South Asia Citizens Wire | 19 April, 2005
[1] Bangladesh: Ahmadiyya under attack
- Inaction has gone too far - Ahmadiyyas in dire strait (Edit., The Daily Star)
- Outrage in Satkhira (Edit., New Age)
[2] India - Pakistan: Peace road map is now out of the box (Siddharth Varadarajan)
[3] Indo-Pak Peace March - crossing the wagah border on 20th April
[4] India: Mumbai's bar girls and the question of morality (Flavia Agnes)
[5] India: Concerned Citizens Demand dismissal of Modi Govt. - text of statement
[6] India: A report from "Flashback Gujarat 2002"
[7] India: Let antiquated laws go and same-sex lovers be allowed to live in dignity (Saleem Kidwai)
[8] Publication Announcement:
'Pratidwandi by Sunil Gangopadhyay' [in English]
--------------
[1]
The Daily Star April 19, 2005
Editorial
INACTION HAS GONE TOO FAR
AHMADIYYAS IN DIRE STRAIT
Last month, the administration sat idle while anti-Ahmadiyya bigots wielding weapons and threatening violence besieged the Ahmadiyya community in Bogra and intimidated the local police into hanging a sign on the wall of the community mosque, "warning" Muslims not to mistake it for a "real" Muslim mosque.
Emboldened by the fact that the government did not lift a finger to either protect the religious rights of the Ahmadiyyas or to punish those guilty of violence and intimidation, the bigots stepped up their campaign of hatred at Satkhira on Sunday.
As estimated 15,000 activists, armed with sticks and machetes, besieged the Ahmadiyya mosque in Satkhira, and threatened violence if the badly outnumbered and ill-prepared police did not acquiesce to the hanging of the offensive sign on the wall of the mosque. When the Ahmadiyyas attempted to resist, the mob hurled stones at them, injuring fifty people, including women and children.
Once the sign had been hung, the mob then proceeded to ransack the surrounding area, looting the houses of some local Ahmadiyyas. To add insult to injury, the injured also allegedly did not receive timely medical help from physicians at a local hospital.
The administration knew full well that this attack against the Ahmadiyyas was coming, as the bigots had announced their intentions well in advance, yet, once again, it did nothing to prevent this outrage.
This has gone far enough. It is not merely a question of the Ahmadiyyas' constitutional rights, which the government manifestly has little concern for. It is also a question of simple law and order. The government cannot permit baying mobs to threaten, intimidate, assault, and ransack with impunity. These are criminal offences, perpetrated in broad daylight in front of thousands of witnesses.
The International Khatme Nabuwat Movement Bangladesh, which organised the attack and has been at the forefront of the movement against the Ahmadiyyas, has been permitted to continue its unlawful operations without hindrance. The close ties between the movement and elements within the four-party ruling alliance are no secret.
So long as the government chooses to abdicate its responsibility in stemming this despicable and criminal conduct by religious extremists, it is no wonder that the image of the country around the world would be seen sliding. The administration's inaction demonstrates quite clearly that it has neither the will nor the inclination to keep the extremists in check.
New Age April 19 2005
Editorial
OUTRAGE IN SATKHIRA
The attack on the Ahmadiyya community by a band of religious fanatics in Satkhira on Sunday demonstrates anew the national concern over the activities of the so-called Khatme Nabuwat movement. In the name of a defence of the Islamic faith, these bigots have for a long time been engaging themselves in activities that are a clear attempt to create chaos in the country. The irony in the whole situation is that when the country is trying to emerge from its existing social and political crises, the fanatics have somehow found the wherewithal to create a new problem that need not have been there. With the new attack, this time in a violent manner, on the members of the Ahmadiyya community, it becomes obvious that some very powerful forces are behind the bigots as they go from one atrocious act to another. It is in the fitness of things therefore that the authorities now go seriously and purposefully into the business of identifying the elements who may be patronising, morally, financially and in other ways, the Khatme Nabuwat in its campaign of creating disorder in the name of ensuring religious purity.
It goes without saying that Bangladesh has by and large been a land of communal harmony. We will not pretend, however, that everything has been perfect in this country either before or after liberation in terms of a practice of the various faiths. But it is true that all governments and the entire Bengali nation have resolutely come down on any attempt by fringe elements to create the conditions which could upset the fabric of peaceful religious activity in the country. Of late, though, such bodies as the Khatme Nabuwat have demonstrated a hitherto unimaginable degree of audacity in their determination to have the Ahmadiyyas declared non-Muslim. For their part, the Ahmadiyyas do not appear to have said, done or propagated anything that could even remotely be construed as an incitement to trouble. The bigger problem in all this Ahmadiyya-related trouble is that some important people, including the khatib of Baitul Mukarram, have contributed their bit. Worse is the fact that the authorities have done precious little to take all these troublemakers to task even when it has been made clear that there is a patent threat to law and order here. All that the authorities have done every time Ahmadiyyas have come under siege anywhere in Bangladesh is to deploy police around their homes and places of worship for such time as their enemies bayed for their blood before going home. In Bogra, the police went quite a bit of the way to placate the bigots when they had the Ahmadiyya sign on a mosque replaced by one prepared by the bigots themselves. That was as outrageous as it was humiliating for the already beleaguered Ahmadiyyas. And now in Satkhira, matters have moved one more dark step forward. News reports speak of the homes of Ahmadiyyas coming under attack by the fanatics. As many as fifty women and children have been injured in the attack and their valuables have been looted by the marauders. The police were either powerless to prevent the violence or were clearly unwilling to come to the aid of those attacked.
The authorities should be reading the writing on the wall. And for the country's civil society, the imperative is to build up a movement that will not only thwart the nefarious activities of any organised band of chaos makers but also ensure that this is a land where the freedom of faith applies equally to each and every citizen. Anyone who is uncomfortable with that inviolable truth must be dealt with by the law of the land.
_______
[2]
The Hindu April 19, 2005
PEACE ROAD MAP IS NOW OUT OF THE BOX By Siddharth Varadarajan
In the joint statement by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President Pervez Musharaf lie most of the elements of a roadmap for peace between India and Pakistan.
CLASP OF FRIENDSHIP: Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh after making the joint statement at Hyderabad House in New Delhi on Monday. Photo: V.Sudershan.
THE LATEST meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf is proof of the fact that in diplomacy - as in cricket - the results of a high-level encounter are often inversely proportional to the expectations that precede it.
If the excitement before the July 2001 Agra summit led to nothing but bitterness and rancour all around, the days leading up to Sunday's path-breaking summit had seen both sides consciously seeking to talk down the hype. At an off-the-record briefing a few hours before the General arrived in New Delhi, senior Indian officials cautioned that the impending summit was not really a summit or even a mini-summit but simply an occasion for the frank exchange of views. And yet, what transpired during the 36 hours the Pakistani President was in the Capital was as momentous as anything the two countries have seen in recent years.
The joint statement read out by the Prime Minister in his deadpan style on Monday morning may seem anodyne to some but within its terse sentences and paragraphs - and the call made by General Musharaf and Dr. Singh in separate meetings with the press to make existing borders irrelevant - lie most of the elements of a roadmap for peace between India and Pakistan.
No turning back
Though the two sides wisely avoided formally capturing the notion of soft borders - the concept needs to be fleshed out and debated adequately in both countries - the joint statement is noteworthy in six respects. First, it stresses the irreversibility of the peace process now under way. The two Governments are saying that come what may, there will be no turning back from what has been achieved so far - the resumption and enhancement of cross-border traffic and people-to-people contact, including sports, and the ceasefire along the Line of Control and up in the Siachen Glacier. The self-imposed quarantine India brought about by cutting all air, raid and road links following the December 13, 2001 terrorist attack on Parliament will, hopefully, never again be repeated.
Secondly, it says that terrorism will not be allowed to disrupt the relationship. The specific formulation is worth noting: "The two leaders pledged that they would not allow terrorism to impede the peace process." Terrorism, here, is no longer a stick for India to beat Pakistan with but a problem which confronts both countries equally. If the statement implies that Islamabad will continue to work to ensure terrorist incidents are not planned or launched from territories it controls, New Delhi, too, has undertaken not to over-react to the odd terrorist incident that might still take place.
In other words, India and Pakistan have jointly resolved not to give terrorists the right to veto the peace process through dramatic acts of violence.
Thirdly, the statement stresses that the purpose of having discussions on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir is to reach a "final settlement." In contrast, the September 24, 2004 statement issued in New York spoke of "possible options for a peaceful, negotiated settlement of the issue," while the January 6, 2004 joint statement spoke of the "peaceful settlement of all bilateral issues, including Jammu and Kashmir, to the satisfaction of both sides." However, the reference in the latest statement to a `final settlement,' though refreshing, is hardly new; it is, in fact, taken directly from the Shimla Agreement of July 2, 1972, Clause 6 of which commits both Governments "to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalization of relations, including the questions of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations." (emphasis added)
After conceding the need for such a final settlement as far back as 1972, India, somewhere along the line, chose to take the view that this was unnecessary. Reams of paper have been wasted on futile debates about whether Kashmir is a core issue or not. By returning to the Shimla language, India and Pakistan have wisely agreed to give the Kashmir issue the importance it actually has and not remain hostage to the linguistic sensibilities of those who do not know the diplomatic history of the bilateral relationship.
Trucks bearing fruit
Fourthly, having stressed the need for a final settlement, the statement suggests preliminary steps consistent with the notion of soft borders. Thus, it speaks of further measures "to enhance interaction and cooperation across the LoC," including passenger movement and trade.
Allowing trucks to cross the LoC - presumably laden with fruit on the outbound, and Pakistan-made consumer goods on the inbound - is a radical leap of faith for both India and Pakistan as it will eventually allow the economic geography of the region to revert to its pre-partition days. The position of Jammu as an entrepot, not just for the valley but also Poonch and Rajouri - once the road to Rawalakot in Pakistan is opened up (or even the old `Mughal Road' to the valley) - would be undermined, which could have unintended consequences for Jammu and Kashmir.
Fifthly, the joint statement undertakes to speed up deliverables, such as an agreement on Siachen and Sir Creek, and strive for greater business interaction. So long as Pakistan had the impression that India was using CBMs as a diversionary tactic to avoid reaching a final settlement on Kashmir, it was not interested in forward-movement on trade or fast-tracking the solution of specific disputes that have readymade agreements for the taking.
By not shying away from the Kashmir issue, India has achieved what it wanted: a Pakistani commitment to put easier problems on the front-burner.
Sixthly, Dr. Singh and General Musharraf have not only endorsed the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline in the face of U.S. criticism of the project but also expanded the scope for energy cooperation between their two countries.
Given the growing demand for energy in both Pakistan and India and the need for South Asia to access Iranian and Central Asian oil and gas, it is essential that the two countries start a broad energy dialogue.
Irrelevance of LoC
In his interaction with Indian editors, General Musharraf reiterated the proposal for soft borders made by him a few days ago. It is my belief that the Indian side - our leadership and the bulk of our media - has not yet understood the huge shift that the General's endorsement of soft borders along the LoC implies. To drive home the point, he reminded the editors of Pakistan's position that the LoC should not become the border, India's position that that there could be no redrawing of borders and the only possible via media between these two positions: "The LoC cannot be permanent, borders must be made irrelevant and boundaries cannot be altered. Take the three together and now discuss the solution," he said.
A soft border is the only administrative arrangement that allows India and Pakistan to maintain their respective de jure or de facto sovereignties in Kashmir while not coming in the way of the people of the divided State enjoying the fruits of a unified territory. The LoC need not be made permanent or redrawn; the solution is to make it irrelevant. Monday's joint statement contains six new elements that will enhance the irrelevance of the LoC. Future meetings between India and Pakistan must find many, many more.
______
[3]
INDO-PAK PEACE MARCH Delhi to Multan, 23 March - 11May
Dear Friends,
As you all know, India Pakistan Peace March, Delhi to Multan is on its way with great support of local citizens along the route. Since last couple of days Pakistani marchers have joined Indian marchers, the dream of walking together on roads of India and Pakistan is now becoming a reality.
We had earlier planned to cross Wagha border on 18th April, but due to administrative delays in visa processing, now we will be able to cross on 20th April.
The ceremony for expressing solidarity in support of the marchers will start at 10 a.m. on 20th April. The occasion will be marked with inspiring cultural activities performed by eminent Indian and Pakistani artists.
We all request you to be at Wagha and strengthen the cause of Indo-Pak friendship, peace and harmony.
Regards,
Sandeep Pandey Karamat Ali India Pakistan Peace March Team
P.S. even if you are reaching as per earlier schedule on 18th April, you will be participating in welcome programmes organised in Amritsar.
Lodging: Guru Arjun Dev Niwas, Golden Temple, Amritsar
Contacts in Amritsar: Bhupinder Singh Sandhu: 09815394623
Contacts in Delhi: Harshavardan: 09322696617, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Shree Prakash: 9818030423, off. 55663958
______
[4]
Asian Age April 19, 2005
MUMBAI'S BAR GIRLS AND THE QUESTION OF MORALITY by Flavia Agnes
Suddenly the dancing girl from Mumbai's beer bars is everywhere. In newspaper headlines, talk shows on television channels, the corridors of power in Mantralaya, in the capital city and before various commissions - in fact, in all places that matter. She is out of her closeted existence and out on the streets, demanding her right to work.
Her photographs are splashed across the tabloids and television screens. She is discussed everywhere, at dinner tables in middle class homes, in street corners and market places and in the ladies' compartment of local trains. Everyone has an opinion and a strong one at that. In her favour, or, more likely, against her. Saint or sinner Š worker or whore Š spinner of easy money and breaker of "good middle class homes" or sole supporter of an entire family Š earning her livelihood or posing a security threat to the nation? The debate on sexual morality and debasement of metropolitan Mumbai seems to be revolving around her existence (or non-existence).
No one has answers to the myriad queries: Is drinking beer (or hard liquor) in public (in a bar) immoral? Are drinking and dancing in public immoral? Or while drinking in public, witnessing the imitation of an erotic "item number" of a Hindi movie immoral? Is throwing money at a dancer while she performs the "item number" immoral? Is performance of a cabaret dance immoral? Are corporate parties in five-star hotels where belly dances are performed, immoral? In a society where traditionally the entertainers are always women and the entertained always men, and where entertainment always has an undercurrent of sexuality or erotica, what are the ingredients which render an act moral at one time, place or for one section of society and immoral at another time, place or another section of society?
How and when did the dancing girl suddenly spring on to the political realm of the state and the nation? How did she become the talk of the town amongst the city's elite social circles and enter the debate in middle class homes? What are the stakes involved for the bar owners, the bureaucrats and the politicians?
She is part and parcel of a city which thrives on its night life. The Mumbai that never sleeps. The city which is hailed as the crowning glory of the nation's entertainment industry. The proposed ban will change the texture and quality of this industry and the city's night life. It will also violate her fundamental right to work and earn a livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution, as well as her right to carry on a legitimate profession under Article 19. Are we moving in the reverse towards 19th century Victorian puritanism in the globalised world of 21st century?
The city's dancing girls are not a new phenomenon. When Bombay (the erstwhile state) as well as the newer state of Maharashtra came out of its prohibition era and started issuing licences for "permit rooms" and "beer bars," simultaneously, it also started issuing licences for "floor shows" permitting cabaret performances and also for "dance floors" where female dancers could dance to recorded music or live orchestras. The licences were issued under "Rules for Licensing and Controlling Places of Public Amusement (other than Cinemas) and performances for Public Amusement including Melas and Thamashas, 1960." The state also evolved elaborate rules to regulate and monitor the functioning of these bars and permit rooms.
The Eighties witnessed a proliferation of these permit rooms and dance bars and many women who were traditionally dancers or women needing to earn a livelihood, came to the city and sought work in these bars legitimately as dancers. The others were children of mill workers. With the sole earner having lost his job, the young girls entered the job market to support their families using their supple bodies and the appeal of their youth.
The reasons which are trumpeted for this arbitrary action range from "depravation of public morality" and "corruption of the youth" to "trafficking of minors for the purpose of prostitution by bar owners" and "inability to monitor and regulate bars." The rhetoric of morality rings hollow when the state suddenly wakes up to "defending the morals of its youth" after 20 years during which the bars - both licensed and unlicensed - have been allowed to proliferate in the city and on arterial roads. The state has either earned a considerable revenue or its corrupt officials and politicians have amassed great wealth through this very activity.
The dances are not provocatively choreographed by the dancers. Their movements, gestures and garments are a mere imitation of what they see in Hindi films, television serials, fashion shows and advertisements. All these industries have used the woman's body for commercial gains. There is sexual exploitation of women in these and many other industries. But no one has ever suggested that you close down an entire industry because there is sexual exploitation of women!
One of the reasons mentioned by the state for the ban includes inability to monitor the activities that go on in "dance bars." The inability to monitor cannot be a pretext to revoke the licences and deprive women of their livelihood. A government which has failed to halt the activity of brothel-keeping and extreme sexual exploitation of minor girls within these brothels, has no authority today to issue a death knell and bring to a grinding halt a legitimate profession practised by thousands of women and deprive them of their livelihood on the ground that it might lead to "sexual exploitation."
Banning dance bars will not solve the problem, but only aggravate it further. Women driven to starvation will be compelled to resort to activities where there is even greater sexual exploitation, and the government will not be in a position to either monitor or regulate these activities. A government which is genuinely concerned for the welfare of its women, will not resort to such mindless activity of revoking the licences of "dance bars."
The government is only using the rhetoric of morality to get the support of the middle class. But there is more to this move than meets the eye. There seems to be a feud between the bar owners and the politicians and huge stakes are involved. The bar girls have been caught in this cross-fire and their meagre livelihoods are being snatched away to settle larger scores.
Bombay (or Mumbai) has always prided itself on its cosmopolitanism. Migrant workers have flocked this city over 300 years with the onset of industrialisation to work in the mills. And with the workers have come the entertainers. The city belongs as much to the mill workers, entertainers and slum dwellers who have come from "outside" as the multinationals, BPOs, five-star hotels and the emerging service industry. The state's vision of Mumbai - as the new gleaming metropolis - free of "slums" and "sleaze" is one whose violence is hidden under the rhetoric of morality and progress.
Flavia Agnes is a lawyer with expertise on gender, human rights and minority concerns. She is also the founder of Majlis, a legal advocacy programme for women based in Mumbai
_____
[5]
Communalism Combat HATE HURTS HARMONY WORKS
16 April 2005
We are sending you this statement that will launch a signature campaign. please send your consent immediately to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A STATEMENT
The harrowing tales of the victims of the Gujarat genocide and their long-drawn out struggle for justice were recounted on April 16, 2005 at a convention in New Delhi [organized by the Citizens for Justice and Peace, Mumbai, Safradr Hashmi Memorial Trust, New Delhi and Human Rights Law Network, New Delhi] at the Speaker's Hall, Constitution Club New Delhi. These testimonies once again highlighted the stark fact that as long as Narendra Modi remains at the helm of affairs in Gujarat, the perpetrators of the Genocide have little chance of being brought to book. If justice is to prevail, a necessary condition for this must be created through the dismissal of the Modi government under Article 356 of the Constitution.
For justice to be finally ensured, for the major carnages let alone the hundreds of major crimes that took place in Gujarat 2002, the process of struggling for justice needs to be supported by the state and its administration. Instead, key witnesses of the major carnages, three years after the horrors that lost them near and dear ones cannot step back into their villages or localities simply because they have chosen to fight for justice. This is the stark and shameful reality of Gujarat, three years after the Genocide where at a rought estimate about 61, 000 persons remain internally displaced within Gujarat, of which all or most belong to the minority community.
Eye-witnesses who are also victims, of incidents like the Gulberg massacre [28-2-2002 wherein 68 persons were slaughtered including former Member of Parliament, Shri Ahsan Jaffri and 10-15 girls and women subjected to brute sexual violence], Naroda gaon and Patiya [28-2-2002 wherein over 120 persons were similarly exterminated while a complicit police and elected representatives watched and led mobs respectively],
Sardarpura [1-3-2002] wherein 33 persons were brutally killed and in another incident 14 burnt alive, and the Ode killings in Anand district on 1-3-2002 to 3-3-2002 in which totally 27 persons were killed recounted their life stories. Many eye-witnesses like a key witness from Naroda gaon and his family members have been thrice or four times penalized on account for their desire to struggle for justice and utterly false criminal cases slapped against them. The attempt is clearly to intimidate all those who stand for the struggle for justice. Over 65 witnesses from the major massacres have filed affidavits in the Supreme Court of India pointing out these gross facts, due to which the criminal trials in these cases have been stayed by the SC since November 21, 2003. Pleas for re-investigation by the CBI have been pending and need to be heard forthwith.
While there are legitimate apprehensions among many about the use of Article 356, lest it may set a precedent for the Centre to get rid of the government in Opposition-ruled states, the Gujarat case is an exceptional one in so much as the state government has been seriously implicated by the National Human Rights Commission [NHRC] and even the Supreme Court, in what is perhaps the most inhuman, horrendous and un-Constitutional acts in the history of post-Independence India. In the past few months courageous statements of serving police officials have lent voice to the outrage expressed by these institutions and hundreds of groups and individuals. These stands by serving policemen, that been made public that clearly show that orders were issued by none less than the present chief minister, Narendra Modi that minorities who resist or protest should be exterminated. Put together, the imposition of Article 356 in Gujarat is warranted not only on grounds of humanity and Constitutional propriety, but for the very maintenance of the country's unity, integrity and secular fabric.
We the undersigned social and political activists, artists and members of the legal and academic professions demand that the Modi government be dismissed forthwith under Article 356.
M.K. Raina Vivan Sundaram Rahul Bose Javed Akhtar Rajendra Prasad Prabhat Patnaik Zoya Hassan D.N.Jha Madhu Prasad Madhukar Upadhyay Madan Gopal Singh Shamsad Ram Rehman Teesta Setalvad Anil Dharkar Nikhil Wagle Jaidev Hattangady Sumedh Jadhav Suresh Bhosale Cedric Prakash Javed Anand Indira Chandrashekhar Mahesh Bhatt
Sabrang Communications & Publishing Pvt. Ltd.
P.O. Box 28253, Juhu Post Office, Juhu, Mumbai ñ 400 049. Tel: (91 22) 26602288/26603927, Fax: 26602288
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.sabrang.com
______
[6]
"Aaj bhi ham hamare mukkam par nahi ja ke rah sakte," Eye-witness Aiyubmiya, witness to the massacre wherein 33 persons were killed from Sardarpura village. Mehsana where they lived for decades says the village is no more their home. "Jab ham bach ke nikle, aath ghante ke baad, aur laash aur laash hamare ghar ke chabootre par giri hui thi; jakar kaanpte kaanpte ham police van me baithe, to police wale ne kaha, ' kya itne log bach gaye hai, kya? Hamne socha sab khatm hue!'" Smt Zakia Jaffri, wife of former Parliamentarian Ahsan Jaffri. 'Mera bees saal ka bacche ko police ne nanga kar ke bithaya, peeth mod kar, goliyon mar mar kar police ne khatm kiya. Aaj bhi hamara case wase hee pada hai, sessions court mein." Zahid Kadri, father
These were only part of the harrowing tales of the victims of the Gujarat genocide and their long-drawn out struggle for justice, recounted today at a convention in New Delhi -Flashback Gujarat 2002-The Indian State and Mass Crime" [organized by the Citizens for Justice and Peace, Mumbai, Safradr Hashmi Memorial Trust, New Delhi and Human Rights Law Network, New Delhi] at the Speaker's Hall, Constitution Club New Delhi on 16th April 2005. These testimonies once again highlighted the stark fact that for justice to be finally ensured, for the major carnages let alone the hundreds of major crimes that took place in Gujarat 2002, the process of struggling for justice needs to be supported by the state and it's administration.
Instead, key witnesses of the major carnages, three years after the horrors that lost them near and dear ones cannot step back into their villages or localities simply because they have chosen to fight for justice. Many are both victims of the massacre and key eye-witnesses as well. This is the stark and shameful reality of Gujarat, three years after the Genocide where at a rough estimate, about 61, 000 persons remain internally displaced within Gujarat, of which all or most belong to the minority community.
The consultation was hugely attended by a wide spectrum of groups, citizens and even members of the political class. Polit bureau member of the CPI(M), Sitaram Yechury said that the occasion was a sharp reminder to the political class to revive it's campaign on the breakdown of constitutional machinery in Gujarat and bring it back into national focus. Congress spokesperson, Anand Sharma said that it was the duty of members of the political class to support the struggle for justice. Brinda Karat, vice-president, AIDWA and member of the polit bureau CPI(M), urged that the plea for re-investigation by CBI be urgently heard by the Supreme Court and that the political class train attention on the issue of attempts to intimidate witnesses and re-location of thousands of internally displaced persons within Gujarat. Former governor, Romesh Bhandari urged that the battle for secularism be taken to the grassroots.
Eye-witnesses who are also victims, of incidents like the Gulberg massacre [28-2-2002 wherein 68 persons were slaughtered including former Member of Parliament, Shri Ahsan Jaffri and 10-15 girls and women subjected to brute sexual violence], Naroda gaon and Patiya [28-2-2002 wherein over 120 persons were similarly exterminated while a complicit police and elected representatives watched and led mobs respectively], Sardarpura [1-3-2002] wherein 33 persons were brutally killed and in another incident 14 burnt alive, and the Ode killings in Anand district on 1-3-2002 to 3-3-2002 in which totally 27 persons were killed recounted their life stories. Many eye-witnesses like a key witness from Naroda gaon and his family members have been thrice or four times penalized on account for their desire to struggle for justice with false criminal cases being slapped against them. The attempt is clearly to intimidate all those who stand for the struggle for justice.
Over 60 witnesses from the major massacres have filed affidavits in the Supreme Court of India pointing out these gross facts, due to which the criminal trials in these cases have been stayed by the SC since November 21, 2003. Pleas for re-investigation by the CBI are pending and need to be heard forthwith.
Senior jurist, Shri Shanti Bhushan urged that a clarion call emerge out of this consultation on the shameful breakdown of constitutional machinery in Gujarat that is a fit case for the invocation of Article 356 of the Constitution. He even urged that it was the duty of the present government to follow this mandate following the historic verdict of the Supreme Court in the BEST Bakery case and dismiss the Gujarat government.
While there are legitimate apprehensions among many about the use of Article 356, lest it may set a precedent for the Centre to get rid of the government in Opposition-ruled states, the Gujarat case is an exceptional one in so much as the state government has been seriously implicated by the National Human Rights Commission [NHRC] and even the Supreme Court, in what is perhaps the most inhuman, horrendous and un-Constitutional acts in the history of post-Independence India. In the past few months courageous statements of serving police officials have lent voice to the outrage expressed by these institutions and hundreds of groups and individuals. These stands by serving policemen, that been made public that clearly show that orders were issued by none less than the present chief minister, Narendra Modi that minorities who resist or protest should be exterminated. Put together, the imposition of Article 356 in Gujarat is warranted not only on grounds of humanity and Constitutional propriety, but for the very maintenance of the country's unity, integrity ad secular fabric.
Other speakers included advocates Kamini Jaiswal, Mihir Desai, Suhel Tirmizi Teesta Setalvad and citizens and activists like Fr Cedric Prakash, Ahmedabad, former president western region CII, Anu Agha and film artiste, Rahul Bose. A widespread signature campaign on the issues raised at the consultation is now being considered by a wide spectrum of groups all over the country.
Teesta Setalvad Citizens for Justice and Peace
Nirant,Juhu Tara Road,Juhu,Mumbai -400049 Phone:26603927/26602288 e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
______
[7]
Outlook Magazine | Apr 25, 2005
TIME TO BREAK SHACKLES LET ANTIQUATED LAWS GO AND SAME-SEX LOVERS BE ALLOWED TO LIVE IN DIGNITY Saleem Kidwai
"We are not living in the time of the inquisition," the poet Firaq Gorakhpuri told a homophobe in 1937, advising him to rid himself of his 'pedestrian prejudice'. It's time to remind ourselves of this advice, now that a plea to remove discrimination against millions of Indians has for the first time reached India's highest court. It is for the Supreme Court now to decide whether those who love people of their own sex will be allowed the basic right to live in dignity.
Recently, the Delhi High Court was asked to strike down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises homosexuality.
The court dismissed the petition on technical grounds. A Special Leave Petition is now before the Supreme Court, which asks the government why the Delhi High Court should not be asked to reconsider the petition.
This
is encouraging. The Supreme Court has shown it is ready to intervene in matters of citizen's rights. This is one occasion when it must. The rights of millions are at stake and a serious health crisis is being aggravated. Hopefully, the Indian government too will dump 'pedestrian prejudice' before it presents its opinion to the court. The last government told the high court that Indian society and culture did not accept homosexuality.
Could there be a better example of uninformed 'pedestrian prejudice'? On what did the government base its assertion? Did it counter the widely available evidence of tolerance? Or was it speaking on behalf of a moral brigade whose acts of harassment and vandalism attract so much media attention but no punishment?
And even if one were to accept society's disapproval as the basis of law, would the state cite the same reasons if asked for its views on inter-faith and inter-caste marriages?
The government must respond with urgency to the health issues raised by the petition. Perhaps it should re-brief itself with what AIDS activists have to say about Section 377. Homosexual and bisexual men are as vulnerable to hiv as heterosexuals. Lesbians are at least risk. But as long as male-male sexual intercourse is deemed criminal, ignorance will continue and the spread of hiv will increase. Even the most preliminary of statistics show that its occurrence is much wider than most people believe. hiv and AIDS are easily preventable but due to shame, guilt and fear, homosexual men in particular, fail to inform or protect themselves.
The law harms millions of Indians who are attracted to their own sex and benefits no one. The destructive effects of prejudice against same-sex love and the price society pays for it in terms of psychological health are well known. Many heterosexuals close to or related to gay people also suffer because of this prejudice. It forces many growing children to feel stigmatised, maladjusted, suicidal and incapable of realising their true potential. Parents seeking a 'cure' to this 'illness' find homophobic doctors who recommend horrific and highly questionable treatment for young adults, damaging them for life.
Irrational prejudice forces adults to live in secrecy and enter into marriages where the truth is never told. Unhappiness is built into a supposedly 'sacred' union. Women in these marriages are twice victimised because they are vulnerable to hiv through their closeted gay or bisexual spouses. Removing the law might also stop young women from committing joint suicides because they want to stay together and society, with the help of law, makes that difficult.
The law stigmatises homosexuals. Without it, it would be easier for them to deal with personal issues of self worth. Its removal would empower people to fight discrimination in health, employment or housing. To retain a law that is rarely used and yet causes so much harm makes no sense.Instead, the government should concentrate on making firm laws on rape and child abuse, both same sex and cross sex.
Section 377 is defunct yet dangerous. Cases of people charged under the section rarely come to court. Yet, it is widely used for harassment and blackmail, both material and sexual, very often by the police themselves. The government cannot prosecute people for being homosexual unless it turns vindictive. And society must not leave such weapons around for any future witch-hunts.
The law punishes certain acts that are a part of the sexual repertoire of both homosexuals and heterosexuals. However, it is used mostly against homosexuals and bisexuals. Technically, it could target heterosexuals too. Heterosexual married couples can be punished with rigorous imprisonment for oral or anal sex. It's time the government withdraws from the sexual life of consenting adults.
Homosexuals were first deemed criminals by a colonial government that has decriminalised them in its own country. We removed their statues; why cling to their destructive statutes? India is perceived as one of the leaders of the third world because it is a functioning and innovative democracy. It should take the lead in this matter too. This would give hope to activists not just in South Asia but also in the rest of the developing world.
The large band of dedicated activists who have energised this initiative must be prepared for the worst. Expectations were high. In fact, the sudden dismissal came as a huge disappointment. What if 'pedestrian prejudice' prevails again? The fight has been long and must continue.
People who resent discrimination but keep quiet must state their stake against this law. They have to stand up and be counted, for numbers matter in a democracy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Saleem Kidwai is a Lucknow-based writer and co-author of Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History.)
______
[8] [BOOK REVIEWS]
TITLE: Pratidwandi Author: Sunil Gangopadhyay (translated by Enakshi Chatterjee) Series: Literature in Translation
The Book
Pratidwandi, meaning 'adversary', is the English translation of the Bengali original by Sunil Gangopadhyay. The story is about a family living in Calcutta during the 1960s-- the mother, two sons, the daughter, and an uncle, who moves in at the death of the father. Having lost their tea estates, they are undergoing a severe financial crisis. Siddhartha, the central character, was able to complete his graduation, because his sister ,Sutapa, was persuaded to take up a job but at the cost of her own education. Siddhartha wishes to become a doctor, but there is not enough money to fund his studies at medical college. Attempts at getting a job prove futile and his sense of frustration and obligation deepen. The apparent immutability of the situation leads to constant bickering and fights in the family. Sutapa, forced into the role of selfless breadwinner, is fed up and in trying to find an escape route brings dishonour to the family-- the final blow to their dignity. The bleakness of the narrative is relieved by a streak of romanticism and an idealistic vision of a world once inhabited by Siddhartha. Satyajit Ray made this story into a film, drawn by the compelling characterisation of Siddhartha.
The author
Sunil Gangopadhyay is a highly successful writer of fiction, His latest forays also include the two-volume historical novel Purba Paschim. He is also a poet and in the 1970s edited a poetry magazine, Krittibas.
Enakshi Chatterji is a bilingual writer and has translated a wide spectrum of literature including Sat Patro, the Bengali translation of A Suitable Boy by Vikram Seth.
(Paperback/103pp/ISBN 81-250-1902-2/Rs. 195.00)
Distributed by: Orient Longman Pvt. Ltd. www.orientlongman.com
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Buzz on the perils of fundamentalist politics, on matters of peace and democratisation in South Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit citizens wire service run since 1998 by South Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
SACW archive is available at: bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/
Sister initiatives : South Asia Counter Information Project : snipurl.com/sacip South Asians Against Nukes: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org Communalism Watch: communalism.blogspot.com/
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.
_______________________________________________ Sacw mailing list Sacw@insaf.net http://insaf.net/mailman/listinfo/sacw_insaf.net
