JAGLAG Petition to NHRC dated March 23, 2016

March 28, 2016

March 23, 2016

To,
Mr Sanjay Jain, Sr. SP
National Human Rights Commission
New Delhi

Subject – Additional Information about the situation in Bastar in relation to Complaint no. 920/33/17/2015-WC

Dear Mr. Jain,

This is in continuation of the submission made by Jagdalpur Legal Aid Group to your team on March 1 in Raipur. We wish to update you on some other incidents that have occurred in Bastar subsequent to your visit to the area –

On March 14, 2016, one of us, Advocate Shalini Gera travelled to Geedam, Dantewada, to assist Ms. SoniSori with some legal counsel on the question of the ongoing investigation into the chemical attack on her. Ms. Gera stayed with Ms. Sori’s family on the 14 and 15 of March 2016.

On March 16, 2016 Ms. Gera travelled to Jagdalpur to consult with the District Legal Services Authority, about the possibility of collaborating with them in providing legal aid services in the district. From the DLSA premises, Ms. Gera walked over to the adjoining court complex in order to follow up on some of JagLAG’s cases which they had been forced to hand over to other lawyers in a hurry at the time the group was forced to evacuate from Jagdalpur. As soon as Ms. Gera walked into the court complex, within minutes Ms. Gera was surrounded by a whole host of people, mostly lawyers, led by one Mr. Anand Mohan Mishra of the Samajik Ekta Manch, and Ms. Madhuri Yadav, loudly asking Ms. Gera to leave the court premises immediately. Once again, these lawyers made claims that since Ms. Gera was not a “local lawyer”, therefore, she had no right to enter the court premises or work therein. Ms. Gera informed them that as of last week, Ms. Gera’s transfer to the Chhattisgarh State Bar Council was complete, and now she was duly registered in the Bar Council of Chhattisgarh State (Enrollment No. CG/344- A/TR/2013). Besides which, the Bar Association’s resolution was before the Appeals Committee of the Chhattisgarh State Bar Council, and hence, she requested that the lawyer’s wait for the final judgment on that appeal and follow the order of the Hob’le Bar Council. However, the angry group of lawyers, by now numbering 50-60, insisted that they were not beholden to the Chhattisgarh State Bar Council, and that they will not allow Ms. Gera and her colleagues to work in the area. Further, they made several other allegations – the primary amongst them being that JagLAG has close relations with the Naxalites, is anti-national, and hence, will not be allowed to operate in the court. By making such false and defamatory accusations, these lawyers tried to inflame passions of other lawyers in the Bar Room of the court, and made it clear that these lawyers will not be allowed to work peacefully in the area. A local paper carried some an article regarding this incident, which is included as Annexure 1.

Earlier on the same day, the National Federation of Indian Women, a national mass-organization of women, had held a dharna outside the Commissioner’s Office in Jagdalpur, which was mainly addressed by the Adivasi women organisers. They demanded action against the guilty security men in the cases of mass sexual violence in Peddagellur, Nendra and Kunna villages in the past few months. In their speeches, they also condemned the eviction of JagLAG lawyers and the journalist Malini Subramanium, and the attack on SoniSori. Ms Gera attended this meeting briefly, where she met Ms. Bela Bhatia. It appears that after Ms. Gera had left, Ms. Bhatia also addressed this meeting.

Presumably in response to this meeting, another meeting was held two days later, on March 18, 2016, by a newly formed group Mahila EktaManch. While this meeting was purportedly organized to protest the recent incident in Sukma where a young girl had lost her life in an IED explosion caused by the Naxalites, this meeting largely raised slogans against Advocate Shalini Gera and Social Worker Bela Bhatia, publicly asking them to leave Bastar. Photos from the event are attached as Annexure 2.

At the end of this meeting, the organizers also submitted a letter to the Prime Minister, asking the government to ensure that lawyers associated with JaLAG – Shalini Gera and IshaKhandelwal, the social worker – Bela Bhatia, human rights worker associated with the Coordination of Democratic Rights Organizations (who were part of the fact-finding team that looked into the Nendra incident)- Ms. Shreya, a JagLAG intern – Ms. Praavita, and a representative of Amnesty International -Makepeace, are not allowed into Bastar, and that they are booked under the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act. Furthermore, this letter also asked that the government arrest the NFIW organizers, Shalini Gera and Bela Bhatia in Naxalite cases. Photos taken of the letter are annexed as Annexure 3. Such letters, specifically targeting private individuals are aimed at intimidating them and vitiating the atmosphere of the area, ensuring that it becomes very difficult for them to work independently.

On the night between March 17, 2016 and March 18, 2016, Ms. Makepeace Silthou of Amnesty International who had been visiting the area, and Ms. Bela Bhatia,were traveling in a public bus from Jagdalpur to Raipur. First, they were accosted by the SamajikEktaManch people at the Jagdalpur Bus Stand, and later their bus was stopped twice at two different check-posts in Bastar, where the police wanted to conduct a security check on all “women passengers,” subjecting both Ms. Silthou and Ms. Bhatia to an intrusive searching of all their belongings, which delayed all the passengers in their bus by two hours or more. Again, these are simply tactics of intimidation and harassment.

It should also be noted that in the name of investigation into the chemical attack on Ms. Sori, her family is being continuously harassed and intimidated. Her brother-in-law Mr. Ajay Markam was illegally detained for over 36 hours over March 10, 2016 and March 11, 2016, when we, as the family’s lawyers were forced to write to the DGP of Chhattisgarh, Mr. Upadhyay seeking his intervention. Her nephew and close colleague, Mr. LingaramKodopi has been receiving direct and indirect threats from no less than Mr. SRP Kalluri that he will be killed in an encounter, and that he will be implicated in this attack. Even after Mr. Kodopi wrote to the DGP on 14.3.2016, raising his concerns that the SIT is not conducting an impartial and objective investigation, and hence, he will not answer their requests for further interrogation, and requested the DGP to constitute an independent team before which he is ready to testify – yet, he is being routinely pressured to appear before the SIT. On March 17, 2016 and on March 21, 2016, he was again asked to appear before the SIT, despite multiple submissions to the SIT on this issue.Not only that, he has also been handed a notice under section 107 of CrPC asking him to sign a bond of good behavior in view of his non-cooperation with the investigative team and his public threat of suicide. It should be noted that Mr. Kodopi has only talked of hurting himself, while the Bar Association and groups like the SamajikEktaManch, MahilaEktaManch etc. have publicly issued threats to JagLAG – yet, none of them have been served any notices under section 107 of the CrPC.

In such an environment of continuous harassment and open intimidation, directly by the police or by groups close to the police, we note that it will be very difficult for people still living and carrying on businesses in Bastar to come before the NHRC team also, and feel comfortable in giving testimonies critical of the police. We request that the NHRC try to look for documentary evidence in order to substantiate some of the allegations made by complainants, or give weightage to testimonies from people who have knowledge of incidents, but who are no longer living in Bastar. For instance, in the case of JagLAG’s eviction, we note that over the last few days of our stay in Jagdalpur and immediately following our evacuation (from 16 Feb to 22 Feb 2016), our landlord received many calls from various officials of the police and the Kotwali PS as well as the Bodhghat PS.

Officials such as the CSP and SP of Bastar have also called him to hasten and ensure our departure. We request that our landlord, Mr. Praveen Baghel’s , call details be called for and looked into. Furthermore, at the time of our eviction, we were also joined by two student interns, Ms. Mukta Joshi and Mr. Ashwin Pantula of NLSUI Bangalore, and a freelance journalist Ms. Freny Manecksha. These independent witnesses, who are not subject to the pressures of Bastar, will be able to give an uninhibited account of the last few days of eviction.

Signed
Shalini Gera,
Isha Khandelwal,
Devesh Agnihotri

Letter to Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh, March 13, 2016 on Deteriorating Situation in Chhatisgarh

March 28, 2016

To
Shri Rajnath Singh
Honourable Home Minister of India

March 13, 2016

Subject: Harassment of human rights activists by police in Bastar, Chattisgarh

Respected Shri Singh,

We are writing to request your urgent intervention to protect our colleagues, women's rights activists in Bastar from attacks by the police and goons who are targeting them for taking up the cases of sexual violence against Adivasi women by police and security forces.

Sir, you are no doubt aware of widespread sexual violence against Adivasi women by security forces in Bastar in the course of search and combing operations. Thse have been widely reported in the media. The National Human Rights Commission has instituted an enquiry into these incidents after complaints from women's organisations.

We would like to apprise you of the sharp deterioration in the situation over these last few weeks, as a result of systematic targeting, hounding and threatening of women activists by Bastar police led by IG Bastar Shri SRP Kalluri.

Adivasi woman leader and AAP party activist Soni Sori has been systematically hounded by the police and has been personally targeted by IG Kalluri. A copy of an FIR that Ms Sori and her nephew Lingaram Kodopi have been trying to file against Shri Kalluri under the SC/ST Act is attached. The police have refused to file this FIR, and threatened Ms Sori with dire consequences if she spoke against Shri Kalluri. On the night of 22 February, Ms Sori wa attacked by three persons who again threatened her and smeared her face with a corrosive substance. Ms Sori was seriously injured and was brought to Apollo Hospital in Delhi for treatment. She has returned to Chhattisgarh on 11th March.
During Ms Sori's absence in Delhi, her young daughters and family including her brother-in-law were threatened by people whose affiliations with the police are well-known. Ms. Soni’s brother-in-law, Mr. Ajay Markam, was picked up by the police on 11th March and held in police custody for a day and a half, with no intimation to his family about his whereabouts and the reasons for his detention. His wife and Ms. Sori’s sister, Ms. Dhani Markam, was also picked up by Bastar police from the hostel of the nursing school where she is a student, and taken to an undisclosed location. They were released only yesterday, after interrogation by the SIT set up by Bastar police to investigate the attack on Ms Sori. They have been pressurised to make a false confession that they were responsible for the attack on Ms Sori. Ajay Markam has been severely beaten and Dhani Markam has been reduced to a state of emotional breakdown. Details of their illegal detention and the behaviour of the police are in the attached complaint filed by their lawyers with the NHRC and the IG Police Chhattisgarh.

Our colleagues Shalini Gera and Isha Khandelwal (women lawyers who are taking up cases of Adivasi women in Bastar courts), have been targeted and threatened by Shri Kalluri and by members of the Samajik Ekta Manch, a vigilante group with close links to the police.These women lawyers who have been living in Jagdalpur for the last several years and taking up cases of rights violations of Adivasis and rape/sexual assault on Adivasi women by the police and security forces, are being systematically targeted and hounded for the last 18 months. Shri SRP Kalluri has held press conferences and public meetings where he has issued thinly-veiled threats that the police are closely monitoring NGOs providing "legal aid to Naxalites". Clients and visiting journalists have been told by the police that they are a "Naxalite front", soon to be arrested. Police claim to be investigating "anonymous" complaints that they are "fraudulent" lawyers who should not be allowed to practise.

The local Bar Association, clearly instigated by the police, took out a resolution prohibiting Shalini and Isha from practice in the local courts. This resolution was challenged by Shalini and Isha in the State Bar Council and which issued an interim order allowing them to practice. They have been receiving anonymous information warning them that they will be attacked during their court appearances. They have now left Jagdalpur after their landlord was picked up by police and warned that he would face consequences if he did not evict them.
Independent journalist Malini Subramaniam was forced to leave Jagdalpur with her family after her house was attacked by stone-throwing goons affiliated to Samajik Ekta Manch. The police refused to respond to Malini's complaint and file an FIR or provide protection. Subsequent to the issue being picked up by the international media, the District authorities assured Malini that the incidents would not be repeated and her safety would be ensured. However, on the night of 17th February, Malini's landlord was summoned to the local thana and ordered to get Malini to vacate the premises. Prachi, a young women employed by Malini, was repeated picked up by police and pressurised to confess to the attacks on Malini.

A team of women activists was in Raipur during 14-18 February 2016 and met with the Chief Minister, the Director-General of Police and the Chairperson of the State ST Commission to apprise them of the deteriorating situation in Bastar, and to urge them to ensure the personal safety and security of activists, lawyers, journalists who are supporting Adivasi women in seeking justice. We are shocked and seriously alarmed to note that the assurances given to us by these officials have proved to be no more than empty promises. The attacks, harassment and hounding has been further stepped up since the visit of the NHRC team.

We therefore urge you to
Immediately direct the authorities to ensure the safety of women activists, and to take action to rein in the police and prevent them from overstepping their powers.
Institute a commission of enquiry into the functioning of the police and the role of IG Kalluri in subjecting activists, lawyers, journalists and citizens to a campaign of threats, intimidation and calumny.

Sir, we trust that you will intervene to ensure protection and freedom of functioning for women activists who are exercising their democratic rights to raise their voice against violations of Constutional rights and the rule of law in Bastar.

Brinda Karat, AIDWA
Jagmati Sangwan AIDWA
Prof Uma Chakravarthy

Kalyani Menon-Sen,

How a Hate-Speech Record Increases Chances of Election Victory by 3 times

March 28, 2016

UPDATE:

Sabrangindia received clarifications in the summary and story done by Indiaspends. These have now been incorporated into the story.
– Editors

Candidates with hate-speech cases against them have three times greater chance of winning elections, as this survey by Indiaspends shows. This analysis has been undertaken from the self-disclosed crime records of candidates who have contested various elections nationwide over the last 12 years.
Of the 70 candidates surveyed, unsurprisingly, the RSS-driven Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) tops the list with 28 candidates with hate crime records. This numero uno position is followed by nine MPS each from the Telangana Rashtriya Samiti (TRS), six MPS from the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM), five from the Samajwadi Party (SP), four from the telugu Desam, three from the Indian National Congress (INC), three others and 12 independents.
So, being guilty of hate-speech with a case registered provides a candidate with a better chance of victory.

Candidates with hate-speech cases against them were three times more successful in elections compared to those without a criminal record, according to an IndiaSpend analysis of self-disclosed crime records of candidates who have contested various elections nationwide over the last 12 years.

To put these data in perspective, over the last 12 years, 10% of candidates with no criminal cases won elections, while the figure was 20% for candidates with criminal cases of any kind.

As many as 70 members of Parliament (MPs) and members of legislative assemblies (MLAs) have hate-speech cases pending against them, according to their own disclosures to the Election Commission (EC) of India.

A season of hate speeches by politicians—including union ministers, MPs and MLAs—is underway across India, riven by inflamed, opposing views on nationalism and free speech.

Some recent examples:

Union Ministers

Members of Parliament

Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs)

Political party chiefs

How “hate speech” is identified, numerous laws in force

“Hate speech” currently has no specific legal definition, although the Law Commission has been tasked by the Supreme Court to do just that.

There are several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that pertain to hate speech, including:

153(A)—statements aimed at creating enmity related to communal, racial, linguistic, ethnic and descent;
153(B)—statements against sovereignty;
295(A)—statements aimed at hurting religious feelings;
505(2)—statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes; and
Section 125 of the Representation of the People Act—promoting enmity between classes in connection with elections.

BJP has given tickets to most number of candidates with “hate-speech” cases

As many as 399 candidates with “hate-speech” cases have been fielded by political parties in various parliamentary and state assembly elections over the last 12 years. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leads the list with 97 candidates.

How political parties violate their oath given to ECI at the time of registration

Each political party, at the time of registration, has to provide a self-sworn oath to the EC, declaring that the party will adhere to the principles of “socialism, secularism and democracy”.

A party must provide a copy of memorandum of rules, which should contain a specific provision—drawn from Representation of the People Act, 1951—that says “….and such memorandum or rules and regulations shall contain a specific provision that the association or body shall bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, and to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy, and would uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.”

By giving tickets to candidates with “hate-speech” cases, political parties in a way violate their self-sworn oath to the EC.

(Manoj K is a graduate of the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, and the founder of the Centre for Governance and Development. He has a special interest in transparency and accountability in governance and has spearheaded several projects on these subjects.)

Courtesy: IndiaSpend

Was Father Tom Crucified by ISIS on Good Friday? Catholic sources uncertain

March 28, 2016

UPDATE:

Fate of ISI captive Fr Tom remains uncertain

JOHN DAYAL writes in a special article for SabrangIndia:

The fate of Indian Catholic priest, Fr Tom Uzhunnalil, remains uncertain a day after Easter as different church officials continued to hope he was alive, but admitted there was no evidence on whether he had been “crucified” on Good Friday by the Islamic State terrorists who had taken him captive on 4th march 2016 in Aden, Yemen. Sixteen persons including an Indian Nun of Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charities order had been killed by the ISIS in their assault on an old age home run by the nuns. News of his crucifixion on Good Friday carried by Washington Times have been denied by Catholic sources to this writer.

Hopes for the priest have waxed and waned with divergent “news” going viral on social media, and even usually reticent web portals.

In a communiqué on Easter night, Bishop Paul Hinder, in charge of the Catholic Church in the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Yemen, indicated that the priest of the Salesians of Don Bosco order was alive though “no information can be given about the efforts to get Fr. Tom free.’ The bishop asks “not to decrease the prayers” for Fr. Tom.

Bishop Hinder said he had “reason to believe that the religious was alive and in the hands of the kidnappers.” Vienna Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, who had earlier reportedly confirmed the execution of the priest, later told the Kathpress news: "There is still hope."

The Indian government said it was still actively trying to rescue the priest. External affairs minister, Mrs Sushma Swaraj, had tweeted on March 26 that the government was continuing efforts to rescue Father Thomas Uzhunnalil. But the Washington Times reported March 27 that Fr Tom had indeed been “crucified” by the ISIS on Good Friday. It said repeated that the priest's death was confirmed by Cardinal Christoph Schonborn at an Easter Vigil Mass.

Catholic sources later told this correspondent that the Cardinal had been misquoted by international news groups.

Monseigneur Joseph Chinnayan, the deputy secretary general of the Catholic Bishops Conference of India was quoted by Ucanews.com on March 28 that he has contacted "all authentic sources" within the church and government. "As of now, there is absolutely no basis for this talk of crucifixion," he said. The CBCI is expected to meet government of India officials soon to urgent them for more intense efforts to secure the release of the popular priest.

Father Mathew Valarkote, spokesman for the Salesian's Bangalore province, told the media the government statements so far "definitely shows that no harm has been done” to the 56-year-old Kerala born cleric. “We will disseminate news in case we have any confirmed reports from credible sources,” he told a Matters India reporter.

The reports of the crucifixion of Fr Tom first flashed when Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna was quoted reportedly mentioning it during the Easter Vigil at Stephansdom. The Dominican prelate was quoted saying the 56-year-old Salesian was crucified by ISIS on Good Friday. Polonia Christiana carried the news, based on Austrian media reports. Catholic News World carried the report on Easter, March 27. Church sources now say the Vienna cardinal might have based his statement on a WhatsApp message that began circulating early Saturday.

The Vatican and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation have been reportedly working with Mid East groups for his rescue.

Earlier Report:

Cardinal Schönborn of Vienna has confirmed last night, that the Salesian priest, Fr. Thomas Uzhunnalil was crucified by ISIS on Good Friday. Father Tom was with the Sisters of Mother Teresa who were killed in Yemen.

According to a report in Washington Times, Thomas Uzhunnalil, an Indian priest who was kidnapped in Yemen in March was crucified by ISIS on Good Friday. His execution was done in the same method that Romans were believed to use on Jesus on Good Friday. The report claims that his execution was confirmed at the Easter Vigil Mass by Cardinal Christoph Schonborn of Vienna.

Earlier, the Indian government had confirmed the capture of Father Tom Uzhunnalil, the Indian priest from Bangalore, who was kidnapped by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) in Yemen and said that efforts were underway to ensure that he is released. "Fr Tom Uzhunnallil – an Indian national from Kerala was abducted by a terror group in Yemen. We r making all efforts to secure his release," External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj tweeted. Her reaction comes after a growing alarm among the Christian community following an ominous report by the terror outfit to crucify him around Easter. This has been subsequently denied to JOHN DAYAL by Catholic groups who have said they have been misquoted.

Tom Unzhunnalil was reportedly kidnapped from the Missionaries of Charity’s home for the elderly in Aden where he serves as a chaplain on March 4. A spokesman for the Bangalore province of the Salesians was quoted saying that no group has taken any responsibility yet. A post on the group’s South Africa page has been taken down. Earlier, the Yemen authorities blamed ISIL for the attack on March 4. The External Affairs Ministry had said only one Indian nurse was killed in the terrorist attack in strife-torn Yemen's Aden city.

Sixteen people were killed in Aden when a group of terrorists stormed an elderly care home run by a Kolkata-based Missionaries of Charity and sprayed bullets at the residents. There are around 80 residents living at the home, which is run by Missionaries of Charity, an organisation established by Mother Teresa. Recently, Missionaries of Charity nuns also came under attack in Yemen in 1998 when gunmen killed three nuns in the Red Sea port city of Hodeida.

Re-Using the Communal Card in Assam: BJP Manifesto 2014, Vision Document 2016

March 28, 2016

Image: The Hindu

The week end, just passed was witness to a whirlwind of meetings by the top brass of the ruling party, not least its mascot, the prime minister Modi making a strong bid for power in the north eastern state of Assam.

On Friday last, March 25, 2016, the union finance minister, Arun Jaitley flanked by BJP President Amit Shah set the stage for the week end that was to follow. “Our priority is the illegal infiltration and detection and deportation of these infiltrators,” he said while adding that the Vision Document, which is a roadmap for progress on all sectors, has also assured that a law would be enacted to deal sternly with industries, business establishments, small and medium enterprises or any other agencies employing infiltrators. This kind od statement, in a party's vision document rises serious questions about policies that may be set into motion on employees and labourers of a particular denmination.

This campaign is ominous, just as it was when, in the April of 2014, the then prime minister in waiting, Narendra Modi said at a rally in Srirampur, “"BJP's position is very clear, votebank politics has destroyed the country… Those who are Bangladeshi infiltrators, will have to go back," welcoming those with Hindu blood from across the border.

This campaign pitch by Modi and followed by others had drawn rich dividends for the BJP in the Lok Sabha polls of May 2014. The party’s vote share had gone up from 11.47 per cent in the 2011 state assembly elections in Assam to 36.5 per cent in May 2014. Since that date, 22 months later, the election fortunes of the BJP have slumped if Delhi (February 2015) and Bihar (November 2015) are anything to go by. With little else to show on its score card however, the RSS-driven BJP appears, in Assam at least, of sticking close to its winning strategy: hate speech and communal polarisation. Assamese or ‘illegal migrant’? What ‘identity’ of people means to different parties ahead of polls.

Modi’s campaign at the end of April of 2014 found an echo in the 2016 plank of the party this time making a bid for power in Assam. Jaitley used a press conference to releasing his party’s “Vision” for Assam to refer repeatedly to “infiltrators”, a term that has come to mean Bengali-speaking Muslims settled in the state. That document promises ‘the people’ ‘that a law will be enacted to “deal sternly” with industries, businesses, Small and Medium Enterprises or any other agencies employing infiltrators’.

Meanwhile, Assam’s leading newspaper today, The Sentinel reported the day after Jaitley’s Guwahati sojourn that the Tribal Sangha has announced its intention of burn copies of BJP's Assam vision document.

The reason, the Sangha feels, is the Document not laying the required stress on the development of the indigenous Scheduled Tribes other than according ST status to the six ethnic groups and a grant of Rs 1,000 crore for the BTC. The AATS also called all tribes of Assam to boycott of the BJP in the 2016 Assembly elections in the State for its disrespect to the indigenous tribes of the State.The decision was taken not just to boycott the BJP in the Assembly election but also burn copies of the Assam Vision Document of the party. The speakers at a meeting of the Sangha on March 26 reported by The Sentinel said that the head ‘tribal development’ in the Assam Vision Document of the BJP has only two aspects – according ST status to the six ethnic groups of the States and Rs 1,000-crore Central assistance for the BTC. “This is nothing but an utter disrespect to the indigenous tribes of the State. This vision document has also laid bare the anti-tribal policy of the BJP,” the AATS leaders said, and added: “So much so that the BJP has been out to deprive the State STs of their rights given by the Constitution of India.”

The meeting clearly spelt out that the AATS was not against according ST status to the six ethnic groups in the State. “The NDA Government at the Centre has resolved to accord ST status to Assam’s six ethnic groups that have been declared other backward classes (OBCs). However, the Centre is silent on the steps to be taken to solve the problems to be faced by the existing STs in the State in the aftermath of inclusion of six more communities in the State as STs. What is baffling is that the head ‘tribal development’ in the vision document speaks of developing communities that have not been declared STs now after giving them ST status. How come the Centre feel that Rs 1,000 Central assistance to the BTC will ensure development of all tribes in Assam? An Assam vision document bereft of issues like preservation of tribal blocks and belts, providing land to tribal farmers through the Forest Rights Act, scholarship for ST students, socio-cultural and economic development of the tribal people of the State is an utter disrespect to the tribals of the State,” various speakers at the meeting said.

Right now, on the eve of polls to five states, the relevant question is whether hate speech and communal polarization is going to work as it has proven for the RSS-driven BJP before.A sample survey by Indiaspends reveals how hate speech crimes have yielded heavy benefits to the ruling BJP during the parliamentary elections of 2014. The survey sums up that candidates with hate-speech cases against them have a 30% greater chance of winning elections, as this survey by Indiaspends shows. This analysis has been undertaken from the self-disclosed crime records of candidates who have contested various elections nationwide over the last 12 years. To put these data in perspective, candidates with no criminal cases boost their victory chances to only 10%, half that of candidates with criminal cases of any kind. Of the 70 candidates surveyed, unsurprisingly, the RSS-driven Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) tops the list with 28 candidates! So, being guilty of hate-speech with a case registered provides a candidate with a better chance of victory if the last Lok Sabha election samples are anything to go by. At least until May 2014.

Since however several elections have come and gone. Year 2015, barely six months after Modi and BJP’s sweeping victory, signaled a clear mood shift. Despite every effort by the BJP’s top brass to capitalise on the Modi mascot (even US President, Barrack Obama’s visit), the Aam Aadmi Party broom swept aside Modi an BJP’s any dream of victory.

Bihar in early November 2015 capped this trend. Despite all out efforts to raise communal temperatures in the state, despite humungous (and un-accounted) expenditures – as many as 40 helicopters a day air dropped central ministers for campaigning in the state every day – the Mahagathbandhan of the Nitish-Laloo kind kept hatred and polarisation at bay.

In April 2014, the writer had written a commentary on Modi’s campaign in the north eastern part of India that was overtly communal. This is relevant today as Assam once more gears up to face an overtly communal campaign led by none less than the leading lights of the government at the Centre. What is greater relevance is the real and perceived inaction of the Tarun Gogoi-led state government to act resolutely against perpetrators of hate speech in Assam.

Article in April-May 2014

Finally the cat is out of the bag and it is left to be seen whether it will become, as the BJP and its mascot, a rather shrill PM-in-waiting wants it, a cat among the pigeons. Or will it in fact become the proverbial albatross with which the BJP will have to bow it’s rather thick-skinned neck.

Page 41 of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s manifesto speaks of the contentious issues that the RSS first raised through its rabid wing, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) in the mid 1980s, and not just enflamed this preciounation, but sowed the seeds of a bitter poison that has still not been bled from its veins. In the name of tushtikaran (appeasement) of the minorities it justified the basest of acts perpetrated through violence against India’s largest minority, the Muslims.

Rewarded for this bloodletting through victories at the ballot box (remember the proverbial increase in seats up to the magical figure of 182) it then set a bout it’s agenda launched cynically when the man at the head of the rath, India’s former deputy prime minister and home minister LK Advani had set in motion post Emergency in the Janata government in 1977, fill key positions in the bureaucracy, police, educational institutions and even the judiciary with men and women who owe allegiance not to Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Constitution but to an ideology that believes in the supremacy of one kind of Indian over another.

The fact that India’s lofty institutions of governance caved in to this ideology meant and means that an Advani guilty of a criminal act of witnessing the demolition of a place of religious belief (and conspiring towards the same, remember rallies he held at Mathura and Kashi before December 6, 1992) could rise to occupy the third most important position in the Indian executive.

This overt, even brazen politics of hatred and violence for which the parliamentary wing of the RSS has never been held accountable, the Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP) now covets for itself not just a central government but a man at the helm who has gone several steps further in the crime notching charts then the offences committed in full public eye on December 6, 1992.

Even if one sets aside the crimes committed in 2002 and since within Gujarat, to be part of a well heeled conspiracy to allow the Godhra tragedy for the vengeful reprisal killings in 19 districts at 300 locations within the state—crimes that include the willful subversion of justice and the destruction of documents—lets zero in on election season (2014) and list the acts of hate speech committed in the here and now.

After voting on April 30, 2014 in Gujarat, the Man who would be PM appeared to clearly violate the Representation of People’s Act by a crude campaigning for his party and himself as he emerges from the booth at Ahmedabad. The Election Commission reacted but the agency that investigates the offence is the selfsame one and the official the very same, Himanshu Shukla who was given the task by RK Raghavan of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) of “giving a clean chit to Modi in the Zakia Jafri case”!

This campaign pitch by Modi and followed by others had drawn rich dividends for the BJP in the Lok Sabha polls of May 2014. The party’s vote share had gone up from 11.47 per cent in the 2011 state assembly elections in Assam to 36.5 per cent in May 2014. Since that date, 22 months later, the election fortunes of the BJP have slumped if Delhi (February 2015) and Bihar (November 2015) are anything to go by. With little else to show on its score card however, the RSS-driven BJP appears, in Assam at least, of sticking close to its winning strategy: hate speech and communal polarisation.

Rewind now to Assam and the tragic violence in Kokrajhar that took place during electioneering in the week following Modi’s rally in April 2014. The prime responsibility for the breakdown of the rule of law must lie with the Congress Tarun Gogoi government but the filthy speeches, hate filled and targeted of the Man who would be PM, since February 2014, created the ripe hate filled climate for the Bodos to strike and must in claw ensure his criminal prosecution. Immediately after the filthy speech of the man made at a rally on April 1, 2014 what happened?

‘On April 1, immediately after Narendra Modi’s rally in Biswanath Chariali, a local BJP leader, Bhavdev Goswami, told a TV channel that the BJP had the support of the NDFB [National Democratic Front of Bodoland] rebels. At Sri Rampur on the Assam-West Bengal border, Modi said he would drive out all Bangladeshis after May 16.’
[The relevance of May 16 is that the BJP expects to win the marathon election held now, which ends on May 12, whose results will be declared on May 16, 2014.].

Interestingly, the NDFB is an armed separatist outfit which seeks to obtain a sovereign Bodoland for the Bodo people in Assam, India. It is designated as a terrorist organisation by the government of India. According to the Assam police, the NDFB’s Sangbijit group is behind the killings in the massacre of Muslims since May 1, though the group has denied its role in a press statement.

The published reports from Assam show that on April 1, Bhavdev Goswami claimed in front of a television camera that he along with some other party workers had a meeting with members of two NDFB factions — Sangbijit and Ranjan Daimary — at Bhalukpung and they had pledged support to the BJP for the Lok Sabha polls. The BJP candidate from Tezpur constituency, RP Sarma, also reportedly told the TV channel that he was aware of the meeting. The BJP’s Sonitpur West district president Ritubaran Sarma later denied that any such meeting took place.

These video casettes of these channels can clearly provide independent and exemplary proof of the claims of the Assam police. Besides the fact that the NDFB was opposing the Congress was clear.

On March 27, 2014 when Rahul Gandhi held a rally at the same rally where Modi spewed poison that led to bloodshed, the NDFB had declared a bandh. Certain sources in government have also alleged that the extremist elements in Bodoland People’s Front, an alliance partner of Tarun Gogoi-led state government, were also involved in the recent violence in Bodoland Autonomous Territorial Districts. The BPF is also in power in the BTAD. It is also alleged that one such extremist leader of the BPF, Pramila Rani made a provocative and incendiary comment on April 30 threatening local Muslims since they did not vote for her candidate from the Kokrajhar seat Chandan Brahma. Chandan Brahma is currently transport minister in the Gogoi cabinet.

Will the Gogoi Government act against this extremist element is also a key question? Muslims are a major constituent of this group that fielded Naba Kumar alias Hira Sarania, a former United Liberation Front of Asom rebel, as an independent candidate in Kokrajhar. Non-Bodos including other tribes have never won this seat despite constituting two-thirds of the population.

The leadership of the BPF has been alleged to have been responsible for instigating cadres to attack non-Bodo villagers, particularly Muslims, because they realized it could lose the Kokrajhar seat. Hundreds of Muslims and other minority groups have fled their villages to safer locations fearing a rerun of the 2012 communal clashes that took the lives of 108 people. According to India Today, indefinite curfew has been clamped in Baska and Kokrajhar districts. The union home ministry has sent 10 companies of central paramilitary forces to Kokrajhar and Baksa.

The Assam government cannot and must not be allowed to escape responsibility for the violence. Key to the accountability that citizens must demand is criminal prosecution of not just those who made incendiary speeches who hail from the national stage and those who belong to possibly the NDFB but if proven even those in alliance with the government in power. Will the Assam government that lays claim to equality and non discrimination (secularism as its creed) have the moral and political courage to take the bull by its horns? We as concientious citizens must ensure that it does so.

Narendra Modi’s other communal speeches have included what he said in Faizabad and elsewhere especially after the phases to ‘urban, cosmopolitan India’ were concluded and the phases to the north east and Uttar Pradesh remained. (EC seeks report on Modi’s Faizabad rally, Modi Invokes Lord Ram to woo voters in Faizabad )

Assamese Muslims now live in fear (April-May 2014). Reuters reported that Anwar Islam, a Muslim who had come to buy food in Barama, a town about 30 kilometres from the villages in the Baksa district where the violence erupted on Thursday and Friday, was heard saying, ‘We are scared to live in our village, unless security is provided by the government.’ He said men armed with rifles had come to his village, Masalpur, on bicycles and had then fired indiscriminately and set huts on fire. A relevant view can be read here

As I write this article on a Sunday, 32 people have died, all Muslims, as a result of the latest pogrom in the BATD of the state of Assam. The district administration in the adjoining Dhubri district has opened up two relief camps. The death toll is expected to go up with many reported missing.

Targeted massacre of minorities has no place in our time, especially in a state that touts itself as a model of democracy and secularism. Such crimes only strengthen the dark forces on all sides, and often have ramifications that go beyond the sources of the trouble.

The Indian government owes it to its people to rein upon such evil fascist forces that have managed to thrive unscathed, often fattened by the local government that is supposed to protect the victims. The Indian Election commission should also look into the matter of hate speech delivered by chauvinist politicians whether such speeches had violated rules during the election time. Simply sending a notice and not pursuing prosecutions under the Representation of People’s Act is in fact allowing the erosion of basic and fundamental values of the Constitution by the forces of majoritarian fascism.

There is little doubt that BJP leaders’ xenophobic speeches have catalysed targeted pogrom in Assam. Justice demands that they be held accountable for their criminal role. Otherwise, all those bloated claims about Indian secularism are mere hogwash and nothing else. The government in power must also be held to account: will it prosecute those who attempted to deny those from Kokrajhar who form a majority of the voters to vote for a candidate of their choice?

If the state does not initiate prosecutions, we as citizens must do so…like we did in Gujarat post 2002. Towards that end…..

BJP Vision Document 2014

(A version of this column appeared in the Rashtriya Sahara on May 9, 2014 titled Secularism on Trial)

Nailing the sangh parivar’s lies: How the Naujawan Bharat Sabha is doing it

March 27, 2016

Welcome: NBS library at Mankhurd, Mumbai

In Mankhurd, a Mumbai suburb, the RSS is faced with a grassroots problem. Undeterred by the local police’s attempt to act at Hindutva’s behest, activists of the Naujawan Bharat Sabha (NBS) in the area have been distributing leaflets in the area and in local trains exposing the fraudulent bid of the sangh parivar to claim Shaheed Bhagat Singh as their own.

When threats did not scare the NBS, the sanghis got the local police, and even the anti-terrorism squad to intervene. The police raided the NBS office, confiscated the anti-RSS leaflets and tried to intimidate the activists. Not to be so easily cowed down, the activists challenged the police to explain under which law of the land it was acting to prevent the NBS from exercising their constitutional right to free speech and democratic dissent.

Recognising the blatant illegality of their act, the police had to back out, for the moment at least. Notwithstanding the continuing veiled threats from the sanghis, the NBS activists have printed a fresh lot of their leaflets in Hindi and Marathi and have resumed distribution of the same in Mankhurd locality and in the local trains.

Written in simple language, the opening para of the leaflet reads: “Brothers and sisters, all over India some people have appointed themselves as the sole custodians of patriotism (deshbhakti) and nationalism (rashtrabhakti). These are the same people who played no role in India’s freedom struggle. These are the same people who had conspired with the British against young Indians like Shaheed Bhagat Singh ready to stake their lives for freedom’s sake. These are the same people who took their inspiration from Hitler and Mussolini and who before independence bowed before the Imperial Queen. Since when have they become the custodians of patriotism”?

Shockingly, they (police) answered that although there is nothing wrong in those pamphlet but people belonging to RSS do not want these pamphlets to be distributed. Finally, when the police could not come up with any substantial argument they had to release me.

Referring to the incidents at JNU and the misconduct of “fascist goons” even inside court premises in open defiance of the Supreme Court’s directions, the leaflet argues that the real reason for the Modi government’s vendetta against the JNU students was simply because “these students were protesting against the anti-student, anti-worker, anti-poor policies of the Modi government”. What’s happening in India today, the leaflet added was “no different from the lawlessness which had prevailed in Germany and Italy under fascist regimes where too self-proclaimed patriots and nationalists ruled the streets”.

The acute embarrassment of the local RSS-BJP activists at this expose of their inglorious past and devious present may well be imagined. Unable to refute the content of the leaflet, they turned to the local police (The BJP-Shiv Sena coalition is in power in Maharashtra) to silence the NBS activists.

Recounting the developments, NBS activist Virat Choudhary told SabrangIndia:

Naujawan Bharat Sabha (NBS) is a youth organisation which follows the ideals of great martyrs like Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev, Rajguru and its goal is to eradicate social ills like casteism, communalism, etc. from society. We are committed to carry forward the legacy of the great revolutionaries and have been continuously waging struggle against the hateful propaganda of communal groups. Precisely because of this, NBS members have been getting frequent threats from such groups. And now the local police has been acting on the behest of RSS.

Recently we decided to publish and distribute leaflets in the area to expose the political designs of RSS and the Modi government.

On the night of March 22, Mumbai police cracked-down at the NBS office in Lallubhai Compound, Mankhurd. The three policemen forced the activists to open the gate and started interrogating. They asked the activists to show their identity cards and other documents such as rent agreement. The only reason for their raid at that hour of night was that the pamphlets distributed by NBS were not liked by the RSS people. The policemen took some of the pamphlets and left saying that the activists have to report at Mankhurd police station in the morning.

The most disturbing thing was that the police which is supposed to safeguard the people and their democratic rights, was trying to intimidate the NBS activists, forcing them to silence their voices against RSS. Moreover one of the policemen was not even in his uniform. When I asked him for his identity, he gave a vague reply.

Clearly, knocking on the door of NBS after midnight and interrogating the activists was aimed at threatening us. In the morning another policemen, again without uniform showed up at the office and asked me to follow him. When asked about his identity, the policeman didn't show his badge or identity card; instead he replied that people call him ‘Kumbar Bhai’.

I was mentally harassed and questioned about the pamphlet at the police station for about two hours. The police was pressurising me to handover all the pamphlets to the police. I refused and demanded to be told if there is anything against the law or constitution in the pamphlets.

Shockingly, they answered that although there is nothing wrong in those pamphlet but people belonging to RSS do not want these pamphlets to be distributed. Finally, when the police could not come up with any substantial argument they had to release me.

But within one hour, two persons from ATS (Anti-terrorism squad) came to NBS's office to ask for rent agreement for verification. They tried to intimidate the activists by indicating that they might have to vacate the room unless the NBS stopped its pamphleteering. As elsewhere, instead of performing its duty, ensuring the masses the freedom of expression and speech, the police is acting unconstitutionally at the behest of the RSS and the ruling party.

When there is nothing unlawful in the pamphlets distributed why is police troubling the young activists? What else is the reason behind raiding the office after midnight, if not intimidating them? What is the motive behind ordering them to stop distributing the pamphlets? The whole incident raises serious questions on the role of police and its autonomy. If anything this is suggestive of its unholy alliance with the ruling party.

Refusing to be cowed down by the bullying tactics of the police or the continuing veiled threats from the sanghis, NBS activists have printed a fresh lot of leaflets and are back distributing them in Mankhurd.

SabrangIndia tried contacting the Mankhurd police today (March 27) to get their version of the entire episode. A phone call on the landline number listed in the directory of the Mumbai police (22926006) was greeted with the response, “this number does not exist.” Attempts to contact the Mankhurd police on two alternate landline numbers provided by the city’s police control room (24783300, 28917286) yielded the same number-does-not-exist response.

When contacted this afternoon, Virat Choudhary and his fellow NBS activists were out on action, distributing leaflets on the streets and in the suburban trains.

What might the RSS and the local police try next?

NBS pamphlet can be found here.

Withdraw Police, Suspend VC, Order Probe: 300 International Academics on HCU

March 27, 2016

Statement of Solidarity
Over 300 International by Academics, Activists, Artists and Writers stand with the University of Hyderabad (Hyderabad Central University-HCU)

We, academicians, activists, artists and writers, condemn the ongoing brutal attacks on and unlawful detention of peacefully protesting faculty and students at the University of Hyderabad by the
University administration and the police. We also condemn the restriction of access to basic necessities such as water and food on campus.

The students and faculty members of the University of Hyderabad were protesting the reinstatement of Dr. Appa Rao Podile as the Vice-Chancellor despite the ongoing judicial enquiry against him related to the circumstances leading to the death of the alit student Rohith Vemula on January 17, 2016.
Students and faculty members of the university community are concerned that this may provide him the opportunity to tamper with evidence and to influence witnesses. Suicides by Dalit students have been recurring in the University of Hyderabad and other campuses across the country. The issue spiraled into a nationwide students’ protest with the death of the Dalit scholar Rohith Vemula. The protests have pushed into the foreground public discussion and debate on the persistence of caste-based discrimination in educational institutions, and surveillance and suppression of dissent and intellectual debate in university spaces.

Since the morning of March 22 when Dr. Appa Rao returned to campus, the students and staff have been in a siege-like situation. The peacefully protesting staff and students were brutally lathi-charged by the police, and 27 people were taken into custody. The 27 detainees were untraceable for 48 hours, brutally tortured, and denied legal access. In short, all legal procedures of detention have been suspended. After the incident, the university has been locked down with no access to food, water, electricity, and Internet connectivity.
Students were brutally assaulted when they opened community kitchens. Lawyers and members of human rights organization as well the ordinary citizens of the city were denied access to students. University of Hyderabad is one of India’s biggest public universities.

We have followed, with deep concern, similar violent attacks and undemocratic crackdown on students on the campuses of Jawaharlal Nehru University, the Film and Television Institute of India, the University of Allahabad, Jadavpur University, Burdwan University, and others across the country. That the highest administrative authorities in the university have allowed the silencing of debate and dissent is unfortunate. We are disturbed by the pattern of growing nexus between student vigilante groups, youth wing of the ruling party, state and university authorities in colleges and university campuses across the country in order to mobilize the state machinery against vulnerable students. This has created a climate of fear and oppression in the country, and continually violates fundamental human and Constitutional rights of students.

We stand in support of the protesting students, staff and faculty of the University of Hyderabad and demand the following:

— Immediate withdrawal of police from the campus.
— Immediate release of, and withdrawal of all cases against, all arrested students and faculty.
— Suspension of the Vice-Chancellor P. Appa Rao.
— Judicial enquiry into the role of the HRD Ministry, the HRD Minister and Mr. Bandaru Dattatreya in inciting violence against Dalits on campus.
— Independent enquiry into the incidents of violence on the campus including the role of the ABVP in vandalising the Vice-Chancellor’s office.
— Action against police personnel named by students in their complaints.
— Passage of the “Rohith Act” against caste discrimination in education.

Signatories:

Lawrence Cohen, Director, Institute for South Asia Studies, University of California, Berkeley
Navtej K Purewal Deputy Director, South Asia Institute SOAS University of London
Akhil Gupta, Director, Center for India and South Asia (CISA), UCLA
Michael Davis, Professor Emeritus, Department of Creative Writing, University of California Riverside
Anuradha Mittal, Executive Director, The Oakland Institute
Barbara Harriss-White, Oxford University
Kavita Krishnan, Secretary AIPWA
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, University Professor in the Humanities, Columbia University
G. Arunima, Professor and Chair, Centre for Women’s Studies, School of Social Sciences, JNU
Sandeep Pandey, former Visiting Faculty, IIT, BHU, Varanasi
Michael D. Yates, Professor Emeritus, University of Pittsburgh, United States
Abha Sur, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Akeel Bilgrami, Sidney Morgenbesser Professor of Philosophy, Columbia University
Haroon Akram-Lodhi, Chair, Department of International Development Studies, Trent University, Canada
Apoorvanand, University of Delhi
Marjorie Griffin Cohen, Professor of Political Science and Chair of Women’s Studies Department, Simon Fraser University, Canada
Gerald Epstein, Professor of Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Surinder S. Jodhka, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Syracuse University
Sangeeta Kamat, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Dr. Shailaja Paik, University of Cincinnati
Kevin B. Anderson, Professor of Sociology, University of California Santa Barbara
Tithi Bhattacharya, Professor of History, Purdue University
Pranav Jani, The Ohio State University
Vinay Gidwani, University of Minnesota
Nivedita Menon, Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Alpa Shah, London School of Economics
Jayati Ghosh, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Srirupa Roy, University of Göttingen, Germany
Rahul Varman, IIT Kanpur
Ashwini Tambe, University of Maryland, College Park
Jens Lerche, SOAS, University of London
Gillian Hart, Professor, University of California, Berkeley
Adrian Wilson, Social Anthropology, London School of Economics
Ayesha Kidwai, Professor ,Jawaharlal Nehru University
Meher Engineer
Aishwary Kumar, School of Humanities & Sciences, Stanford University
Ajantha Subramanian, Professor of Anthropology and South Asian Studies, Harvard University
Jyoti Puri, Chair and Professor of Sociology, Simmons College
Abdul JanMohamed, Professor, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Nathaniel Roberts, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Goettingen, Germany
Paula Chakravartty, New York University
Atul Sood, Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Prof. Mohan Rao, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Yasmin Saikia, Professor of History, Arizona State University
Nandini Chandra, Delhi University
Elisabeth Weber, Professor, University of California, Santa Barbara
C. P. Chandrasekhar, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Prof. Rupa Viswanath, University of Goettingen, Germany
Rama Baru, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Svati Shah, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Immanuel Ness, Professor, City University of New York
Balmurli Natrajan, William Paterson University
Veena Hariharan, School of Arts and Aesthetics, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Rajat Datta, Professor, Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Geraldine Forbes, Professor, State University of New York, Oswego
Joya Misra, Professor of Sociology and Public Policy, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Richard Seymour, London School of Economics
Susan Visvanathan, Professor of Sociology, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Dr. Pérez de Mendiola, Richard Armour Professor of Modern Languages, Chair, Dept. of Latin American, Caribbean and Spanish Literatures and Cultures & Humanities, Scripps College
Peter Spiegler, Asst. Prof., Dept. of Economics, UMass, Amherst
Swati Birla, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Atreyi Dasgupta, Baylor College of Medicine
Kuver Sinha, Syracuse University
Sirisha Naidu, Wright State University
Siddhartha Mitra, Programmer, Rockefeller University
Samantha Agarwal, PhD Candidate, Johns Hopkins University
Anup Gampa, PhD Candidate, University of Virginia
Anu Mandavilli, Friends of South Asia
Deepankar Basu, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Nandini Dhar, Assistant Professor, Florida International University
Michael Levien, Assistant Professor, Johns Hopkins University
Devika Dutt, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Smita Ramnarain, Assistant Professor of Economics, Siena College
Taki Manolakos, Wright State University
Valentina Dallona, Johns Hopkins University
Iveta Jusova, Carleton College, USA
Aditi Chandra, University of California, Merced
Hee-Young Shin, Wright State University
Anjali Arondekar, UC Santa Cruz
Jinee Lokaneeta, Drew University
Ajay Chandra, University of Warwick
Xiao Yu, Peking University
Bettina Apthekar, UC Santa Cruz
Anirban Karak, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Natasha S K, Syracuse University
Mitul Barua, Syracuse University
Simmy Makhijani, San Francisco State University
Sofia Gavtadze, Solidarity Network, Georgi
Avishek Konar, Alumnus, The Ohio State University
Robert Carley, Wright State University
Dia Da Costa, Associate Professor, University of Alberta
Ann Smock, University of California, Berkeley
Liz Mount, Syracuse University
Terese V Gagnon, Syracuse University
Giorgi Kobakhidze, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
Levin Ahmed, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Christos Mais, Universiteit Leiden
Taveeshi Singh, Syracuse University
Aniruddha Das, Columbia University
Safar Safqat, St Mary’s College of Maryland
Ramaa Vasudevan, Colorado State University
Osman Keshawarz, doctoral student, University of Massachusetts at Amherst
Narendra Subramaniam, McGill University
Ammel Sharon, University of Pennsylvania
Gventa Gventsadze
Borisi Cirekidze
Minakshi Menon, Max Planck Institute, Berlin
Dmitri Khuskivadze
Salo Kaladze
Judith Rodenbeck, UC Riverside
Ashok Prasad, Colorado State University
Priyanka Srivastava, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Arani Roy, Brandeis University
Dag Erik Berg, University of Gottingen, Germany
Rahul Nair, Antioch College, USA
Gajendran Ayyathurai, Goettingen University, Germany
Balaji Narasimhan, William Paterson University, United States
Ember Skye Kanelee, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Jungyeon Suh, Independent Researcher, United States
Kannan Srinivasan
Roli Verma, University of New Mexico
Piya Chatterjee, Scripps College, US
Lalit Batra, University of Minnesota
Avanti Mukherjee, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Tyler Hansen, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Subho Basu, McGill University, Canada
Laurie Nisonoff, Hampshire College, United States
Satya Mohapatra, MIT
Julia Corwin, University of Minnesota
Parama Roy, UC Davis
Noeleen McIlvenna, Wright State University
Daniel Thompson, Johns Hopkins University
Jesse Knutson, University of Hawaii, Manoa
Prashant Keshavmurthy, McGill University, Canada
Anasuya Sengupta, Berkeley, USA
Uditi Sen, Hampshire College
Zarrina Juraqulova, Denison University, USA
Kiran Asher, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Prakash Kashwan, University of Connecticut, Storrs
Hamid Rezai, Pitzer College, USA
Anindya Dey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Lara Deeb, Scripps College, USA
Richa Nagar, University of Minnesota
Vatsal Naresh, Columbia University
Niharika Yadav, Princeton University
Bedatri Datta Choudhury, NYU
Sanjiv Gupta, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Suvadip Sinha, University of Minnesota
Ipsita Mandal, Perimeter Institute, Canada
Poulomi Pal, Fulbright scholar
Asmita Rangari, Activist, New Delhi
Shipra Nigam, Activist, New Delhi
Srinivas Lankala, Independent media scholar, Hyderabad
Carolyn Elliott, University of Vermont
Aviroop Sengupta, Columbia University
Madhura Lohokare, Syracuse University
Arijit Sen, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Suyapa Portillo Villeda, Pitzer College, USA
Oishik Sircar, University of Melbourne
Arjun Bagchi, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Greg Anderson, Ohio State University
Prarit Agarwal, Seoul National University, Korea
Sayori Ghoshal, Columbia University
Uponita Mukherjee, Columbia University
Suyapa Portillo Villeda, Pitzer College
Patricia Morton, University of California, Riverside
Sofia Checa, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Arpan Roy, John Hopkins University
Cynthia Correa, The University of Texas at Austin
Parvathy Binoy, Syracuse University, Syracuse
Jonathon Hurd, RN, Seattle
Varuni Bhatia, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Erin McElroy, UCSC, Director, Anti-Eviction Mapping Project
Geert Dhondt, John Jay College, The City University of New York
Mithun Bhowmick, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Alladi Sitaram, Retired Professor, Indian Statistical Institute
Dr Kasturi Ray, San Francisco State University
Alicia Giron, National University of Mexico
Probal Dasgupta, Indian Statistical Institute
Larry Halpern, Wittenberg University
Suchitra Mathur, Faculty, IIT Kanpur, India
Aditi Saraf, Johns Hopkins University
Ketaki Jaywant, University of Minnesota
Nagesh Rao, Colgate University
Irfan Ahmad, ACU Melbourne, Australia
Suvrat Raju, TIFR
Saikat Ghosh, IIT Kanpur
Samyak Ghosh, Columbia University
Catherine Liu, UC Irvine
Francis Cody, University of Toronto
Bhavani Raman, University of Toronto
Erika Suderburg, University of California Riverside
Saptarshi Mandal, Assistant Professor, Jindal Global Law School, Sonipat
Anannya Bohidar, Graduate Student, South Asia Studies, UPenn
Rahul Pandey, visiting faculty, IIM Lucknow
Tania Bhattacharyya, Columbia University
Aditi Sarkar, Architect, Las Cruces, New Mexico
Shakti Sathish Nambiar, Melbourne Law School, University of Melbourne
Krishna Melnattur, Washington University School of Medicine
Rupal Oza, Hunter College, City University of New York
Maroona Murmu, Assistant Professor, Jadavpur University
Gayatri Chatterjee, Symbiosis School of Liberal Art
Sipra Mukherjee, Professor, West Bengal State University
Raja Swamy, Asst. Prof., Dept. of Anthropology, University of Tennessee
Anandavardhanan, Department of Mathematics, IIT Bombay
Priyanka Bhattacharya, The Doon School, Dehradun
Anuradha Roy, Jadavpur University
Ramesh Sreekantan, Statistics and Mathematics Unit Indian Statistical Institute, Bangalore.
Srinath Jagannathan, Indian Institute of Management Indore
Tanima Sharma, PhD student, University of Chicago
Meena Alexander, City University of New York
Sharmila Sreekumar, IIT Bombay
Venkatesh K Subramanian, IIT Kanpur
Food Sovereignty Alliance, India
The Ghadar Alliance, US
Nandita Narain, St.Stephen’s College, Delhi University
Deepa Kurup, University of Oxford
Ramesh Bairy, IIT Bombay
Papori Bora, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Ritwik Balo
Ranjani Mazumdar, School of Arts and Aesthetics, Jawaharlal Nehru University
PK Vijayan
Dr. Papia Sengupta, CPS/SSS
Krishna V V, CSSP/SSS
A.K. Ramakrishnan, Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Arunima S Mukherjee
George Chkhaidze
Elizabeth Abel
Dr. Kochurani Abraham, Kerala
Saumyajit Bhattacharya
Pradip Datta, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Rohit Azad, Center for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Deepak K Mishra, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Tulay Atay–Avsar, Mustafa Kemal University, Turkey
Dr. Vikas Bajpai, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Saradindu Bhaduri, Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi and ISS, The Hague
Dr Erica Wald, Goldsmiths, University of London
Navaneetha Mokkil
Manidipa Sen, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Ameet Parameswaran, Jawaharlal Nehru University
K. B. Usha, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Gopinath Ravindran
Avinash Kumar, CISLS, SSS, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Puja Rani, University of Delhi
Ritoo Jerath, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Hannah Carlan, Department of Anthropology, UCLA
Ganga Bhavani Manthini
Sucharita Sen, Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Dr. Mallarika Sinha Roy, Centre for Women’s Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Archana Prasad, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Dinesh Abrol, Institute for Studies in Industrial Development.
Vikas Rawal, Professor, Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce, Delhi University
Simona Sawhney, IIT Delhi
Dr Debjani Sengupta, Indraprastha College for Women, University of Delhi
Anirban Gupta-Nigam, University of California, Irvine
Nandita Badami, University of California, Irvine
Sneha Gaddam, PhD Candidate, University of Leicester
Prabhu Mohapatra Department of History Univ of Delhi
Farida Khan, Univ. of Wisconsin Parkside
Pankaj Mehta, Dept. of Physics, Boston University
Tista Bagchi, University of Delhi
Ra Ravishankar, Bangalore
Sambuddha Chaudhuri, University of Pennsylvania
Ani Maitra, Colgate University
Ethel Brooks, Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Women’s and Gender Studies and Sociology, Rutgers University
Abha Dev Habib, Miranda House, University of Delhi
Surajit Mazumdar, Center for Economic Studies and Planning, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sonajharia Minz, Professor, School of Computer & Systems Sciences, JNU
Vinay Kumar Ambedkar
Naveen Gaur, Associate Professor, Dyal Singh College, University of Delhi
Margot Weiss, Wesleyan University
Vivekananda Mukherjee, Professor, Dept. of Economics, Jadavpur University
Dr Shakira Hussein, National Centre of Excellence for Islamic Studies, Asia Institute, University of Melbourne
Udaya Kumar, Professor, CES, School of Language, Literature and Culture Studies, JNU
Kriti Budhiraja, Graduate Student, University of Minnesota
Radhika Balakrishnan, Rutgers University
Seema Saha Poddar
Poulomi Saha, Assistant Professor of English, UC Berkeley
Swapnil Deshmukh, Mumbai University
Dr Lata Singh
Tyler Feaver, Wright State University
Pavithra Vasudevan, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
Santosh Rohit Yerrabolu, Buffalo, NY
Professor V V Krishna, Centre for Studies in Science Policy, SSS, JNU
Amy E. Alterman, Graduate Student, University of California Los Angeles
Ian Duncan, Professor of English, University of California, Berkeley
Bir singh, Asstt. Professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Delhi
Amit Singh, Postdoctoral Fellow, Northwestern University
Poonam Srivastava, University of Chicago, Postdoc Researcher
Omnia El Shakry, University of California, Davis
Jhuma Sen, O.P. Jindal Global University, India
Corey Payne and Chase Alston, Co-Presidents of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), Johns Hopkins University
Sankaran Krishna, Professor, Dept. of Political Science, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Mytheli Sreenivas, Professor, Ohio State University
Preeti Shekar, Asian College of Journalism
Susan Himmelweit, Emeritus Professor of Economics, Faculty of Social Sciences, Open University, Walton Hall, UK
Kalyani Monteiro Jayasankar, Graduate Student, Princeton University
Nicolau Dols, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Spain
Kartik Misra, Graduate Student, Dept. of Economics, UMass, Amherst
Dolly Daftary, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan
Sugata Ray, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science
Kunal Chattopadhyay, Professor of Comparative Literature, Jadavpur University
Soma Marik, Associate Professor of History, RKSM Vivekananda Vidyabhavan
Pratiksha Baxi, Assoc. Prof., Centre for the Study of Law and Governance, JNU

1...2,5732,5742,575...2,697 Page 2,574 of 2,697

JAGLAG Petition to NHRC dated March 23, 2016

Petition to NHRC, Women Against Sexual Violence and State Repression, February 19, 2016

Letter to Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh, March 13, 2016 on Deteriorating Situation in Chhatisgarh

How a Hate-Speech Record Increases Chances of Election Victory by 3 times

UPDATE:

Union Ministers

Members of Parliament

Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs)

Political party chiefs

How political parties violate their oath given to ECI at the time of registration

Was Father Tom Crucified by ISIS on Good Friday? Catholic sources uncertain

Fate of ISI captive Fr Tom remains uncertain

Re-Using the Communal Card in Assam: BJP Manifesto 2014, Vision Document 2016

Nailing the sangh parivar’s lies: How the Naujawan Bharat Sabha is doing it

Withdraw Police, Suspend VC, Order Probe: 300 International Academics on HCU

Statement of Solidarity
Over 300 International by Academics, Activists, Artists and Writers stand with the University of Hyderabad (Hyderabad Central University-HCU)

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT

UPDATE:

Union Ministers

Members of Parliament

Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs)

Political party chiefs

How political parties violate their oath given to ECI at the time of registration

Fate of ISI captive Fr Tom remains uncertain

Statement of SolidarityOver 300 International by Academics, Activists, Artists and Writers stand with the University of Hyderabad (Hyderabad Central University-HCU)

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT

Statement of Solidarity
Over 300 International by Academics, Activists, Artists and Writers stand with the University of Hyderabad (Hyderabad Central University-HCU)