again (Editorial, The Times of India)
[7] Shifting balance (Pritam Singh)
______
[1]
Economic and Political Weekly
May 31 - June 06, 2008
ON A BUMPY ROAD TO ELECTIONS
Fakhruddin Ahmed announced that the elections in
Bangladesh will take place as scheduled in
December. The ultimate motives are questionable
as the state of emergency is still in place.
Qualms about closer civil-military cooperation
are widespread. With the pretext of bolstering
national security the fear is that military will
play a permanent role in political affairs. The
choice of the new us ambassador is also
indicative of American intervention in empowering
the army.
by Farid Bakht
http://www.epw.org.in/epw//uploads/articles/12301.pdf
______
[2]
Daily Mirror
June 7, 2008
Editorial
IMPORTANCE OF MENDING OUR FENCES
We hear nice things about South Asian camaraderie
emanating from the South Block, and we believe
them. As the SAARC summit rolls up in early
August, we can expect to hear from all capitals,
including New Delhi, about the importance of
mending fences in the subcontinent, and about
promoting trade and people-to-people contact. And
we will believe them.
But even as tentative movements are being made to
relax visa regimes and expand the token rail
transport that exists between India and
Pakistan/Bangladesh, there is the awkward fact of
the border fence that the Indian Home Ministry is
constructing along the frontiers of the east and
west. As the article on the India-Bangladesh
border in this issue indicates, the fencing
project is well on its way to completion, with
only 1495 km left unfenced along the 4095 km-long
India-Bangladesh border. On the western front,
meanwhile, less than 100 km of the 2000 km that
are planned for fencing remain to be sealed.
Try as we might, we are not able to correlate the
fact of fence-building - with service roads,
steel pylons, concertina- and barbed-wire,
watchtowers and floodlights - with expressions of
SAARC-era bonhomie. Curiously, this period of
fence-building coincides with perhaps the most
responsible period of bilateral relations in the
northern half of the subcontinent. While the
India-Bangladesh relationship has always been
relatively stable, that between India and
Pakistan has survived all kinds of events that,
in an earlier era, would have led to escalating
tit-for-tat actions between Islamabad and New
Delhi. And yet, the fence-building has gone on
and on.
On the Pakistani side, these fences are supposed
to be to deal with infiltration by militants; on
the Bangladeshi side, for militancy and to check
illegal migration. While some might say that it
is in fact the construction of fences along the
border that has resulted in less friction and
more peace, we believe that the relative peace
that is being experienced today is due to factors
other than a wealth of fences.
Fence-building flies in the face of the
historical movement of peoples of Southasia
across the landscape, and creates a rigid
frontier that is incongruous with both our past
and present. The Nepal-India frontier is all the
proof needed that an open border does not destroy
sovereignties, even while allowing people to move
freely between countries. A fence is easier to
build than to dismantle, however. This is
particularly important to remember given that the
current spree is a essentially a rather primitive
reaction by the central government in New Delhi
to the populist ultra-nationalism in India, which
tends to blame 'cross-border terrorism' for any
and all ills. Incidentally, the fence is not
being built with the support of either Dhaka or
Islamabad, though the exercise may be tacitly
supported by the establishments in both.
Those Indian policymakers who are slightly
embarrassed by the fence-building ask other South
Asians to take note of the fact that, anyway, the
fence will not really work for its intended
purpose: it cannot really prevent infiltration,
because there remain too many ways for a
determined militant or migrant to force a way
through. That may well be, but it is more likely
that this exercise proves the hypothesis that in
the humongous machinery that is the Indian
government, one hand (the Home Ministry) does not
quite know what the other hand (the Foreign
Ministry) is doing. It may be still more likely
that the dynamics of the Home Ministry makes it
wary and unsupportive of South Block's overtures
to the neighbouring countries.
o o o
(ii)
Indian Express
June 6, 2008
AND THEN THERE'S ALWAYS BANGLADESH
by Naeem Mohaiemen
They let us cook rice-daal for them, let us raise
their children, trust us with the keys to
house-home-jewelry. And then they turn around and
vote for people who call us terrorists and want
to cut us into pieces and bury us underground - A
Bangladeshi taxi driver in Delhi, 2005
Bomb blast in Jaipur. What will we do now? Round
up the usual suspects. Abdul, Rahman, Rahim,
Karim, Salim. All you 'illegal' Bangladeshi
immigrants within our borders. Report to the
newest detention centres.
Remember, it's not who you say you are, it's what we say you are.
Bangladesh has emerged as the all-purpose 'Nondo
Ghosh' (scapegoat) for Indian intelligence
agencies. Attack on train station? Defused bombs?
Bicycle bombs? Bag bombs? It must be the
ultra-efficient, tentacle-spreading,
just-in-time, always there spectre of 'terrorist
organisations based in Bangladesh'.
With meticulous efficiency, we are informed that
the 'modus operandi' of the Jaipur blasts is
similar to the UP court blasts (November 2007),
Hyderabad Mecca Masjid blasts (May 2007) and
Malegaon (2006). Every bomb blast is similar to
the one before. They are all connected, except
when they aren't. Working on these leads, police
are raiding Bangladeshi localities at Galta Gate,
Baghrana, Ramganj, Subhash Chowk and Bhatta Basti
in Jaipur. It's also election season.
I remember (a little wistfully) the old days of
media hysteria about 'Pakistani' militants.
Bullet riddled bodies (dead don't talk) and
Pakistani passports (always in their pockets!).
But Pakistan has become more complex, with its
role in the US axis of willing. Anyway the public
wants new, fresh faces. New borders. New panic.
Some time in the last few years, it has become
easier and acceptable to bring out the
Bangladeshi 'militant cell' bogey. That there is
Islamist politics inside Bangladesh is not in
question (many of us spend a great deal of energy
opposing it as a political force). That these
forces have more theatrical clout than a decade
ago is also clear (electoral strength is muddied
by the vote splitting agreement of 2001, and the
cancelled elections of 2007). That some of them
have fantasies of armed intifada is not in
question either. But that they have the capacity
to wage cross-border forays - this still needs to
be proven (that is, are the fantasy groups ten
strong, or one hundred thousand - noone has done
credible research on this inside or outside
Bangladesh).
The proof after the blasts always seems to come
from shaky sources. That shadowy beast of Indian
intel. Well, not just Indian intel, also American
intel. The US has listed HuJI as a
'global-standard' terrorist organisation. Does
this listing reflect the reality, or it is
wish-fulfillment elevating a group of smalltime
operators into the global bigtime? We don't know
and we won't know as long as the WOT equation
continues to profit from inflated enemy strategy.
The Bangladesh government muddies the water
further by insisting that there are 'no
Bangladeshis' inside India. Of course there are
many Bangladeshi immigrants inside India. There
will always be. The real question about Jaipur is
- who are these people in the 'Bangali para' -
what were they doing all this time? Working for
middle class Indian families, of course. Everyone
in India knows exactly why these people are there
- to work. As house help, cleaners, sweepers,
cooks, maids, taxi drivers, tailors, weavers,
jewelry makers, construction workers. Keeping
Shining India rolling along. Yesterday, they were
your convenient and easy source of cheap labour.
Why are they a problem today?
As India develops as a hyper-growth Asian tiger,
with Bangladesh next door, immigration is
inevitable. Until Bangladesh becomes a medium
growth country (Goldman Sachs seems to believe
it's possible), we will be as a 'Mexico' to
India's 'United States'. Bangladeshis, hungry for
work, with families to feed, will cross the
borders.
Immigrants are ubiquitous in the daily lives of
modern cities. In a megapolis like New York, they
are the ones who drive taxis, sell newspapers and
coffee, clean restaurant tables and work in
kitchens. They are intimately present in the
physical space, but absent from consciousness.
Only when they are detained do they become
hyper-visible as 'sleeper cells.'
The desire to identify 'traitors' within borders
has a long lineage. In America ('the immigrant
nation'), the last century saw detention of
Italian immigrants after the anarchist bomb
attack in 1919, jailing of German-Americans
during WWI, internment of Japanese-Americans
during WWII, execution of suspected Soviet spies
Julius & Ethel Rosenberg, Joseph McCarthy's 'Red
Scare', the scapegoating of California Mexicans,
and the rise of the border vigilante militia
Minutemen. W.E.B. Dubois's question to African
Americans, "How does it feel to be a problem?" is
now redirected and made freshly relevant for a
new population.
When the Hyderabad blasts happened, we heard
intel was tracking phone calls to Bangladesh.
What happened to that trail? Did the
investigation go somewhere? If not, what about
the public perception created about 'dangerous'
Bangladeshis? A few years ago, there was another
Bangla 'terror cell', splashed across Indian
media. Again the story died out. The similarities
to the US media are eerie.
After Jaipur, Pankaj Singh, a senior Rajasthan
police officer told the press: "The modus
operandi, the way the bombs were manufactured and
concealed in bags, is very similar to the way
Huji [Bangladesh] operates." I wonder what
exactly made the trademark so easily spotted?
Were the bags made out of jute? Sealed with
jackfruit juice? Lined with Nilkhet Bangla book
pages? Now I hear that bombs of medium intensity
planted on bicycles are a HuJI trademark? Really?
It's an original and never before tried idea? The
Vietcong were using bicycle bombs against
Americans in public spaces as far back as 1965.
But oh dear, that's only history.
A previously unknown Islamic militant group, the
Indian Mujahedeen, has actually claimed credit
for the Jaipur bombing. But internal enemies are
suddenly not so convenient. Questions of internal
disenfranchisement and homegrown anger are so
inconvenient. Naturally, Indian intel says the
'evidence' provided by Indian Mujahedeen is not
credible, it has many holes. But apparently the
Bangladesh HuJI link is rock solid. The smoking
gun points to over there, across the border.
Inevitably, tragically, the fallout is underway.
Political, legal and social. Arrest, round up,
deport. Kick them out.
So hard to get good help these days. Now who will
clean little Siddharth's bottom? I hear the
Nepalis are rested and ready.
The writer works on art projects in Dhaka and New York
o o o
(iii)
Indian Express
Saturday, June 07, 2008
THE INTIMATE ENEMY
by Ajay K. Mehra
The political discourse around the recent blasts
in Jaipur has fallen into a predictable pattern.
Not surprising, for most such discourses are
state-propelled, if not state-sponsored. The
opposition (and government-in-waiting) BJP has
been quick to demand the anti-terrorist law
repealed by the UPA government, blaming the
absence of such laws for the rise in terrorism
during the UPA's tenure. The prime minister
stressed the need for a federal agency to deal
with terrorism and federal crimes, an assertion
repeated after each "terrorist" attack since the
UPA came to power.
Both these "anti-terrorism" assertions of the
Indian state, represented by the two political
formations that are likely to alternate in power
in near future, deserve to be analysed. States
and international state systems, as well as
non-state actors, are implicated in the savagery
of blowing innocents to pieces to achieve
political ends. The matter of concern is that
people who are helplessly caught in the
collateral damage zone are orchestrated to play
the state-composed tune.
Interestingly, the organised use of political
terror coincides with the emergence of the most
notable slogan of democracy since the French
Revolution - liberté, égalité, fraternité .
Obviously, the use of terror as a tool by state
or non-state actors receives political-moral
justification from similar sources. Even
religious validation of terror has lately been
used as a political instrument of mobilisation
(by non-state actors) and condemnation (state
systems). Further, both in national and
international contexts, states and regimes have
created terrorist monsters they then lost control
over.
It is not surprising that the post-colonial
Indian state, retaining many of the harsh
features of the colonial state, has also dabbled
in the politics of terrorism. It has maintained
and perpetuated the colonial criminal justice
system, insensitive to democracy in several ways.
It has also enacted and re-enacted "security"
acts - Defence of India Rules, Preventive
Detention Act, Maintenance of Internal Security
Act, Terrorist and Disruptive Activities
(Prevention) Act, Prevention of Terrorism
Ordinance, Unlawful Activities (Prevention)
Amendment Act and the Armed Forces (Assam and
Manipur) Special Powers Act (in the context of
the Northeast, Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir) - with
strong anti-human rights features, such as arrest
on suspicion and long detention without trial.
Not all of these have been in response to
terrorism, neither have they minimised, let alone
eradicate, terrorism; they have nonetheless been
a source of state terror. A look at the legal
instruments available within India's criminal
justice framework would suggest that the
country's arsenal of normal laws is not too
deficient, if properly utilised.
Whether or not a Central counter-terror agency is
eventually created, the Indian state's role in
internal security has been constitutionally
obligated. Even before entry 2A of the Union list
was inserted in 1976 to empower the Centre to
deploy the armed forces or the paramilitary "in
any state in aid of the civil power", qualifying
the entry on "police" in the state list, Article
355 charged it with a clear duty "to protect
every state against external aggression and
internal disturbance..." Moreover, the suggestion
of a parliamentary panel on the law to give
special powers as well as responsibilities for
intelligence to a Central agency like the CBI to
investigate terror-related cases on its own, also
suggests that institutional instruments for
counter-terror exist with the Centre; these have
to be properly utilised.
The key to effective counter-terror, however, is
a balanced and non-partisan partnership between
the Centre and the states. For, the police
stations are the nodal policing agencies, as they
alone can discover and keep tabs on the sleeper
cells within their territories. Police reforms
therefore are key to effective counter-terror; an
inefficient, corrupt and brutal police system
cannot take on terrorism despite a Union body to
fight terrorism. The Punchhi Commission, assigned
a fresh look at Centre-state relations, has a
task in hand in this regard too.
Last but not the least, the political blame game
amongst politicians obfuscates the real issue of
the "ticking bomb" scenario presented by the
politics of terror. Considering that the extreme
use of terror is only a deviant extension of
mainstream politics (I am indeed implying that
the use of a certain degree of terror is implied
in politics), the politics of terror finds space,
if not justification, in democratic politics,
which condemns terrorism day in and day out.
The writer is Ford Foundation Professor, Centre
for Dalit and Minorities Studies, Jamia Millia
Islamia
o o o
(iv) [Invitation Note for a panel discussion and
press conference by Intercultural Resources,
INSAF and Reachout ]
Sustaining violence and impunity
50 YEARS OF ARMED FORCES SPECIAL POWERS ACT, 1958
On 22nd May 1958, the Government of India
promulgated an ordinance called the Armed Forces
Special Powers Ordinance to meet the challenges
arising out of the assertions of the Naga tribes
in the then Naga Hills of Assam and parts of the
then North Eastern Frontier Agency (NEFA). This
ordinance was almost identical to a similar
ordinance promulgated by the colonial British on
15 August 1942 to suppress the uprising of Quit
India Movement. It gave extraordinary powers to
members of the armed forces, such as arrest
without warrant and shoot to kill on the basis of
suspicion. The Parliament subsequently converted
this ordinance, (which was brought in as a
temporary measure), into an Act on 18 August
1958, and the President gave his assent on 11
September 1958.
Thus, the unleashing of state's violent power or
what some have called "State terrorism", that
began on 22nd May 1958 was consolidated on that
fateful 9/11 as the Armed Forces Special Powers
Act and began its journey as a permanent
instrument to militaristically treat the people
of North East. While the people of Punjab had a
brief taste of the Act in the 1980s, the people
of Kashmir have been subjected to the same Act
since 1990. But it is the people of the North
East who have been its sustained victims for the
last 50 years.
While two MPs from Manipur opposed the Act in
the Parliament in 1958 itself, and protests have
regularly occurred, since the 1980s, various
organizations and individuals have also
challenged the legal and constitutional validity
of the Act. After 15 long years, the Supreme
Court took up litigation by NPMHR, and while
accepting that the disturbed condition where the
Act has been enforced is not due to armed
rebellion and that it does not constitute a
threat to national security, it upheld the
constitutional validity of the Act in 1997.
The numerous acts of human rights abuses under
the Act came to the fore again in the gruesome
murder of Manorama by the security forces
operating under the Act in 2004. The people of
Manipur rose up not only against the murder but
also against the Act, which was joined by various
civil liberties organizations and concerned
citizens from across the country and world.
Ultimately, the PMO was compelled to constitute
the Reddy Committee to look into the matter and
explore the possibility of substituting the AFSPA
with a "more humane" Act. The Committee submitted
its report on 6 June 2005 and recommended that
the Act be repealed. Similarly the Administrative
Reforms Committee headed by Veerappan Moily also
recommended on 26 June 2007 that the Act to be
repealed. Earlier, in February 2007, the United
Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination had also recommended that the
Indian Government immediate repeal the AFSPA.
There has been no response from the Government.
Even the Jeevan Committee report has not been
made public, though The Hindu has leaked the
report.
Just as the people continue to suffer under the
Act, the struggle, including that of Sharmila who
has been on fast for years, against the Act also
continues. On the 50th anniversary of the Act, to
initiate further debate and to affirm the urgent
need to repeal the Act, we are organizing a panel
discussion and a Press Conference. We will also
circulate a dossier at the Conference.
Date: 22 May 2008
Place: Indian Press Club
Time: 3:00 pm
Chair: Mr Smitu Kothari, Intercultural Resources and Lokayan
Panelists:
Mr Sanjoy Hazarika, Member of Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee
Dr Bimol Akoijam, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies
Mr. Ravi Himadri, The Othermedia
______
[3] Terror in Pakistan : Making Peace with the Fascist Taliban a Huge Mistake
Dawn
June 04, 2008
THE KILLING FIELDS ARE SPREADING
by Irfan Husain
I WAS going to write about something else, but
got sidetracked by the explosion outside the
Danish embassy in Islamabad. As usual, almost all
the casualties in this latest act of terrorism
were Pakistanis, and presumably, Muslims.
None of them were in any way connected with the
publication of the sacrilegious cartoons
published in Denmark. Indeed, most of the embassy
personnel had been moved to a local hotel after
the controversial cartoons were printed, and the
Danish mission had been reduced to a skeleton
staff. So basically, the killers were targeting
Pakistanis for something that happened thousands
of miles away.
Most of the targets of Islamist militants have
been fellow-Muslims who happened to be at the
wrong place at the wrong time. And yet, there is
little condemnation of these ruthless killers.
Instead, I hear plaintive questions like 'Why did
the Danes have to publish those offensive
cartoons, anyway?'
This is a classic case of blaming the victim. The
other refrain in media reporting of the incident
was the fact that the embassy was not in the
heavily-guarded diplomatic enclave, and was
therefore somehow fair game.
These perceptions are totally at odds with how
the rest of the world perceives this attack. The
thing to remember is that Denmark is a democracy,
and freedom of the media is taken for granted.
And while the cartoons were insensitive,
offensive and in poor taste, the fact remains
that their publication did not break any law.
The Danish government has no powers to dictate
the content of newspapers. We would do well to
remember that Jesus Christ is caricatured
regularly in the Western media.
Certainly, editors and publishers can be taken to
court by individuals and groups. In any case,
there is due process available to aggrieved
parties. Suicide bombing is not on of the options
civilised people take recourse to in order to
lodge a protest. But obviously, those behind this
and similar acts of terrorism are brutal killers
of whom we cannot expect civilised behaviour.
It is the duty of the host country to provide
security to diplomatic missions. In case of
terrorist attacks, it has to pay for damages. In
1979, when the US embassy in Islamabad was
attacked by a mob and partly burned down, Zia's
junta paid the repair bill (with our taxes, of
course). To say that all missions will be moved
to the diplomatic enclave, as this government has
just done, is to force foreign countries to pay
for the lawlessness that prevails in Pakistan.
For many developing countries, this might not be
possible. Even for some rich countries, Pakistan
might not be important enough to build a new
chancery. We operate out of rented buildings in
many capitals abroad. How well would we cope if
we had to construct new embassy buildings in
every country where we have permanent
representatives?
But more important than these practical
considerations is the larger question of how
Pakistan is increasingly perceived abroad. Hardly
a week passes without some foreign government
warning its citizens not to travel to Pakistan.
This recent attack will only reinforce the
perception of a weak, dangerous country where
religious fanatics rule the streets, and killers
can strike at will. Unfortunately, we have got so
accustomed to this frightening level of violence
that we no longer see how abnormal it is to have
terrorist attacks rocking our country day in and
day out.
The bombing of the Danish embassy also shows us
the hollowness of the so-called peace accord
reached with Baitullah Mehsud and his loose
alliance of militants. It should be obvious to
the meanest intelligence that he has no intention
of keeping his word, and that this truce is only
a tactical ploy for him. He will use it to
strengthen his base, and launch more attacks in
Afghanistan. Significantly, when he was asked by
a BBC reporter if he would offer the Karzai
government in Kabul a similar deal, his only
response was a mocking laugh. Many observers,
both in Pakistan and abroad, have warned the
government of the dangers inherent in a separate
peace. Already, despite the accord signed with
the militants, there have been a number of
attacks within the country, with the bombing of
the Danish embassy being the most serious. Our
western allies have expressed their grave
reservations about the one-sided nature of the
talks with Baitullah Mehsud. Given the weakness
of our economy, and the serious security threats
we face, we cannot afford to antagonise our
friends, especially when the returns are so
transient.
It appears that in our desperation to seek peace
with the militants at any price, we are willing
to gamble with the Pakistan the nation's founder
wanted. Although we have drifted far from his
goal, there was still a lingering hope that sheer
pragmatism would prod us away from the kind of
extremist dystopia many Muslims are striving for
today.
We see the shape of things to come in the daily
attacks on girls' schools, barber-shops and video
stores in settled districts and tribal areas in
the NWFP every day. When this image of Pakistan
is overlaid on the constant reports of radical
young Muslims coming to Pakistan from all over
the western world to receive training in
bomb-making, we can understand why our country is
now seen as the source of great danger to the
region and the world.
Should we proceed on our present path of
providing a safe haven to terrorists, we will
give western forces in Afghanistan a good reason
to attack them. If we cannot enforce our
sovereignty over the tribal areas, somebody else
will fill the vacuum.
To think that other governments will permit their
forces to suffer casualties through attacks from
Pakistani soil, and not retaliate, is to live in
a fool's paradise. In England and elsewhere, I am
often asked by friends why we cannot tackle this
menace. After all, they argue, with such a huge,
well-equipped standing army, why can't your
government take on these terrorists? Why not,
indeed?
Obviously, there are big problems in fighting our
own countrymen. But as long as Baitullah Mehsud
and his cohorts are willing to slaughter innocent
fellow Muslims in Pakistan and elsewhere, we owe
them no mercy. We certainly owe them no sympathy
or support.
o o o
(ii)
Himal
June 2008
A MINI-TALIBAN STATE IN MAKING
The recent agreement between the NWFP government
and the Taliban of the Swat Valley may have
brought a momentary peace, but at what cost?
by Muddassir Rizvi
It has come full-circle. The friends-turned-foes
say they are friends again. The latest peace
agreement between the Pakistan government and the
Taliban could well cease hostilities in the
serene Swat Valley, but the price of peace might
prove too high. The deal, finalised on 21 May, is
a unique quid pro quo: the Taliban has agreed to
respect the writ of the state, in return for the
government's commitment to enforce the writ of
Allah, by implementing Sharia law in the
country's mountainous northern Malakand area.
The agreement, clinched by representatives of the
government of the Northwest Frontier Province
(NWFP) is, however, somewhat limited in scope,
and will cover only six districts of the province
- Swat, Shangla, Bunair, Dir Upper, Dir Lower and
Chitral. As such, it will not be implemented in
the seven Federally Administered Tribal Agencies
(FATA) along the border with Afghanistan, which
have been witness to Taliban militancy following
the US-led coalition attack on Afghanistan in
2001. However, the contents of the agreement with
the Swat Taliban are indicative of the extent to
which the government is ready to go to achieve
peace in militancy-stricken areas. "Separate
channels are being used to engage with all
groups, in an effort to stop violence which has
paralysed our lives in the country," said a Home
Ministry official. "We hope we'll be able to
bring everybody on board to protect the interests
of the country."
The 16-point agreement is considered by many to
be an achievement for the new democratically
elected government, which is trying to clear the
political, security and institutional debris left
behind by nine years of military rule. At least
one of its election promises, of curtailing
militancy through talks, appears now to be
materialising. This was taking place even as the
government was drawing flak from its own
coalition partners and civil society, on the
question of the restoration of judges sacked by
President Pervez Musharraf as he imposed
emergency rule on 3 November last year.
It was not difficult, though, to understand why
the government appeared jubilant.
"Congratulations - we have an agreement!"
exclaimed Bashir Bilour, head of the official
team that drew up the accord much quicker than
expected, after just two rounds of talks over 11
days. Besides agreeing to de-escalate the
violence, the Taliban also undertook to withdraw
its opposition to various vaccination efforts,
and agreed not to obstruct women's education.
Other clauses include handing over all foreign
militants to the government, and an assurance
from the militants that they would not attack
barber shops and markets visited by women.
For all the excitement, worries remain that the
agreement is mostly one of a statement of
promises, and ominously lacks details of
implementation. The agreement names
representatives from both sides who will oversee
its operationalisation, but little more.
"Matching fine words with actions will be the
real test," said Shamrez Khan (not his real
name), who has previously been affiliated with a
proscribed religious group. "Attaining peace is
easier than sustaining it." He believes that
Taliban-affiliated formations are not the only
groups active in Swat, an area that saw
stepped-up insurgency in reaction to the military
action against the Red Mosque in Islamabad last
summer, which left hundreds of people dead. These
groups have been active in the area since 1993,
when the Movement for the Enforcement of Shariat
Mohammadi launched an armed struggle for Islamic
laws in the area. The Movement eased after the
Benazir Bhutto government agreed to constitute
Islamic courts in the area in the mid-1990s;
however, the various groups continued to pursue
their Islamicisation agenda on the local level.
The Movement again reared its head when its
leader, Sufi Muhammad, led thousands of people
across the border to fight the American forces
following their attack on Afghanistan in October
2001. Sufi was arrested on his return, only to be
released in April 2008. This was apparently as a
gesture of goodwill towards the Swat Taliban,
which had been led by the hardcore Islamist
Maulana Fazullah in Sufi's absence. During that
time, the Swat Taliban had been able to shut down
the video and cable-television businesses in many
areas of the valley, in addition to having closed
many schools for girls. Fazullah's illegal radio
station, which he used to mobilise foot soldiers
and preach his message, had become a constant
irritant for the country's security apparatus.
The valley, which used to be a popular tourist
destination, had become a base for all sorts of
extremist groups on the run, at least until the
government launched a military operation in
December 2007.
The foreign hands
"Taliban are not the only stakeholders,"
explained Shamrez Khan. "There are Islamic groups
such as Jaish Muhammad, which may not accept the
agreement and may continue their struggle until
the withdrawal of American forces from
Afghanistan and Iraq." Khan's suspicions are not
unfounded. Just hours before the agreement was
inked, unidentified attackers bombed two girls'
schools and cable-television shops in the Swat
Valley - perhaps a statement of protest against
the deal by any one of an assortment of militant
groups that continues to function in the valley
and throughout the country's tribal areas.
The worst threat to lasting peace, however, could
be foreign militants. Many of these have been
left stranded in Pakistan, where they have taken
refuge in the wake of the American invasion of
Afghanistan. "There are foreigners, hundreds of
them, many from Central Asia, who are not going
to stop unless their presence is legitimised by
the government," said a leader of the Pakistan
People's Party (PPP) from Shangla District,
requesting not to be named. But the government
seems to be in no mood to compromise on the issue
of foreign militants, and appears to have been
successful in convincing the Swat Taliban to turn
them in to the authorities. "This may provoke
internal fighting among militant groups," warned
the PPP leader. "There are numerous Uzbeks in the
area who are armed with sophisticated weapons.
They will not give in at any cost, and will fight
whoever attempts to uproot them."
The peace agreement has also made Pakistan's
international allies in the US-led 'war on
terror' quite jittery. "We hope that they proceed
cautiously," said American Deputy Secretary of
State John Negroponte, "and do not accept an
outcome that will give extremist elements the
ability to use FATA in order to carry out attacks
on Pakistan, on Afghanistan, or on the United
States or the rest of the world." When he visited
Pakistan this past March, Negroponte had opposed
talks with "irreconcilable" elements.
How Pakistan will manage complex diplomatic
concerns will be seen in the days to come.
Indeed, the government may find it difficult to
sell the idea of withdrawing militarily from Swat
and the tribal areas to its international allies.
Such a withdrawal from Waziristan could well be
met with a non-negotiable 'no', particularly from
the US, which sees the rugged terrain as a hotbed
of militancy, where the Taliban and al-Qaeda have
found a 'safe haven' to regroup. There is clearly
some truth in this. In 2007 alone, Pakistan saw
the killing of more than 750 people, including
Benazir Bhutto, in 56 suicide attacks. Most of
these were blamed by Pakistan's intelligence
agencies on the Baitullah Mahsud-led Taliban
Movement of Pakistan. Mahsud is believed to
operate out of hideouts in Waziristan, and his
men have also been accused by NATO commanders of
carrying out attacks inside Afghanistan. Mahsud
has also been accused of Benazir's assassination,
and with holding the Pakistan ambassador to
Afghanistan, Tariq Azizuddin, hostage until
mid-May, when he was apparently released as the
government attempted to woo Mahsud into accepting
the recent deal.
Perhaps most critically in this diplomatic dance,
the agreement with the Swat Taliban does not
allay concerns about the crossborder militancy.
While on the one hand the accord entails the
gradual withdrawal of the Pakistani military from
certain areas, it does not preclude the Taliban
from joining international jihadi movements.
Taliban members thus may transform into
law-abiding citizens in Pakistan, but be quite
free to foment terror elsewhere. This fear was in
fact raised by Kabul, even as the new government
opened channels for dialogue with Taliban groups.
A spokesperson for the Afghan Foreign Ministry
warned that the peace deal in Pakistan's tribal
areas would not stop Taliban attacks on targets
inside Afghanistan - and could even jeopardise
the relationship between the two countries.
At the moment, Pakistani officials have no
answers to these concerns. Rather, they are
merely reiterating the government's resolve to
curb militancy and prohibit the use of Pakistani
soil to launch attacks on other countries.
"Pakistan has reassured the United States that
any deal with Taliban will require their
disarming," said an official with the Foreign
Ministry in Islamabad. In the face of such
promises, however, the deal with the Swat Taliban
does not expressly include any such provision,
but merely requires their 'voluntary ceasefire'.
High price for peace
It is not just Pakistan's international allies
who are nervous. Equally stressed are the
country's liberal democrats, who believe that, in
the long run, the country may be paying too high
a price for peace. "We are giving ground to the
rightwing forces, accepting their demands such as
enforcing Islam on their terms," said Afreina
Noor, a rights activist based in Islamabad. "We
have seen the Taliban rule in Afghanistan, and we
are legitimising the same band of people in our
country."
These fears mostly stem from some of the more
blatant Taliban demands to which the government
has now acceded. The withdrawal of the military
from Malakand, despite the fact that no timeframe
has been specified, is itself a moral victory for
the Swat Taliban. The group now hopes to draw up
an amnesty for its leaders, including Maulana
Fazullah. Meanwhile, the government agreed to
enforce Sharia law, though again the accord is
silent on exactly how this will happen. This has
already created a fear within many that a
mini-Taliban state is on the verge of being set
up within Pakistan. Perhaps most worrying to many
is the precedent of the agreement - for other
groups to band together, take up arms and kill
innocent people in order to push the state to
accept their radical demands. "This agreement
will encourage the spread of Talibanisation in
Pakistan," said Noor.
At the moment, the NWFP government sees the peace
deal as a reinforcement of the writ of the state,
which has been consistently challenged by
militants since the military launched an
operation in the area more than four years ago.
"What we couldn't achieve through force over all
these years was made possible by meaningfully
engaging with them [the Taliban] and hearing them
out," said a government official who has been
privy to the dialogue. "There has been no barter
involved, but only an understanding of the
position of the two parties. Let's give dialogue
a chance."
______
[4]
END OF HINDU RASHTRA : BIRTH OF A NEW NEPAL
Why Jaswant Singh feels Humiliated Over Developments in Nepal !
by Subhash Gatade
Jaswant Singh, the exforeign minister of India,
who also handled the finance portfolio for quite
sometime, rather could not hide his displeasure
in the recently held meeting of the BJP executive.
Of course the immediate provocation for the
ex-Army man was neither because of any fresh move
by his bete noire in state politics namely Ms
Vasundhara Raje Scindia. It also had nothing to
do with the manner in which L.K.Advani had flatly
denied any knowledge of his not so famous sojourn
to Kandahar after the plane hijacking incident.
In fact he shared his piece of mind over recent
developments in Nepal. He called it a 'negative
development' and a 'danger to India's security'
and said that 'as a believer in sanatan Dharma he
feels humiliated and as a Hindu, he felt
diminished over the ouster of a Hindu king.'
Any close watcher of the Nepal situation would
tell you that Jaswant Singh is not alone in
having and expressing a negative opinion about
the developments in the newest republic which has
seen the end of 250 year old monarchy and the end
of the 'model Hindu Rashtra' much espoused by the
Sangh Parivar organisations. In one of his recent
outbursts, Mr Ashok Singhal, the International
President of Vishwa Hindu Parishad is reported to
have compared Jihadists and Maoists who would
together bring further calamity to the tiny
country.
It was expected that all such outbursts from the
BJP and its allied organisations would be
immediately rebuked by the Nepalese leaders.
Rambahadur Thapa, a senior leader of NCP
(Maoists) called all such utterances 'anti-Nepal'
and an 'intervention in the internal affairs of
the country' .
Perhaps one needs to ask oneself why does Mr
Singh feels pertrubed over the end of a regime
which concentrated all power in the hands of a
small caucus centred around the King which denied
basic human rights to a vast majority of Hindus
and which condemned the followers of the other
religions to a secondary status. Whether it has
to do with emergence of NCP (Maoists) as the
single largest party in the new republic which
has humbled all the other parties or it has to do
with the emergence of the most diverse and
representative parliament in the world today.
Independent observers have noted that the newly
elected Nepalese parliament has more than one
third of women and other one third representation
is from the different ethnicities and oppressed
castes.
Does Mr Singh then think that while he and his
formation can benefit themselves from
participating in the Democratic process, for the
Nepalese people monarchy provides the best
solution ?
Jaswant Singh's displeasure and outbursts of
other hotheads from the Sangh Parivar once again
brings into sharp focus the special relationship
enjoyed by them with the ( now defunct) monarchy.
To be very frank, it was a relationship which
benefitted both the parties. While the Monarchy
let the Sangh Parivar organisations spread their
network in the Himalayan kingdom, which at times
brought them in conflict with local religious
heads who did not support their weltanshauung (
world view) on their part BJP and other Sangh
Parivar organisations provided crucial support to
the beleagured monarchy on very many occasions.
It is now history how VHP working president,
Ashok Singhal had exhorted Hindus of the world to
follow the great monarch in a conference of Hindu
leaders form across the world which was held in
Kathmandu. He said : "It is the duty of 900
million Hindus the world over to protect the
Hindu samrat (king)..God has created him to
protect Hindu dharma." In this conference these
leaders had deified King Gyanendra as the world's
only Hindu monarch. Mr Singhal had also then
proposed to organise a world Hindu meet in New
York the coming year under the leadership of
King Gyanendra (Indian Express, January 23,
2004). He added that the New York gathering would
project Hindus as a global power..with the Nepal
king leading the way.
It did not matter to Mr Singhal then that with
his utterances he was showing loyalty to the King
of another country much derided by his one time
leader and RSS ideologue Golwalkar.In his
monograph 'Bunch of Thoughts' he had castigated
Muslims, Christians and Communists as the
country's main enemies for their
"extraterritorial loyalty". It is worth noting
that Secular formations and individuals in this
part of the world also did not try to put him on
the defensive over such a sensitive issue.
Apart from the mutual support they derived from
each other the 'Hindu Rashtra' in Nepal under the
rule of the king served a deeper ideological
purpose for the Sangh Parivar. It acted as a
'model' for its own project of nation
building.And the internal social-cultural
situation suited its purpose well.
For the Sangh Parivar and its affiliated
organisations it was the only state in the world
where the `one nation, one people, one culture'
weltanschauung of the Hindu rashtra was already
in place. It had made religious conversion an
offence and where the slaughter of the official
national animal, the cow, could be punished by 18
years of rigorous imprisonment or where the state
had imposed its own version of `sanatan dharma'
on the vast multitude of the people.
The hard facts pertaining to Nepal then were for
everyone to see. Being a Hindu rashtra,
autocratic rules still persisted in the Himalayan
kingdom. Its constitution made the Hindu way of
life a basic part of Nepalese life. It stated:
"Nepal is a multiethnic, multilingual,
democratic, independent, indivisible, sovereign,
Hindu and Constitutional Monarchical Kingdom".
The richest people in this Hindu rashtra were the
royalty, priestly class and the outsiders. The
monarchy was so privileged that, according to the
constitution "... No question shall be raised in
any court about any act performed by His Majesty".
In order to preserve its Hindu character,
conversion to any other religion was prohibited.
Until 1963, the Nepali state upheld Hindu
jurisprudence - formally at least. Fourthly, in
view of this ban on conversions 90 per cent of
the population was stated to be Hindu. Fifthly,
being a Hindu rashtra, all royal claims were
legal. The Hindu king could do no wrong. Also,
though the constitution guaranted that there
won't be any discrimination based on caste, the
age-old stranglehold of this institution
continued. Untouchables, who constitute 22 per
cent of the Nepalese population, were the worst
victims. For centuries, Nepal's untouchables have
had to stay out of Hindu temples, refrain from
drawing water at village wells and have even
changed their children's names so that they could
get an education. The status of Dalits and
backward communities was the same as it was in
India 100-125 years ago.
This Hindu rashtra had become the single biggest
supplier of people to other countries. The system
trained young workers and soldiers for other
countries. Statistics of persons leaving this
`Ram Rajya' on account of poverty and migrating
in search of jobs was really mind-boggling.
Sudheendra Sharma, a social scientist who had
written extensively on the religions of Nepal,
rightly underlined that "...cultural isolationism
from India meant that Nepal was also shielded
from influence of the 19th century Hindu
renaissance. Furthermore, within the territorial
bounds of the nation-state, this policy
meantaggressive Sanskritisation and cultural
integration of hill ethnic communities based on
an orthodox Hindu framework."
It is widely known that Nepal was ushered into a
constitutional monarchy as a consequence of a
people's movement against the partyless panchayat
system in 1990, when a new constitution was
adopted by the parliament.But very few people are
aware that when the constitution of 1990 was
written, there was pressure to make Nepal an
officially secular state like India. It could be
called the only key demand which was put forward
by the Dalits, tribals, women and people from
other faiths like Buddhism.
The pressure generated was so great that at one
point of time the members of the constitution
committee even had to concede to the demand that
Nepal won't be declared a Hindu state. This
demand created dissensions within the
constitution committee as well. However, in the
end, the views of the Hindu establishment won the
day, and the constitution was decided in favour
of making Nepal a Hindu country.
All that is passe now. And despite all the pious
wishes and attempts of the BJP leaders and Sangh
Parivar organisations, the model Hindu Rashtra
has finally been given a decent burial and Nepal
is now a secular democratic republic with Maoists
at the helm of affairs. Perhaps the agony and
pain experienced by the likes of Jaswant Singh
and other Hindutva acolytes could be compared to
the shock and disbelief experienced by people -
who believed in justice and progress - over the
dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Of course it need be underlined that Sangh
Parivar and affiliated organisations made last
ditch efforts to save the monarchy despite the
overwhelming majority going against them. When
Terai region in Nepal witnessed violent agitation
recently the role played by Hindu extremist
organisations had also come under scanner. Mr
Bharat Bhushan had specifically commented on this
aspect in one of the writeups in 'The Telegraph' :
Nepalese political observers also point to the
role being played by Hindu extremist
organizations from India in fomenting trouble in
the Terai to save the king. A high-ranking
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh representative from
Nagpur is believed to have held a meeting in
Gorakhpur with several royalists, including
Upendra Yadav and members of the Sadbhavna Party.
The role played by the local Indian MP, Mahant
Avaidhyanath, is also being questioned by some in
this regard. (Royalists Fish In Terai Trouble, 29
th January 2008, The Telegraph)
But as things unfolded before us all their not so
pious wishes and attempts could not stop the
wheel of history in taking a forward turn in
Nepal. In fact, despite all the displeasure shown
by the likes of Mr Singh a New Nepal is before
us. And now it is upto them to decide whether
they would welcome this new face Nepal or still
maintain nostalgia over the bygone era.
______
[5]
Frontline
June 07-20, 2008
Books
MINORITIES & JUDGES
by A.G. Noorani
Discrimination is a legal concept; "appeasement" is a political slogan.
ALL democratic states ensure constitutional
protection for minority rights. They can,
however, be enforced only by an independent
judiciary, comprising judges with a broad,
liberal outlook when politicians in the executive
and the legislature trammel on the rights of
minorities. For obvious reasons, the majority
needs no such guarantees.
When A.B. Vajpayee said that Article 30 of the
Constitution (embodying the fundamental right of
religious and linguistic minorities to establish
and administer educational institutions of their
own choice) should be extended to Hindus also, he
was indicating his distaste for minority rights.
The Sangh Parivar always said that the Minorities
Commission should be replaced by a Human Rights
Commission. It is both facile and deceptive to
assert that "we are all Indians, why then the
distinction?"
On February 13, 1988, Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh
(RSS) chief Balasaheb Deoras said that the word
"minority" should be removed from the
Constitution.
Will this help? India is a party to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights. Article 27 of the Covenant explicitly
recognises the rights of "ethnic, religious, or
linguistic minorities".
India is bound to report on its enforcement of
the Covenant to the United Nations
Secretary-General and is answerable to the Human
Rights Committee set up under it. Successive
Attorneys-General have been grilled by its
members for the shoddy reports that New Delhi
submitted.
The Committee adopted on April 26, 1994, as
Article 40 (4) envisages, a "General Comment" on
the scope of Article 27. It ruled: "Positive
measures of protection are required not only
against the acts of the state party itself,
whether through its legislative, judicial or
administrative authorities, but also against the
acts of other persons within the state party."
That includes groups such as the Shiv Sena, the
Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) and the RSS.
U.N. declaration
The United Nations General Assembly unanimously
adopted on December 18, 1992, a Declaration on
the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or
Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.
At the Conference - now Organisation - for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) summit
in Helsinki in July 1992, its 51 members decided
to establish a High Commissioner on National
Minorities.
The Council of Europe adopted on June 22, 1992,
the European Charter for Regional or Minority
languages. There is also the E.C. Framework
Convention on the Protection of National
Minorities, which was signed by 22 member-states
on February 1, 1995. India never hesitates to
instruct other states in good manners in dealings
with their minorities: Bangladesh and Fiji, for
instance.
International guarantees, though helpful, are not
enough. It is the country's ethos that matters.
Judges reflect it. In 1958, the Chief Justice of
India, S. R. Das, said in the Kerala Education
Bill case: "So long as the Constitution stands as
it is and is not altered, it is, we conceive, the
duty of this court to uphold the fundamental
rights and thereby honour our sacred obligation
to the minority communities who are of our own."
Referring to the Aligarh Muslim University case
decided in 1968, H.M. Seervai remarked that "this
is the first case in which the Supreme Court has
departed from the broad spirit in which it had
decided cases on cultural and educational rights
of minorities which was reflected in the words of
Das C. J.". The "first case" was followed by not
a few in which the court whittled down Article
30. In the AMU case, it ruled, incredibly, that
"the university was not established by Muslims".
These two books should be read by every judge who
has to decide such cases. We have reached a stage
when our judges do not even understand that
historical fiction is not history. Not that a
work of history requires assurances of accuracy
to courts of law. That is a matter for a
different court - the readers. The judges'
outlook and intellectual equipment matter.
"Incredible" is the only word one can use to
characterise the remarks made by Justice T.S.
Thakur of the Delhi High Court on May 12, when he
sat on a Bench with Justice Siddharth Mathur.
The court was hearing a petition challenging the
implementation of the report of the Prime
Minister's High Level Committee, headed by
Rajinder Sachar, entitled "Social, Economic and
Educational Status of the Muslim Community of
India", submitted in November 2006. It was
unanimous and massively documented.
Justice Thakur asked: "Is this meant to appease
some community?... a lot of money is spent in a
welfare state, is it that you [the Union
government] spend it only for minority?" The
remark was highly improper.
Discrimination is a legal concept; appeasement is
a political slogan. Justice Thakur could not have
been unaware of the fact that it is used
exclusively by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
He has every right to strike down
unconstitutional discrimination. But, it is no
concern of a judge whether the government
"appeases" anybody.
The word itself is used improperly. It is defined
by the Concise Oxford Dictionary to mean "placate
(someone) by acceding to their demands". This is
not a case of placation by sheer redress.
The Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru contain
his letters galore, over the years, urging that
very redress. Is not the state entitled, indeed
bound, to redress wrongs to a minority? It is,
therefore, untenable to ask "why are you not
doing it (welfare measures) for the majority
community?" (Indian Express; May 13, 2008).
Now that this issue is squarely joined, it must
be met and finally resolved. When a judge
declaims "you are trying to please one community"
he is making a political criticism and imputing a
political motive. True, "poverty is the common
enemy"; but are not some poorer than others? It
is a fundamental error to say that the state
cannot take affirmative action to help any
underprivileged and discriminated section of the
people.
This principle is recognised even in the United
States The admonition "such issues should not be
decided on the basis of emotions" applies to all,
judges included. Such remarks are inappropriate
at that stage of the hearing. The matter is far
too important to be addressed thus. The
documentation in the report alone merits careful
study.
Discrimination
For decades, the Minority Rights Group
International has rendered high service by its
scholarly studies. Its latest report deserves
wide readership. This is what it says on page
111: "Like low-caste Dalits, India's tribal
Adivasis also face issues of discrimination and
inhuman treatment. Religious minorities, mainly
Muslims and Christians, in majority Hindu India,
were also victims of violence and persecution in
2007. Muslim minority groups in September
launched protests against the government for its
failure to implement recommendations of the
Sachhar Committee report. The report, released in
2006, recognised the discrimination against
minorities and called for a series of government
measures to bring an end to it."
The scholarly Journal of South Asian and Middle
Eastern Studies published an article by Omar
Khalidi, entitled "Entrepreneurs from Outside the
Traditional Mercantile Communities: Muslims in
India's private Sector", in the last issue
(Volume xxxi; No. 2, Winter 2008; pages 13-42).
Its 167 footnotes testify to thorough research.
The writer lists the impediments Muslims face -
state-assisted pogroms, access to bank credits,
and so on. Union Finance Minister P. Chidambaram
noted: "credit to minorities is not satisfactory"
(The Hindu; December 20, 2006).
In 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in United
Jewish Organisations of Williamsburg vs. Carey
(430 U.S. 144) a delimitation law that
"deliberately increased the non-white majorities
in certain districts". In 1980, it upheld in
Fullilove vs. Klutznick (448 U.S. 448) a law that
reserved 10 per cent of federal public works
programmes for minority contractors. These
rulings are of direct relevance to the Sachar
report.
So, is the mass of material in the volume on
universal minority rights edited by Marc Weller,
Director of the European Centre of Minority
Issues, under whose auspices, jointly with that
of the Centre of International Constitutional
Studies, University of Cambridge, it is published.
It assesses the implementation practice of human
rights bodies worldwide and demonstrates that
"there is an emerging universal jurisprudence on
minority rights, drawing on the corpus of general
human rights. In addition to this overall goal we
strive to advance the understanding of the
application of human rights in relation to
minorities in general and their application to
issues of particular relevance to minorities."
The issues are analysed in depth by scholars of
note and cover the rights to equality, freedom of
speech, assembly and association, and to practise
religion; family and cultural rights, education,
"physical integrity", "socio-economic rights as
minority rights" and "effective participation of
minorities in public life".
It would shock these scholars if any one were to
call this "appeasement" of minorities. The
section of "minorities and economic
opportunities" is particularly relevant to our
situation. The volume is indispensable to
students of minority rights and, indeed, to
lawyers and judges.*
______
[6] India: Freedom of Press at Risk in Gujarat
and Maharashtra - declarations by concerned
citizens and editorials
(i)
CITIZENS AND MEDIA PERSONS SOLIDARITY MEETING AGAINST SEDITION CHARGE
ON TIMES OF INDIA AND TO UPHOLD FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
A charge of sedition has been filed against the
Times of India, Ahmedabad edition, because it
exposed the nexus of the City Police Commissioner
Mr. O.P. Mathur with the underworld don. The
story of the news was how safe is Ahmedabad under
Mr. O.P.Mathur. Earlier the journalist staged a
spirited demonstration before the office of the
Police Commissioner, Shahibaug, Ahmedabad joined
by the activists and the concerned citizens.The
journalists met the Governor Mr. Navalkishore
Sharma.
The Sedition charge against the Times of India
developed a unique solidarity of the media
persons and the concerned citizens and the
activists. A series of activities on freedom of
expression are going on in the city.
The citizens of Ahmedabad came out and condemned
sedition charge and stood for freedom of press
and freedom of expression. On 5th. June A
Citizens' meet was organised at Himavan, Paldi by
Movement for Secular Democracy (M.S.D.), People's
Union for Civil Liberties ( P.U.C.L.) and
PRASHANT to protest against the Sedition charges
against ' Times of India' and to uphold the
freedom of expression.Concened citizens belonging
to all walks of life joined the meeting. They
were jurists, academicians, columnists,
activists, students, youths and of course media
persons. The journalist friend of Times of India,
who is facing the charge of sedition (along with
the resident editor and the photographer), Mr.
Prasant Dayal, who carried the news on Mr.
O.P.Mathur was also present and was greeted
warmly as soon as he entered the hall.
The introductory speech was delivered by Mr.
Dwarika Nath Rath and there after Sri Gautam
Thaker conducted the meeting
The meeting was addressed by Advocate Mr.
Girishbhai Patel, eminent citizen Mr. Prakashbhai
Shah,. noted journalistm.Mr. Urvish Kothari,
senior journalists Mr. Rathin Das, Mr. Digant Oza
.Fr. Cedric Prakash of PRASHANTand Prof.
Dineshbahi Shukla.
Media persons Mr. D.P. Bhattacharya of India
Express, Mr. Dilip Patel of Times of India,Mr.
Ashis Vasi , Vishal Patadiya too expressed
their anguish
.Of course Mr. Prasant Dayal spoke in the meeting.
Ms. Ilabehn Pathak of AWAG,.Prof.Ghanshyam Shah,
Mr. Indukumar Jani. Editor, Nayamarg Mr.
Harinesh Pandya, campaigner of RTI Mr.Vithkbjai
Pandya, the father of slained Harin Pandya,
Prof.Dhavalbahi Mehta,Ex BJP MLAMr. SunilOza,Mr.
Rajanibhai Dave ,editor, Bhoomiputra,Mr. Ashok
Chatterji, ex Director N.I.D., Mr. Mahadev
Vidrohi of Sarvoday, and others actively
participated in the discussion and made valuable
suggestions
Noted Sarvoday leader Sri Chunibhai Vaidya was
present in the meeting. Apart from him Prof.
Abid Shamsi, Sri Dilip Chandulal,Suvarnabehn,
Damayanti behn,Sri Arunbhai Thkore, Sri
Himmatbbhai Shah, Sri Jayesh Patel,Ms. Ramabehn
Vora,Ms. Meenakshi Joshi, Ms. Sarah
behnBaldiwala,Ms.Verona D. Souza , Mr. Bhavik
Raja,Mr. PravinShah and many others from all walk
of life were present in the meeting.
A resolution was unanimously passed
The Resolution
The sedition charge against the Times of India is
a matter of great concern for all the democratic
minded people in the society. The meeting of the
citizens condemns the charge of sedition filed
against Times of India and term it as a direct
assault on freedom of Press, which is the fourth
Estate in a democratic country. Registering the
case against Times of India is a deliberate
action of Police to suppress the voice of dissent
of the press and create an atmosphere of panic in
the state, where violation of human rights and
Democratic rights is becoming a regular practice
of the Police and Govt. in Gujarat in overt and
covert fashion for last so many years.
The features carried by Times of India exposing
the close nexus between Police officer Mr. O.P.
Mathur with Mr. Abdul Latif , is not only
appalling but raises serious question about the
credibility of the Police Officer in high rank
and level criminalization of Police in the state.
The Ahmedabad city Police Commissioner Mr.
O.P.Mathur instead of responding to the
documented investigative report published by the
Times of India either by refuting the charges or
by filing defamation case but to treat the
reports questioning his competence as amounting
to excite hatred, contempt or dissatisfaction to
wards the Govt. reflects his undemocratic
character and audacity to equate himself as Govt.
established by law.If Mr.Mathur has acted with
the approval of the Govt. ,it exposes how the
state attempts to suppress democratic dissent.,
which can be a British colonial hang over.
So, we consider any threat to freedom press and
freedom of expression by any quarter of the
administration is a direct threat to democracy
and perpetuate fascist type of rule
The role of media as the watchdog of democracy
and it's role to disseminate right information to
the citizen is always indispensable, which we
consider the Times of India has been performing.
So we demand-
1 Withdrawal of the charge of sedition and conspiracy immediately
2 Institute a high level judicial enquiry on the
charges against Mr. O.P. Mathur
3 The column of Sedition be scrapped permanently.
4 A delegation of the citizens will meet the Governor of Gujarat
5 A State Level conference will be held on 22nd June On Freedom of Expression.
6 The Home Minister of Gujarat should come out
with the clarification on the charge of Sedition
against Times of India
GAUTAM THACKER
DWARIKANATH RATH
FR. CEDRIC PRAKASH
Date- 6-6-08
- - -
(ii) STATEMENT BY JOURNALISTS AND CONCERNED
CITIZENS FOLLOWING ASSAULT ON KUMAR KETKAR THE
BOMBAY BASED NEWSPAPER EDITOR
We condemn the unprovoked and dastardly attack on
the house of Kumar Ketkar, Editor-in-Chief,
Loksatta, on the morning of June 5th, 2008. This
is an attack on the freedom of expression. All
democratic and freedom loving people must stand
up to such fascist attacks.
Supporters of Shiv Sangram Sanghtana are
reportedly behind this attack. They were
protesting against the editorial in Loksatta of
June 4th that commented on the government
proposal to instal Shivaji Maharaj's statue in
the Arabian sea .
In democracy, no one has the right to scuttle
freedom of expression by use of force. Such
fascist means have no place in a democratic and
civilized society. Those who feel offended by the
editorial are free to approach either the Press
Council of India or an appropriate court of law.
We demand that the Mumbai Police and Government
of Maharashtra should immediately initiate
action, as per law, against the culprits. No one
should be spared, howsoever influential he may be.
Arun Tikekar
Anil K Singh
Darryl D'monte
Deepak Lokhande
Gurbir Singh
Jatin Desai
Kalpana Sharma
Meena Menon
Neera Adarkar
Nikhil Wagle
P Sainath
Rajiv Khandekar
Ramesh Pimple
Ranjona Bannerjee
Shishir Joshi
Siddharth Bhatia
Smruti Koppikar
Vishwanath Sachdeo
Yogesh Kamdar
Yuvraj Mohite
- - -
(iii)
Times of India
7 June 2008
EDITORIAL: Here They Go Again
Competitive identity politics in Mumbai has taken
yet another ugly turn. In the process, it has
chipped away, again, at India's liberal,
democratic foundations.
When activists claiming allegiance to the
Shivsangram Sangathana - which has links with the
NCP - vandalised the house of Loksatta editor,
Kumar Ketkar, on Thursday, it was our
constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression
that was under assault, along with the life and
property of Ketkar and his wife.
Vinayak Mehte, a former NCP MLC, claimed his
organisation was upset by an editorial written by
Ketkar, which had criticised the Maharashtra
government's decision to erect a statue of
Shivaji in the Arabian Sea.
Anyone who has read the editorial will see that
it simply did not denigrate the great Maratha
warrior. What it did was ask whether such a
project was necessary when the state had so many
pressing problems - including farmer suicides
and malnutrition - facing it.
It's a valid question, and as a journalist Ketkar
has the right to raise it. Indeed, any other
citizen could have asked the same. Freedom of
expression is every Indian's fundamental right.
However, such questioning in Maharashtra seems to
be an invitation to trouble, especially if
Shivaji figures in the equation.
We know that the Shiv Sena links pride in the
warrior and his heritage to Marathi asmita and
sets its cadre amok, especially in Mumbai,
whenever it decides this pride has been offended
in a book, a movie or elsewhere.
Successive administrations of other political
dispensations, instead of countering this
regressive brand of politics, have adopted it.
Though the NCP and the Congress do not speak the
language of Bal Thackeray or Raj Thackeray - at
least officially - they are in effect doing so by
merely watching instead of coming down hard on
the violent mobs. Four years ago, it was the
Congress government that banned historian James
Laine's book on Shivaji and an NCP-backed
organisation that ransacked Bhandarkar Institute
in Pune.
In their crude attempts to gain political capital
by presenting themselves as protectors of
Shivaji's legacy, political parties in
Maharashtra are impoverishing India's liberal tradition.
Meanwhile, in neighbouring Gujarat, freedom of
the press is under attack as well, for different
reasons. Angered by investigative reports against
him by this newspaper, Ahmedabad's police chief O
P Mathur - instead of suing for defamation -
pressed sedition charges.
This is a dangerous move. It could have damaging
consequences for not just journalists but all
citizens. Freedom of expression, which includes
the freedom of the press, is vital to a healthy
democracy, which protects individual and
collective rights.
Increasingly, in one way or another, we seem to
be fighting a losing battle against those who
have little regard or respect for the liberal
values on which this nation was founded.
______
[7]
Himal, June 2008
SHIFTING BALANCE
by Pritam Singh
As global capital moves East, developing
economies need to understand the importance of
not aping the entrenched lifestyles of the West.
[Full Text at: http://www.himalmag.com/2008/june/cover_balance.htm]
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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