Home

IMC-USA Weekly News Digest - September 28th, 2009


IN THIS ISSUE

COMMUNAL HARMONY

NEWS HEADLINES

OPINIONS & EDITORIALS

COMMUNAL HARMONY

OLD CITY AREAS WITNESS COMMUNAL HARMONY (SEP 23, 2009, TIMES OF INDIA)

Monday witnessed communal harmony in the Old City areas of the city with Eid and Durga Puja celebrations falling on the same day. The streets of the Old City areas including Johnstangunj, Leader Road, Kotwali area, Attarsuiya, Meerapur and Kalyani Devi were buzzing with activity as people gathered around the streets to have a glimpse of the pre-Ram dal processions slated to pass from that route.

On the other hand their Muslim counterparts also gathered at different crossings with music being played in the backdrop to exchange pleasantries with the members of their communities and Hindu brethren. Talking to TOI the convener, Allahabad Moharrum Jhoola committee, Ghulam Rasool said that it is a memorable occasion when festivals of Hindus and Muslims are falling on the same day. He recalled that it was in 2005 when the last Friday of Ramzan coincided with the Hindu festival of Diwali adding glitter to the festivities.

He, however, added that the area bears testimony to the undying spirit of communal harmony given the fact that members of Allahabad Moharrum Jhoola committee have always made it a point to ensure that basic civic amenities are provided to their Hindu counterparts during Dussehra celebrations. The issue is also raised vociferously during their meetings with the district officials and civic authorities.

Holding similar views another resident of Subzi Mandi, Mohd Sadiq said that their Hindu counterparts also reciprocate in the same way by welcoming the tazia processions and offering water and refreshments to the processionists. A local shopkeeper, Mohanji Tandon said that it is the Allahabadi spirit which binds the members of two communities closely together and the ten dulling Dussehra festival and historic Ram Dal processions are enjoyed by people from different parts of the city and outside also.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/5043751.cms

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

NEWS HEADLINES

ADVANIS POLITICAL CAREER MORE OR LESS OVER: BJP LEADER (SEP 22, 2009, TIMES OF INDIA)

Senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Manohar Parrikar has likened party veteran LK Advani to ageing pickle that had turned rancid and said his political innings were "more or less over". Advani had only a couple of more years left in active politics, the former Goa chief minister told a local news channel on Monday. "Pickle tastes good when it is left to mature for a year. But when if you keep it for more than two years, it turns rancid. Advani-ji's period is more or less over. Another couple of years, maybe. But he should be around as a guide or a mentor for the party members," Parrikar said.

Parrikar, currently leader of opposition in the Goa assembly, said Advani had been the best leader in the BJP in terms of integrity and character. "I have great respect for Advani-ji on these counts," he said. Calling for a change in guard at the party's helm, Parrikar, 54, said it would have to project a new youthful face with credibility.

"I am not against elders, but the BJP should give prominence to leaders who are between 40 and 60 years," he said. Parrikar has reportedly been touted as a successor to BJP president Rajnath Singh, whose term ends in December.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/5041405.cms

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

ONE KILLED IN COMMUNAL FLAREUP IN JAISALMER (SEP 24, 2009, TIMES OF INDIA)

Communal tension erupted in Fatehgarh town of Jaisalmer district following a dispute over an encroached land near the sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) office on Wednesday morning. A teenager was killed and 10 others were seriously injured when people of two communities clashed using iron rods, knives and sticks. Over a dozen shops and four vehicles, including a diesel tanker, were burnt and the offices of the SDM and tehsildar were ransacked. As the tension escalated, plying of vehicles on National Highway 15 came to a halt.

District collector R N Meena said meetings of people from both the communites were being conducted to resolve the matter. "The SDM has been asked to stop the allotment process and acquire the land immediately," said Meena. SP, Jaisalmer, Vishnu Kant said that two battalions of Rajasthan Armed Constabulary (RAC) have been deployed.

According to reports, people from two communities had encroached upon a piece of government land measuring four bighas. "The district administration was to initiate the allotment process, but some people had already encroached upon the land. A dispute over the encroachment was going on between the two sides," said a police officer.

On Wednesday morning, people from one community tried to raze constructions built by those belonging to the other community on the encroached land. It snowballed into a clash following which the district collector rushed to the spot. For a while, on the assurance of the collector, the people calmed down, but as soon as he left, a violent clash followed between the two groups.

Reports said people used lathis, iron pipes and sharp-edged weapons in the clash. "An 18-year old boy, identified as Haneef, was run over by a jeep in the clash. The people set fire to over a dozen shops in the locality. A tanker carrying diesel was also torched, but the fire brigade managed to douse the flames before it could cause a major damage," said a senior police officer.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/5048187.cms

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

UPA CABINET MINISTERS ARE PATRONISING MAOISTS: CPM (SEP 22, 2009, INDIAN EXPRESS)

Bearing the brunt of Maoist attacks in Bengal, the CPI(M) said on Tuesday that the Centre was facing a "contradictory situation" in the matter with the Prime Minister describing Left extremist violence as the greatest threat and his cabinet colleagues "patronising and protecting" these elements. Responding to questions on the Maoist attack on CPI(M) offices in West Midnapore district yesterday, senior Marxist leader Sitaram Yechury said there was "a pattern (of violence) being unleashed now by targeting our offices, our comrades and supporters".

"Unfortunately, this violence is being patronised in Bengal by parties who are in the ruling UPA coalition and the (Central) government today," he said without directly referring to the Trinamool Congress. While Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has described Maoist violence as the greatest threat to internal security, "you have Cabinet Ministers who are patronising Maoists and providing them protection and sustenance," he said, adding this was a "contradictory situation" being faced by the UPA at the Centre.

Regarding Monday's attack on the CPI(M) office at Enaitpur, Yechury said the Maoists had "encircled our office and attempted to burn and kill our comrades there. That was resisted. The Maoists fled only after the central and state security forces arrived at the spot." He said over 60 CPI(M) activists have been killed since the anti-naxal operations began in the state.

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/520162/

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

KIDNAPPED, TORTURED, FORCED TO BEG (SEP 21, 2009, INDIAN EXPRESS)

The last two months will remain etched forever in the memory of 12-year-old Prakash Singh. Separated from his loved ones, Prakash lived on the Mathura station and was forced to beg on the station and in trains. He was kidnapped from outside his school and taken to Mathura. He was finally rescued from Jalandhar after relentless efforts by his father, Ramnath Singh, an auto-driver. According to Prakash, he was kidnapped by four men from outside Sri Ram Model High School in Faridabad on July 21. They drugged him and took him to Mathura, where he was joined by four other children. "We were kept under the supervision of one Shanker, a cobbler who lived on the platform," said Prakash. "He would ask us to beg on the platform. Shanker set my school uniform and my books on fire and forced me to wear torn clothes. Since I had no clue of what needed to be done, he would often beat me when I failed to give results."

To hide his identity, the kidnappers shaved off his head and tattooed the letter 'R' on his right forearm. Prakash is scarred all over and complains of loss of vision in the right eye due to torture. "Shanker would burn me and hit me on the head with an iron rod," said the traumatised child. "To ensure we did not slip away at night, they would drug us. I was not given food on most nights since we were all were supposed to earn for him and get a share."

According to Ramnath, he had even bribed traffickers to get his son back. "I have spent weeks on several stations and had to pay people to get any clue. If the police play their role, it will save other children from the trauma my son has suffered," he added. When the traffickers realised that the child's parents had discovered his whereabouts, they abandoned him on the Jalandhar railway station in a semi-conscious state. He was picked by the Jalandhar police, who on questioning him, discovered his identity. The Commissioner of Police, Faridabad, P K Aggarwal, said: "The case is still premature. It is a serious issue and we need to find the kingpin and help rescue more such victims."

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/519639/

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

BJPS TRIPLE ACHE (SEP 25, 2009, THE TELEGRAPH)

An ailing Bal Thackeray, "spoiler" Raj Thackeray and the late Pramod Mahajan's absence have compounded the BJP's woes and reduced its prospects of grabbing power from the Congress-NCP combine in Maharashtra. The BJP and ally Shiv Sena claim they have contained the rebellion over the nomination of Mahajan's daughter, Poonam Rao, from Mumbai's Ghatkopar (West). But there are other worries. The big concern is the rivalry between top BJP leaders Nitin Gadkari and Gopinath Munde, who gave away tickets to relatives and friends, including niece Poonam. But Munde, sources said, lacks the finesse of brother-in-law Mahajan, who was known to silence dissenters by dispensing favours.

Another bugbear is Raj Thackeray's MNS. "Part of our strategy was based on the calculation that our voters might not waste their votes on the MNS. But our feedback is that people are unconvinced about our potential to emerge as a stable alternative and also because they think if the Congress and the NCP fall short, the MNS might bail them out," a state leader said. The MNS lost in all the 11 Lok Sabha seats it contested this year but cut into the Sena's votes. The Congress, rumoured to have pumped up the MNS as a "spoiler", is hoping for a repeat performance.

Sena chief Bal Thackeray's poor health, forcing him to limit campaigning, is another problem. BJP sources said his heir-apparent Uddhav hadn't "enthused" the cadres. "Uddhav is soft-spoken and low-key. The cadres are used to rabble-rousing (Thackeray's style)," a source said. But the biggest factor, both BJP and Sena leaders say, is the allies' failure to be an effective Opposition. "Price rise or farmer suicides, we haven't campaigned on a single issue effectively," a BJP MP said.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090925/jsp/nation/story_11540131.jsp

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

ACADEMIC SAY IN MADARSA BOARD (SEP 22, 2009, THE TELEGRAPH)

The human resource development ministry has nudged the balance of power within the proposed Central Madarsa Board away from religious scholars towards educationists in a quiet shift under pressure from liberal Muslims. The ministry has tweaked the composition of the board to bolster the strength of eminent educationists on the proposed body that for the first time aims to regulate madarsa education, government officials told The Telegraph. The move comes less than a fortnight before HRD minister Kapil Sibal is scheduled to meet 59 Muslim MPs to discuss the legislation to create the board, viewed with suspicion by some sections of the community. The change in the structure of the board is the result of pressure from liberal Muslims of eminence who asked why the government was stacking an education body with clerics.

Lyricist Javed Akhtar had criticised the earlier structure of the board at a meeting of the Central Advisory Board of Education (Cabe) earlier this month. Akhtar is a nominated member to Cabe. The earlier draft of the Central Madarsa Board Bill, 2009, prepared by the HRD ministry envisioned a 10-member body consisting of seven clerics, a Muslim philanthropist and two educationists. The HRD ministry's revised bill, which will be discussed with the MPs on October 3, proposes creating a larger, 15-member board. The new structure allows the philanthropist and seven religious scholars to continue but adds five more educationists - taking their number also to seven.

What may tilt the power balance in favour of the educationists is the condition that the chairman of the body must be an educationist of eminence with contributions to madarsa education - not a cleric. "The structure of a landmark body like the madarsa board is critical to the shape it goes on to give to education at these seminaries. We believe the concerns over too many clerics on the panel may be justified," a ministry source said. One religious scholar each from the Deoband, Barelvi and Ahl-i-Hadith schools of thought - the three most important Islamic schools in the country - will be members of the board.

The four other religious scholars on the board will be from the Imam Shafai sect (a Sunni group), the Shia sect, the Dawoodi Bohra sect and a cleric who has worked on traditional madarsa education. The educationists on the panel should have made "outstanding contribution" in the social sciences, sciences, vocational training and education. The board will steer clear of all theological concerns but will enjoy responsibilities in madarsa education similar to the combined mandates of the Central Board of Secondary Education and the National Council for Educational Research and Training. Madarsas can voluntarily seek affiliation to the board but,once affiliated, will have to subscribe to its norms, including expert visits to scrutinise standards and audits.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090922/jsp/frontpage/story_11526446.jsp

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

JAIL INMATES WANTING TO OFFER ID NAMAZ THRASHED IN JAIPUR, PROBE ORDERED (SEP 25, 2009, THE HINDU)

Over a dozen persons accused of carrying out and conspiring in the May 13, 2008 bomb blasts in Jaipur were allegedly brutally thrashed in the Central Jail here, where they have been kept in judicial custody for more than a year, when they sought permission to offer prayers along with other prisoners in the jail compound on Id-ul-Fitr this past Monday. Two of the accused booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act - Munawwar Hussain and Nazakat - have alleged in their complaint to the higher prison authorities that the jail officials, incensed over a tiff with them on their request to join Id prayers earlier in the day, dragged them out of their cells on Monday evening with the help of other "hardcore prisoners" and beat them with batons and other objects.

The jail officials and policemen on duty stormed into the cells on the pretext of searching incriminating material and desecrated religious scriptures of the accused, according to the written complaint. "We found holy books strewn across the floor with the muddy footprints on them when we returned to the cells," it said. Two young men from Azamgarh and one from Lucknow are lodged in the Central Jail here with the charges of masterminding and carrying out the blasts that claimed 70 lives, while there are 13 accused from three towns in Rajasthan facing the charges of being involved in the conspiracy and taking part in the activities of the banned Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI).

All the accused are lodged in cramped and dingy cells without ventilation, away from other prisoners in the Central Jail, and are not allowed to mingle with other prison inmates. The only time they can see the sunlight is three hours in the afternoon when they are taken out to an open verandah daily. Director General of Prisons Omendra Bharadwaj, when contacted by The Hindu on Friday, confirmed that he had received the complaint and agreed that it had made "certain serious allegations". "I have shifted out the Jailer and Deputy Jailer and ordered an inquiry into the incident," he said. Mr. Bharadwaj said he had himself asked for a written complaint when a "group of citizens" met him on Thursday and brought the incident to his notice. A six-member delegation of Rajasthan Muslim Forum, accompanied by former Congress MLA M. Mahir Azad, had raised the issue with him and demanded immediate action in the matter.

The delegation was allowed to meet some of the accused in the prison compound and get their version. The accused reportedly told the delegation members that they were kept in isolation and constantly taunted for their religious beliefs and their alleged role in the blasts. Jamat-e-Islami Hind State president Mohammed Salim, one of the activists who met the accused, said the complaint also made a mention of the "daily torture" of all of them for 15 continuous days in October last year, when they were blindfolded and mercilessly beaten up. The Muslim Forum, an apex body of the community's groups, pointed out that the chargesheet against 13 of the accused arrested from Kota, Baran and Jodhpur had not made any claim of their direct role in the blasts. The cases of SIMI membership were registered against them on the basis of confessions made by those held in neighbouring Gujarat.

The torture of the accused, who are in judicial custody and waiting for the trial that is yet to start, led to tension in Kota when their relatives returned after meeting them on Id-ul-Fitr earlier this week. Agitated people gathered outside the Ghantaghar police post in the town and demanded action against the jail officials. Mr. Salim said this was the second round of persecution of the accused in custody, after their initial torture by the police who tortured them to extract "fake confessions". With none of them getting bail so far, the accused are mired in a prolonged legal battle to prove their innocence.

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/states/other-states/article25106.ece

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

PRESSURE MOUNTS ON JUSTICE DINAKARAN (SEP 19, 2009, THE TRIBUNE)

A delegation of advocates, led by Shanti Bhushan, today called on Law Minister M Veerappa Moily and demanded an inquiry into the "integrity" of Karnataka High Court Chief Justice PD Dinakaran, proposed to be elevated to the Supreme Court. Simultaneously, the five-member SC collegium headed by Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan held an informal meeting and is believed to have discussed the explanation given by Justice Dinakaran, who has denied the allegations.

The delegation, comprising senior advocates Shanti Bhushan, Anil Divan and Kamini Jaiswal, all members of the Committee on Judicial Accountability, also urged Moily to hold back the appointment of Justice Dinakaran till the outcome of the inquiry. "The probe could be conducted by retired SC Judge N Santosh Hegde, at present Lok Ayukt of Karnataka, as he was a "man of high repute." He could find out whether the charges against the Karnataka CJ were right or wrong," Divan told reporters after the half-an-hour meeting with Moily. He, however, clarified the inquiry was not to find out whether the Judge in question was "corrupt as this is never proved. Constitutional authorities have to satisfy themselves whether the candidate has integrity."

Alternatively, the SC collegium, which had recommended Justice Dinakaran for elevation, could seek the views of SC Judges Markandey Katju and AK Ganguly, who were CJs of Madras HC when the Judge in question was a Judge there, he said. The Committee on Judicial Accountability had earlier written separate letters to President Pratibha Devisingh Patil, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the CJI on the issue. The CJI had summoned Justice Dinakaran to Delhi last week and taken his response to the allegations.

Divan said reverting to the pre-collegium system, which had a role for the executive also in the appointment of Judges, would be "equally bad". "We have to devise a new mechanism, which involves Constitutional amendment. It could be on the lines of the Judicial Appointments Commission of Britain which had more than 15 members," he said. Asked whether it was proper for the collegium to review its recommendation, the delegation said this was necessary as the doubt about his integrity had cropped up after the proposal was forwarded to the government. The committee had raised the issue as any dip in the image of the SC and HCs also adversely affected advocates' reputation which was "even worse", he said. Besides the CJI, the SC collegium consists of Justices BN Agarwal, SH Kapadia, Tarun Chatterjee and Altamas Kabir.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090919/nation.htm#1

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

J-K IPS OFFICER ACCUSED OF DOWRY HARASSMENT (SEP 15, 2009, IBN)

T Sharmila, a 25-year old woman, has accused her husband who is and Indian Police Service officer of cheating and ill-treating her. The woman has also lodged a complaint with Chennai Police against her husband SR Samuel. "The first night after the wedding, my husband asked me to kneel down and he asked me-to remove all the jewels and give it on a plate and said-is this all? It's mere pittance-it doesn't befit my status and he threw it on my face," says Sharmila. According to Sharmila it was the first of many nights of humiliation and abuse in a marriage broken within a day.

Sharmila, a civil servant aspirant and a bank employee, got married to Samuel posted in Jammu and Kashmir. She alleges fraud, ill-treatment, dowry harassment and criminal intimidation against her husband and mother-in-law. "One day in a drunken state my husband called me and said 'you idiot, you stupid lady, you're not my legal wife'. I was astonished .The marriage took place in front of a minister who presided over the marriage and thousands of other people," she says.

According to Sharmila, Samuel, a divorcee, had pretended to be a Hindu and had cheated her into a marriage that's legal only between Hindus. Samuel even filed a nullity petition, alleging that his wife was immoral and that she had an abortion from a pregnancy before marriage. Sharmila claims she has medical reports to prove this wrong. Mysteriously, the police is yet to register an FIR in the case.

"Today is the eighth day and still it's not seen the light of the day. It has not come up at all. The FIR has not been registered," adds Sudha Ramalingam, counsel for Sharmila. Ironically Samuel, earlier the SSP of Leh, is also one of the 60 IPS officers who were transferred following the Shopian rape case.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/jk-ips-officer-accused-of-dowry-harassment/101402-3.html

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

PRIEST HELD ON RAPE CHARGES (SEP 22, 2009, THE TRIBUNE)

The district police has registered a case under various sections of the law against priest of the Sidhi Peeth Mata Vaishno Devi temple located near the toll plaza on the NH1, along with a Sadhvi, on charge of attempting to rape his own niece. According to information, Swami Vishnu Prakash attempted to rape his 16-year-old niece on the temple premises. The police stated that he was assisted by Sadhvi Gobind Bharti in alluring the girl to a room where he tried to molest her.

However, as the girl raised an alarm, her parents who were in the vicinity reached there and rescued their daughter from the clutches of the priest. The girl's father later reported the matter to the Sadar police station after which both priest and the sadhvi were called to the police station where the swami confessed to have committed the crime.

After registering a case the police arrested the accused. Later, he was produced before a local court which granted him bail. The girl's parents were the natives of Lodhipur village of Hamirpur district in Himachal Pradesh, but as of now they were residing in Nizampur village of the district.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090922/haryana.htm#7

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

OPINIONS AND EDITORIALS

MURDER BY ENCOUNTER - BY PRAFUL BIDWAI (SEP 26, 2009, FRONTLINE)

Ahmedabad Judicial Magistrate S.P. Tamang's report on the killing in an "encounter" of 19-year-old Ishrat Jahan has confirmed what many had suspected on the basis of less-than-convincing official accounts - that she and three others were killed in cold blood by the Gujarat Police. The fact that the police team was led by former Anti-Terrorism Squad chief D.G. Vanzara, indicted for the encounter killing of Sohrabuddin Shaikh in 2005, only adds a sin ister dimension to the episode, itself a part of a long string of such cases under Narendra Modi since the anti-Muslim pogrom of 2002. By all accounts, Tamang based himself on strong ballistics evidence and official post-mortem reports to show that "Ishrat was murdered in a systematic manner, cold-bloodedly, mercilessly and cruelly by the police… with their service revolver and unlicensed and illegally held AK-56 rifle and with other weapons." Tamang concludes that the police version was fabricated: "No encounter took place", nor did the police fire in self-defence. The police planted three loaded magazines containing 30 cartridges each on the victims' bodies. Tamang has indicted 25 State officials for the gruesome crime. To its abiding disgrace, the Gujarat government has tried to discredit Tamang by resorting to hair-splitting about the remit of Section 176(1A) of the Criminal Procedure Code. This simply will not wash. The section empowers a magistrate to investigate every death, disappearance or rape in police custody. If the encounter was indeed fake, then, logically, the victims were in police custody before being killed. (Custody does not mean lock-up - it means in the control of the police.) Even more deviously, the Gujarat government has cited a Central government affidavit that links Ishrat to a terrorist group. This is a complete red herring. The affidavit does not sanction or justify non-judicial killing, or to put it plainly, murder. The Bharatiya Janata Party has shown where it stands on the issue by defending the Modi government and chiding the Congress for "sympathising with" terrorists such as Ishrat.

Ishrat's murder, like Sohrabuddin's, highlights the high level of criminalisation of the administration under Narendra Modi. No less a person than R.B. Sreekumar, Gujarat's intelligence chief during the 2002 pogrom - who was victimised for deposing against the government before the Nanavati-Shah Commission and denied a promotion as Director-General, but who got it after retirement under the Central Administrative Tribunal's orders - has now stated that the Gujarat Police staged encounters "as a matter of policy". During the February-April 2002 violence, G.S. Subbarao, Chief Secretary of the Gujarat government, told Sreekumar that "we will have to kill some people to prove that the Gujarat Police is very strong… ." Sreekumar is a conscientious officer who maintained a detailed diary of the 2002 events. His allegation calls for a thorough investigation into the encounter "policy". Gujarat is, of course, an especially obnoxious case of extrajudicial or custodial killings of individuals suspected to be terrorists or hardened criminals. Hundreds of people have been subjected to physical harassment and torture or gunned down there, often out of communal motives. Regrettably, Gujarat is not the only State where there is a high incidence of custodial deaths, of which fake encounters are a subset. Many other States and Union Territories (Delhi, Puducherry and Chandigarh) too have witnessed custodial deaths and reported them to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) under the guidelines it issued in 1993.

Now, it is a well-known fact, confirmed by the NHRC itself, that its guidelines are regularly flouted, and that States do not report custodial deaths to it within 24 hours as they are meant to do. In fact, the NHRC had to issue revised guidelines in 2003 after noting this. The 2003 guidelines mandate an inquiry into all cases of custodial deaths by an "independent investigating agency" and "a magisterial inquiry… in all cases of death which occur in the course of police action… [with which] the next of kin of the deceased must invariably be associated". It calls for the filing of an FIR for "culpable homicide" against police officials where a cognisable offence is made out; and for "prompt prosecution and disciplinary action… against all delinquent officers found guilty in the magisterial inquiry/police investigation". The NHRC also mandates that "no out-of-turn promotion or instant gallantry rewards shall be bestowed… soon after the occurrence" and that "a six-monthly statement of all cases of deaths in police action in the State shall be sent by the Director-General of Police to the Commission with the pre-trial details". These guidelines too are often violated. Even so, the cases reported to the commission are enough to send shivers down one's spine. Between 1994 and 2008, there were 16,836 custodial deaths in India - an average of 1,203 persons a year, or more than 100 a month. This number has risen from 1,037 in 2000-01 to 1,977 in 2007-08 at a virtually uninterrupted rate (except for one year). This list is incomplete. Reputed human rights groups have documented and reported additional cases to the NHRC. The State-wise break-up bears testimony as to how deep and wide such murderous proclivities have spread in our police. Between April 2007 and March 2009, Maharashtra topped the list, with 192 custodial deaths - no surprise, given the fatal contributions of some "celebrated encounter specialists". Next come Uttar Pradesh (128), where suspected dacoits and terrorists are summarily killed, and Gujarat (113), where Muslims are especially targeted. No less appalling is the record of Andhra Pradesh (85), Jharkhand (29), and Chhattisgarh (23), where Maoists are gunned down. The turbulent north-eastern region (Assam, 74; Meghalaya, 16; Arunachal Pradesh, 11; and Tripura, nine) is high on the list. Even West Bengal has a score of 83. Delhi, where "encounter king" Rajbir Singh long held sway, recorded 25 deaths. And even "peaceful" Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh recorded 16 and two deaths. Surprisingly, Jammu and Kashmir reported only nine deaths.

Note that these custodial deaths figures generally exclude "fake encounter" killings. The police typically claim they killed in self-defence outside police custody. There is no way of knowing how many such murders have occurred. But we have graphic evidence of the murder of Sanjit Chongkham in July in Manipur, the infamous Ansal Plaza case of 2002, and the Batla House episode a year ago. The police version(s) of the Batla House encounter does not square up with the sequence of events as seen by eyewitnesses, the fact that Inspector M.L. Sharma was not wearing a bullet-proof jacket, and visual evidence from the injuries on the skulls of the two killed "terrorists", suggest that bullets were fired from point-blank range. Ballistics tests and post-mortem records could clarify things. But the police have refused to disclose these. The NHRC recently produced a report endorsing the police version. But this lacks credibility because it did not conduct an independent inquiry, record evidence or reveal the forensic reports. The picture that emerges is distressing. The police enjoy virtual impunity as regards extrajudicial killing. There is no accountability. There is no real pressure to follow NHRC guidelines. The NHRC lacks the power to enforce them. Errant policemen are rarely brought to book. Their superiors tend to shield them. Encounter specialists exercise a corrosive influence on the police, and wield enormous blackmailing clout because of their access to large clandestine funds, and their contacts with the underworld who tip them off, enabling them to bypass and sabotage standard operating procedures and regular law-compliant police methods. Often, even Ministers are unable to transfer them out of their postings. They undermine the rule of law in the very institution that is meant to respect and enforce it. This spells descent into lawlessness and a barbaric state of affairs, where a handful of men impose their will upon the citizenry by force, with impunity, and with the silent complicity of the state. No one, least of all, the police, can exercise the terrifying power to snuff out human life without destroying the legal foundation on which civilised society is built.…

In February, however, a Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court issued four directions to the government, which mandated tighter procedures than the NHRC's guidelines, including FIRs and a magisterial inquest even in the case of police killing in self-defence. In effect, these procedures prevent the police from playing their favourite trick: file an attempt-to-murder counter charge against the victim while taking shelter behind "self-defence", eventually closing the case because the victim is dead. This is a big step forward in bringing the practitioners of encounters to book. Regrettably, on March 4, the Supreme Court stayed the order on a mere verbal mention by a lawyer of the Andhra Pradesh Police Association, who contended that this would entail putting on trial even the policemen who killed the November 26 terrorists in Mumbai. One can only hope, fervently, that at the next hearing, due soon, the Supreme Court upholds the High Court's order and stipulates even stricter procedures to plug the loopholes policemen use to evade responsibility for encounters. The higher judiciary must not let down the causes of the rule of law and respect for human life, the constitutional right to which is foundational, indeed sacrosanct in any society that aspires to be even minimally civilised. If the judiciary fails us, Parliament should enact a law creating a specialised independent agency which deals with complaints of police excesses, along the lines of the United Kingdom and South Africa. We cannot allow trigger-happy policemen to gun down a thousand citizens a year without giving them the opportunity to face trial, defend themselves, be proved guilty, and punished. That is wholly unconscionable.

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2620/stories/20091009262010000.htm

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

WHETHER HUMAN RIGHTS OF PRISONERS STAND SUSPENDED? - BY SUBHASH GATADE (SEP 23, 2009, COUNTERCURRENTS)

The letter sent by an undertrial Mukesh Kumar, at present lodged in Karnal Jail (Haryana), through his counsel to the Chief Justice of India makes depressing reading. The letter talks about the manner in which he was brutalised by the Jail staff for disobeying their orders. It is learnt that the Jail wardens compelled him to clean the toilets calling him names and 'reminding' him of his 'caste profession'. His refusal to continue the dehumanising work led to his public thrashing and tonsuring/shaving of his head and moustache. According to the administration, Mukesh Kumar is one of those persons who were arrested from different parts of Haryana from April to June 2009 as part of the state campaign 'to curb Maoist activity'. Of course, any close watcher of the human rights situation in the state would tell you that it is not for the first time that jail officials in Haryana were engaged in targetting particular section of undertrials/detainees. Three years back Gohana, a place around 50 kms of Delhi had witnessed burning of dalit houses with the police turning a mute spectator supposedly to avenge the death of a Jat youth. Few dalit youths who were arrested for the death of the Jat youth were similarly brutalised by the jail staff.

It is beyond any sane person's comprehension that when the matter is pending before the court itself, which is deliberating on it, then what is the rationale behind the extra enthusiasm shown by the jail staff. It would be height of innocence to say that jail officials are ignorant about the human rights of prisoners/detainees/undertrials. In fact, the impunity with which they operate makes it clear that they know the wide chasm which exists between precepts and practice. It has been more than three decades that the Supreme Court has given its verdict on it. Responding to two separate writ petitions filed namely by Sunil Batra and Charles Sobharaj, two prisoners in Delhi's Tihar jail, the highest court made an intervention to humanize jail conditions. As noted in a writeup 'Prisoners Rights : Some Landmark Judgements' the question before the Court was: "Does a prison setting, ipso facto, outlaw the rule of law, lock out the judicial process from the jail gates and declare a long holiday for human rights of con-victs in confinement ? And if there is no total eclipse what luscent segment is open for judicial justice? Sunil Batra, sentenced to death had challenged his incarcera-tion in solitary confinement and Charles Sobhraj had challenged his confinement with bar-fetters. The Supreme Court held that there is no total deprivation of a prisoner's rights of life and liberty. The "safe keeping" in jail custody is the limited juris-diction of the jailer. "To desort safe-keeping into a hidden opportunity to care the ward and to traumatize him is to betray the custodian of law, safe custody does not mean deprivations, violation, banishment from the lanter barguet of prison life and infliction's of travails as if guardianship were best fulfilled by making the ward suffer near insanity." Despite clearcut instructions from the Supreme Court, one discovers that brutalisation and dehumanisation of inmates at the hands of Jail officials, is not an exception but the rule.

It was only in March 2009 that Gujarat high court ordered the Session Judge to visit Sabarmati jail and asked him to contact the detainees/prisoners lodged there. Responding to a petition filed by Jan Sangharsh Manch about the alleged atrocities committed by the jail staff on the inmates- most of whom were Muslims - it also issued notices to Inspector General of Police (Jails) and V. Chandrasekhar, Jail Supdt of Sabarmati Central Jail (Indian Express, 28 th March 2009) In fact, tension between the inmates and the jail staff flared up when one of the prisoners Yunus Sareswala was not allowed to meet his ailing mother. In the melee that ensued, twenty two prisoners were badly beaten up by the jail staff(25 th March 2009). As noted in a fact finding report of human rights activists which met with prison officials as well as detainees and their relatives, "…[I]nmates, most of them Muslim, who were on a hunger strike, were denied medical attention after a brutal attack on them by jail staff, which left at least three of them unconscious for so long as to start rumours in the city that they had died. They were subsequently denied access to counsel, their relatives were refused permission to meet them for three days, and then the Sabarmati Police station failed to register an FIR as sought by relatives and counsel of the victims. A question naturally arises why one notices quantum jump in cases of custodial human rights violations despite all talk of humanising jail conditions. One should see it as a product of faulty government policies and lack of transparency observed by the powers that be. Much on the lines of United States of America, our government also shies away from accountability in all such matters. Figures collated at National Human Rights Commission confirm this trend. As of now complaints which have reached its offices have already surpassed a figure of 70,000. While fourty percent of the complaints focusses themselves on the police, violations of human rights inside jail comes second.

Of course, there are moments when jail officials are held accountable for their acts of omission and commission.In an important writeup 'Walls Not A Prison Make' Editor at large of 'Tehelka' Mr Ajit Sahi provides details of a case where 'Terror accused dare to take on their brutal jailers - and win' (Vol 6, Issue 35, Dated September 05, 2009). The said story discusses the brutal assault on Sohail and 26 other inmates in the prison on June 28, 2008 when the jail staff rained "…[b]lows, belts, bamboo sticks and stones on them, smashing their heads, breaking their bones and spilling blood." Accused of participating in terror attack in Bombay and brought to Mumbai's Central Prison in 2006, Sohail and his fellow accused were quickly branded traitors not just by the jail staff but also by the "regular" prisoners and faced all-round hatred and contempt. To cover up their attack, jail authorities claimed that the prisoners had rioted unprovoked shouting Pakistan Zindabad, Hindustan Murdabad [Long live Pakistan, Down with India] and attacked the jail staff. Undeterred by the ongoing brutalisation Sohail with the help of his son Saeed filed a case against the jail authorities despite the odds and actually won a favourable ruling. As noted in the writeup : "The order of Bombay High Court judges Bilal Nazki and AR Joshi, delivered on July 21, 2009, does not just bring justice to Sohail and the others the prison staff brutally attacked. The ruling is historic because it restores the Constitutional rights of tens of thousands of inmates who face indignities and brutalities inside Indian prisons without let or hindrance. It also prescribes criminal prosecution of the jail staff for brutalising the inmates." According to the judges: "… We have found [that] force was used against the under trial prisoners for no fault of theirs. Force was used excessively for extraneous reasons and [the] law was also flouted. Even as a formality, the Jail Manual was not followed. We, therefore, direct the Chief Secretary, State of Maharashtra to initiate [a] disciplinary inquiry against all the Officers involved in the incident… If need be, in addition to the departmental inquiry, criminal action be also initiated against the concerned Officers."

The said judgement unequivocally lays down that the jail authorities have no authority over an inmate's life: "Once a charge sheet has been filed, nobody has authority over the custody of an under-trial except the court… It has to be remembered that the convicts or the under-trials are human beings and they have to be treated like human beings. The jail authorities who have custody over them have [a] special responsibility to protect their rights and in fact they are their custodian, reformer and counsellor." "They cannot assume the role by which they turn into [a] villain. They in fact should command respect from the prisoners and that respect should come as a result of their conduct with prisoners. This is no longer in debate in this country whether or not the prisoners have fundamental rights available to them as this has been decided in [a] number of cases by the Supreme Court." It need be noted that the judges also slammed the Jail Superintendent at the Central Prison, Swati Sathe, a female officer who is infamous for her brutalities among inmates.As of now a departmental inquiry has been started against Sathe and there are plans to seek her criminal prosecution once the departmental inquiry is completed.

http://www.countercurrents.org/gatade230909.htm

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

MURDER THAT NEVER WAS - HC PUNISHES THE PUNJAB POLICE, RIGHTLY - EDITORIAL (SEP 25, 2009, THE TRIBUNE)

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rightly ordered the release of five persons who were sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial court after the Punjab Police falsely implicated them in the murder of a man who was actually alive. It has directed the state government to pay them a compensation of Rs 1 crore (Rs 20 lakh each) within a month. The quantum of compensation announced by the court is unprecedented and a reflection of the gravity of the crime committed by the men in khaki. A Division Bench consisting of Justice Mehtab Singh Gill and Justice Jitendra Chauhan has rightly taken serious exception to the conduct of the Punjab Police and ordered registration of a criminal case against the erring investigating officers and witnesses who fabricated evidence to prove Jagseer Singh dead. The trial court in Barnala has been directed to start proceedings against them for perjury.

At a time when the Punjab Police does not enjoy a kind of reputation it can cherish, the High Court verdict is bound to affect its standing with the people. The duty of the police is to protect people and not to harm them. But the Punjab Police have not learnt any lesson over the years and there has been no improvement in their style of functioning. The Bench observed that because of the thoughtless action of the police functionaries, the five persons in question had undergone a lot of mental torture and hardship. In fact, one of the appellants committed suicide after spending five years in jail.

The Bench did not blame the trial court for the miscarriage of justice. It ruled that the trial court believed the "evidence" brought before it and had no alternative but to convict the five persons. But the Bench did not spare the police for violating the law and subverting the criminal justice system through "meticulous falsehood". Clearly, no leniency should be shown towards the guilty policemen and witnesses. They deserve exemplary punishment for the crime they have committed. It is only through stringent punishment that the image of the police will improve.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090925/edit.htm#2

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

COMMUNAL RECIPE - BY K.N. PANIKKAR (SEP 26, 2009, FRONTLINE)

The recent electoral defeat is not the reason for the present turmoil in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The defeat is only a symptom. The reason lies deeper in the very nature of the party, its ideology and programme. Success and defeat are endemic to all political parties. When a party is politically mature it does not panic in the face of defeat, nor does it go overboard to celebrate success. But then, political maturity is not a virtue the BJP enjoys in abundance. This is surprising; for the party has waited for about 50 years to come to power. Nevertheless, power proved to be a disaster, as it foregrounded the schisms within and, more grievously, exposed the party's utter inability to provide efficient and effective administration. The BJP came to power in 1998 riding on popular, emotive slogans and programmes inspired by Hindu religious sentiments. The political appeal of these slogans could not be sustained for long. The alternatives, such as "shining India", which the BJP election managers invented, failed to arouse popular enthusiasm. Obviously, those who lived on less than Rs.20 a day could not be made to believe in the myth that India was shining. Facts are more powerful than fiction. The elections of 2004 proved that Goebbels is not necessarily right; slogans, however loudly and repeatedly raised, cannot always convince the people. If economic and administrative reasons made the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government unacceptable to a large section of the population, the BJP's obscurantist and communal policies alienated even its own staunch supporters. Except during the Emergency, no other government in India aroused so much opposition of the people. It was mainly because what the government advocated and implemented went against common sense. Whether the Congress believed it or not, the BJP was pushed out in the 2004 elections mainly, though not exclusively, because of its anti-secular and communal image. The Congress was not voted in; the BJP was voted out. The Congress was an unintended beneficiary as people had no other choice but to repose faith in the grand old party. In the elections in 2009, the BJP could not become a serious player because of its communal image, although several other factors were also responsible for its marginalisation.

The success of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement in 1992 convinced the Sangh Parivar that it was on the right path to power. Ayodhya, projected as a cultural and religious symbol of Hindus, was perceived as a gold mine with inexhaustible possibilities, the least of which was the expansion of the BJP's mass base, until then drawn mainly from the cadres of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS). A large number of social and cultural organisations were set up to pursue this agenda. Their main effort was to forge an identity between religion and culture at the grassroots level for the consolidation of Hindu religious believers, who would subsequently become supporters of the communal cause. The communal euphoria of the 1990s was, in fact, a result of this transformation, which the cultural intervention of the Sangh Parivar organisations effected through sustained activities. This strategy was eminently successful: around a variety of religious issues Hindus were brought to the fold of the Parivar, which in turn provided mass support for the party. Consequently, the BJP emerged as a mass party, capable of bidding for power. At the same time, a shift to the right was generally taking place among the intelligentsia. The left radicals, Sudheendra Kulkarni and Chandan Mitra, and liberals, Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha, among others, flocked to the BJP, convinced that it was the party of the future. At any rate, the BJP being a party short of talent, their future in it was assured. They were all absorbed in important administrative or organisational positions. How this inflow of "outsiders", who had nothing to do with the party's RSS base, would affect the BJP's ideological coherence and internal solidarity was not a concern then, when power was not yet at a striking distance. Their entry, it was believed, would help the party's general acceptance. But very soon their rise in the party created internal tensions, partly because most of them were earlier severe critics of Hindutva.

Despite their visible presence and influence in the party, they were looked upon by the RSS with reservation. To the RSS, they were at best a necessary evil to be tolerated for the sake of gaining political acceptance from the middle classes and forging alliances with secular parties. Although they were an important ingredient in the coalition manoeuvre of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, they could not win the RSS' confidence, however much some of them, such as Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha, tried. As a consequence, over the years, the former left and liberal intellectuals became critical of the party's subjection to the RSS, not only in ideological terms but more so in practical politics. This was possibly a result of the conviction that the BJP as a party wedded to Hindutva had reached its limits and had to break out of it in order to come back to power. Sudheendra Kulkarni, believed to be a close aide and adviser of Lal Krishna Advani and who was reported to have scripted the Jinnah speech, had advocated an independent path for the party. There is a general impression that what impelled Advani to extol Jinnah's contribution and Jaswant Singh to write the book on Jinnah was the urge to free the party from the clutches of the RSS. That Advani was almost shown the door and Jaswant Singh was thrown out without even routine procedures being followed indicate the control the RSS continues to wield on the party. In the BJP, there is no chance for survival for anyone who does not accept the RSS' supremacy. Conscious of this reality, Vajpayee suppressed his initial anger over the Gujarat massacre, and Advani quickly backtracked from his admiration for Jinnah's secular credentials. The present turmoil in the party is occasioned by another reminder from the RSS that the BJP is not an independent political formation but one of its front organisations, charged with the responsibility to implement the Hindutva agenda. In the past, whenever the party faced a crisis, the RSS intervened to maintain discipline and assert its ideology. There was never any doubt about what that ideology was constitutive of. Its main contours were laid down by M.S. Golwalkar; it unambiguously advocated a Hindu Rashtra and its practical politics was inspired by a hatred of the minorities.

The BJP's mission, therefore, cannot be separated from these basic principles. When Advani or Jaswant Singh were accused of deviating from the principles of the party, it was not so much the praise of Jinnah or the critique of Vallabhbhai Patel that mattered, but the possibility that their stance might affect adversely the commitment of the cadres to a Hindu Rashtra. The RSS rightly fears that the liberal dominance in the BJP is likely to dilute the Hindu nationalist fervour. Therefore, during the past 10 years it has consciously tried to promote Hindutva hardliners and marginalise the liberals. Tension between the "liberal" and core Hindutva factions has simmered for quite some time. Positioning himself within the liberal fold, Vajpayee tried to create a space in which liberal opinion could at least co-exist with Hindutva. When Narendra Modi let loose terror in Gujarat, his early response was very critical and he urged the party to make amends by removing Modi from power. The RSS immediately intervened and forced Vajpayee to retract. For the RSS, Vajpayee was a convenient mascot, as described by K.N. Govindacharya, a former ideologue of the party, in order to project a liberal image as a strategy to remain in power. After him, there was none in the liberal camp with a popular following to fulfil that role. That was the only reason why the RSS tolerated his occasional musings, expressing the pangs of his troubled conscience. The liberal and the Hindutva factions have drawn opposite conclusions from the electoral defeats in 2004 and 2009. The RSS believes that the days of liberalism are over and the only way for political revitalisation is a return to Hindutva and cultural nationalism. That requires both a reaffirmation of ideology and a reconstitution of leadership. As a result, Hindutva and cultural nationalism have been restated as core ideologies, and efforts are on to enthrone a new leadership, dispensing with the old guard, however useful they were in the past. On the other hand, the assessment of the liberal fraction is that identity politics has reached its limit and it is not possible to make any further headway on that path. After all, 20 years of religion-centred mobilisation has not succeeded in persuading the majority of Indians to subscribe to communal politics. Nor is it possible to invoke another Ram Janmabhoomi, as evidenced by the failed agitation over Rama Sethu and Bababudangiri. Also, the violence against minorities in Gujarat and Orissa drew revulsion rather than admiration all over the country. Therefore, it is imperative to chart out a new political programme that addresses secular issues and at the same time does not give up the religious cause. Ram Janmabhoomi can still be a part of the agenda, but without highlighting the livelihood issues of the people the party may not attract popular support.…

In the election campaign, the BJP was hard put to project an image that was sufficiently distinct from that of its main rival. It could not accuse the Congress of supporting imperialism, nor could it oppose neoliberal policies, as in both respects the BJP's hands were equally soiled. Therefore, the space available to the BJP for mobilisation was practically limited to its political philosophy based on the conception of cultural nationalism. The Congress from the time of the anti-colonial struggle had championed an inclusive nationalism, whereas the BJP has been an advocate of religious nationalism and of the two-nation theory. Along with the latter, the BJP also invoked other religion-oriented issues such as Ram Janmabhoomi, Article 370 and a common civil code. The BJP found to its dismay that these issues did not anymore excite its support base, such as the members of the middle class, and even its captive supporters of Hindu fundamentalists. This failure is the reason for the troubled times of the BJP. The takeover of the BJP by the RSS, which appears to be imminent, is intended to tide over this crisis. The control of the RSS is sure to strengthen the party's ideological foundation and reorient its political practice to become more pronounced in the realm of religious fundamentalism. Over the years, the Sangh Parivar built up a formidable social support through the innumerable social and cultural organisations under its umbrella. In the past 10 years, however, they became relatively inactive and grew lukewarm in their active support to the BJP. What the RSS is likely to attempt is to regroup these organisations in order to revive the BJP's strength. In the process, what the RSS is likely to ensure is the unambiguously Hindu communal and fascist character of the party and its affiliates. Implicit in this strategy is the possible danger of greater social strife and violence. Will the troubled times of the BJP lead to trouble for the nation?

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2620/stories/20091009262008600.htm

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

THROW OUT ROTTEN APPLES - EDITORIAL (SEP 15, 2009, THE TRIBUNE)

Chief Justice of India Justice K.G. Balakrishnan has rightly stressed the need for confiscation of properties and assets of corrupt bureaucrats who are convicted of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Addressing a seminar in New Delhi, he has said that if a public official amasses wealth at the cost of the state exchequer, the state would be justified in seizing such properties. His statement, coming close on the heels of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's statement on checking corruption at the top by catching the big fish, underlines the imperative need to root out corruption in the administration and improve the quality of governance. Few will disagree with the CJI's observation that corruption is going on unchecked because of long delays in granting sanction to prosecute corrupt officials often because of extraneous considerations. As there is virtually no fear of punishment among the corrupt, it is not the "quantum" but "certainty" of punishment that will be an effective deterrent, the CJI has said.

The CJI has cited several reasons for the poor conviction rate of corrupt officials. Among these are the government's refusal to sanction prosecution of officials, shortage of courts, a large number of witnesses creating hurdles in the court work, and lack of coordination between the CBI and government law officers. No wonder, according to a study, of 153 cases of senior officers awaiting the government's sanction, as many as 21 cases were pending for more than three years, 26 for 2-3 years and 25 for 1-2 years. On their part, bureaucrats know how to use filibuster and loopholes to delay the cases for years and avoid punishment.

Unfortunately, the government has very rarely taken resort to Article 311 of the Constitution for sacking officers for causing serious monetary loss to the state. Significantly, Union Law Minister M. Veerappa Moily has said that he is pursuing the matter with the Prime Minister for a review of Article 311 so that corrupt civil servants can be summarily dismissed. Equally significant is his statement that the government's prior sanction is not needed to prosecute a civil servant who is caught red-handed while accepting a bribe or found in possession of assets disproportionate to his/her known sources of income. Clearly, if corruption has to be checked, swift and decisive punishment of officials is imperative. It requires the government and the judiciary some will to throw out the rotten apples.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090915/edit.htm#1

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]

WEAPONS OF MASS DESPERATION - BY SHOMA CHAUDHURY (OCT 3, 2009, TEHELKA)

On September 22, 2009, India woke up to the news that the Delhi Police had captured a top Naxal ideologue, 58-year-old Kobad Ghandy – a South Bombay Parsi who had grown up in a giant sea-facing house in Worli, had gone to Doon School, and had studied for a CA in London before returning to India to work with the most destitute of Indian citizens in Maharashtra, before going underground in the 1970s. His wife Anuradha, a sociologist, went underground with him and died of cerebral malaria last year. (Malaria, particularly the lethal falciparium malaria, is a common affliction in the neglected heartland of central India.) Home Minister P Chidambaram called Ghandy the State's "most important Naxal catch." On the night of September 22, Times Now had a prime time debate on the significance of Ghandy's arrest. The aggressive rhetoric of anchor Arnab Goswami epitomised typical high urban attitudes to Naxal issues. If you happened to watch him anchor the show, several terrifying things would have become evident. Over this past year, the Home Ministry has been planning a major armed offensive against the Naxals, particularly in Chhattisgarh. According to reports, the plan involves stationing around 75,000 troops in the heartland of India - including special CRPF commandos, the ITBP and the BSF. Scattered newspaper accounts have spoken of forces being withdrawn from Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast; there is also talk of bringing in the feared Rashtriya Rifles - a battalion created specially for counter-insurgency work - and the purchase of bomb trucks, bomb blankets, bomb baskets, and sophisticated new weaponry. Minister Chidambaram has also said that if necessity dictates, he will bring in the special forces of the army.

The decision to launch such a massive armed operation on home ground - due to start this November - should have triggered animated political, civil society and media debate. But Operation Green Hunt - as the offensive is being termed - has been gathering force in almost complete silence. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Home Minister Chidambaram have variously called Naxals - or "Maoists" - "the gravest threat to India's internal security." Perhaps a military offensive against them is the answer, but is it the only answer? Is it the best answer? Will it provide a solution? Who will be impacted by this offensive? What will be its repercussions? Who are we really declaring war on? What are we declaring war on? Are we going into this with eyes wide open? Is there anything we should have learned from the seemingly irreparable psychological mess in Kashmir and the Northeast? These are the questions a democratic society should be asking. One can perhaps understand the well-heeled turning their back on such bleak issues. But with such a significant operation looming on the horizon, what can excuse the complete absence of debate from national political parties? But silence, perhaps, is only the lesser worry. A few days ago, the government announced an ad blitzkrieg as part of its psychological offensive. "Naxals are nothing but coldblooded murderers" the ad screamed across all major news dailies. The visual showed a series of men, women and children brutally killed by Naxals. On the night of September 22, discussing Kobad Ghandy, Arnab Goswami mouthed the same line. "Terrorist or ideologue?" he intoned, with the moral certitude of a man who has never got off his urban chair to trudge the interiors of the country. "Six thousand innocent Indians have been killed on Mr Ghandy's 'watch,'" he said (as if Kobad Ghandy was some Idi Amin figure presiding over a banana republic), "and yet human rights organisations and NGOs are asking for his release." (Mr Goswami always reserves special scorn for human rights activists, as if they are a uniform sub-species of anti-national humankind, rather than men and women with differing and individual views.) "What about the 12-year-old girl the Naxals killed in Jharkhand?" he thundered. "What about the 15 CPM cadres they killed in Bengal last night?" Every time one of his panelists tried to introduce the larger political context behind Naxalism or a more complex argument, Mr Goswami swatted them down: "The question we are asking is very simple," he said, "is he a terrorist or an ideologue? Is he responsible for violence or not? Can he be blamed for 6,000 dead or not?"

Watching the show was like straying into a child's playroom, watching the grave judgments of infants playing at Good and Evil. As an individual point of view it would have counted for nothing, but as the voice of Times Now, currently deemed the most popular English channel, Mr Goswami's unthinking edit line seems symptomatic of a wider, urban, English-speaking constituency. Coupled with the government ads, it presents the disturbing prospect of a public discourse that is marked by reductive official propaganda on the one side and infantile ignorance and simple-mindedness on the other. We can afford neither. At the heart of the Naxal riddle, there are three primary questions: Who is a Naxal? What is one's position on violence as a tool of struggle? And why is Naxalism on the rise across the country? To understand the first, try a useful metaphor. Imagine fish in water. Naxal leaders are the fish, finite, identifiable (even punishable); the water is the vast, infinite constituency they speak for. And swim in. As Kobad Ghandy proves, a Naxal ideologue, commander or politburo leader can come from any milieu. The disempowered dalits of Andhra Pradesh, the destitute tribals of Chhattisgarh, the middle-class intellectuals of Bengal or the privileged rich of Bombay. These "informed revolutionaries" function at two levels. At a political level, they do not believe in parliamentary democracy (where they see power still concentrated in the hands of the feudal upper class) and their long-term objective is to seize State power for the people through armed struggle. In this, they threaten the sovereignity of the Indian State and many humanist thinkers, including men like K Balagopal of the Human Rights Forum, who was part of brokering peace talks between the government and Naxals in Andhra Pradesh in 2004, believe the State is within its rights to confront them. "The Maoists themselves would not tolerate such a challenge if they came to power," says he. Balagopal is also critical of Naxal leaders creating "liberated zones" where the Indian State cannot function. "If they claim to be the voice of the people, can they pursue a political agenda that injures people - either by their actions or the repercussions they invite? Does the current tribal generation of Chhattisgarh want to sacrifice itself for a utopian future that may never come?"

It is true that in this prolonged ideological war, many Naxal attacks like the horrific one on the Ranibodli police station two years ago and the more recent one in Rajnandgaon embrace brutal tactics and almost fetishise violence. Even if these attacks are against an oppressive and corrupt police, it is a nobrainer to condemn them and say one is opposed to this violence. Or that their perpetrators should be punished. But like dozens of other intellectuals, Balagopal points out that it is suicidal to focus only on this ideological war or resort to extrajudicial means alone to quell it. Can Naxalism really be wiped out by brute counter force? If that were so, Siddhartha Shankar Ray's crackdown in Bengal in the 70s should have nailed it for all time. But the fact is, while stories of their own coercions are true, Naxal leaders enjoy wide support because they also espouse social-economic causes and empower people that the Indian State has ignored - criminally - for 60 years. Most Naxal cadres, therefore, are not "informed revolutionaries" fighting a conceptual war: they are beleagured tribals and dalits fighting local battles for basic survival and rights. Bela Bhatia, an activist, says she met a mazdoor in Bihar who was part of the cadre. "You can call me a Naxal or whatever you want," he said. "I have picked up the gun to get my three kilos of annaj." The point is, should the Indian State be declaring armed war on its most despairing people? Is there no other way to empower them and wean them away from the gun and the seduction of the 'informed revolutionary'? When Arnab Goswami evoked the 15 dead CPM members in Bengal last week, he forgot to mention that, according to newspaper reports (since no TV channel bothered to send teams there to find out) a 10,000-strong crowd of tribals had descended on the CPM office which was stockpiling arms in Inayatpur, near Lalgarh. When his panelists tried to draw his attention to this, he scathingly dubbed all 10,000 tribals as Maoists. Should "Operation Green Hunt" then stamp all 10,000 out? And if 10,000 Maoists had attacked an office, is it possible that only 15 people would have died? What is the real truth about the attack on the CPM office last week? And why was the superintendent of police, visiting a day later, unable to find any bodies? And why were the central paramilitary forces stationed there unable to prevent any of it?…

EAS Sarma, former Commissioner of Tribal Welfare and former secretary, Expenditure and Economic Affairs, unlocks the real heart of the matter. "I am totally against violence of any kind and a firm believer in democratic process," says he. "But Left extremism is a secondary issue. How many tribals even know there is a government? Their only experience of the State is the police, contractors, and real estate goons. Besides, the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution grants tribals complete rights over their traditional land and forests and prohibits private companies from mining on their land. This constitutional schedule was upheld by the Samatha judgement of the Supreme Court (1997). If successive governments lived by the spirit of the Constitution and this judgment, tribal discontent would automatically recede." Mr Sarma is probably right. Human rights activists have long argued that the real intention of the Salwa Judum in Chhattisgarh was to capture tribal land - brimming-rich with minerals - and hand it over to private companies. The fact that 600 tribal villages have been evacuated in the last few years gives credence to this theory. If tribals no longer live on that land, the inconvenient Fifth Schedule of the Constitution will not apply. Given that the Supreme Court directed that the Salwa Judum was to be dismantled, perhaps, Operation Green Hunt is the second lap. In any case, whether for ill-intention, poor execution, or unplanned collateral damage, there is much to fear in the impending operation.

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main42.asp?filename=Ne031009coverstory.asp

SEE ALSO: 

[Back to Top]
Indian Muslim Council–USA is a registered non-profit 501(c)3 tax-exempt organization. Tax ID: 05-0532361 6321 W Dempster St. Suite #295, Morton Grove, IL 60053-2848 Phone: 800.839.7270 Email: info@imc-usa.org


Designed & Developed By Managefolio IT Division