State of Chhattisgarh Versus Dr. Binayak Sen

*By Radha Surya*

21 February, 2011
*Countercurrents.org*

There is an image that torments our collective conscience. This is the image
that shows Dr. Binayak Sen sitting inside a police vehicle after he was
awarded a life sentence by the Raipur Sessions Court in Chhattisgarh. An
observer who was present on that bleak December day said that he looked
completely defeated when the judgement was delivered. On December 24 as in
the widely circulated photo from the years 2007-2009, Dr. Binayak Sen’s hand
rests on the barred window of the police van. But this time he looks
straight ahead rather than the world outside the van. His clouded,
despairing gaze is that of a doomed man who already in his mind’s eye sees
the inexorable prison walls closing in on him.

It has been said many times before by those who have first hand knowledge of
the situation in Chhattisgarh. An all-powerful nexus consisting of the
Chhattisgarh government, police and judiciary and acting on behalf of
business interests had set its sights on Dr. Binayak Sen. In his capacity of
human rights activist, he had played a key role in exposing the true nature
of the state sponsored vigilante group the murderous Salwa Judum. Under the
pretext of being a spontaneous anti-Naxalite people’s movement, the Salwa
Judum ran amok in the tribal areas of Chhattisgarh killing large numbers of
villagers and herding survivors into refugee camps. This forcible clearing
of villages by the government paved the way for the appropriation of the
resource rich areas of the state by mining and manufacturing interests. Dr.
Binayak Sen’s outspoken condemnation of the perpetration of state violence
for advancing the interests of private capital made him an enemy of the
state—someone who had to be silenced at all costs. The Chhattisgarh police
force had its own vendetta to wage against Dr. Sen. For them he was a marked
man from the time he drew attention to encounter killings and other
atrocities committed by the police.

The rejection of Dr. Binayak Sen’s bail application by the Chattisgarh High
Court on February 10 is the most recent in the series of blows that have
been dealt by a vindictive state apparatus. It had been hoped—not
unreasonably--that at least the High Court would uphold ordinary standards
of legally permissible evidence. The hearing of the bail application took
place over the period from January 24-February 10 with a lengthy break from
January 25-February 8. As it happened one of the judges absolutely had to go
on leave during this critical period. Concomitantly national campaigns
seeking justice for Dr. Binayak Sen went into high gear. A group of artists
that included well known and respected film personalities wrote to the Prime
Minister appealing to him to press for a judicial review of the verdict and
urgently undo the injustice being done to Dr Binayak Sen. The international
campaign too stepped up its efforts and conveyed unmistakable anxiety to
secure justice for Dr Binayak Sen. All the signs were propitious. The
European Union Human Rights Commission obtained permission to attend the
bail hearing and a number of Nobel Laureates rallied behind their imprisoned
colleague. In response, the all powerful Chhattisgarh state apparatus and
its loyalists struck back by representing the expression of international
concern as a matter of controversy.

Supposedly the EU representatives who were present at the Chhattisgarh High
Court hearing of Dr. Binayak Sen's bail application had overstepped their
boundaries. So had the Nobel Laureates forty of whom had signed a statement
that was released on the eve of the court's announcement of its decision.
The statement referred to the blatantly unfair trial of Dr. Binayak Sen and
made an appeal for his release on bail. The call for justice made by the
Nobel Laureates and the presence of EU observers in court evoked howls of
protest among some speakers in TV debates that followed the refusal of bail
to Dr. Sen. The talking heads were irate that the Nobel Laureates had failed
to pay due deference to the Indian state and its institutions. For them the
scandal consisted not in the travesty of justice that has been witnessed in
the persecution of Dr. Binayak Sen but the taking cognizance thereof by
international observers. The obvious seemed to elude the comprehension of
the ultra-nationalists. Or maybe they understood and were left frothing at
the mouth because the shining work of Dr Binayak Sen, uncompromising human
rights activist and physician selflessly devoted to the service of the
otherwise abandoned and neglected tribal inhabitants of Chhattisgarh, had
won him friends and admirers and garnered respect and recognition across the
world.

With the appropriateness of the so-called internationalization of Dr. Sen's
trial becoming a topic of discussion on the news channels, the family
members who spoke on his behalf were placed in the unimaginably bizarre
position of having to explain and even apologize for the international
dimensions of the shock and outrage with which Dr Sen's conviction has been
received. On CNN-IBN--and no doubt other venues as well--Dr. Ilina Sen was
asked if she had recruited foreign support because she had lost faith in
India's judicial system. She answered that the Nobel Laureates had not acted
at her request and that she had not approached them. That she should have
been required to make this disclaimer is nothing short of outrageous.
Consider the facts. Ever since Dr Binayak Sen was convicted on December 24 a
searchlight has been trained on the trial proceedings. Fabrication of
"evidence" by the prosecution, inconsistencies in key facts such as date and
place of arrest of alleged co-courier Piyush Guha, reliance on inferences
shown to be incorrect to the point of being laughable--all of these have
been brought out by a flood of commentary. The term kangaroo court has been
used by credible observers in connection with the Raipur court that handed a
life sentence to Dr. Binayak Sen. In view of all this it is rather rich that
Dr. Sen's wife while still reeling from the trauma of the rejection of the
bail application should be called on to implicitly refute the charge of
being anti-national and to affirm her faith in the judicial process. The
fact that she kept her self-possession is further testimony to the
remarkable fortitude and courage of a woman who has been made to go through
hell since Dr. Binayak Sen's arrest in May 2007.

At every step the reasonable and legitimate hopes and expectations of
Binayak and Ilina Sen, family members, supporters and well wishers have been
dashed to the ground by a vindictive state apparatus. With the Chhattisgarh
High Court refusing to loosen the coils that have been wound around the
life, liberty and work of Binayak Sen, Ilina Sen has declared her intention
of moving the Supreme Court in an expedient manner. In the mean time Dr
Binayak Sen is suffering out his incarceration in the Raipur jail's maximum
security division where the living conditions are worse than those of zoo
animals. Ilina Sen has said that the cells in the maximum security unit are
merely five iron cages with no facilities in a large courtyard. Dr. Sen is
known to be a heart patient. Unsurprisingly the otherwise vociferous ultra
nationalists have not alluded to the savage treatment meted out to a sick
man by the State. Dr. Sen is kept in isolation and is not allowed to read
newspapers. Can we at least hope that the apex court will give a favorable
hearing to the call for a modicum of justice? Even Home Minister
Chidambaram, an unquestioning proponent if any of state power, has
acknowledged that a miscarriage of justice could have taken place. There is
no remaining recourse if the Supreme Court refuses to overturn the judgement
which has committed Dr. Binayak Sen to a tomb while still alive. That Ilina
Sen has mentally confronted that eventuality is clear from her calm
statement--they would then join the thousands of others in India who live
and die with injustice.

Why did Dr. Binayak Sen give room to the remorseless forces which are
rending apart his life? Why oh why did he not ask in 2007 for transference
of the trial to a state other than Chhattisgarh? This question has been
answered in an interview given by Ilina Sen. She said they believed they
would get justice in Chhattisgarh. Another reason may also be surmised. Dr.
Sen moved to Chhattisgarh in the early 80s and dedicated his life’s work to
alleviating the hardships of life for a tribal population whom the state
regarded as undeserving of its services. Maybe he reasoned that his seeking
a change of venue for the trial would result in feelings of hostility being
engendered amidst the general populace of Chhattisgarh. This in turn would
have made his remaining in Chhattisgarh untenable and necessitated the
abandonment of the tribal inhabitants whom he served and who depended on
him. Such speculation is far from implausible in light of what is known
about the selfless nobility of Dr. Binayak Sen. The day he was arrested he
had requested the police for permission to attend his medical clinic as some
of his patients needed urgent medical attention. The scale and reach of his
work as a physician has been brought out by the human rights activist
Nandita Haksar. In her book on Dr. Binayak Sen she has written that by
jailing the doctor, the state has effectively deprived people, living in
more than 200 villages, of access to any medical care (“Binayak's patients
await treatment,” Times of India, December 31 2010).

For his well wishers and those closest to him there is reason for anguish in
each additional day that Dr. Binayak Sen remains in incarceration. Looking
ahead into the future one can foresee that the activists will recover
eventually from the shock of the rejection of the bail appeal. They will
regroup and resume their efforts. Once again the rallies will be held and
calls made for justice. The campaigners have to continue in the hope that
the mighty and the powerful can be made to see that it is in their interest
to undo the mockery of justice implicit in the persecution of Dr. Binayak
Sen. What other recourse is there?

http://www.countercurrents.org/surya210211.htm



-- 
Adv Kamayani Bali Mahabal
+919820749204
skype-lawyercumactivist
*
*
*"Nobody is giving up violence. Neither the state nor the Maoists are giving
up violence. I am interested in furthering my cause, which is the cause of
peace with justice.- DR BINAYAK SEN *
*www.binayaksen.net*
*PL SIGN ONLINE PETITION: *
http://www.petitiononline.com/sen2010/petition.html
*JOIN THE FACEBOOK EVENT: ONE MILLION FACES
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=179177728772740*
*FREE BINAYAK SEN CAMPAIGN VIDEOS*
*http://www.youtube.com/user/Kamayaninumerouno#grid/user/B4A70E211712242B*
*
*
*
*
*
*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"humanrights movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement?hl=en.

Reply via email to