South Asia Citizens Wire | January 23-24, 2008 | Dispatch No. 2492 - Year 10 running
[1] Afghanistan: CPJ Fax urges Karzai to protect Afghan media [2] Pakistan: (i) Two leading Pakistani lawyers to receive 3rd Asian Human Rights Defender Award (ii) Mullah driven parallel legal system in NWFP - HRCP objects (Robert Muggah) [3] Himalayan Concerns of India's Far Right (J. Sri Raman) [4] India: Justice for victims of Communal Riots (i) Mumbai's incomplete tryst with justice (Jyoti Punwani) (ii) Democracy's Bilkis Test (Ajay K. Mehra) (iii) Beyond the Bilkis Bano case (Editorial, The Hindu) (iv) Braveheart (Editorial, The Telegraph) [5] India: Text of Report of the National Commission for Minorities's (NCM) visit to Orissa [6] India - Chattissgarh: Letter expressing concern re Binayak Sen (People's Union for Civil Liberties, Gujarat) [7] Indian History Congress Award for 2007 given to Meera Nanda [8] Announcements: (i) Assembly of Social Movements for Rights and Justice in Pakistan (Karachi, 26 January 2008) (ii) Upcoming demo against Musharraf (London, 28 January 2008) ______ [1] CPJ URGES KARZAI TO PROTECT AFGHAN MEDIA January 17, 2008 President Hamid Karzai Islamic Republic of Afghanistan C/o The Embassy of Afghanistan 2341 Wyoming Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20008 Via facsimile: 202-483-6487 Dear President Karzai: The Committee to Protect Journalists is concerned about your government's failure to push through proposed media reforms at a time when the Afghan press is growing increasingly restricted. As a nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization of journalists committed to supporting our colleagues around the world, CPJ is troubled by our findings on Afghanistan, which suggest that media policy is increasingly aimed at hampering journalists. Long-debated amendments to Afghanistan's media law were delayed when you declined to endorse them on December 26, according to many local journalists. Shaped by a joint commission of the upper and lower houses of parliament, with informed critiques from journalists and media commentators, the amendments represent a promising step toward reaffirming media freedom. In the interim negotiating period, while the parliamentary houses choose whether to act on or overrule your suggestions, journalists are left vulnerable to prosecution for cultural transgressions as determined by the Ministry of Information and Culture. The ministry does so with the backing of the National Directorate of Security (NDS) and the Nationwide Council of Religious Scholars of Afghanistan. There have been several incidents that are indications of this trend: * The Council of Religious Scholars has recommended the death penalty for a young reporter and student charged with blasphemy in Mazar-i-Sharif, according to local press freedom advocate Rahimullah Samander. Local journalists are vocal in their support of Parwez Kambakhsh, who was detained on October 27 for downloading distributing to friends an article about the Prophet Mohammed from the Internet. We share their concerns that Kambakhsh is being targeted in order to put pressure on his brother, journalist Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, who has repeatedly offended officials with his articles for the Institute for War and Peace Reporting. Although the Balkh provincial council appealed for the 23-year-old Kambakhsh's release after meeting with him on January 6, clerics renewed their call for his execution on January 14, Samander's colleague Naqibullah Taib told CPJ. * On January 4, you met with influential clerics who called popular music shows and Indian soap operas broadcast by Tolo TV un-Islamic, according to Agence France-Presse. Shortly after that meeting a communication from Minister Abdul Khuram to private TV channels banned programs contrary to Afghanistan's culture and laws on threat of referral to the attorney general for prosecution. Saad Mohseni, who runs Tolo and other networks, provided CPJ with a copy of the letter last week. Mohseni told us that NDS representatives reiterated the minister's ban in a meeting with private TV station heads on January 9. * In 2002, you pledged to turn state-owned Radio Television Afghanistan (RTA) into a public service broadcaster. Yet your latest recommendations on the proposed media law vetoed the draft proposals to establish an independent commission, including legislative and judicial representatives, to govern RTA on the grounds that they were unconstitutional, local news reports say. RTA's director of planning and foreign relations, Abdul Rahman Panjshiri, resigned in September 2007, directly citing Minister Khuram's efforts to curb the station's independence as his reason. "During my 29 years of service with RTA I have not seen such an attempt to suppress freedom," he said in comments published on the Web site of Radio Netherlands. We do, however, applaud your recommendation for increased clarity in the proposed media bill regarding punishment for violations of new restrictions against insulting Islam, which were overly broad and open to misinterpretation. As Afghanistan gears up for presidential and parliamentary elections in 2009, it is more important than ever to promote a professional media industry, free from the threat of reprisal and content restrictions on religious or any other grounds. We ask that you intervene to ensure that the charges against Parwez Kambakhsh are immediately dropped and, on a broader scale, we encourage you to press for revisions to the media law that guarantee increased protection for journalists. We urge you to counteract the threat of prosecution for private TV stations and allow them to determine the cultural relevance of their own programming. We ask, finally, that you fulfill your promise to develop Radio Television Afghanistan as a public media outlet, and take steps to reduce the Ministry of Information and Culture's editorial and administrative influence over the broadcaster. These actions will send a clear signal that you will not tolerate moves to restrict the media but rather to allow it to flourish as Afghanistan grows as a democracy. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Sincerely, Joel Simon Executive Director ______ [2] (i) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE AHRC-STM-022-2008 January 23, 2008 A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission ASIA: TWO LEADING PAKISTANI LAWYERS TO RECEIVE 3RD ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER AWARD Today, January 23, 2008, the Board of Directors of the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is pleased to announce that it has decided to grant its 3rd Asian Human Rights Defender Award jointly to Muneer Malik, former President of the Pakistan Supreme Court Bar Association, together with his successor, Choudhry Aitezaz Ahsan. The award is in recognition of the historic leadership role that the lawyers of Pakistan have had in fighting against military dictatorship there during the past year, spearheading the protests against General Pervez Musharraf's unconstitutional removal and illegal confinement of Chief Justice Iftekhar M. Chaudhary on 9 March 2007. The lawyers' movement has attracted interest and immense support of people from all walks of life in Pakistan and the scheme to remove the chief justice was thwarted, although he was again illegally removed from his post, along with 55 other senior judges, including 13 from the Supreme Court, when Musharraf seized power through an unconstitutional declaration of emergency rule at the end of the year. The lawyers, judges and others of Pakistan have been making great sacrifices to defend the independence of their judiciary as a last bastion against the otherwise unchallenged power of the military. This struggle is continuing today. The 3rd Asian Human Rights Defenders Award is thus awarded to these two leading lawyers both in recognition of their personal sacrifices as well as to them as representatives of the entire people's movement against dictatorship in Pakistan. For his leading role in fighting against the removal of the chief justice and promoting the struggle for an independent judiciary, Muneer Malik was arrested and drugged, causing him to suffer renal failure. He is still recovering today. Choudhry Aitezaz Ahsan has been kept under detention since the emergency was imposed on 3 November 2007. The two lawyers' leadership, courage and unswerving commitment to their profession, their integrity and their country are strongly symbolic of their cause. In them we acknowledge and award all of the lawyers, judges and others who have refused to bow down to the immoral pressure of military force, including all of those dismissed from their posts and kept in their houses. They stand today as the representatives of civilised society and institutional commonsense in Pakistan, in stark contrast to the barbarism and primitive feudal order represented by Musharraf and his allies. By making this award we also again emphasise that the international community is obliged to support the people of Pakistan at a time that they are faced with the very real threat of being subjected to the sole authority of a merciless and self-interested executive authority. We call upon others to join with us in open expression of support for these lawyers and their struggle. ABOUT THE AWARDEES Muneer A. Malik was President of the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan from October 2006 to October 2007. He has fought for the independence of the judiciary and independence of the legal profession consistently. When Chief Justice Iftekhar M. Chaudhary was removed unconstitutionally by General Musharraf, he was among the senior lawyers who openly defied the move and led his peers in their struggle to oppose it, which swelled into a massive outpouring of dissent against military dictatorship from people in all quarters and professions. As a result, he was arrested and imprisoned. While held in the notorious Attock Jail under supervision of the ISI, the military intelligence agency, he was given drugs that he was told were painkillers. Thereafter he suffered renal failure. His life was saved only due to massive locally and internationally pressure that led to the authorities acquiescing to the needed medical intervention. He is still undergoing treatment. For details of his views on the present crisis see: www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2008statements/1325/ Choudhry Aitezaz Ahsan is the serving President of the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan and he too has consistently fought for the independence of judiciary and lawyers. He also led the protests against the attack on the chief justice. He successfully represented the chief justice in the case for his reappointment, despite heavy pressure being brought upon him not to do so. He was put under house arrest together with the senior judges and other lawyers when the emergency was imposed illegally on 3 November 2007 and remains there to this day. For his views see: www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/opinion/23ahsan.html?ex=1199077200&en=c560e42dac0c2828&ei=5070&emc=eta1 o o o (ii) Daily Times 24 January 2008 Editorial DON' T TOUCH QAZI COURTS YET! The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has reacted to the plan of the NWFP caretaker government to enforce a system of Qazi Courts in regions coming under its jurisdiction as Provincially Administered Tribal Areas (PATA). This means that Swat, Dir and Chitral will be separated from the judicial system in force in the province and given special treatment. The HRCP has objected to the creation of a parallel system that will ultimately challenge the entire system functioning in Pakistan under the Constitution and its Sharia amendments. In fact, if it is enforced, this could be the beginning of the admission that the judicial system under the Constitution is inadequate and should be replaced. Unfortunately, the caretakers have acted just days after the militant Uzbek warlord Tahir Yuldashev demanded that Sharia be enforced in Pakistan. Under the circumstances, it is shocking that a caretaker government should kowtow immediately after helping to bring a semblance of peace to the Swat region. Reverting to Qazi Courts has bad memories attached to it as it takes us back to 1999 when, submitting to the violence and outlawry of Maulvi Sufi Muhammad - who is now in jail - the Nawaz Sharif government had imposed Qazi Courts in Malakand. The rebel mullah was acting at the behest of the smugglers of the area and should have been sorted out instead of being so accommodated. The new scheme will require the normal magistrates to get Islamic training and act as Qazis while deferring to clerics whom the administration will appoint as "helpers" through a complex system of selection. The appeal will not lie at the High Court but at the Federal Shariat Court, which means that if the intent is to provide quick justice it will be defeated. In any case what the militants demand is "Talibanised justice on the trot" through which a peripatetic mullah-judge doles out Islamic punishments without appeal and not such Qazis appointed by the government. Thus, for example, trouble will flare up after a sentence of the cutting of hands awarded by a PATA court is overturned by the Federal Shariat Court. Why can't the caretaker government of NWFP let the judicial system for PATA be decided by the new elected government? Presenting the elected government with a fait accompli of this kind would be most unfair. * _______ [3] truthout.org 22 January 2008 HIMALAYAN CONCERNS OF INDIA'S FAR RIGHT by J. Sri Raman Two Himalayan states await general elections, scheduled to be held within three months. The polls are expected to decide the future of monarchies and the fate of pro-democracy movements in both - and India's far right is not an uninterested observer. This powerful phalanx - with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as its political front and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), a major participant in the Gujarat pogrom of 2002, and other outfits of comparably virulent and grisly records as other members of the "parivar" or the far-right "family" - is evincing particular interest in the electoral fortunes of Nepal. The country has just mourned the death of New Zealand's mountaineer Sir Edmund Percival Hillary, who scaled Nepal's and the world's highest peak, Everest, in 1953 (along with local hero Tenzing Norgay). The polls to be held on April 10, after two postponements, will represent an equally challenging peak to conquer for Nepal's people, who overthrew a despotic monarchy in April 2006 but have been waiting ever since to move forward to a full-fledged democracy. What made the victory of the pro-democracy and anti-palace struggle possible in 2006 was an alliance between the parliamentary parties and the Maoists who had been raging an armed rebellion for a decade. It is this newfound unity that has since been the target of forces inside Nepal and outside seeking to rescue King Gyanendra Bikram Bir Shah Dev and, if possible, restore his rule These forces have ranged from James Francis Moriarty, US envoy to Nepal until recently, to former Indian princes with family links to the Palace in Kathmandu and elements in southern Nepalese plains (the Terai) seeking to thrive on the regional grievances of an ethnic Indian population. The BJP and its band have not concealed their unhappiness over a recently reforged unity between the Maoists and the Seven-Party Alliance (SPA) of Prime Minister G. P. Koirala that has made the coming elections to a constituent assembly possible. The Maoists have had more than a minor share of blame for the delay in the pro-democracy process. Many well-wishers of the movement have had more than one occasion to be critical of the lapses of the Maoist leadership, including the most prominent among them, Pushpa Kumar Dahal, better known by his nom de guerre of Prachanda. Not many in Nepal would dismiss his fears of a possible derailment of the process of democracy. At a recent public rally, Prachanda voiced the apprehension that Nepal might be in for a Bangladesh-type army-backed rule, which might be established under the excuse of countering a challenge to Nepal's unity and sovereignty from the Terai. Accusing "Hindu elements" in India of trying to sabotage the polls, he added: "I don't blame the whole of India, but a section of Indian politics and the Hindu elements do not want to see elections being held in Nepal and the country turning into a republic." The accusation would not appear unfounded, even to the political adversaries of Prachanda in Nepal. The BJP and the "parivar" had never made a secret of their pro-monarchy predilection, though the party may have been more circumspect in its past statements. The BJP, in fact, kept up a pro-democracy pretense as early as February 2005, when the king suspended a partial democracy. The party said: "The events in Nepal have seriously affected the cause of legitimate democracy. India has been consistently supporting the development of a political system that truly reflects people's aspirations. King Gyanendra's actions have caused a serious setback to this process." No strong denunciation, but a disapproving statement, which suggested that the suspension of the process is temporary. The statement cleverly avoided comment on the ground - "Maoist terrorism" - the king cited for his action. Along with the party's statement, however, came the far right's true response, articulated by its far less circumscribed fronts. The always quotable Praveen Togadia of the VHP, who had glorified the Gujarat massacre as a great 'Hindu' upsurge, said: "There was anarchy in the Hindu kingdom before the king's takeover". He warned that, "if India remained a mute spectator to the unfolding events in Nepal, China might take advantage of the situation." VHP president Ashok Singhal, who had proclaimed he was "proud of Gujarat," said that "increased extremist terror targeting innocent people had prompted the palace" to place even a guided democracy under suspension. On January 22, 2004, in Kathmandu, capital of Nepal, Singhal attended a ceremony to honor King Gyanendra as the world's only Hindu monarch. Ordained the VHP oracle: "It is the duty of 900 million Hindus the world over to protect the Hindu samrat (king) ... God has created him to protect Hindu dharma." Singhal also proposed to organize a world Hindu meet in New York under the king's leadership. The proposed event "would project Hindus as a global power ... with the Nepalese king leading the way". The pro-king stance has always been an integral part of the essentially anti-minority, "Hindutva" politics of the "parivar." The BJP is more outspoken now. The party's most prominent leader, with the added stature of a shadow prime minister, Lal Krishna Advani told a public meeting days ago: "My party and I stood firmly by the side of the people of Nepal in their desire for effective and fully empowered democracy. But we also backed their other aspiration, which was suppressed by the rise of Maoist forces in the politics of Nepal: namely, preservation of Nepal as a Hindu kingdom with constitutional monarchy. Maoism and democracy are a contradiction in terms. The two cannot go together. It is unfortunate that they have gained ascendancy in the polity of Nepal." He asserted: "The monarchy in Nepal was a symbol of its unique national identity and a source of its stability." He demanded to know why friends of the pro-democracy movement applauded "when the identity of Nepal as a Hindu kingdom was erased even before the Constituent Assembly had discussed it? Would they demand that Pakistan or Bangladesh cease to be Islamic republics?" The Advani-speak raises legitimate apprehensions in Nepal that India's main opposition party may not remain a mere spectator of the election process. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's repeated statements on "Maoist insurgencies" in India as the country's "worst threat of terrorism" can give the Advanis of the land an opportunity to advance the Nepal agenda. Curiously, the BJP has refrained from taking a similar stand in relation to the coming general election in Bhutan. Monarchy may not quite be the same issue in the mountain state of enchanting landscapes to Nepal's east. It is the palace here that has ordered the polls to be held on March 24. Democracy, however, still remains an issue of bitter debate, with bomb blasts marking the run-up to the event no less than in Nepal. In Buddhist Bhutan too, the electoral process faces a challenge from the minority of Hindu Nepalese, a hundred thousand of whom are reported to have fled the country since 1990 and are still "languishing" in refugee camps in Nepal. As part of what they described as a "pro-democracy movement," they have made several attempts to return but failed - with no help from India and, now, with the US offering them an alternative American asylum. Proclamations from the palace in Thimphu, Bhutan's capital, however, describe the "pro-democracy" movement as nothing more than a terrorist campaign. It is officially condemned as an offensive by organizations identified as the Bhutan Tiger Force, the Bhutan Maoists Party, and the Communist Party of Bhutan based in Nepal. Significant, if not eloquent, may be the silence of the BJP and its brigade on the scenario, involving a Buddhist monarchy on China's border and an alleged Hindu-Maoist opposition. A freelance journalist and a peace activist in India, J. Sri Raman is the author of "Flashpoint" (Common Courage Press, USA). He is a regular contributor to Truthout. ______ [4] India: Justice for victims of Communal Riots (i) The Times of India January 24, 2008 MUMBAI'S INCOMPLETE TRYST WITH JUSTICE by Jyoti Punwani Only Mumbai's riot victims will understand the irony. Bilkis Bano, hounded and threatened in her own state, got justice in their city. Even while her tormentors, including the police, were being convicted and sentenced in a Mumbai court, the city's riot victims, who had been similarly targeted with the help of the police 15 years ago, were discovering that their city, which had given Bilkis a new faith in the system, had nothing to offer them. Forced by public pressure to take a fresh look at Mumbai's riot cases, a high-level committee, after weeks of scrutiny, has released a list of cases to be sent to fast-track courts, which would try them exclusively. They had found "no case which was not registered because of oversight, delay or refusal by the police," announced a senior home department official. The Srikrishna Commission's two-volume report is only 238 pages long. Of these, two pages are spent on the 'Diamond Jubilee incident'. Haroon Rashid, resident of the Diamond Jubilee Compound and editor at that time of Urdu Blitz and later of the Urdu daily Inquilab, had travelled throughout the country, telling the story of how the compound had been attacked and finally burnt by Shiv Sainiks, with whom the compound's boys used to play cricket, and how the policemen on duty had simply stood by. The Commission found that assistant inspector A.N. Kamat had not even bothered to record statements of the residents. This case was closed by the police as 'true, but undetected'. Kamat is one of the 31 policemen against whom the Commission had recommended 'strict action' for "utter dereliction of duty; serious lapses in investigation; passive and active collaboration with Shiv Sainiks". Kamat has indeed been punished: his increments were stopped for six whole months. CR 25/93, LT Marg police station, was re-opened in 2001 by the special task force (STF) set up to act on the report, but closed again as 'true, but undetected'. Why? Residents recall a perfunctory visit by two cops when most of the men were away at work, asking if they were interested in pursuing the case. No assurances were given of protection; no encouragement to come forward and help bring the culprits to book. Two more pages are devoted to what the Commission describes as 'cold-blooded murder by the police'. The victim: 16-year-old college student Shahnawaz Wagle. The testimony of his sister, mother and other eye-witnesses convinced Justice Srikrishna that Shahnawaz had been shot in the back by the police as he was being led to a police vehicle, not while rioting, as the police claimed. He ordered an inquiry. Disgusted by the 'eyewash' that was conducted, he recommended in the report that the incident be probed by an impartial agency. The STF probed it and repeated the police version. Shahnawaz's case features nowhere in the new list, though his father has given his statement afresh to the zonal DCP. An entire paragraph in the report is devoted to the attack on Azmi Stores, a small shop in Dongri. Its owner, Mohamed Ismail told the police how his Hindu neighbours stopped the miscreants from setting fire to it. But the police didn't bother to take the neighbours' statements, which could have helped identify the miscreants. The case was closed, re-opened by the STF, closed again. Byculla's Shabbir Tambawalla's complaint about his building being attacked by Shiv Sainiks, was registered six weeks after the incident. The report describes how assistant inspector Jaiswal called the local shakha pramukh and asked Tambawalla to compromise. In a recent interview to this reporter, Tambawala expressed readiness to pursue the case. But his name does not figure in the latest list. Perhaps the most vivid example of the blind alley Mumbai's riot victims find themselves in is CR 718/92, Dharavi Police station, described by the Commission as the very first violent incident of the riots. Contrary to popular belief, the first stone wasn't thrown by Muslims angry at the demolition of the Babri Masjid. It was thrown at namazis in Dharavi, by a victory cycle rally of Shiv Sainiks celebrating the demolition, on the evening of December 6, 1992. The report devotes two pages to the rally, taken out in defiance of the police, its incendiary slogans, and the police's delay in registering a case against the organisers, all Sena corporators and local leaders. Guess what? The Congress government has still not given permission to prosecute these worthies, and surprise! CR 718/92 does not feature in the recent list. So where do Mumbai's riot victims go for justice? The writer is a Mumbai-based freelance journalist who has covered the '92-'93 Mumbai riots o o o (ii) Indian Express Tuesday, January 22, 2008 DEMOCRACY'S BILKIS TEST by Ajay K. Mehra The judgment on the Bilkis Bano case provides an opportunity to reflect on a range of issues relating to inter-community relations as well as the state and legal mechanisms available to deal with riots in India. Above all, an increasing political patronage to rioters and political justification of organised collective violence of a majority community against a minority, and the abuse of power and state-machinery by a ruling party, deserve debate. But the question is: will a law against communal riots, like the one contemplated by the UPA, solve this complex problem? That the Bilkis Bano case was shifted out of Gujarat, where her family fleeing from the brutal riots in 2002 was murdered by a frenzied mob and that she was gang-raped, is a stark reminder of the collapse of the criminal justice system and lower judiciary in the country. The police not only cheated an illiterate Bilkis in registering the FIR, they also tampered with the evidence in the cruelest fashion by severing the heads of the victims after post-mortem. While there is a reason to celebrate in Bilkis's resolute and successful fight for justice, there is equally a reason to introspect whether it is possible to shift a case to another state every time a case of this kind comes up. The partisanship and disregard for the rule of law injected into an already politicised and incompetent police in this case may lead to more violence against minority communities. The judgment in the Bilkis Bano case has laid bare the soft underbelly of democracy, which has virtually justified the communalisation of state and society and subverted the rule of law. In a sense, the justification of this social and ethical aberration, which appears to have been institutionalised in Gujarat, has economic underpinnings. The middle class that has gone gaga over 'development' has no time to ask whether these newfound opportunities are available for every citizen, or how the deep-seated animus, now perpetuated through a 'majoritarian' politics, is aggravating the divides. Communal riots in India over the years have turned from spontaneous manifestations of local conflict between communities over resources, faith or politics to more organised political pogroms against a minority community. The 1984 riots against the Sikhs soon turned into a violence that was politically instigated and supported, and finally explained away by Rajiv Gandhi in the most cavalier fashion. The intermittent violence as the Hindutva campaign of the BJP/VHP built up momentum with L.K. Advani's rath yatra and culminated in the demolition of the Babri Masjid, was politically backed. Whether initially spontaneous or planned, they all eventually showed a macabre preparation that came into play. Those like Bilkis may show determination to fight the system and find justice, but can individual grit alone reverse this dreadful situation? Finally, as we grope for solutions to the hydra-headed monster of communal riots, the question remains: Will a law on communal riots help us tackle the menace? This leads us to another question: What is required to tackle collective and communal violence? Communal riots can normally be treated as a social aberration, and the local administration is responsible for tackling it. When it acquires a political hue, which it has lately, then it is wholly different in scale and implication. The local administration in such a case is handling a double-edged weapon, which is sharp enough to cut them both ways. Obviously, in such a case, any law could become toothless. However, in the first case, the local administration, and the police in particular, has sufficient legal instruments both in the Cr PC and the IPC. Sections 41 (arrest without warrant), 42 (refusal to give name and address), 46 (use of necessary force for arrest if required), 149 (prevention of cognisable offence), 151 (preventive arrest on knowing of a design) and others are effective instruments in the Cr PC. Sections in chapter 6 of the IPC make waging war against the state, conspiracy and sedition a cognisable offence. Sections 120 A & B as well as 153 A are harsh enough against those promoting disunity in society as well as hatching criminal conspiracy to create communal disharmony. Then there are provisions against offences at places of worship. Indeed, a new law can be framed, but we need to use the available instruments first. The lessons offered by judgments in cases such as this must not be lost in politics. The writer is Ford Foundation Professor, Centre for Dalit and Minorities Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia o o o (iii) The Hindu - January 23, 2008 Editorial BEYOND THE BILKIS BANO CASE Justice was manifestly done in Mumbai with a special court sentencing 11 of the 12 found guilty to life imprisonment in the Bilkis Bano gang-rape and massacre case. This landmark judgment, which is bound to reinforce public faith in the judicial system, was preceded by a series of Machiavellian attempts to subvert justice by lending a friendly hand to the accused. One of the most heinous of the post-Godhra cases, a pregnant Bilkis Bano was gang-raped while 14 members of he r family were killed when they were trying to flee their riot-affected village during the Gujarat pogrom in 2002. The case might have been easily derailed if it wasn't for the Supreme Court, which entrusted it to the Central Bureau of Investigation. In response to a petition from Ms Bano - who maintained that the Gujarat police were hand in glove with the accused, that evidence was being tampered with, and that witnesses were being threatened - the apex court also transferred the case from Gujarat to Maharashtra. But it was not such judicial intervention alone that saved the case from collapse. A heap of praise is due to Ms Bano, who pursued the case doggedly and with great determination, refusing to be cowed down by threats or tempted by inducements. The remarkable courage of this young woman sends a powerful message to the victims of other riot cases - namely, that justice is possible even when one is up against a State government that is hell-bent on circumventing it. Like the Best Bakery massacre, which was also transferred by the Supreme Court out of Gujarat, the Bilkis Bano case became a symbol of the communal carnage in the State. While there is reason to celebrate the intervention of the apex court and to applaud Ms Bano's resolve, it is important to remember that this is but one of the several hundreds of pending cases relating to the Gujarat riots. Six years have passed since the dreadful incident that shattered Ms Bano's life and it is a matter of conjecture how many more will elapse before the other Gujarat riot victims receive justice. The question assumes a worrying character given the country's extremely poor record in providing justice to the riot-affected - consider the fate of the victims of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots or those who suffered in the Mumbai riots in 1993. The question must also be seen against the backdrop of the attitude of the Gujarat government, which had closed more than 1,600 riot cases - these were reopened in 2004 after the Supreme Court directed that they be reviewed. In a way, the real challenge for the criminal justice system lies in how it deals with the remaining Gujarat riot cases. o o o The Telegraph January 24, 2008 Editorial BRAVEHEART Bilkis Bano has been an unforgettable face of the Gujarat riots of 2002 ever since the world came to know of the horrific crime perpetrated against her and her family. Now that face, apart from being a reminder of the remorseless cruelty man can inflict on another, will also stand testimony to what courage and dogged determination can achieve. The judgment of the special Mumbai sessions court, which convicted 12 of the suspects and gave life term to 11, is based primarily on the evidence given by Ms Bano. In providing the court this evidence, Ms Bano has had to battle not only an overwhelming personal tragedy that drove her to the verge of insanity, but also life threats and, above all, the unsettling lure of money and safety that has derailed the Best Bakery case. In replacing the other well-known face associated with the riots - that of Zahira Sheikh - in public memory by virtue of her unwavering resolve to see the guilty punished, Ms Bano does a profound service to the cause of justice. The Bilkis Bano case is bound to rekindle dying hopes inside Gujarat and beyond. It is not Ms Bano's grit and dedication alone that helped her case. The judiciary's response to the aftermath of the Gujarat carnage and its understanding of the plight of the riot victims have been exemplary. The Supreme Court had taken it upon itself to order the review, and even the reopening, of closed cases, following petitions from human rights bodies and organizations in 2004. It also ordered the transfer of the cases to the Mumbai court when the environment in Gujarat appeared ill-suited to the search for justice. While doing so, it was unsparing in its criticism of the Narendra Modi government. The ruling of the Mumbai sessions court in the Bilkis Bano case, and the clear indication it provides of the complicity of the administration in suppressing and distorting evidence, and its indifference to the sufferings of its citizens, is unlikely to improve the image of the Gujarat government. In fact, the Bilkis Bano case may retrain the spotlight on the crime that the Gujarat government is trying hard to hide behind the veneer of a caring, flourishing state. The resilience of Bilkis Bano, the organizations that help the fight of victims like her, and judicial activism will bear fruit when they, together, force the state authorities to look the crime in the face. ______ [5] TEXT OF REPORT OF THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MINORITIES'S (NCM) VISIT TO ORISSA, 6-8 January 2008 is available at http://ncm.nic.in/pdf/orissa%20report.pdf [Also at Communalism Watch: http://communalism.blogspot.com/2008/01/report-of-ncm-visit-to-orissa-6-8.html ] ______ [6] INDIA - SECULAR DEMOCRACY AND COMPOSITE CULTURE by Rajindar Sachar 23 January 2008, New Delhi I have read with chilling apprehension Arun Shourie's two articles in Indian Express (28th and 31st December, 07) because these are not merely his individual views but seem to represent the election oriented strategy of B.J.P. He presents Hinduism having a strong fundamentalist face of ferocious response not excluding violence. He also tells us that Hinduisms most sacred book Bhagwad Gita openly supports the maxim of "Wickedness to the wicked - and for these" gems of wisdom" Shourie quotes Lokmanya Tilak as his source (I refuse to attribute this sacrilege to the great Tilak - I hope more knowledgable people will scotch this heresy). No wonder Shourie ridicules Gandhiji for claiming his inspiration from Bhagwat Gita for his true law " Truth even to the wicked". Paradoxically Shourie's view of Hinduism as being capable of meanness and vengeful is such that not even an opponent of Hinduism had even remotely suggested. Uptill now most people readily accepted defination of Hinduism, as a way of life, as propounded by Sir Radhakrishanan. Thus "Vasudhaiva kutumbakam" (the world is one family) was proudly proclaimed by Hindus to show the spirit of tolerance. Of course unbiased knowledgable people also accept that the same message of humanity and common good runs through all religions. Thus Holy Quaran proclaims, "All the created ones belong to the family of God.so, an Arab has no precedence over a non-Arab, a White over a Black". And Christ said succinctly, "All are children of God." I do not take Arun's articles as an intellectual exercise. As an openly converted Narinder Modi Cheer follower. Shourie wants to send a message of BJP for next lok Sabha elections - that violence, deception will be the election tools and that minorities must know that if they wear different dress it will be treated as a conspiracy by the Muslims to stick together and be charged with offence of separatism. Thus Shourie's objection to some Muslim women wearing head scarf is not on the ground of gender discrimination or at curbing the freedom and personality of women (incidentally Shourie must be seeing Muslim women in India and more in Lahore, Karachi without head scarves; as against Hindu women in villages in Rajasthan, Up covering their head and faces even when talking to a stranger.) But Shourie would not treat this as a cultural practice having nothing to do with religion. He would read it is a deliberate ploy by Muslims in India to show their separateness. I find this conclusion figment of imagination. Shourie and my family come from W. Panjab (now in Pakistan). May be Arun is too young to remember but even when after partition (1947) Hindus came to India all elderly ladies and even younger generation coming from rural areas and even many from urban areas willingly continued covering their heads in public as a part of cultural tradition they had been brought up in, and yet they were all devout Hindus. Carried to the extreme the conclusion would be that men in south ( who wear Dhoti, they are trying to forge a separate force against North (where we wear pyjamas). Dhoti is worn by Hindus and Muslims in South - so where does the communal divide come in. Shourie of course has his pet theory that Islam was spread in India by sword. But this false premise is repudiated by Vivekanand the greatest exponent of Hinduism thus - "The Mohammedan conquest of India came as a salvation to the downtrodden, to the poor. That is why one-fifth of our people have become Mohammedans". He denied that it was all the work of sword and fire and said that to call it so was " the height of madness". He also told Hindus not to talk of the superiority of one religion over another. Even toleration of other faiths was not right; it smacked of blasphemy. He pointed out that his guru, Sri Ramakrishna Paramhansa, had accepted all religions as true. Vivekanand in fact profusely praised Islam and remarked that "without the help of practical Islam, theories of Vedantism, however fine and wonderful they may be, are entirely valueless to the vast mass of mankind. For our own motherland a junction of the two great systems, Hinduism and Islam - Vedanta brain and Islam body - is the only hope". Vivekanand was not, as Shourie obliquity was referring. to "Islamic body" as brutal strength but to the freshness of approach and message of equality brought in by Islam. Vivekanand castigated the orthodoxy thus " No man, no nation, my son, can hate others and live; India's doom was sealed the very day they invented the word mlechchha and stopped from communion with others". Shourie castigates Christians because they speak against idolatry and refers to Ramakrishana Paramhans devotion to the Goddess of Dakshineshwar and which according to him restored respectability to the image of idolatry. The greatness and spiritual height of Ramakrishan Paramhans is undisputed. His devotion to Goddess was his way of becoming one with God. But then Christians are not the only ones against idolatry. There have been and are great souls and intellectuals who speak against the practice of idolatry. This is what Swami Dayanand one of the greatest exponent of Vedas and Hinduism in 19th century, (though born in a priestly family and brought up to worship idol of Shiva) has to say "that there is not a single verse in the Vedas to sanction the invocation of the Deity, and likewise there is nothing to indicate that it is right to invoke idols". He also said, "Idol worship is a sin. " His remedy, in his own words: "Under a righteous government these lovers of idols (priest) would have been compelled to earn their living by breaking stones; making bricks and carrying materials for building purposes or doing the like work." I am firm in my conviction that any attempt to dilute the composite culture and inclusive democracy of our country can only bring harm. Maulana Azad's soul stirring speech (1940), puts it in beautiful prose, "I am a Muslim and proud of the fact. I am indispensable to this noble edifice. Without me this splendid structure of India is incomplete. Everything bears the stamp of our joint endeavour. Our languages were different, but we grew to use a common language. Our manners and customs were different, but they produced a new synthesis..No fantasy or artificial scheming to separate and divide can break this unity". ______ [7] PRESS RELEASE DATE: 20th January 2008 We at the PUCL, Gujarat are appalled by the arrest of Dr. Binayak Sen, General Secretary of the Chhattisgarh People's Union for Civil Liberties and Vice-President of the National PUCL by Chhatisgarh police on 14th May 2007 in Bilaspur under the most undemocratic and barbaric Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act 2006 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 2004. Letter to the Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh send by PUCL, Gujarat. We are also concerned over Dr. Binayak Sen's deteriorating health, as he is reported to have lost 20 kilograms of weight over the past six months of his imprisonment. We appeal to the authorities to take cognizance of this medically significant development by immediately shifting him to a competent hospital where relevant investigations and treatment can be provided. - PUCL People's Union for Civil Liberties C/o Shishu Milap, 1 Shrihari Apartment, Behind Express Hotel, Vadodara 390 007, Gujarat Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________________________________________ Date: 20th January 2008 To, Dr. Raman Singh The Chief Minister, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Sub: We request you to revisit afresh the arrest of Dr. Binayak Sen General Secretary of the Chhattisgarh People's Union for Civil Liberties and Vice-President of the National PUCL and to ensure conditions for his release. Dear Sir, As members of a human rights organization working for the poor and the marginalised, we are disappointed that the Sessions Court in Raipur in its hearing on the 28th of December '07 granted neither parole nor bail to Dr. Binayak Sen. This is particularly dismaying as it meant that Dr. Binayak Sen could not be present in Mumbai on 30th December 07 to receive in person a prestigious gold medal, the Paul Keithan Award, from the Indian Academy of Social Sciences at their national convention. This award was given in recognition of Dr Binayak Sen's lifetime contribution in the fields of public health and human rights. We at the PUCL, Gujarat are appalled by the arrest of Dr. Binayak Sen, General Secretary of the Chhattisgarh Peoples Union for Civil Liberties and Vice-President of the National PUCL by Chhattisgarh police on 14th May 2007 in Bilaspur under the most undemocratic and barbaric Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act 2006 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 2004. The charges leveled against Dr. Sen for arrest are fictitious and it is an unjust attempt to silence the voice of a conscientious person against the States unlawful actions perpetrated on the poor and especially tribal community of Chhattisgarh through different mechanisms such as Salwa Judum. We are also concerned over Dr. Binayak Sen's deteriorating health, as he is reported to have lost 20 kilograms of weight over the past six months of his imprisonment. We appeal to the authorities to take cognizance of this medically significant development by immediately shifting him to a competent hospital where relevant investigations and treatment can be provided. The arrest of such an eminent person and denial even of bail to him is a threat to all those fighting for civil liberties and basic human rights. On the one hand, we want doctors to go to remote areas and to work among the poorest of people. On the other hand, if doctors like Binayak are arrested, young medical graduates are going to receive mixed and fearsome messages about what their future fate might be. It is never possible to work with people without being confronted with poverty and discrimination, which are the root causes of ill-health. One cannot be punished for raising valid concerns about the dismal situation of a large part of our population. The Medico Friend Circle and Jan Swasthya Abhiyan had conducted an investigation into the Public health conditions in Dantewada in June this year, in the context of Salwa Judum related displacement. The findings of this team confirmed initial observations of Dr. Binayak Sen's team in 2005, about the involuntary nature of Salwa Judum camps and the dismal conditions in which the inmates were staying there. The MFC-JSA investigation also revealed that several hundred villages in Dantewada are not receiving any public health services due to blockade and threats by Salwa Judum since the last two and half years. The pressure on the international humanitarian organization MSF to close down its medical work and reports of threats to doctors and health professionals by Salwa Judum are also matters of serious concern. The Dantewada investigation has reiterated the concerns expressed by Dr. Binayak Sen about the negative public health impact of Salwa Judum. We request you to revisit afresh the arrest of Dr. Binayak Sen and to ensure conditions for his release. We are sure that the due process of legal justice will prove his innocence. But to make him languish in jail until then, especially without any credible evidence, will only undermine people's faith in the democratic credentials of the law enforcement agency in the country. As socially oriented professionals, we call upon all media persons to give wide coverage regarding Dr. Sen's exceptional work and to the facts as they have emerged up till now, to strengthen the process of justice. Dr. J. S. Bandukwala Amitaben Verma Chinu Srinivasan Rohit Prajapati Trupti Shah Maya Valecha Ambrish Mehta Trupti Parekh Rajni Dave Members of People's Union for Civil Liberties, Gujarat. ______ [8] Indian History Congress Professor Hira Lal Gupta Research Award endowed by Professor Hira Lal Gupta formerly of the Sagar University and Sectional President, Section III, IHC (1973) General President, IHC (1990-91) & Vice President, IHC (1991-92) AWARD FOR THE YEAR 2007 Awarded to MEERA NANDA for her work PROPHETS FACING BACKWARD: POST-MODERNISM, SCIENCE AND HINDU NATIONALISM "Meera Nanda is a philosopher of science who has pursued questions important to contemporary modes of thought many of which have a bearing on historical debates. In critiquing post-modernist thinking she draws attention to its undermining of the role of rationality in historical analysis. Her exploration of the influence of these ideas is insightful, and her work thus contributes to the refinement and rigour of the historical method." --Committee of Awards Presented at the 68th Session Indian History Congress University of Delhi, Delhi December 28, 2007 signed (Professor BP Sahu) Secretary, Indian History Congress ______ [9] ANNOUNCEMENTS: (i) Dear Friends, Network for Women's Rights and National Organization for Working Communities are jointly organizing a Social Movements Assembly for solidarity among the deprived and marginalized communities "to act together-to change the world for better". The topic of the assembly is The Social Movements for Rights and Justice in Pakistan: Need, Problems and Prospects. You are cordially invited to participate fully in the assembly. Regards, Farhat Parveen Nigar Barkat General Secretary General Secretary National Organization for Working Communities Network for Women's Rights Programme [on 26th of January, at Arts Council of Pakistan, Karachi] Registration 9:00am to 9:30am First Session Part I 9:30-11:30 Guest of Honour: Justice (retired) Majida Razvi Chair: Kaisar Bengali Aims and Objectives of the Assembly Farhat Parveen Introduction of Network for Women's Rights Nigar Barkat Introduction of National Organisaiton for Working Communities Mir Zulfiqar Ali Political Situation in Country Saleha Athar Presentations of Movements Urban Labour Movement Ghulam Mehoob Peasants Movement Aqila Naz Fisher Folk movement Tahira Muhammad Ali Shah Minorities Movement Joe Paul Tea Break 11:30-11:45 First Session Part II 11:45-12:30 Chair: Anis Haroon Guest of Honour: Noor Naz Agha Writers movement - Zahida Hina Teachers/lecturers movement Dr.Riaz Ahmed Student movement Gul Hassan Jakhrani- First Session Part III 12:30PM-1:15PM Chair: Justice (R) Wajeehuddin Guest of Honour: Shameem-ur-Rehaman Journalists' movements Ehfaz ur-Rahman Lawyers and judges Movement Justice (retd) Rasheed Rizvi Doctors Movement Dr. Shershah Syed Lunch Break 1:15-2:15 Second Session: Group discussions 2:15-3:00pm Group Discussion among all representatives of different social movements Presentations from all groups. 1 hour Third Session: Work plan by joint working group 3:00pm-4:15pm Concluding Remarks by I.A. Rahman 4:15-pm-4:30pm Vote of Thanks Mehtab Akbar Rashidi Rally for Peace and Democracy _____ (ii) Dear All, A massive protest is being planned against Musharraf in UK. All concerned, students, lawyers, civil societies, political party workers, etc. are invited to come to this protest. If you are in or around London on the 28th [January 2008], please try to come. The plan is to bring people from all backgrounds holding the flags of their political parties or the flag of Pakistan in case you don't support any political party to represent the much united resistance movement against Musharraf. Please circulate this mail widely. As with any protest, numbers matter! In total solidarity, Samad ------------- JOIN ASMA JEHANGIR, IMRAN KHAN, JEMIMA KHAN, PTI, PML-N, PPP, OTHERS AT DEMO OUTSIDE DOWNING STREET GO MUSHARRAF GO DEMO TO RESTORE JUDICIARY AND THE CONSTITUTION RELEASE ALL POLITICAL PRISONERS FREE THE MEDIA HOLD FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS ON Date: Monday January 28th 2008 Time: 11.30 AM Location: 10 Downing Street, London, SW1A 2AA Tube: Westminister Station FOR MORE INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT : KHWAJA IMTIAZ 07886318577, SHAHID DASTGIR 07939114451 OR RABIA 07515 549541 _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), 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: http://insaf.net/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/ 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