SACW | July 2-3, 2009 / Refugees / Kashmir / Court Ruling on decriminalizes homosexuality - Homophobes oppose / Ram Narayan Kumar / Women’s work / Honduran Feminists

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | July 2-4, 2009 | Dispatch No. 2640 - Year  
11 running
From: www.sacw.net

[ SACW Dispatches for 2009-2010 are dedicated to the memory of Dr.  
Sudarshan Punhani (1933-2009), husband of Professor Tamara Zakon and  
a comrade and friend of Daya Varma ]
____

[1] Pakistan / Afghanistan:  HRCP questions voluntary nature of  
refugees’ repatriation
[2] Pakistan’s Kashmir problem (Alok Rai)
[3] Punditry about Muslims (Jawed Naqvi)
[4] Some Thoughts on Developments in Nepal (Anand Swaroop Verma)
[5] India: Landmark Delhi High Court Ruling decriminalizes homosexuality
    + Full text of the 2 July 2009 ruling
    + End to unnatural exclusion (Shohini Ghosh)
Homophobia Unites Moral and Culture Police From All Religio-Political  
Lobbies In India: Secular Forces Must Not Duck
   - Legalising homosexuality will lead to sexual anarchy: church  
(The Hindu)
   - Govt resolve to act on Section 377 hits Deoband hurdle (Times of  
India)
   - Excerpt from PTI report in Herald
   - Excerpt from report in Times TV
   - Religious leaders disapprove HC judgement on homosexuality
   - Muslim clerics deplore homosexuality, lesbianism (Atiq Khan)
[6] India: The Rebellion in Lalgarh - The CPI(M) itself is  
responsible for the predicament it is in (Ashok Mitra)
[7] Tributes: Ram Narayan Kumar - An Obituary (Pritam Singh)
    - A Condolence Message from Naga People's Movement For Human Rights
[8] Protecting and Promoting Rights in Natural Disasters in South  
Asia: Prevention and Response - Summary Report (Brookings / Berns  
Project)
[9] India: Regardless of contents, Liberhan report is bad news for  
BJP news analysis (Siddharth Varadarajan)
[10] Book Review: Women’s work - Never done and poorly paid (Nirmala  
Banerji)
[11] A Statement From Honduran Women’s Organizations and Feminist  
Networks

_____


[1] Pakistan / Afghanistan:

Human rights Commission of Pakistan

HRCP QUESTIONS VOLUNTARY NATURE OF REFUGEES’ REPATRIATION

Press release, 24 June 2009

Lahore: The repatriation of registered Afghan refugees from Pakistan  
does not meet the required standard of voluntarism deemed mandatory  
by international refugee law, a report by the Human Rights Commission  
of Pakistan (HRCP) has said.

The report entitled ‘Push Comes to Shove’ – whose publication  
coincided with the World Refugee Day, June 20 – studies the trends  
and patterns of repatriation of Afghan refugees through 2007 and 2008  
to determine whether the process was voluntary.

The study conducted by HRCP’s Peshawar chapter says that even though  
many Afghan refugees in Pakistan signed up for repatriation, large  
numbers did so not because they thought that it was safe to return,  
but because they believed they had no choice in the matter.

Refugees interviewed from camps slated for closure spoke of  
harassment by police, lack of security, basic infrastructure,  
education, health and livelihood opportunities in Afghanistan as the  
main reason for their hesitation to return.

All Afghan refugees registered in Pakistan were required to leave by  
the end of 2009. Those living in camps slated for closure could opt  
to relocate to another camp. An overwhelming majority of refugees  
declined relocation to another camp, not because they were keen to  
return to Afghanistan but said they would not want to be uprooted  
again when the December 2009 deadline arrived. That deadline has now  
been extended to 2012.

According to the report, outside the camps slated for closure, “an  
environment of persecution and intimidation was created by checking  
movement of refugees and harassment at the hands of police. In camps,  
houses were razed and businesses locked, often resulting in  
confrontation between the authorities and the refugees.”

Repatriation may be the preferred solution for all concerned but  
adhering to the principle of voluntarism must not be ignored and the  
needs of refugees with additional vulnerabilities must be considered,  
the report said.

“Any attempt to repatriate Afghan refugees must take into account  
their willingness to return and the conditions back home, especially  
security and shelter,” it added.

I.A. Rehman

Secretary General

______


[2]

The Daily Times
July 03, 2009	

PAKISTAN’S KASHMIR PROBLEM

by Alok Rai

My Pakistani interlocutor assures me that it is the hour before dawn  
that is the darkest, that the present generation, even in Punjab, is  
ready to move out of this mutually destructive cycle and start a new  
chapter in the sad history of our sub-continent

(The present article grew out of a series of exchanges between two  
friends, one Indian, the other Pakistani. “Kashmir” is a problem with  
far-reaching consequences for both societies. It is important that  
members of civil society on both sides of the border talk to each  
other in a spirit of serious engagement, and so carry forward the  
people-to-people dialogue beyond the not insignificant level of  
biryani and banter. It is in that spirit that this view from India is  
offered.)

My proposition is simple — despite the proclamations of generations  
of Pakistani leaders, Pakistan’s Kashmir problem has nothing to do  
with Kashmir. It is a fact that the transfer of power in Kashmir way  
back at the time of Independence and Partition was a messy business —  
but that is over and done with.

As far as the UN Resolution is concerned, there is simply no  
possibility of a return to the status quo ante. Even if it were  
possible to imagine Pakistani forces vacating “Azad Kashmir” — a.k.a.  
POK, but why bother to go that way? — and of Indian forces vacating  
Indian Kashmir, there is no possibility of returning to that time in  
which the plebiscite was supposed to be held.

Further, it needs to be asked: what is the nature of the engagement  
of Pakistani civil society with “Kashmir”? Is it an engagement at the  
level of our common humanity — in the sense in which I may, for  
instance, be deeply involved with the tragedy of Africa? But if it is  
something more or other than that, it needs to be spelt out just what  
that something more is. Because the most evident explanation for  
Pakistan’s special claim to a locus standi in “the Kashmir problem”  
can only be in terms of the two-nation theory.

I realise that the state of Pakistan must have a somewhat fraught  
relationship with the two-nation theory — it is after all the  
necessary foundation for the state of Pakistan. But members of civil  
society may well feel — on both sides of the border — the “theory”,  
first propounded by the ideologue of Hindutva, Savarkar, was a  
historical blunder, a catastrophic political mistake, one that was at  
the root of millions of destroyed lives, Hindu and Muslim. It also  
left the Muslims of India, the putative beneficiaries, somewhat less  
politically consequential than they would have been otherwise.

(This rejection of the two-nation theory is entirely consistent in my  
mind with accepting the present reality of two independent, sovereign  
states, India and Pakistan, which should have mature relations.)

In the light of this, “Kashmir” becomes a way of addressing the  
Pakistani problem of legitimacy — because if Kashmir can be  
maintained as an “issue”, then the “two-nation theory” is still  
available as a founding principle, despite all that has happened in  
the last 60 years.

In the context of “Kashmir” that fatal “theory” raises its ugly head  
again. Still, it would be the height of political irresponsibility if  
it were to be legitimised now, and allowed to work its malign  
destruction again, unleashing the ethnic cleansing that would  
necessarily result in Kashmir — with its Muslim majority and its  
Hindu minority, in Jammu with its Hindu majority, and in Ladakh with  
its Buddhist majority. The notion of a religion-based plebiscite at  
this point in history is quite simply a horrible idea — and one that  
should be unthinkable even, perhaps particularly, in contemporary  
Pakistan. Is it?

I do not by any means wish to suggest that all is well in Kashmir —  
even in Indian Kashmir — I don’t know enough about the other one. The  
Indian state has a serious problem with commanding the loyalties of  
the people of Kashmir, who might legitimately be said to have a  
problem with the state of India and its armed forces.

It may be argued that the widespread exercise of democratic franchise  
by Kashmiris in the last election shows that the situation might be  
changing — that the people of Kashmir have, so to speak, voted with  
their votes, and voted not only in the immediate elections, but even  
in that hypothetical plebiscite on whether they wish to be a part of  
India.

But it would be silly — worse, cruel — to pretend that “India’s  
Kashmir problem”, and “Kashmir’s India problem”, has thereby come to  
an end. It hasn’t. A lot more needs to be done — and trigger-happy  
soldiers cannot be part of the solution.

But all this — and more, much more — has nothing to do with Pakistan.  
In fact, the best thing that Pakistan can do for the people of  
Kashmir — for whom many tears are shed — is to lay off, let be,  
recognise that while it can certainly make things worse — difficult  
for Indian forces of course, but also worse for the people of Kashmir  
— it can certainly not make them better. Pakistani meddling —  
infiltration, “freedom fighting”, etc — can only prolong the agony of  
the people of Kashmir and their ordeal at the hands of Indian forces.

But is Pakistani civil society prepared to recognise this? It appears  
that there is far too much invested — in terms of material resources,  
of course — but also in terms of emotion, of national purpose — for  
Pakistan to be able to let go of “the Kashmir problem”. This is not  
the same as letting go of Kashmir — nothing is going to change the  
situation on the ground, not in J&K, not in AJK. It is “Kashmir” —  
the foolish fantasy of “freeing” Kashmir — that enables the Army to  
maintain its stranglehold on Pakistan. The ideological investment in  
“freeing” Kashmir — in schools and out of them — will not easily be  
dissolved. Pakistan’s Kashmir problem is its inability to rid itself  
of the notion that it has a role to play in the resolution of  
Kashmir’s India problem.

There is of course the valid military insight that Pakistan can, by  
keeping “Kashmir” on the boil, bleed India, and “avenge Bangladesh”.  
But such is the dynamic set in motion by the explosive rise of jihadi  
Islam in Pakistan that now India, too, can crucify Pakistan by  
teasing it over Kashmir and so prolonging its ordeal at the hands of  
the jihadis.

However, it devolves upon civil society in both countries to force  
their states not to continue with this cynical game, a game in which  
Kashmir — and Kashmiris, “ours” and “yours” — are merely the pretext;  
the instrument, the bloodied means to a suicidal end, a wilful  
prolongation of the tragedy of South Asia.

But my Pakistani interlocutor assures me that it is the hour before  
dawn that is the darkest, that the present generation, even in  
Punjab, is ready to move out of this mutually destructive cycle and  
start a new chapter in the sad history of our sub-continent. I am  
writing this in the hope that he is right and I am wrong. Happy to be  
wrong.

The writer is a professor at the University of Delhi

_____


[3]

Dawn
2 July, 2009

PUNDITRY ABOUT MUSLIMS

by Jawed Naqvi

Farah Pandith (pictured above) is the US Special Representative for  
Muslim Outreach. Pandith is a Kashmiri Muslim who immigrated to the  
United States. - File photo


(AN open letter to Ms Farah Pandith, US Special Representative for  
Muslim Outreach)

DEAR Ms Pandith,
Welcome to the chaotic club of seekers who have periodically set out  
to engage with Muslims of the world, obviously with good intentions  
but not always without a flawed plan to carry out the mission.

I use the word ‘chaotic’ to describe the experience so far, not to  
berate your mission.

There were two recent messages from the US embassy in Delhi in my  
inbox, one concerning your appointment by Ms Hillary Clinton to your  
new position at the US State Department. An older message underscored  
your participation in an interfaith dialogue in July last year, which  
was sponsored by the United States Institute of Peace. Both messages  
point to your keen interest in creating a global cornucopia of  
religions, if I have understood the gist correctly, in which mutual  
tolerance and harmony are the main attractions.

According to your new brief, you will carry out Ms Clinton’s efforts  
to ‘engage with Muslims around the world on a people-to-people and  
organisational level’. We are also told that you were previously an  
adviser on ‘Muslim engagement’ at the State Department, serving as a  
senior adviser to the assistant secretary of state for European and  
Eurasian affairs. You have also served on the National Security  
Council as the coordinator for US policy on outreach to Muslims, and  
worked at the US Agency for International Development on assistance  
projects for Iraq, Afghanistan and the Palestinian territories.

We are told that you are a Kashmiri Muslim who immigrated to the  
United States. You have been quoted as saying that along with the  
importance of education, you ‘also learned … to balance pride in my  
cultural heritage with a deep attachment to the values of America’.  
To set the context of your new job, the official note makes a  
reference to President Barack Obama’s speech of June 4 in Cairo,  
where he sought ‘a new beginning’ between the United States and  
Muslims ‘based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and … based  
upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not  
be in competition’.

At the interfaith dialogue, almost exactly a year ago, you supported  
a participant’s view that groups like Al Qaeda exploit young people’s  
search for an identity. ‘We cannot allow them … to take advantage of  
things that we all in this room understand are just very natural.’

Allow me to make a few quick observations about your road ahead.  
First, the syncretic culture of Kashmir to which you belong has been  
subjected to vile abuse in your absence. Beginning with 1990 an  
exclusivist and narrow-minded Islam was sought to be imposed on the  
people by armed groups with the alleged support of zealots within  
Pakistan’s intelligence and security forces. On the other hand, the  
demonic logic of occupation has spurred Indian security forces to  
brutalise the people at will, without accountability.

You must have wondered, Ms Pandith, how the tragedies of our times  
are getting identified with religious strife. Take the important  
briefs that you have held. The Palestinian question is posed as a  
Muslim issue. Afghanistan is described as a religious problem. Note  
also the sleight of hand, since the colonial era, in the orchestrated  
positioning of identities. Shia, Sunni and Kurds in Iraq, for  
example, comprise a scantly noticed absurdity: two religious groups  
and one ethnic community. Does that ethnic community have a religion?  
Wouldn’t the word ‘hydrocarbons’ explain the ethnic-religious  
discourse better?

In Lebanon, it is the Shia, Sunni and Druze that beg the question. I  
think the mischief began with colonial historiography. In India,  
English chroniclers divided us into Hindu, Muslim and British period.  
The subterfuge found an echo in Sri Lanka, where Sinhalese, Tamils  
and Burghers are lumped with Muslims: three ethnic groups and a  
religious category. Do the Muslims have an ethnicity?

This question acquires urgency because of President Obama’s speech in  
Cairo, where he said America and Islam are not exclusive and need not  
be in competition. Pardon me for saying so, but his formulation was  
inane, possibly rooted in a poor management of specificity. Not even  
the state of Israel will claim that it has a deep-rooted suspicion of  
Islam. What the world would like to know from Mr Obama is why  
apologists of the Fukuyama and Huntington worldview are still  
powerful in the US Congress, and in the White House in his watch.

Where was the need to mask America’s obvious allergies with political  
Islam? Even Muslims have problems with extremist categories of fellow  
believers. What the middle-path Muslim youth, the constituency that  
you are seeking to address, would like to hear from the White House  
(and you) is an assurance that no US presidential candidate will  
henceforth do genuflection before the Israeli lobby (not to be  
confused with the Jewish people, the most revered of whom is Noam  
Chomsky) no matter how influential they are in your adopted country.

When you embark on your mission, Ms Pandith, you would realise the  
truth of my submission — from Indonesia to Morocco. You will meet  
fairly moderate Muslims, who are willing to bend key prescriptions of  
religious beliefs but would not flinch from their core beliefs in  
humanism and fair play. At present there is a yawning gap between  
religious punditry and the need for a just and peaceful global order.

To achieve that you would need to reach out to the world’s dwindling  
liberal community regardless of their religious affiliations. They  
are the most marginalised everywhere. Sincerely.

The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Delhi.

_____


[4]

SOME THOUGHTS ON DEVELOPMENTS IN NEPAL

by Anand Swaroop Verma, 30 June 2009

Translation of the Hindi article published in the June 2009 issue of  
FILHAAL, a radical Hindi fortnightly published from Patna.

After the resignation of the Prime Minister, Mr Pushp Kamal Dahal “  
Prachand” the political parties once again have created the situation  
which reminds of the days of the 12-point agreement which took place  
in November 2005. The 12 point understanding was reached at that time  
between the CPN-Maoists (which was underground and carrying out  
peoples’ war) and seven parliamentary parties. This was a historic  
accord as based on this the programme which was framed that  
culminated in November 2006 peace agreement, election to the  
Constituent Assembly and establishment of republic. If 12- point  
accord was not signed then the monarchy would not have been thrown  
out so soon in Nepal. This is worth recalling that America had  
brazenly launched a campaign against the accord. The then US  
Ambassador to Nepal, Mr James Moriarty had advised the parliamentary  
parties not to join hands with the Maoists and instead should face  
the Maoists in league with King Gyanendra. He also told the parties  
that even if they had signed the accord they should come out of it  
and do some evaluation. This is imperative to mention that this  
agreement was signed in Delhi and at a time when the government of  
India was also busy arresting the Maoists of Nepal. Obviously this  
accord could not have been signed without the consent and knowledge  
of India. Since the image of Nepali Congress of the then Nepal prime  
minister, Mr Girija Pradad Koirala has been quite good in the eyes of  
the Indian government, this accord could be signed in India due to  
his efforts. However after some time once the situation completely  
normalised it was revealed that Mr Prachanda had suggested to hold  
the meeting in Rolpa and had even offered to ensure the security of  
the political leaders but Mr Koirala did not agree for this. Instead  
he selected Delhi while giving guarantee of security to Mr Prachanda  
and his colleagues. In fact once Mr Gyanendra took control of power  
on February 1, 2005 and launched the drive to arrest the leaders of  
the parliamentary parties then they realized the need for joining  
hands with the Maoists for providing strength to fight against  
monarchy. Maoists were also looking for proper opportunity to forge  
alliance with parliamentary parties.

The American reaction to this accord also revealed that  
notwithstanding mutual cooperation between India and US on many issue  
of having control on Nepal they have sever contradictions. India  
treats a strong presence of America in Nepal against its national  
interest.

The political polarization in Nepal on the issue of dismissal of the  
old Shahi army chief Rukmangad Katwal to a large extent is the  
manifestation of the American desire that all the parties should form  
a front against Maoists. Monarchy has been abolished but its remnants  
are present in the form of Katwal and once again America, which had  
earlier lost the game, has tried to turn the situation in its favour.
[. . .]
Full text at: http://www.sacw.net/article981.html



_____


[5] India: Great Leap forward - Landmark Ruling by Delhi Court  
decriminalized homosexuality by striking down section 377 of the
Indian Penal Code.

+ FULL TEXT OF THE DELHI HIGH COURT DECISION - WP(C) NO.7455/2001
http://www.sacw.net/article985.html

o o o

END TO UNNATURAL EXCLUSION

by Shohini Ghosh

Hindustan Times
New Delhi, July 02, 2009
In a historic judgement, a two-judge bench comprising Chief Justice  
A P Shah and Justice Murlidharan has decriminalised non-heterosexual  
sex between consenting adults. In an eloquently argued judgement of  
150 pages, the bench has struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal  
Code (IPC), a colonial legislation drafted by Lord Macaulay in 1860,  
that criminalised “carnal intercourse against the order of nature”  
punishable by imprisonment extending up to ten years. India was one  
of the few countries left in the world that criminalised and  
discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation. By overturning  
Section 377, the Delhi High Court has foregrounded the importance of  
sexual rights, lent dignity to people of different sexualities and  
upheld the Constitutional values of democracy and equality.

Arguing that Section 377 is violative of Articles 21 (right to life  
and personal liberty), Article 14 (equality before law and equal  
protection from law) and Article 15 (prohibiting discrimination on  
several grounds including sex), the judgement holds that if there is  
one “constitutional tenet” that can be considered an “underlying  
theme” of the Indian Constitution, it is “inclusiveness”.

Nurtured over many years, “inclusiveness” recognises “a role in  
society for everyone” where “those perceived by the majority as  
‘deviants’ or ‘different’ are not ‘excluded or ostracised’”. It  
argues that “Constitutional law does not permit the statutory  
criminal law to be held captive by the popular misconceptions of who  
the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) are. It cannot be  
forgotten that discrimination is the antithesis of equality and that  
it is the recognition of equality which will foster the dignity of  
every individual.”

However, it retains the provisions of Section 377 to govern “non- 
consensual penile non-vaginal sex and penile non-vaginal sex  
involving minors” thereby allowing child sexual offenders to be  
prosecuted under it. However, it is now being strongly argued that  
child rights are best protected, not by the provisions of 377, but an  
entirely separate law.

This visionary judgement is the culmination of a ten-year legal  
battle. In 2001 Naz Foundation (an NGO related to HIV/Aids issues)  
filed a petition in the Delhi High Court asking for Section 377 to be  
‘read down’ by decriminalising consensual sex among adults. In  
September 2003, the Government insisted on retaining Section 377 on  
the grounds that ‘Indian society’s disapproval of homosexuality was  
strong enough to justify it being treated as a criminal offence even  
where adults indulge in it in private’.

In February 2006, the Supreme Court ordered the High Court to  
reconsider the constitutional validity of Section 377. The Naz  
Foundation petition was supported by Voices Against 377, comprising  
12 organisations across the country while it was being opposed by the  
government of Delhi and others. The position of the government  
(represented by the Ministries of Health and Law) has been conflicted  
while many of its affiliates demanded decriminalisation.

Naco (National Aids Control Organisation) demanded the scrapping of  
Section 377 as it was obstructing effective health interventions. The  
172nd report of the Law Commission of India and the recommendations  
of the National Planning Commission for the 11th Five Year Plan also  
demanded decriminalisation of homosexuality.

In the last two decades, LGBT activism played a major role in  
creating awareness on the issue. In 2006 writer Vikram Seth released  
a public letter demanding that the “cruel” law be struck down. The  
letter was supported by a  large number of signatories including  
Captain Lakshmi Sehgal, Aruna Roy, Soli Sorabjee, Shyam Benegal,  
Shubha Mudgal, Arundhati Roy, Aparna Sen, Mrinalini Sarabhai and  
demanded the scrapping of the “brutal law” that “punitively  
criminalises romantic love and private, consensual sexual acts  
between adults of the same sex” while being used to “systematically  
persecute, blackmail, arrest and terrorise sexual minorities”.  
Amartya Sen also asked for an abolition of the “colonial era  
monstrosity” that ran contrary to “the enhancement of human freedom”  
and India’s commitment to “democracy and human rights”.

Like all laws, Section 377 was used both inside and outside the  
courtroom. In 2001, activists of Bharosa Trust, Lucknow were arrested  
under Section 377 for running a “gay racket” and conspiring to  
“promote homosexuality” through advocating safe sex practices among  
homosexual and bisexual men. In 2006, the Lucknow police entrapped  
five gay men by tracking them over the internet and then arresting  
them under Section 377. For years, police have used Section 377 to  
extort, threaten, intimidate and harass LGBT people. Commenting on  
how law-enforcers can misuse such penalisable offences, Amartya Sen  
observed that the harm done by such an “an unjust law” can,  
therefore, “be far larger than would be indicated by cases of actual  
prosecution”.
It remains to be seen how the UPA government responds to a judgement  
that derives its inspiration from a Nehruvian vision of ‘Equality’.  
While moving the ‘Objective Resolution’ on December 13, 1946,  
Jawaharlal Nehru said (and the Judgement quotes): “Words are magic  
things often enough, but even the magic of words sometimes cannot  
convey the magic of the human spirit and of a Nation’s passion. [The  
Resolution] seeks very feebly to tell the world of what we have  
thought or dreamt of so long, and what we now hope to achieve in the  
near future.”
These words no doubt echo the feelings and aspirations of all LGBT  
people and their friends and family.

Shohini Ghosh is Sajjad Zaheer Professor at the AJK Mass  
Communication Research Centre, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi


o o o

HOMOPHOBIA UNITES MORAL POLICE FROM ALL RELIGIO-POLITICAL LOBBIES IN  
INDIA

[The 2 July 2009 judgement by the Delhi high court is a great victory  
for human rights; but all secular forces must be beware that all the  
major religious and conservative forces will unite to block and  
oppose the full legalisation of homosexuality in India. So lets us  
firmly fight them back on a secular platform. A common front of  
retrogressive forces from the religious spectrum ranging from  
Maulvis, catholic clergymen, Hindutva types and also people from  
mainstream political parties are likely to appeal and challenge legal  
decision and any moves to develop state policy. A selection of  
reports and excerpts from the Indian press is posted below. -hk]

o o o

The Hindu, July 2, 2009 : 2015 Hrs

LEGALISING HOMOSEXUALITY WILL LEAD TO SEXUAL ANARCHY: CHURCH

Kochi (PTI): Expressing reservation over the Delhi High court  
judgement legalising homosexuality, the Catholic Church in Kerala on  
Thursday said this would 'open up' the society to 'sexual anarchy'.

"Though Homosexual act is immoral, we should be merciful, considerate  
to people with homosexual tendencies. However, that does not mean  
they have the right to the homosexual act," the Catholic Church  
spokesperson Paul Thelekat said.

"Legalising gay sex will open up the society to some sort of sexual  
anarchy. Perhaps Indian culture is being eroded by the western  
promiscuous culture," he said.

The Church would work with every sensitive person and community to  
keep the moral fabric of the society intact, he said.

o o o

Times of India

GOVT RESOLVE TO ACT ON SECTION 377 HITS DEOBAND HURDLE

30 June 2009

NEW DELHI: Islamic seminary Deoband's condemnation on Monday of moves  
to repeal Section 377 of IPC to legalise same sex liaisons -- by  
calling it
a wish of an "ungodly few" -- set off fears that conservative  
religious opinion could dilute the resolve of the government to  
"decriminalise homosexuality".

The seminary, reacting to statements from government circles that  
there was a case for scratching Section 377, called it a  
"contemptible move likely to corrupt the gullible in society". The  
strong criticism may well increase the wariness that has marked the  
reactions of ministers after initially signalling a preparedness to  
legalise homosexuality.

While there was a strong reaction from Muslim clerics in general,  
their stand was bolstered by Deoband with deputy V-C of Darul-Uloom,  
Mufti Mohammad Abdul Khalik Madrasi, warning, "Homosexuality is an  
offence under Shariat law and haram (prohibited) in Islam."

Two days after reactions from Union ministers raised hope among  
groups working for its repeal, the mood was one of caution and the  
ruling Congress itself made it clear that it had no particular views  
on the matter. The apprehensions are largely on account of  
conservative opinion from religious quarters, which can have a social  
resonance and are seen to have a political impact as well.

What may make withdrawal of Section 377 a challenge are hints of  
convergence across religious barriers against the move. Mohammad  
Arshad Farukhi from the fatwa department of Darul-Uloom said, "A  
joint forum of Hindus, Muslims and Christians must be set up to check  
the government from making the offending legislation."

It has tempered the aggression in government. Law minister Veerappa  
Moily assured that a wide debate on the issue would take care of  
reservations of Christian groups. "The government cannot take a  
decision in a hurry. We need to apply our mind," he said in  
Hyderabad, adding, "We are examining it."

Health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad was as non-committal. "I can simply  
say there should be more debate -- public debate, Parliament debate.  
There has to be a consensus. The negative and positive has to be  
evaluated and then a conclusion should be evolved," he said.

Azad favoured a debate in Parliament, saying, "There should be a  
total consensus. Not only government, but other political parties  
should also be in line with it (amendment)."

As the two key ministers advocated debate and consensus, Congress  
refused to take sides on the issue. "This is under consideration of  
the government. It is a normal government process. The party does not  
have any opinion on it," party spokesman Shakeel Ahmed said in  
response to queries about the party's stand on repealing Section 377.

o o o

EXCERPT FROM PTI REPORT IN HERALD
http://oheraldo.in/pagedetails.asp?nid=23802&cid=2


"While Rt Rev Abraham Mar Paulos Episcopa, head of Marthoma Syrian  
Church of Malabar diocesan, said homosexuality is not at all  
acceptable and agreeable as it is against the tenets of Bible.

According to Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, repeal of the section would create  
“sexual anarchy” in the society.

VHP said homosexuality is against the culture and family system in  
India and will result in spread of number of diseases."

o o o

EXCERPT FROM REPORT IN TIMES TV

http://www.timesnow.tv/Political-divide-over-legality-deepens/ 
articleshow/4321162.cms

"Kamal Farooqui, Member, All India Muslim Personal Law Board,  
speaking against the judgement said, "This judgement is just to  
please our western and american friends. In Indian socieity this is  
not accceptable whether Muslim or Hindu. Basically we are a religious  
society. Our temperament is that homosexual act is an unnatural act."

Amar singh, General Secretary, Samajwadi Party, also speaking against  
the high court order said that the party does not support  
homosexuality or sexual relations between the same sex."

Meanwhile, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, Islamic scholar, said, "As far as  
the practice of homosexuality is concerned, I think that is  
completely wrong."

Acharya Giriraj Kishore, VHP Leader, not in favour of the judgement  
said that the high court order is unfortunate and that it would  
destroy the society."

o o o

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Religious-leaders-disapprove-HC- 
judgement-on-homosexuality/484077

Indian Express

RELIGIOUS LEADERS DISAPPROVE HC JUDGEMENT ON HOMOSEXUALITY

Posted: Thursday , July 02, 2009 at 1326 hrs IST New Delhi:

Certain religious leaders on Thursday strongly disapproved of the  
Delhi High Court judgement which legalised gay sex among consenting  
adults. "This is absolutely wrong to legalise homosexuality. We will  
not accept any such law," Jama Masjid Imam Ahmed Bukhari said. He  
also critcised the government for trying to amend the Indian Penal  
Code to scrap section 377 that criminalizes homosexuality. "If the  
government makes such attempt to scrap the Section 377, we will  
oppose it strongly," Bukhari said.

All India Muslim Personal Law Board member Maulana Khalid Rashid  
Firangi Mahli said homosexuality is not allowed by any religion. "It  
is against all religions. It is against the culture of Indian  
society. We feel there is no need to legalise homosexuality. This  
practice is unnatural. It should continue as a criminal act," he  
said. Father Dominic Immanuel said that churches have no objection to  
decriminalisation of homosexuality but it should not be legalised.  
"We have no objection to decriminalisation of homosexuality because  
we do not consider these people as criminals on par with other  
criminals," Immanuel said.

However, churches do not approve of homosexual relations as ethical  
and moral right of the people, he said. "It is against nature.Our  
position is that homosexuality should not be legalised," he said,  
adding such practice will increase paedophilia and HIV/AIDS. The  
court said Section 377 of the IPC as far as it criminalises gay sex  
among consenting adults is violation of fundamental rights.

o o o

The Hindu
July 03, 2009

MUSLIM CLERICS DEPLORE HOMOSEXUALITY, LESBIANISM

by Atiq Khan

Lucknow: Taking a firm view that homosexuality and lesbianism  
threatened to destroy the already crumbling family system in the  
country, Muslim religious leaders are unanimous that consensual sex  
of this form should not be legalised in a multi-religious society  
such as India’s.
The leading Islamic seminary, Darul Uloom - Deoband in Uttar Pradesh,  
the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JeI) and the All-India Muslim Personal Law  
Board (AIMPLB) have struck a common chord on this issue.
For them, the issue does not concern Islam alone as no other religion  
sanctions this form of sex.

Clerics told to unite

“The time has come for all religious leaders to unite on this issue  
and jointly protest the government’s proposed move to legalise gay  
rights. A consensus should be evolved for challenging the Delhi High  
Court order in the Supreme Court,” said Maulana Syed Jalaluddin Umri,  
Amir (president) of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind.
Questioning the right to freedom for consensual sex (homosexuality  
and lesbianism), the JeI chief said it would destroy the family  
system as has been the case in Western societies where consensual sex  
has been legalised.

‘Against Indian ethos’

“Homosexuality does not jell with India’s ‘mizaaj’ [cultural ethos]  
and cannot be tolerated in our society. Moreover, medical evidence  
has also been found of homosexuals being carriers of HIV-AIDS,” the  
Maulana said from the Jamaat office in Delhi.
In Islam, homosexuality is treated as “gunaah” [sin], and is against  
the concept of a family as a unit. If the family is destroyed, the  
society gets disintegrated. This is the commonly-held view among  
Muslim clerics.

“Retain Section 377”

“Section 377 of the IPC should stay and nothing should be done by the  
government which legalised homosexuality,” said Maulana Abdul Rahim  
Qureishi, assistant secretary general and spokesperson of the AIMPLB  
while talking to The Hindu from Hyderabad.
He said it was the fallout, or even a manifestation of the  
promiscuity so prevalent in the West. “Consensual sex is one the  
reasons for the break-up of the family system in Western societies,  
mainly in Europe and the U.S.,” he added.
The Maulana did not rule out the possibility of the issue figuring in  
the one-day executive committee meeting of the Muslim Personal Law  
Board in Kozhikhode on July 12.
In Lucknow, the Naib (deputy) Imam of Aishbagh Idgah and AIMPLB  
member, Maulana Khalid Rasheed Firangi Mahali, said the Union  
government should ensure that no such law was framed in the country  
which legalised homosexuality. “No religion approves of unnatural  
form of sex; besides, the family cannot be expanded by indulging in  
homosexuality,” Maulana Rasheed said.
Verdict ‘disappointing’
The Maulana described the Delhi High Court verdict as “disappointing”  
and said it should be challenged in the Supreme Court.
The Darul Uloom - Deoband had also voiced its concern over the  
prospect of gay laws being legalised.
Voicing the seminary’s view, the Deputy Rector, Maulana Abdul Khaliq  
Madrasi, had reportedly said: “Homosexuality is an offence under  
Shariat laws and prohibited in Islam.”



_____


[6] India: The Rebellion in Lalgarh

The Telegraph
July 3, 2009

  FIRE AND FOREBODING - The CPI(M) itself is responsible for the  
predicament it is in
Cutting Corners - Ashok Mitra

Legal rhetoric is not the real issue though. Spokesmen of the  
administration led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) in West  
Bengal had been importunating for the despatch of Central forces to  
quell the rebellion in Lalgarh. We have obviously travelled aeons  
since the days the Left questioned the very right of the Centre to  
raise police and security forces on the ground that law and order  
were an exclusively State subject. In response to the state  
government’s plea, CRPF personnel have entered West Bengal, taken  
charge in Lalgarh and its neighbourhood, and are currently engaged in  
combing operations with gusto. The drama, however, has only reached  
Act One, Scene Three. Having answered the state government’s prayer,  
New Delhi is now intent on extracting its pound of flesh. The Maoists  
are a national menace; to combat that menace, other states have  
banned them in terms of the relevant Central legislation. West Bengal  
too must fall in and apply the same legislation; the West Bengal  
government has agreed to do so.

 From the first day of Independence, the Left has fought against what  
it used to describe as the obnoxiousness of preventive detention. The  
regime in West Bengal, led by the CPI(M), has now gone on reverse  
gear. It is, in consequence, in the tentacles of a double jeopardy.  
The perverse logic they subscribe to induces the Maoists to target  
the Marxists as their biggest enemies. The grisly, indiscriminate  
killings of Marxist cadre in and around Lalgarh have no other  
explanation. But are the Marxists sufficiently aware of the other  
peril lying in wait for them? The Congress leadership mapping the  
strategy in New Delhi wants to liquidate not just the Maoists but the  
entire Left, including the CPI(M). To make a particular coalition  
partner happy is only one part of it. The ‘soft Hindutva’ line of the  
Bharatiya Janata Party does not worry the Congress; it is confident  
about containing that challenge — if necessary, by organizing a spell  
of round-the-clock temple-hopping by the Nehru-Gandhis. There is, in  
any event, no class divide as far as the BJP is concerned. That is  
not the case with the Left, which, at the national level, continues  
to put up irritating roadblocks to thwart the completion of the  
‘economic reforms’ agenda, class interest according to demands  
choking the Left wherever possible.

The Marxists would therefore be living in a fool’s paradise if they  
think that once Lalgarh is cleared of Maoists, the Centre would shake  
hands in a gentlemanly way and withdraw its forces from West Bengal.  
The aforesaid coalition partner, fired up further by the results of  
the state municipal polls, will turn more raucous with every passing  
day. It will, rest assured, plot to create a situation in the state  
where the demand will intensify to bring certain parts of the state  
under the purview of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. Chaos will  
mount, and the Left Front administration will be fighting  
simultaneously on several fronts; New Delhi, it is a fair surmise,  
expects it to collapse reasonably soon.

Is not the CPI(M) itself responsible for most of the predicaments it  
finds itself in? It was inordinately confident of its ability to  
persuade the Congress to rein in enthusiasm for both neo-liberal  
economic policies and the strategic alliance with the United States  
of America. And in spite of its severe disappointment, elements in  
the party still seem to think all was not lost, the Congress might  
yet bail the Left out at the very last moment.

Even more worrying is the gradual withering away of the party’s mass  
base in what was hitherto its strongest bastion, West Bengal. The  
Left Front administration’s desperate move to re-establish its  
control over certain parts of the state through induction of Central  
forces, with all its implications, is a sad admission of that  
reality. The CPI(M)’s political line for coping with the Maoist  
threat is unexceptionable: to isolate the Maoists from the people. In  
this context, should not the prime task of the party and the state  
administration have been to use all the energy and resources in their  
command to improve the conditions of the wretchedly poor adivasis in  
areas such as Lalgarh? The panchayats should have been made the focal  
point of welfare and developmental activities, with party leaders and  
cadre acting as the eye and ear of the masses.

Nothing of the sort, it is now clear, took place. Funds allocated to  
the panchayat bodies under different heads were either not spent or  
disappeared in mysterious directions. Party leaders generally played  
a passive — if not negative — role. Many of them imbibed the habits  
and attitudes of feudal overlords and allowed a social distance to  
grow between them and the people. What Gunder Frank had called the  
development of under-development expanded its empire. This, in sum,  
is the story that unfolded over the past decade or thereabouts in  
several districts of the state.

Lalgarh has, for the present, been freed from Maoist clutches through  
Central help. The prior question, though, is to ask how the Maoists  
got their opportunity to penetrate into territories where the CPI(M)  
had once overwhelming mass support. The answer is simple: instead of  
isolating the Maoists, the CPI(M) succeeded in getting itself  
isolated from the people.

When Maoist mayhem was at its peak at Lalgarh last month, television  
cameras had occasion to zoom their sight on a particular event: a  
frenzied mob setting fire to an apparently newly built, dazzlingly  
white palatial building, standing in unabashed and isolated splendour  
in the midst of squalor and destitution all around: parched earth,  
dishevelled huts, rickety children with not a stitch on, men and  
women with sunken cheeks and deep hungry looks. Then came the  
astounding revelation: that mansion was owned by the CPI(M)’s zonal  
secretary — by profession, trader, and by caste, high Brahmin; the  
party’s zonal office too was located there.

When the Left Front assumed charge of the state administration in  
1977, it made a commitment to itself: notwithstanding the restraints  
set by the Constitution, it would carve out a Left alternative for  
social and economic development that would inspire the rest of the  
nation. Its initial years, marked by land reforms, speedy  
decentralization of administration and animation of the panchayat  
institutions, enabled it to make great strides toward that direction.  
Something obviously snapped in the later years. It could be the lure  
of economic liberalization in spite of the general party line: class  
awareness wobbled, and hubris set in. The panchayats, once considered  
the salvation of the people, can no longer claim to be as clean as a  
hound’s tooth. The state administration, as a whole, is in a state of  
atrophy. The CPI(M)’s state leadership, which was expected to act as  
a moral guide, is transformed into an unfeeling bureaucracy.

Does not one almost hear the whispered foreboding of an excruciating  
tragedy? Objective conditions in the country call for radical  
initiatives on the part of the Marxists and their allies. Were they  
to fail to fulfil that task, the nation’s millions, hapless victims  
of deprivation and relentless exploitation, would conceivably have no  
alternative but to migrate toward the direction of those who promise  
nothing beyond murderous anarchy.

_____


[7] Tributes:

http://www.sacw.net/article986.html

RAM NARAYAN KUMAR : AN OBITUARY

by Pritam Singh

Ram Narayan Kumar, one of the finest human rights researcher,  
activist and campaigner in South Asia, passed away on June 28 at his  
house in Kathmandu (Nepal). His death at a relatively young age of 54  
has sent shock waves among all those struggling for justice and  
fairness in South Asia.

His first major confrontation with state power was in 1975 when he  
opposed the authoritarian Emergency regime in India and was  
imprisoned for 19 months for his political act of defiance to defend  
democracy. He came from the Indian socialist tradition influenced by  
JP Narayan and R M Lohia but had the courage to oppose the  
overemphasis on the caste dimension in somewhat opportunistic  
politics of some of the followers of JP and Lohia. It was, perhaps,  
this disenchantment with his erstwhile comrades, which attracted him  
to the more universalist appeal of human rights work.

By family background, he came from a distinguished religious family  
of India. His father was the head of a math/peeth in Ayodhaya with a  
very large following. Ram was groomed until his teenage years to  
succeed his father as the head of the math but Ram revolted and  
joined the secular world of socialist politics. However, the large  
following of the math in Austria resulted later on in Ram marrying an  
Austrian doctor.

Although he worked on almost all regions of India where human rights  
violations took place such as Kashmir, North East, Gujarat and  
Eastern India, and even in the Middle East against US interventions  
and Israeli aggression, his most remarkable contribution to human  
rights practice and documentation was in Punjab. Coming from a South  
Indian Brahmin family, he had no personal link with Punjab. However  
the massacre of the Sikh minority in Delhi in 1984 pushed him into  
the study of Punjab and its troubles. He never abandoned Punjab after  
this in spite of his many time demanding pre-occupations elsewhere.  
It is a reflection of his deep humanity that he spent about 15 years  
of his life studying and documenting human rights abuses in Punjab, a  
state with which he had no other relation except the bond of  
humanity. He traveled to remote villages of Punjab to hear the  
painful stories of victims of human rights violations, expressing  
solidarity with them and bringing their plight to the attention of  
concerned Indians.

I met him for the first time in 1988 when during one of his visits to  
the UK; I invited him to speak in Oxford on the crisis in Punjab from  
a human rights perspective. Our friendship grew and since 2008, we  
were involved in a joint project to write a book on Punjab. His death  
means the death of that project also.

He had phenomenal knowledge of Punjab’s history, politics, geography,  
culture, civil and police administration and Punjab’s troubled  
relationships with the federal Centre in Delhi. He was meticulous in  
his research to the point of obsession, never compromising on the  
empirical evidence of his claims. His work on disappearances in  
Punjab Reduced to Ashes is destined to become a classic in the  
literature on disappearances and the brutality of state power. He  
published a pioneering paper on the institutional flaws in human  
rights law and practice with reference to Punjab in the International  
Journal of Punjab Studies. On the invitation of the Association of  
Punjab Studies (UK), he presented a paper on the constitutional and  
institutional rigidities in defending human rights in Punjab at the  
Association’s bi-annual conference in Oxford in 2003 where he  
received standing ovation from the conference participants for the  
rigour of his analysis and his towering moral integrity.

His last book on Punjab was Terror in Punjab: Narratives, Knowledge  
and Truth (2008) and it is some solace to me that my review of this  
book was published in the June 2009 issue of Himal South Asia  
magazine (Kathmandu) and Ram was able to see this review.

Ram Narayan Kumar was directing a major project on studying the  
culture and practice of immunity that the state officials involved in  
human rights abuse enjoy in India. The project covering four critical  
regions of India- J & K, North East, Gujarat and Punjab- and  
involving joint collaboration between Kathmandu-based South Asia  
Forum for Human Rights and Canada’s International Council for  
Development Research (ICDR) has the promise of path breaking output  
in bringing transparency, accountability and justice to human rights  
practice in India and South Asia.

Ram, as he was affectionately called, was an inspiration to human  
rights activists not only in India but also in Pakistan, Bangladesh,  
Sri Lanka and Nepal. Some of the key dons of Harvard Law School  
recognised from an international perspective Ram’s contribution to  
furthering the cause of defending the vulnerable and the weak in  
India and South Asia.

He worked too hard, was too pure in his heart and was too demanding  
of himself. That took its toll on his health. Though he has gone, his  
insights and dedication will forever remain a source of inspiration  
to those who want to unearth truth and bring the powerful to  
accountability.

He is survived by his wife Gertie, daughter Cristina, sister Sita and  
brother Gopal, all living in Austria. He will be cremated in  
Kathmandu as per the wishes of his family.

o o o

http://www.sacw.net/article983.html

A TRIBUTE TO RAM NARAYAN KUMAR

by NPMHR, 1 July 2009

1 July 2009

Dear Madam/sir,
  Kindly help us to reach this message to the Naga public and to all  
friends in India and across the world of our deep grieve in losing a  
close friend in Ram Kumar Narayan, who passed away at Kathmandu  
yesterday.

with prayers,
  NPMHR Secretariat


CONDOLENCE MESSAGE

The Naga People Movement for Human Rights (NPMHR) is deeply shocked  
and saddened by the sudden death of Ram Narayan Kumar who was working  
as a full time project Director on South Asian Orientation Course in  
Human Rights and Peace Studies with the South Asia Forum for Human  
Rights (SAFHR), Kathmandu, Nepal at the point of his demise. Ram was  
an astute human rights activist, research and writer campaigning for  
democracy and human rights against state brutality on the innocent  
citizens since 1975. He was imprisoned for 19 months for his vocal  
opposition to Indira Gandhi‘s emergency regime. Ram’s work for  
justice and accountability in Punjab is widely recognized and is lead  
author on many books on the Sikh struggle. Some of his latest works  
are “India’s Constitutional Discourse: some Unanswered Question” and  
“Rights Guarantees and Judicial Wrongs: Arguments for appraisal” in  
Recasting Indian Politics, ed. Paul Flather (Palgrave, 2007);  
Critical Readings in Human Rights and Peace (Shipra publications, New  
Delhi, 2006). Ram was a Former Reuter Foundation Fellow at the  
University of Oxford and has recently released his new book, Terror  
in Punjab: Narratives, Knowledge and Truth (Shipra Publications,  
Delhi, 2008). Reviewed at: http://www.himalmag.com/The-third-Sikh- 
ghallughara-Terror-in-Punjab-by-Ram-Narayan-Kumar_nw2960.html

Ram is best known to Nagas for his work with Laxmi Murthy, Four Years  
of the Ceasefire Agreement between the Government of India and The  
National Socialist Council of Nagalim: Promises and Pitfalls,(New  
Delhi: Other Media Communications, 2002) which was an outcome of  
civil society engagement in peoples to peoples dialogues between the  
Nagas and people of India.

When NPMHR commemorated International Human Rights day in December  
2006 under the theme “Harmony through Culture- a musical celebration  
of Indigenous peoples”, Rams message to the meet give a glimpse of  
his inner soul which will will be engrave in our memory forever and  
NPMHR takes this liberty to partly quote the solidarity note “ During  
the time I spent in the region, I had been astonished by the mirth  
and the power of cultural expressions of the indigenous peoples who  
had, otherwise, been subjected to monstrously cruel forms of  
discrimination and violence and economic injustice in their  
subordinate relations with India that has unfortunately chosen to act  
like a conquest state for so long. I do not cease to wonder how a  
people who are weighed down by memories of death, torture and  
spiritual crippling can yet retain that inner mirth and beauty of  
soul to be able to transcend all that evil through music, dance and  
togetherness and sharing as aspects of their autonomous cultural  
identity. That spirit of transcendence also seems to permeate the  
flora and fauna, climate, rain, sun, soil, their loom, wood, and cane  
artifacts, their shawls and sarongs and their jewellery. I do not  
want to romanticize, but it is my firm conviction that the people  
endowed with these qualities must have a chance to undo the wrongs of  
hegemonic cultures that combine the military might with their  
hegemonic hubris, and to infuse the futures of the indigenous peoples  
with the spirit of unity in culture and through that unity towards  
socio-economic and political transcendence.”

NPMHR’s last contact was during his visit to Nagaland in line with  
research work on the issue of Impunity and the Armed Forces Special  
Powers Act. We pay our sincere respect to a great soul who has linked  
our struggles together with his and the rest of world oppressed, in  
our common search for dignity, justice and peace.

NPMHR on behalf of the Naga people and rest of the struggling  
communities in this part of the world salutes Ram, our comrade, who  
indeed was a partner to our struggles, a profoundly compassionate  
human sharing our common thread of humanity and a gifted channel of  
communication for the voiceless people’s call for Peace and Justice.

NPMHR shares our grieve with all Ram’s friends, colleagues at SAFHR  
besides his near and dear one at this moment of loss. We pray for his  
soul for to receive abundant peace and join all human rights  
defenders across the world during this period of mourning.

NPMHR Secretariat
  Oking.

_____


[8]   PROTECTING AND PROMOTING RIGHTS IN NATURAL DISASTERS IN SOUTH  
ASIA: PREVENTION AND RESPONSE - SUMMARY REPORT

(Brookings-Bern Project on Internal Displacement)
http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2009/~/media/Files/rc/reports/ 
2009/0701_natural_disasters/0701_natural_disasters.pdf


_____


[7]

The Hindu
1 July 2009

REGARDLESS OF CONTENTS, LIBERHAN REPORT IS BAD NEWS FOR BJP NEWS  
ANALYSIS

by Siddharth Varadarajan

But Congress may shrink from taking firm action

New Delhi: Sixteen years on from the Sangh parivar’s single biggest  
act of infamy, the Bharatiya Janata Party and its leaders are likely  
to discover there is no political statute of limitations for the  
crimes of conspiracy, incitement, rioting and vandalism that were  
committed in the name of Hindutva when the Babri Masjid was  
demolished on December 6, 1992.

Having prospered politically for more than a decade from the  
resulting polarisation, the BJP’s ‘rath’ eventually ran out of steam  
in 2004.
Catalyst

The catalyst was perhaps the Gujarat killings of 2002 or the  
neoliberal economic policies to which the illiberal politics of  
Hindutva were wedded. But today, after its second consecutive defeat  
in a general election, the BJP finds itself increasingly aware of the  
liability that communalism has become.

Officially, the party claims the demolition was the result of  
spontaneous action by the mob which it had mobilised in Ayodhya that  
fateful day. BJP leader L.K. Advani, whose alleged role in the  
conspiracy is the subject of a CBI prosecution, famously described  
the event as the “saddest day” of his life. But the fact is that he  
and his colleagues had hitched their political fortunes to the  
violence and intolerance that was the Ramjanmabhoomi movement. And  
today, they have to accept political responsibility for the  
consequences of that movement, even if the Indian judicial system  
eventually proves incapable of assigning criminal liability.

This is where the report of the Liberhan Commission delivers the  
cruellest blow: at a time when the BJP is looking for ways to  
repackage itself as an inclusive party, its role in the destruction  
of the 16th century monument is a reminder of its intolerant agenda.  
“The subject matter of the report is 90 per cent about BJP,” a senior  
Congress leader told The Hindu. He acknowledged that the report might  
also criticise the role of Narasimha Rao, who was Prime Minister at  
the time, and his Congress-run Central government for its inaction.  
“But the entire episode is one which is of, for and by the BJP.”

Second, the manner in which the report names and assigns guilt is  
likely to accentuate the already acute internal fissures within the  
party. Indeed, Liberhan may become an ‘internal brahmastra’ for Mr.  
Advani regardless of the role the report says he played in the  
demolition. Worse, by bringing Ayodhya back into the news, the report  
will also encourage those within the Sangh parivar who feel the Ram  
temple issue should remain at the core of their political agenda.

Instead of jettisoning the Hindutva agenda, a remedy that some inside  
the party now say the 2009 election results indicate, the BJP might  
then find itself thrust into an even tighter embrace with sectarianism.

For the Congress, the party is likely to want to use the report’s  
recommendations to weaken the BJP and its leadership politically  
without allowing them to claim the mantle of martyrdom. But after 17  
years, those citizens who still feel aggrieved at the criminal  
destruction of the mosque are also entitled to expect that justice  
will be done and that all politicians involved in the crime are  
prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

However, the track record of the Congress does not encourage  
optimism. Most of the recommendations of the Srikrishna Commission of  
Inquiry into the 1992-93 Bombay riots, for example, remain  
unimplemented a decade after that report was submitted. And the more  
fundamental reforms that are needed to protect the citizenry from  
official acts of omission and commission during riots are not even on  
the Manmohan Singh government’s radar screen.

_____


[10] Book Review:


WOMEN’S WORK: NEVER DONE AND POORLY PAID

by Nirmala Banerji

Jayati Ghosh’s new book on women’s work in globalising India reveals  
the Indian state’s patriarchal attitude towards women’s work

Never Done and Poorly Paid: Women’s Work in Globalising India, by  
Jayati Ghosh. Feminist Fine Print. Published by Women Unlimited, an  
affiliate of Kali for Women, New Delhi 2009. Rs 250

In writing about women’s issues, scholars often tend to dwell on the  
specifics of the problems being discussed and ignore their wider  
context. Ghosh is a welcome exception to this because she has  
squarely put the issue against the backdrop of the fast globalising  
international economy and, within it, India’s experiments with the  
process.

The first chapter of the book provides the international context; the  
second deals with trends in India, particularly in the years 1991 and  
onwards when the country formally embarked on a programme of economic  
liberalisation. However, it is a little frustrating to find that  
India is generally treated as just another case of development under  
the growing economic imperialism of international capital. From a  
scholar of Ghosh’s stature, one would have expected a more nuanced  
analysis of the structure of the Indian economy, and the special  
baggage of the past the country bears vis-à-vis its labour force and  
especially its women.

Compared to many other newly-developing countries, especially in  
Asia, India carries a huge load of uneducated, unskilled labour due  
mainly to past policies which have been assisted or pressurised by  
the unholy alliance between class, caste and political power.

Although international capital has many ways of keeping labour  
vulnerable, Indian capital has a long history of exploitative labour  
practices in all sections of the economy, by routing work to home- 
based workers and combining this with a hold on them through  
provision of credit. International capital is merely finding new uses  
and users for such practices. One really has to take into account  
Indian capitalism nurtured by the Indian state in the first 50 or so  
years after Independence. The complexities of the Indian situation  
deserve a more sensitive approach, especially from an Indian scholar.

The third chapter is an assessment of work by women. It seems rather  
unfortunate that Ghosh has ignored the huge amount of past work,  
particularly measurement of women’s work and worker status, which has  
been done in this country over nearly 30 years. There has been work  
to show that there is a qualitative difference in the nature of men’s  
work and women’s work, arising chiefly from the fact that women are  
usually not in control of their own labour. Especially in rural  
areas, decisions about the deployment of women’s day-to-day labour  
are most often based on traditions or the requirements of family  
authorities. That is why even when women work on productive tasks  
they have to combine those with housework. This makes it difficult  
for standard employment surveys to assess the distribution of women’s  
time between economic tasks and household tasks; as a result, women  
tend to get labelled ‘housewives’ even if their total time spent on  
productive tasks is substantial.

In India, these controls are especially strong on young women workers  
and, unlike in Asian countries outside South Asia, young Indian women  
even today face a lot of resentment against their appearance in  
public. The age profile of women workers in India has therefore  
always been distinct from that of most developed or developing  
countries. In the conceptualisation of women’s work in the Indian  
context, it is impossible to ignore the patriarchal controls under  
which women work.

The book has an interesting way of dividing chapters. According to  
me, the best chapter is the one on women in public employment; it  
paints a vivid picture of the ways in which the state has  
increasingly put the burden of providing social services -- health  
and education -- on women. Ghosh offers a detailed description of the  
items of work that ICDS (Integrated Child Development Services)  
workers or ASHAs are supposed to perform, and the terms and  
conditions on which they are expected to work. ASHAs are in fact  
supposed to be voluntary workers! The picture reveals how the state  
is short-changing the poor as well as women workers, and exposes its  
little regard for the legitimate claims of the poor for provision of  
basic services. It also shows how the state is a major party to  
women’s disempowerment; their hard work is still dismissed as part of  
their ‘caring’ nature. The state’s excuse that it does not have money  
to pay better wages for this work is astounding when one sees how  
money is being squandered on repeated awards of pay commissions to  
bureaucrats. This reinforces the theory that in India the state is in  
cohorts with patriarchal authorities in order to offload its  
legitimate work for women.

Overall, Never Done and Poorly Paid: Women’s Work in Globalising  
India makes interesting reading, with a good analysis of the  
available official data. My objections, such as they are, have to do  
with the diversion of the author’s analysis into channels that are  
not as fruitful as they could have been. Still, the book provides a  
useful background for future work in the field.

(Nirmala Banerji is a feminist economist formerly with the Centre for  
Social Studies, Kolkata)

Infochange News & Features, July 2009



_____


[11] STATEMENT FROM HONDURAN WOMEN’S ORGANIZATIONS AND FEMINIST  
NETWORKS:

     “On Sunday June 28, the President (of Honduras), Mr. José Manuel  
Zelaya Rosales, was assaulted, kidnapped and sent to the Republic of  
Costa Rica in the presidential plane with military guards who claimed  
he had violated the Constitution…

     He had implemented a popular consultation through a public  
opinion survey, which asked the people whether or not they agreed  
that on November 29 (national election day) a fourth urn be placed  
for the people to vote on a proposed National Constituent Assembly,  
which would develop a new Constitution with the full participation of  
different social actors in the country.

     This consultation was declared illegal by the judiciary, the  
Public Ministry and the National Congress, to justify the arrest and  
extradition of the President of the Republic, which has violated the  
rule of law through the use of brutal force and the lack of respect  
by the military for his election as President of the Republic by the  
people.

     The National Congress immediately appointed the President of the  
Legislative Chamber, Mr. Roberto Michelleti, as the Constitutional  
President of the Republic of Honduras, arguing that President Manuel  
Zelaya Rosales had resigned, which was denied at a press conference  
in the Republic of Costa Rica by President Zelaya Rosales. This  
confirms there has been a congressional coup d’état as legal  
proceedings, in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic were  
not implemented and there were no constitutional guarantees in the  
way he was captured and extradited from the country.

     Legal mechanisms exist in the country that are implemented  
through the courts, if President Zelaya had violated the  
Constitution, but he was not given opportunity to defend himself or  
to resort to legal mechanisms. He was brutally removed from his post  
and banished from the country, as in former times of dictators that  
governed by the practices of “imprisonment, banishment and burial.”

     This political-military coup d’état, which was led by the  
President of the Congress and the political economical power of the  
country that control the state and the media, with the support and  
compliance from the Armed Forces and of some political analysts and  
the media, has broken the rule of law and constitutional guarantees  
of Honduran citizens and some diplomats (such as the Ambassadors of  
Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua).

     According to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution the actions  
that have been taken constitute the crime of treason. The  
Constitution establishes that when the rule of law is violated by the  
authorities, citizens have the right to insurgency, which is what is  
happening: the people peacefully expressing their repudiation of the  
coup and demanding the immediate restoration of President Zelaya and  
to return to the rule of law.

     The main cities are militarized, a state of siege has been  
decreed, there is no international communication, cabinet officials  
of Manuel Zelaya Rosales’ government are being persecuted, and others  
have been forced to leave the country in a violent manner; state  
institutions such as the Presidential Palace, are militarized and  
many leaders, of social movements and human rights defenders are  
being harassed and threatened by state security forces, media offices  
have been intercepted, interrupted and militarized.

     In the face of these terrible events we request International  
Cooperation to demand the return of the rule of law, and an end to  
the persecution of Cabinet members, government officials supporting  
Manuel Zelaya Rosales, leaders of social movements and the media. We  
call for an end to all forms of brutal violence and that fascism is  
not imposed on our society because the majority of Hondurans advocate  
for peace, solidarity and respect for human rights. We call for an  
end to all forms of brutal violence that fascism is not imposed on  
our society. The majority of Hondurans advocate for peace, solidarity  
and respect for human rights. We emphatically denounce to the human  
rights bodies in the region and the international community, the  
complicity in this whole process by the Commissioner for Human Rights  
in Honduras, Dr. Ramón Custodio before the human rights mechanisms in  
the region and the international community.

     Signatories:

         * Centro de Estudios de la Mujer – Honduras (CEM-H)

         * Centro de Derechos de Mujeres (CDM)

         * Centro de Estudios y Acción para el Desarrollo de Honduras  
(CESADEH)

         * Red de Mujeres Jovenes (REDMUJ)

         * Acciones Para el Desarrollo Poblacional (ADP)

         * Red de Mujeres Adultas (REDMUCR)

         * Colectivo de Mujeres Universitarias (COFEMUN)

         * Marcha Mundial de las Mujeres, Comité Nacional Honduras

         * Articulaciones Feminista de Redes Locales

         * Movimiento de Mujeres Socialistas, Las Lolas

         * Comisión de Mujer Pobladora Articulaciones Feminista de  
Redes Locales

         * Convergencia de Mujeres De Honduras Iniciativa  
Centroamericana de Seguimiento a Cairo y Beijing

         * Feministas Independientes


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

South Asia Citizens Wire
Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. An offshoot of South Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/

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