SACW | Oct. 1-2, 2008 / Sri Lanka civilians / Prachanda in NY / India: Communal Bias, Police, Human rights, Chhattisgarh, Homophobic State

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | October 1-2, 2008 | Dispatch No. 2575 -  
Year 11 running

[1] Sri Lanka: Removal of international NGOs worsens civilian plight
[2] Nepal: Nepal’s Evolving Identity (Drew Haxby)
[3] India:
- Terrorism, Police and Minorities in India (Asghar Ali Engineer)
- Why Everybody Loves A Good Stereotype (Antara Dev Sen)
[4] India - Homophobia of the State: Home bias (Indian Express)
[5] India: Chhattisgarh - the illegal was of the state
- Letter from 139 academics to the Police Chief of Chhattissgarh
- Scrap Salwa Judum (Editorial, The Tribune)
[6] Announcements:
(i)  Peoples March to protest against communal violence (New Delhi, 2  
October 2008)
(ii) The National Public Meeting on Software Patents (Bangalore, 4  
October)

______


[1]

New Age
October 1, 2008

REMOVAL OF INTERNATIONAL NGOS WORSENS CIVILIAN PLIGHT

It is important that the international humanitarian organisations led  
by the UN should also insist that they be permitted to stay on to  
monitor the distribution of the relief supplies, as that too is part  
of their international obligation, Jehan Perera writes from Colombo


THE special representative of the UN secretary general on the Human  
Rights of Internally Displaced Persons, Professor Walter Kalin, who  
visited Sri Lanka recently laid down the appropriate guidelines to be  
followed in dealing with the victims of Sri Lanka’s earlier phase of  
war, tsunami and displacement. He said that displaced persons have  
the right to go back to their homes in the conflict zones or relocate  
to any other part of the country. He said that the UN and  
humanitarian organisations have a vital role to play in securing the  
lives of the people. He also said that lasting peace was only  
achievable if they were assured safety and security from war and  
bombs, compensated for lost property, provided with reconstructed  
houses and safeguarded against discrimination.

    But with government troops nearing the LTTE’s administrative  
capital of Kilinochchi statements by government spokespersons exude  
confidence that Sri Lanka has had enough with foreign advice, and  
will do things its own way. Those in charge of the war effort in  
particular have reason to be upbeat in their mood. The government’s  
progress on the battlefield has gone better than anticipated. The  
town of Kilinochchi is within range of the government’s firepower.  
There is a human trait when things go well to believe in the  
correctness of one’s own assessment of the current position. But when  
this is coupled with the narrowing of vision that accompanies ethnic  
nationalism, the possibility of mistakes becomes higher.

    One of the areas in which the government has taken strong but  
questionable action has been with respect to international  
humanitarian organisations. Earlier this month the government  
requested the international humanitarian organisations working in the  
north to vacate the battle ground areas. The government’s  
justification for this order was that it could not guarantee the  
safety of international humanitarian workers and did not wish to see  
a repeat of the tragedy that occurred in the east. Two years ago 17  
national aid workers belonging to an international humanitarian  
organisation were summarily executed in a battle zone.

    But there has also been a perception within the government, and  
one that is shared by the wider population, that many international  
organisations have been sympathetic if not downright supportive of  
the LTTE. There have been many public speeches by government members  
that NGOs are pro-LTTE and cannot be trusted, and this charge has  
received wide publicity in the government-controlled media and also  
in sections of the nationalist media. After the government forces  
started to recapture territory held for a long period by the LTTE  
they began to find equipment and other donations of international  
NGOs within captured LTTE bases. This gave rise to the suspicion that  
the NGOs had been deliberately supplying the LTTE.
    Sections of the media, especially those of the government- 
controlled media, gave wide publicity to these findings that were  
adverse to the NGOs claim to be impartial and neutral humanitarian  
actors. However, speaking to the UN General Assembly last week,  
President Mahinda Rajapaksa himself admitted that the LTTE had been  
taking a portion of the relief supplies that the government itself  
was sending to the people in the LTTE-controlled areas. The president  
did so to highlight the more important point that Sri Lanka was  
unique amongst war-affected countries, in that it did not  
discriminate against people living in rebel-held areas, but supplied  
them irrespective of where they lived.

    National interest

    Despite President Rajapaksa’s statesmanlike speech in New York,  
the government’s insistence that international NGOs should leave the  
northern battle zones continues to prevail. Government spokespersons  
have said they have evidence that some international NGOs have tried  
to cover up the extent of LTTE take-over of their supplies, while  
some of them may have permitted their supplies to fall into LTTE  
hands. Powerful sections of the government believe that the  
international NGOs are on the side of the LTTE. Accordingly, the  
government’s decision to completely handle the distribution of food  
and other relief items is seen as being in the national interest.

    As its alternative to the presence of international humanitarian  
organisations within the LTTE-controlled areas, the government has  
requested them to deliver their assistance through the government’s  
administrative system that continues to operate within the LTTE- 
controlled areas. The government has reason to be satisfied that its  
administrative system continues to function in LTTE-held areas. The  
government has also offered the international NGOs an opportunity to  
travel with the food and relief convoys into the LTTE-controlled  
areas and to ensure that the relief supplies are handed over to the  
care of the government agent of the area.

    However, the problem is that the government officials working in  
the LTTE-controlled areas have to be very mindful of what the LTTE  
also wants. Their salaries are being paid by the government and they  
are responsible to the government. But it is also likely that the  
government officials in the north are more fearful and possibly  
supportive of the LTTE, and are less independent of them, than the  
international NGOs. In the past the LTTE has assassinated several  
government officials, including government agents who headed the  
district administration, presumably for non-compliance with their  
directives. On the other hand, the LTTE has not dared to punish any  
international member of an NGO in a similar manner.

    What this means is that the government’s decision to evacuate the  
international NGOs from the north is likely to lead to greater LTTE  
dominance over the issuance of food and other relief items. It is not  
reasonable to expect the government officials working in the LTTE- 
controlled areas to be independent of the LTTE and to check them in  
case of any abuse of those relief supplies. Ironically, with the  
departure of the international NGOs at the government’s behest, there  
will be no one who can independently monitor the distribution of  
relief supplies and report back without fear of being punished by the  
LTTE.

    Human shields

    Fortunately, there is still time for the government leadership to  
reconsider their stances in favour of the civilian population. At the  
present time, it is reported that Kilinochchi has become a ghost town  
with most of its inhabitants having fled to the eastern part of the  
Wanni. Therefore the problem of civilian casualties and human shields  
is reduced. The problem will arise after the battle for Kilinochchi,  
if the government forces decide to carry on the battle to the last  
LTTE-hold town of Mullaitivu in the Wanni. At that point there will  
be nowhere left for the civilian population to flee.
    The government needs to consider if it is doing right by ordering  
the evacuation of the international humanitarian organisations. The  
government’s most recent decision to permit the international NGOs to  
accompany the humanitarian convoys into the LTTE-controlled areas is  
a positive development, but it is unlikely to prove sufficient. If  
limited to having the international community verify safe receipt of  
the supplies, it will not help in the distribution process after the  
convoys leave. After the international NGOs leave the area having  
ensured that the supplies are delivered to the government agent,  
there will be no one who can independently monitor what happens to  
those supplies.

    One of the fears expressed about the plight of the civilians is  
that they will be utilised as human shields. If the international  
humanitarian organisations do accompany the relief convoys sent in by  
the government, without safeguards for longer-term monitoring, there  
is the distinct possibility that they will be giving legitimacy to a  
process that is open to abuse. There is a possibility of the LTTE  
ordering the government officials to send the supplies to areas they  
consider strategic in order to compel the people to also move there.  
The government officials working in the LTTE-controlled areas may not  
be in a position to give advance notice of such decisions, let alone  
challenge the LTTE on them.

    The UN spokesperson is reported to have said that relief workers  
would be part of the convoys going into the LTTE-controlled areas in  
keeping with international obligations during conflict situations.  
The hope has also been expressed that this measure would be  
reassuring to the people of those areas that they have not been  
abandoned to the mercies of the two armed combatant parties, and that  
the international community continues to watch over their welfare.  
However, it is important that the international humanitarian  
organisations led by the UN should also insist that they be permitted  
to stay on to monitor the distribution of the relief supplies, as  
that too is part of their international obligation.


_____


[2]  Nepal: Prachanda's in New York


The Nation, October 1, 2008

NEPAL’S EVOLVING IDENTITY

Drew Haxby: Pushpa Kamal Dahal, newly elected Maoist Prime Minister  
of Nepal, provides insight into his country’s political dilemmas.

But Nepal defied the usual story line. Galvanized by King Gyanendra’s  
grab for power, the parliamentary parties put aside their differences  
and began peace talks with the Maoist rebels. Weeks of protests  
forced the King to reinstate the Parliament. The Maoists agreed to  
peace accords overseen by the United Nations, and entered the  
government as a nonviolent political party. The monarchy was soon  
abolished and—in the first election of the new constitutional assembly 
—the Maoists won the largest bloc of seats. And so it was on the  
evening of September 26 that the newly elected Maoist Prime Minister  
and former revolutionary leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal (better known by  
his guerilla nom de guerre "Prachanda," meaning "the Fierce One")  
arrived at the New School in New York City, fresh from the UN, to  
speak to of an audience of students, journalists, Western-style  
communists and expatriate Nepalis.

Those expecting a fiery diatribe denouncing right-wing ideology and  
foreign hegemony were in for a disappointment. "We will focus  
ourselves on three major issues," the Prime Minister said, "taking  
the peace process to a logical conclusion, writing a democratic,  
inclusive and forward-looking constitution and thinking about the  
socioeconomic transformation of the country." The speech sounded less  
like Prachanda the guerilla warrior than Dahal the statesman, eager  
to ameliorate rifts with Nepalis and to recast Nepal’s image as a  
nation moving toward a peaceful, economically stable future. He  
talked about the inclusion of women and "untouchable" castes in the  
constitutional assembly. He referred to the UN’s help in brokering  
the cease-fire and portrayed his government as an aspiring member of  
the international community. He talked of stomping out corruption and  
criticized Nepal for failing to tap its natural resources. He spoke  
at length about plans to rebuild Nepal’s infrastructure and encourage  
private enterprise and foreign investment in order to develop its  
hydroelectric capabilities. By the time PM Dahal had finished  
speaking, the vision he had painted resembled contemporary European  
socialism much more than it did China, circa 1966.

The discrepancy between Dahal’s vision and Mao’s was not lost on  
either the audience or on the prime minister himself. During the  
question-and-answer period, one questioner asked if the Nepali  
Maoists plan to disconnect themselves entirely from their communist  
roots, to which Dahal quipped that, if they are supposed to dismiss  
Engels and Mao, then what about Lincoln and Washington as symbols of  
American democracy? Communism, he seemed to say, is a heritage, not  
an orthodoxy, a point that he returned to repeatedly as he railed  
against the condescending rigidity of Western Marxists and described  
his movement as "the Prachanda Path," a new, more "scientific" step  
in the evolution of communism. "Concrete analysis of concrete  
conditions is the soul of Marxism," the Prime Minister said. "We are  
devising our policy and program according to the changed situation of  
the first decade of the twenty-first century."

Dahal’s willingness to adapt Maoist doctrine is partly a reflection  
of how nebulous modern Maoism can be. Indeed, Maoism today is defined  
as much by its military strategy as it is by its economic and  
political ideals—the so-called "people’s war" that uses popular  
peasant support and guerilla warfare to cripple the state and wear  
down its military capabilities. But with the Maoists’ turn towards  
peaceful multiparty democracy, this defining aspect no longer  
applies. What then? Follow China’s lead of hyper-capitalism? Move  
towards a centralized economic model? Even the original forty-point  
platform the Maoists submitted to the Nepali government at the  
beginning of this conflict was less a blueprint of radical leftist  
economic and political models than a list of pragmatic, nationalistic  
grievances aimed at reforming a failing democracy. One exception was  
the condemnation of "so-called privatization and liberalization to  
fulfill the interests of all imperialists," a position from which  
Dahal now seems to be backing away.

As inspiring as it was to hear a revolutionary talk so pragmatically,  
it did little to mask the fact that many difficult decisions lie  
ahead. Three times audience members asked the Prime Minister whether  
the government’s harsh treatment of its Tibetan refugee population  
was a result of back-room dealings with the Chinese government. Each  
time, the Prime Minister dodged the question, stating that the  
government will respect human rights but cannot tolerate actions "on  
our own soil" that might be taken as hostile towards its neighbors.

Questions about Nepal’s corrupt ministry of finance and the Maoists’  
infamously violent youth wing were met with equally evasive answers.  
And yet, more than undermining Dahal’s credibility, these questions  
only emphasized the fundamental challenges facing Nepal as a small,  
poor and unstable country, sandwiched between two rising Asian  
superpowers. Despite advances in the last few years, Nepal’s economy  
remains in shambles, its infrastructure nonexistent, and its future  
as unclear as it has ever been. The bloodshed is over, at least for  
now, and that alone is a miracle. But for Nepal to fulfill Dahal’s  
vision, many more miracles will be necessary.


_____


[3]  India: Communal Bias, Police, the Media

(i)

Secular Perspective,
October 1-15, 2008

TERRORISM, POLICE AND MINORITIES IN INDIA

by Asghar Ali Engineer

The police as such has strong minority bias right from the dawn of  
freedom. Our freedom came at the cost of partition and partition  
further increased Hindu-Muslim divide and the police could not remain  
unaffected by communalization of society. Though communalism and  
communal violence has changing graph in India it reached its  
crescendo during Ramjanambhoomi-Babri Masjid controversy and during  
the decade of eighties communal discourse became almost mainstream  
discourse and BJP indulged in this discourse blatantly and  
unabashedly while the Congress, being a secular party, had to  
exercise caution in using it. But nevertheless Congress too displayed  
its communal bias in a more restrained and sophisticated way.

The police was also communalized in the same way as political  
rhetoric. Even when the Congress appealing to minorities to support  
it in return for its secular credentials and also tried to assure  
minorities of protection and security, it never tried seriously to  
inject secularism into the minds of security agencies. The police  
record, as various inquiry commission reports into various major  
communal riots show has been extremely poor and tainted.

While the Congress Government shunned from giving proper ideological  
training the Sangh Parivar made constant efforts to communalize the  
police in various ways. Apart from the fact that it recruited those  
trained in RSS ’shakhas’ (branches) into the police force whenever in  
power in states or Central Government, its strident communal rhetoric  
deeply affected police mind.

To what extent the police has been affected by the communal virus  
became abundantly evident during its conduct in investigating terror  
attacks. What happened in Delhi in Batla House on 21st September is  
indeed hair raising story of police prejudice against Muslims. It is  
indeed great mystery as to who is behind terror attacks in various  
places. When Delhi had bomb explosions on 13th September the police  
as usual assumed that SIMI is behind it who has assumed the new garb  
of Indian Mujahidin (IM).

It raided Batla House on the morning of 21st September where five  
students, all from Azamgarh district studying in Jamia Millia Islamia  
University, Delhi. Let me emphasize one thing here that Jamia Millia  
Islamia has been the centre of Nationalism and it was established at  
the height of civil disobedience movement in post 1st World War by  
Nationalist Muslims of great stature like Zakir Husain, Mohammad Ali  
Jauhar and others at the instance of Mahatma Gandhi and when number  
of Muslim teachers and students boycotted Aligarh Muslim University.

The Jamia has ever since has maintained its nationalist character and  
Zakir Saheb and others made great sacrifices to keep it running  
despite severe economic crunch. Later it became Central University.  
Even today it has strong nationalist and secular credentials. It is  
unimaginable that those studying there would be so badly affected by  
communal ideology so as to turn terrorists.

But the police suspected these students and in fact claimed that Atif  
(or Atiq) was the mastermind behind Delhi, Jaipur and Ahmedabad  
blasts and was responsible for sending the e-mail in the name of  
Indian Mujahidin. The Delhi police killed Atif and Sajid in  
’encounter’ and a police inspector Sharma was also killed. The police  
also claimed to have found AK-47 and a country revolver in the place  
where these students lived. It arrested one Saif and claimed that two  
other escaped.

All leading human rights activists who carried out investigation on  
the spot found serious gaps in the police claim and raised several  
questions blasting the police theory of ’encounter’. Inspector Sharma  
who was killed was ’encounter specialist’ in Delhi Police Force. Not  
only Delhi police, but police all over India, particularly in  
Maharashtra, Gujarat are known to carry out false encounters in  
league with underworld dons and accumulate phenomenal wealth.

The police has not been able to answer these questions raised by  
human rights activists and there seems to be genuine concern among  
people about killing these ’dreaded terrorists’. They might have been  
quite innocent. Police claimed that Sajid was 22 or 23 years old  
without producing any proof. His parents showed certificates to prove  
his age was 18 years and he had come to Delhi only three months ago  
to seek admission in 11th standard in Jamia Millia Islamia.

This has created strong feeling of alienation among Muslims  
throughout India. The police, after every blast arrests innocent  
young Muslim boys, mostly from lower middle class and, accuses them  
of being involved in the conspiracy to carry out terror attacks  
despite total lack of any proof. After arrest it manages to obtain  
’confession’ from them and gives out story of having cracked the  
case. It is well known how this confession is obtained.

What is more unfortunate is that the media publishes these stories  
uncritically and describes these boys as ’dreaded terrorists’ and  
masterminds. The police changes after every explosion the names of  
masterminds and even then the media – both print as well as  
electronic – does not question the police version. Some human rights  
activists or the ’Tehelka’ team has done splendid work in exposing  
serious flaws in the police claim.

Why this police approach? One obvious reason is its natural  
assumption, due mainly to its communalization, that no one else but  
Muslim boys belonging to SIMI who have also assumed the name of IM  
can do it. Despite lack of any proof except self ’confession’ they do  
not change their track. Many Bajrang Dal youth were caught making  
bombs but police downplays these explosions and completely ignores  
any possibility of their role.

Secondly police, apart from being infected by communal violence, is  
under pressure to ’solve’ the case as any delay exposes it to not  
being able to do its work efficiently. Thirdly, it has found easy way  
out to arrest some innocent youth, obtain their confession, and claim  
they have ’solved’ the case. Thus they are also able to satisfy their  
political bosses under pressure from public to solve the case and  
stop further terror attacks.

Such casual and communal approach on the part of police has serious  
consequences for the country. After every police claim that it has  
caught the mastermind further terror attacks take place as if to  
ridicule their claim. Thus it is resulting in continuous terror  
attacks. In no time after Batla House ’encounter’ wherein police  
claimed that it has nabbed the masterminds of Delhi blast and even  
killed them another blast took place on 27th September in which one  
boy of 12 years was killed on the spot and another killed later in  
the hospital and several persons seriously injured.

Unless police sheds its communal bias and does hard work through  
collecting credible evidence terror attacks cannot be stopped.  
However, no one, much less the media, is prepared to buy the theory  
that police is lacking in its duty. In every blast several innocent  
people are killed. The Governments, state as well central, are  
failing to provide protection to its people. How many more will be  
killed in such blasts?

The BJP, on the other hand, is further communalizing the situation in  
the hope of getting more Hindu votes by demanding enactment of POTA  
or POTA like law to nab the terrorists. It was BJP which had enacted  
dreaded law and despite POTA several major terrorist attacks  
including one on Parliament took place. More terrorist attacks will  
give more advantage to the BJP in coming elections. Should this  
dimension also not be taken into account for these repeated attacks  
despite claim that real masterminds have been arrested?

The police approach is also creating anguish and anger among Muslims.  
In several meetings with important Muslim leaders and intellectuals  
that we held in different towns and cities, they said what is the  
guarantee that my son’s turn will not come tomorrow? Today they are  
feeling quite alienated and isolated and it is not healthy for a  
multi-religious country like India to alienate the largest religious  
minority to such an extent.

The Sangh Parivar has seriously damaged the secular character of our  
country. It has completely destroyed its secular character and its  
age-old tradition of tolerance and human values for its lust for  
power and for making India Hindu Rashtra. Now the Christian minority  
is under similar attack, Christians who have contributed so richly to  
modern India. Christians are also anguished today like never before.  
It is highly regrettable that our Prime Minister described these  
attacks on Christians as ’sporadic’ during his trip abroad.

He also described these attacks as ’shameful’, which is more honest  
description. Remember Mr. A.B.Vajpayee, the then Prime Minister, had  
said after Gujarat riots of 2002 what face will I show abroad? And  
now Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has to face embarrassing situation  
in France. Then why does he not act firmly against communal forces?  
Why is he so soft towards the Sangh Parivar. Why does he not ban  
Bajrang Dal and VHP for attacking Christians in Orissa (Kandhmal  
district) and in Karnataka? The role of police has been no different  
in Orissa and Karnataka. Its sympathies were obviously with Sangh  
Parivar when Christians were being attacked.

Is not our country inching towards fascism?

o o o

(ii)

The Asian Age
October 2, 2008

WHY EVERYBODY LOVES A GOOD STEREOTYPE

by Antara Dev Sen

"You support terrorists?" my friend was horror-struck.

"We can’t presume they are terrorists," I begin, "there must be a  
trial first."

"Rubbish! They are terrorists! And it’s indefensible that Jamia Milia  
University is using government money to protect them."

"Everyone is entitled to legal aid and is innocent until proven  
guilty..."

"They are guilty. The police nabbed them."

"That’s the police version…"

My friend, a secular and sensitive writer, is mortified. "The  
terrorists shot an officer dead! But you still won’t believe them?"

"You believe police ‘encounters’?"

"Certainly. You don’t?"

"Maybe, if they’re credible."

"Why won’t you believe the police?"

"It would have been easier to believe the cops if they didn’t offer  
several versions of the same ‘encounter’, if they could find the  
bullets that killed Inspector M.C. Sharma and the gun that fired  
them, or answer the questions locals and activists are throwing at  
them punching holes in their theories, if fake ‘encounter’ killings  
like Sohrabuddin’s and his wife’s were not fresh in our minds…"

"A police officer is killed, and you side with the terrorists!"

"No, a life cut short is tragic — especially for the family. But two  
boys were also killed in the shootout. Terrorists? Prove it. Sharma  
did have a reputation — remember his killing ‘terrorists’ in a fake  
encounter at Ansal Plaza?"

"He faked his own killing, you say?"

With bombs going off every few days and our threat perception  
spiralling, it’s not easy to root for civil rights. Logic and ethics  
get all tangled up as fear spooling out of bombed markets and  
grieving neighbourhoods flood your senses. Where does one draw the  
line between safeguarding human rights and supporting terrorism? How  
much of our rationality and morals are we ready to barter for some  
more security? Would it really buy safety or are we being manipulated  
into fighting others’ battles? Conversely, are we bending over  
backwards so much to protect civil rights that we can’t see the obvious?

For example, you can’t deny that there is Muslim terrorism in India.  
We are not immune to the global virus, especially since some  
neighbours have been diligently breeding it for us. And it is naive  
to pretend that all Muslim terrorism in India is retaliation against  
discrimination and abuse, or to romanticise the murder of innocents.

But to prop up Muslims as the enemy, or suggest that every Muslim is  
a potential terrorist, is ridiculous. For decades, we have faced  
terrorism from non-Muslims, from Punjab to the Northeast to the  
recent rash of terror across India by Maoists or Hindutva extremists.  
We have lost one Prime Minister to Sikh killers and one to Hindu  
terrorists. And lost thousands of lives to Muslim militants, from  
Jammu and Kashmir to the Mumbai blasts.

Yet the trend today is to equate terrorism with Islam. Take Delhi.  
Every recent bomb blast has been blamed on Muslims — the attack on  
the Red Fort in December 2000 and on Parliament in December 2001, the  
Diwali blasts of October 2005, the serial blasts of September 13,  
2008, and the blast last Saturday. Even though 15,000 clerics had  
congregated in February at Darul Uloom Deoband, the Muslim seminary  
in Uttar Pradesh whose alumni include the Taliban, and denounced  
terrorism as anti-Islam.

We love stereotypes. So while parading the three suspects in the  
Delhi blasts — middle class kids, two of whom are students of the  
Jamia Milia Islamia University — instead of the hood to protect their  
identity, the police wrapped brand new red Palestinian scarves around  
their heads, revealing only their eyes, like Hamas militants.  
Manipulating the perception of the Muslim as terrorist, or the  
terrorist as Muslim, was easy.

Religious profiling has been part of our anti-terrorism drive, and  
with their socio-political deprivations, Muslims are easy targets.  
According to the Sachar Committee Report, only 59 per cent of Muslims  
are literate and their participation in governance is severely  
limited: only 4 per cent in the IPS, 3 per cent in the IAS, barely  
1.8 per cent in the IFS, etc. Marginalised for long, Muslims are now  
being pushed dangerously close to the edge.

Apart from violating the constitutional guarantee of equality,  
religious profiling hinders the fight against terror. It diverts  
attention from those who are tangibly linked to terrorism but do not  
fit the religious profile. So stereotypes about Muslim terrorists  
make us ignore State-sponsored Hindu terrorism like in Gujarat, where  
justice was so beyond reach that the Supreme Court had to transfer  
the 2002 "riot" cases outside of the state. Or the continuing terror  
attacks on Christians in Orissa (about 50 killed in Kandhamal this  
time), and Karnataka by Hindu extremists. Bajrang Dal activists have  
been found making bombs, like in Kanpur a month ago. Maharashtra’s  
Anti-Terrorism Squad found them making bombs in Nanded in 2006 and  
also recovered a false beard, moustache and sherwani. This Hindu  
group had bombed three mosques since 2003. Once free from  
stereotypes, the police can efficiently counter terror.

But stereotyping terrorists is easier. We remember the jailing and  
torture of Iftikhar Gilani, Delhi bureau chief of Kashmir Times, for  
almost seven months, before intense lobbying by the media and  
politicians got him released in January 2003. Similarly, Tariq Ahmed  
Dar, a young Kashmiri model, was jailed for several months in 2006,  
as a "Pakistani spy". He was released after intervention by the media  
and top politicians. In August, cops picked up Milan Molla, a tea- 
shop owner in Kolkata, threatening to brand him a terrorist unless he  
paid up Rs 150,000. His mother paid part of it with borrowed money,  
freed him and went public with a complaint. Every year, there are  
dozens of such cases. Given that young Muslim men are routinely  
targeted in the name of fighting terrorism, Jamia’s decision to  
provide legal aid to its students is perhaps essential.

"But would Jamia have provided this support if the boys were accused  
of rape?" exclaimed my friend. Maybe not. But then, being accused of  
a crime against an individual is not the same as being charged with a  
crime against the nation. The loyalty of Indian Muslims is regularly  
questioned — from India-Pakistan cricket matches to national  
politics. In a terrified society, officially branding them anti- 
national would be easy. To prevent our strained social fabric from  
falling apart, we need to pursue the truth, not myths, and protect  
civil rights. That does not make us supporters of terrorism, it helps  
us curb it.

Antara Dev Sen is editor of The Little Magazine. She can be contacted  
at: sen at littlemag.com


______


[4]  India: Homophobia of the State


The Indian Express
Oct 02, 2008


HOME BIAS

Editorial

In reports emerging of the reactions of the judges of the Delhi High  
Court who are hearing the government’s arguments against the  
legalisation of homosexuality, the outrage and confusion that they  
clearly feel at the illiberal and contradictory stand that the  
additional solicitor-general has taken on behalf of the Government  
come through quite clearly. The court’s incredulity is something that  
is, needless to say, shared by all of liberal India, as the  
government has in succession said that homosexuality “disturbs the  
public peace”, impacts health adversely for homosexuals, impacts  
health adversely for non-homosexuals, that it would “open the  
floodgates for delinquent behaviour”, that it is a “social vice” and  
a “reflection of a perverse mind”. This cavalcade of antediluvian  
attitudes and half-formed misinformation is supposed to serve as  
justification for keeping an unknown but large number of otherwise  
law-abiding citizens of India in a state of permanent criminality.

Let us be clear on this: as the court implied, in asking for  
empirical evidence, there is absolutely no data that can back up the  
government’s claims. Indeed, in Brazil, for example, increased public  
and administrative acceptance of homosexuality in an otherwise macho  
culture was one prong of a multi-pronged effort to contain the spread  
of AIDS. Some years later, the number of HIV/AIDS patients was barely  
half the figure that had been predicted by the World Bank. Compare  
that to famously homophobic Jamaica, where efforts to stem the HIV  
epidemic have stumbled on the fact that no homosexuals come forward  
to be treated, according to its own health ministry. India’s health  
minister, Anbumani Ramadoss, has repeatedly said that it is his  
ministry’s position that criminalisation of homosexuality impedes  
anti-HIV work. He is to be lauded for this. What is even more  
laudable, and impressive, is that he has chosen to publicly take on  
the home minister on the subject, not only as a doctor and health  
practitioner but as a liberal, demanding that Patil be “more  
progressive” and “a lot more sensitive”, while pointing out that  
acceptance of alternate sexualities has grown “the world over”.

Fortunately, this is a question of rights — fundamental rights in the  
Constitution clearly prohibit sex-based discrimination — and the  
domain of the courts. But whatever the decision, it is also a  
question of basic dignity, and the government has already failed  
miserably in ensuring that one of India’s minorities is provided the  
minimum respect that any liberal...

______


[6] India: Chhattisgarh

(i)

http://www.freebinayaksen.org/wp-content/ 
2008/10/139faculty_todgpchhattisgarh.pdf
http://www.sacw.net/article79.html

Letter from university faculty to the Police Chief of Chhattissgarh

September 27, 2008
  Berkeley, California

To: Mr. Vishwa Ranjan
  Director-General of Police, Chhattisgarh

We, concerned members of university and college faculties, write to  
condemn the ongoing violations of the human and civil rights of its  
citizens by the state of Chhattisgarh, primarily through the agency  
of your department, the Chhattisgarh police force. These violations  
include the arbitrary arrest and indefinite detention of hundreds of  
people, including Dr. Binayak Sen, an internationally respected  
provider of medical services to Chhattisgarh’s tribal communities,  
threats and assaults against civil liberties activists, lawyers and  
journalists, and most egregious of all, the growing depredations of  
the state-sponsored violent militia known as the Salwa Judum. We  
regret to note that not only have you been unsuccessful in halting  
these violations of human rights, but you have actively justified  
them and accused anyone opposing them as “demoralis[ing] the state  
machinery.”

In a report released this past July, Human Rights Watch (HRW) has  
documented in detail the human rights abuses committed by the Salwa  
Judum against civilians in Chhattisgarh. HRW’s report gives the lie  
to your oft repeated claim that the Salwa Judum is a spontaneous  
unarmed peaceful anti- Naxalite movement by documenting eyewitness  
accounts of “police participating in violent Salwa Judum raids on  
villages - killing, looting, and burning their hamlets.”1 Similar to  
earlier investigative reports by the People’s Union of Civil  
Liberties (PUCL) and People’s Union for Democratic Rights, among  
others, the HRW report also documents the arbitrary detentions and  
torture of villagers by the Chhattisgarh police. Reporters without  
Borders noted with concern that “[journalists] are prevented from  
reporting and investigating by corrupt politicians, police and Salwa  
Judum members, many receiving harassment, intimidation and beating …  
Currently journalists report from press releases produced by the  
government or risk their life and career by reporting objectively  
both sides of the struggle.”2

Perhaps the best-known case of a non-violent dissenter being arrested  
and jailed in Chhattisgarh is that of Dr. Binayak Sen, a prominent  
and early critic of the Salwa Judum and of state violence. Dr. Sen, a  
physician serving the poorest and most marginalized communities in  
the interior and tribal areas of Chhattisgarh for more than 25 years,  
has been a guiding light for peace and community health. He has won  
many awards for his work, including the Paul Harrison Award in 2004  
from CMC Vellore, his alma mater, from which he had been graduated  
over 30 years ago following a most distinguished academic career, and  
most recently the Jonathan Mann Award from the Global Health Council  
in May 2008. Binayak Sen appears to have earned the government’s ire  
by being a vocal critic of the high-handed and illegal ways adopted  
by the state in the name of suppressing the Maoist insurgency in  
Chhattisgarh. For instance, Dr. Sen’s and PUCL’s investigations had  
exposed that 12 alleged Maoists, killed by the police in Santoshpur  
village in a supposed gunfight on March 31, 2007, were unarmed  
tribals executed at close range. The State Human Rights Commission  
took note of this investigation, and ordered the bodies of the  
victims exhumed. Shortly afterward, Dr. Sen was arrested.3 Not only  
have you and the state prosecutor failed to present any legally valid  
evidence against Dr. Sen, the responsible police officers appear to  
be blatantly concocting fables and planting false evidence.4

Other citizens who have been harassed by the police include: Amarnath  
Pandey and DP Yadav, two lawyers who had filed lawsuits regarding the  
‘encounter killing’ of one Narayan Khairwar and the custodial rape of  
one Ledha Bai; filmmaker Ajay TG, a member of the State Executive  
Committee of the Chhattisgarh Unit of PUCL, and journalist Sai Reddy,  
both of whom had to be released on bail when the police failed to  
file a chargesheet even after ninety days; Himanshu Kumar of the  
Vanvasi Chetna Ashram, an NGO that implements implements government  
programs on health, nutrition, and education, for the “crime” of  
assisting fact-finding teams investigating human rights abuses;  
journalists Santosh Poonyem and Kamlesh Paikra for daring to write  
about the violence committed by Salwa Judum; and even the  
participants at the third annual meeting of Chhattisgarh Net  
(www.cgnet.in), an online citizen journalism initiative.

It bears noting that such actions by the law enforcement machinery of  
any state are not only in violation of the laws of India, but also  
run counter to India’s international treaty obligations. The  
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR), which  
India acceded to in 1979, declares in relevant part that:

• All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that  
right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue  
their economic, social and cultural development. (Article 1.1)

• Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall  
be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his  
life. (Article (6.1)

• No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or  
degrading treatment or punishment. (Article 7)

• Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. (Article  
9.1)

• Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention  
shall have an enforceable right to compensation. (Article 9.5)

• All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with  
humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human  
person. (Article 10.1)5 We strongly urge you, as the highest police  
official in the state of Chhattisgarh, to:

• Follow in letter and spirit, the values enshrined in the Indian  
Constitution and the CCPR.

• Stop encouraging an all-out civil war in Chhattisgarh in the name  
of Salwa Judum, an organization whose violent activities are so  
distasteful and blatant that the Supreme Court of India recently  
noted that support of Salwa Judum by the state amounts to abetment of  
murder by state officials, and whose excesses as documented in a  
recent NHRC report were deemed “very painful to read” by the Chief  
Justice of the Supreme Court of India.

• Drop all charges against political prisoners, including Dr Binayak  
Sen, filmmaker Mr. Ajay TG, journalist Mr. Sai Reddy, release them  
unconditionally, pay compensation for the harassment and loss of  
liberty they have suffered due to their unwarranted detention, and  
arrest and prosecute all police officers involved in arresting and  
holding all these political prisoners.

• Stop victimizing dissenters in Chhattisgarh;

• Ensure a just and honest governance that improves the lives of  
millions of desperately poor people in Chhattisgarh.

—  EndNotes
  1 http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2008/07/14/india19345.htm
  2 http://www.rsf.org/IMG/pdf/Report•Chhattisgarh-2.pdf
  3 http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA20/013/2007/en/ 
domASA200132007en.html
  4 http://www.phmovement.org/cms/en/node/751
  5 http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a•ccpr.htm

-

Signed,

Concerned Faculty of Universities and Academic Institutes

Itty Abraham
  Associate Professor of Government Director of South Asia Institute  
University of Texas at Austin

Meena Alexander
  Poet & Distinguished Professor of English Hunter College, City  
University of New York

Bernardo Attias
  Professor and Chair of Communication Studies California State  
University, Northridge

Niharika Banerjea
  Assistant Professor, Sociology University of Southern Indiana

Pranab Bardhan
  Professor of Economics University of California at Berkeley

Dilip Basu
  Professor and Founding Director Satyajit Ray Film and Study Center  
University of California at Santa Cruz

Amitabh Behar
  Executive Director National Centre for Advocacy Studies, Pune

Kim Berry
  Associate Professor of Women’s Studies Humboldt State University  
Arcata, California

Satindar Mohan Bhagat
  Professor of Physics University of Maryland College Park

Nirveek Bhattacharjee
  Senior Research Fellow University of Washington

Arabinda Bhattacharya
  Reader in Statistics & Business Management Calcutta University

Purnima Bose
  Associate Professor of English Indiana University

Peter E. Caines
  Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering McGill University  
Montreal, Canada

Mia Carter
  Associate Professor of English University of Texas at Austin

Rabin Chakraborty
  Reader in Applied Physics Calcutta University

Nandini Chandra
  Visiting Assistant Professor of Asian Languages and Literature  
University of Minnesota

Shefali Chandra
  Assistant Professor of South Asian History University of Illinois  
at Urbana-Champaign

Sharad Chari
  Assistant Professor of Geography London School of Economics

Angana Chatterji
  Associate Professor of Anthropology California Institute of  
Integral Studies San Francisco

Indrani Chatterjee
  Associate Professor of History Rutgers University, New Jersey

Kalyan Chatterjee
  Distinguished Professor of Economics and Management Science  
Pennsylvania State University

Kumkum Chatterjee
  Associate Professor of History Pennsylvania State University

P.S. Chauhan
  Professor of English Arcadia University Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

B. J. Cherayil
  Associate Professor of Pediatrics Harvard Medical School Cambridge,  
Massachusetts

Lawrence Cohen
  Associate Professor of Anthropology and South & Southeast Asian  
Studies University of California at Berkeley

Dia Da Costa
  Assistant Professor Queens University Kingston, Canada

Om Prakash Damani
  Associate Professor of Computer Science Indian Institute of  
Technology Bombay

Veena Das
  Professor of Anthropology; The Johns Hopkins University Baltimore,  
Maryland
[. . .]

SEE FULL TEXT at: http://www.freebinayaksen.org/wp-content/ 
2008/10/139faculty_todgpchhattisgarh.pdf


o o o


The Tribune
September 27, 2008

Editorial

SCRAP SALWA JUDUM
Brigandry in the name of self-defence

THE Supreme Court has strongly disapproved of the Chhattisgarh  
government’s Salwa Judum or self-defence group to combat the  
increasing Naxalite menace. It has directed the government to follow  
the recommendations of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in  
this regard. The NHRC’s report, presented to the court, is believed  
to have pointed out innumerable instances of human rights violations  
and high-handed behaviour by the Salwa Judum activists. Chief Justice  
K.G. Balakrishnan, who headed the Bench hearing the case, said: “If  
private persons, so armed by the state government, kill other  
persons, then the state is also liable to be prosecuted as an abettor  
of murders.” Salwa Judum was initiated by the government in June 2005  
as a people’s movement against Naxalism and terrorism. However, the  
remedy proved to be worse than the disease. It became a violent  
institution and its activists are charged with rape, loot and arson.

In all fairness, Salwa Judum was introduced for ensuring effective  
coordination between the security forces and the local people in  
tackling Naxalism. However, it soon degenerated into a private  
militia that behaved in much the same manner as the Naxalites,  
killing villagers to settle old scores and perpetrating atrocities on  
those who opposed them. The government’s strategy of picking up local  
men, giving them arms training and inducting them as Special Police  
Officers (SPOs) to assist the security forces in the anti-Naxal  
operations also backfired. The SPOs used the opportunity to enforce  
their might in the villages and indulged in arson, loot and mayhem.

The Planning Commission, the Administrative Reforms Commission, the  
National Commission for Women and several other organisations have  
pointed out the dangerous track record of the ill-conceived campaign.  
The Raman Singh government should understand that Salwa Judum is not  
the answer to the Naxalite violence. Besides improving governance, it  
must focus on socio-economic measures to help the downtrodden. Giving  
arms to civilians is illegal and it does not have the force of the  
law. The Chhattisgarh government would do well to follow the court’s  
advice to scrap Salwa Judum.


______


[6]  Announcements:

(i)

http://www.anhadin.net/article58.html

In Defence of Pluralism, Harmony and Peace
People’s March in New Delhi on 2nd October 2008

Come and join

People’s March on 2nd October
  Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday and the International Day of Non-Violence

The march is a protest against communal violence and increasing  
brutal attacks on innocent people, minorities and human rights’  
defenders by fanatics and terrorists of all kinds

The March will start at 1400 hours (2 pm) from Jantar Mantar till  
Rajghat New Delhi

PLEASE come in large numbers for a show of strength and solidarity!

o o o

(ii)

http://www.sacw.net/article87.html


On behalf of the organizers, the Free Software users Group-Bangalore  
cordially invites you to The National Public Meeting on Software Patents

==Venue==

2nd Floor, Ecumenical Resource Centre, United Theological College,  
Millers Road, Benson Town. (Behind Cantonment Railway Station)  
Bangalore-560046

==Date and Time==

10:00-17:00
  Saturday, October 4, 2008

==Background==

Software patents in India occupy a contentious and indeterminate  
legal space. While recent amendments to the Patent Act have sought to  
bring our law in conformity with WTO-mandated standards, these  
amendments have shied from pronouncing conclusively on the  
patentability of software. The result is an equivocation in the law  
which is being wrestled aggressively and effectively by corporate  
interests, patent attorneys and the Patent Office in favour of  
granting software patents. Unheard, and so unrepresented in this  
powerful triad are the interests of millions of citizen-consumers who  
are either presumed too ignorant to be credited with a view on the  
issue, or are presumed to be irrelevant to the determination of  
issues which are seen as purely "business" matters (as opposed to  
"citizen" matters).

Software is everywhere you look (and many places you never think of  
looking). With the explosion of low-cost computing devices (think  
mobile phones and iPods), software has leaked out of its traditional  
home-the PC-and begun infiltrating various aspects of our lives. From  
traffic signals to toilet commodes in some countries, refrigerators  
to railway tickets, vacuum cleaners and electronic voting machines,  
TVs, refrigerators and electronic pacemakers, inanimate objects of  
all sizes are humming to themselves, chattering amongst themselves in  
an intricate, highly complex tongue called ’software’ that few of us  
can ever hope to understand. On the impulses of software, we stop or  
move on streets, fill up on petrol, and elect governments. Someone’s  
heart beats. Someone else receives land records on a village kiosk.  
Someone is standing by helplessly for fourteen years (the un- 
evergreened term of a patent) because software failed to factor in  
her disability.

There are big stakes involved in the control of software in an era  
when software is becoming increasingly central to the way we humans  
organize our lives and inhabit a democracy. At one level this is  
about preserving the right of agency and self-direction that citizens  
have in their own lives. At another, it is about the right not to be  
silenced when our long-fought democratic republic is at risk of being  
diminished by a few lines of software in a machine. Whether or not we  
are all in fact capable of deciphering software is inessential. Those  
of us who are ought not to be denied the freedom to interrogate,  
tinker and improve.

Patents have the effect of adding an additional layer of ’protection’  
to already existing copyright protection of software, while  
simultaneously overriding the various affordances and safeguards  
built into copyright law. For instance, the right of "fair dealing"  
under copyright law permits users to examine and modify any software  
in order to make it interoperable with other software. This is an  
extremely potent right that reasserts our right to intervene in the  
shaping of our surroundings. It is also one of the rights that is  
most imperiled by software patents.

The present "public hearing" on software patents is an invitation for  
dialogue on the various issue surrounding software patents. Although  
the Patent Office had scheduled a public consultation on its Draft  
Patent Manual to be held in Bangalore in August this year, that  
meeting was abruptly cancelled (or postponed indefinitely, or to an  
unannounced date-we can’t be sure) without any reasons having been  
assigned by the Patent Office. This signals either of two unpleasant  
scenarios: first, the Patent Office is proceeding with its  
consultations in an extremely mechanical fashion, not intending  
inputs received in the course of these consultations to qualitatively  
impact their functioning in any way; or secondly, perhaps the Patent  
Office underestimates the amount that citizens living in the IT  
capital of India might have to say on the subject of software  
patents. It is our attempt in this public hearing to organize the  
kind of consultation that the Indian Patent Office ought to have  
conducted. We hope also hereby, to serve as a gentle but firm  
reminder to the Patent Office that its task is as yet undone.

==Agenda==

1000-1100
  Presentation on the principles of patent law and software patents

Sudhir Krishnaswamy (National Law School)

Prabir Purkayastha (Delhi Science Forum)

Nagarjuna G. (Free Software Foundation of India)

1100-1130
  Discussion on software patents in the Indian context: Indian Patent  
Act, and the draft patent manual
  Prashant Iyengar (Alternative Law Forum)

Venkatesh Hariharan (Red Hat)

1130-1150
  Tea break

1150-1240
  Discussion on patents and the development sector (freedom of  
speech, open standards, healthcare, biotech, agro-sector, etc.)
  Sunil Abraham (Centre for Internet and Society)

Anivar Aravind (Movingrepublic, FSUG-Bangalore)

Others

  1240-1300
  Presentation on the software patents that have been granted so far  
in India

Pranesh Prakash (Centre for Internet and Society)

1300-1400
  Lunch break

1400-1700
  Open House

Those speaking will include:
  Joseph Matthew (Special IT Adviser to the Government of Kerala)

T. Ramakrishna (National Law School)

Abhas Abhinav (DeepRoot Linux)

Sreekanth S. Rameshaiah (Mahiti Infotech)

Vinay Sreenivasa (IT for Change)

(And any others who wish to speak)

==Organizers==

  Centre for Internet and Society;
  Free Software Users Group-Bangalore;
  Free Software Foundation of India;
  SPACE;
  IT for Change;
  Alternative Law Forum;
  Delhi Science Forum;
  Movingrepublic;
  Sarai/CSDS;
  OpenSpace;
  Swathanthra Malayalam Computing;
  Servelots - Janastu;
  Mahiti;
  DeepRoot Linux;
  Wiki Ocean;
  Turtle Linux Lab;
  Zyxware Technologies;
  INSAF;
  Aneka


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

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://sacw.net/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/

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