Watch Gandhian activist Himanshu Kumar explaining the motives and methods behind the alleged killing of innocent young adivasi woman named Madkam Hidme in Chhattisgarh.
Video by: Amirtharaj Stephen
Email: sabrangind@gmail.com
Why was Madkam Hidme allegedly raped and killed by Chhattisgarh police: Himanshu Kumar’s Video
Why Has the Audience Gone “Wild”?
Celebrated Marathi playwright Jayant Pawar reviews Sairat, the critically acclaimed blockbuster that talks of love, caste and honour killings.
Yesterday I performed a social duty. I watched Nagraj Manjule’s Sairat [English: Wild]. Every once in a while, I miss an important film. No one quite holds you up to it. But since Sairat’s release, everybody around me has been asking, “Did you watch Sairatyet?” The tone implies that watching this film is a duty. I performed it yesterday.
I watched it at a suburban multiplex. The theatre was half-empty, and there wasn’t a crowd enjoying the tunes from the film’s hit soundtrack. So I could watch the film properly. There were a few non-Marathi speakers in the audience. The Marathi speakers were responding well, unwittingly commending its script with giggles, snickering, smiles and nudges, all at the right time. Some left the theatre with tears. A lot has been written about this movie on the social media, particularly its ending, to the point that the shock element has been blunted. But as the end of the movie approached I felt like that man who sees his imminent end. In the film Madras Cafe, just before the blast, the bomb-clad terrorist is dressed up in her final attire. The director mutes all sound. On display is a cruel ceremony, a bride being dressed up to leave home forever. Sairat’s ending stirs up a similar emotion. I wasn’t taken aback by the ending, unlike the early watchers; but it did suffocate me.
With all its flaws and its merits, I liked the movie. The flaws exceeded the merits though. At first I was perplexed about why it would be the biggest ever blockbuster in the history of Marathi cinema. After all, an overstretched plot and a dispersed focus are major artistic impediments that ail this film. In this day and age of diminishing attention spans, a feature’s three-hour length should worry its makers. Yet the viewers watched it, enjoyed it and experienced it fully. This is nothing short of a miracle. But it cannot be dismissed as a mere marketing miracle. Nor can the brand value of a director drive such a feat. When a regional film breaks all collection records and grows across length and breadth, its popularity spreading wild, the reasons for its success and its implications become crucial. The implications of Sairat‘s success need a thorough examination, and from a variety of angles. The secret to Sairat’s success, I believe, lies not within the artefact, but without. I contend that we cannot find answers within the scope of the craft. In fact, what we will find through such a limited investigation would be deceptive. On the other hand, looking at what the success reveals, about the changing tastes and sensibilities of a huge section of society, is critical.
Of course Sairat has several noteworthy features. One of them is the absence of a contrived, scripted dialogue. It stands out as realistic and spontaneous. It is chitter-chatter, ambiguous and in its very nature, bahujan. Bahujan – that militant demonym coined by the visionary 19th-century social revolutionary Jotirao Phule to denote the vast majority of the Indian population that Manu’s caste order relegated as inferior to the “twice-born”. The language Sairat’s characters speak demolishes the grammar of the standardised dialect. Sentence structures militate against strict logic. Equally remarkable are its character sketches, particularly those of the male protagonist’s two friends — Pradeep a.k.a “Langdya” [Tanaji Galgunde] and Salim a.k.a. “Sallya” [Arbaz Shaikh]. The limping, bowlegged Pradeep is a superb character. Tanaji Galgunde, who plays Pradeep, is outstanding. In a number of scenes “Langdya” is conspicuously juxtaposed on the screen by various men with assorted physical deformities.
The pervasiveness of such symbols of disabilities of ordinary, poor people and their helplessness is prominently on display. The movie also moves increasingly from fantasy to reality. But even the fairytale romance of its two lovers is in the firm grip of the reality of rural life. The nakedness of caste in rural life is not hidden. When the Patil’s brat slaps his dalit teacher in the classroom, his Maratha father’s reaction betrays a certain pride and admiration. Later in the film, this same teacher has the following advice for the male protagonist: “Didn’t you sleep with the Patil’s daughter? Well, now leave her. This is what they do anyway.”
Such clear, caste-ridden references are, perhaps, gratifying to the audience. The film thus strikes a closer resemblance to the romantic lives of young women and men who live in the shadows of deprivation. It caresses that sense of romanticism and heroism in their lives. To date, quite a few “hero-heroines” on screen have appealed to the youth. This is different. The Parshyas, the Archies, the Sallus, the Langdyas are present in the audience and they are seeing themselves on the screen. Their environment is just as violent, heartless, deprived. It is here, in this very environment, that they seek reassurance. Sairat provides it, by picturing both their fantasies and their reality. But it also unpacks a picture of the future. The everyday lives of young men and women are presented for us in the form of a three-hour capsule.
The film is laden with bahujan culture. It resonates with the majority which can hear itself in it. It has its own aesthetics. This might seem false, fabricated and flat to the elite, or to those trained in elite understanding of Art. This film also does not have a definitive or well-formed shape. It flows organically. But it does have its own pace and its own nature.
The bajuhan youth that comes to watch this film have entered every small and big cinema theatre across the state. They have danced to its musical numbers. We can now go to a fancy urban theatre and dance, standing on its seats. There are none of those high-born types there anymore. The crowd resembles us now. Never mind the flip-flops, we shall dance full-on. This is a unique confidence that this movie has conferred upon the young. This picture shows their face and speaks their tongue. This inadvertent realisation has driven them wild. It is factors like these that operate covertly behind the success of Sairat. Its success has less to do with its art per se, and more to do with the social-scientific factors within and without.
What Sairat’s massive achievements mean, though, is that henceforth the responsibilities of, and exceptions from bahujan art, have augmented. It is clear now that the neat compartmentalised plots of older films might have been convenient; but beyond sanitising reality, they achieved little. People will now expect frank and explicit depiction of caste realities. It is no longer just an artistic element; it will be a demand, a need. This reality, unfortunately, is very complex. Films can no longer resort to the lazy, hackneyed and over-simplified equation of caste reality with the “Villainy of the Patil”. Khwada and Sairat might have offended a small section of Marathas, but such caste pride will also be of little use. Just as criticism of Brahmins has to be borne and tolerated by a progressive and sensible section of Brahmins, the Marathas too shall have to deal with criticism. There is no alternative. They will have to engage with it, attenuate their snobbery, and reform themselves towards a common progressive future. At the same time, other castes cannot assume the status of the oppressed. There are oppressors in those castes too. There are oppressors in all castes. Each caste looks down on those below it in the hierarchy. Particularly when it comes to matrimonial alliances, caste-conscious human beings metamorphose into ravenous beasts. Honour killings happen within every caste and there are innumerable examples of these from Maharashtra. Patriarchy afflicts every caste – the most oppressed castes included.
The woman of the “lowest caste” is thus the most oppressed human being. Bahujan artists who aim to confront reality will have to bravely face the layered complexities of caste oppression. The members of any caste, high or low, motivated by pride and identity will not think twice before trying to gag the voice of a work ostensibly critical of them. But the bahujan artist will have to take on, and struggle against, this kind of censorship. Sairat has not taken on this challenge. But it has cleared the way for future projects of this type. It is easy to expose the other who oppresses you. It is far more difficult to show – or even watch – how you oppress your kind. But that is the key to invoke humanity.
Translated from Marathi by Siddharth Adelkar from a review first published in the Maharashtra Times
Courtesy: indianculturalforum.in
Indian Intelligence Agencies: Unchecked Accountability
Spooks have a Field Day, Supreme Court Squashes Accountability for IB
On the August 19, 2015, the Central Government informed the Supreme Court of India that there was an "enormous amount of control" over the working of the intelligence agencies, including their finances, by the government."There is an enormous amount of control over the working of the intelligence agencies. A parliamentary sub-committee (looks) into their working and tables report in parliament which are not published," Additional Solicitor General P.S. Narasimha told the bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra.”ASG Narasimha is reported to have said the accounts of the intelligence agencies were audited.[i]
The Center for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) had sought Parliamentary control of Intelligence Agencies and fiscal oversight through the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG). Subsequently, on February 23, 2016, the court dismissed the petition filed by the CPIL.
According to media reports the court observed, “We do not think the court should entertain such kinds of petitions which deal with security of the country," a bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh said. The media report further reported the bench as saying, "We are not inclined to entertain this petition…Trying to get into the domain of intelligence may create dent in national security."
It rejected the plea of Prashant Bhushan, appearing for NGO CPIL which has filed the PIL, claiming that in most advanced democracies like the UK and the USA, such agencies are accountable to parliamentary panels as they spend tax- payers' monies. No detailed reasoning was provided by the court.
"What they do in the United Kingdom, we cannot practice in India," the bench said, adding "They (Centre and Parliament) must be having some measures. It cannot be said that they do not have any mechanism. You need not legislate on all issues. You need to have some kind of caution also, otherwise, the very purpose will be lost."The bench said that irrespective of nature of the PIL, any plea that may dent national security should not be entertained by courts."As a student of History, Law and Literature, I do not think any court should enter into this territory," Justice Misra, heading the bench, added.[ii]
A careful look at the Parliament of India website as well as the website of the union home ministry reveals that neither have any mention of an extant subcommittee of Parliament on the subject.
The United States has a system of judicial authorisation, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). While the FISC has authorized on individual basis targeted surveillance within the US since 1978, it has had a more limited, supervisory, role to play in strategic surveillance.
Under Section 215 FISA, the Government must apply for a warrant before a judge of the 15-member the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The FISC approves both the “Primary Order” authorising the overall program and “Secondary Orders” which require individual phone companies to provide information to the NSA. Every order is subject to renewal every 90 days.
The FISA court process for considering applications may include a hearing, and FISC judges have the authority to take testimony from government employees familiar with the technical details of an application. If issued, a warrant requires a telecommunications provider to furnish information to the NSA on a periodic basis.
In Sweden, a Defence Intelligence Court was established (Försvarsunderrättelsedomstolen or UNDOM) together with a control and monitoring body, the Defence Intelligence Inspection (Statens inspektion för försvarsunder-rättelseverksamheten or SIUN). UNDOM consists of two former senior judges and six lay members (mainly former politicians, from several different political parties).
The judges are appointed by the government after an open recruitment process in the Judicial Council. The former politicians are appointed by the government after consultations between the parties represented in the parliament. UNDOM is thus a hybrid body. It is assisted by a small registry.
The Intelligence Bureau (IB) is not known either for intelligence or accountability. Take the premature obituary of Lok Nayak Jayaprakash Narayan as an example of the numerous blunders by our friends in the Intelligence Bureau- a slip that left the then Janata Government red-faced, with Prime Minister Morarji Desai having to issue an unqualified apology. The Lok Nayak reportedly took it in good humour. But it doesn’t stop there
In Canada, the Federal Court of Canada exerts oversight over the intelligence community. For example, in Canada, to obtain a warrant to intercept telephone communications there is a rigorous process where internal approval is initially sought from senior members of the agency and final approval must be given by the judiciary. The United Kingdom put in a statutory framework in 1989 for MI 5 and for MI 6 in 1994 respectively. Israel put in its statutory control mechanism in 2002. Australia and New Zealand too have their own Acts.
The Intelligence Bureau (IB) is not known either for intelligence or accountability. Take the premature obituary of Lok Nayak Jayaprakash Narayan as an example of the numerous blunders by our friends in the Intelligence Bureau- a slip that left the then Janata Government red-faced, with Prime Minister Morarji Desai having to issue an unqualified apology. The Lok Nayak reportedly took it in good humour. But it doesn’t stop there.
In the nineties of the last century , I.B. cooked up a fantasy spy ring indicting two of ISRO’s scientists of being spies and tortured them to obtain ‘confessions’. It reportedly delayed India’s development of cryogenic engines. The CBI in 1996 in a classified report indicted the IB chief in Kerala and nine other senior officers in this botched fiction. [iii]
Not to mention their role in the Ishrat Jahan case, with charge-sheets pending against four I.B. members.[iv]
It is not certain if the Bench was made aware of Lieutenant Colonel Shrikant Purohit’s alleged involvement in the 2008 bomb blasts in Malegaon, Maharashtra. Col Purohit was an officer of Military Intelligence. And the less said about Kargil the better.
Further, Gopal Subramanian’s confirmation to the bench by the collegium was vitiated by reports submitted to it by the CBI and the IB (two of his former clients). It is rather amusing that in the reports submitted, the CBI and the IB cited ‘personality oddities’ and ‘corporate links’[v]as reasons for red-flagging Mr Subramanium.
In any event, if there is an adverse report regarding a potential candidate for judgeship of any of the superior courts, ought he/she not be given a chance to defend him/herself? In this regard, India needs to learn from the United States. For appointments to the senior judiciary, a nominee needs to undergo a rigorous procedure of vetting in the US Senate by the Senate Judiciary Committee before the Senate gets to vote. Personal prejudices denied Justice A P Shah a place on the Supreme Court.
In any event, if there is an adverse report regarding a potential candidate for judgeship of any of the superior courts, ought he/she not be given a chance to defend him/herself? In this regard, India needs to learn from the United States. For appointments to the senior judiciary, a nominee needs to undergo a rigorous procedure of vetting in the US Senate by the Senate Judiciary Committee before the Senate gets to vote. Personal prejudices denied Justice A P Shah a place on the Supreme Court.
For all the good fiction that the IB produces, it has had to face little criticism from those in power (executive or judiciary, regardless). It is no surprise, of course. Who doesn’t like a good story? With all the scholars of literature, law and history on and off the bench to gobble up the fiction, one wonders if democracy and accountability have a chance in India that is Bharat.
A reading of Benjamin Franklin all around would have been instructive.“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
(The author is a renowned analyist of human rights jurisprudence and can be reached on ravinairsahrdc@gmail.com)
[i]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Intelligence-agencies-cant-be-subject-to-CAG-audit-Centre-to-SC/articleshow/48550409.cms
[ii] http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-putting-ib-raw-and-other-intel-agencies-under-judicial-scrutiny-may-dent-national-security-supreme-court-2181471
[iii]http://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/ib-imagined-spy-ring-cbi/205531
[iv]http://www.rediff.com/news/interview/headleys-testimony-on-ishrat-jahan-is-like-kbc/20160211.htm
[v]http://www.firstpost.com/politics/cbi-ib-hypocrisy-gopal-subramanium-was-their-top-choice-for-criminal-cases-1589631.html
Fascism Knocks at India’s Door
From persistent efforts to cut the judiciary’s independence to size, to the manner in which RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan was targeted through a sleazy media campaign, not to mention an attack on free thought and Indian institutions, the signs are clearly there for all to see. We ignore these at our peril
Image: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Namo-Nazi/
Fascism is an ideology with typical characteristics and fanatic follower’s .Its chief characteristic is to make every organ of the State subservient to the Leader and to totally regulate the life of every citizen.
Hitler and Mussolini were its incarnations in the last century .Their inhuman acts and the end to which they brought their nations are well known facts of history.
Though the 21st century is very different from 1930s, and fascism in its 1930's form may not flourish, a fascist State in its modified form is still possible. India is under its serious threat.
For example, Narendra Modi is now the only leader of the BJP and its government .All other leaders of the party who devoted their whole life to the party have been reduced to non-entities. L.K.Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and the rest are nursing their humiliating wounds in silence. Rajnath Singh, a former president of the BJP has been reduced to nothingness as India's Home Minister. Nitin Gadkari, another ex-president of the BJP counts for nothing in the current dispensation. Sushma Swaraj, once an aspirant for the post of prime minister, is doing, at best, a house keeping job in the Ministry of External Affairs while it is Modi that performs as the de facto Minister of External Affairs for India.
Like a hyena feeding on the kill of bigger animals, Arun Jaitley is feeding off on Modi's kill. Like an archetypical fascist leader, Modi has surrounded himself by non-entities like Smriti Irani to project himself as a giant among the pigmies.
Like all fascists , he is systematically engaged in destroying the autonomy of all constitutional bodies and autonomous institutions .When two names were recommended by the Collegium for appointment as judges of the Supreme Court, he notified the name of one (Mr Nariman ) and withheld Mr Gopal Subramanian’s name. Such selective action was unprecedented. Mr Subramaniam withdrew his name out of disgust because –in typical fascist style — a campaign for his character assassination was launched.
Through this, one independent judge was prevented from reaching the apex court. Later, the Constitution was amended to give the power to appoint judges of higher courts to a National Judicial Appointment Commission with the Union Law Minister as one of its members .It was so formed as to make sure that nobody could be appointed as a High Court or Supreme Court judge who did not find favour with the government .
The sinister design is implicit; fill the higher judiciary with pliant and servile judges. Now that the National Judicial Appointment Commission was declared unconstitutional by the apex court, Modi is still trying to have the last word on appointments through unconstitutional provisions in the memorandum of procedure, which are being resisted by the judiciary leading to a confrontation with the Executive. Other political parties, too, are sympathetic to his move because they, too, have skeletons in their cupboards and want an amenable and manageable judiciary.
Universities and free students' organisations have been under a two pronged attack .The motive is to foist persons loyal to the Sangh's ideology ready to toe their line on the educational institutions and the other is to suppress freedom of thought of students and academia, on the campus.
A student organisation loyal to Ambedkar's ideology was banned in MIT, Madras, students at Hyderabad Central University were suppressed and victimised and almost a war was declared on JNU. A typically fascist tactic is employed to suppress students’s organisations and their activities. A conflict is engineered on the campus by employing the services of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (AVBP).
The technique is simple, the ABVP, a student’s wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), lodges a complaint with the authorities who then use their administrative power to suppress other students' organizations using police force, and their goons, if necessary. These fascist practices have been in evidence almost everywhere where there has been trouble on the campus (es).
Fascists perceive every independent person and institution as a thorn in their flesh. The RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan was a thorn which hurt Jaitley's ego more than his flesh. He is intellectually far superior to Jaitley, the lawyer and Modi, the Pracharak, whose small egoes were bruised by his intellectual superiority.
The government had the power to remove him and they would have been within their right to sack him or to let him complete his term and part gracefully, but they chose to set Subramaniam Swamy to heap insults on him through the media to satisfy their meanness. Rajan has now declared that he would be returning to the academics in the US after completing his term.
Fascists create an enemy to attack, viscerally, to divert people's attention from their continued and daily exploitation, suppression and misery and to, insidiously, justify their inhuman acts. Hitler projected German citizens of Jewish origin as the enemies of the fatherland (motherland, Bharatmata, here) and targeted and destroyed them. Modi has chosen the minorities, especially the Muslims, for this purpose.
While he himself keeps mum, his Ministers and members of parliament (MPS) act as the shameful firing squads, brazenly public in their minority bashing. Muslims are potrayed as disloyal Indians without any basis. They are projected as a threat to Hindus, who constitute 80% of
India's population, which is ridiculous.
This anti-Muslim tirade in different forms continues to be pursued with venom, rancour and a sinister design .The unfounded fear of a rising Muslim population, ordering Muslims to go to Pakistan at the drop of a hat, exhorting Hindu women to produce at least four children each, declaration of dates by which India would not have a single Muslim or Christian and other anti-minority acts are being used to keep the enemy image of the Muslims alive to pursue their fascist agenda.
The tell tale evidence of fascism knocking at our door is there for all to see and can be ignored only at the cost of our democracy and a free society; at our collective peril.
BJP’s Doublespeak on Terror
From the 1985 Air India bombings to 2007 Samjhauta Blasts, Acts of Terror need to be Tackled whichever the Ideology that Legitimises Them
_compressed.jpg)
Image: Rajnish Katyal/HT
As we gear up in remembrance of those who died in the Air India bombings on June 23, 1985, a few days from now, the question that should be bothering everyone is that what has really been learnt from the worst attack in the history of aviation terror before 9/11?
The Air India bombings had left 331 people dead. While 329 people died in the blast aboard Air India Flight 182 above the Irish Sea, two baggage handlers died at the Narita Airport.
The two suitcase bombs used in the crime originated from Vancouver and were intended to be used against Air India flights heading to India from different routes.
The bombings were blamed on Sikh separatists seeking revenge from the Indian government for the ugly political events of 1984. The Indian army had invaded the Golden Temple Complex, the holiest Sikh shrine in Amritsar to flush out militants who had fortified the place of worship in June 1984. The military operation had left many people dead and the buildings inside the temple complex devastated.
That year, the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated in a fit of rage by her Sikh bodyguards as a result of which anti Sikh pogrom was orchestrated by the leaders of Indira Gandhi's Congress party.
The Air India investigation has led to only one conviction of Inderjit Singh Reyat who was instrumental in making the explosive devices. The prime suspect and the ring leader of the conspiracy Talwinder Singh Parmar had died at the hands of the Indian police in 1992 under suspicious circumstances.
Parmar was a Canadian citizen and had traveled back to India to pursue armed struggle for a Sikh homeland when he was eliminated in a staged shootout, a practice that was commonly used by the Punjab police to finish off the Sikh extremists to pocket rewards and achieve quick results. This policy had partly contributed to the end of armed insurgency that was started by Sikh militants in mid 1980s and had lasted until mid 1990s.
As against the excessive force used by the Indian state to crush Sikh militancy, the police and the intelligence have generally been soft towards terrorism spread by the supporters of Hindu theocracy.
This is despite the fact that India claims to be a secular democracy. It is since the early 2000s, that the trend of bombing Muslim targets by the ultra Hindu nationalists who want to turn India into a Hindu state has picked up and gained momentum, although they had earlier, always been active and mostly been involved in rioting and mob violence against religious minorities (Gujarat 2002 pogrom being the ultimate example).
Whereas, any bomb blast during this period would quickly be blamed on the Muslim and Sikh extremists by the police and the intelligence, it is thanks to some honest investigators, open to investigate sans the blinkers of prejudice, who actually looked into other possibilities and succeeded in smashing a terror network operated by the Hindu extremists.
India blames Pakistan for sponsoring Sikh and Muslim extremists, whereas Pakistan blames India for aiding and abetting Baluch separatists. Indeed, the Pakistani agents have been supporting the Sikh and Muslim extremists in carrying out bombings in India.
These investigations revealed that they wanted to settle scores by indulging in retaliatory bombing attacks against Muslims. Ironically, in some of these cases they disguised themselves as Muslims to carry out the attacks so that the Hindus do not become suspects and the police and the intelligence consumed by a pervasive Islamophobia, too, never really tried to see how and why Muslim extremists would be targeting their own people.
The year 2007 witnessed series of such bombings, where Muslim mosques and localities were targeted. As part of this pattern, a terror attack with major ramifications occurred in February that year when the Samjhauta Rail Express was bombed leaving 68 people dead. The rail service was started to connect India and Pakistan.
A majority of those killed in the attack were Pakistani Muslims who were returning to their country after seeing their relatives in India. In fact, India and Pakistan used to be one before 1947. The two countries were divided on religious lines. While Pakistan became an Islamic republic India chose to remain a secular state in spite of the fact that it is a Hindu dominated nation. The Hindu supremacists have, since then, been on a publicly declared project to India into a Hindu state.
They (Hindutva supremacists) have been involved in the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi in 1948. Gandhi was opposed to the religious partition of India and spoke vehemently against violence against Muslims by the Hindu extremists. Those involved in Samjhauta Rail episode follow the principles of the killers of Gandhi.
Since the time of division of India and Pakistan, an atmosphere of mistrust has prevailed between the two countries which have even turned to two major wars in 1965 and 1971. The two sides continue to accuse each other of creating disturbances in their respective countries.
India blames Pakistan for sponsoring Sikh and Muslim extremists, whereas Pakistan blames India for aiding and abetting Baluch separatists. Indeed, the Pakistani agents have been supporting the Sikh and Muslim extremists in carrying out bombings in India.
Notably, the BJP government is known for its tough anti terror stance, but this is weakened or stands exposed when it comes to dealing with the terrorists from within their lot. It is pertinent to mention that the current Prime Minister Narendra Modi was seen in the company of one of the Samjhauta blast accused Swami Aseemanand in Gujarat where he was previously the Chief Minister.
So when the Samjhauta blast happened it was instantly blamed on Pakistan-based Islamic extremists. The Hindu extremists were never even seen as potential suspects even though they opposed the train service connecting India with a "traditional enemy".
In some other blasts that happened the same year, Muslim men were arrested as suspects and incarcerated in jails. Only later when it emerged that these blasts were the handiwork of the Hindu extremists, the Indian authorities had to face embarrassment.
The Hindu ‘nationalist’ (read supremacist) Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) which is currently in power was in the opposition at that time. The so called secular Congress government too tried to play down the involvement of Hindu extremists initially as it wanted to isolate Pakistan internationally for sponsoring terrorism. The truth however cannot and could not be buried. As the complicity of the Hindu extremists became apparent, the BJP reacted sharply and accused the Congress government of defaming the Hindu community.
It is therefore not surprising to see that under the present BJP government in India, those arrested for Samjhauta blast and similar attacks directed at Muslim community are getting a reprieve and back door amnesty. The charge sheet previously filed against them (Malegaon 2008 blasts) is being diluted and the investigators are not opposing bails being granted to those facing charges.
Notably, the BJP government is known for its tough anti terror stance, but this is weakened or stands exposed when it comes to dealing with the terrorists from within their lot. It is pertinent to mention that the current Prime Minister Narendra Modi was seen in the company of one of the Samjhauta blast accused Swami Aseemanand in Gujarat where he was previously the Chief Minister.
Aseemanand is an ascetic who ran a camp in Gujarat that worked aggressively to covert Christians into Hinduism. It was during Modi's tenure as chief minister that an anti Muslim massacre took place in 2002. Modi had also publicly opposed the arrests of Hindu extremists in connection with terrorism.
Nevertheless, it is also a question of constitutional duties of the investigators and prosecution who are expected to act impartially and follow the rule book. If the list of banned terror groups on the National Investigation Agency that is looking into these cases is any indication, no Hindu extremist group has been or is designated as terrorist organisation.
Only the Sikh and Muslim separatist groups and Maoists, besides groups representing armed movements by other sub nationalities within India appear on this list. Unlike Parmar and members of other minority terror groups who have been killed in staged police shootouts, the Hindu extremists enjoy state patronage.
The self styled critics of terrorism and violence who have always been much in the news have maintained a studied silence over the existence of terrorism in the name of Hindu nation.
In lasting and meaningful memory of those who died for no fault of theirs; whether they were Air India victims or those aboard Samjhauta Rail we need to question terrorism in all its forms.
Political forces that not only patronise terrorism and violence, but also breed them through their politics of bigotry need to be exposed, however inconvenient this may prove to the powers that be.
The Air India tragedy was a culmination of this dangerous game of dividing people on the basis of religion and terrorising a minority community. Under the BJP government this threat has grown has manifold as not only attacks on religious minorities have grown, rather those indulging in them are being openly shielded by a democratically elected government.
The Indian state that continues to point fingers at Pakistan or Canada and tells the world to stand up against terrorism, should first set its own house in order. Rather than seeing terrorism as a problem exported from outside, it needs to look also, inwards for enemies within. Pakistani agents and ISI only took advantage of the grievances of the minorities in India but they can never be blamed for creating circumstances that forced the extremists from these communities to take to the arms.
The Air India tragedy was a culmination of this dangerous game of dividing people on the basis of religion and terrorising a minority community. Under the BJP government this threat has grown has manifold as not only attacks on religious minorities have grown, rather those indulging in them are being openly shielded by a democratically elected government.
Meet the Dalit Professor Arrested For “Insulting” Ram and Modi
Are the Hindutva forces all over the country bubbling with enthusiasm? So it seems, given that they have launched a virulent campaign to suppress every voice that opposes their hegemonic ideas and designs. Their different groups are trying to silence every voice of reason – either through use of force or by misusing state agencies. The latest in the series is the arrest of B.P. Mahesh Chandra Guru, the country’s first Dalit-Buddhist professor of media studies.
Prof B.P. Mahesh Chandra Guru addresses a function
Why the arrest?
More than a year ago, on 3 January 2015, while speaking on Media and Human Rights at a workshop for teachers organized under the auspices of the University Grants Commission (UGC) at Mysore University, the Ambedkarite professor, Guru, had criticized Ram (famous Indian mythical character). He said, “Ram ofRamayana had violated human rights. He suspected Sita’s fidelity and victimized her. I see this as a violation of human rights.” He also said that the media presented Ram as an ideal person, which was not correct. In the workshop itself, Appaji Gowda, an assistant professor of anthropology, had opposed him. According to Dileep Kumar, a student of the university, Appaji provoked Ravishankar of Karnadu Sarvodaya Sena to get a case registered against Guru on the same day. A real-estate businessman, Ravishankar got the complaint registered at the Jayalaksmipuram police station. A year later, Prof Guru launched a front against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union HRD minister Smriti Irani on the issue of Rohith Vemula’s suicide , which was unpalatable to Modi followers and brahmanical forces. It was against this backdrop that a Mysore court ordered his arrest.
He was arrested when he appeared in the court for a hearing on the case. The judge was angry that he had not appeared for the two earlier hearings. He could not attend the hearings because of academic preoccupations.
Who is Professor Guru?
Professor B.P. Mahesh Chandra Guru is the first Dalit-Buddhist professor of media studies. He has been teaching journalism for the past three decades. He has also served in important administrative positions at the state and national levels. He was a member of the Karnataka Public Services Commission and Union Public Services Commission and of many UGC committees. He has published more than ten books in Kannada and English. Professor Guru has been an active participant in movements and discourses informed by Dalitbahujan consciousness. He has been consistently raising his voice against the Hindutvavadi assaults on thought and reason. On 13 June, he had written a piece for FORWARD Press condemning the lodging of a case against Dalit thinker Kancha Ilaiah. Little did he know that he too would fall prey to the Hindutvavadi scheming within the next couple of days and end up behind bars.
Friend of Mahishasur Movement
Kannada students celebrate Mahishasur Day
Professor Guru believes that Mahishasur was a Buddhist ruler and that Mysore is named after him. According to him, “In 245 BC, Buddhist emperor Ashoka had dispatched a Buddhist monk Mahadeva to “Mahishamandal” of Karnataka. Later, a ruler called Mahisha founded the Mahishamandal state. There is a lot of evidence to prove the historicity of Mahisha’s rule, though there is no evidence that Chamundeshwari Devi (Durga) murdered him. Brahmanvadis branded him as ‘Asur’.” Recently, Professor Guru and his friends observed Mahishasur Martyrdom Day in Mysore. A detailed article by Professor Guru, contending that Mahishasur was a Buddhist, has been included in a forthcoming bookMahishasur: Debrahmanizing a Myth. The book has been edited by Pramod Ranjan, editor of FORWARDPress.
Intellectuals condemn arrest
Dalit thinker Kancha Ilaiah, human rights activist Teesta Setalvad, economist Jayati Ghosh, sociologist Shamshul Islam, Ram Puniyani, Anand Swaroop Verma, Kumar Prashant, S. Anand, Ratan Lal, writer and critic Kanwal Bharati, Prayag Shukla, Rajesh Joshi, Manglesh Dabral, Jitendra Bhatia, Sudhir Suman, Bajrang Bihari Tiwari, Kripashankar, Farid Khan, Amlendu Upadhyaya, Sanjay Jothe, social activist Vidya Bhushan Rawat, Anurag Modi, Preetam Singh, Girijeshwar Prasad, Badal Saroj and Nawal Kumar among others have condemned the arrest.
Courtesy Forward Press
Why the first Olympic refugee team may not be the last
Yusra Mardini, originally from Syria, trains in Germany. One of the Olympic Refugee Team members, she will compete in swimming. Photo Credit: NBC
June 20 has been declared World Refugees Day and UNHCR has launched the “#WithRefugees petition as the world faces a huge crisis with the UN pegging refugees at over 60 million
Ten refugee athletes will march into the Maracanã Stadium in Rio de Janeiro on Friday, August 5, 2016. Unlike the other athletes there, they will not represent the countries of their birth, heritage or citizenship. These athletes will comprise the first-ever Olympic refugee team, and they will march under the Olympic flag.
“We want to send a message of hope for all refugees in our world,” said Thomas Bach, president of the International Olympic Committee. With over 65 million forcibly displaced persons worldwide, 21 million of them refugees, hope may be as essential as food and housing.
War, civil unrest, genocide, criminality, environmental catastrophes, famine, poverty and disease have led to the voluntary and involuntary migration of far too many people around the globe.
These 10 athletes will likely draw significant media attention. But what happens after the television crews pack up their equipment, the stadium lights go off and the crowds go home? Having been sensitized to the plight of refugees, what will viewers do with this information?
As a scholar who studies refugees, I think wealthy nations like the United States could do more, but politicians need a clearer mandate from their constituents. A humanitarian response could include the resettlement of more carefully vetted refugees in the United States, but that is not the only option. Wealthy nations could provide more financial assistance to the international organizations that provide emergency relief.
But it is also within governments' power to facilitate the conditions that would allow refugees to return to their homelands, to rebuild their lives and communities. Returning home is what refugees ultimately seek.
Searching for durable solutions
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the U.N. agency mandated to protect the rights of those fleeing war and persecution, seeks three durable solutions to refugee crises – voluntary repatriation, integration in host societies or resettlement in third countries.
More than half of all forcibly displaced people are children. Because of protracted conflicts, the average refugee can now expect to spend a quarter-century away from home. Exile is all these refugee children may ever know, undermining ties to the homeland and preventing them from fully integrating into a host society.
Girl plays with a plastic bag at a refugee camp. REUTERS/Alkis Konstantinidis
While “durable solutions” are worked out, aid workers try to meet refugees’ immediate needs: housing, food, water and medical care. Humanitarian aid becomes all the more important in a world where resettlement options are limited, and interventions to prevent or mitigate humanitarian crises are perceived as questionable foreign policy. For decades now, the UNHCR and other refugee relief organizations have responded to refugee crises with ever-diminishing resources.
Only three percent of the UNHCR’s budget comes from the United Nations. The remaining 97 percent comes from voluntary contributions from governments, corporations and individual donors. The United States ranks among the top 10 donor nations, offering close to 30 percent of all humanitarian aid.
Yet, the need for humanitarian aid has never been greater. Roughly 40 percent of those forced to flee across international borders settle in refugee camps, with populations larger than some U.S. cities. In these camps, immediate needs are met, but refugees are denied a chance to legally work, practice professions, run businesses, own property, choose their place of residence, move about freely or become citizens.
The education and medical care offered them are rudimentary, at best. Their safety is often compromised, and they are vulnerable to trafficking and other forms of organized crime. Housing that was designed to be temporary has become increasingly permanent.
Sixty percent of refugees bypass camps altogether and try their luck in urban areas. There, many work in the underground service economy and are easily exploited.
What’s in it for us?
Financial costs of resettlement in third countries can be exorbitant, making nations less likely to want to accommodate a large share of refugees. Domestic interests trump international obligations, even if they are, like the United States, signatories to the U.N. Convention on Refugees. Less than one percent of refugees under the care of the UNHCR ever receive permanent resettlement in third countries like the U.S.
Given these circumstances, greater financial assistance to the UNHCR and other international relief agencies is necessary, and not just because it’s the humane thing to do.
Policymakers have long recognized that a large, sudden influx of refugees can politically and economically destabilize developing countries and regions. Refugees compete with host populations for land, jobs, housing and other scarce resources. These social pressures can exacerbate ethnic, racial and sectarian tensions and make them scapegoats for local and national problems.
Protests over refugee issues in Los Angeles. REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni
They sometimes trigger new political conflict that causes further displacement. Addressing the refugee crises of today helps to prevent – or, at the very least, mitigate – the political crises of tomorrow.
Perhaps, the greatest assistance we can offer refugees is to hold our governments accountable for policies that contribute to their displacement. In 2007, for example, the United States provided US$30 million to the UNHCR to assist Iraqi refugees, but this number paled in comparison to the estimated $2 billion per week they spent to wage the war that made many Iraqis flee as refugees.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon said:
Refugees want homes, not tents. They want a flag that waves for their rights. And they deserve a world that gives them more than assistance; they deserve a world that is at peace.
Many refugees want to return home, if their safety can be guaranteed. Throughout its history, the UNHCR has facilitated the voluntary repatriation of countless refugees around the world. But today, repatriation is at a 20-year low.
The 10 refugee athletes competing at the Rio Olympics will no doubt give other refugees hope. “Let us all be on the team of refugees until there is no need for a refugee team at all,” said the UN secretary general.
Given that one in 122 humans is now either a refugee, internally displaced or seeking asylum, it looks like we may have many more Olympic refugee teams in the future.
This story was first published on The Conversation.
Fourth Day of Hunger Fast, Soni Sori to Continue Protest in Raipur
Chhatisgarh High Court is hearing a PIL filed by the Aam Admi Party (AAP) against the alleged brute encounter killing of Madkam Hidme from Gompad
.jpg)
On the fourth day of her fast unto death in protest against the brutal killing of an Adivasi young woman, Madkam Hidme (falsely termed Maoist by the authorities), Soni Sori has resolved to carry the protest to Raipur, the Chhatisgarh state capital tomorrow. Meanwhile the sheer brutality of the ‘encounter’ of the young Adivasi woman has caused widespread outrage and unrest in the village of Gompad and around. Speaking to Sabrangindia, Soni Sori said that the sheer brutality of the killing –chopping of the girls nose and ears and other bodily parts—was worse than or matched the Nirbhaya rape and killing taht shook the nationwhen and after it took place on December 16, 2012.
Soni’s protest fast started on June 15 is against the police and administration for not allowing her to visit the village. Meanwhile she has collected photographs of the gruesome killing that will be available shortly. Sabrangindia had initially reported on this killing on June 15.”How many more deaths will it take before we accept that too many people have died: Chhattisgarh.
Meanwhile, the Aam Admi Party has filed a petition in tge Chhatisgarh High Courtseeking a SIT and judicial probe into Madkam Hidme encounter. The Aam Aadmi Party has filed a petition in the Chhattisgarh High Court seeking the formation of an SIT, consisting of officers from outside the state, and a judicial inquiry into the death of Madkam Hidme, who was allegedly killed in an encounter in Sukma on June 13.
Soni Sori has maintained over the past three days that they have been prevented “from visiting Gombad village on one pretext or another which shows that the state government has something to hide”. Sori said Friday that she and other members of the AAP team that had sought to go to Gompad were forced to return after the “administration engineered a protest”.“For the past three days, they have been doing one thing after another to prevent us from going. Around noon, a group of people, at least a hundred, came to the circuit house where we were waiting and started raising slogans. Instead of controlling the crowds, the police told us that they would not be able to handle it and the best thing for us was to leave Konta. It is clear that the government is hiding what has happened in Gompad. I will now take this fight to Raipur and hold a demonstration there after speaking to other AAP members. I have been on a fast and I will not break it,” Sori said.
In the petition to the High Court, AAP state convenor Sanket Thakur, who is the petitioner, has taken note of a photograph of Hidme’s body, raising doubts over the seeming contradiction of the police claim that she was killed in an encounter as her uniform was “nearly spotless”. Thakur has filed a petition in court demanding that it call for all case-related documents. He has also demanded that a case of murder and rape be registered.
“We have also asked for setting up of an SIT of officers from outside Chhattisgarh and a judicial inquiry into the matter,” Thakur said.
When contacted by The Indian Express, D M Awasthi, Special DG (Anti-Naxal Operations), said, “I have spoken to the Sukma SP and have told him to go to the spot. It is his moral duty to inquire into what happened. As far as Soni Sori or anyone else who wants to go, I have conveyed that nobody can be stopped as far as the Indian Constitution is concerned. They can go and visit the spot. If everything is right, there is no harm in people visiting.”
On June 15 we had reported:
Soni Sori, Adicasi woman leader and other members of the Aam Admi Party (AAP) party are right now on dharna outside the Sukma collectorate against the recent incident of Rape and Fake Encounter of Madkam Hidme, a young girl from Gompad village. Speaking to Sabrangindia at 11.30 p.m. Sonio Sori said that they would sleep out there and not leave the spot until the team is allowed to go in.
On June 13, the Sukma police announced a successful encounter where a woman Maoist, Madkam Hidme, was killed in an encounter close to village Gompad, Konta Tehsil, Sukma district. Villagers called up Soni Sori and her lawyers yesterday complaning that the 'official' account was incorrect and that Madkam Hidme was not a Naxalite, but a villager, picked up from her home, gang raped by the police and then killed, with the body then callously returned to the villagers. Today, June 15, a fact-finding team on behalf of the AAP, led by Soni Sori tried to visit the village to investigate the allegations.
On a legitimate citizen's mission, the team was stopped and harassed at four different camps on the way, finally they were stopped and held for almost hours at the Injeram Camp on various excuses, just 10 km short of the village. Soni Sori and others thereafter returned back to Sukma in the evening to meet the collector and SP. But no one was available at their office. ASP, Sukma Mr. Santosh Singh met the team and told them that they cannot be allowed inside without personnel from the security forces. The team then asked them to send some personnel's with them, ASP said no one was available and so they can;t be allowed to visit the village.
While the police is reluctant to afford even a basic degree of transparency to a leader like Soni Sori and her team, villagers on the other hand are willing to talk and are waiting with the body of the girl for the team or journalists to come and talk to them and see for themselves. In protest, Soni Sori and others have decided to camp/do a dharna at the collectorate itself until they are allowed to go in. That is where they are, past midnight, waiting and protesting.