About Us Contact Us
Home Blog Page 2122

Why does Pakistan bring out the worst in our politics, including misogyny, asks Kapil Sibal?

By
-
0

They do it with bangles

In all the chest beating and muscle flexing over Pakistan and its transgressions at the Line of Control, one object has made its way back into Indian politics: the bangle. On Tuesday, veteran Congress leader Kapil Sibal invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi “to remove your bangles and show what you can do”. He also referred to a speech made by Smriti Irani, now textile minister, at a rally in Indore in 2013, after another incident where an Indian soldier at the Line of Control had been killed and mutilated. Irani had offered to send Manmohan Singh, who was prime minister then, a gift bangles for failing to take appropriate action. The tables had turned now, was Sibal’s triumphant point.

The gift of bangles suggests the old Hindi phrase “chudiyan pehen lo”, which means that those not cut out for a job should stay at home. Like women do, naturally. Bangles have long been a favoured ornament in Indian politics. In 2014, after Aam Aadmi Party leader Somnath Bharti conducted an impromptu raid on Ugandan women living in Delhi’s Khirki Extension, BJP legislator RP Singh saw fit to hurl bangles and lipstick at him. The BJP had then defended the act by saying it was not meant to be “derogatory”. It wouldn’t be, of course, in a political culture where leadership is measured by the size of one’s chest (56 inches is ideal) and voters are told to choose the “vikas purush” over the “videshi bahu”, the Man of Progress over the Foreign Daughter-in-Law.

Femininity, the wearing of bangles, the exercise of restraint and moderation, is associated with weakness or incompetence. The BJP has frequently, but not exclusively, been guilty of peddling a gendered politics that boils down to this: masculinity good, femininity bad, unless sterilised into certain acceptable forms. And when it comes to Pakistan, all the toxic masculinity stored up in our politics roars to life. Even female politicians have learnt to speak its language. Around the time Irani was offering bangles to Manmohan Singh, Sushma Swaraj, who was then the leader of the Opposition, was demanding 10 Pakistani heads for the head of one Indian soldier. Peace at the LoC looked like a remote prospect then, as it does now.

This article was first published on Scroll.in.

Retaliation & Revenge by State or Non-State Actors is Not the Answer: Sukma

By
-
0

The Maoists' statement claiming the Sukma attack was in retaliation
for sexual violence against adivasi women and girls by paramilitary
forces is highly problematic and condemnable, for a variety of
reasons.


Image Courtesy: Times of India

1) The women's movement for long has been stressing that retaliation
and revenge, whether by the State or by non state actors, do not
constitute justice for victims of sexual violence. An organized
military 'retaliation' of this kind is very very different, also, from
any spontaneous resistance or self defence by a woman victim herself.
Such retaliation by the Maoists perpetuates the same macho masculinist
logic that the State also peddles when it upholds death penalty for
rape. Such retaliation says 'We're man enough to avenge our women.'
Like the State, the Maoists might argue that such retaliatory violence
will be a 'deterrent' and so on. Again, women's movements have long
argued against the so-called deterrent potential of draconian
punishments or retaliatory violence.

2) The Maoists' rationale smacks of the logic of collective punishment
– I. E it does not claim to bring individual perpetrators of rape to
justice, or even the individual commanders who encourage and enable
such rapes; instead it kills one lot of CRPF men in retaliation for
acts done by other CRPF men.

3) By claiming the Sukma attack to be retaliation by [read: "against]
sexual violence by CRPF men in Bastar, the Maoists have undermined the
painstaking work by women's groups to seek justice for those acts of
sexual violence. There are women's rights activists and human rights
defenders putting themselves in considerable peril to bring such
instances of sexual violence to light and helping the victims or
victims' families pursue the cases. The Maoists' rationale for the
Sukma action undermines this immensely courageous work.

Finally, some journalists have flagged the possibility that some of
the CRPF jawans' private parts were mutilated in the attack. The
police and CRPF officials have so far denied this. The Maoists have
also denied inflicting such mutilation. So, in this particular case
there is no confirmation yet that bodies were mutilated. But for the
record let us reiterate what we have said often before – that
mutilation of bodies whether by State or non State actors would be
nothing less than an atrocity. If the State forces – police or CRPF –
are covering up an atrocity of this kind anywhere please hold them to
account.
 

 

(The author is Secretary, AIPWA)
 

Supreme Court Judgement on Yogi Adityanath, December 13, 2012

By
-
0

The Supreme Court of India on December 13, 2012 Confirmed the Order of the Allahabd Bench of the High Court Directing that an FIR could be lodged against Yogi Adityanath and Others.

SC Rejects GOI’s attempts to Grant Armed Forces Immunity, Verdict Has Profound Implications

By
-
0

Rejecting a Curative Petition filed by the government of India, the Supreme Court recently upheld its earlier order in which it had said that the
Army cannot use excessive force.

1,528 alleged encounters

Days ago, the Supreme Court rejected a curative petition filed by the government of India. This dismissal, by a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court of an appeal by the Central government for recall of an earlier ruling by a smaller bench of the same court in the case of 1,528 alleged fake encounter killings in Manipur is a historic verdict. Force, torture amidst a culture of impunity has governed the way India’s military and paramilitary have functioned in conflict zones like the north east of India and Jammu and Kashmir.

Hence this dismissal will also have implications for the future of counter-insurgency strategies. The outline of such a force was quite distinctly visible in the dialectic between the government’s curative petition and the wording of its dismissal by the Supreme Court bench. Very briefly, the petition argued that the matter was urgent as the morale of the forces would drop if they were subject to investigation by the local police after every incident. The arguments by the state emphasised that the army needed freedom to use whatever means in its command to tackle what was described as “war-like” situations, actions then should not be open to judicial review.

The judgment rejected the argument that “war-like” situations warrant a free hand to the army, noting that “democracy would be in danger” if the armed forces were permitted to kill citizens on the mere suspicion that they were enemies of the state. It was categorical that there would be “no absolute immunity” from legal prosecution for armed forces personnel on counter-insurgency duties if they are suspected to have caused deaths by the use of excessive and disproportionate force.

The problem is, if this was war, it would imply a conflict of states, thereby giving the insurgents a status that all states would normally avoid. Moreover, if this was war, rules of war, such as the Geneva Conventions and the Hague Conventions, would be deemed applicable, again a prospect no state would concede to. From the government’s point of view, insurgency is therefore definitely not “war”, the noun, but “war-like”, the adjective. But would such semantic acrobatics warrant the use of unaccounted force, as in war? The Supreme Court has said no, urging, instead, all stakeholders “to find a lasting and peaceful solution to the festering problem.”

It was in 1977 that international combat laws attempted to address the grey area created by “non-international armed conflicts” and the Geneva Conventions Protocol II was conceived. The protocol is aimed at bringing violence by non-state forces under the purview of international humanitarian laws. But few states with internal conflicts have ratified it. India, too, though a signatory to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, refused to sign this additional protocol. The ambiguity as to whether insurgencies are “wars”, or merely law and order problems, remains. The use of the military in civil unrest situations, as is being done under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), also remains controversial.

In many ways, the Manipur police commandos, a unit responsible for a great number of the alleged 1,528 fake encounter killings, is one such entity. Although they are not covered by the AFSPA, they still came to be affected by the climate of impunity introduced by prolonged exposure to the AFSPA.

Before the July 2009 photo expose by Tehelka magazine on how a captured former insurgent, Chongkham Sanjit, was eliminated in broad daylight, reporters of local dailies in Imphal would vouch that there were practically daily body counts of suspects killed by the government forces, often police commandos. Some even have frightening anecdotal stories of how they may have saved some would-be encounter victims. In those days, commandos even called up newspaper offices to send someone to cover encounter sites where alleged insurgents had just been shot. After the Sanjit killing expose, and the judicial probe that followed, everything quietened down, suddenly. Practically no more encounters, much fewer gallantry awards, and surprisingly less insurgent activities too.

If the police is often more brutal than the military, when charged and prosecuted it has to answer to the law. In the Sanjit case has demonstrated how much this one attribute can be a check on the impunity of the forces.


Image Courtesy: NDTV.com
 

Over a Century Old Cross Demolished by BJP-Run Corporation in Bandra, Christians Protest

By
-
0


Images Courtesy: Mangolerean.com

The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) demolished a 122-year-old cross in suburban Bandra on the order of the Bombay High Court directing the civic body to remove unauthorized religious structures-the demolition of the cross has now evoked sharp reactions from the Christian community, with the Bombay Catholic Sabha terming the action as an “insult” to the community. The HC had recently ordered removal of as many as 32 temples and 6 crosses from H west ward, which fall under ‘B’ Category. But as per Christian activists the matter will be legally pursued by the Archdiocese of Bombay, and presently makeshift cross has been installed on the site in an effort to offer reassurance to worshipers.

According to Fr Nigel Barrett, spokesman for the archdiocese of Bombay who said, “A notice by Sharad Ughade, Assistant Municipal Commissioner, pertains to a 2010 PIL pending before the Bombay HC, which relates to structures on public property but this was invalid since the cross which was demolished was on private land. Ughade was met with documentary evidence by the owner and community organizations, who had replied in time to the BMC notice. The matter will be pursued legally since the cross was demolished despite this. This move by BMC is an insult to our religion”.

Dolphy D’souza-the Former President of the Bombay Catholic Sabha; Former National Vice-President- All India Catholic Union; and spokesperson for SOUL-Save Our Land, and also convener of Police Reforms Watch speaking to Team Mangalorean over the phone said, ” Mumbai civic body Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s (BMC) decision to demolish a cross at Bandra in Mumbai has sparked controversy. Members of the Christian community in the area allege there is selective action by the civic body, demand action against the Assistant Municipal Commissioner who carried out the act and want Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis to intervene over the issue.”

“The cross was on a private property and not on any public or disputed property-so it should be restored to its original place. There are photographs and evidence to prove that the cross has been there at the particular place since 1895, and the court order which says illegal religious structures should be removed from public places should not apply to this structure since it is on a private land. Though the residents have provided evidence to the civic body officials, it has not been taken into considerations and the razing of the structure by BMC is an ‘unjust’ act. A formal complaint has been given by the residents at the local police station, and an FIR is registered over the issue. A massive protest rally is planned for tomorrow, where we request the Christians to join in large numbers, so that justice is served in this regard” added D’souza.


Images Courtesy: Mangolerean.com

In the meantime, sources from BMC reveal that the Category B structures are the ones which did interfere with the DP (Development Plan) of the city. The letters of the court order were sent to the concerned people and they were requested to remove these religious structures. Also, a meeting was arranged with the representatives of the religious structures along with local councilors. During the meeting, the court order was explained and another request was made to remove the unauthorized religious structures. Accordingly, six temples were found to be removed by themselves. On April 29 a temple and the cross, which were on the road and obstructing traffic movement, were removed. Action will continue in the next week on remaining structures of ‘B’ Category. Police has been providing good support to BMC in this regard.

However, Rita D’sa of Bombay Catholic Sabha termed the demolition of the 19th century cross as an “insult” of the Christian community. “This PIL (in the high court) only relates to religious structures on public property. The notice issued has no application to the said Holy Cross since it was constructed on a private property,” D’sa claimed. The court had directed that all illegal religious structures that have come up after September 29, 2009 should be demolished. A May 2011 Government Resolution (GR) had divided illegal religious structures into various categories. Category B pertains to illegal shrines that interfere with the city’s development plan.


Images Courtesy: Mangolerean.com

Also Read Related Statement Released and sent to the Municipal Commissioner, Mumbai and the Police Commissioner, Mumbai.
*WE DEMAND ARREST OF SHRI SHARAD UGADE, ASSISTANT MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER H WEST WARD, BMC, FOR BLASPHEMY.*
On behalf of the entire Christian Community, we hereby register our strongest protest and displeasure against the Assistant Municipal Commissioner Shri Sharad Ughade, who has illegally and deliberately by taking law in his own hands with the help of Staff of H West Ward, BMC along with Police Protection from Bandra West Police Station intentionally demolished the Holy Cross ( erected in or about 1895) with a Bulldozer with an intent to damage/defile the place of worship which is held sacred by Christians thereby insulting the religion of Christians with clear knowledge by doing so he and others would insult the Christian Community.
– The said Holy Cross is situated on a private land being Plot No.38 situate at C.S. No.A/650 near D’monte Street and Bazar Road, Bandra West Mumbai 400 050.
-The notice issued on 26th April 2017 Assistant Municipal Commissioner Sharad Ughade gives reference to Public Interest Litigation No.104 of 2010 pending Hon’ble Bombay High Court. This PIL only relates to religious structures on public property. As such the notice in question issued to the said Holy Cross had no application to the said Holy Cross since same is constructed on a private property. The Owner /the Community Organizations had written/replied few days to the said notice and even met Shri Sharad Ughade with documentary evidence including Revenue Plan/Property Card and explained the legal position.
– However, today (29 April 2017) at about 10.30 am Assistant Municipal Commissioner Sharad Ughade along with staff of H/West Ward along with Police Officials arrived at the site, but the locals vehemently opposed the said illegal and deliberate demolition but Shri Ugade was adamant even quoted that “Humne EK Mandir Toda Hai to ek Cross bhi todna padega”. Thereafter Sharad Ughade along with staff of H/West Ward along with Police Officials demolished the said Holy Cross. ( photographs attached )
– This is nothing but blasphemy. An outrageously ridiculous reasoning which not only defies law of land but does not appeal to reason. This wanton and deliberate action on the part of Sharad Ughade and H/West Staff.
– How can a responsible Public Servant make such an irresponsible statement in full public view. This statement by Shri Ugade has been knowingly made by him disobeying the law thereby caused injury to the members of the Christian Community.
-This is record that one Kaka Shidu Maske, AMC had filed a detailed Affidavit in Writ Petition No.2063 of 2002, giving therein detailed list of alleged illegal religious structures and shrines, wherein 67 such structures have been then noticed by BMC in H/West Ward, but nowhere the Holy Cross mentioned above and which has been demolished today figures. it cannot figure for the simple reason that the said Holy Cross was on private property.
– As such we kindly request you to immediately file an FIR against Sharad Ughade and H/West Staff and also request hon’ble Municipal Commissioner to suspend Sharad Ughade and H/West Staff, who have conspired with each other with common intention and offence be registered under Sections, 34, 120B, 166, 295, 298, 425, 441 and 506 of IPC.
-We are alive of the facts that some local Politicians will now rush to the hon’ble Chief Minister to smooth the ruffled feathers.
– We hereby demand that the cost of re-erection of this Holy Cross may be recovered from the salary of Sharad Ughade and concerned H/West Staff.
– IN CASE OF YOUR FAILURE TO TAKE ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, WE WILL BE CONSTRAINED TO TAKE FURTHER ACTIONS AS DEEMED FIT.
– Bombay Catholic Sabha (Rita D’Sa)
– Save Our Land (Dolphy D’Souza/Greg Pereira/Stanley Fernandez.com)
– Watchdog Foundation (Nicholas Almeida/Godfrey)
– Bombay East Indian Association (Adv. Vivian D’Souza)

Horrific Rape & Police Torture of Minor Tribal Girls Rampant says Women Jailer: Chhattisgarh

By
-
0

Varsha Dongre, who deleted her post later, called for introspection.

 
Varsha Dongre, Deputy jailer of the Raipur Central jail recently wrote a Facebook post (subsequently deleted) that spoke of the torture of minor girls in Chhattisgarh. She urged introspection on how the state was treating young girls and women
 This woman official, known for her uprightness has irked the authorities in the government of Chhattisgarh with a Facebook post raising questions about a model of governance that allows for alleged harassment of tribal people in the state.

"I am a witness to the torture of minor tribal girls … In the police stations, women personnel have stripped and tortured girls as old as 14 and 16 … They were given electric shock on their hands and breasts. I have seen the marks … I was horrified … Why third-degree torture on minors? I have given directions for their treatment", Varsha Dongre, deputy jailer of Raipur Central Jail, recently wrote in a post in Hindi.

"We need to introspect, because those who are getting killed in either side of this war in Bastar are our own people. The capitalist system is being forced on Bastar, tribals are being pushed out of their lands, their villages are being burnt, women raped — all this to grab land and forests. All this isn't being done to end Naxalism", she added.

Coming in the wake of the Maoist attack on CRPF jawans in Sukma district of the state, her comments were shared widely on social media. The jail department was forced to order of a probe, based on her allegations.

"The tribals can't leave this place as it is their land but when law-enforcers target women and minor girls and false case are registered, where do the victims go for justice?" she went on. "The CBI report says it, the court says it — this is the reality. When human rights workers or journalists tell the truth, they are sent to jail. If everything is fine in tribal lands, why government is so afraid and why people are not allowed to go there?"

Dongre invoked India's constitution to say it doesn't allow anyone the right to harass and torture another citizen. "A particular kind of development can't be thrust on the adivasis," she said. "Farmers and jawans are brothers, they shouldn't kill each other."

Known to be an upright officer, Dongre had approached the Chhattisgarh High Court in the PSC scam case in 2007. Based on a Right to Information application filed by her, action against top PSC officials, accused of irregularities and corruption.

After her post drew attention and caused a controversy, Dongre has now been taken off. However, talking to media persons later, she said that she had merely exercised her right to freedom of expression.

Meanwhile, a probe has been ordered by the jail authorities. "A top jail official has ordered an inquiry in this regard", a prison department official said. A DIG-rank officer would conduct the probe, sources said.

The full post in Hindi, now deleted, may be read below.
 

Honour Sab Ka Saath, Sab Ka Vikas, Banaras Meat Traders Tell Adityanath Govt

By
-
0


 
When 99 per cent Slaughterhouses are Licensed and Run by Govt, Why is the Livelihood & Food of Lakhs of Families Being Targeted: A Banaras Protest
 
Police intimidation and terror by the self-styled ‘Gau Rakshaks’ (cow vigilantes) have rendered lives of thousands in Banaras, mostly Muslim and Dalits
 
Thousands of persons, many or most Muslim, took to the streets in prime minister, Narendra Modi’s parliamentary constituency of Banaras demanding their constitutiuonal right to livelihood and life
 
In a substantial protest that wound its way from Nadesar to the office of the district administration, a joint protest by the Al Qureishi Welfare Society, Meat Vyapari, Mazdoor and Minority Samaj questioned the Yogi Adityananth’s policy vis a vis the meat and buffalo trade. They submitted a memorandum to the district administration addressed to the chief minister. After the rally concluded, a public meeting at the spot was addressed by Manish Sharma, Aman Akhtar, Arshad, Sarita Patel, Muniza Khan, Pragya and Anurag Pande.
 
The memorandum states that this crucial right to life and livelihood issue affects the rights of approximately 25 lakh persons in the entire state and documents that the steps taken by the Adityanath government in the past month since it assumed power had reduced these persons in UP to the verge of starvation.
 
Addressed to chief minister Yogi Adityanath, the memo urges that since
 
“Livelihood is our Constitutional Right and the (illegal) manner in which the crackdown on small slaughter establishments has been undertaken has rendered lakhs of persons on the verge of starvation.
 
The memorandum also urges that
“Until the process of regularization is not completed, until then an alternative locations and places for slaughtering should be immediately provided
 
“Thirdly, since the High Court (has in other petitions) ordered that all slaughterhouses should be regularized within three months, in Banaras too, slaughter houses should be allowed to rehularise within 3 months
 
The organizations who protested stated that
 
“We are also serious about environmental concerns but this question should not be at the cost of our livelihood and food. As you are aware our Constitution gives us this right, of life and livelihood.The Hon’ ble HC has also ruled on this issue and hence the district administration should follow this.
 
Hence we also to wish to bring to your attention, on the one hand our livelihood is affected and families are on the verge of starvation, we are also being harassed and intimidated by the police/ Plus organizations (non state actors)who are supremacist are using intimidartory tactics with us
 
We therefore demand that:
 
a) Police intimidation and harassment should top
b) Gau Raksha Dals should be Banned or Stopped from Operating with Impunity
 
“We wish to tell you that there has been no increase in the number of slaughter houses in the past years and there has been a sharp increase in the population.
 
“Hence we also demand that new slaughter houses are also allowed to be opened and older ones should be permitted to operate immediately
 
“Presently, to ensure guidelines and orders of the National Green Tribunal are followed, smaller businesses should be also given subsidies to upgrade like large businesses and the license procedure should be streamlined
 
“We also wish to draw attention to the fact that in the state of UP, 90 per cent of the slaughter houses are run by government. And hence the state government is answerable to the question why these have not been upgraded as far as NGT Guidelines are concerned.
 
“Is it just and fair that due to the tardy and questionable practices of the government and state, lakhs of families –depsite having licenses –are being deprived of their food and livelihood?
 
“Despite these factors we express the hope ‘Sab Ka Saath Sab Ka Vikas’ slogan will be followed in it’s true spirit.


 
 
 

On Why the Expansion of Aadhar Despite It’s Shaky Record Is Dangerous: Interview

By
-
0

 
Interview with Usha Ramanathan
Interviewed by Bodapati Srujana


 
 
 The NDA II Government has recently announced that Aadhaar numbers will now be compulsorily linked with Permanent Account Numbers (PAN) necessary for all tax payers.
 
Legal Researcher Usha Ramanathan speaks with NewsClick on how the Centre is undemocratically widening the ambit of the bio-metric project despite its shaky record on privacy given the recent massive data breach in some states.  
 
 
 

1...2,1212,1222,123...2,697Page 2,122 of 2,697

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Join our mailing list to get the latest human rights news that matters, straight to your mailbox.

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Join our mailing list to get the latest human rights news that matters, straight to your mailbox.

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT

Email: sabrangind@gmail.com

© Sabrang | All Rights Reserved