SACW Jan 18-19, 2011 / Taking on fundamentalists in Pakistan / India Court order on Salwa Judam

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire -  Dispatch No. 2700 - January 18-19, 2011
From: sacw.net

[1] Taking Back Pakistan  (Beena Sarwar)
    - The “epicentre” of terrorism (Ayesha Siddiqa)
[2]  Bad scene in Pakistan, India is lucky to have secularism (Dipankar Gupta)
[3] India : Commendable Court order on Citizenship (Soli J Sorabjee)
[4] Tributes:
      (i) Minhaj Barna passes away (Zaib Azkaar Hussain)
      (ii) K G Kannabiran (Pritam Singh)
[5] India: Supreme Court orders security forces to vacate schools, disband Salwa Judam and rehabilitate victims (text of Press Release by Petitioners)

---------

[1] Pakistan:

Viewpoint, January 14, issue 33

TAKING BACK PAKISTAN
by Beena Sarwar 

A complaint has also been registered in Karachi against the cleric of a Saudi-funded mosque for inciting hatred and making threatening remarks against PPP MNA Sherry Rehman

“There are no less than 24 groups as of now supporting Qadri on FB and 1 against what he did, that says it all.

So went a tweet from a fellow Pakistani early morning on Jan 5, the day after the assassination of Salmaan Taseer, the governor of Punjab who took a courageous stand against religious extremists in Pakistan.

The facebook pages cropping up don’t quite say it all. Facebook is usually quite slow to take action against pages that users consider abusive (unless they have to do with Israel). In this case, many of those pages (mostly started by young men who like western shows like Sex and the City, support Pervez Musharraf and say they follow Islam – any contradictions here?) were taken down within 24 hours – which means that enough people reported them as abusive.

When it comes to religion, there is confusion in people’s minds in Pakistan. This confusion has been building up over the years, particularly since America, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and their allies took up cudgels against the Communist threat in Afghanistan and injected religion into the Afghans’ war of liberation against the Soviet invasion. Calling it a ‘jihad’ or a holy war enabled them to draw in Muslim fighters from around the world. The late Eqbal Ahmad warned against this long before the horrific events of 9/11 and US President Bush’s immature response sent the world into a downward spiral of violence, especially Pakistan, the frontline state in America’s war first against the Communists and then against extremist Islam.

Of course, Pakistan's leadership is equally culpable not only for accepting this narrative that has been adopted by most Pakistani regimes – military, those propped up by the military, and those dependent on the military for their survival. Even before this narrative gained dominance, Pakistani rulers had developed their own security paradigm, based on a siege mentality seeing themselves encircled by hostile powers. This mentality is evident in the long-running anti-India narrative and the myth of ‘strategic depth’ that Afghanistan that Pakistan’s security establishment has propagated and clung to.

The questions arising from Taseer’s assassination indicate that some forces in Pakistan are continuing along the old trajectory.  The assassin, 26-year old Malik Hussain Qadri, was assigned to the elite force guarding the Punjab Governor. It now emerges that he had been removed from the Special Branch because he was perceived as a security threat – so how did he end up on the security detail of a Governor who was already receiving death threats?

According to the post-mortem, he fired 41 bullets at Taseer as the Governor was getting into his car. He then threw down his weapon and raised his arms in surrender.

Standard operating procedures in VIP guard duty require the other guards to immediately open fire even if the assailant is one of them, explains my military analyst friend Ejaz Haider. So why did the other guards not follow the SOP?

Chillingly, Qadri has revealed that he had told his colleagues what he was going to do and asked them not to open fire, as he would surrender. Which means that he was confident of getting away with it. 

“Now the judicial process will take over,” predicts Haider. “The judge/prosecutors will be threatened, and the murderer will be declared a hero.”

This is of course already happening, as the facebook pages show. Some of them have referred to him as a ‘ghazi’ (conqueror) and are justifying and glorifying his murderous act – including several religious organisations. In fact, some have gone so far as to say that because he was ‘guilty’ of ‘blasphemy’, no Muslim should lead or attend his funeral prayers. Most disturbingly, hundreds of lawyers, many of whom showered him with rose petals and raised slogans in support of him, have come forward to assert that they will argue his case for free.

Qadri’s smiling face was flashed on television channels, along with his comments that "Salmaan Taseer is a blasphemer and this is the punishment for a blasphemer". He is reported to have told interrogators that the Governor had called the blasphemy laws ‘black’ and had defended Aasia Noreen, the Christian woman sentenced to death for ‘blasphemy’. 

Taseer’s role in highlighting the Aasia Bibi case, as it came to be known, was significant although some have criticised his high-profile visit to her jail cell and his promise to obtain a presidential pardon for her, which circumvented due process. According to due process, the President’s pardon would have been sought after the Supreme Court confirmed the death sentence following the High Court’s confirmation of it.

The Pakistani state has not executed any blasphemy convicts because so far, the High Courts or the Supreme Court have acquitted those accused under this law (295-C, imposed by Gen. Ziaul Haq to add to 295-A that existed since British times). Yet the mere allegation of ‘blasphemy’ has been enough to incite the murder of over 30 people so far. Taseer’s is the most high profile such murder.

Given the current climate, it is unlikely to be the last. For things to significantly change, ‘deep state’ will have to change its policies of support for ‘jihadis’ and jihadi mind-sets.

But those who have been opposing the blasphemy laws and other injustices perpetuated in the name of religion have not given up the fight. Taseer’s murder appears to have ignited efforts of ordinary citizens to step up the fight to take back Jinnah’s Pakistan.

The recent jumping back of the MQM into the fold gives hope to these efforts, particularly since the leadership has indicated its willingness to take up the fight. According to members of the Citizens for Democracy (an umbrella group of professional organisations, trade unions, NGOs and individuals formed last month) who met the MQM leadership in Karachi on Jan 13, Altaf Hussain has directed party workers to attend Friday prayers to monitor and report hate speech. A complaint has also been registered in Karachi against the cleric of a Saudi-funded mosque for inciting hatred and making threatening remarks against PPP MNA Sherry Rehman and anyone else who talks of amending the ‘blasphemy laws’. Hundreds of citizens have endorsed a request for the Chief Justice to take suo moto notice of the cleric who offered a reward to murder Aasia Noreen. Others are starting to come forward to make such complaints.

These forces cannot match the street force of the right wing extremists who manage to bring out thousands of supporters and shut down cities through threats, force and the covert support of secret agencies.

Our battles must be fought through the courts and in Parliament. And that war has only just begun.

--

This is an updated and revised version of ‘Salmaan Taseer’s death is liberal Pakistan’s loss’ (Jan 10, 2011), published in Tehelka Jan 15, 2011 issue -http://www.tehelka.com/story_main48.asp?filename=Ne150111Proscons.asp
	

Beena Sarwar is a film maker and senior journalist based in Karachi          


o o o

The Express Tribune, 15 January 2011

THE “EPICENTRE” OF TERRORISM

by Ayesha Siddiqa

So we don’t like what US Joint Chief of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen said about us: that Pakistan has become an “epicentre” of terrorism. Many have disliked the statement and consider terrorism as a temporary phenomenon linked with American presence in Afghanistan. Once foreign forces leave, things will return to normal and we will be a peaceful and liberal society once again.

This particular scenario building does not seem to take cognizance of the rapid social changes that Pakistan faces today, mainly due to the prominence of the militant and right-wing narrative. The fact is that Mumtaz Qadri’s act is not a coincidence nor is the behaviour of the lawyers offering to defend him odd. One should also consider the behaviour of the Punjab police as normal — it reportedly created security hazards for the Islamabad police as it came to drop Qadri in Adiala jail. Apparently, the jail superintendent physically attacked the officer who had come to drop off Qadri. The Punjab police has grown vehemently anti-US and inclined towards the religious right. The main issue is not that they dislike the US, but that they have grown in the fear of militants which operate amongst them with impunity. The Punjab government’s secret deal with Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, which resulted in the release of the outfit’s leader Malik Ishaq, is a case in point. Recently, Punjab Law Minister Rana Sanaullah defended Qari Saifullah Akhtar of the Harkatul Jihad al Islami, saying that he was not a terrorist. Similarly, the government has completely overlooked the rapid expansion of the second big madrassa-cum-ideological conversion facility being built by the Jaish-e-Mohammad in Bahawalpur. The fact that it is on the main road, connecting Lahore and Karachi, does not impress the provincial government either.

Naturally, these are friendly forces, which we claim are not attacking Pakistan. However, we have no guarantee that people joining these outfits will not become hostile to the state, or that forces will easily give up power once foreign forces leave the region. If we consider two possible scenarios around the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan, we may see that peace and stability may just not be on the cards for the future. The first scenario is that of foreign forces leaving without any major adjustment and replaced by regional states with competing interests. This could mean more conflict, not less. Another possibility is that foreign forces leave after installing a Taliban-dominated government in Kabul which will be friendlier towards Pakistan. The question is: in this perfect scenario, will the Pakistani state have the intent and the capacity to dismantle the friendly militants?

Given the state’s eroding capacity to deliver to the general public, any form of militancy is a rising fad. Moreover, such militancy is likely to find safe ideological havens within state institutions. Already, we have a system where the police are unable to furnish evidence by which some of the known militant-terrorists could be convicted. The judiciary, on the other hand, is either too scared or inclined to the right to convict the killers (Mumtaz Qadri’s case, in fact, will be a major test of whether the judiciary has enough courage to bring the killer to justice, especially when the bulk of the legal community seems supportive of Qadri).

Courtesy the war on terror, our ambivalence towards fighting the war, and our support to ideologically driven non-state actors, has affected our attitudes and encouraged latent-radicalism in the society, across the socio-economic and political spectrum. Latent radicalism can be described as the tendency to be exclusive instead of inclusive, vis-à-vis other communities on the basis of religious beliefs. Such an attitude forces people to develop bias against an individual, a community, a sub-group or a nation on the basis of faith. In its extreme form, it can take people towards violence as well. Such an attitude is akin to European fascism which was internally destructive.

Another possible development is the tighter embrace between religion and politics, and the disconnect between ideological and electoral politics becoming sharper. Traditional western-liberalism is on its way out, which may not be that bad, but admission of facts is necessary for any intelligent intervention in the future design of the state and society.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 16th,  2011.

____


[2] : [Why should liberal Indians be mock at neighbour's malhuer, they should instead extend solidarity to Pakistanis and help repair the gaping holes in India's secular system  ?]


Mail Today

LOOK AT PAKISTAN AND BE HAPPY

by Dipankar Gupta

OUR grief at Salman Taseer’s assassination has a schadenfreude aspect to it. We are sad that a brave man died unjustly, but we are happy this happened to our neighbour next door. True, Taseer was part of the establishment, but he had a change of heart when it came to the blasphemy law.

It takes a lot to leave your barber halfway through a haircut, but he did that, and paid for it.

The broad band endorsement of Taseer’s death is clearly more horrifying than the act itself. While rejoicing that we are lucky to be born here and not there, let us remember that Khap Panchayats in Haryana and UP are against women wearing jeans, Ram Sene does not want couples to date in coffee shops, and honour killings take lives of young women. We are that close to being like Pakistan; but we could have been closer.

Secularism

Secularism, with all its faults, has helped to distance us from Pakistan in more ways than we imagine. It is not just that we are secular and Pakistan is not, but that we are thinking development and they are not.

Secularism takes our minds off whether our wives and sisters are behaving, or whether our gods are being upstaged by other gods.

In place of such ungovernable passions, it positions issues of economic growth and development instead.

Pakistan’s near total obsession with identity politics has disabled it on a number of fronts. Its theocratic character has kept it from bringing about land reforms, curbing the military, setting up institutions of higher learning, and establishing steel mills. That we have been able to do all that— from engineering units to IT giants— is because secularism gave us the space to grow. We had energy in stock to think of poverty removal, economic sovereignty, export promotion, and so on.

In politics a kind of zero sum game is at work. Either we exhaust our reserves asserting identity politics or get ahead with developmental programmes. The two cannot be combined. Is it surprising then that theocratic states are nearly always the least developed? Once we open the door to ethnicity, out goes progress and economic well being.

Those who snigger at India’s secularism should perhaps take a step back from the fence that separates us from Pakistan. Only then will they realise how fortunate we actually are. All the forces of primeval passion, let loose by the Partition, were baying for a Hindu state mirroring that of Pakistan; blood for blood, and so on. Pakistan has not made matters easier either.

Every time it gets too hot and crowded in their kitchen, they open the window and throw junk in our backyard. There have been more times than we would like to remember when we have given in to ethnic passions.

That we did not go all the way is because secular values are still with us, courtesy, the founders of our Constitution.

When the UPA came to power in 2004, we were more relieved than elated. We could now switch off the ethnic engines ( they were over heated anyway) and think development instead. Today, that promise the UPA held out is without real legs. It is not because this government has yielded to Muslim and minority baiters, but because it has done little to improve the everyday life of everyday people— majority and minorities included. This is why ethnic parties are getting their tails up once again. There is no point in condemning Narendra Modi for being communal if Congress- run states elsewhere cannot out- perform Gujarat on the economic front. Secularism has a double burden: it must not only be good, it has to be better than the rest.

Growth

This is a lesson that is often hard to drive home. Secularism is not just about minority protection, it is about majority promotion too. Secularism draws our attention away from medieval concerns so that we can think about economic progress. History is a testament to this. When the western world came out of the religious trap, they experienced economic growth like never before. By not emphasising this aspect, the promoters of secularism have under served their cause.

In the period 1820 till today, the per capita income in Europe and America grew anywhere between fifteen fold to twenty fold. Till that time, for centuries, nobody knew about anything called growth. It never rang anybody’s door bell. John Maynard Keynes made this point emphatically in his 1930 essay, “ Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren.” He argued there that from the beginning of the Christian era right up to the 18th century “there was no real change in the standard of living of the average man….” Life expectancy till then was extremely low; people died of natural causes that are easily controllable now; epidemics swept the world— even in today’s developed countries.

How did it all change? There are many reasons for this, but the most important one is that politics changed. It now espoused industrialisation, freedom of movement, rights of children and workers as free citizens.

Religion was put in its place.

Round the corner we have the example of Singapore where once ethnic tensions were dominant and the economy stagnant.

After Lee Kuan Yew banished religious politics Singapore became a poster- state and a model worth emulating. There are negative examples too.

Hitler’s promise of full employment was backed by his unrepentant anti- Semitism. It took him some distance, but where is fascism now in Germany? On the other hand, there are continuous success stories that read like fairy tales. Quebec, in Canada, and the Basque province of Spain, made huge strides after they shook off the hold of the Catholic Church.

France realised the importance of this very early when in 1906 it clipped the wings of the Catholic clergy and forced them to behave. It is only after that that the vision of the Third Republic got a fighting chance of realising itself.

Choice

David Brooks, one of America’s renowned Conservative journalists, made a similar point recently. He argued that when secular ideologies come to the fore, ethnic passions must recede. This is an interesting insight, made more remarkable by the fact that it comes from Conservative quarters. Yet, because he is a Conservative he termed political ideologies the new ethnicity, and spoilt it all.

If we want to believe like our forefathers did, if we want to tremble at the sound of thunder, if we want to be helpless in the face of avoidable diseases, we should go back to religious passions.

If, on the other hand, we want to enjoy the comforts of today, the sciences of today, then we better get secular.

There is much more to secularism than mere religious tolerance, religious equidistance, or even religious goodwill. Without secularism there is no development, and that is the hard truth.

The choice is clear. We can either think like our grandparents and go ethnic, or think of our grandchildren, as Keynes did, and become secular. There is no other option!

The writer is a senior fellow at the Nehru Memorial Museum & Library

____

[3] INDIA COURT ORDER ON CITIZENSHIP

Deccan Chronicle, 17 January 2011

[excerpt from] Padmas are for defenders of human rights

by Soli J Sorabjee
[. . .]
Justice For Tibetans: Namgayal Dolkar, a Tibetan, applied for a passport. It was refused on the ground that Namgayal was not an Indian citizen and that in her application for grant of identity certificate she had declared herself to be a Tibetan national. The decision was challenged in the Delhi High Court. Dr Roxna Swamy in her elaborate submissions before the court argued that under the Citizenship Act as amended in 1986 “every person born in India on or after the 26th January 1950 but before the 1st day of July 1987” shall be citizen of India by birth. In the instant case admittedly the petitioner was born in India on April 13, 1986, ie after January 26, 1950 but before July 1, 1987 and merely because she described herself as a Tibetan national did not amount to renunciation of citizenship. Justice S Muralidhar in a well-reasoned judgment accepted Dr Roxna Swamy’s submissions. He referred to the policy of the MEA set out in the affidavit of the government which made it clear that MEA treats Tibetans as ‘stateless’ persons and that is why they are issued identity certificates. The learned judge highlighted that “without such certificate Tibetans face the prospect of having to be deported. They really have no choice in the matter.” The court ruled that holding of an identity certificate, or the petitioner declaring, in her application for such certificate, that she is a Tibetan national, cannot constitute valid grounds to refuse her a passport.

The judgment is commendable for its realistic approach to the grim ground realities facing Tibetans who are constrained to obtain identity certificates to avoid deportation.

The judgment provides welcome relief to several Tibetans who face the same dilemma as Namgyal Dolkar.

[. . .].

_____


[4]  Tributes 


(i) The News International


MINHAJ BARNA PASSES AWAY

Saturday, January 15, 2011

By Zaib Azkaar Hussain
Karachi

The sad demise of veteran journalist, poet and writer Minhaj Barna came as a shock for the people belonging to different sections of society, particularly the journalist community. Barna passed away on Friday in Rawalpindi. He was 85.

Barna was not only a veteran journalist and founding President of the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) but he also acted as a trade union leader, besides being a writer and poet.

The Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (Piler), Progressive Writers’ Association, National Council of Academics and Irtiqa Institute of Social Sciences have expressed deep shock and grief over the sad demise of Minhaj Barna. Another writer and poet Mahboob Sada also passed away in Rawalpindi the same day. The PILER representatives said that both the scholars had rendered great services in the filed of literature and journalism. The leaders and representatives of different organizations, including former President of Karachi Union of Journalists (KUJ) Wahid Bashir and Iqbal Alvi, described Minhaj Burna as a stalwart of democracy, freedom of press and one of the pioneers of democratic struggle.

“Barna was a mentor of political activists, poets and journalists, and an advocate for the rights of the down trodden.”

They noted that Barna was imprisoned several times for fighting for the right to information as well as for the welfare of working journalists.

Barna had remained steadfast in his beliefs and principles and his death was a loss to the democratic journalist fraternity all over Pakistan, they added.

Some representatives mentioned that Barna was a veteran journalist who, among many organisations, worked at Imroze and later as a correspondent for the Pakistan Times.

He also served as general secretary of the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ). Being associated with the Communist Party, he made untiring efforts to link the struggle for journalists’ rights with the labour movement. Being a poet and creative writer, he was a formidable part of the Progressive Writers Association, they said while expressing deep sympathy with the bereaved family.

The story of compiling literary works by Barna is so interesting that people close to him knew that he was a wonderful poet, but others were unaware of this posture of Barna till the appearance of his books in 2007.

It was he who did not publish his poetry collection despite the fact that he had written a lot and then a time came when in 2007 he had to consider the requests of his close friends and admirers to bring a book and he got his poetry collection published. The book by Minhaj Barna entitled “Marssiya Chauthey Sutoon Ka” is in fact a story of violation of human rights and imposition of ban on freedom of expression in Pakistan in poetic form. His poetry covered almost all the regimes of dictators in Pakistan who not only violated human rights and democratic norms, but also imposed restrictions on newspapers and journalists for depicting the actual plight of the people of Pakistan. In a way, his poetry was a kind of epic that presented a study on the overall situation in Pakistan, including the imposition of martial laws and emergencies, toppling of governments, victimization of journalists, trade unionists, political workers and other representatives of masses.

He depicted the negative role of rulers in a highly courageous manner with regard to the victimization of people, punishing human rights activists, judges, women, workers and journalists.

Prominent Urdu critics and educationists and other scholars have described the poetic work by Barna as a unique experience.

Meanwhile, Muttahida Qaumi Movement chief Altaf Hussain has expressed deep shock and grief over the sad demise of Minhaj Barna. In a statement, he said that the country’s journalist community has lost a dedicated and principled journalist. While praying for the departed soul, Altaf Hussain expressed profound sympathy with the bereaved family.

o o o

(ii)

Letter to EPW - January 15, 2011

K G Kannabiran

I felt a sense of personal loss on hearing of the death of K G Kannabiran, the great stalwart of India’s human rights movement.  I had met Kannabiran only once but his earnestness and deep compassion left a lasting impression on me. In the early 1980s when the Punjab crisis was brewing up, I spoke on the crisis at a meeting in Hyderabad organised by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties. The meeting lasted for several hours. Kannabiran and the others asked searching questions about the class, nationalist, religious, linguistic and regional dimensions of the crisis. They were interested in developing a holistic human rights perspective on the conflict. It was the best meeting I ever had on Punjab and the human rights situation there. I came away from the meeting enriched by the understanding that different regions and states of India looked at the Punjab conflict in different ways.  In Kannabiran’s death, India’s human rights movement has lost one of its tallest figures. In every critical moment in India’s history in the last few decades whether it was the Emergency, Naxalite movement or the Gujarat carnage, Kannabiran was in the forefront in using his legal erudition and moral authority in defending the rights of the victims of authoritarian state power. His was a life well-lived that has left a powerful legacy behind.

Pritam Singh
Oxford, UK

_____


[5] India: Supreme Court orders security forces to vacate schools, disband Salwa Judam and rehabilitate victims

http://www.sacw.net/article1863.html

18th January 2011

PRESS RELEASE ON HEARING OF SALWA JUDUM MATTER

  1. SCHOOLS TO BE VACATED BY SECURITY FORCES WITHIN FOUR MONTHS
  2. GOVERNMENT ASKED TO SHOW TIME BOUND PLAN TO DISBAND SALWA JUDUM CAMPS AND RESTORE PEOPLE TO THEIR VILLAGES
  3. STATE RELIEF AND REHABILIATION COMMITTEE TO SHOW ACTION ON COMPENSATION TO ALL VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE, WHETHER BY SALWA JUDUM, SECURITY FORCES OR NAXALITE. 

The Salwa Judum matter was heard in Court 9 of the Supreme Court today by Justice Sudershan Reddy and Justice SS Nijjar. The petitioners were represented by Senior Counsel, Mr. Ashok Desai, the Centre by the Solicitor General, Mr. Gopal Subramanium and the State of Chhattisgarh by Mr. Harish Salve and Mr. Manish Singhvi. Arguments lasted all day.

The Court ordered the Chhattisgarh government to vacate security forces from all educational institutions within four months. The Court also recorded the consensus on the need for Salwa Judum camps to be disbanded and their inhabitants to be sent back to their villages. The state government is required to submit a plan for this within two weeks by February 3rd. The Court recorded the Chhattisgarh government’s statement that the State Relief and Rehabilitation Committee had compensated all victims of violence regardless of perpetrator, as well as the submission of the counsel for the petitioners that only victims of Naxalite violence were compensated. The State Committee is to give a report within two weeks (by February 3rd) as to who has been compensated, how much etc.

Right at the beginning of the proceedings, Justice Sudershan Reddy said he had received a small chit saying that since he was a member of the PUCL, and PUCL had impleaded in the case, he should not be hearing the matter. He asked all counsel if they had any objection to his hearing the matter. Mr. Subramanium, Solicitor General, replied that he too had been giving donations to the PUCL. Nobody had any objections. In any case, it was pointed out that this was not a case filed by the PUCL and the PUCL impleadment filed by Mr. KG Kannabiran (specifically on the biases of the NHRC investigation team) had not yet been formally admitted. The Judge has formally recorded in his order that none of the counsel raised any objections.

Mr. Desai began by going through the written submissions of the petitioners addressing the five points raised by the court in its directions of August 2010, to which the Chhattisgarh government had been asked to respond:

  1. Disbanding of Salwa Judum
  2. By when schools and ashrams would be vacated by security forces,
  3. Report on the FIRs registered and prosecution undertaken
  4. Status of rehabilitation and compensation to all victims regardless of perpetrator,
  5. Constitution of a High Level Committee to oversee rehabilitation and registration of FIRs.

He pointed out that there was a serious conflict of interest in having a monitoring committee headed by the Chief Minister and comprising the DGP and Mr. Mahendra Karma all of whom had been vociferous supporters of Salwa Judum and also referred to a newspaper report that textbooks in Chhattisgarh had a chapter praising Salwa Judum. Mr. Harish Salve denied the existence of any such textbook. The Court, while noting the state government’s support for Salwa Judum, sought to know from the Counsel for the state whether the Chief Minister could be set aside when it came to overseeing rehabilitation.

Mr. Desai pointed out that nobody was challenging the power of the Chief Minister, and that the petitioners were explicitly requesting state support for a high level monitoring committee. However, the specific task of rehabilitation was different from the development core group presided over by the Chief Minister, quite apart from the conflict of interest. Mr. Desai also argued that the draft affidavit submitted by the Union Government on 7.1.11 in court referred to an Integrated Action Plan proposed by the Planning Commission, which however, has been publicly repudiated by the Planning Commission itself. Finally, he presented a tentative list of names for an independent committee which included four independent persons, four representatives of the union, four representatives of the Government of Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh and two of the petitioners.

Mr. Harish Salve arguing for the state of Chhattisgarh insisted on referring to the NHRC report, which he claimed did not show the Salwa Judum in a bad light and said that all the petitioners allegations about it had been found invalid. However, in the course of his reading of the report, it clearly emerged that the Salwa Judum had been violent. Justice Nijjar remarked that the situation showed a lot of violence all through and asked how the state could support such a movement. Mr. Salve then said ‘such things happen when people become hotheaded, but now the movement is over’. (According to this view all rapes, murders, arson and looting would be forgotten and consigned to the past because ‘such things happen’. No justice would ever get done.) He also again raised the bogey about the petitioners being Naxalite supporters saying they were ‘intellectually robust’ and that Naxalites had intellectual backing, to which the Court again asked him not to accuse everyone of being Naxalite supporters.

Mr. Desai pointed to the shortcomings in the NHRC investigation, since they sent sixteen police officers who were accompanied by SPOs and went about in armoured tanks. Mr. Salve claimed that the petitioners had never objected to the NHRC investigation whereas the petitioners affidavit in response to the NHRC report clearly points to a number of problems with it, including letters sent to the NHRC investigation team during the investigations itself about witnesses being threatened etc. There was some discussion between the counsel and the bench on whether this could even be considered an NHRC report since none of the members had themselves heard the petitioners and had merely forwarded the report of the police investigation team. Mr. Desai conceded that whatever the problems with the report, we should take this as the view of the NHRC. He pointed to the recommendations of the NHRC, all of which supported the petitioners, and showed how even these had not been followed by the government of Chhattisgarh, despite claiming that the report was in their favour. Hence, he reiterated, there was a need for an independent monitoring committee.

In the course of Mr. Salve’s reading of the NHRC report, the Judges remarked that all the fundamental rights of the Salwa Judum camp residents appeared to have been suspended and they were virtually imprisoned. Mr. Salve said they were all now supporters of the Salwa Judum and SPOs and if they were sent back to the villages, they would be killed, though he later admitted that living in camps was unnatural. He said there were only 18,000 people left in camp. Mr. Salve also claimed that the State Human Rights Commission could be strengthened to deal with the issue of complaints. (The SP, Mr. Manhar, who started Salwa Judum and is recorded as saying kill all journalists if they come here, was posted to the State Human Rights Commission).

The Court concluded the day’s hearing by recording the consensus that Salwa Judum camps should be shut down and people enabled to return home and asked the state of Chhattisgarh to provide a time bound action plan for this. They also asked for a report on the status of compensation paid to all victims of violence. Finally, they directed that all schools should be vacated within four months.

*It should be noted that Mr. Desai who is over 75 years old is arguing the case pro-bono, and is doing a brilliant job of it. He was on his feet all day today, giving up all his other matters for this. He is assisted by a team of lawyers who are also working pro bono, Nitya Ramakrishnan, Menaka Guruswamy, Suhasini Sen, Bipin Aspatwar, Rahul Kripalani, Sumita Hazarika and Pragya Singh (Advocates on record). Senior counsel Mr. TR Andhyarujina has also argued this matter pro bono on several occasions. Were it not for the commitment of these lawyers to the constitution and the rule of law, as well as their concern for the fate of the country’s poorest citizens, we would not have come this far.

Petitioners

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

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.