IMC-USA Weekly News Digest – August 23rd, 2010

by Publisher on August 23, 2010

In this issue

Communal Harmony

News Headlines

Opinions & Editorials

Book Review

Communal Harmony

Communal harmony pledge administered (Aug 21, 2010, The Hindu)

All the government officials and employees took communal harmony day

oath at the respective Collectorates on Friday. Before administering the

pledge, the Collectors paid a floral tribute to the portrait of the

former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. V. Arun Roy, Collector, administered

the pledge to the officials and other employees at the Krishnagiri

Collectorate.

A large number of district officials including P.

Prabhakar, District Revenue Officer, G. Lakshmi Priya, Additional

Collector (Development), and T. Manoharan, Public Relations Officer took

the pledge. The birth anniversary of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi

is being observed as ‘Communal Harmony Day’ throughout the country on

August 20.

In Dharmapuri, Collector P. Amutha administered the

pledge to the employees at the Collectorate. The heads of various

departments including Maheshwari Ravikumar, District Revenue Officer,

took the pledge, says a release.

http://www.hindu.com/2010/08/21/stories/2010082153980300.htm

[Back to Top]

Hamidiya Masjid: A perfect example of communal harmony (Aug 21, 2010, Twocircles.net)

When you are in a hurry and also don’t want to miss the Traveeh,

Special Namaz prayed after Isha in the night during Ramazan, then there

is only one option and that is the Hamidiya Masjid in Pydhonie, a

commercial hub in South Mumbai. More than 100 years old, Hamidiya Masjid

is best suited for Mumbaikars where time is important and people are

busy travelling from suburb to city for their work and then rush to home

in the night after a tidy day. Sharique Ahmed, a resident of Mumbra,

nearly 60 kilometer from city, has to come in the city to earn his

livelihood. He Said, “I had to rush to catch the train at 9.45 p.m. and I

have only one option i.e. offering Traveeh in Hamidyah Masjid and reach

home early.” Hamidiyah Masjid offers 2 traveeh prayers, one at 8.50 pm

that ends at 9.30 pm and another begins at 11.00 pm.

Hafiz and

Qari Yusuf, in his late seventies, is leading a Traveeh prayer here

since 1960. He was a teacher in Anjuman-e-Islam Urdu School situated

opposite Chatrapati Shivaji Terminus Railway station from 1960 to 1976.

He also used to recite Quran for Akashvani Radio on Eidul Fitr and Eidul

Azha and was awarded for his excellent voice and Qirat. Remembering the

old days he said, “I was in my teens when I started leading the prayer

here. People are very co-operative and respect Ulemas very much in

Mumbai.” Qari Yusuf is highly respected in Mumbai. He leads Namaz in the

four different mosques of South Mumbai and comes to lead Isha and

Traveeh Prayer in Hamidiyah Masjid throughout Ramzan. He also leads the

Namz of Eid and Eidul Azha in YMCA playground in Mumbai Central. He

said, “Muslims should catch hold of Al-Quran, the words of God and the

Sunnah, the teaching of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that’s the only way for

success here and hereafter.”

Pydhoni Police station is situated

just opposite the mosque and the staff takes care of security of the

mosque. CCTV camera is installed here and it’s being monitored by the

Senior Police Inspector. “After Masjid gets packed up Namazis offer the

Traveeh on the road and that’s possible only with the help of Police”

said Usman Patel, the Managing Trustee. Hamidiyah Masjid is situated at a

very distinct place. It is at the crossroad where on one side there is a

Muslim locality and the Hindus live on the other side of the mosque.

It’s surrounded by 5 Temples and a great example of communal harmony.

Usman Patel, Managing Trustee said, “During and after the 1992 riots

this place was very safe and no untoward incidents took place here. In

fact after 1992-93 when electricity of the mosque went off, trustees of

Temple situated near the mosque provided us the electricity and helped

us to offer Namaz peacefully.” He also added that the trustees of the

mosque and temple are in agreement that at the time of Namaz, temple

will not allow ringing of bell.

Hamidiyah Masjid is built in 1880

by Haji Mohammed Kasam and his family and Abdul Hamid the then governor

of Mumbai facilitated the land for the mosque therefore it was named

after him as Hamidiyah Masjid. “It was a pond before the mosque where

people used to wash their feet to go to the temples and that’s how this

area is called Pydhoni. Abdul Hamid Sahab helped the trust to get the

land and finally the Hamidiyah Masjid came into existence” concluded

Usman Patel.

http://www.twocircles.net/2010aug21/hamidiya_masjid_perfect_example_communal_harmony.html

[Back to Top]

News Headlines

High court admits plea to cancel Babu Bajrangis bail (Aug 17, 2010, Times of India)

Gujarat High Court on Monday admitted the state government’s plea to

cancel bail of Babu Bajrangi, who is the main accused in post-Godhra

riots in Naroda area. Bajrangi was granted bail in two cases of Naroda

Patia and Naroda Gam by Justice Akshay Mehta of the high court in 2002.

The

state government wants Bajrangi to get back to prison in view of new

evidence collected by the Supreme Court-appointed special investigation

team (SIT). The special prosecutor in this case, JM Panchal argued that

the state government was seeking revocation of Bajrangi’s bail because

new evidence had come on record in form of his confession made during a

sting operation.

In the video tapes, Bajrangi was seen boasting

about his heroics during the riots. He also describes how belly of a

pregnant woman was slit open and foetus was brought out and killed on

February 28, 2002. After hearing advocate Panchal, Justice ZK Saiyed

admitted the case and issued notice to Bajrangi asking him to file a

reply by August 27, when further hearing is scheduled.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6322726.cms

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Gujarat riots: SIT indicts ex-minister, two senior cops (Aug 19, 2010, Hindustan Times)

The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered the statement of Gujarat Chief

Minister Narendra Modi, recorded by the special investigating team

(SIT), probing some of the 2002 Gujarat riots cases, should not be made

public, and also granted more time to the SIT to conclude its

investigations into the Ehsaan Jaffrey murder case. But the report is

understood to have indicted former Gujarat home minister Goverdhan

Zaphadia and two senior Gujarat cadre police officers. One of them, M.K.

Tandon, is former additional director general of police, while D. B.

Gondia is former inspector general of the state. The court also

criticised the role of activist Teesta Setalvad in the investigations.

After

going through the SIT’s latest status report, a special bench headed by

Justice D.K. Jain, declined permission to disclose the contents of the

riots report before the Nanavati Commission. It added that the contents

of Modi’s statement to SIT would be divulged only to the trial court and

the public prosecutor of the case. The bench also took exception to

activist Teesta Setalvad contacting a special public prosecutor in

connection with one of the Gujarat riots cases. It passed a stern

direction that no one, except SIT chief R.K. Raghavan, would communicate

with the special prosecutors.

The SIT had criticised Setalvad

for allegedly threatening the prosecutor when she opposed an application

seeking stay of trial in a riots case. Further, the court did not

appreciate Gujarat High Court order directing the SIT to investigate the

alleged fake encounter of teenager Ishran Jahaan. When the bench

objected to the direction, senior advocate and amicus curiae Harish

Salve said an application would be filed before the Gujarat HC to recall

the order.

Interestingly, during the hearing, Gujarat government

opposed the court’s direction to SIT to hand over its latest report to

amicus curiae Prashant Bhushan, assisting the court in the petition

seeking an inquiry into the Ehsan Jafri murder case. However, the court

overruled the objections, but told Bhushan the report should not be

leaked. SIT’s interim report comes after the April 27 Supreme Court

order asking SIT to probe the role of 62 persons including Modi in the

post-Godhra riots cases. Jafri’s wife, Zakia Jafri moved the petition

before court. Jafri was among the 40 persons who died during the riots

at Gulburg society.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/588992.aspx

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Narendra Modi let off in barter for Bill (Aug 19, 2010, The Hindu)

Amidst the commotion and allegations levelled by non-United

Progressive Alliance secular parties that the Central Bureau of

Investigation (CBI) gave a clean chit to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra

Modi in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh-Kausar Bi murder case as a trade-off to

secure the Bharatiya Janata Party’s support for the nuclear liability

Bill, the government tabled the report of the Parliamentary Standing

Committee on the issue in Parliament on Wednesday.

The alleged

Modi let-off issue, championed by the Rashtriya Janata Dal, the

Samajwadi Party, Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the CPI, and the

demand for dismissal of the Karnataka government over the issue of

illegal mining, raised by the Bahujan Samaj Party, together stalled the

entire day’s proceedings in both Houses, which witnessed three

adjournments.

Right from the word go, RJD’s Lalu Prasad and SP

chief Mulayam Singh dominated the scene in the Lok Sabha, entering the

well, dashing to the Speaker’s podium and even staging a sit-in, which

Mr. Prasad did briefly. The Congress and the BJP were charged with

having struck a deal, interpreting the CBI clean chit to Mr. Modi as a

trade-off for its purported support to the nuclear liability Bill.

The

BSP only added to the discomfiture of the BJP by raking up the illegal

mining issue and demanding the dismissal of the Karnataka government.

The BJP benches silently suffered the twin onslaught of slogans, without

trying to deny or counter the allegations, in the Lok Sabha. The BSP

successfully sought to get one back at the BJP for making an issue of

the police firing on farmers in Aligarh and Meerut in Uttar Pradesh, and

attacking the Mayawati government.

Mr. Prasad did not spare the

Congress either alleging that it had let down Muslims by allowing Mr.

Modi to go scot free. The Lok Sabha proceedings were adjourned soon

after beginning on all three occasions, and it was amidst this commotion

that the Standing Committee’s report was tabled by its member Pradeep

Tamta.

http://www.hindu.com/2010/08/19/stories/2010081957181400.htm

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Sohrabuddin case: Shahs judicial custody extended till Sept 3 (Aug 20, 2010, Indian Express)

The judicial custody of former Gujarat minister Amit Shah, arrested

in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case, was extended till

September 3 by a special CBI court said. Chief Additional Judicial

Magistrate A Y Dave also rejected the BJP leader’s application seeking

permission to register his presence in the court through

video-conferencing from the Sabarmati Central Jail, where he is lodged.

In

the application moved through jail authorities yesterday, Shah had

cited security reasons for his request. The court observed that in the

interest of justice, Shah has to remain present in the court and

directed the jail officials to provide him necessary security and asked

them to produce him before it on September 3. Shah was sent to judicial

custody till August 21 after he was interrogated by CBI for two days on

August 7-8. The former minister of state for home was interrogated in

CBI custody for over eight hours each day.

CBI had obtained

Shah’s remand on ground that he was the “kingpin” of the entire

conspiracy leading to the November 2005 encounter of Sohrabuddin,

killing of his wife Kausar Bi and Tulsi Prajapati, his associate and a

key witness. Hearing on Shah’s bail plea is scheduled for August 30 in

the special court.

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/662911/

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Gujarat policeman held for murder of RTI activist (Aug 17, 2010, The Hindu)

Nearly a month after RTI activist Amit Jethwa was shot dead, a police

constable from Gujarat’s Junagadh district has been arrested in

connection with the murder, officials said on Tuesday.Three others have

been detained for questioning in connection with the killing of Jethwa,

who had filed a PIL against illegal mining in Gir forest, on the night

of July 20. “Bahadursinh Dhirubha Wadher (37), posted as a constable in

Girgadhada police station in Junagadh district, was arrested for

allegedly getting Jethwa killed through contract killers,” Joint

Commissioner of Police (Crime) Mohan Jha told mediapersons.

“We

have also tracked the contract killers, who are history-sheeters. They

have been identified as Shailesh Pandya and Pancha Shiva and were

promised Rs 11 lakh for the job. Both are absconding and we have

launched a manhunt to nab them,” he said. Police declined to give

details about the persons detained for questioning. Asked if Junagadh

BJP MP Dinu Solanki had any link with the murder, Mr. Jha said “we

cannot rule out anything at present as the probe is in initial stages.”

A

day after the activist was shot dead by two motorcycle-borne

assailants, his father Bhikabhai Jethwa had alleged that Mr. Solanki was

behind his son’s murder. A few days before his death, Mr. Jethwa had

filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in Gujarat High Court against

illegal mining in Gir forest in Junagadh.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/article576228.ece

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Hemant Karkare was killed by right wing outfit (Aug 18, 2010, DNA India)

A petition filed in the high court has sought a re-investigation of

the death of former ATS chief Hemant Karkare alleging that the attack on

him on the night of 26/11 was orchestrated by Intelligence Bureau (IB)

personnel and members of “right wing terrorist outfit” Abhinav Bharat.

The petition filed by Radhakant Yadav, 77, former MLA from Bihar is

broadly based on the contentious book written by former IPS officer SM

Mushriff.

In his petition, Yadav has stated that a parallel

operation was planned and executed by Abhinav Bharat with the connivance

and aide of communal officers of the IB that coincided with the 26/11

attack. The petition alleges that Karkare was targeted as he was about

to arrest some industrialists, diamond merchants and builders who

allegedly funded the activities of Abhinav Bharat.

“The IB, with

the help of Mumbai police crime branch, stage-managed the encounter at

Girgaum Chowpatty” where one of the terrorists, Abu Ismail, was gunned

down and another, Kasab, was caught alive,” his petition states. The

petitioner has relied on the judgment of the trial court in 26/11

attacks case, wherein it is stated that names of Kasab and his slain

aide Abu Ismail find absolutely no place in the intercepted conversation

between the LeT operatives and their Pakistani handlers. The government

has to file a reply in two weeks.

http://www.dnaindia.com/print710.php?cid=1425023

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Babri demolition: Charges framed against 23 accused (Aug 17, 2010, Times of India)

A special court here today framed charges against 23 accused,

including two legislators and the then Faizabad District Magistrate, in

the Ayodhya demolition case. Special Judge (Ayodhya Prakaran) Virendra

Kumar fixed August 23 for recording evidence in the case which pertained

to the demolition of Babri mosque on December six, 1992.

The

charges were framed against VHP leader Acharya Dharmendra Deo, SP MP

Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, BJP MLA Lalu Singh, then Faizabad District

Magistrate R N Srivastava and others. The framing of charges would pave

the way for start of the trial in the case.

The court also

initiated the process to declare accused Laxminarayan Das Mahatyagi, who

has not been appearing before it for a long time, as a proclaimed

offender. The court framed charges against the 23 accused under various

sections of IPC which included criminal conspiracy. The case was handed

over to the CBI on December 13, 1992 and the agency had filed a

consolidated chargesheet against accused on August 27, 1993.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6326560.cms

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Forum objects to use of its photo in BJP advertisements (Aug 22, 2010, The Hindu)

ANHAD, a voluntary organisation working against communal forces, has

expressed shock over the use of a photograph of its month-old

demonstration against “excessive” use of force by the security forces in

Kashmir, in advertisements issued by the BJP, which observed ‘Save

Kashmir Day’ on Saturday.

Objecting to the use of the photograph

of people associated with the voluntary organisation, ANHAD managing

trustee Shabnam Hashmi termed the act by the BJP “defamatory, unethical

and illegal,” as it gave an impression that ANHAD and those associated

with it were associated with the BJP and its views.

In a letter

to BJP president Nitin Gadkari, she said that it provided “comic relief”

about the “total ideological bankruptcy of the BJP, which used the

ANHAD photograph, carrying slogans like “10,000 Missing in Kashmir,

Who’s responsible?” and “Stop Killing Innocent People in Kashmir,” while

having a diametrical opposite understanding about the issue.

Ms.

Hashmi pointed out that last month’s dharna by ANHAD was to urge the

government to reverse its policies on Kashmir and to show remorse and

apologise for the deaths of innocent people. “This is in total contrast

to the BJP meeting, which is unconcerned about the plight of the people

of Kashmir and looks at the issue as a law and order problem and calls

for even more severe repression by the use of security forces,” she

said.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article586560.ece

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

2 cops suspended for cremating Muslim (Aug 20, 2010, Times of India)

Two police officers have been suspended here after a Muslim banker

found dead near a park was mistakenly identified as a beggar and

cremated according to Hindu rites. The body of Mohd Ishrafil, a

46-year-old State Bank of India official, was recovered near Gandhi

Maidan last week. He was cremated within three hours.

According

to police, Ishrafil’s body was cremated after officials assumed he was a

beggar. “It was a big mistake on the part of the police,” an officer

admitted Friday. Patna Senior Superintendent of Police B.S. Meena said

two guilty police officials have been suspended. Ishrafil’s family had

lodged a complaint with the police Aug 12 that he was missing. This was a

day before his body was found.

Ishrafil’s family wants a

criminal case registered against the guilty officers. Ishrafil’s son

Mohd Sohrab Alam said the police cremated his father at Banshghat near

the Ganges. He pointed out that police usually preserve unidentified

bodies for 72 hours. But in his father’s case, they disposed his body

within hours.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6377110.cms

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Curfew in parts of Bareilly after communal violence (Aug 16, 2010, Yahoo)

Curfew was clamped in parts of Uttar Pradesh’s Bareilly district

Monday after communal violence broke out, police said. According to

Bareilly Deputy Inspector General of Police N.K. Srivastava, a number of

neighbourhoods under Fareedpur police station and Fatehganj (East)

police station were put under indefinite curfew.

No casualties

were reported, even as the situation continues to remain tense. Trouble

was sparked off when some unidentified miscreants set ablaze a

motorcycle belonging to a kanwariya group camping in Fareedpur town on

the outskirts of Bareilly city early Monday.

According to police,

‘once the kanwariyas traced the culprits, it was followed by a clash

and retaliatory arson in which some shops were burnt down in Fareedpur’.

Additional Director General of Police Brij Lal claimed that the

situation was now ‘under control.’

http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20100816/812/tnl-curfew-in-parts-of-bareilly-after-co_1.html

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Opinions and Editorials

Modi controls half the ministries in Gujarat. What does he fear? – By Anumeha Yadav (Aug 28, 2010, Tehelka)

Since Amit Shah was arrested over three weeks back, the question

uppermost in the public mind has been: is Narendra Modi next? For not a

leaf stirs in Gujarat without his consent, and it is difficult to

believe that a minister of state for home would dare to operate without a

nod from the top on major issues. In eight years of rule, the

self-styled hriday samrat of Gujarat has concentrated all power in his

hands. By systematically subverting all major institutions, Modi has

left no scope for dissent. He retains a chokehold over 43 percent of the

Rs.29,500 crore budget by controlling half of the 28 ministry

portfolios. These include Home, Industries, Mines, Minerals, Energy,

Petrochemicals, Ports, Information and Broadcasting, General

Administration, Planning, Administrative Reforms and Training, Narmada,

Kalpsar, Science and Technology, besides bodies that deal with legal

issues.

Anandiben, Modi’s closest ministerial aide, holds three

portfolios that account for 14 percent of the budget. Thus in a cabinet

of 18 ministers, over 50 percent of the budget remains with Modi and his

closest supporter. “No minister except Shah, Anandiben and a couple of

others like Vajubhai Vala and Saurabh Patel have any kind of autonomy,”

says Sunil Oza, a two-time BJP MLA who is now with the Mahagujarat Janta

Party, a regional outfit floated by BJP dissidents. Of course, such

autonomy is limited to minor matters. Besides presiding over a puppet

cabinet, Modi also closely choreographs Assembly proceedings. In January

2007, for instance, the home department headed by Modi sent out emails

to all superintendents of police instructing them to get five blank

forms for starrted questions signed by party MLAs. “Modi wanted to get

the blank forms signed so that they could later be filled with questions

allowing him to glorify his own government. For this, both he and Shah

misused the police,” says Arjun Modhwadia of the Congress.

That’s

when the House is allowed to function. An analysis of Assembly data

shows that between 1960, when Gujarat was carved out of Maharashtra, and

2002, the Assembly met for 48 days every year. Since Modi took the

helm, though, the sessions have averaged just 29 annually. “Modi does

not let the Assembly function beyond the minimum number of days needed

to pass the budget for 28 departments, despite having a majority. This

is because he wants to leave no room for anyone wanting to question his

government,” says senior BJP leader Suresh Mehta. This deliberate

tampering with governance structures is only to make sure that Modi’s

writ in all matters runs unquestioned. “Everywhere else MLAs choose

their leader. But the signal here is, ‘You were all elected because of

me’. By that illogic, all orders to district collectors must be sent in

his name so they know just who the boss is. And being close to the big

industrialists he manages to send enough funds to Delhi, ensuring that

even the BJP’s national leadership do not touch him,” says Gagan Sethi, a

human rights activist.

The servility of the district- level

bureaucrats is proof of the absolute power that Modi has over them. In

2008, the then Collector of Amreli district, DG Jhalwadia, made

headlines by touching Modi’s feet at a state function to seek his

blessings. That same year, Gujarat University Vice-Chancellor Parimal

Trivedi followed his example – once again in full public view. In the

Gandhinagar secretariat, too, officials are kept on an exceedingly tight

leash. Indeed even officials of principal secretary rank use multiple

SIMs, fearing that their official phones may be tapped. From all

accounts, the state bureaucracy’s spine is well and truly broken. “I

have seen my colleagues sit for hours with Modi’s photos, trying to

figure out which pose would please him most. In the cutouts he is shown

taking credit for Infocity and Science City, but both were set up by his

predecessor.”

Similar hype surrounds the MOUs that were signed

during the so-called ‘Vibrant Gujarat’ summits, 90 percent of which

never bear fruit. “It is said that you cannot fool all of the people all

the time, but here this is just what is going on,” says an IAS officer.

Indeed all democratic institutions have come under the Modi hammer and

made malleable. The state has had no Lok Ayukta since 2003. The

government constituted a human rights commission in 2006 following a

Supreme Court order; but it has no members – just a chairman. When the

BJP announced a rally to protest Shah’s arrest, feeble murmurs of

protest were heard at the party office. “First, they want to make off

with the loot, and now they want the police batons to rain down on us,”

was the bitter comment of a party worker.

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main46.asp?filename=Ne280810modicontrols.asp

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Encounter menace – By Venkitesh Ramakrishnan (Aug 14, 2010, Frontline)

Uttar Pradesh, says Varanasi-based human rights activist Lenin

Raghuvanshi, could well be called the encounter killings capital of

India. “Whether it is statistics or the way the law and order machinery

functions or the overall policing climate, all point towards wanton

misuse of power, leading to the torture and killing of hundreds of

innocents,” he said. Raghuvanshi’s observations are corroborated by

statistics compiled by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on

fake encounter killings in different parts of the country over the past

16 years (1993-2009). Uttar Pradesh tops this list with 716 such

incidents. The NHRC list, accessed by human rights activist Afroz Alam

Sahil through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, has the following

statistics for the past four years. Of the 122 fake encounters in the

country in 2006, Uttar Pradesh accounted for 82. In 2007, 95 such

incidents took place across India, of which the State recorded 48, the

highest. In 2008, 103 fake encounters were reported across India, with

Uttar Pradesh accounting for 41. In 2009, the State had 83 such cases.

A

case-study-oriented report prepared by Human Rights Watch (HRW), titled

“Broken System: Dysfunction, Abuse and Impunity in the Indian Police”,

records several instances of how police officers in Uttar Pradesh

resorted to torture and other extrajudicial practices. These include

abduction, rape, custodial violence and killing, fake encounters and

unlawful detention. The HRW report highlights how the corrupt practices

in political and administrative systems promote this high-handed style

of policing. “In this climate, underprivileged innocents are naturally

at the receiving end of injustice and many of them pay with their

lives,” said Raghuvanshi. An encounter killing of an “innocent Army

personnel” in May attracted considerable attention in the State. The

police in the western Uttar Pradesh district of Bulandshahr had killed

Kuldeep Singh branding him a car thief. But the facts given by Kuldeep

Singh’s family revealed that the killed person was from Aligarh and

belonged to 12 Rajputana Rifles in the Army. Kuldeep Singh was

apparently on vacation from his unit.

According to Indra Bhushan

Singh, senior lawyer of the Lucknow and Allahabad High Court, the

families of many victims in Uttar Pradesh do not report fake encounter

killings, fearing police harassment. “I would estimate that the number

of unreported killings is at the least more than double the number of

reported fake encounters,” he said. As a lawyer, said Indra Bhushan

Singh, he had come across several families of victims who dared not

raise the issue of fake encounter killings owing to open threats of

sustained harassment from police officers. He said an analysis of the

so-called encounters the Lucknow police or the Lucknow unit of the

Special Task Force (STF) designated for anti-mafia operations has had

with anti-social, mafia or extremist elements over the past five years

would bring out an amazing fact.

“Time and again, one finds that

the police unit or the STF group gets into an encounter with the

anti-social, mafia or extremist elements at the same spots. Two such

favourite spots are the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) road and

the road behind Hathi Park, at a distance of less than 10 kilometres

from Lucknow city. Both these areas are deserted. A probe of these

favourite encounter spots itself will establish how the police and the

STF go about their encounter business,” he told Frontline. Indra

Bhushan Singh and many other observers of the law and order machinery in

Uttar Pradesh do perceive a “business angle” to encounter killings in

the State. According to them, there are two dimensions to this business.

One relates to the benefits a police officer gets from within the

system in the form of cash rewards and out-of-turn promotions. The other

involves largesse from interested parties, who provide police officials

a tidy sum or other allurements for bumping off a business, political

or family rival. According to Indra Bhushan Singh, three sub-inspectors,

two constables, one constable in the Armed Police and six commando

constables were given out-of-turn promotion in 2009, and all of them had

allegedly been involved in fake encounters.

The second dimension

has much to do with the overall criminalisation of politics in the

State. It is no secret that the majority of police officers who are

touted as “encounter specialists” get protection and patronage from one

major political party or other. The ruling Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) has

its set of favourite police officers and the opposition Samajwadi Party

(S.P.) has its set who were powerful when the party was in government.

Even smaller parties in the State, such as the Congress and the

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), have their own committed officers who are

always willing to carry out tasks assigned to them. The net result of

all this is that watchdog institutions such as the State Human Rights

Commission (SHRC) are largely rendered ineffective. They are not able to

intervene effectively to improve the overall climate of policing.

Organisations such as the Varanasi-based People’s Vigilance Committee on

Human Rights (PVCHR), led by Lenin Raghuvanshi, highlight police

atrocities on a regular basis and seek redress, but this, too, has not

resulted in any improvement in the situation. As Raghuvanshi points out,

the country’s most populous State is badly in need of comprehensive

police reforms but it seems impossible given the political,

administrative and policing set-up.

http://www.frontline.in/fl2717/stories/20100827271702100.htm

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Firebrand Madani is back in jail. But the prime witness says his testimony is forged – By Shahina KK (Aug 28, 2010, Tehelka)

This is unbelievable. I never imagined that the police could

fabricate a case like this,” says Jose Varghese, the prime witness in

the 2008 Bengaluru blasts case. Varghese’s purported testimony was the

basis on which the Karnataka Police nabbed Popular Democratic Party

(PDP) chairman Abdul Nasar Madani amid high drama in Kollam, Kerala, on

17 August. Madani had been staying at a house owned by Varghese’s sister

in Kochi after he was released from prison in 2007. Madani was arrested

in 1998 for his role in the Coimbatore serial blasts.

“On 6

January this year, I got a call from the Bengaluru Police at around

noon,” Varghese recalls. “A man introduced himself as Omkaraiah, the

Deputy Commissioner of Police. He asked me to come to Madani’s house and

bring a copy of the rent agreement. When I reached, Omkaraiah brought a

person inside, whose face was covered. The police told me that he was T

Naseer, one of the key accused in the blasts case. They showed me a

document written in Kannada and asked me to sign it. Initially, I

refused because I don’t know Kannada. Then they explained that they just

wanted me to be a witness to their procedure of adducing evidence. So, I

reluctantly signed it,” Varghese says.

“Four months later, I got

another call from Omkaraiah, who asked me to come to a hotel in Aluva.

There, the police showed me some photographs, but I wasn’t able to

identify anyone. They showed another photograph and forced me to say

that I knew that person. They told me he was a terrorist who had been

shot dead in Kashmir. But I didn’t lie,” says Varghese, who claims the

police were irritated when he refused to cooperate. A few days later,

Varghese was shocked to hear that he had been made the prime witness in

the case. “I came to know about it when a news channel reporter came to

interview me,” he says. “I realised that what I had signed was a

testimony against Madani. Within days, I filed a private complaint in

the court.”

According to the police chargesheet, Varghese had

witnessed Naseer talking to Madani when he went to collect the rent and

overheard the words “blast” and “Bengaluru”. Eight blasts had occurred

in a span of 30 minutes, killing a woman and injuring 15 on 25 July

2008. “I can’t cheat my conscience. I don’t know whether Madani is

involved in the case. I’m compelled to believe that Madani has been

falsely implicated,” claims Varghese. The Bengaluru Police cited

Varghese’s plea before the court as an example of Madani’s ability to

turn witnesses hostile and asked the Karnataka High Court to reject

Madani’s bail plea.

Meanwhile, doubts have surfaced about another

testimony. According to sources, PDP worker MM Mazeed had testified to

the Karnataka Police in Kannur on 12 January about the relationship

between Naseer and Madani. However, PDP leaders claim that Mazeed was an

acute cancer patient and was undergoing treatment 317 km away in an

Ernakulam hospital where he died on 16 January. Madani was arrested from

Anwarssery with the Karnataka Police executing the warrant with the

help of a reluctant Kerala Police. The Kerala government tried its best

to distance itself from the high profile case and the friction has

developed into a tug-of-war with Karnataka.

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main46.asp?filename=Ne280810firebrand.asp

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Delusions of Grandeur – Editorial (Aug 14, 2010, Economic & Political Weekl)

India bid for and set about preparing for the 2010 Commonwealth Games

in New Delhi to showcase its so-called emergence as a global power.

What we have had on the way is large-scale eviction of the poor from

sites on the Yamuna that were chosen for the Games, a trampling on the

rights of tens of thousands of workers engaged in construction of the

facilities, a destruction of the surrounding environment, a judiciary

insensitive to the rights of labour and the environment and now

revelations of large-scale corruption. This journal has argued before

that mistaken notions of “national prestige” have driven the desire to

host the Games (“Commonwealth Games: Wrong Priorities”, 5 December

2009). Civil rights groups have exposed, in considerable detail, the

extent to which basic rights of workers are neglected, often with fatal

consequences, in this rush to build by way of glass and concrete

(“Violation of Workers’ Rights at the Commonwealth Games Construction

Site”, 13 June 2009). Now a different, yet familiar, face of official

India has again been revealed – rapacious and incompetent in equal

measure. In recent weeks, these two issues have grabbed headlines.

Reports of widespread corruption by top functionaries of the

Commonwealth Games Organising Committee are now too many and too

comprehensive for even the government to ignore.

Much of the

scandalous expenses on various utilities and paraphernalia have been

justified by the Organising Committee as required to meet “international

standards”. However, the pervasive corruption and incompetence has

resulted in incomplete facilities, leaking roofs, clogged drains and a

city in a shambles. With the Games scheduled for early October, much of

these shortcomings are beyond fixing. The diversion of over Rs 700 crore

from Delhi’s scheduled caste sub-plan of 2007 to the Games is shocking.

This has come to light only because of a right to information petition

filed by the National Campaign for Dalit Rights. In response the Delhi

government has deliberately obfuscated the matter and come up with an

incredulous defence – apparently the expenditure on games infrastructure

would benefit all communities, including dalits. Hence the diversion!

The entire saga of the Commonwealth Games in Delhi – from the bidding

process to the utilisation of public funds for infrastructure and

organisation – is full of malfeasance, graft and misplaced priorities.

This is clear from the lavish money spent for gratification of the

sports officials during bidding, to the displacement of slum dwellers in

the name of beautification, to subsidisation of private realty firms to

hasten construction and to the current irregularities in overlays.

As

in all such international sports extravaganzas, the costs of these

games have ballooned. The original cost estimate made in 2003, when

Delhi bid for the Games under the National Democratic Alliance

government, was for a total of Rs 1,900 crore. The overall costs have

escalated to an estimated Rs 11,000 crore and the Government of Delhi is

spending an additional Rs 17,000 crore on Games-related and city

improvement facilities. Other calculations of the actual costs of these

games, inclusive of hidden subsidies, are more than double this amount.

Not only have costs ballooned, there has been no transparency in the

budgeting, expenditure and accounting of these large monies. The

exercise thus far seems only to have been successful in generating

cutbacks for the bureaucrats, politicians and wheeler-dealers involved

as well as succulent contracts for select realty, construction and

hospitality companies. The makeover of roads and infrastructure, meant

to please the upper and middle classes, has not been based on any

democratic plan for the city. Were the citizens of India’s capital asked

whether they would rather spend all this money for addressing public

necessities – low cost housing, public hospitals, shelters for the

homeless, and water supply – or for the Games?

India’s elite

already appears embarrassed by the comparison between Delhi 2010 and

Beijing 2008. In the great race it has contrived to run with China, it

reflects poorly on the emerging power of south Asia that compared to the

dazzle of the Beijing Olympics, India will necessarily put up a poor

show with the Commonwealth Games. Countries and cities have often used

sporting spectacles to announce their economic and political resurgence -

Tokyo 1964 was Japan’s way of announcing its re-emergence from the

defeat of 1945, Seoul 1988 was that of South Korea and 2008 Beijing was

China’s grating announcement of its arrival in the global economy. More

recently, the 2010 FIFA World Cup was used by South Africa to announce

its transition to a post-apartheid society. But what moral achievement

is there for a country or city which mounts a global sports spectacle at

enormous political, social, and environmental cost?

We only need

to remember how Hitler used the 1936 Olympics to showcase Nazism to

realise that there can be little pride and much shame in staging the

“perfect” international sports event. Sports extravaganzas held without

addressing the basic issues of the host society and state often further

highlight the host’s shortcomings on the global stage, as the Indian

state and its garrulous elite are coming to realise. Would the

experience with corruption, incompetence, maladministration, social and

environmental costs make the ruling classes rethink their grandiose

plans of hosting more such sporting events? The intoxicating appeal to

be counted as a “great power” belies any expectations of such a rethink,

whereas an investment of such large financial resources into building

sports infrastructure for the masses and providing encouragement to

athletes may actually help India emerge as a sports power.

http://epw.in/epw/uploads/articles/15054.pdf

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

The Lambs Share – By Abusaleh Shariff (Aug 23, 2010, Outlook)

It is essential to begin this essay by emphasising that minorities,

including the Muslims, maintain aspirations and seek opportunities for

development like any other community in India. Yet an empirical review

suggests that Muslims are lagging practically in all spheres of

development, including education, employment, income, assets and so on.

There have been efforts by both the Centre and state governments to

overcome deprivation amongst the Muslims across India, but a quick

review of outcomes suggest little improvement. There is a need for

durable changes, a recognition that deprivation amongst the

minorities/Muslims exists due to systemic causes which can be set right

only through broad-based public policy initiatives, not just through

special purpose vehicles such as the minority/Muslim-oriented

programmes; in fact, it would be best to assist them to strive to access

their share within the mainstream line of ministries, departments and

programmes.

India, through the 73rd and 74th constitutional

amendment, has made a strong sociopolitical statement of its arrival as a

mature democracy, championing multi-layered decentralised governance,

sharing substantial powers and a national pool of resources with the

states. Further, the enduring canons of governance and economic

development are grounded in the principles of socialism, inclusiveness

and secularism and fully conscious of regional imbalance. Like the other

main communities of India, the Muslims should have been able to pursue

social, economic and educational aspirations within the framework and

support of state-provided infrastructure, opportunities and political

awakenings. One expects that the ‘diversity’ natural to our population

would be reflected in public spheres such as in educational

institutions, public and organised sector employment, political systems

and governance structures at all levels. Yet, in spite of the fact that

practically all social, educational and economic spheres of living are

governed and regulated by the states, one finds substantial differences

(often unacceptable levels) between varied social groups and across

states. Such differentials are prominent in spite of special

constitutional provisions bestowed upon the minorities since

Independence.

Over 150 million citizens, just about 14 per cent of

all Indians, profess Islam as their religion and reside in all parts of

India. Muslims are the largest (80 per cent) of all the identified

minorities. They reside in substantial numbers and proportions in states

such as Assam, West Bengal, Kerala, UP and Bihar, Gujarat, Maharashtra

and so on. There are examples and best practices found within India.

Consider the states of Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu,

all have devised policies favouring Muslims at two levels. Muslims here

have relatively better access to quality mass education (both

elementary and higher level) and employment; and given the history of

relative deprivation of the Muslims, the states have extended the

benefit of reservations in a certain measure of fractional-proportions

linked to their size and share in the population. Such quotas are

enabling Muslim girls and boys to catch up with their peers amongst the

Hindus and Christians, both in education and employment. Similar

provisions enable Muslims to participate even in the political spaces.

AP has made a beginning by promoting a system of ‘co-option’ or

‘nomination’ system to the mandals, zila parishads and

municipalities/nagar panchayats (AP Panchayat Act, 2006).

Maintaining

diversity in public spheres is essential. When this does not happen

naturally, it has to be made to happen through government intervention.

Legislation can be one way (the mechanism is to remind the government

and the institutions that ensuring diversity is their responsibility).

Diversity can also be assured by offering incentives/credits to

government departments, institutions, universities and so on. Another

means is to provide institutional access to citizen representatives

(including those from the minorities) to ensure ‘equity’ in the public

sphere. An ‘Equal Opportunities Commission’ will go a long way in both

ensuring diversity as a key state objective, and also as an institution

to enforce redressal. The Centre has made some efforts during the past

3-4 years to address various aspects of Muslim deprivation. Under the

revised 15-point programme, a special investment programme is on in

about 100 minority concentration districts (MCDs); exclusive

scholarships have been announced for the first time to cover minorities,

both in elementary and at higher levels of education. The RBI is

consistently sending memos to public sector banks to increase funding to

applicants from the minorities and so on. However, a review of all the

above suggest that the MCD programme has not even made a presence in

many states like West Bengal, Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand and Gujarat. The

overall utilisation is less than 20 per cent of the total funds

earmarked for the programme since inception. Similarly, the scholarship

programme, although very popular, is able to cover only a fraction of

total applicants. And it appears that the public sector banks have not

even taken note of the repeated requests by the RBI, a matter of utmost

concern.

The larger malice of exclusion has to be fought unitedly

by all ‘regular-line departments’ and ministries at the national and

state levels. It also needs collaboration and partnership with civil

society and private institutional structures. Will a separate ministry

ensure the implementation of the over 300 programmes that aim to

alleviate poverty and improve human development, promote inclusiveness

of the excluded, whether they be SCs, STs or Muslims? In the absence of

any timeline, programme-specific implementative strategy and clarity on

monitoring mechanisms, no results will be forthcoming. It is important

to mention here that a flat policy of earmarking 15 per cent of

budgetary allocations to favour the minorities is not implementable.

Rather, the service delivery procedures must use population shares at

the “programme-specified operational levels” such as the district,

taluka and block levels so as to ensure maximum coverage and provide a

sense of equity. The early euphoria and expectations are dying out.

UPA-1 took many initiatives to diagnose the problem; now UPA-2 must

ensure that inclusive policies are actually implemented before the

people at large become disappointed. I only hope that government

procrastination on issues related to Muslims does not lead to

frustration.

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?266661

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Book Review

RSS, School Texts and the Murder of Mahatma Gandhi: The Hindu Communal Project

Author: Aditya Mukherjee, Mridula Mukherjee and Sucheta Mahajan

Reviewed by: Namrata R Ganneri

Available at: Sage Publications, B-1/I-1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate Mathura Road, Post Bag 7, New Delhi 110 044. www.sagepub.in/

Review:

Saffron Schooling and the Gandhi Murder (Aug 14, 2010, Economic & Political Weekly)

The

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s (RSS) pedagogical programme of creating

soldiers in the cause of Hindutva is well known. Beginning its work with

shakhas for children and young men, the RSS founded several affiliates

to reach different constituencies – students, workers, peasants,

tribals, religious bodies and women. Veritably, one of its first few

interventions in the field of education were primary schools – Saraswati

Shishu Mandirs (1952). The institutional presence in the field of

education was formalised through the Vidya Bharati (1977), which

coordinated its burgeoning schools set up all over India. These schools,

though affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE),

“corrected” the “secular bias” of the curriculum through various

pedagogical practices-extracurricular practices, classes on moral

education and supplementary textbooks. While this had elicited academic

comment at regular intervals, the controversy over “saffron schooling”

took on a new turn after the ascendance to political power of the

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the foremost Hindutva party and the

political affiliate of the RSS in the late 1990s. The RSS had in the

late 1990s packed its own people in the human resource development

ministry and all educational bodies including the University Grants

Commission (UGC) and the National Council of Education, Research and

Training (NCERT) and a new curricular framework was introduced in

schools (2000) so as to unleash its educational agenda on the country.

These attempts to monopolise education did not go unchallenged and the

slim monograph under review chronicles this struggle. The book, as the

publisher’s blurb declares, juxtaposes “three apparently quite different

issues” to delineate the threat posed by the Hindu communal project.

The authors align the key ideas of Hindutva ideologues and demonstrate

that the RSS project set to be revivified by the latter’s control on the

state educational apparatus remains: distortion of historical facts to

service its political agenda, peddling of untruths and creation of

“threatening others” (Muslims, Christians, communists, secularists at

different moments) and advocating violence against them as patriotic

duties to keep the cycle of hatred and violence alive – indeed, the same

ideas that led to the murder of Mahatma Gandhi years ago. The authors

further demonstrate that the RSS has an ideological problem with the

cultural underpinnings of the nation state that emerged from the

anti-colonial struggle. To use Sunil Khilnani’s evocative title, its

“idea of India” is different and this explains its profound interest in

education, particularly curriculum, to reorient the political arena.

Understandably

teaching of history is critical to the whole enterprise, since the past

is pressed into service at various intervals as reason and

justification for present actions which include avenging past

injustices. Naturally, demolition of accepted historical knowledge and

construction of new truths is essential to Hindutva advocates.

Consequently, the most virulent debates around the “textbook

controversy” were centred on textbooks of history and unfolded in two

stages. In the first stage, passages purportedly denigrating religious

sentiments (about Sikh history) or inconsistent with current religious

practices (defeating Aryans) or plain unsavoury truths (caste and gender

injustices) in existing textbooks were deleted, while their authors

were kept in the dark about the doctoring. In the second stage, new

textbooks were introduced, written by authors with pronounced right wing

sympathies, and, predictably, packed with pet Hindutva themes: India

was the original home of the Aryans, and the Vedic civilisation

repository of all that is the best in world and caste practices or

women’s oppression, “rigidities”, never an original part of “Hindu

civilisation”. Further, the medieval period synonymous with the Muslim

period was the dark age when destruction of temples, forced conversions

and abduction of women prevailed. In this monochromatic Hindutva

history, all evidence of syncretism is excised from historical memory.

In accounts of the anti-colonial nationalist movement, roles of leaders

may be magnified, or, in cases like that of the RSS chief Hedgewar

forcefully inscribed, or erased, all depending on their ideological

predilections.

All these themes constitute sacred tenets of

Hindutva history which was being salvaged from the fringes of the

academy through state support. The authors have catalogued several such

“saffron facts” in their publication as members of the Delhi Historians

collective. They reproduce extensive quotations in this book and refrain

from a detailed “content analysis” here. Another serious critique

mounted by intellectuals of all hues was that these new textbooks were

on all counts dismal, academically and pedagogically. Scarcely

revisionist, the new textbooks replicated material from propaganda

tracts of the RSS. The authors point out that the catechism format

predominates in the new textbooks, arguably, the preferred pedagogical

technique in the shakha as well. Evidently, there was no intention to

develop critical faculties of students or enable them an understanding

about production of historical scholarship. The salience of this project

then emerges from the necessity to manufacture what Tanika Sarkar

(2003) describes elsewhere as “usable past” – narrating repeated tales

of ancient Hindu glories, Muslim atrocities and Hindu suffering to

foster hatred, a project that reached its apogee in Gujarat, the

“laboratory of Hindu Rashtra”. The authors corroborate their point with

this citation from a standard 10th textbook where students are taught

about the internal achievements of Nazism: Hitler lent dignity and

prestige to the German government within a short time by establishing a

strong administrative set-up. He created the vast state of Greater

Germany. He adopted the policy of opposition towards the Jewish people

and advocated the supremacy of the German race. He adopted a new

economic policy and brought prosperity to Germany. He began efforts for

the eradication of unemployment. He started constructing Public

buildings, providing irrigation facilities, building Railways, roads and

production of war materials. He made untiring efforts to make Germany

self-reliant within one decade. Hitler discarded the Treaty of

Versailles by calling it just a “piece of paper” and stopped paying the

war penalty. He instilled the spirit of adventure in the common people

(emphasis in the text) p 30. After years and years of schooling about

the virtues of Nazi Germany, it appears that the young and the old in

Gujarat had no qualms in executing unprecedented planned political

violence against Muslims – a pogrom in every sense of the term. When

violence was associated with machismo, and the most horrifying of sexual

violence against women condoned, it is certain this state, no longer

the land of Gandhi, does not even wish to be reminded of his militant

non-violence.

The revised textbooks introduced by the saffron

regime not only omitted mention of the assassination of Gandhi, but

obliterated any reference to the politics that culminated in his

assassination. The authors rightly point out that Gandhi’s assassination

was not an isolated act, but a conspiracy fanned by the virulence that

was spread around his persona and politics in the days preceding the

Partition. Drawing from the substantial investigative reports on

Gandhi’s assassination, they establish the link between Gandhi’s

murderers and the present-day RSS. In the light of current scholarship,

when ideological and institutional links between the RSS and the Hindu

Mahasabha have been conclusively established, the authors certainly seem

to be belabouring this point. Hindutva ideologues had, indeed,

developed a trenchant critique of Gandhian politics, Congress version of

secularism and the supposed “appeasement” of Muslims. Savarkar had

publicly disclaimed the role of “Hindu Muslim unity”, vital in the

Gandhian scheme of things, as a precondition for success in

anti-colonial nationalist struggle. Particularly virulent was their

denunciation of non-violence – in newspapers, speeches and writings. In

fact, the identification between killing and masculinity is a uniquely

Hindutva teaching. Hindutva ideologues advocated military training and

after all, the RSS is a standing militia. Violence for the RSS is both a

source and proof of maleness. And finally, instead of engaging in a

dialogue, the proponents of Hindutva prefer the annihilation of

opponents – be it Gandhi or modern-day historians opposed to their

version of history. The Gandhian political style in negating the easy

equation between masculinity and martiality and valuing the “feminine

virtue” of suffering posed the greatest threat to the hierarchy

conscious hyper masculine selves being forged in the service of

Hindutva. By all means, Gandhi’s emphasis on political ethics was

certainly redundant even for his own followers in pursuit of

realpolitik. To quote Gandhi’s assassin, Nathuram Godse, Indian politics

in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be practical, able to

retaliate, and would be powerful with armed forces (1977: 154). The

authors intriguingly have not used Godse’s own testimony in their book.

In fact, in the third part of the book, the authors reproduce tired

quotations from Savarkar’s and Golwalkar’s widely circulated and much

quoted English language texts. This, despite the recently released

English translations of Golwalkar’s works and widely available literary

texts by Savarkar. Thus, the delineation of the Hindu communal project,

in the absence of new insights on Hindutva ideology, is the weakest part

of the book.

The authors do not tie the three “unusual” themes

together in a conclusion which makes one meander to the first and most

invigorating chapter of the book – school textbooks. Textbooks in any

case are just a part of the pedagogical practice and learning takes

place in a certain context. Latika Gupta’s interesting work shows that

young children learn to replicate communal prejudices fairly early. The

storm over history textbooks makes one wonder as to why similar debates

on content were not generated in the case of other textbooks, of

science, for example. There were few interventions on nature of

pedagogical practices or teacher education and training. And most

importantly, the voices of both parents and students were largely

missing. This probably was a reflection of the overall culture where

critical thinking drawing from the humanities is no longer a part of the

middle class agenda, obsessed with marks and degrees, which are enough

to catapult them abroad. Cocooned in the first world, the

“professionally qualified Indian” wants settled facts upholding the

greatness of her tradition and culture rather than uncomfortable

contentious debates about the past. Hence, while his-tory as a favoured

subject in undergraduate courses and universities in India is gasping

for breath, the cyberspace is flush with glimpses of militant Hindu

history masquerading as Indian history. The authors, all professional

historians by training, represent the debate as that strictly polarised

between saffron and secular, myth and history, popular and academic

despite the presence of thin porous membranes between these clusters.

They remain remarkably silent on the politics of production of

historical knowledge. Although it is well known that the academic

discipline of history is just one of the modes of accessing the past.

The chief merit of this book is that it offers snapshots of the three

issues in question and through the wealth of detail offered, encourages

the general educated reader to reflect on myriad challenges facing the

country, that of history writing, curricular development, recurring

violence, the trajectory of aggressive Hindutva and perhaps contending

versions of Indian nationhood.

http://epw.in/epw/uploads/articles/15066.pdf

Related posts:

  1. IMC-USA Weekly News Digest – August 2nd, 2010
  2. IMC-USA Weekly News Digest – August 9th, 2010
  3. IMC-USA Weekly News Digest – August 16th, 2010
  4. IMC-USA Weekly News Digest – August 30th, 2010
  5. IMC-USA Weekly News Digest – February 23rd, 2009

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: