South Asia Citizens Wire | January 20-21, 2007 | Dispatch No. 2351 - Year 8
[1] The army, not the politicians, now runs Bangladesh (The Economist) [2] India: Online Peition - Presidential Clemency For Mohd. Afzal Guru [3] India: A travesty of justice (Indira Jaising) [4] India: Irom Sharmila's Health Deteriorates [5] India's Growing Uranium Enrichment Program for Military Purposes (David Albright, Susan Basu) [6] India: Report of National Consultation on Minorities and Biases in Text Books [7] Hindu[tva] activists riot in India's Bangalore ____ [1] The Economist print edition Jan 18th 2007 | Dhaka THE COUP THAT DARE NOT SPEAK ITS NAME THE ARMY, NOT THE POLITICIANS, NOW RUNS BANGLADESH Between the barracks and the mosque WHEN Iajuddin Ahmed, Bangladesh's president, declared an army-backed state of emergency on January 11th and cancelled the election due on January 22nd, neither he nor the foreign governments quietly cheering him on used the word "coup". Yet that is what it looks like. The army, in the tradition of "guardian coups" from Fiji to Thailand, has stepped in with the usual list of apparently noble goals. The interim government it is backing will enable credible elections, clean up the country's extremely politicised civil service, fight corruption, fix the country's power crisis and keep food prices in check-and then return to the barracks. The president stood down as head of the caretaker government that had been supposed to oversee the elections. He was replaced by Fakhruddin Ahmed, a former central-bank governor and World Bank official. The technocratic administration he heads has so far sent the right signals. A drive against corruption-in which Bangladesh regularly nears the top of world league tables-is under way. The national-security chief, the top civil servant in the power ministry and the attorney-general have all been ousted. A start has been made in separating the judiciary from the executive. But restoring democracy remains a tall order. The political system has collapsed. The army insisted the president step in before the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which headed a coalition government for the past five years, could rig the election and secure itself another term. Delaying the vote averted a possible bloodbath. Allegations of election-rigging levelled by an alliance led by the other big party, the Awami League, had led to weeks of often violent protests and strikes. Their charges were, in effect, backed by foreign observers. Both the European Union and the UN withdrew their support for the election. The UN also warned the army against partisan intervention in politics, adding that this might jeopardise its lucrative role in UN peacekeeping operations. This threat helped sever an alliance between the army and the BNP. The BNP's leader, the previous prime minister, Khaleda Zia, is reported to have been taken aback by the state of emergency and disappointed in the generals. But the BNP is unlikely to go quietly, raising fears that the administration might be forced to make fuller use of its wide-ranging emergency powers, which it has so far used with restraint. Unless something extraordinary happens to make the parties behave, there will be no return soon to two-party politics. It will take time to fix a voter list bloated with millions of extra names, to issue voter-identity cards, to set up a new independent election commission, and to purge the bureaucracy. It seems unachievable before the July monsoon, which pushes polls back to the final quarter of 2007. Indeed, what would be the fourth electoral battle between Mrs Zia and the League's Sheikh Hasina Wajed may never happen. Arguing in favour of the state of emergency, Bangladesh's largest-selling newspaper, Prothom Alo, has exposed the practice of parties' auctioning off parliamentary seats for money. Matiur Rahman, the editor, also alleges that both big parties entered a bidding war to lure the Jatiya Party of the former dictator, Hossain Mohammad Ershad, into their alliance. Jatiya has asked the army to shut the paper down. Although the state of emergency has supporters even among some liberal democrats, it is a high-stakes gamble. Authoritarian rule is unlikely to appeal for long, however fed up voters are with the two big parties and their mutually-loathing leaders. The main beneficiary from the failure of mainstream politics is an extremist Islamist fringe. Internationally, the stakes are highest for neighbouring India. It accuses Bangladesh of harbouring insurgent groups from its north-east, and is home, claim politicians, to some 20m Bangladeshi migrants. By 2050 Bangladesh, only twice as big as Ireland, will have about 250m people. In the short term the only voting on offer to Bangladesh's people, half of whom live in abject poverty, is with their feet. _____ [2] [ Endorse the petition to the President of India ; Sign on petition open for signature at: http://www.petitiononline.com/CMAG/petition.html Deadline for signatures is 31 January 2007. ] o o o PRESIDENTIAL CLEMENCY FOR MOHD. AFZAL GURU 19 January 2007 Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam President of India Rashtrapati Bhavan New Delhi Dear Dr. Abdul Kalam, When the then President of India rejected the mercy petition of Kehar Singh, sentenced to death in the Indira Gandhi assassination case, the statement of the government was this: "The President is of the opinion that he cannot go into the merits of a case finally decided by the Highest Court of the Land." This was challenged by Kehar Singh, and a five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court (AIR 1989 SC 653) held that the opinion formed by the then President was wrong because a decision of the Supreme Court can also be wrong. The President, the Supreme Court held, can determine whether or not a convict is guilty--the findings of the courts, including the Supreme Court, notwithstanding. Here are a few excerpts from the full-bench judgment: "... To any civilized society, there can be no attributes more important than the life and personal liberty of its members. That is evident from the paramount position given by the courts to Article 21 of the Constitution. These twin attributes enjoy a fundamental ascendancy over all other attributes of the political and social order and consequently, the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary are more sensitive to them than to the other attributes of daily existence. The deprivation of personal liberty and the threat of deprivation of life by the action of the State is in most civilized societies regarded seriously and recourse, either under express constitutional provision or through legislative enactment, is provided to the judicial organ. But, fallibility of human judgement being undeniable even in the most trained mind, ... it has been considered appropriate that in the matter of life and personal liberty, the protection should be extended by entrusting power further to some high authority to scrutinize the validity of the threatened denial of life or the threatened or continued denial of personal liberty. The power so entrusted is a power belonging to the people and reposed in the highest dignitary of the state. "... It is open to the President in the exercise of the power vested in him by Article 72 of the Constitution to scrutinize the evidence on the record of the criminal case and come to a different conclusion from that recorded by the court in regard to the guilt of, and sentence imposed on, the accused. "... It is apparent that the power under Article 72 entitles the President to examine the record of evidence of the criminal case and to determine for himself whether the case is one deserving the grant of relief falling within that power. The President is entitled to go into the merits of the case notwithstanding that it has been judicially concluded by the consideration given to it by the Supreme Court." You will be aware, Sir, that the Supreme Court has without explanation rejected the curative petition filed by Mohd. Afzal Guru, sentenced to death in the Parliament attack case. That petition was the last option available to him through the courts. Now his only hope of living is the mercy petition which is with you. As we have seen, the Supreme Court itself has said, in a full-bench judgment, that it is in the nature of things that it can be wrong. We know that Mohd. Afzal Guru was convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence and that from the start he had no effective legal defence. We know also that he was the victim of a shrill media campaign. The President has the power to re-examine the evidence and come to a conclusion different even from that of the Supreme Court. While a court is limited to examining the material placed before it, the President can take into account a wide range of considerations, including political, social and moral ones. The Supreme Court has referred only to the President's power under Article 72 of the Constitution. We wish to go further and say that it is the President's moral responsibility to ensure that injustice is not done to a citizen by depriving him of life or personal liberty. We urge you, Sir, to exercise your constitutional power in the matter of Mohd. Afzal Guru's mercy petition keeping in mind your moral responsibility and also the fact that your power was entrusted to you by us, your fellow citizens. Yours truly, Mukul Dube, N. D. Pancholi and Harsh Kapoor _____ [3] The Hindustan Times January 20, 2007 A TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE by Indira Jaising In an otherwise verbose Constitution, one of the simplest - yet the one of the most important provisions - is the one relating to the Right to Life: Article 21. "No person shall be deprived of life or liberty, except by procedure established by law." For anyone alive, this is the most important guarantee there is in the Constitution. No doubt the more privileged among us rely not only on the law for our protection, but also on our class background, our connections with those in power and so on. But the poor have only the law to depend on - and that is where the guarantee of the procedure prescribed by law comes in. Many among us detest the death penalty. Legal processes are fallible, but execution cannot be revoked to restore justice. Be that as it may, at least the process by which the penalty is imposed needs to be fair. The seminal requirement of this fairness is that the person facing a death penalty be represented by a lawyer. How would we like it if we entered a court room, when arraigned as an accused, without a lawyer? Journalists facing defamation, newspapers facing contempt, business tycoons locked in legal battles are all represented by very senior lawyers. What if a person facing the death penalty were to be unrepresented by a lawyer? In order to avoid such an eventuality, the Constitution was amended in 1976 to introduce the Right to Legal Aid for indigent people as a directive principle of state policy. The Supreme Court has held the Right to Legal Aid for an accused facing a trial which could lead to deprivation of life or liberty. The government enacted the Legal Services Authority Act 1986, to ensure that legal aid is available to indigent people. And yet, Afzal went to trial for a capital crime without adequate representation. From his arrest till he made a so-called confession, he was not represented by a lawyer. He gave a list of four lawyers who he would have liked to have represented him. Judge Dhingra, who finally found him guilty of conspiracy to wage war against the country, records that two of the named lawyers refused to represent him. There is no record of the other two being asked. When produced in court, he was told that a lawyer, who he had never met, who had not visited him in jail to get a first-hand account of what happened, would represent him. He is then said to have admitted documents identifying the five dead persons and the post mortem reports. It seems that the die was cast then: if he admitted to knowing the five who were dead, he must have been be part of the conspiracy. Sometime early in the trial, the lawyer withdrew her appearance and represented another accused. Afzal was told that her junior would represent him. During the trial, he noticed, that the young lawyer was denying facts he had admitted, at which point he said that he did not want the lawyer in question. From then on, the record indicates that he was cross-examining witnesses against him himself and that too without being given copies of the depositions. The court, in the meantime, appointed the very same lawyer in whom Afzal had expressed no confidence as an amicus curiae. Amicus curiae means "a friend of the court"! Now that Afzal's curative petition has been dismissed by the Supreme Court, there will be far-reaching consequences for thousands of people in this country. To send a man to his death without legal representation is not only unconstitutional but also barbaric. Why go through an elaborate trial if the accused is not represented by a lawyer? One might as well be judge, prosecutor, and counsel for the accused anyway and pronounce judgment. The tragedy is that Afzal is not the only one in these circumstances; there are hundreds like him, deprived of liberty without adequate legal services. The legal profession is privatised, regulating its own fees. The legal aid on offer provides no more than Rs 3,000 to the counsel representing an indigent accused for the entire trial. Can one really hope to get adequate representation for that fee? It is pointless to argue that lawyers should appear free of charge in an otherwise unregulated profession. A well-funded Legal Services Authority should pay its legal aid lawyers better to attract talent to legal aid. There are many young lawyers committed to providing legal services to the poor, who need to be backed by a proper legal aid system. There is no lack of finances with the authority; the question is how the money is spent. On conferences and airfares, or on providing legal services to the poor? I am aware that these questions have been raised in the appeal and the review petition. But review petitions are rejected without reasons and without a hearing. The law laid down by the Supreme Court visualises the filing of a curative petition to cure a miscarriage of justice. That was done by Afzal - to no avail. Now, only the President of India can have the last word. We can only give opinions that there has been a gross miscarriage of justice. (The writer is a senior advocate.) ______ [4] [with thanks to Kavita Joshi for forwarding this] o o o ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: kshetrimayum onil [EMAIL PROTECTED] IROM SHARMILA'S HEALTH DETERIORATES New Delhi: 19th January 2007 The health condition of Irom Sharmila Chanu deteriorates under the arbitrary detention of Delhi police in Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. Since 7 th October 2006 she has been detained in two different hospitals (AIIMS and RML) at Delhi. Since then she has lost 4 kgs. and her current body weight is only 37 kg. Today, the Delhi High Court heard the two fresh applications filed by her brother Singhajit. The first application asked for RML to be made a party to the case and also to handover all medical records to Sharmila's family. So far the hospital had refused to give any medical reports. The High Court has now asked for copies of all medical records to be produced on Tuesday, 23 rd January - the next date of hearing. The Court has expressed its opinion that Sharmila can be detained in order to protect her health. It is critical to note that during six years of detention in Manipur her weight had remained almost constant. The second application was for Sharmila to be allowed to attend a meeting in New Delhi. The Court will decide the application on Tuesday after receiving and assessing for itself Sharmila's health status. Since November 2000, the 'Iron Lady of Manipur', Sharmila has been on hunger fast for the repeal of the repressive Armed Forces Special Powers Act. Determined to continue her agitation for justice and peace, she is currently detained at Room No. 8 A, Nursing Home, Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. For further information contact: Kshetrimayum Onil - 98187 81767 Coordinator Desk for Sharmila's Struggle ______ [5] Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) January 18, 2007 INDIA'S GAS CENTRIFUGE ENRICHMENT PROGRAM: GROWING CAPACITY FOR MILITARY PURPOSES by David Albright and Susan Basu Since the 1970s, India has pursued gas centrifuges to enrich uranium. The history and current status of India's gas centrifuge program has been a long-held state secret. Nonetheless, ISIS sought to trace the history of India's centrifuge enrichment program and assess its current and projected enrichment capacity based on open sources, information from interviews with Indian and other government officials, and publicly available procurement data. The Indian Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) commissioned India's main enrichment plant, codenamed the Rare Materials Project (RMP), around 1990. In addition to a gas centrifuge facility, this site, located about 19 kilometers from Mysore, may also contain a uranium hexafluoride production facility. By 1997, after several years of difficulty, India seems to have achieved a technical breakthrough at RMP. Although India has experienced difficulties in building centrifuges, it now appears to be competent at constructing centrifuges comparable to those common in Europe in the 1970s. Our conclusion is that India is currently operating between 2,000 and 3,000 centrifuges at the RMP. The DAE is currently attempting to expand the number of centrifuges at RMP by 3,000, increasing RMP's capacity by at least 15,000 separative work units (SWU) per year, a common measure of the output of a uranium enrichment plant and more than double its current output. Further expansions in capacity are expected. The Indian government has proposed to designate its gas centrifuge enrichment facilities, such as RMP, as military sites under the framework of US-India nuclear cooperation. Thus, India is unlikely to use these facilities to create fuel for the Tarapur boiling water reactors, which will be designated as civilian facilities. India is currently importing sufficient amounts of low enriched uranium (LEU) to fuel the Tarapur reactors. These reactors could have otherwise absorbed the RMP's capacity. As a result of its recently acquired ability to import LEU, India can devote the enrichment capacity of RMP to highly enriched uranium (HEU) for military applications. India would most likely use the HEU for fuel in submarine reactors and in thermonuclear weapons. The production of thermonuclear weapons may lead India to conduct additional underground nuclear tests as it seeks to make more deliverable, reliable, and efficient weapons. [. . .] FULL TEXT AT: http://www.isis-online.org/publications/southasia/indiagrowingcapacity.pdf ______ [6] sacw.net | 19 January 2007 REPORT OF NATIONAL CONSULTATION ON MINORITIES AND BIASES IN TEXT BOOKS 13 - 14 January 2007, New Delhi http://www.sacw.net/HateEducation/textbrep19Jan07.html ______ [7] HINDU[TVA] ACTIVISTS RIOT IN INDIA'S BANGALORE 21 Jan 2007 13:50:45 GMT Source: Reuters BANGALORE, India, Jan 21 (Reuters) - Hundreds of Hindu activists burnt shops owned by Muslims and set vehicles ablaze in the southern city of Bangalore, India's technology hub, on Sunday, police and witnesses said. The violence occurred as activists moved through the city to join a rally organised by the right-wing Hindu fundamentalist organisation Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS -- National Volunteers' Corps). On Friday, thousands of Muslim demonstrators protesting against last month's execution of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, clashed with police and destroyed shops and cars in the city. Bangalore is home to about 1,500 global and Indian IT firms. Their operations were not affected by the violence as they are located on the city outskirts. Police used teargas and batons to disperse the crowds and prohibition orders, restricting movement of four or more people together, were issued in central Bangalore. More than 2,000 police officers patrolled the affected areas as mobs targeted Muslim shops and vehicles, forcing the closure of some businesses, witnesses said. Police said there were no injuries but witnesses said about five people were wounded in stone-throwing incidents. "Prohibitory orders will be in force until Tuesday," city police chief N. Achuta Rao, told Reuters. He said there had been some arrests but did not give a number. The Indian state of Karnataka, of which Bangalore is the capital, is ruled by a coalition of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party and a regional party. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ 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: bridget.jatol.com/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 [email protected] http://insaf.net/mailman/listinfo/sacw_insaf.net
