Posts tagged as:

Hindutva Terrorism

IAMC Weekly News Roundup – February 20th, 2012

by newsdigest on February 19, 2012

In this issue of IAMC News Roundup

Communal Harmony

News Headlines

Opinions & Editorials

Communal Harmony

Around empty Gulberg, Muslims, Hindus find a way to co-exist (Feb 16, 2012, Indian Express)

The name is embedded in collective memory as a symbol of the Gujarat riots and, to many, of the administrative complicity behind it. In Gulberg Society, the past is never far even as those looking at the future have learnt to make peace with it. The empty shells of its 29 bungalows and 10 apartments now serve as godowns for neighbouring Muslim bakers, who supply their wares to Hindu shopkeepers next door. The smell of these bakeries and shahi dawats once filled the society, a Muslim-dominated area that came up in 1965 in the predominantly Hindu Chamanpura. Targeted during the riots, they had all left. The owners of all eight bakeries are now back with their shops, though they stay 7km away in Muslim-dominated Rakhial.

Shamsul Haq Ansari’s Robin Bakery, adjoining Gulberg Society, was looted and torched. He suffered losses of lakhs and claims not to have received any compensation. He chose to return and rebuild from his savings, and said not only has his business taken off again but that he is doing better than before. Ansari’s customers are all Hindus, including local provision stores, as there is no Muslim habitation around. For him or other bakers in the area, that hasn’t been a problem so far. Mubarak Ansari, owner of Mubarak Bakery, said there was some tension immediately after the riots. “But with time, things have improved. My entire business depends on local Hindus and they support me wholeheartedly.”

However, none of them lives in the area. Haseemuddin, working with Ashiana Bakery, said the owners as well as the workers live in Rakhial – which has been the case since they migrated from Bijnore. He cited “cultural and social reasons” for this. As such, they did not lose any near ones during the Chamanpura riots. Those who did have chosen not to continue in Gulberg Society, except Kasam Mansuri, 62, who lost 12 members. After his sons relocated, Mansuri stayed back and makes a living selling mattresses outside the society. “This is my society, where will I go?” he said. Looking at the garbage dumped outside Gulberg Society, the Hindus, on the other hand, feel it is time to break free from the past, if only to bring Gujarat’s famed development to the area. Said Bhavanlal Jain, a moneylender whose customers are mostly Muslims: “The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation has been neglecting the locality since they do not want legal complications of property, etc.” The Citizens for Justice and Peace has come up with the idea of turning the society into a “holocaust museum”. To people like Saed Khan, who moved to the Muslim-dominated Juhapura, that is better than selling the houses to strangers. “It would be like selling the graves of your beloved.”

While Mansuri gets angry at times that the survivors of Gulberg moved away and set up a new life, Khan said: “Gas cylinders were busted in homes; when these caught fire, they threw acid bulbs on people hiding. Women were pulled out and raped in public. No one wants to go back there.” The bakers are the only remnants of a life that was. The mosque that was destroyed now holds five prayers a day for them. On Fridays, it also draws a number of Muslims working in nearby areas. As days such as these become routine, Afroz Ansari, a salesman working with J-K Bakery, is hopeful. “The riots,” he said, “were an aberration.”

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/912815/

[Back to Top]

British Muslims in state to study communal harmony (Feb 14, 2012, Times of India)

The Islamophobia, which has gripped the western countries, stemmed from the lack of knowledge on Islam, observed a four-member delegation of prominent British Muslims, here on Monday. Interacting with the students of Farook College, Yusuf Ebrahim Akudi, a member of the delegation, which kick-started the five-day visit on Monday, said, “Islam was not able to reach out to the public to explain the faith.”

The team visited Kozhikode as part of their India tour to study the communal harmony existing between different communities in the state. Appreciating the harmony, the team said they would try to replicate the Kerala-model in the Britain once they reach there. In Kozhikode the team visited Farook College and University of Calicut on Monday. The delegation will meet key representatives from social, educational, and political fields in a bid to understand key concerns of Muslims in India and to give them a realistic picture of Islam in Britain.

It will enable ‘cross-fertilization of ideas’ between British and Indian Muslims and activists working on interfaith, integration and community issues, according to the delegation. In New Delhi the team will meet Muslim community leaders, workers and representatives of Darul Uloom, Deoband and interact with students and youth at an interactive session in the Jamia Millia Islamia.

“I am honoured to visit a country as dynamic as India. I am here to gain a more nuanced perspective of the lives and aspirations of Muslims in India. I hope that the visit will facilitate mutual understanding of Indo-British cultures and enable us to appreciate one another in a positive light,” said, Dr Abdul B Shaikh, a team member and lecturer in comparative religion.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-02-14/kozhikode/31058521_1_communal-harmony-british-muslims-indian-muslims

[Back to Top]

’02 riots: Ex-judge puts Modi in dock (Feb 18, 2012, Indian Express)

In fresh problems for Narendra Modi, a member of peoples’ tribunal that visited Gujarat after the 2002 riots said former Home Minister Haren Pandya had told them that the Chief Minister allegedly directed the police to give Hindus a free hand to vent their anger during the riots. Justice H Suresh, a retired Bombay High Court judge, also alleged today that the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) appears to have ignored the statements recorded by it of him and another tribunal member Justice P B Sawant, a former Supreme Court judge.

Both the judges were members of the fact-finding team headed by veteran jurist and former Supreme Court judge Justice V R Krishna Iyer, which had gone to Gujarat in March-April 2002 after the Godhra riots. Suresh said the evidence of the tribunal given to SIT on alleged instructions given to police by Modi to teach Muslims a lesson hours after the Godhra train attack was based on what was told to them by Pandya on May 13, 2002. Pandya was murdered on March 26, 2003.

Suresh said the Tribunal had an audio recording of Pandya’s statement to it in which he said Modi had called a meeting on the night of February 27 hours after the Godhra train attack where he allegedly told the police to look the other way during the riots. “In that (the recording) he (Pandya) has stated that there was a meeting at Chief Minister’s place, where he directed the police what to do and what not to do. He told the police actually that they should give free hand to the Hindus, who would act in their own way,” Justice Suresh told a news channel.

He said Pandya’s statement was relevant and “cannot be ignored” in a court of law. “I was there, Justice Sawant was there and he (Pandya) said this in our presence,” the former judge said, adding “the SIT recorded out statements”. He also said that the tribunal had given the SIT the audio recording of Pandya.

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/913640/

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

HC notice to Modi govt over plea for relief by riots victims (Feb 16, 2012, Indian Express)

The Gujarat High Court today issued a notice to the state government over a contempt of court petition moved against it by 56 people from Rakhial area of Ahmedabad, who claim to have suffered huge commercial losses during the 2002 riots. The petitioners approached the court after the state government allegedly did not take a decision on their claims for compensation in spite of an order by the high court in May last year.

A division bench comprising Justices Akil Kureshi and C L Soni issued a notice to the Narendra Modi government and posted the petition for further hearing on March 14. According to Utpala Bohra, the advocate for all the petitioners, their shops situated on the Rakhial road had been looted and destroyed by rioters. They had made applications to various authorities of the state government to get compensation but having got no response, they finally moved court.

A division bench of the high court held in May last year that the petitioners were liable to get relief. The court had also ordered the state government to expeditiously dispose of their claims. “Despite the order of the high court, the state government has not acted on the victims’ claims, following which the contempt petition was moved,” Bohra said.

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/912814/

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Saffron brigade halts Muslim realty deals in Gujarat (Feb 16, 2012, Times of India)

Six months ago, a doctor was all set to make a killing by selling his posh bungalow ‘Chaitanya’ near Crescent Circle to a Muslim family. As soon as the news spread, a group representing the saffron brigade reached his house and tried persuading him to call off the deal. When the doctor did not agree, the group held a sit-in outside his house and started chanting Ram Dhun. The agitators refused to budge till he assured them that he would scrap the deal. Finally, the bungalow was sold to a Hindu.

Saffron brigade is using Ram dhuns and Ram Darbars to thwart all deals in town where Muslims are buying properties in Hindu-dominated areas. The brigade’s modus operandi is simple: on getting information about a Hindu planning to sell his property to a Muslim, they squat in front of his house and chant or conduct Ram Darbars. They don’t move from the place till the seller caves in. The group has managed to get 10 such property deals cancelled over the past six years.

A six-year-old group ‘Setubandh Mitra Mandal’ – consisting of VHP, Bajrang Dal, RSS and Shiv Sena members – is wary of Muslims buying properties in Hindudominated areas. The group members said that earlier, Jogivad ni Tanki and Sandhiyavad were traditional Muslim ghettos but now the community is buying properties, both residential and commercial, in posh Hindu-dominated area like Shishu Vihar, Ghoga Circle, Crescent Circle, Vadva and Kalanala.

Bhavnagar was the only place in Saurashtra which saw communal riots in 2002. “Over the past five years, Hindus have started migrating from the localities where they have been living for generations after selling the property to Muslims,” said Kirit Mistry, a VHP leader. “We have written about it to the state government to demand the implementation of the Disturbed Areas Act in order to stop this activity.” However, Arif Kalva, a community leader, said, “Muslims in the city have progressed and become prosperous. They too aspire to live in areas where they can become part of mainstream society.”

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/11907061.cms

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Ishrat encounter: Old Crime Branch hand under CBI lens (Feb 15, 2012, Indian Express)

In a new twist in the 2004 Ishrat Jahan encounter case, a constable who was recently shifted out of the Ahmedabad Crime Branch after serving there for over 20 years is now under the CBI scanner for allegedly having kept the Mumbai girl at his house in Gaekwad Haveli days before she was killed on June 15, 2004. CBI sources said summons are about to be issued to the senior police constable who was shunted out of the Ahmedabad Crime Branch after the central probe agency registered an FIR in the encounter case in December last year.

CBI sources said recent leads in the case indicated that the constable had rented out the first floor of his house to another policeman from the crime branch who is a suspect in the Ishrat encounter case. According to leads with the CBI, soon after Ishrat was brought to Ahmedabad, the police constable had assured encounter specialist D G Vanzara (the then DCP of Ahmedabad Crime Branch who is now in jail) that Ishrat would be kept at his house until they got a place to shelter her.

CBI sleuths believe the constable could be involved in the abduction of Ishrat and her friend Javed from Vasad in Anand district two days before their encounter on June 15, 2004. The constable in question was recently shifted to city police headquarters. He is said to be a trusted hand in the Crime Branch since the time it was led by Vanzara, N K Amin and Abhay Chudasama – all police officers accused in encounter cases.

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/912359/

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

’4 men planted 4 bombs on Samjhauta Express’ (Feb 18, 2012, Indian Express)

Startling revelations by Kamal Chouhan are helping investigators understand how the Samjhauta Express bombs were brought to the capital, who all took it to the railway station and the sequence of events leading to the tragedy that killed 68 passengers, most of them Pak nationals. Tomorrow marks the fifth year since that attack. Chouhan, arrested last Sunday and produced in court earlier this week, has reportedly said that he has no “regrets” over the Samjhauta bombing. He is said to have told interrogators that there were four “planters” who came in two separate groups to Old Delhi Railway station with four suitcases, each one carrying a bomb. Chouhan has said that he was among 11 people who were given arms training at Bagli in early 2006 and also part of the “firing lessons” – organised by Sunil Joshi (now dead) – given to eight people in Faridabad in April 2006.

Chouhan has said that in the group that received the initial arms training, there were Joshi, Ramji (Ramachandra Kalsangra, who is on the run), Sandeep Dange (absconding) and Lokesh Sharma (in jail). Chouhan said that on February 15, 2007, three days before the bombing, he received a phone call from Sharma in Indore who told him that “the time for work has come”, and asked him to come to the Indore railway station to “accompany him on a journey”. Chouhan claims he didn’t ask for details but knew that “they were going to plant a bomb somewhere”. At the railway station, Chouhan told investigators, he met Lokesh who had two suitcases. “I pulled one and found it is heavier, heavier than a suitcase with clothes. He (Lokesh) had arranged the train reservation already. We had confirmed tickets,” he said. Investigators are not sure what names were used.

Chouhan and Lokesh boarded Intercity Express to Hazrat Nizamuddin. Chouhan said Lokesh used a chain to lock the suitcases. He said they avoided all talk of their “mission” because there were people around. Both reached Nizamuddin the next morning from where they went to the Old Delhi Railway Station where they checked into a dormitory. They kept the suitcases in the room and went for a stroll, had lunch near Red Fort and it was then that they discussed the bombing plan, Chouhan told investigators. That evening, Chouhan told investigators, they waited for Samjhauta Express to pull in. “Lokesh took the briefcase that he was carrying and boarded the train and left it there. He had asked me to wait. Then he came back and took the briefcase that I was carrying and went to another compartment,” Chouhan told investigators. “After this, we left the station immediately.”

On their way out, Chouhan reportedly said, they saw two of their associates on the platform. “They were at a little distance. I recognised them but we didn’t talk, they also had come with two bombs.” Investigators have already identified the other two planters, one of them is from Nashik. Their names aren’t being revealed. Interestingly, Lokesh Sharma, booked for his role in Samjhauta bombing in the chargesheet filed by NIA against Naba Kumar Sarkar alias Swami Asimanand, Sunil Joshi, Ramchandra Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange on June 20, 2011, is already in jail. He is likely to be questioned again. After Chouhan’s revelations, investigators are once again examining CCTV camera footage from the Old Delhi railway station.

Regarding the source of the bombs, Chouhan has told investigators that these were given to Lokesh by Ramji. Four IEDs were planted in unreserved compartments of the Samjhauta Express, of which the IEDs in the 12th and 13th compartments exploded. The explosion was followed by fire in the compartments. One unexploded IED in a suitcase was recovered from the 15th compartment, which exploded in the process of being defused. One unexploded IED in a suitcase was recovered from the spot down the railway line (near the 15th compartment).

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/913657/

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Killers of Hemant Karkare, were behind Shahid Azmi’s murder, claims London acadimician (Feb 14, 2012, Ttwocircles.net)

The first Shahid Azmi Memorial Lecture, organized by friends, ‘comrades’ and students of late Shahid Azmi was held at Mumbai Marathi Patrakar Sangh on 11th Febrauary 2012. The chief guest of the lecture and main speaker was Advocate Mukul Sinha. About 100-150 people from across Mumbai attended the lecture. The lecture was chaired by Professor Jairus Banaji (SOAS, University of London). Prof. Banaji, in his introductory remarks, termed the killing of Advocate Azmi as a ‘political assassination’. He claimed that the same people who killed Hemant Karkare were also behind the murder of Azmi. He wondered why in major cases of political assassinations, the forensic evidence has never been preserved by the Indian state because it does not want forensic and legal outcomes. Banaji added that the state apparatus was a seamless web of intrigue and deception. The most staggering fact of Indian democracy is that any crime can be committed with no accountability. The Indian state is enmeshed with the political forces of the right.

On the other hand, the extreme right pursues the ‘strategy of tension’ resembling Italy of the 1970s. The terror networks of the right organized themselves during the NDA regime. Hemant Karkare had started dismantling this network when he was killed. During the investigations of Malegaon blast, Praveen Togadia’s name had cropped up but he disappeared later without a trace. Banaji concluded by stating that the crime branch remains the most criminal organization across the country. At the same time, building a resistance cannot be accomplished individually, but in solidarity and collectively. Indian democracy is turning fascist; a fascist society which works from within and is much more insidious than classical fascism. Mukul Sinha began his speech by pointing out how many suffer from the illusion that India is a secular country. But India has a peculiar kind of secularism. If Mukul himself were named Mushtaq, we could be having a memorial lecture in his memory. In recent times, two words have been presented to us by the West – “terrorism” and “secularism”. After the fall of Soviet Union, only forces that need to be contained are Islamic forces.

Sinha reminded the audience that even nationally, the birth of secularism was mediated by three competing ideologies. The Nehruvian idea fought with Gandhian and RSS views on secularism. But even within the Congress, there were soft-hindutva elements that were against strict separation of state and religion. In fact, secularism was slipped into the constitution only in 1976 during emergency. The Supreme Court judgments also reflect the ambivalent character of secular polity in India. The judgments traverse the spectrum of the idea of Indian secularism from “Sarva Dharma Sambhav” to “separation of church and the state”. In India, secularism does not mean godlessness, but god everywhere. If the judicial ideas remain confused on the meaning and relevance of “secularism” in India, how we can expect trial courts to be free of biases, he wondered.

There is another myth that secularism protects the minorities. Here leaving aside the question of economic and social justice, Sinha focused on two basic questions, affording equal protection of law to the minorities and the efficacy of the criminal justice system of delivering justice to the minorities. With the list of major communal riots where Muslims were the victims, Sinha pointed out that such a perception was misplaced. Beginning from Neli massacre, 1984 Sikh riots, 1989 Bhagalpur, 1993 Mumbai and Gujarat 2002, it has never happened once that the perpetrators were punished. Ironically, in few cases such as Bhagalpur riots, the only punished were Muslims. However, Muslims have kept their enormous faith on the idea of secularism. Arif Azmi (brother of Shahid Azmi) narrated how Shahid was fighting 110 POTA related cases and he had secured 14 acquittals too. He always used to receive calls asking him to refrain from such cases but he never budged. Shahid maintained that if justice had to delivered, it had to be delivered to all.

Maulana Gulzar Azmi narrated the eventual year of 2006 when young Muslims were framed in cases of Aurangabad (May), Mumbai (July) and Malegaon (September). MCOCA was invoked against the accused in most of these cases. Shahid was fighting all these cases simultaneously. When he asked Shahid why is he deeply bothered about such cases from across India? He replied, “I want peace in the country. I was jailed myself and I fear lest these accused go to jail and turn from innocent youth into real terrorists. And the peace of India is disturbed.” Shahid felt every such case as his own- he used to say, “they must be undergoing exactly what I went during my imprisonment and afterwards”. Banaji concluded the discussion by highlighting two major ideas of Sinha’s lecture. First, that the idea of secularism in India as balancing between different religions, which, in effect, becomes majoritarian rule. Second, the culture of political impunity where the legal and political system actively ensures that the criminals are not punished. He added that judicial compliance was a cornerstone of fascist politics in Germany for 10 years leading up to fascist rule. Indian fascism is more dangerous because it is deep rooted and molecular.

http://twocircles.net/2012feb14/killers_hemant_karkare_were_behind_shahid_azmi%E2%80%99s_murder_claims_london_acadimician.html

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

2006 train blasts: Former DGP cross-examined (Feb 16, 2012, Hindustan Times)

AN Roy, former director general of police (DGP), on Wednesday was cross-examined before the special designated MCOCA court in connection with the July 11, 2006, serial train blasts case, where 34 people died and 138 were injured.

Roy, who was the police commissioner at the time, had sanctioned for the accused to be charged under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA).

Special public prosecutor Raja Thakare examined Roy on the reasons behind invoking special acts in the case. The former DGP will continue his deposition on Friday.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/812132.aspx

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

A Shaheen Bagh foiled in Batla House; Six cops suspended (Feb 17, 2012, Twocircles.net)

The residents of Jamia Nagar, a Muslim populated area in South-East Delhi, have been living under constant fear since the Batla House encounter of September 2008 because of several attempts at regular interval of investigative/police agencies to pick Muslim youths from the area. The latest occurred in the wee hours of Thursday but the bid was foiled by locals who woke up and gheraoed the team of Delhi police. The drama unfolded during the early morning hours of Thursday when policemen, most of them in plain clothes, tried to forcibly pick some residents of Batla House locality, alleging them to be “illegal Bangladeshi.” The local police alleged that they had no information about the “raid.” It was at about 1:30 am when occupants of a building in the area got a knock. The next thing was that Rustam Khan and 7 other residents were being forcibly taken by the cops.

Khan alleged that the police didn’t reveal why he along with his other neighbors were being taken so late at night. Besides Khan’s wife Rubeena, others who were being taken by the cops included other occupants of the same building where he stays. Two of the residents reportedly belong to West Bengal and the rest hail from Bihar. In no time, almost the entire nearby area woke up after the occupants of the building started screaming for help. When Khan’s neighbors came out they reportedly found that he along with his wife and several others were being pushed inside a vehicle. The angry and agitated crowd which had gathered at the spot confronted the raiding team and asked why Khan and others were being taken away so late at night. The situation was almost on the verge of getting out of control before the local Station House Officer was called up who came and allegedly fired two rounds to bring the situation under control.

It was only after the interference of the local police that the situation was brought under control and those detained by the Bangladeshi cell were let off after they submitted their relevant documents including their voter ID cards to prove that they are Indians. A complaint was registered in the Jamia Nagar police station against the six cops from the Bangladesh cell of Delhi Police. Taking the matter seriously the six cops have been placed under suspension by higher police authorities pending enquiry into the entire episode. Ajay Chaudhary, ACP (South East Delhi) said the “police team from the Bangladeshi cell must have got some information about illegal immigrants and that’s why they might be checking if illegal immigrants live there. However, they should have informed the local police. Six of these cops have been suspended.”

Akhlaque Ahmad of the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) told TwoCircles.net that the, “police are to protect citizens and inspire a sense of safety among them and not to create fear psychosis by doing raids illegally.” Asif Mohammad Khan, the local MLA told TCN that “we don’t have any illegal Bangladeshi living among us. If at all the police want to enquire and check about this, there is a legal way of doing that. Doing a raid after midnight without informing even the local police is in violation of the law.” “Had we been informed about the raid, we would have cooperated to make sure that no Bangladeshi stays in our area, but this pattern of action from the police which has only created fear among the residents, is completely unacceptable,” the MLA further added. The residents, community leaders and activists living in the area, which is also regarded as a Muslim “ghetto”, find these “pick-ups” “illegal” as most of them defy rule of law, violate human rights provisions and are done without taking into confidence both the community leaders and Jamia Nagar police.

Only a few days back the residents of Abul Fazl Enclave area in the same Jamia Nagar had foiled the alleged attempts by the Mumbai ATS to forcibly arrest Darbhanga native Taquee Ahmed. Even though the ATS said that its sleuths had gone to meet Taquee just to give him summon orders, the Delhi Police Special Cell considered ATS efforts to “summon” Taquee, illegal as Mumbai ATS had no jurisdiction over Delhi. These events also take a very sensational angle as it reminds the residents of the Batla House “encounter” of 19th September 2008 in which two boys of Azamgarh were killed. Hardly a month after the encounter, police had attempted to pick a youth from Shaheen Bagh area and vigilant people gathered and the cops had to flee. A team of Noida policemen in civil dress had entered the Shaheen Bagh area in the night of October 16, 2008 and tried to force a youth Aamir in their black Verna car carrying no registration number. As the youth began crying locals gathered. Seeing the car without number and the men in civil dress they doubted the purpose of the ‘abductors.’ They prevented the men, which the Delhi Police and Noida Police later confirmed were Noida policemen, from picking the youth. The Noida policemen had come to Shaheen Bagh area in Jamia Nagar without informing the local police. The higher authorities had taken the issue seriously; cops involved in the case were transferred as punishment.

http://twocircles.net/2012feb17/shaheen_bagh_foiled_batla_house_six_cops_suspended.html

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Accusing cops of killing villager, Naxals call Palamau bandh (Feb 17, 2012, Indian Express)

A week after the body of Lucas Minz (35), a hearing and speech impaired person, was recovered from a forest, the Maoists have called for a bandh in Palamau on Friday claiming that he was killed by the security forces. CPI(Maoist) spokesperson Deen Bandhu issued a statement: “During their operation against us, they (security forces) shot him dead.” The police have sounded an alert fearing law and order problems.

Last month, the security forces had launched an operation against the Maoists inside forests falling under Palamau division’s Barwadih block in Latehar district, where Lucas lived with his two unmarried sisters, Mukut Mani and Irma, and three brothers, Amal, William and Pradhan. On January 31, Lucas went missing. His body was found in the forest on February 7. Five days later, his family alleged that Lucas was murdered. In his FIR filed on February 12, William alleged that Lucas was shot dead. “We noticed a bullet injury on his left eye,” William said. He did not name anyone in the FIR.

The police registered a case under Section 302 against unidentified persons. The district administration exhumed the body and set up a team of three doctors on Tuesday to conduct post-mortem. On Wednesday, the doctors decided to refer the case to the state government-run RIMS hospital, citing lack of equipment. On Wednesday, William said, “Since Lucas could not hear nor speak, they suspected him to be a Maoist and shot him dead.”

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/913239/

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Physically challenged girl raped by Mizoram police constable (Feb 13, 2012, Hindustan Times)

A police constable allegedly raped a physically challenged girl in Mizoram, said a report on Monday evening. The report said that K Lalrova, 42, a constable posted at Lunglei police station raped a physically challenged girl on the night of February 9 near Saikutihall in Lunglei, 235km south of Mizoram capital Aizawl.

The police did not disclose details of the victim. “The accused has been suspended and sent to Lunglei district jail,” said Lunglei superintendent of police Lallianmawia.

Records with the Mizoram police reveal that 639 cases of crime were registered from January 2008 to October 2011. Of these, 303 were rape cases.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/810936.aspx

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Opinions and Editorials

Defeat Pernicious Hindutva Terror Designs – Editorial (Feb 19, 2012, Peoples Democracy)

Yet another link to the terror web cast by the RSS and its affiliates has been established with the arrest of one Kamal Chauhan by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for his alleged involvement in the terrorist bomb blast on the Samjhauta Express that claimed the life of 68 passengers of the Delhi-Lahore train around midnight of February 18, 2007. The arrest of this longstanding RSS activist from Madhya Pradesh is the second in this case. Earlier, in June 2010, one Lokesh Sharma, also from Madhya Pradesh, was arrested on charges of attending a meeting in which this terrorist attack was planned. Media reports suggest that investigative agencies are now framing fresh charges on his alleged participation in the actual bombing itself. Crucial leads indicating the involvement of RSS and its affiliates in the Samjhauta bombing came after investigations that established that these outfits were linked with the terrorist attacks at Malegaon (September 8, 2008), Mecca Masjid in Hyderabad (May 18, 2007) and at the Dargah in Ajmer Sharif (October 11, 2007). These have established the RSS links in creating this web of Hindutva terror.

The CPI(M) had, in fact, drawn the attention of the central government, much earlier, at a meeting of the National Integration Council on October 13, 2008. “Police investigations in the past few years have noted the involvement of Bajrang Dal or other RSS tentacles in various bomb blasts across the country – in 2003, in Parbani, Jalna and in Jalgaon district of Maharashtra; in 2005, in Mau district of Uttar Pradesh; in 2006, in Nanded; in January 2008, at the RSS office in Tenkasi, Tirunelveli; in August 2008, in Kanpur etc etc. Internal security of our country can be strengthened only when all such cases are also probed impartially and with the same degree of intensity”. Following this and the subsequent leads, the union home ministry’s report card for July 2010 announced that the NIA will probe the terrorist attacks on the Samjhauta Express. It is these investigations that have led to the current arrest. Investigations also revealed, according to media reports, that a core group of RSS leaders were involved in the manufacture of explosives and planned a series of Hindutva terrorist attacks that began in 2002. The disillusionment that set in amongst sections of the RSS following the then reigning Vajpayee led central government’s alleged dilution of the core Hindutva agenda (by putting on the back burner issues like temple construction in Ayodhya, to appease NDA allies for the government’s survival) and the apparent refusal to replicate nationwide the 2002 communal genocide in Gujarat are believed to be the reason for the rise of militant Hindutva terror.

Surely, the RSS, as is its wont, will once again proclaim that such terrorist acts may be the result of actions by a few ‘deviant elements’ but will insist that the organisation as a whole is not to be blamed. Such claims are nothing original. This is precisely what was said about Nathuram Godse following the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. Godse’s brother, however, is on record, in a media interview, to say that all brothers in the family were active members of the RSS. However, the history of the RSS and its methodology of functioning belies such theories of a differentiation between the ‘core’ and the ‘fringe’. The issue of imparting militant training to the Hindus and using violence as a political weapon by the RSS has a long history. It was Savarkar (who advanced the two nation theory – Islamic and Hindu – full two years before Jinnah did) who gave the slogan “Hinduise all politics and militarise Hindudom”. Inspired by this, Dr B S Moonje, mentor of RSS founder Dr Hegdewar, travelled to Italy to meet the fascist dictator, Mussolini. The meeting took place on March 19, 1931. His personal diary notes of March 20 reveal his fascination and admiration of the manner in which Italian fascism was training its youth (read storm-troopers) militarily. Upon return to India, Dr Moonje established the Central Hindu Military Education Society at Nasik in 1935, the precursor to the Bhonsala Military School (now charged with importing training to Hindutva terror) established in 1937. Golwalkar, in 1939, exults Hitler’s purging of the Jews under Nazi fascism and says that it is “a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by”. Subsequently, following the demolition of the Babri Masjid, the RSS tentacles, VHP and Bajrang Dal, had publicly prided themselves at the training imparted to ‘kar sevaks’.

The RSS often questions the term ‘Hindu terrorism’ asking, “How can you club an entire community with the concept of terrorism?” Its former chief once went further to state, “Coining such terms is the conspiracy to defame the Sangh. It is a political conspiracy to defeat and defame Hindutva forces.” Very cleverly, the terms ‘Hindutva’ and ‘Hindu’ are used synonymously. What we are speaking about is Hindutva terror, not Hindu terror. Clearly, no religious community, as a whole, can be held responsible for the terrorist activities of individuals embracing that religion. Same yardstick, however, should apply to other religions as well. However, not, according to the RSS. The RSS routinely adopts resolutions seeking to, “curb Islamic terrorism with an iron hand”. This is not merely an expression of double standards. It reflects the ideological roots of converting the modern secular democratic republic of India into the RSS version of a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ based on rabid religious intolerance. In these columns, we continue to maintain that terrorism has no religion. It is simply anti-national and, hence, the country should display zero tolerance. Further, terrorism of all varieties only feed and strengthen each other, seeking to destroy the very unity and integrity of our country. To safeguard and strengthen modern India’s secular democratic foundations, it is imperative that such pernicious terroristic methods for realising this RSS political objective needs to be decisively defeated.

http://pd.cpim.org/2012/0219_pd/02192012_1.html

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Ten Long Years – By Smruti Koppikar (Feb 16, 2012, Outlook)

The confusion that reigned for the first few hours, on and fuelled by news television, after the Ahmedabad metropolitan magistrate’s order Wednesday Feb 15 afternoon on Zakia Jafri’s petition, would have been hilarious if the matter was not so sombre. Every reporter had a differing piece of information to offer, some contradictory; likewise, the lawyers for each side offered different interpretations of the order – from Jafri will get the already-controversial report of the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) Report to Jafri will not be given a copy of the report. It’s not as complicated as it appears. Jafri and her co-petitioners – activists Teesta Setalvad and lawyer Mukul Sinha – had filed separate applications in Magistrate M.S. Bhatt’s court on February 9, a day after the SIT had submitted its report in a sealed envelope. There were two sets of applications: one seeking to obtain copies of the SIT report and the other objecting to the manner in which SIT had filed its report which the applicants argued was “not in compliance” with the SC’s September 2011 order.

On Feb 15 afternoon, the magistrate upheld the second set of applications in which Jafri and her co-petitioners had argued that the SIT had not complied with paragraph 9 of the SC order. The key part of this says SIT must “forward its final report, along with the entire material collected by it” which means all documents, case papers, annexures, recorded statements, investigation papers and the report filed by amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran – which together run into thousands of pages. This allows the magistrate – and at a later stage the petitioner and public – to read the findings in the report against the material/evidence they are based upon. The magistrate stated that once this is done, on or before March 15, the court will “act according to law”. Only when the report is submitted in full will the magistrate formally decide on Jafri’s application for a copy; Setalvad and Sinha are not entitled to get copies because they have no locus standi in the case, the magistrate stated. Jafri will have to wait for the SIT to comply and submit all the documents relevant to the Gulbarg Society massacre of February 28, 2002, where her husband and Congress MP Ehsan Jafri was killed with 57 others by a violent mob.

Significantly, this means the question is when, not if, Jafri will get a copy of the SIT report. And, the phrase “act according to law” strengthens her plea because, under section 173 (2) (ii) of the CrPC, Jafri should get a copy of the report. She is the original complainant in the case, right from the police station, in the lower courts, the Gujarat high court and later in the Supreme Court. Though the SIT submitted its report in a sealed envelope, information that immediately leaked out suggested that Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi had been given “a clean chit” as “no prosecutable evidence” had been found against him. Jafri’s original complaint stated that Modi and 61 others be charge-sheeted for the Gulbarg Society massacre, one of the many areas attacked by raging mobs in the wake of the fire in two Sabarmati Express coaches, at Godhra railway station on February 27, 2002, that killed 59 people including kar sevaks returning from Ayodhya.

The magistrate today received another application from the petitioners seeking that he declare the contents of the SIT report, on the grounds that no document from an investigating agency can be termed confidential. The order on this application has been posted for February 29. If the order is in their favour, Jafri and others will know that day or thereafter if the SIT has, indeed, given a closure report – as widely speculated after the leaked contents – or recommended filing a charge-sheet and if so against whom, or sought time for further investigation. Many in the legal community in Ahmedabad, not to mention sections of the BJP, are keen to amplify the strategic leak about the “clean chit” but has Modi really escaped being in the dock? In the Gulbarg Society massacre case, it will be prudent to wait for the magistrate to open the sealed envelope and make the report public. The focus on this case has eclipsed two other cases this month; Modi has been rapped twice in two weeks by the judiciary for the apathetic attitude shown by him and his government during and after the communal violence of 2002.

In a severe indictment of Modi, the Gujarat high court, last week, observed that the Gujarat government had failed during the 2002 violence and shown negligence in protecting citizens and religious structures. A petition filed in 2003 by Islamic Relief Committee seeking compensation for damaged religious structures had been opposed by the state, on the grounds that it had neither a policy nor an obligation to pay such compensation. The two-judge bench slammed this position; it said the state machinery had completely failed to anticipate communal disturbance and had subsequently floundered in containing the violence. “The state’s inaction resulted in the damage,” the bench observed, and ordered the government to “repair and rehabilitate” nearly 600 damaged places of worship, majority of them mosques and dargahs. In the second case, on Feb 15, even as the SIT report was fought over, the Gujarat high court served a contempt notice to Modi administration for not complying with its order of September 2011 to pay compensation to 56 petitioners whose shops in Rakhial area had been gutted in the 2002 violence. The Ahmedabad district collector has to file reply by March 14. As Gujarat – and the nation – marks ten years of the horrific violence in Godhra and later across the state, and Modi completes his carefully-calibrated Sadbhavna mission in a bid to erase the 2002 blot, he finds the courts closing in on him and his government.

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?279916

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Pure speculation on SIT closure report – By RB Sreekumar (Feb 15, 2012, DNA India)

Media reports on Special Investigation Team’s (SIT) Final Report u/s 173 CRPC on Zakia Jafri’s complaint/FIR against the Chief Minister Narendra Modi and 62 others generally confirm the exoneration of nearly all culprits for want of evidence. Indeed, it is flabbergasting and frustrating development for all those who value the Rule of Law, social cohesion and unity of our motherland. If the media version is true, the riot victim survivors and the officers who risked their career and marshalled evidence against perpetrators would be depressed.

A hypothetical exercise as to what could have been done by SIT for building an impenetrable defence for rioters will be rewarding. Any police officer with the motive of defending the riot accused will try to denigrate, marginalise and invalidate copious of evidence available on (1) scheming and consummation of anti-minority carnage, (2) subversion of the state administration to delay and deny justice to riot victims and (3) intimidation of witnesses to block the flow of evidence against the state government functionaries, narrated in Jafri’s FIR.

Witnesses, had, reportedly, tried to prove the conspiracy by the state government, by stressing on facts, i.e. (A) CM giving instructions in a late evening meeting of officers at Gandhinagar on February 27, 2002, to give a free play of Hindu revengefulness, in the context of killing 59 Hindus in Godhra train fire incident. SIT would find contradictions in the semantics of three versions about the CM’s instructions, in the depositions of the late Haren Pandya (to the Citizens Tribunal), RB Sreekumar and Sanjeev Bhatt (both before the judicial bodies). Moreover, Haren Pandya and Sreekumar were not present in the meeting also. Bhatt’s presence in the CM meeting is also questioned after refusal by his subordinate officer Pant to support Bhatt. (B) Secondly, allegations about bringing the bodies of Godhra train fire victims to Ahmedabad, VHP leaders accompanying the bodies and so on would not be deemed to be incriminating as these actions were taken on the request of the relatives of deceased persons by the CM.

(C) SIT would also be reluctant to draw any adverse inference on facts like, (1) the government not keeping minutes of meetings chaired by the CM and other senior officers, (2) positioning of ministers in DGP and CP, Ahmedabad officers on VHP sponsored bandh day on February 28, 2002, (3) transfer of officers who took effective actions against the rioters in the thick of riots, i.e. Rahul Sharma, Vivek Shrivastava, MD Antani and others, despite DGP’s objection, (4) rewarding those who collaborated in riots, (5) CM characterizing the riots as operation of the Newton’s Law, (6) failure of the government to take action on media making communally inciting reports and (7) non-implementation on regulations on riot control in Gujarat Police Manual, and other government documents, which facilitated riots. These are to be deemed as mere administrative omissions without any malicious motive.

The evidence supporting the charge of subversion of the administration are, (1) failure to take follow up action on reports from State Intelligence Branch (SIB) for countering the anti-Muslim bias of government officials, i.e. police and public prosecutors not performing duties properly and this resulting in damage to cases of riot victims.

http://www.dnaindia.com/print710.php?cid=1650559

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

The NCTC Imbroglio – By Lt Gen Prakash C. Katoch (Retd) (Feb 17, 2012, Outlook)

A number of Chief Ministers and political parties have raised strong objections against the establishment of the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) that was to come into effect on March 1, 2012 as reported by the media. The main fear of the these Chief Ministers, being vehemently aired on TV channels, is that the government will use the NCTC to target non-Congress states, the issue was not discussed with the opposition/states and that the establishment of the NCTC will be an infringements of the rights of the states. The first part of the objection by the concerned Chief Ministers is very genuine. Switch on any TV channel or pick up a newspaper today and you get the view that everything wrong is going on in non-Congress governed states while Ram Rajya prevails in the ones governed by Congress. The ruling polity obviously feels that the citizenry is totally naïve. What is more significant is to note is what M.K. Dhar, former Joint Director Intelligence Bureau wrote in his book Top Secret – India’s Intelligence Unveiled. He says that irrespective of which party is in power in India, the entire intelligence effort of the country is focused on how to do down the opposition. He also mentions that during the entire tenure of Zail Singh as the President, all the phones in his bedroom and office in Rashtrapati Bhavan were tapped. So, how does the country get over such a malaise?

The second part of objections relate to the NCTC not having been discussed with the opposition/states. Michael Krepon wrote an article titled “Prime Ministers and Army Chiefs” (an abridged version was also published in the Dawn of Pakistan) last month. In this article, he quoted what V.R. Raghavan wrote in the Nonproliferation Review wherein he says, “There has been a shift in Indian decision making from a collegial and consensus-based approach to decisions arrived at by a small group of individuals based in the Prime Minister’s Office”. This has been emerging as the pattern in most cases and not in the case of nuclear issues alone, the latest proof of PMO’s involvement being even in the case of denying justice to the General V.K. Singh in the deliberately created age row. Do we see a replay of the Emergency era – political arrogance et al? No denying the fact that the issue of the NCTC should have been discussed both with the opposition and the states especially when it has took 22 excruciating months to sanction its establishment.

The third objection that the NCTC will infringe on the rights of the states stems from the fact that despite facing decades of insurgency and terrorism, India has failed to look at how our Constitution should strengthen our hands in fighting this twin malaise. Take the example of the Maoist insurgency that since past five-six years is being described as the biggest internal threat by the Prime Minister. Yet, the response is left largely to the states aside from dishing out Central Armed Police Forces (CRPF) and intelligence related warnings. No centralized set up has come up to tackle this major security threat holistically. That is the reason that the proposal of the home minister to establish a ministry of internal security (akin to the US ministry of Homeland Security) was shot down. The moot question here is how long India will continue to cope with such issues, given that ‘Law and Order’ is a state subject? Though our founding fathers gave us a solid Constitution as a base, have we not undertaken hundreds of amendments? Why can we not de-link terrorist and insurgent acts from the states and bring them under the centre?

There is no doubt that this will require thorough discussion and consensus, which is unlikely unless the government in power can convince everyone that adequate measures have been instituted to ensure that the intelligence effort of the country is not utilized to target the opposition- a very difficult proposition in the current dispensation considering the reluctance displayed in bringing even the CBI under the Lokpal. The fact is that without such measures our response to terrorism and insurgencies will remain disjointed and our adversaries will continue to exploit this asymmetric battlefield being offered by us on a plate. There was considerable merit in the home minister’s original proposal that the entire counter-terrorism architecture including the proposed NCTC function under the home minister till the creation of a ministry of internal security was accepted and implemented. However, what eventually has been sanctioned implies that while Multi Agency Centre (MAC) hitherto run by the Intelligence Bureau is subsumed into NCTC but organizations like the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) will continue functioning independently albeit all intelligence agencies are to provide inputs to NCTC.

Notwithstanding this, the NCTC in the proposed shape too will take many months/years to attain optimum level of real-time use operationally. To start with, it must have data links and standardized protocols with and amongst all intelligence agencies for real time passage of information. More significantly, state counter terrorism centres (SCTCs) must be established, which will ensure regular flow of ground level intelligence upwards and collated and analyzed intelligence flowing down. SCTCs should be established in all states and not like UHQ (Unified HQ) in selected few as is the current practice, for the simple reason that the threat of terrorism is omni-present. Look at Mumbai today- periodically suffering from terrorism, it has hubs of the MARCOS (marine commandos of the Navy), NSG (National Security Guard) and Force One (Special Police unit created post 26/11 Mumbai terror attack) and yet no SCTC and no UHQ (Unified HQ) either. Same is the state in Delhi. The SCTCs should function under respective State UHQ and be linked with the NCTC through the NATGRID. The requirement to incorporate a Decision Support System (DSS) is also essential, enabling short, medium and long term assessments. The national focus must shift from ‘investigating’ to ‘preventing’ terrorism. Is India ready for all this? More importantly, do our politicians have it in them?

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?279947

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Dirty picture – Editorial (Feb 9, 2012, The Hindu)

Legislative proceedings are usually far from stimulating and we have grown accustomed to MPs and MLAs stealing a surreptitious nap or even snoring defiantly to escape the tedium of debate. But the three Karnataka BJP ministers who were forced to resign Wednesday morning chose a most unusual way to escape what they regarded as an arid discussion on the drought situation in the State. Much to the embarrassment of themselves and their party, TV cameras caught them transfixed by, ahem, a film clip, on one of their cell phones. Laxman Savadi, who was Minister for Cooperation, may protest till he is blue in the face, but his explanation that he was watching a newsclip about a woman being gang-raped simply doesn’t wash.

The best that can be said in an age where our legislatures are sporadic witnesses to a range of boisterous activity – fisticuffs, abuse, screaming, overthrown furniture, ripped out microphones, torn papers and flung slippers – is that the trio were at least passing their time in quiet communion. Watching pornographic material in the House is a first in the history of Indian legislatures, but like almost everything else in the sleazy world of politics, somebody’s already been there, done that. Last April, an Indonesian MP belonging to an Islamic party that campaigns for anti-pornography legislation was forced to resign after being caught watching porn in parliament, presumably to acquaint himself better with the subject matter of what he was opposing.

On a serious note, there is an important message in this, one that exposes the unalloyed hypocrisy of those who adopt conservative and hardline postures on issues relating to sex and morality. It is in Karnataka that fundamentalists assaulted women in pubs, ran campaigns against Valentine’s Day, launched investigations into the so-called love jihads – all professedly to protect Hindu culture from immoral foreign influences. For a party that likes to think it is different, the porn incident is a severe embarrassment for the BJP. To have forced the three ministers to “voluntarily resign” is hardly going to check the damage caused to the party and State government, which is already under some fire for permitting a reportedly wild rave party in Udupi.

When privilege motions are moved against legislators and outsiders for lowering the dignity of the House, it would be really strange if no more action is taken against the erring MLAs. But rather than reacting to what they did with blustering moral outrage, the incident should be used as an opportunity to expose the hypocrisy of the BJP and its aggressive fellow travellers in the Sangh Parivar, who, through their moral policing and self-styled vigilantism, regard themselves as the custodians of Indian morality.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/article2872933.ece

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

At the crossroads of mediaphobia – By Amitabh Mukhopadhyay (Jan 30, 2012, The Hindu)

Recently, the Telecom Minister was attacked by a large number of netizens for his move to screen content on social networking sites. Some bloggers called this drive idiotic. The characterisation seemed harmless till a little reflection brought The Idiot of Dostoyevsky to mind, and I felt crediting a Minister with a trusting nature as in that story might be good for our social imagination but not grounded in any evidence.The shifting sands of his reasons for objecting to certain matter carried on social media are interesting. Apparently, he first found a page maligning Sonia Gandhi and told Facebook officials on September 5, 2011 this was unacceptable. He then wrote a letter and held meetings with Google and Facebook. In an interview on NDTV in November, he said he objected to pornographic images. Then there was a mention in newspapers that at a press conference on December 5 he was worried about things that hurt religious sentiments.

Some of us are often disturbed by the politicisation or corruption of individual personality by journalism. I remember as a ten-year-old boy, my father asked me to read The Statesman first thing in the morning to improve my English and my grandmother took me aside to advise that I start my day with thoughts about Ishwar instead of reading reports about rape and murder. Philosophers have commented that journalists make people doubly ridiculous – first by making them feel they must necessarily have an opinion on every matter and then by renting them their opinion as an object of necessity they can flaunt around. We may not agree with the first, but the second point, about the role of journalists as purveyors of public opinion is of great relevance in the present context because the internet enables the world to break through the filter of journalism and reach individuals directly. The internet has been described as the network of networks. Through social networking, it helps isolated individuals constitute themselves as a group or a ‘public’. By playing the role of intermediation, it has helped all trades and professions expand their working communities and given us a practical source of two-way communication with the capability for everyone to hear both sides of the story. It has had a great democratising impact the world over.

In the context of the scourge of ‘paid journalism’ as a means of state and corporate control of media, social networking sites are a countervailing force. Google’s Transparency Report says 70 per cent of what was objected to by government agencies in 2011 related to political criticism. Only an insignificant number of items, just eight out of 352, could be termed hate speech. The Minister is obviously worried about social networking sites because he cannot control them to his advantage. How is he to regain control? To gauge this, the sequence in his reactions to what he saw, or was caused to see, is important. He first encountered something denigrating Sonia Gandhi and colloquially cried “blasphemy”; next, he objected to extreme pornography and finally he referred to things hurtful to religious sentiments. He can well cry blasphemy even though India does not have a state religion, because blasphemy laws exist in several European countries and the U.N. too has some resolutions against defamation of religions.

Blasphemy was a canon law offence in the U.K. till the 17th century when it was made an offence against common law. When BBC staged “Jerry Springer – the Opera” in 2005 and thousands of Christians objected to scenes set in hell with Jesus and Satan, the High Court said the Theatres Act, 1968 of the U.K. prevented any prosecution for blasphemy in relation to public performances of plays. Besides, the Broadcasting Act, 1990 did not allow for any prosecution in relation to broadcasts. Blasphemy as an offence was abolished in the U.K. by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act, 2008. However, the same Act introduced new offences described as ‘possession of extreme pornographic images’ (Sec. 63) and ‘publication of obscene article’ (Sec. 71). Hate crime could be tied to these to make a case for ‘reasonable’ restriction of freedom of speech and expression. Like people in the U.K. till 2008, we in India also happen to be very sensitive to anything irreverent about any religion. Despite this common perception of our national character, both while framing the Indian Constitution as well as when working it, Rajendra Prasad and B.R. Ambedkar staunchly defended the freedom of expression. After the famous Crossroads case, when Nehru tried to broaden the scope of restrictions to freedom of expression and framed the First Amendment, they succeeded in persuading him to allow the word ‘reasonable’ qualifying the word restriction in Article 19 (2) to remain unchanged. This was due to their understanding that the Constitution is the vehicle of a nation’s progress. The Press (Objectionable Matter) Act, 1951, based on the First Amendment, was itself repealed in 1957.

More recently, in 2004, the Delhi High Court dismissed the complaints against M.F. Hussain of promoting enmity between different groups. Despite this, a case was registered in Mumbai in February 2006 against the painter for “hurting sentiments of people” by painting Hindu goddesses not as deities but visual stimuli, which forced him to live and die in exile, shaming all Indians. Even during the otherwise repressive British Raj, though Sarat Chandra’s novel Pather Dabi was banned, he walked around as a free man. The failures of government to provide equal protection of the law under Article 21 of the Constitution to Hussain the painter and, more recently, to Salman Rushdie the writer, are both reprehensible. Similar law-ways appear to have been deployed in the present case as well, with a private civil suit being filed by one Vinay Rai in a District Court of Rohini in Delhi which passed an ex-parte order asking 22 networking sites to remove certain content because they amount to “defamation and derogation against the sentiments of every community” and might “hurt religious sentiments”. The order did not spell out whether it is pornographic images/obscenity/hate speech that is being objected to or something blasphemous. Apparently, on another petition filed by the founder of a website FatwaOnline.org, a civil judge issued summons to Facebook and Google India, who sought relief from the Delhi High Court. …

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article2842921.ece

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

{ 0 comments }

IAMC Weekly News Roundup – November 21st, 2011

by newsdigest on November 21, 2011

In this issue of IAMC News Roundup

Communal Harmony

News Headlines

Opinions & Editorials

Communal Harmony

Measure in place to observe communal harmony week (Nov 18, 2011, Times of India)

The district authorities are all set to observe “communal harmony week” from November 19 to 25. A string of functions would be organized during the week. While seminars/symposiums/meetings would be organised on November 19 on the topic of non-violence and communal harmony, special function would be organised on November 20 on the occasion of Minority Welfare Day to strengthen brotherhood. On November 21, cultural events would be organised on the occasion of regional sadbhavna diwas and rallies/meetings would be held on November 22 to observe Weaker Section’s Day.

Similarly, a series of cultural events would be held on November 24 to mark Sanskratik Ekta Diwas and importance of women would be highlighted on November24 in programmes to be held on the occasion of Mahila Diwas. On November 25, an awareness campaign would be taken on the issue of protecting environment, informed the district magistrate. Pointedly, the National Foundation for Communal Harmony (NFCH), a Central government organisation based in New Delhi, has been conducting a campaign around the issue from November 19 to 25. Schools across the country have been encouraged to participate as well. “We have been celebrating it every year since it is a good opportunity for students to learn more about communal harmony,” said an official.

District authorities in the same regard have chalked out a series of cultural activities around the theme, like music recitals and role plays which are performed. Along with promoting communal harmony among the youth, the NFCH also provides assistance to children rendered orphans or destitute as a result of communal, caste, ethnic or terrorist violence. It would be an additional aim of the campaign week to raise funds for the support of these children.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-11-18/allahabad/30414369_1_communal-harmony-sadbhavna-weaker-section-s-day

[Back to Top]

Hindu radicals disguised as Muslims planted Malegaon bombs? (Nov 14, 2011, Rediff)

On Monday, as seven of the nine accused who were granted bail in the 2006 Malegaon blasts are set to be released from jail, there was a sense of relief in Nashik town. For years, investigators have been suspecting the involvement of Muslim youths in this case. It’s just a matter of time that the National Investigating Agency files its status report in the case, which is likely to indict the two accused – Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and Lieutenant Colonel Srikant Purohit. The focus of the probe in the 2006 Malegaon blasts case has been on the confessions made by Swami Aseemanand, a key figure in the Hindutva terror network. After having admitted to have planned terror attacks on Ajmer Sharif, Mecca Masjid, Malegaon and the Samjhauta Express, Aseemanand retracted his statement. But it was this confession that made it easier of the NIA to gather leads in the 2006 case.

Aseemanand’s retraction will not have much impact on the case, according to legal experts. He will have to prove before the trial court that the statement was made under duress. And if he does prove this the court will have to direct the magistrate before whom the statement was made to testify. But despite this the NIA will tread carefully and only use the confession to obtain leads rather than document it before the court. Today, the investigators are close to cracking the case. But for years the biggest point of debate has been over who planted the bombs in the Muslim cemetery. Hemant Karkare, who led the investigations in the 2008 Malegaon blasts, gave a new dimension to the case after he pointed out the involvement of some radical Hindu groups in terror-related activities. One of angles that was being probed was that Purohit threatened some Muslim youths from the banned Students Islamic Movement of India to prepare the bombs since they had the required expertise. Another theory was that Muslim youths were hired by Hindu extremists to plant the bombs.

Investigations into the 2006 Nanded blast, which investigators say was one of the first terror activities involving Hindu extremists, point out to yet another interesting tactic deployed by saffron extremists. During a raid that was conducted after the Nanded blast, the police recovered Muslim attire, skullcaps and fake beards at a place where the operation was allegedly planned. During the course of the investigation it was also found that Hindu radicals planned to dress up like Muslims to plant bombs in a move to malign the minority community. Investigators say that those behind the 2006 Malegaon blasts could have also disguised themselves as Muslims. Soon after the blasts a Muslim newspaper The Milli Gazette reported that a corpse with a fake beard was discovered while lifting bodies after the strike. The police in Malegaon immediately took charge of the body and claimed to have sent it to Nashik. However, the next day it denied that any such body was ever found, said the report. The report also said that the news of the corpse with the fake beard was carried by Delhi’s Urdu daily Hindustan Express on September 9, 2006 and the Mumbai-based Inquilab on September 11, 2006.

Probe agencies have been able to draw a lot of similarities between the attacks in Nanded and Malegaon operations. However, investigators have not been able to reach at a conclusive decision regarding the hiring of Muslim youth to plant bombs or Hindu extremists disguising themselves. But, Aseemanand had admitted to investigators that he had developed a deep sense of vengeance against Muslims in general. One of the accused in the Nanded blasts – Manohar Rao – had confessed to having procured Muslim attire, beards and caps. The accused have said that they wanted to mislead the police by leaving traces of the involvement of the Muslim community. If they planted bombs disguised as Muslims the eyewitnesses’ account would reveal the same. The module also created fake email ids in the names of Muslims once again with an intention of misguiding investigators. A similar modus operandi was used in the terror operations carried out in the Marathwada region in central Maharashtra – at Jalna, Purna and Parbhani, say insiders.

Aseemanand in his confessions made no mention of the Nanded, Parbhani, Jalna and Purna operations and only spoke about the Mecca Masjid, Malegaon, Samjautha and Ajmer blasts. This clearly indicates that two different modules were involved in the attacks though their motives were similar. The accused in the Nanded case said that they wanted to hit back at the Dawood Ibhraim gang for helping terrorists carry out 2003 Mumbai twin blasts at Gateway of India and Zaveri Bazaar. Aseemanand also speaks about similar revenge when he propounded the “bomb ka badla bomb” theory. The NIA is expected to file a status report in the 2006 Malegaon case, but that’s going to be no cakewalk. “Like the Mecca Masjid case, while probing the Malegaon we were misled and a lot needs to be undone. Moreover, the four cases – Mecca Masjid, Malegaon, Samjautha and Ajmer blats – are interlinked,” say NIA officials.

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/hindu-radicals-disguised-as-muslims-planted-malegaon-bombs/20111114.htm

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Justice is yet to be fully delivered in the post-Godhra riots (Nov 15, 2011, Economic Times)

A Gujarat special court’s sentencing to life imprisonment 31 accused in the Sardarpura massacre, part of the post-Godhra pogrom in 2002, is important: never before have such a large number of the accused in a communal violence case been punished. That is a minor reversal of India’s shameful history of lack of convictions in such cases. Justice delayed is justice denied. In this case too, justice took almost a decade to achieve, even as 42 others among the accused were let off. And it is now hoped that the law of the land is brought to bear on the perpetrators of the other post-Godhra riots cases of violence.

The problem, however, which faced the nation after the carnage in Gujarat was how to deal with a situation, and deliver justice to victims and their families, when the whole state apparatus was suspected to be complicit in acts of communal violence. The long-drawn, murky twists and turns that have happened since in investigations into the riots – everything from witnesses turning hostile, reports of intimidation, the perception of hounding of whistleblowers, even the shocking admission by the state government, some months ago, that it had destroyed what seemed like critical records relating to the riots – have only reinforced the impression of an administration out to subvert justice.

Indeed, the Supreme Court’s intervention, in the form of its appointment of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), itself was a stinging indictment of the law enforcement and judicial mechanisms in the state. The larger problem in India has been the commonly acknowledged role of political parties and state administrations in many communal violence cases. The wider political class, therefore, bears much of the responsibility of perpetrating a culture of immunity.

In Gujarat, for instance, the big question is whether directions to allow the rioting flowed from the highest levels of the government. We need a clear answer to that question. In that context, the passage of the Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence Bill assumes critical importance in a country all too often ravaged by such riots.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-11-15/news/30401515_1_post-godhra-communal-violence-sardarpura

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Gujarat riots: SIT concealing evidences to protect politicians, say victims (Nov 14, 2011, DNA India)

Some of the victims of 2002 Gulberg housing society riots in Ahmedabad have accused the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) of concealing evidences to protect politicians and high-ranking policemen in the post-Godhra communal violence case. The allegations were levelled by their lawyer SM Vohra while making submissions in a local court on their application seeking a stay on the trial in the case till SIT submits its final report.

Judge BJ Dhandha, after hearing all parties – the applicants, the accused and the prosecution – reserved his order on the application till November 18. Seeking a stay on the trial, Vohra contended unless all evidences related to the case were submitted in the court, prejudice could be caused to the trial. He said SIT has probed the complaint of Zakia Jaffery, whose husband Ahsan Jaffery was among those killed in the violence, on a direction of the apex court, and demanded that its findings related to the Gulberg case be placed before the court.

Zakia’s complaint had alleged inaction on the part of top Gujarat government officials to contain the statewide riots triggered by the February 27, 2002 Godhra train carnage. SIT was not submitting relevant evidences in the court as it wanted to protect some powerful politicians and high-ranking police officers who have been accused of dereliction of duty by the riot victims, Vohra claimed. He said the court should wait for the evidences to be submitted by SIT and till then, stay the trial. This would not cause any prejudice to the accused as there is already a stay on pronouncement of judgement in the case by Supreme Court.

http://www.dnaindia.com/print710.php?cid=1612498

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

There’s threat to life, but it’s not going to stop me: Bhatt (Nov 20, 2011, Hindustan Times)

Out on bail, suspended Gujarat IPS officer Sanjeev Bhatt still fears for his life and says that people “deserve” the Narendra Modi government as the state has been “laboratory of hatred politics”. Bhatt, who claims he is being targeted by the BJP government in Gujarat, said the 2002 Godhra riots was one of the best documented in history.

“I know I have threat to my life, but it is not going to stop me. It is government’s responsibility to safeguard life of every citizen of the country,” he told reporters here on the sidelines of a conference on human rights. Bhatt was arrested on charges of forcing his subordinate, KD Pant, to file a false affidavit against Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi, implicating him in the 2002 riots. Averting a question on why he remained silent for so long as the Gujarat riots took place in 2002, Bhatt said he had already answered it several times.

On how Modi came back to power with a thumping majority despite the riots, Bhatt said, “People get the government they deserve. Gujarat has been laboratory of hatred politics.” Drawing similarity between 1984 anti-Sikh riots and 2002 Gujarat riots, Bhatt also made it clear that his raising of voice was not motivated against a particular political unit and he is of the view that any targetted violence, be it communal or be it sectarian, should be stopped.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/771795.aspx

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

SC to examine 21 Gujarat ‘encounters’ (Nov 15, 2011, Asian Age)

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to go into all alleged “fake encounter” killings by the Gujarat police since 2003 after it passed judicial orders on three such cases, saying the issue was urgent and needed to be looked into.

“These are important matters of four-five years old. We don’t want delay. We will give a specific date for hearing in January,” a bench of Justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana Prakash Desai said.

The court was hearing two PILs filed by journalist B.G. Verghese and Bollywood star Javed Akhtar, seeking a thorough investigation into 21 alleged fake encounters in Gujarat since 2003.

http://www.asianage.com/india/sc-examine-21-gujarat-encounters-284

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Truth is out: Ishrat Jahan encounter was fake, SIT tells Gujarat HC (Nov 21, 2011, Hindustan Times)

Nineteen-year-old Ishrat Jahan was killed in a fake encounter along with three others, a special investigation team (SIT) told the Gujarat high court on Monday. The shooting was staged and according to forensic, medical and material evidence, the victims were killed before the “encounter date” of June 15, 2004, said the report, which was submitted on November 18. The three member SIT was headed by Bihar cadre IPS Rajiv Ranjan Verma.

A high court bench – which did not make the report public – initially ordered that a fresh FIR be filed, charging the policemen involved with murder. However, later, it decided that a final order regarding the FIR will be given on Wednesday. Police have maintained that Ishrat, Javed Sheikh alias Pranesh Pillai, Amjad Ali Rana and Zeeshan Johar were members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, on a mission to kill chief minister Narendra Modi. Over 20 policemen, including senior IPS officers, are involved in the case.

The probe will now pass on to a central agency. The court on Monday sought suggestions from the petitioners and the government on whether to entrust the task to the CBI or the National Investigation Agency. “The probe agency needs to find out who played the key role… what was the motive, what was the actual time of death and the circumstances in which they were killed,” it said. The development is a blow to the Modi government, facing a series of fake encounter charges against its police force. But families of the victims hailed the report as a “victory of truth”. Said Ishrat’s uncle Rauf Lala: “She was innocent, it is our victory.”

The Gujarat high court on October 7 asked the SIT, probing the encounter, to submit its final report by November 18. That was the second time that the court had directed the SIT to submit its final report. During the hearing on September 10, the SIT was asked to give its final report by October 7. However, the team had submitted an interim report saying investigation into the case was not yet over. During the October 7 proceedings, Verma had said that they wanted to conduct psycho-analysis test on some of the witnesses, who have turned hostile and the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) has given them time to conduct such a test between October 19 and 21. Verma also told the court that they had some queries regarding the CFSL report on reconstruction of the encounter.

Ishrat, Pillai, Rana and Johar were allegedly killed by Ahmedabad Crime Branch in an encounter on June 15, 2004. A team of Ahmedabad crime branch on July 15, 2004 had intercepted an Indica car and later on killed four persons in encounter. The probe in the case was supervised directly by the high court which constituted the SIT last year to investigate the genuineness of the gunfight after petitions were filed by Ishrat’s mother Shamima Kausar and Gopinath Pillai, father of Pranesh, raising questions about the police version of the incident.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/772053.aspx

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

NAC members demand tabling of communal violence bill in winter (Nov 18, 2011, IBN)

Members of the National Advisory Council (NAC) today demanded tabling of the Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence bill in the winter session of parliament. NAC members Farah Naqvi and Harsh Mander told a meeting today that, “If the UPA is sincere, they should do it now. Today the ball is firmly in their (government) court.” The Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence(Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill 2001, better known as communal violence bill, has been submitted by NAC to the government which has yet not acted on it in the wake of opposition to the draft provisions by political parties like the BJP.

The draft law intends to prevent and control targeted violence against the scheduled castes, the scheduled tribes and religious and linguistic minorities. Harsh Mander said that not only the leadership but the executive too has failed to give equal justice under the existing law to minorities and it is necessary to pass the new law. He said that as long as the accused are Muslims, flimsy allegations are enough to keep them in jail but when the accused is a Hindu, then you need highest standard of investigation and proof.

Former High Court judge Hospet Suresh questioning the delay over tabling of the bill asked “should we to go on fast like Anna Hazare and demanded that the government should table the bill in the parliament. “We are still debating this when it should have been passed (in the parliament) by now”, he said.

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/nac-members-demand-tabling-of-communal-violence-bill-in-winter/906843.html

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Muslim youths tortured after Modi’s call to release the detained tourists (Nov 15, 2011, Twocircles.net)

Some Muslim youths in the Kalpeni Island of Lakshadweep were reportedly subjected to torture for allegedly detaining 131tourists including 45 from Gujarat, who had entred the island without adequate documents. The Gujarat tourists were believed to be close aids and officials of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi. The tourists were held ‘hostage’ by locals on Kalpeni Island on 29th October for lack of sufficient travel documents but they were released on 30th October. The tourists that included 25 children had reached there by MV Kavaratti vessel from Kochi. After they landed the islanders examined their travel documents and found that over 100 of them had no proper documents including boarding passes.

The tourists had reached the island under the ‘Samudra’ package of Lakshadweep Tourism Department to visit Kalpeni, Kavarathi and Minicoy Islands. They were expected to possess proper documents to entre each Island and it was the responsibility of the Island sports department to provide them adequate documents but it was found that over 100 tourists had not their names in the passengers list of MV Kavaratti or in the online port department list. The ship had 750 passengers in all. It is believed that their documents and luggage weren’t sufficiently checked at Kochi port. The local administration charges penalties on people arriving Lakshadweep without proper documents. So, the people of Kalpeni Island reportedly demanded action against the tourists who had entered the island without proper documents but the administration explained that the problem was technical. This enraged the locals and they reportedly detained the tourists.

The news was flashed by both print and electronic media but with twisted tone and text. It was presented as if ‘Islamic extremists detained Modi’s men’. Some of the detainees reportedly called up Gujarat CM’s office and it was on Modi’s call to Union Home Minister P Chidambaram that Island Administrator Amarnath and Collector N Vasantha Kumar rushed to the island in helicopter and soon 26 local Muslim youths were taken into custody.

The Muslim youhts were taken to Kavarathi Police station and allegedly tortured. Though they are now out on bail after two days remand, they have been asked to report to the Kavarathi Police station on a daily basis. On the other hand, no case has been lodged against the Gujarat tourists who were there without necessary documents. Meanwhile, Kalpeni Island Chairperson Kakkayillam Nalakam Naseema told mediapersons that Collector N Vasantha Kumar misbehaved with her as she questioned torturing of the Muslim youths.

http://twocircles.net/2011nov15/muslim_youths_tortured_after_modi%E2%80%99s_call_release_detained_tourists.html

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

India nun Valsa John murder: police probing Maoist role (Nov 21, 2011, BBC)

Sister Valsa John was killed after about 50 people broke into her home last week. Police say that Maoist pamphlets were left at the crime scene. They said that rebels were finding it hard to infiltrate the area where the nun had considerable influence. More than a dozen villagers have been detained in connection with the murder. Initially, the police said they believed the Maoist pamphlets were left at the crime scene to mislead investigators.

But after interrogating the detained villagers, police say they believe that rebels were behind the murder. “She was a major block in their [Maoists'] way,” senior police officer Arun Oraon told the BBC Hndi’s Salman Ravi. “Therefore, the Maoists fanned all the resentment against her. They provoked the villagers to resort to such an extreme step,” he said. Sister John’s brother, however, says she recently spoke of threats from a “mining mafia”. There has been no word from mining officials.

Some reports said that Sister John had also angered a group of tribal people by going to the police to file a complaint after a local woman was allegedly raped. The tribesmen wanted the issue to be settled out of court. Mr Oraon said the police were investigating all these angles. Sister Valsa, originally from Kerala, was working with the Missionaries of Charity and had gone to Jharkhand to work with tribespeople.

Our correspondent says she later took up the cause of tribal people displaced by mining around Pakur, about 400km (250 miles) north-east of the state capital Ranchi. The state government has ordered an inquiry into the incident.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-15814591

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Charkop teen’s rape: Probe ordered into police inaction (Nov 17, 2011, Hindustan Times)

A day after a detailed report by HT about the insensitivity displayed by Borivli police that may have contributed to the abduction and rape of a 14-year-old girl from Charkop, a DCP-level inquiry has been ordered into the incident.

On Wednesday, joint commissioner of police (law and order) Rajnish Seth directed the deputy commissioner of police (DCP), Zone 11 Mahesh Patil to conduct an inquiry and submit a report by Thursday.

The 14-year-old was allegedly abducted and raped over a period of 34 days by the two accused before she was rescued on Monday. Two days before she was kidnapped, the girl had lodged a complaint with the Borivli police alleging molestation by the duo. Instead of taking strict action, the Borivli police booked the duo under lighter, non-cognisable sections and let them off with a warning.

“This is serious matter which needs to be looked into immediately. I have asked the DCP to conduct a detailed inquiry,” Seth told HT. Appropriate action would be initiated against policemen found guilty, he added.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/770255.aspx

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Opinions and Editorials

Sardarpura lesson: Gullible go to jail, not mastermind – By Girish Patel (Nov 21, 2011, DNA India)

I know I am a person who is easily moved. Perhaps this is why I could not keep my eyes from filling up with tears when I saw the photos of the kin of people killed in the Sardarpura massacre of 2002, as also of the relatives of convicts jailed for life in the case. I do not overlook the important difference between the two groups – relatives of innocent victims against kin of people found guilty in the case – but the plight of their families is the same. What is far more important is that the real culprits behind the Gujarat pogrom of 2002 are still free and in power.

These people could have prevented or controlled the communal riots but deliberately did not do so. It was these people and their storm-troopers who created murderous frenzy in the name of cultural nationalism and poisoned the minds of ordinary people with hatred, intolerance and violence. These people are still free and they continue to enjoy temporal power and “religious” blessings. Given this state of affairs, one question continues to haunt the mind: who really gets justice in our society? The trial court simply decided who was or was not proved to be guilty of specific crimes – and nothing else. What about the communal carnage of 2002 in its totality? What is the real truth behind it? Who and what led to the communal frenzy and large-scale violence that resulted in the killing and uprooting thousands of people, not to talk of the destruction of their properties worth crores of rupees?

The suffering of the people does not just end with the conviction of the guilty and acquittal of the innocent. On the contrary, the judgement in Sardarpura case that came after nine years of the incident reopens old wounds among the victims and rekindles the feeling of enmity and bitterness among the convicted. Further, acquittal cannot compensate those acquitted for the years they had to stay in jail or for the ignominy of criminal proceedings. Moreover, the matter does not end here for there are many more years of appeals to go. What type of criminal justice system do we have that allows inflicting of pain on innocent victims and their families and also on the kith and kin of the indoctrinated and almost insane wrongdoers? What is this criminal justice system which neither deters nor prevents nor delivers retributive justice in time?

The Nanavati enquiry commission which was appointed in 2002 to investigate the riots is not able to find out the truth even after nine years and expenditure of Rs 6crore. Can truth be so complex and expensive? What is the purpose of such enquiry commissions? Everyone in Gujarat knows the truth about the 2002 pogrom but it is strange that only the learned judges find it difficult to discover it. Our experience with the working of a large number of such commissions of enquiry in India during the last 50 years has shown that such commissions are actually intended to delay the discovery of truth. The delay helps higher-ups in power or in command to avoid answering for their culpability besides creating general amnesia among the people.

Why fool the people and why waste so much money? Why the need to accommodate or oblige retired judges when that undermines the status, authority and independence of the judiciary? Why mystify the truth? It is far better to stop this charade of justice and truth. The real question which troubles me is why have we failed to create a humane society and loving, caring and sharing human beings even after thousands of years of civilization, religions, saints and mahatmas? Why is it that philosophers and scholars, scientific inventions and technological advances have all failed in making human beings truly human?

http://www.dnaindia.com/print710.php?cid=1615472

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Ruining Innocent Lives: Guilt of Investigation Agencies – By Ram Puniyani (Nov 13, 2011, Countercurrents)

Nine youth accused in Malegaon blast case of 2006 have been granted bail by the MCOCA court. (Nov 6 2011). These Muslim youth were arrested after the bomb exploded on the Shab-e-Barat, killing several people. Immediately after that the Anti Terrorist Sqaud, arrested nine Muslim youth, there was really no evidence worth its name against them. Still police which is, motivated more by biases than by professionalism, arrested these Muslims youth. The investigation agencies have firmly believed all through that all terrorists are Muslims. Human rights workers tried to reason with the top police authorities that how can Muslim youth conspire to kill their own kin. In other quarters the way the virus of Islamophobia and anti Muslim sentiments has gripped a large section in society including the police authorities, have strong biases against Muslims. The investigation for authorities so far had become an easy job, after every blast, catch hold of few Muslim youth put them behind bars and then try to generate the evidence, if possible.

Similar things happened in Mecca Masjid blast when the authorities arrested nearly 25 Muslim youth after the blast in the mosque. That time even the National Commission for Minorities minced no words and concluded that the case against Muslim youths, who were detained in the immediate aftermath of the 2007 Mecca Masjid blasts, has been fabricated. The Godhra train burning investigation is also mired in much deeper misconception, where nothing could be proved against the alleged Chief conspirator, Maulana Haji Umarji. Despite that, other Muslim youth were given the sentence. All these investigations show a clear pattern that the biases of the investigation authorities overtake their professional training. This was also one of the lazy way of going about things as arresting Muslims after such an episode is passe’ in public opinion and in the media in particular. Barring a small section of media others hardly played their role of raising doubts about the methods of investigating authorities.

In the blasts in Nanded (April 2006) two Bajrang dal activists died while making the bombs. They were making the bombs in the house of one Mr. Rajkondawar, a RSS worker. It had all the clear evidence of the Hindutva terror gang undertaking such terrorist operations. But Mahrashtra ATS stubbornly ignored the basic point and protected the real guilty of the crime. It took the like of Hemant Karkare to impeccably unearth the evidence linking the Malegaon blast of 2008 with Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, Swami Dayanand Pandey and other RSS associates, to meticulously demonstrate that the real cause of terror attacks in these places from Nanded, Modassa, Parbhani, Jalna, Aurangabad, Ajmer and Samjhauta blast lies somewhere else. It is unfortunate that the police officer of such an integrity was killed in the Mumbai terror attack on 26/11 2008. What was happening so far was that since police was merrily botching up the investigation, the real culprits were becoming bolder and they went on committing one after the other acts of terror. There is a long list of RSS affiliates, against whom there is a strong ground to allege them. Of course, RSS true to its character was quick to say that those involved in acts of terror, had already ‘left’ the RSS.

The matters really could not be hidden after the confession of Swami Aseemanand, which was reported first by the gutsy magazine Tehelka. Swami Aseemanand, an RSS worker, who was working for VHP in Dangs, organizing Shabri Kumbh in the presence of top RSS top brass, confessed in presence of a magistrate. This confession as per the law can be treated as an evidence in the court. He spilled the beans and confessed his role in Mecca masjid and other blasts and also named his colleagues in the crime. This forced the agencies to do the course correction in some ways. Aseemanand has named senior RSS leader Indresh Kumar, the murdered RSS pracharak Sunil Joshi, Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and senior RSS pracharaks Sandeep Dange and Ramji Kalsangra, among others, as being key conspirators in the terror blast. The result of this fortunately is that in Malegaon blast accused after 5 years of their suffering and loss of youthful years in jails, have been granted the bails. This raises multiple questions as far as our society and nation are concerned. First is, do we deserve such a biased investigation agencies who, episode after episode, keep repeating the same method despite the lack of proper evidence. The heavy reliance of agencies on the role of SIMI, a banned organization and some vague groups with Muslim names has been the favorite line of investigation of the authorities. How can this trend be reversed? The biases in the minds of authorities are also a reflection of ‘social common sense’ prevalent in the society. This ‘social common sense’ has been manufactured by communal forces and media has disseminated it further. Despite the Harmony Programs by Government, despite the Home ministry’s lip service to prop up National Foundation for communal harmony, not many awareness programs have been consistently followed or taken up seriously.

The state has enough resources to ensure that police academies, the officers training institutes and college-universities are made the conduit to disseminate the values of plural traditions, the synthesis of religions in the form of Bhakti and Sufi traditions, the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi on communal harmony. A lot is possible to give a prop to the values of harmony which underlie the India’s freedom movement and are inherent in Indian Constitution. There are many a NGOs and individuals who are trying to do this work, but definitely their reach is very limited. This promotion of culture of amity and celebration of diversity by the state is a must at this juncture. The second point of serious concern is what does state and society do when the lives of innocents are ruined by the callous attitude of investigation authorities. There have demands that these youth should be adequately compensated and their amount of compensation should be recovered from the salaries of the police officers who are blinded by their prejudices and push aside professionalism to give a free play to their biases in arresting these youth. A suitable rehabilitation program, scholarship, assistance to rebuild the life has to be the responsibility of the state in these matters. State must come forward to undo the severe harm it has inflicted on these innocent youth.

http://www.countercurrents.org/puniyani131111.htm

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Ramkatha, Rambhakts and the University – By Ashwin Anshu (Nov 12, 2011, Economic& Political Weekly)

An essay by the world-renowned Indian folklorist and linguist A K Ramanujan, “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation” has been at the centre of controversy ever since Delhi Uni¬versity’s history department office was vandalised in February 2008 by youth belonging to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) in protest against the introduction of that essay as part of under¬graduate readings. Three years down the line, Delhi University, going against the recommendation of the expert committee established on the orders of Supreme Court, has set a perverse seal of legitimacy on that attack by shelving the essay from suggested readings. It is a well-known agenda of the Hindu right to control education in a way that sup¬ports its own anti-secular ideology. Earlier attempts were made via the rewriting of school textbooks. An even more sinister method is that of invoking “religious” or “popular sentiment” to attack writings that question the prevailing orthodoxies or put forward new perspectives. This is more dangerous as it erases the crucial line between the freedom of rational enquiry, which is basic to any academic pursuit, and the limitation of this freedom by ideologies which uphold the supremacy of religion and the religious community. The Hindu right wing has increasingly sought to curtail academic freedom by setting up this crite¬ria of “religious sentiment”. The works of some of the best historians in this country, like the late R S Sharma, Romila Thapar and Sumit Sarkar, have been targeted in the past for hurting “religious” senti¬ments. This time it is Ramanujan’s essay.

A brief summary of the background and context in which Ramanujan’s essay had been included in the syllabus will help re¬move misconceptions about the justification for its inclusion in the undergraduate course. Delhi University, following extensive de-liberations and due procedures, had put into place from July 2005 the restructured syllabi for undergraduate students for Honours courses. This was done by the academic council (AC) based on the report of the Bachelor of Arts (Honours) restruc-turing committee that had been set up by the vice chancellor on 11 October 2004. The major change effected was to do away with defunct subsidiary courses and replace them with a set of concurrent courses which sought to expose students “to a range of challenging academic debates in areas other than the one covered by the main subject”, considered necessary for students to acquire “critical social awareness” and avoid “over-specialisation”.

For students, from streams other than History, a range of disciplinary courses had been framed which included “Culture in India: A Historical Perspective” that had ancient, medieval and modern components. Ramanujan’s essay was included along with Irawati Karve’s novel Yuganta, based on the Mahabharata, for the sub-theme “Ramayana and Mahabharata: Stories, Character and Versions” for the ancient component of the course. These essays were selected in order to expose students from non-History backgrounds to the “best and most innovative historical scholarship” of an “interdisciplinary nature”. The in¬clusion of Ramanujan’s essay was thus in tune with the nature and purpose of the course that sought to instil a critical and historical understanding of a diverse and plural Indian culture. History as a discipline has been a favoured site for extra-academic and coercive inter¬ventions since it serves as an important tool for legitimising certain constellations of power or to question them. It is a matter of extreme concern when a secular state and its institutions buckle before the hooliganism of right-wing elements and endorse their undemocratic and anti-rational standpoint which subverts the very premises of a healthy academic environment. The recent decision of the AC of Delhi University to shelve that essay from the reading list of the undergraduate courses is precisely such an action.

The question that arises is, who has the authority to decide whether a piece of writing hurts sentiments or not? Surely self-appointed groups, which are rising by the dozen in the country these days, cannot be given that authority. The correct thing to do in this case would have been to go by the recommendations of the committee appointed to look into this matter as a result of the Supreme Court order. What makes the AC decision a matter of concern is that three out of the four members of that committee did not find anything objection¬able in Ramanujan’s essay, and yet the AC decided to remove it. The particular essay, rather than hurting religious sentiments or pronouncing moral judgments, is actually a creative effort, from an “objective” standpoint to draw upon many pre-existing studies of the Ramkatha tradition and points out an important historical and cultural fact – the diversity of stories connected with Ramkatha. The title “Three Hundred Ramayanas” drew from the enumeration of 300 Ramayanas by one of the most well known of such surveys, that by Camille Bulcke, widely regarded as a classic of the Hindi literary sphere. There are different stories about Ram in different cultures, which reflect the beliefs and attitudes of these cultures. In Jaina Ramayana for example, Ravana rather than being a rakshasa (demon) is considered one of the 63 great Jaina heroes. …

The controversy over Ramanujan’s essay highlights some key issues. One of them is the Hindu right’s claim to act as the custodian of Hindu identity and to assert its hegemony over all “Hindu” traditions is often successful due to the weaknesses of our institutions. The other is that the defence of academic freedom and autonomy is central to the life of a university. The supremacy of rational enquiry is the funda¬mental basis of all academic endeavours and undermining that destroys the basis of a university. If the logic of the criticism of Ramanujan’s essay is extended, then historical studies will be transformed into theological works that discuss religion only from the theological rather than secular standpoint. If the aim of history education is to broaden minds and to infuse a critical under¬standing of the past then shelving of essays like that of Ramanujan on non-academic grounds does not help. The climate of intolerance will only be furthered. There¬fore, it is the duty of all members of the university community, the larger academic community as well as citizens concerned about our secular public institutions to impress upon Delhi University authorities that they should not bow down to violence but defend their own faculty and academia and reinstate Ramanujan’s essay in the undergraduate syllabi.

http://epw.in/epw/uploads/articles/16731.pdf

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Maya Woos Them All – By Virendra Nath Bhatt (Nov 26, 2011, Tehelka)

Chief Minister Mayawati, till now opposed to dynasty in politics, has added her grandfather Mangal Sen to the pantheon of Dalit icons in a bid to reassure her core votebank. This, at a time when she’s visibly wooing upper castes and rousing regional aspirations by seeking four-way division of UP. Mayawati’s Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) had won 206 seats in the 403-strong UP Assembly for the first time in 2007 by forging a new social coalition dubbed ‘Sarvajan’ – a euphemism for Dalits, Brahmins and Muslims. But in the 2009 Lok Sabha election, the party could lead in only 100 Assembly segments falling under 80 Parliamentary seats.

A BSP leader told TEHELKA on condition of anonymity that the pandering to upper caste sentiment is being watched warily. It’s a tightrope walk. On 12 November, National Education Day, Mayawati inaugurated a university for the physically challenged, named after Shakuntala Mishra, mother of Satish Chandra Mishra, her right-hand man and Rajya Sabha MP. Here, she mentioned her grandfather in glowing terms, recalling how he had insisted on educating girls in the family. And instead of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s address to students, it was her speech that was read out in schools, in which too she invoked her enlightened ancestor.

With the 2012 Assembly polls less than six months away, stark realities haunt the BSP. Its vote share in the 2009 Lok Sabha election plummeted to 27.42 percent against 30.43 percent in the 2007 Assembly election. In at least three constituencies, there were warning signals. Take Agra, widely regarded as the ‘Dalit capital’ because of the large number of Dalit entrepreneurs and employment of Dalits in the footwear industry. The Agra seat was won by the BJP, with the BSP coming second. Another setback for the BSP came in Barabanki (reserved) Lok Sabha seat. The victory of Congress candidate PL Punia, that too by a margin of over 1 lakh votes, came as a shocker, as he had served Mayawati as her principal secretary over her three tenures as CM.

Defeat of the BSP candidate in Etawah Lok Sabha seat also highlighted the failure to implement the Dalit-Brahmin formula. This was the seat from where Kanshi Ram, Mayawati’s mentor and BSP founder, had won in 1991. In the past four years, Dalits have watched with dismay as over three dozen of Satish Chandra Mishra’s family members and associates, including his brother and sister, got posts in government bodies and in the judiciary. The price Mayawati might have to pay is too high, according to Badri Narayan, author and professor at GB Pant Social Science Institute. “In 2007, of the total 13 percent Brahmin population in UP, hardly two percent voted for the BSP,” he says. “In fact, Mayawati needs only this much support of Brahmins.”

Of course, Dalits and Brahmins may not actually vote on casteist lines, belying Mayawati’s cynical calculations. Atul Anjaan, national secretary of the CPI, certainly hopes not. “All this shows to what extent the politics of UP has degenerated,” he says. “For two long decades, castebased and communal parties have held sway.” But most political pundits say the fight will be between the regional players – Samajwadi Party and BSP – rather than the BJP and the Congress.

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main51.asp?filename=Ne26101maya.asp

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

Reforming the Press Council – By A.G. Noorani (Nov 19, 2011, Frontline)

The appointment of Justice Markandey Katju, a former judge of the Supreme Court, as Chairman of the Press Council of India is about the best thing that has happened to that body in a long while. It is no exaggeration to say that the PCI commands little prestige today and less relevance. It is not representative of the press at all. What Justice Katju has done, in a few days after his appointment, is to infuse life into it and involve the press in its work. This is a good step towards making the media feel that it is their institution. It is a liberal approach, which he expounded in a get-together with mediapersons at his residence on October 10. “There are two ways to remove these defects in the media. One is the democratic way, that is, through discussions, consultations and persuasion – which is the method I prefer. The other way is by using harsh measures against the media, for example, by imposing heavy fines on defaulters, stopping government advertisements to them, suspending their licences, and so on. “In a democracy we should first try the first method to rectify the defects through the democratic method. For this purpose, I have decided to have regular get-togethers with the media, including the electronic media, so that we can all introspect and ourselves find out ways and means to rectify the defect in the media, rather than this being done by some government authority or external agency. I propose to have such get-togethers once every two or three months, at which we will discuss issues relating to the media and try to think of how we can improve the performance of the media so that it may win the respect and confidence of the people.

“If the media prove incorrigible, harsh measures may be required. But in my opinion, that should be done only as a last resort and in extreme situations. Ordinarily, we should first try to resolve issues through discussion, consultation and self-regulation. That is the approach which should be first tried in a democracy. I, therefore, request the Union government to defer the implementation of its recent decision regarding news channel licences, so that we can ourselves discuss the issue thoroughly, and ourselves take corrective measures. “Till now the function of the Press Council was only adjudication. I intend to make the Press Council an instrument of mediation in addition, which is in my opinion the democratic approach” ( The Hindu, October 22, 2011). But the archaic Press Council Act, 1978, is most unsuited to serve as a platform for such an imaginative enterprise. It was atrophied at its very birth by imposing (Section 5 (3)) a strange composition of the Press Council, which ensures its own irrelevance and cynicism by the press. Justice Katju rightly holds that the electronic media should also be brought within the remit of the Press Council. Indeed, failure to do so would violate the constitutional guarantee of equality (Article 14). Equals must be treated alike. Cinematograph films are different in that, unlike the print and electronic media, they are subject to pre-censorship. A ramshackle system of supposedly quasi-judicial institutions is set up by the Cinematograph Act, 1952. Meanwhile, the electronic media roams at large like a rogue elephant.

However, if television is to be brought within the purview of the Act of 1978, as it must be, the statute will have to undergo a drastic overhaul beginning with its title. The composition of the PCI must be changed fundamentally. This would provide an excellent opportunity for reform, in which Justice Katju’s PCI can perform the role he promises as an instrument of mediation. But 2011 is not 1978. The media are more assertive. No reform will be acceptable or will work unless it is based on the largest measure of consensus in the print as well as the electronic media. To begin with, the PCI’s composition must change. Names need not be mentioned, but it is well known that over the years it has had members whose presence on the Council was nothing short of scandalous. Members of the print and electronic media should put their heads together to ensure that the PCI truly represents the media. Justice Katju might propose a radical change. The PCI should no longer be headed by a former judge of the Supreme Court but by a person elected by the media itself. Appointment of a judge by the government adds an “outside” element to what is a “Court of Honour” comprising the media, mandated to discipline its own erring members. The task will be more effectively performed if the PCI represents both the wings of the media, print and electronic, and is headed by one of their own.

Bar a few honourable exceptions, the former Supreme Court judges who served as Chairmen did poor service to the PCI and brought little credit to themselves. What is it that inspired a former judge of the Supreme Court presiding over the Press Council, Justice N. Rajagopala Iyengar, to write to V.C. Shukla, easily the most despicable Minister for Information and Broadcasting we have ever had, on August 13, 1975, during the Emergency, confidentially in this conspiratorial vein: “You remember I spoke to you about the desire of some members to have a meeting convened for the purpose of discussing the Emergency and the Censorship. I had an informal meeting of the Delhi-based members and I was able to convince them that this is not necessary or desirable. So this will not figure in [sic] the agenda of my meeting that is being called” ( White Paper on Misuse of Mass Media during the Internal Emergency; Government of India; August 1977; page 40). The context brings out the betrayal by the PCI Chairman. Kuldip Nayar had proposed a resolution condemning restrictions on the press. The judge, a custodian of press freedom as the PCI’s head, not only sabotaged the move but wrote to the Minister about his brilliant piece of work to earn brownie points. Justice R.S. Sarkaria was another favourite. He was appointed on a Commission of Inquiry in 1976 against the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, M. Karunanidhi; as head of the Commission on Centre-State Relations in 1983, along with two former bureaucrats, to deliver the desired report; and later as Chairman of the PCI, in recognition of his high services to the state. In 1990, participants at a seminar were shocked to hear him argue that it took the United States 200 years to acquire a law on the freedom of information. Fortunately, we did not wait for those 200 years. But his worst abdication of duty lay in entertaining an oral complaint by the Army on press reportage on Kashmir. It included reports of alleged rapes of 31 women by army personnel during the night of February 23-24, 1991. A probe into the veracity of such a report is one for a Commission of Inquiry to undertake; surely not for the Press Council of India. Besides, Regulation 4 of the Press Council (Procedure for Inquiry) Regulations, 1979, binds the PCI to reject any complaint that is not in writing and does not contain the details required under Regulation 3. The upshot was a report by B.G. Verghese, which lies discredited today. …

Justice Katju lost little time in dissipating the credit he had initially acquired. The penchant for sweeping remarks for which he was known in the “outbursts” on the Supreme Court Bench asserted itself soon after he became Chairman of the PCI. He deservedly received reprimands from the Editor’s Guild and the Broadcast Editors Association on November 1 and 2. All of which only fortifies the case for revamping the PCI by eliminating Supreme Court judges from the chairmanship and including the electronic media within the ambit of a reconstituted Media Council as suggested in this article. Katju ought to know that judges of the Supreme Court exhibit appalling ignorance of literature when they demand that avowed works of historical fiction should be historically accurate. You cannot denounce and persuade at the same time. … But not all his comments on the media should be brushed aside. Some are fair. For instance, TV anchors assiduously whip up chauvinism in their contest for Television Rating Points – their current target is China. Four leading anchors behave like licensed louts every evening. They promote sensationalism and revel in aggressive demeanour. Print media journalists have to undergo a long grind before they reach editorial positions. Only a TV anchor will loftily proclaim while in Ladakh, “the McMahon Line is behind me”. He did not know that the line is our boundary in the north-east. It does not extend westward. In Ladakh the Sino-Indian boundary was never defined. Only a Line of Actual Control exists. Another TV channel has broken all norms of professional integrity by reducing itself to a platform for Omar Abdullah whenever he has been in trouble ever since he was pitchforked into the office of the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir nearly three years ago. To everyone’s surprise, he on his part grants it and its correspondent preferential treatment. Still and all, Justice Katju should be given a fair chance for he has some good ideas and intends to infuse life into the PCI.

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2824/stories/20111202282408800.htm

SEE ALSO:

[Back to Top]

{ 0 comments }

IAMC Urges Central Government to Ban Terror Outfits Sanatan Sanstha and Abhinav Bharat

October 1, 2011

Saturday, October 1st, 2011 The Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC – http://www.iamc.com), an advocacy group dedicated to safeguarding India’s pluralist and tolerant ethos, has called upon Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to act on the request of the Maharashtra State Government to ban right-wing terrorist organization Sanatan Sanstha. In a letter to the Prime Minister, IAMC [...]

Read the full article →

IAMC Weekly News Roundup – September 5th, 2011

September 5, 2011

In this issue of IAMC News Roundup Communal Harmony School students take out national integration rally NIC meet to discuss communal harmony, terrorism News Headlines Modi involved in my brother’s killing, claims Haren’s sister Tulsiram killed Haren, not Asgar Ali: Sanjiv Bhatt CBI questions Chudasama in Tulsiram encounter case Why Narendra Modi is on the [...]

Read the full article →

IAMC Weekly News Roundup – August 1st, 2011

August 1, 2011

In this issue of IAMC News Roundup Announcements Indian Americans Express Alarm at Breivik’s Hindutva Nexus Spread the Word and Spread the Tweet .. IAMC Updates Available Via Twitter Communal Harmony Muslim Sanskrit academic bags harmony award News Headlines Narendra Modi under cloud again as amicus differs with SIT, SC to take final call Narendra [...]

Read the full article →

‘Have clinching evidence of RSS training people to make bombs’ (Jul 24, 2011, Hindustan Times)

July 25, 2011

Congress leader Digvijaya Singh reiterated on Sunday that he had clinching evidence of the RSS’ involvement in training people in bomb-making. He also accused the Madhya Pradesh government of interfering with the police probe, rejecting the charge that he was ‘communalising’ terror. Singh, however, denied that he had said Hindu outfits could be responsible for [...]

Read the full article →