South Asia Citizens Wire | January 4-6, 2008 | Dispatch No. 2484 - Year 10 running
[1] Pakistan: (i) Statement by Citizens Group on Electoral Process (ii) An assassination most foul (M B Naqvi) [2] Sri Lanka: From half-war half-ceasefire to full time war Annus Horribilis (Shanie) [3] Bangladesh: Call for Release of cartoonist imprisoned for "hurting religious feelings" (Amnesty International) [4] International: Old Questions, New Answers - A manifesto of freedoms (Ruchir Joshi) [5] India - Freedom Speech: Tasmila Nasreen still remains confined in a glasshouse - I want to be in Kolkata: Taslima - Bengal in no mood to let Taslima return [6] India: On Hindutva's anti christian violence in Orissa and Ban on RSS lifted in Himachal Pradesh - A citizens fact finding report on violence in Orissa's Kandhamala district - Himachal Pradesh BJP govt lifts ban on RSS shakhas at public places (Ashwani Sharma) [7] India: Lessons from Gujarat Election Results (Kavita Krishnan) [8] India: The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - a draconian law (Rakesh Shukla) [9] Announcements: World Social [EMAIL PROTECTED] (New Delhi, 11 January 2008) ______ [1] (i) Citizens Group Calls for: 1. A Non-Partisan President 2. Independent Inquiry Commission for the Benazir Bhutto tragedy 3. Appointment of a New CEC and Reconstitution of full ECP 4. Effective Use of Powers by the ECP 5. Restraint by the Political Parties 6. Responsibility by the Media 7. Peaceful Conduct by all Citizens 8. No Further Postponement of Polls on any grounds Lahore, January 4; The Citizens Group on Electoral Process held its 16th Meeting at Lahore on January 4, 2008. Names of participants are attached. The Group began its deliberations by offering fateha for the departed soul of Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto. The Group held extensive deliberations on all aspects of the situation arising from the demise of the former Prime Minister of Pakistan. The Group formulated the following observations and recommendations for considerations and implementation by the Election Commission of Pakistan, the Government, Political Parties, Media and Civil Society: 1. The dastardly assassination of Benazir Bhutto is a tragic loss and an enormous blow to the democratic process. 2. Ultimate responsibility rests with the State and the Caretaker Government that have an obligation to secure the life of every citizen. In this instance, there was a special, additional duty of the Government to ensure optimal safety for a leader of great eminence who had already been unsuccessfully targeted on October 18, 2007. 3. Failing to conduct an autopsy on the slain leader as per the categorical requirements of the law and hastily hosing down the crime scene, the Caretaker Government has provided at least 3 different versions of the causes of the death of Benazir Bhutto. Such premature, inconsistent claims raise well-founded concerns about the actual motivations behind the creation of such confusion. 4. The investigation into all aspects of the assassination should be conducted by an authentically independent Commission of Inquiry headed by a person whose integrity and ability are accepted by the heads of all major political parties. 5. The virtually unprecedented breakdown of law and order across the country and especially in Sindh from the evening of December 27, 2007 to December 31, 2007 is an abysmal, shameful failure of the Federal and Provincial Governments and the law enforcing agencies to anticipate and prevent the killing of innocent citizens and the massive destruction of public and private property. 6. There are substantive grounds for the view that, however large scale and spontaneous the violence was, in which criminal elements were brazenly allowed to kill, loot and burn, it appears that the invisibility of law enforcement agencies for the first 100 hours and then belated deployment was a deliberate ploy to create a situation that could justify the postponement of polls beyond January 8, 2008. 7. The Group is of the firm view that the postponement of elections to February 18 is beyond the prescribed Constitutional deadline. It violates the letter and spirit of the Constitution. Article 254 can not be invoked to postpone the elections beyond the prescribed limit. 8. The consensus in the Group was that the postponement of the election was motivated by partisan considerations which amount to pre-rigging the electoral process despite serious damage to property and facilities. There was no credible logistical reason to postpone the entire election. The postponement manifests the partisan disposition of the Election Commission and the Federal Government. 9. The Group strongly stands against any further postponement of polling for one reason or another. 10. The assassination of a major national leader has led to suspicions and speculations that have the potential to adversely impact on inter-provincial harmony. The Group therefore considers this aspect to be of utmost importance. We believe that considering all the dimensions and possible fall-out, the situation needs to be handled with extraordinary care and sensitivity so that the heat of the election does not worsen conditions and perceptions. 11. The Group was deeply disappointed at the failure of the Election Commission to enforce the Code of Conduct which is being repeatedly violated by some political parties, the administration and the local government officials. 12. The Group reiterated that free, fair and transparent elections are not possible in the absence of a truly independent judiciary. 13. A new Chief Election Commissioner, with the consensus of political parties, should be appointed immediately and the Election Commission should be reconstituted to represent all provinces as per the requirements of the Constitution because even as of January 4, 2008, the existing EC does not fulfill the requirements of the Constitution. 14. The Election Commission needs to take urgent and serious notice of the newspaper advertisements of a political party playing up regional-ethnic sentiments for the sake of votes. This effort, if not checked immediately, can sharpen regional polarization and pose a serious threat to internal harmony and stability. 15. The Election Commission should exercise vigilance and take strict action against any political party, or any other elements that provoke disharmony between the people of the four provinces. 16. The Group also appeals to the media to use its professional judgments for discouraging the publication of advertisements and statements that specifically play up regional and ethnic biases. 17. The media should, therefore, exercise caution and show special responsibility to desist from printing, broadcasting or transmitting any advertisements which may lead to provoking regional and ethnic biases. 18. Political Parties should give national harmony primacy over point-scoring and refrain from statements and actions which may, in any way, hurt the feelings of the people of other provinces. 19. Recent developments underline the inescapable duty of the office of the Presidency to play a strictly non-partisan role. However, because the present President is an avowed partisan and his election on October 6, 2007 is devoid of legal and moral authority, it would be better in the national interest that he should step down. Members of Citizens Group on Electoral Process who participated in the Meeting: 1. Justice (Retd.) Saeed-uz-Zaman Siddiqui, Former Chief Justice of Pakistan: Chairman CGEP 2. Mr. Arif Nizami, Editor The Nation 3. Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Asad Durrani, Former DG ISI/MI 4. Mr. Ghazi Salahuddin, The Jang Group 5. Dr. Hasan-Askari Rizvi; Defence and Political Analyst 6. Dr. Ijaz Shafi Gilani, Chairman, Gallup Pakistan Ltd. 7. Mr. Javed Jabbar, Former Senator & Minister 8. Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Moinuddin Haider; Former Governor Sindh 9. Mr. Mujib-ur-Rehman Shami, Editor-in-Chief, Daily Pakistan 10. Justice (Retd.) Nasira Iqbal, Former Judge Lahore High Court 11. Mr. Omar Khan Afridi, Former Chief Secretary NWFP 12. Dr. Parvez Hassan, Renowned Lawyer 13. Mr. Shafqat Mahmood, Former Senator & Minister 14. Mr. Tasneem Noorani, Former Federal Secretary 15. Mr. Ahmed Bilal Mehboob; Executive Director, PILDAT 16. Ms. Aasiya Riaz; Joint Director, PILDAT Observers - Justice (Retd.) Khalil ur Rehman, Former Judge, Supreme Court of Pakistan - Mr. Shamshad Ahmad, Former Foreign Secretary (ii) The News International January 4, 2008 AN ASSASSINATION MOST FOUL by M B Naqvi It appears Benazir Bhutto fell to an assassin's bullets and or the bomb blast meant for her. Passing away of a charismatic leader is always tragic and an unwelcome surprise. It always leaves behind a trail of bitterness. Even so this was exceptionally so. What the country has to grapple with is its consequences that may become trends. Large numbers have gone on to protest and express an anger that has a long history. Superficially it may look like a sudden explosion of pent up emotions. The kind of disturbances that have followed and the loss of life and property have been involved is troubling. Certain conclusions follow. It is rather sudden that otherwise law-abiding people have become rowdy in expressing their anger, vandals or even occasionally killers, shows the feelings had been pent up for long and people needed an occasion to explode. They want a change. Not knowing how to proceed or achieve what they vaguely wish to achieve, on the one hand, and, on the other, the inadequacy of national leadership -- government, political parties and other leaders of opinion -- underlines a dangerous all around confusion while too many interests are contending for supremacy. Too many ideas about social reconstruction without adequately equipped leadership can cause a lot of trouble. This is what has happened. Political leaders are associated with vague ideals. Benazir was no exception. She embodied feelings of her followers that were not likely to be fulfilled by her and was perhaps not giving the lead that the people wanted or are ready for. The reality is that there is one, a widespread confusion of what should be done and how should things be reorganized; and two, there is a tendency towards violence that has grown over the years due to inadequate leadership or lack of guidance from saner elements, leading to disillusionment with what has happened. Structures of state that keep law and order are virtually breaking down. A growing section tends to take the law in their own hands because they do not expect anyone else to enforce the law. This is anarchy properly so-called. Anyway, two questions arise the answers of which must be attempted. One is about the future of the PPP. While its charismatic leadership has made it into the largest party in Pakistan, it has now chosen a new leader. Then, there have been complaints of distortions in party's working because of non-democratic way of its internal functioning. Shouldn't there be democratic elections for its top leadership. A new crop of leaders should emerge with every generation. The current generation has produced competent and attractive leaders: mainly lawyers and judges. This genuine new leadership is outside the PPP. Why? Will PPP remain the property of a dynasty? The next question is about the future of Pakistan. The rampant ideological confusion and an unhappy, angry people sans responsive leadership make for a dangerous situation. With state structures becoming ineffective and people's tendency towards violence remaining uncorrected, the society's and the state's future becomes vulnerable. Vacuous patriotism of shutting one's eyes to actual grassroots trends poses a danger. The confusion arises from the deepening fissures in the polity over basic questions. The oldest confusion that is simultaneously easy and very difficult to resolve is the contention over the nature of the federation: On one side are believers in a strong central authority, presided over by a stronger individual, and, on the other, are people in the regions possessing their own identity through distinctive language, culture, traditions and perhaps also race. Pakistan had come to grief on this question. If we continue as hitherto, next tragedy should not be unexpected. Isn't there a solution? Another issue that now ominously divides the people is over the rise of a new Islam, represented by al-Qaeda, Taliban and other extremist groups that seize power from time to time in their areas on the ground they are enforcing Shariah here and now, wanting to wipe out sins from society through Shariah punishment. The other side comprises traditional Islam where the same 'promotion of virtue and discouraging of sin' is taken to mean individual purity through good works and by persuasion. What is undeniable is that in Islam the relationship of individual with God is direct; there is no intermediary institution or group. Everything to be done desired by Islam is to be done at individual level by each Musalman without the use of force, except Jihad that requires all Muslims' consensus through a commonly accepted Caliph. In practice most schools believe that injunction about Jihad is no longer operative in the absence of its necessary requirements. Those who suppress sin by others and try to enforce piety and virtue in others with a gun is a new element in the body politic of Muslims the world over. It leads to a clash of civilizations, nations, and religions that can end in misery for all. Therefore it has to be contained. It will destroy the very fabric of Pakistan anyway -- and probably other Muslim countries. Then there are social questions. Musharraf regime's propaganda of having reduced poverty and increased prosperity all around is contradicted by the behaviour of common Pakistanis. They are dissatisfied and angry; they had to tolerate injustice for long in silence; and that makes for building up of an anger that occasionally finds expression in violent protests. Benazir was associated with the idea of equitable reforms. She was taken to stand for the state that looks after the interests of common people and does not serve economic and social elites. It was thought she would run the economy for the benefit of the common people and would promote a development that is oriented to job creation and poverty reduction. The fact is no politician is paying any attention to these objectives. Most political parties are failing on that score, including the PPP. But old images too die hard, if accompanied with cynical rhetoric. Insistent question is what should be done in today's political crisis. The year 2007 has seen one crisis after another. The world press informs us that authority and power of retired Gen(r) Pervez Musharraf is oozing out of him. But the observed fact is that his hold on governance is still complete with America, conservative Arab kings and NATO powers backing him; he remains a force who is suppressing the civil society and sacked an assertive judiciary, presiding over tumultuous events of the last few months with bomb blasts and suicide bombings in political gatherings. He does not look like fading away soon, though he had better take note of new stirrings and popular anger. State is becoming weak and Pakistan is in real danger. Larger forces can be unleashed. The way he acts will make or mar the future for Pakistan. Without much ado, it has to be asserted that after him there will be no deluge. World's graveyards are full of indispensable men and women. He had better find a way out of his militarised "Islamabad". Otherwise the cost to Pakistan would be just too great. He should transfer effective governance to a national government formed after an All Parties Conference -- like the one called by Ayub Khan in 1969. A new Caretaker government comprising these leaders will help hold a free and fair election, sometime in late March or April. Postponement of Jan 8 elections is anyhow necessary. Best course is to evolve a broad consensus over initial reforms but restoration of pre-Nov 3, 2007 situation in respect of judiciary and media is the necessary first step the ugly ducklings left behind by emergency and PCO need to be buried here and now. _______ [2] The Island - 5 January 2008 NOTEBOOK OF A NOBODY Annus Horribilis by Shanie A journalist has referred to the year that has just past as an annus horribilis meaning a horrible year. She was using a Latin phrase that came into popular usage after Queen Elizabeth II used it fifteen years ago to define the year in England that had then just ended. If 2007 in Sri Lanka was an annus horribilis, 2008 has begun on a note that promises to be an annus terribilis or a more dreadful year. The assassination of a parliamentarian in A Hindu temple on New Year's Day was similar to the assassination of another parliamentarian in the Batticaloa Cathedral on Christmas Day two years ago, not long after Mahinda Rajapakse was elected to the presidency. The New Year's Day assassination is widely believed to have been by a paramilitary group close to the seats of governmental power. This has been followed in the next two days by bomb explosions that have killed at least seven soldiers and civilians in Colombo and Kebbitigollawa. The bomb attacks are believed to have been carried out by the LTTE. In between the two bombs, the Government announced the unilateral termination of the Ceasefire Agreement with the LTTE. All these do not portend well for the rule of law and peace in the year just begun. There are three major actors on the politico-military scene now in Sri Lanka who contribute in varying degrees to this pall of gloom - the Government, the LTTE and the paramilitary groups. They continue to act with impunity, disregarding the Constitution and all democratic norms. The abductions and political killings not only continue on a daily basis in the North and East but take place in other parts of the country as well, as did the recent incidents. It is reported that in the East, armed paramilitaries brazenly walk into homes demanding money and jewellery. Men are abducted and released only on payment of ransom money. No one is arrested in this regard and the affected people have little faith that official complaints will bear any result; on the contrary, it can mean more trouble from the paramilitaries. In the Jaffna Peninsula, there are several killings taking place on a daily basis. The latest report of the independent University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna) gives details of many of them. The assassinated Parliamentarian Maheswaran also referred to this in a TV talk show recently and made an oblique reference to a paramilitary group as being responsible. Since his revelations, there appears to have been a lull in the number of killings but the people of Jaffna believe that killings will resume once the heat is over. The abductions, disappearances and targeted killings are similar to what the people of the North and East went through in the past at the hands of the LTTE. Then the targets were all those who dared to defy the LTTE or made public criticism of the LTTE's politico-military strategy. Today, the targets are those with even the remotest association with the LTTE - whether they be that willingly or unwillingly. The paramilitaries responsible this do so with complete impunity. The 'war on terror' Spokespersons for the Government, the Defence Secretary and the Army Commander in particular, have stated that the LTTE would be defeated militarily within the year. Military analysts however remain sceptical. The East was 'liberated' with much fanfare. But the people have yet to experience liberation. They lived through difficult days when the LTTE was operational but now find conditions under the LTTE renegades who form the dominant paramilitary group even more difficult. They also know that the LTTE is only waiting on the wings to make a comeback. Rule by using discredited paramilitaries to carry out killings and land grabs will be counter-productive even in the short run. There is no alternative for the Government to adhere to the rule of law and to win, to use a cliché, the hearts and minds of the people. It takes time but the results are certain. This is what the University Teachers for Human Rights also reported about the spectacular success achieved by Gen Larry Wijeratne in winning the confidence of the people of Jaffna. The manner in which this paramilitary outfit is being used and its terror condoned will make even a military victory over the LTTE a hollow one. A democratic election in the East for local self-government would normally have been welcome. But under the present circumstances, the people are not going to be given a free choice. The Tamil and Muslim voters are going to be intimidated and the Government will lose even a semblance of credibility. It will be the very negation of democracy. Many already have fears that such a farcical election in the East may only be a dress rehearsal for such 'elections' in the future in the rest of the country. A 'political solution' Within two years, the present Government has succeeded in polarising the country as never before. It has used the media and other resources at its command to divide the people. The recent public opinion poll conducted by the Centre for Policy Alternatives shows that almost half the Sinhalese interviewed agreed with President Rajapakse's view that peace can be restored only after the LTTE is defeated, whereas the overwhelming majority of Tamils and Muslims felt the war should be stopped and peace negotiations resumed immediately. In fact, it was the up country Tamils (90%) and Muslims (85%) who were most vocal in this regard. Even given a margin of error (not having a tradition of such polls and given the present climate of fear in airing one's political views), this polarisation is striking. Many feel that President Rajapakse's statement that a political solution will be presented only after the military defeat of the LTTE is only a pretext for appeasing Sinhala ethno-nationalists whom he needs to prop up the Government. Otherwise his statement does not make any sense. If a reasonable political solution acceptable to moderate Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim communities (who no doubt form the majority in each of the communities) is presented and accepted, it will most certainly defeat the LTTE both militarily and politically. This is perhaps what the Snhala ethno-nationalists do not want. They need the LTTE; without it, they would become irrelevant in southern politics. International Monitors This is also the rationale for the polarisation between 'us' and 'them'. Anybody who is not with 'us' is a traitor. The international community and the non-governmental organisations have been condemned for working with the enemy. That is also the rationale for deciding to terminate the Ceasefire Agreement. Over the last two years, it has been totally ignored but as long as it remained on paper, there was a need to accommodate international monitors. The mere presence of these monitors, even though they had no powers other than to report, acted as a restraint to unbridled militarism on the part of both parties. During the period when they were free to monitor, they reported to the international and local community over 3000 violations by the LTTE and around 300 violations by the Government. This kept both parties under check. With the termination of the Ceasefire Agreement, the monitors will have to be withdrawn and with that the happenings in the war and conflict zones will cease to be reported. Would that be in the interests of the people of this country? The monitors have been discharging their duties with impartiality and in conformity with internationally accepted norms. The ethno-nationalists among both Sinhala and Tamil communities did not find that acceptable. They wanted them to side only with 'us' and characterise 'them' as the violators. Without the presence of an independent group of monitors or an independent media, there is going to be greater reliance on stories that come down the grapevine - sometimes accurate and sometimes not so. Does that serve the interests of the people of this country? The Government is dumping the Ceasefire Agreement and with it the international monitors against the advice of both the international community as well as pro-peace Sri Lankans. Undoubtedly domestic party political considerations have played a part in the decision. The Government in its anxiety to preserve its parliamentary majority wants to appease the Sinhala ethno-nationalists. The pro-peace elements within the Government have little manoeuvrability. They are caught in a real predicament. All indications are therefore that the Government's singular purpose in the coming year would be to secure a military victory over the LTTE. Economic and social development programmes, reduction of the cost of living, tackling rising lawlessness and unifying a divided people are going to be put on the backburner, in the hope that a military victory over the LTTE would divert people's attention from the negative impact of economic and social decline. Certainly, that is not going to be in the interests of the people of this country either in the short term or in the longer term. _______ [3] Amnesty International RELEASE CARTOONIST IMPRISONED FOR "HURTING RELIGIOUS FEELINGS" 4 January 2008 Call on the Bangladesh authorities to release a cartoonist imprisoned for "hurting religious feelings" Protestors against publication of cartoon burn copies of the newspaper in Dhaka, Bangladesh, 21 September 2007Mohammed Arifur Rahman, a cartoonist in Bangladesh, was arrested when street demonstrations by Islamist groups followed the publication of one of his cartoons. He has been detained since 18 September 2007. The cartoon was published in Alpin, a supplement of the leading daily newspaper in Bangladesh, the Prothom Alo. Mohammed Arifur Rahman was subsequently charged with "hurting religious feelings" and detained in jail pending trial. The charge carries a maximum sentence of two years' imprisonment. He is also held under the Special Powers Act, which allows for preventive detention without trial, whether or not the detainee has been charged with a criminal offence. The detention order was initially imposed for 30 days, but it is reported that it has been extended for another three months. Mohammed Arifur Rahman is a university graduate with a keen interest in art and painting. He was awarded the first prize in a national anti-corruption cartoon competition by the Bangladeshi newspaper, the Daily Star. He is the sole breadwinner of his family and was supporting his mother and younger sister through the income earned from his drawings, supplemented by part-time work as a shop assistant. He continues to deny that his cartoon, which he described as replicating the words of a joke popular in his home village, was in any way intended to offend religious sensibilities. Amnesty International considers Mohammed Arifur Rahman to be a prisoner of conscience, having been detained and charged solely for the legitimate and peaceful exercise of his right to freedom of expression, and is calling for his immediate and unconditional release. ______ [4] The Telegraph January 6 , 2008 OLD QUESTIONS, NEW ANSWERS - A manifesto of freedoms The thin edge / Ruchir Joshi No fatwa Here is a Counter-fatwa Manifesto for the new year. Every citizen has the right and freedom to challenge, satirize and otherwise make fun of the beliefs of any other citizen, be those beliefs pertaining to religion, notions of morality, or politics. These challenges may come in the form of words, written, printed or spoken, and in any audio-visual form as well. No citizen has a right to take recourse to violence using offence taken at such challenges as an excuse. The right to freedom of speech is an inalienable fundamental right and it becomes meaningless if it does not include the right to offend others. The right to challenge and criticize is to be clearly differentiated from incitement to violence and murder. No individual or group has the right to call for physical harm to be caused to another person or group. And here is an imaginary Q&A with a true believer, someone, say, who's not a cynical user of religion. Does this mean you can criticize or create offensive stories about revered figures of my religion? Yes, absolutely, so long as they are not alive. If they are alive, the criticism or satire may fall into the area of libel and that's a different area of contention. If the satirized figures are not with us in any corporeal sense then they belong, as it were, to everybody, and anybody can therefore say what they like about them, paint them in any way they choose. And, yes, that means I can make fun of any figure of reverence, real or fictional, mythical or historical. But that's like saying I'm supposed to keep quiet while you insult my mother and father! Yes and no. No, you don't need to keep quiet: if I insult your mother and father you can insult mine in return. Yes, we can both insult each others' near and dear ones but that doesn't give either of us the right to physically attack the other. Also, I can insult my own mother and father and that doesn't give my 'siblings' the right to attack me. But god is the reason we are alive! How can I let you criticize god? Yes? Okay, if god is criticized let god handle it. You, as a human being, cannot take on the job of being god's policeman or god's protector. It's like saying I'm going to kill you for spitting at the sun. Or for throwing a stone at the Himalayas. You can't have it both ways: either god doesn't exist or god is all-seeing and almighty and can therefore take care of himself or herself. But my holy book says I have to protect my religion! Your holy book is actually not a book but a later transcription of an oral tract. Neither you nor I, nor any priest alive today was around when the book was first written. The word of god was exactly that - word. People heard; others remembered what others said they heard and passed it down to yet other people who wrote it down; what they wrote has survived in incomplete, unreliable bits, other important bits were eaten by goats and camels or used by uncaring people as fuel for their fires; or there were fifteen or fifty writers all vying to write the same story in fifteen or fifty different ways. What you call your holy book, immutable and immovable, is actually a remnant of a remnant of a remnant which has been re-written and re-worked many, many times by the imagination of fallible humans. What you call your holy book has actually been debated and argued over for hundreds of years, the text and meaning changing with time like the shifting geological plates of the earth itself. It's not a good or moral idea to attack and kill people on the basis of an old and shifting text. Or even a new and verifiably unshifting one, because, if it's a text, then time will shift it and change it. So, you are saying I can take nothing of value from my holiest of holy books? No, that's not what I am saying. What I'm saying is that you and your holy book have to live with others and their holy books, and yet others who don't believe in holy books at all. So, the only things you can and should take from your holy book are the bits that talk about love, about getting along with others, about finding your own, individual, personal way to god and salvation. Any bits about killing others and how that is your duty, any bits about suspending your conscience in favour of your religion's 'law', are, frankly, suspect bits and you should only read them for entertainment. Because, if everyone takes the murder-orders in their holy books seriously, we won't survive as a species. Survival of this earthly species is of no consequence, it's the after-life that matters. If I don't do my duty I will be punished by god. Maybe, but you can't make that decision for others. Maybe god will punish you, but if you believe in a just god that's a risk you have to take - that you might burn in hell for eternity or be endlessly reborn as a tortured insect or animal. Your fear for your own after-life cannot be a justification for you to send others to theirs. But my priest says I have to do my duty. Ah, yes, the priest. Always ask yourself: where does the priest come from and what does he want? Has the priest met god personally? Were you there when they met? If not, then check the following: if the priest who sends you out to kill blasphemers doesn't want money, if he doesn't want political power, if he doesn't want glory, then he wants only one thing: to secure his after-life on the back of others' now-life, those others including you. And that's not worthy of a priest, that's a worse sin than mere blasphemy. But people like you are in a minority! You are not mainstream! Yup. And what about you? Somewhere or the other on this planet you and your religion are also in a minority. Somewhere on this planet, the fact that you believe in the god you believe in is actually blasphemous to others - it challenges their god. Does that mean they have a right to kill you or silence you? ______ [5] TASLIMA NAREEN REMAIN'S CONFINED IN A GLASS HOUSE ndtv.com I WANT TO BE IN KOLKATA: TASLIMA by Bano Haralu, Monideepa Banerji Saturday, January 5, 2008 (Kolkata) Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen has written an open letter to her friends in Kolkata describing how she is living virtually under house arrest in a safe house in Delhi. In the letter, distributed at a literary fair in the city on Thursday, Taslima says she doesn't even know the address of her current residence. Taslima was forced to leave Kolkata in November after protests against her novel Dwikhandito by a section of the Muslim community. ''This existence cannot be called living,'' this is what Taslima has written in the open letter to her friends in Kolkata, penning for the first time her thoughts since her forced ouster from the city. ''I am virtually under house arrest. I don't even know the address of where I am being kept. Every visitor has to be cleared by the Home Ministry,'' Taslima writes. Written from confinement in Delhi and undated, Taslima's two page letter was distributed at a literary fair in Kolkata and evoked sharp reactions from those protesting her ouster from the city. ''West Bengal government has done this to please the fundamentalist in the state. They think they will get Muslim votes by doing this. This is a very dirty thought,'' said Mahashweta Devi, writer. ''She alone is not in a predicament. It is as much a predicament for the people in Bangladesh for people in West Bengal, a predicament that faces humanity at large. The freedom of expression is an inherent human right,'' said Ashok Mitra, former Finance Minister of West Bengal. The controversial writer clearly believes her rights are being violated. ''I do not believe my writings are the cause of protests. I believe the attack on me is politically motivated and that the events of November 21 have no connection with my writings,'' Taslima writes. However, the letter, ends with an appeal. ''India has in the past been a refuge for so many people. I am one of them,'' she writes. ''I long to be back in Kolkata.'' o o o Times of India 30 Dec 2007 BENGAL IN NO MOOD TO LET TASLIMA RETURN KOLKATA: Bad news for controversial Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen. Despite CPM patriarch Jyoti Basu and external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee's assurances that she could return to the city, the Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government in West Bengal is unlikely to let her return. Soon after Basu's statement that Taslima could return to Kolkata provided the Centre agreed to arrange security for her, Mukherjee said the central government would do so, but the request had to come from the state government. Sources in the state home department said the government was in no mood to write to the Centre for Taslima's security before the panchayat polls. Asked about Mukherjee's statement seeking a letter of request from the state government for the author's security, chief secretary Amit Kiran Deb said, "Only the chief minister can reply to the question." But the chief minister has been consistently refusing to take any questions pertaining to Taslima ever since she was escorted out of Kolkata to Jaipur and from there to somewhere in NCR - post-November 21 protests by a minority forum against her presence in Kolkata. Reacting to the Bengal government's reluctance, Taslima told TOI, "Will they allow me to come back after the panchayat elections?" When she was told that the state government has, for now, chosen not to think beyond the polls, she said, "I can't imagine I will never return to Kolkata. I hope... Oh, how I hope they (the Bengal government) will change their mind." And what if they don't? Would she go to Kerala - as offered by the UPA government? "No, why should I go there? I'm not a Malayali. I am a Bengali. It's Kolkata where I want to live," she said. "I really don't understand how my living in Kolkata will affect the panchayat votes." ______ [6] India: On Hindutva's anti christian violence in Orissa and Govt functionaries free to join RSS in Madhya Pradesh (i) NON GOVERNMENT WHITE PAPER ON THE VIOLENCE IN THE KANDHAMALA DISTRICT Preliminary report of the fact finding team led by Dr John Dayal which visited the Kandhamala district, Orissa on 29th December - 3rd January and from 1st January to 3rd January 2008 Released at Bhubaneswar 5th January 2008 http://communalism.blogspot.com/2008/01/orissa-non-govt-white-paper-on-violence.html o o o (ii) Indian Express January 06, 2008 DHUMAL LIFTS BAN ON RSS SHAKHAS AT PUBLIC PLACES Ashwani Sharma Shimla, January 5:Within a week of coming to power in the state, the BJP Government led by Chief Minister Prem Kumar Dhumal has lifted the ban on holding RSS shakhas at public places. Moreover, government servants will also be free to participate in the shakhas and other activities of the Sangh Parivar now. Earlier, the Virbhadra Singh Government had banned shakhas in public spaces and also barred government staff from attending such functions. Dhumal announced the decision at a public meeting in his native district of Hamirpur last night. "We had opposed the Congress decision and staged protests both inside and outside the Assembly, demanding freedom to hold RSS shakhas. But, Virbhadra Singh did not budge," recalled state BJP president Jairam Thakur. In another decision, Dhumal announced that the functioning of the religious shrines would be handed back to their managements, as per the BJP's poll promise. The Congress Government had taken over the management of some temples to ensure their smooth functioning. [. . .] ______ [7] ML International Newsletter January-February 2008 Indian Elections LESSONS FROM GUJARAT RESULTS by Kavita Krishnan The widespread factionalism in the Gujarat Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) ranks and the fact that on the eve of the polls Modi stood firmly indicted for his regime's role in the Gujarat genocide and custodial killings of Sohrabuddin and others created a uniquely favourable situation for its main contender, the Congress. If in spite of this, Modi scripted a win, there is no escaping the fact that it is the craven capitulation by the United Progressive (UPA) Government at the Centre as well as the Congress in Gujarat on the issue of state sponsored communal violence, accompanied by the failure to offer any meaningful alternative to Modi's brand of neoliberal 'development' which is dispossessing Adivasis, Muslims and rural and urban poor, that are to blame. The last minute rhetorical flourishes by Sonia Gandhi failed woefully to compensate for the bankruptcy of the Congress on the question of offering a credible and consistent challenge to the communal fascism of the Sangh Parivar and BJP. Its reliance on BJP rebels as candidates and its official embrace of the 'soft Hindutva' slogan further announced the Congress' surrender on this issue. Modi has entered his third term strutting with impunity, declaring that he has always been and will always remain the Chief Minister (CM). The BJP camp, riding the Gujarat euphoria, is already claiming that Gujarat marks 'BJP rising', and hopes that the 'Modi mask' that symbolises the Gujarat win can give BJP a facelift nationally. The corporate houses are celebrating the victory of the 'CEO CM'. Meanwhile the Congress is hoping that the debacle may have the silver lining of pressurising the secular parties to close ranks and unite with the Congress in the name of countering communalism. The Communist Party of India (Marxist Leninist) - CPI (ML) contested seven seats in Gujarat. We polled third with 7289 votes in the Kherbrahma seat in Sabarkantha district where the CPI (ML) is leading struggles of the tribal poor against eviction from land and dispossession from water sources, and for rights over forest land. Kherbrahma and Meghraj (where the CPI (ML) candidate polled 3031 votes), are both seats in the Sabarkantha district, an Adivasi area that was one of the hotpots of the communal pogrom of 2002. CPI (ML) started work in this area in 2003-04, reaching out to marginalized Adivasis (this section had been mobilised in Modi's mobs in 2002 but who were worst hit by Modi's 'development' and had in many cases been cheated of their land by Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal). In the process we attracted many democratic forces towards us. Encouraged by our initiative, local CPI (M) ranks including a member of the CPI (M) district committee too joined us. Our main slogan in this constituency was 'Jhanda par teen tara hai; jal jangal zamin hamara hai' [Three stars on a flag (the CPI (ML) election symbol); water, forests and land are ours']. CPI (ML) candidates polled 3031 votes in Meghraj; 2209 votes in Bulsar; 1123 in Umbergaon; 899 in Bhavnagar North; and 265 in Bhiloda. CPI (ML) had also fielded a candidate in Maninagar against Modi, advocate and youth leader Amit Patanwariya, who polled 1045 votes. On polling day (December 16), our candidate and supporters braved a violent mob attack by Modi supporters led by the notoriously criminalised local BJP corporator Jayas Patel who is a close aide of Modi. Our supporters fought back, and our candidate, his father Lakshman Patanwariya who is our Town Committee Secretary and three brothers were all arrested by the partisan police force on serious charges of attempt to murder and Arms Act. Our supporters rallied around at the thana lock up, mounting a spirited pressure, even as Modi visited the thana gate with his convoy to buoy up his supporters. Eventually our perseverance paid off, the police booked our candidate and his family on less serious charges of rioting and was also forced to book Modi's supporters on the same charges. In the wake of the Gujarat results, the CPI (M) has advised the Congress that the BJP cannot be defeated in a mere electoral battle, communal fascism needs to be tackled ideologically. For the Left movement in the country, Gujarat indeed poses tough questions. Can the Left afford to wash its hands off responsibility for the state of Gujarat merely by advising the Congress to correct its course and abandon soft Hindutva? Isn't it true that the absence of a powerful Left movement inside Gujarat has also left the state vulnerable to the unchallenged domination of the communal fascists? In Gujarat, the CPI contested two seats, polling 1236 votes in one and 4236 in the other, while the CPI (M) contested only one seat in a seat-sharing arrangement with the Congress and NCP. The UPA Government betrayed its single raison d'etre by abandoning the fight against communalism. But equally, the CPI (M) led Left camp too, in spite of its 60-plus tally of MPs in Parliament, did precious little to utilise its impressive parliamentary profile as a foundation for any serious Left presence in Gujarat. For all its pontificatory advice to the Congress now, the fact is that the CPI (M) too chose to toe the Congress' bankrupt line rather than take up the arduous task of developing a Left movement in the Sangh stronghold of Gujarat. With the Congress' dismal failure to combat communal fascism underlined, it is all the more clear that what Gujarat urgently needs is a powerful Left movement and a credible third force that is willing to challenge the communal forces head on and mobilise the poor and marginalised on issues of livelihood and survival. The CPI (ML) has made a small but encouraging beginning in this direction. The encouraging response to CPI (ML)'s campaign in a sharply polarised election and against a BJP tide, despite its fledgling presence in the state, is a sign that there is a real space in Gujarat for progressive, democratic, Left politics. The CPI (ML) is committed to consolidating this response and expanding this space in the days to come. ______ [8] Times of India 11 Dec 2007 A DRACONIAN LAW by Rakesh Shukla The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, is a draconian law because it places the state in the capacity of a moral guardian vis-a-vis the citizen. The recent uproar over former Union minister Jaswant Singh serving an opium-based drink, riyan, points to the draconian nature of the NDPS Act. Singh could get a 10-year jail term if the serving of the drink is established. The restrictions imposed on grant of bail under NDPS Act amount to virtual denial and ensure years of incarceration. Section 37(1) declares that an accused person is not to be released on bail unless the court has reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty and is not likely to commit an offence while on bail. This provision is identical to provisions of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act and Preven-tion of Terrorism Act which resulted in long periods of imprisonment without trial, evoking strong criticism from the human rights movement. Like in the West, the NDPS Act provides for stringent punishment for cultivating, possessing or purchasing the "substances" enumerated in it. Sadhus smoking chillums on the ghats of the Ganga are a fairly common sight. However, the law in its majesty has forbidden the mere possession of charas and ganja. Section 2(iii)(a) defines cannabis (hemp) to mean charas and includes the "separated resin, in whatever form, whether crude or purified, obtained from the cannabis plant" and subsection (b) includes "ganja, that is, the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant". Sections 2(xv) to (xix) define the entire spectrum of opium, opium derivatives and poppy and bring it within the ambit of the Act. Sections 17 to 20 prescribe stringent punishments extendable to 10 and 20 years' imprisonment with respect to use, possession, sale, purchase of opium, charas and ganja. Generally, a person is punished for acts which cause harm to others, such as murder or theft. Statutorily created offences like those under the NDPS Act fall under the category of victimless crimes. There is no harm done to anyone by a person being in possession of marijuana or partaking of an opium-laced drink and there is no victim. An offence comprises two elements, the specific action and the guilty mind or dishonest intention which leads up to it. According to criminal jurisprudence, it is the responsibility of the prosecution to establish both before a person is convicted and punished. However, NDPS Act dispenses with 'dishonest intention' and Section 35 directs the court to presume the existence of a culpable mental state for all the offences under the Act. If possession is to constitute an offence, it must mean conscious possession. For example, if a thing is put in the hand of a sleeping person A, then it cannot be said that A is in pos-session of it. Similarly, if something is slipped in the handbag of B, then B cannot be said to be in possession of it. However, under the NDPS Act knowledge of the contents is imputed to the accused. Section 54 says that it is to be presumed that a person has committed an offence under the Act, if he fails to account satisfactorily for the possession of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or any other incriminating article. Under the blanket of drug menace to society, the draconian nature of the legislation has passed unnoticed. Section 31-A provides for mandatory death sentence, without the alternative of life imprisonment, in the case of a second conviction, which could be restricted to abetment or attempt to commit an offence. There is no doubt that with its unduly harsh punishments - death penalty, virtual denial of bail, presumption with regard to intention and knowledge, virtually leading to the burden-of-proof being placed on the accused to establish innocence - the NDPS Act should be reviewed from the viewpoint of civil liberties. The larger jurisprudential question whether the state should criminalise vices needs to be debated. The assump- tion that those who practise vices like recreational drug use are mentally infirm and need to be protected from self-destruction is open to question. The writer is a Supreme Court advocate. ______ [9] ANNOUNCEMENTS: Dear Friends ! Greetings for the New Year ! Looking ahead to the 'Global Day of Action' that has been called by the World Social Forum on January 26 2008, but also focussing on the steep decline that some observers feel that the WSF and the global social justice movement is going through, CACIM (India Institute for Critical Action - Centre in Movement) and SADED (South Asian Dialogues on Ecological Democracy) had each planned to call meetings in Delhi in mid January to take advantage of the presence in town of Teivo Teivainen, from Finland, a critical thinker and actor who is deeply involved with the WSF. Rather than do separate events, we now jointly invite you to a day-long event focussed on the theme World Social [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Friday, January 11 2008, from 11 am onwards, at ISI (Indian Social Institute). Details are given below. Please join us for the discussions and also spread the word around about the event to all those who you feel might want to take part in such an exchange. Please do also print out the attached note and pin it up in your organisation's notice board. ALL ARE WELCOME ! [EMAIL PROTECTED] A critical engagement with the emerging dynamics of the Forum process in India and globally Session 1, organised by SADED : 11:00 - 1:00 Genesis of the Forum Panel discussion. Speakers : Teivo Teivainen, Professor of World Politics and Head of the Political Science Department at the University of Helsinki, Finland, and as representative of NIGD (Network Institute for Global Democratisation), Finland, founding member of the International Council of the World Social Forum (Other speakers to be confirmed) Lunch break Sessions 2 and 3, organised by CACIM : CACIM Multilogues Under its Multilogues Series, CACIM cordially invites you to two sessions to critically discuss and debate the future of the Forum : 2:00-4:00 The Idea of the Global Day of Action and its Political and Cultural Significance Panellists : Shuddhabrata Sengupta, media artist, member of the RAQS Collective and Sarai, CSDS, Delhi (tentatively confirmed) Teivo Teivainen, University of Helsinki, and NIGD, Finland (Third panellist to be confirmed) Tea break 4:30-6:30 The Future of the Forum : Is the World Social Forum approaching a point of crisis ? Panellists : Kamla Bhasin, member of Sangat (South Asian Network of Gender Activists and Trainers), New Delhi Teivo Teivainen, University of Helsinki, and NIGD, Finland Sitaram Yechury, MP, member of the Politburo of the CPI(M), and handling the party's international affairs (tentatively confirmed) Friday, January 11 2008 @ Indian Social Institute Lodhi Institutional Area, New Delhi 110 003 (Behind Sai Baba Mandir) The Panel Discussions will also be attended by members from the WSF India Organising Committee, academics, activists, students and others who have played an active role in the Forum organising process. This set of events also looks forward to another event that CACIM, perhaps together with others, will be organising in Delhi on January 25 2008, as its observance of and contribution to the Global Day of Action. With warm regards, Jai Sen & Madhuresh Kumar Rakesh Bhatt & Hrishikant CACIM, New Delhi SADED, New Delhi Attached : - Discussion Brief for the Session - Programme Leaflet ******* CACIM (the India Institute for Critical Action - Centre in Movement) is an initiative towards cultivating and nurturing a culture of critical reflexivity and action in individual and public work. In principle we expect to work in many fields, but our focus at the moment is on activism, research, and publication in relation to social and political movement. CACIM is involved in detailed research on and documentation of the Forum and other related processes (such as social movements); plays an active role in the organising process of WSF in India and globally; publishes books, reports, newsletters, and bibliographies on the Forum, both in Hindi and English; and organises debates and discussions around related issues. Visit <http://cacim.net/twiki/www.cacim.net>www.cacim.net and <http://cacim.net/twiki/www.openspaceforum.com>www.openspaceforum.com for details. <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] SADED (South Asian Dialogues on Ecological Democracy) is an initiative for defining a relationship between nature and human beings that protects nature's bounty and allows it to be available for all its children -- human beings irrespective of class, caste, colour, race, religion, sex or age, as well as all non-human living beings. 'Development', as known in the 20th century, has wreaked havoc with nature and human societies. SADED attempts to identify ways of life that are ecological, egalitarian and individuality fulfilling and contribute to evolving visions for future development while preserving the positive of the past and present. <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ 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