Islam guarantees rights but where are the women theologians?

February 12, 2016

Rights and freedom of women have always been a burning issue. The problem of Muslim women in this connection has become especially controversial. Muslims constitute more than 14 percent of India’s total population, fifty per cent of this vast population are Muslim women. The unhappy fact in India is that women of the Muslim community have been almost as much suppressed or oppressed as women in general within Indian society. It is only the form and types of of exploitation that have varied between one religious community to another.

Within Islam, discussions on women’s status have been discussed in detail. The Quran itself has laid down rules regarding matrimonial relations, the social position of women, and their legal and economic rights. It has prescribed certain laws regarding maintenance, dower, and inheritance and sharing of property by women in their different capacities as a daughter, sister, mother and wife.

In practice, however, Indian Muslim women are less assertive in enjoying these rights granted to them. The reason lies in the lack of awareness of these rights granted within religion itself; and this leads further to a sense of helplessness. This state of affairs prevailing among large sections of the Indian Muslim women is not only keeping them in a state that amounts to a denial of their basic rights but is also hampering their full and complete contribution to the social, political and economic life of their community, and in their participation in the development of Indian society as a whole.

Marriage and Mehr
Islam has not laid down a definite age of marriage for girls or boys. The Quran is silent about this. In pre Islamic days the custom among the Arabs allowed the father to marry off his daughter to whomever he liked and at whatever age the girl was. Islam introduced certain changes and laid down a general rule, namely, that the girl should not be married off by her father against her own will. The implicit pre-requisite, the agreement of the girl being a necessary condition to the nuptial contract, could hence be used (in interpretation) as the basis for interpreting the age of the girl at which she could be considered fit for entering into matrimonial relations.

There is an instance of the Prophet’s view on this subject. A young girl come before the Prophet perplexed and anxious; she exclaimed,

“No Messenger of Allah from the hand of this father!”
“But what has your father done to you,” the Prophet asked.
“He has a nephew she replied,” and he has given me in marriage to him before consulting me in the matter.”
“Now that he has done it,” said the Prophet, “you should not oppose it. Agree to it, and be your cousin’s wife.”
“O messenger of Allah I do not like my cousin. How can I be the wife of a man whom I do not like..”
“If you do not like him that is an end to the matter. You have full authority. Go and make the choice of a man whom you would like to marry.”[1]

This makes it quite clear that the opinion of the girl to be married is regarded as decisive to the marriage. According to Muslim Law, marriage is purely an agreement between two persons. At the time of the ‘nikah’ (marriage) the Qadi [2] determines the person who is to act as ‘wali’[3] on behalf of the bride. He requests the ‘wali’ to go to the bride along with two witnesses and ask whether she is ready and willing to marry ‘such and such a man’ with a definite amount as ‘mehr’ (dower). If she says ‘yes’ she is deemed to have agreed to the alliance.

The ‘wali’ returns with the witnesses to the Qadi and informs him that the bride has agreed. The Qadi recites some verses from Q’uran and gets the signature of the bride, bridegroom and ‘wali’ on the ‘nikahnama’ (the marriage register). He too signs in the ‘nikahnama’ in token of his having performed the marriage.

Although there is no need to change the form of marriage, in Jordan there is a provision that a woman, at the time of marriage can stipulate that she will have the right to divorce given specified circumstances or to live in a specified place.

Within the Muslim community the religious text allow the man to have four wives, but on the condition that all four be equally treated, financially and emotionally. The Quran has permitted it under exceptional conditions but these conditions are violated in practice. Several Muslim countries like Turkey, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Egypt, Syria etc. have changed their law. In these countries a plurality of wives is positively prohibited, marriage with more than one wife is not permitted except with the permission of the Qadi. In Pakistan no man can now marry a second time if his first wife was alive, unless she documented her consent, something which the Shariat did not provided for.

Marriage and Mehr are importance factors in the life of a Muslim woman. The Mehr (dower) according to Islamic scriptures requires that a man must pay a certain amount of money to the women, he is going to marry. The exact amount of money is determined keeping in view the status of the man. According to Islam if ‘Mehr’ has not been paid by the husband during his lifetime, it has to be paid out of his bequests after his death. Islamic law also lays down that if the husband divorcees his wife he must pay her the Mehr amount and give her a proper maintenance allowance as long as she does not remarry or does not find an alternative support. In the Quran sura ( Chapter) II, ayat (verse) 241 runs as follows:

“Wali Motallaqatay Mata Un Bill Maaroofay Haqqan Alal Muttaqeena”[4]
“For divorced women maintenance should be provided on a reasonable scale. This is a duty on the righteous husband.”

“Kazaleka Yubaiyyanullaho Lahum Ayatehee Law Allakum Taqeloon”[5]
“It is expected that you will use your common sense”.
This arrangement seems reasonable if followed in practice according to the spirit of the precept.

Mehr in the Islamic System
There are a number of verses in the Quran ordaining that the woman’s Mehr belongs to her and not to anyone else, whether father or husband. The Quran says: “..and give unto the women, (whom ye marry) free gift of their marriage portions : But if they of their own accord remit unto you a part there of, then ye are welcome to absorb in (in your wealth).”[6] The Quran encourages man to give as much as possible. It says: “And if ye wish to exchange one wife for another and ye have given unto one of them a sum of money (however great), take nothing from it. Would ye take it by the way of calumny and open wrong?”[7] When the second caliph Hazarat Umar wanted to impose a ceiling on Mehr a woman stood up and recited this verse and said, “when Allah wants men to give a heap of gold (by way of Mehr), who are you to put a ceiling on it?”

Thus according to the scriptures a woman can ask much as a heap of gold by way of Mehr. The Quran also warns men not to take anything away from their wives after giving something to them. The Quran says: “And it is not lawful for you to take any part of what you have given them.”[8]
It is usually asserted that the Mehr money is a good security for the woman in case of any difficulties in her marital life. For example, if and when she is divorced, the Mehr money has to be given to her (but in case the divorce has taken place due to her own fault or volition, she will not get any money). More so, the woman is entitled to her Mehr money) (if not paid) after her husband’s death, the sons have to pay her the Mehr money.

In case the woman dies, then her father and brothers can demand the Mehr money from her husband. This account gives a reasonably secure picture of a woman’s financial position. In reality, however, one finds that very few women can avail of this money.

Payment of Mehr
The Mehr (dower) assist according to the scriptures is that a man must pay a certain amount of money to the woman he is going to marry. The exact amount of money is determined keeping in view the status of the man, and the payment is to be paid either at the time of the marriage itself of at some later date that has been agreed between the practices concerned. According to scriptures, Mehr (dower) may be prompt dower (Muajjal Mehr) or deferred dower (Muwajjal Mehr). Prompt dower is payable immediately after marriage. A wife can refuse to enter into conjugal domicile with her husband until the payment of the prompt dower. Deferred dower is payable on dissolution of the marriage by either death or divorce. In India it has been the general practice, not to pay Mehr money or pay only a part of it. In the vast majority of cases Mehr is a mere paper transaction. Its fixation is more of a ritual than a realistic assessment of women’s general requirement in the event of “talaq”. Moreover, if the husband is unable to pay the Mehr, he requests his wife to forgo it. The request is a form of emotional blackmail to which the wife invariably succumbs. Thus, the concept of Mehr, which was created to guarantee the economic security of a woman, is not presently serving any useful purpose.

Islamic law also lays down that if the husband divorces his wife he must pay her the ‘Mehr’ amount and give her a proper maintenance allowance as long as she does not remarry or does not find an alternative support. This arrangement seems reasonable if followed in practice according to the spirit of the precept. What Islam has laid down for payment by the husband in the form of ‘Mehr’ is to be paid right at the marriage time or later is certainly a guarantee for the protection and maintenance of the woman at the time of divorce or against ill-treatment meted out to her during the period of the marriage, e.g. Islamic traditions have laid down that the husband has no right to compel his wife to suckle the babies, to do domestic work like cooking and washing etc, she can claim a salary from her husband in return for such tasks, or part ways with her husband in return for his demanding that she perform such tasks. She also has the right to part ways with the husband and earn whatever she can, out of a sense of fulfillment, in various occupations.

Divorce and Maintenance
Islam is perhaps the first religion in the world, which has expressly recognised the termination of marriage through divorce. Islam recognizes the right of every husband to divorce his wife with or without reason. But if the wife wishes to leave the husband, she has to persuade the husband to divorce her. This form of divorce is called ‘khula’. In the Quran, there is no mention about wives divorcing their husband. It only speaks of husbands divorcing their wives and lays down rules regarding how to divorce, what treatment to ensure after the divorce, such as maintenance to the divorcee and for the upbringing and custody of the children if any, etc.

To deal with the Quranic position first, a number of Quranic verses mention the rules regarding divorce and its implications in various suras (chapters) of the book.

Talaq was a constant threat to the wife, which could at any time, throw her into a state of social insecurity. In early Arabia, the Arabs used to pronounce talaq and revoke it. To end this practice of the Arabs, Prorhet Mohammed declared that,” of all the permitted things the most detestable is divorce in the eyes of God.”

He affected many reforms in the institution of talaq. In the Quran, the following procedure was prescribed for divorce, “When you divorce women, divorce them for their prescribed time and calculate the number of days prescribed and be careful of (your duty to), God, you Lord. Do not drive them out of their houses, nor should they themselves go forth, unless they commit on open indecency.”[9]

In another verse, the Quran says, “For divorced women a provision in kindness : a Duty for those who ward off (evil).”[10] The Quran ordains, “…….if ye fear a breach between them two in (the husband and the wife) appoint an arbiter from his folk and an arbiter from her folk. If they desire amendment, Allah will make them of one mind”[11].

The pronouncement of talaq may be revocable or irrevocable. The revocable forms of divorce are considered as the “approved” ones and the irrevocable divorce are considered to be the ‘not approved’ category; Prophet Mohammed favored the revocable mode of divorce over the irrevocable forms.
The forms of talaq are classified as follows:-

Talaqus – sunna i.e. revocable or approved (three sitting).
Talaq-i-bida i.e. irrevocable or not approved (one sitting).

The subject of divorce has proved a fruitful source of misconception and controversy; but there can be no question that the Quranic verses concerning the treatment of women in divorce are from a position of ‘better humanity and regard for justice.” According to the principles of Islam, whether divorced or widowed, a woman is at liberty to marry again. The only restraint is that they have to wait for a period of three menstrual periods, before re-marrying. The Prophet promoted specific legislation in woman’s favour addressing various domestic situations. The law gave considerable rights to free women. It was obligatory for the husband to pay to the bride, before marriage, what was called ‘Mehr’.

We may say then that though Islam has not given men and women absolute and equal rights, it treats women with respect and honor. Unfortunately, in actual practice, the tendency seems to be to overlook or misinterpret the principles (and orders) in the Quran and consequently to accord to her an inferior status. M. Mujeeb observed that actual practice was based on the custom of the family, which was the custom of the community or the professional group to which the family belonged rather that based on religion.[12]

In the Prophet’s own words and his own life were the best commentary upon the divinely inspired Last Testament or the Final Gospel, i.e. the Holy Quran, we shall see what he himself had to say about women and how he treated members of that sex. Prophet Mohammed has said :-

“The thing which is lawful, but disliked by God, is divorce.”
“The Great Apostle dislike the idea of beating women : Those men who beat their wives do not behave well. He is not of my who teaches a woman to stray.”
“That is the best Muslims whose disposition is best; and the best of you are they who behave best to their wives.”
“God, enjoins upon you to treat women well, for they are your mothers, daughters and aunts.”
“The rights of women are sacred. See that women are maintained in the rights granted to them.”
“A virtuous wife is a man’s best treasure.”
“Do not prevent your women from coming to the Mosque.”[13]

The Sharia
There are four sources from which is derived the Shariah and it if from these that it draws its authority: the Quran, the Sunna, Ijma, and Qiyas. Deemed the “uncreated word of Allah,” the Quran reflects direct divine revelation and is understood to be the primary source of Islamic law. After the Quran, Islamic jurists next turn to the Sunna, considered to be an indirect divine revelation arising out of the Hadiths, or sayings or acts of Mohammed. Ijma refers to the consensus of the grand Mujtahids of the past, a historic process in which, once consensus was reached, provisions became a permanent part of the immutable body of Islamic law. Finally, the fourth source for the Shariah is the Qiyas, or reasoning by analogy, which applies accepted principle(s) or assumption(s) to arrive at a legally binding ruling.

According to Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer it is believed by millions of Muslims across the world that Sharia laws are immutable and represent divine will. This is based on serious misunderstanding.

Sharia is not and cannot be immutable.
Justice being a very important ingredient for Sharia laws, it is clear that there is enough scope within the Islamic Sharia to bring about changes ensuring gender justice. The Quran supports gender equality and so any such change will be in line with the Quranic framework. This will only help clear the misconceptions and contradictions that have crept in on account of different cultural and customary practices.

In fact, as already pointed out, if Muslims had carried out Quranic injunctions, without interjecting dominant (often patriarchal) cultural practices, the Islamic world would have been a great pioneer in ushering gender equality in the world. Unfortunately, feudalism destroyed, in practice, the revolutionary spirit of Quran.[14]

In order to emphasise the principles of gender justice it is high time that we produce female theologians with profound knowledge of the Arabic language. In this context we welcome the recent development of Muslim women as theorists/Qazis. This will help to resolve the grievances regarding family law, especially Islamic personal law, in India.

* Researcher, Gandhian Institute of Studies, Rajghat, Varanasi-221001

[1] Mutahhari Murtada, The Rights of Women in Islam. (Tehran: World Organisation for Islamic Services, 1981), pp-61-61

[2] a Muslim judge who renders decisions according to the Sharīʿah, the canon law of Islām

[3] A wali (guardian) is a very important and vital aspect in a marriage. It determines whether or not a certain marriage contract (akad nikah) that has been performed is valid. This can be clearly understood from a hadith by the Prophet

[4] The Quran; 2:241

[5] The Quran; 2:242

[6] The Quran; 4:4

[7] The Quran; 4:20

[8] The Quran; 2:229

[9] George Sale, The Quran, Commonly called the Quran of Mohammed (New York, n.d.) p.560

[10] The Quran; 2:241

[11] The Quran; 4:35

[12] M.Mujeeb, Islamic Influence on Indian Society (Merrut, 1972), p.91

[13] Allama Sir Abdullah Al-Suhrawardy, The Sayings of Mohammed (1954), pp. 115-117

[14] Asghar Ali Engineer; The Rights of Women in Islam, 2008

Why the idea of an Islamic state is full of holes

February 12, 2016

The attitude of Indian Islamist organisations and scholars towards secularism is ridden with hypocrisy and double standards

It is sad but true that there is a large degree of hypocrisy and double standards on the part of Indian Islamist organizations and scholars when in their attitude and approach towards secular democratic India.

Over the course of the last five-odd years, ever since the crisis that has erupted all across the Muslim world, in Muslim-majority and Muslim minority contexts, I have been troubled by a simple question. Do Indian Islamists accept the Indian secular state and the values and ethos of secularism only because Muslims are in a minority? If Indian Muslims were in a majority, would India have had a secular or an Islamic state? My assessment is that the latter would be true and without doubt we would have been reduced to another Pakistan.

The Islamists start by saying since I am asking a hypothetical question, it requires no answer. I then request them to give me a hypothetical reply. I request a simple yes or no which they try and avoid. But the honest ones do say ‘yes’, if India were a Muslim majority country, it would have been an Islamic state, as they claim that essentially secularism is shirk, a sin.

A few of the moderate elements go on to state that Indian secularism does find the right balance between religion and modernity and is therefore acceptable as the way ahead.

But with the rising tide of political Islam, symbolised by the crisis raging all the way from West Asia to North Africa, with the crisis gripping certain nations of South Asia, an Islamic Caliphate is very much a subject of conversation.

The saving grace here is that the Indian Muslims masses are committed to the idea and the ethos of a ‘living secularism’. The very Idea of India for them is a unique experiment in the annals of human history, unparalleled at many levels.

Indian secularism is founded on the idea, an ethos of “mutual acceptance and respect” and not mere “tolerance”, which a very weak expression indeed. All those who still tom-tom the idea of a theocratic state – Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Jewish – need to understand that modern democracies and nations have no place for any theocracy. This is so because theocracies are inherently against equal citizenship rights, against equal rights for people of all religions, against the very concept of ‘sarva dharma samabhava’, that is, mutual respect and acceptance of all faiths, religions and cultures. It’s as simple as that.

In an Islamic state only Muslims have the right and freedom to practise, preach and proselytize, convert, whilst all other religions only have only the right to practice, that too with restrictions. Forget the right to preach and convert; Dhimmis are simply not allowed to do so. Islamists who hold such notions are the very same ones who demand equal rights in India or in the western countries wherein they dwell

Theocracies cannot lay the foundation for modern nations and democracies, or even regional unions and confederations. Nations need to be built around a vision where each citizen is equal, where every religious, gender, cultural, ethnic, sect, linguistic, class, tribal diversity and identity finds itself mirrored in the Constitution in equalitarian and legal terms, and not only that of the majority faith or sect. This has and will only create a weak society, a divided nation, regions, leading to hatreds, divisions and chaos which ruling elites and foreign imperial powers will take advantage of. Thus every individual, every section of society needs to be made an equal stake-holder without any exception.

This principle also applies at the regional and global levels, even as humanity integrates and evolves. In these nations and societies, all religions are accorded due respect and constitutional space, protecting and safeguarding the rights of diverse groups and communities.

I am opposed to the idea of a theocratic state just as I am opposed to a Communist state, as the latter too has proved to be as intolerant of other ideologies and religions, as well as multi-party democracies.

In an Islamic state as propagated by the Islamists –

1) Muslims have more rights than the Dhimmis (non-Muslims), who are ‘protected citizens’ but not equal citizens.

2) In an Islamic state only Muslims have the right and freedom to practise, preach and proselytize, convert, whilst all other religions only have only the right to practice, that too with restrictions. Forget the right to preach and convert; Dhimmis are simply not allowed to do so. Islamists who hold such notions are the very same ones who demand equal rights in India or in the western countries wherein they dwell.

3) Islamists are also committed to the concept of ‘murtad’ (apostate) that a Muslim who leaves the fold of Islam and converts to another faith deserves to be killed. Where then is the concept of ‘freedom of conscience’, which they demand for themselves in secular lands?

4) Only a Muslim can become a prime minister or president in an Islamic state. Others cannot even think of rising to the highest office in the land, as that is prohibited by the Constitution of such countries. Thus out of the window goes the concept of equal rights. This is very different from the Indian ethos where we have had a Sikh as our PM for 10 years, four Muslims have been elevated to the President’s post and a Muslim may even dream of some day sitting in the PM’s chair.

In short, in a modern, secular democratic State, all citizens are equal whereas in a ‘theocraZy’, those from the majority are more equal than others.

(The writer is an activist and an expert on West Asian Affairs).

Stop the deification and appropriation of Babasaheb: Dalit youth to the Sangh Parivar

February 12, 2016

On January 22, 2016, graduate students of the Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University Lucknow, created history of sorts when they raised sharp and aggressive slogans against Narendra Modi, the prime minister. “Modi go back,” they shouted as he addressed the Convocation barely four days after Rohith Vemula’s “institutional murder” on January 17.

“If we had not protested, Modi would not have apologized,” Ram Karan Nirmal and Amrendra Singh Arya told Communalism Combat in this exclusive interview. Done in collaboration with Newsclick.in and Hillele, these two students and another, Manoj Kumar spoke at length on issues of discrimination and redressal in Indian society and on the campus. Teesta Setalvad of Communalism Combat conducted the interview.

“This is the first time after the Mandal commission agitation that campuses across the country are aflame with cries for justice. Caste, gender and minority rights, these are the three issues around which youngsters are agitating. All progressive forces need to join in.”

‘Today, even after the enactment of the Right to Education Act (RTE) and the provision that there should be 25 per cent entry to lesser privileged children, most schools do not meet this requirement. Those that do, single these children out, brand them, cut their hair, differentiate them; it is shameful,” Amrendra Arya.

“The movement that has begun with the death/sacrifice of Rohith Vemula is not going to stop. India is a land of the youth. The youth want this country to change: they want casteism, gender and religious discrimination to go,” Ram Karan Nirmal.

“The nature of casteism may have changed but caste discrimination has not disappeared. I recall one bitter experience at the Banaras Hindu University where I had completed my LLB. I was presenting a paper on “The Marxist Theory of International Relations. I had worked hard and thought I did a good job. You know what the professor remarked? “Until now Brahmans and Rajputs used to speak. Now ‘others’ have also started speaking!’” This hurt me and made me feel very uncomfortable,” Manoj Kumar.

“There are so many vacant seats in central universities, this need to be filled. Adequate representation at all levels is a must, even in the judiciary, “Ram Karan.

“Others say, Garv se kahon ham Rajput hai!. When will we able to say, “Garv se kahon ham Dhobhi ya Chamar hai?” Manoj Kumar.

“This appropriation of Babsaheb Ambedkar is nothing short of a deification and saffronisation of a personality. Babasaheb was rational and scientific. You cannot deify him and take away this essence, which is a sharp critique of the Hindu religion itself which anoints and legitimises caste,” Ram Karan Nirmal.

“The RSS move to have a Samrasta Week –to assimilate or appropriate Dalits is hypocritical. As Dalits we eat non-vegetarian food. Then why the Samrasta week with enforced vegetarianism, without our food our culture?” Manoj Kumar.

“The patriarchal and casteist attitude towards Rohith Vemula’s mother, Radhika questioning her Dalit identity; the behaviour of ministers Bangaru Dattarya and Appa Rao (Vice Chancellor) is simply trying to weaken the movement. But this movement is not going away.” – Ram Karan, Manoj Kumar, Amrendra Arya.

Whither Freedom: The Chhatisgarh attack on journalists

February 11, 2016

Smashed rear window of Malini's WagonR. [Photo courtesy: Malini Subramaniam]

Two days after the attack on the house of Scroll.in contributor Malini Subramaniam, the Chhattisgarh police finally filed a First Information Report in the incident on February 10. Subramaniam's lawyers have, however described the FIR as "inadequate" since it does not account for the events leading up to the attack and fails to name anyone.

It was on Sunday (February 7, 2016) evening, that a group of 20-odd men from the Samajik Ekta Manch, a newly formed group that claims to be working to counter the spread of Naxalism in Bastar region, staged a demonstration outside Subramaniam's house. She has identified two of the men, since they had visited her house on January 10 and warned her against writing articles that tarnished the image of the police. Later that night, around 11 pm, the police had turned up at her house for questioning.

The month-long process of intimidation had culminated in an attack on Subramaniam's home in the early hours of Monday. Around 2.30 am, stones were hurled at her house, shattering the rear window of her car. The local police initially refused to file an FIR.

After reports of the attack appeared in both local and national media, and there was widespread condemnation of the incident, the police registered an FIR was filed against unnamed persons for the offences of house-trespass and "mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees and more".
Isha Khandelwal, Subramaniam's lawyer, pointed out that the FIR had several holes in it. "While registering the FIR, the police has ignored the incident that took place in the evening before the assault. The police has, in effect, refused to accept the obvious fact that what happened in the night happened as a result of the incident of the evening, thus making both incidents part of one single continuous transaction.

Also, the action of the Samajik Ekta Manch's action in the evening on its own amounts to an illegal act under Sections [of the Indian Penal Code] such as 117, 143,147,153 [relating to unlawful assembly, promoting enmity between classes and other charges] which are all cognisable. Then why was an FIR for that incident where Malini has recognised people not been registered? Also the sections they have put up for the incident that took place in the night are ones that attract simple imprisonment even though offences under Section 440, 451, 452, 457 [relating to house trespass] have been clearly made out.”

Meanwhile, in a press conference, members of the Samajik Ekta Manch denied any involvement in the attack and claimed they were simply protesting against Subramaniam's writings in a "democratic manner". The press release of the Samajik Ekta Manch can be read below. See also our earlier story at https://www.sabrangindia.in/article/nwmi-condemns-attack-malini-subramaniam

Statements in support
Support has continued to pour in for Subramaniam. The Editors' Guild of India issued a statement expressing concern over attempts to intimidate her. The human rights organisation Amnesty International also issued a statement, calling at the attack "another indicator of the increasingly hostile atmosphere in which journalists and human rights defenders operate in Chhattisgarh. The government of Chhattisgarh must not just sit on its hands and watch journalists being threatened and harassed," said Makepeace Sitlhou, Campaigner at Amnesty International India. "They must act on their promise to protect journalists from being attacked simply for doing their work.”

Chhattisgarh Bachao Andolan, a non-profit in the state, has also issued a statement asking the government to ensure such attacks do not take place. It said an attempt was being made to create front organisations that would cover-up for the police.

Full text of the Editors' Guild statement
The Editors Guild of India is deeply concerned by the intimidation of a contributor/stringer of the online magazine Scroll.in, Malini Subramaniam, currently based in Jagdalpur town of Bastar region in Chhattisgarh.

On Monday, February 8, a group of unidentified persons allegedly hurled stones at her home in which the rear window of her car parked in the compound was shattered. The incident took place within hours of a mob of 20 people who are part of a social group called Samajik Ekta Manch, which comprises of political workers of all major parties in Bastar and some former Salwa Judum activists claiming to be anti-Maoists, gathering outside her home Sunday evening and protesting against her writings as being pro-Maoists. They even accused her of being a Maoist sympathizer. Ms Subramaniam has been living with her daughter in Jagdalpur for four years now. While she is working as a stringer/contributor for the online news site Scroll.in for a little over one year, she was previously working on a project for the International Red Cross in Bastar. It was perhaps in the context of a series of her recent reports in Scroll.in that were perceived to be against the police that the Samajik Ekta Manch activists recently met her at her residence last week – this came after several inquiries and questioning of her by the local police themselves.

Bastar has been in the throes of an armed conflict. Two local stringers working for a newspaper have been arrested by the police on charges of aiding the Maoists and are languishing in jail. The Manch activists reportedly took objected to her reportage saying it was in support of the Maoists and against the development of the region and that she was not giving the others versions. While the activists and the police are free to place their point of view, even counter the stories that she has written, the physical and mental intimidation of the Scroll.in writer, Ms Subramaniam, and the attempt to stop her from reporting from the region is not acceptable; it’s a crime to attack someone’s home. The incident is highly condemnable and against the tenets of the freedom of the press. That the local police have not deemed it fit to register an FIR in this incident, smacks of partisan behaviour. The Editors Guild of India urgently calls for the intervention of the Chattisgarh Chief Minister and hopes that he would ensure a free and fair probe into the matter.

On February 10, 2016, the New York based Committee to Protect Journalists has also issued the following statement:
Indian authorities should immediately investigate the harassment of and threats against journalist Malini Subramaniam, the Committee to Protect Journalists said today.

Assailants on Monday pelted Subramaniam's home in Bastar, in the central Indian state of Chhattisgarh, with rocks, shattering the rear window of her car, according to news reports. Subramaniam, who has reported on human rights abuses and the conflict between Maoist groups and the state in Chhattisgarh for the independent English-language news website Scroll.in, told CPJ that a group of about 20 men demonstrated outside her house on Sunday evening, accusing her of supporting Maoist groups and chanting, "Death to Malini Subramaniam."

"Chhattisgarh police must send a firm message that vigilante attacks and mob violence against any citizen, any journalist, are unacceptable," said CPJ Asia Program Senior Research Associate Sumit Galhotra. "Authorities must fully and immediately investigate this attack on Malini Subramaniam, make sure the perpetrators face justice, and preserve the safety of all journalists."

In an interview with Scroll.in, Subramaniam said she recognized two of the men from the group, and that they belonged to major political parties in the state. She also said she recognized men from the crowd as members of the anti-Maoist group Samajik Ekta Manch who had previously visited her to discuss her coverage of the decades-old, low-intensity conflict between Maoist rebels and the government.

The group of men urged her neighbors to join them in pelting her home with stones, alleging that Subramaniam had been supplying arms to Maoists and that she could plant explosives in neighboring houses, according to reports.

In the last month, police officials have come to Subramaniam's home several times, once late at night, to interrogate her about her reporting, she told CPJ. "There is pressure to cover their version of the story," she said.

Subramaniam told CPJ that while police allowed her to file a complaint, they initially refused to file a First Information Report, a necessary step to set in motion a police investigation. On Wednesday, police finally did register a First Information Report, but Subramaniam told CPJ that it was weak because it did not name any individual and because the charges related only to trespassing and damage to her property.

The online directory for Chhattisgarh police was unavailable at time of documentation. When CPJ reached the superintendent of police in Bastar district, R.N. Dash, at a phone number provided by local journalists, he declined to comment and declined to pass CPJ on to someone else for comment.
Reporting from the region poses serious challenges: According to CPJ research, police often pressure, harass, or abuse journalists in an effort to silence critical reporting or to compel them to serve as informants. Meanwhile Maoists have attacked journalists they accuse of being informants for police, according to CPJ research. In 2015, Chhattisgarh police arrested two journalists–Somaru Nag and Santosh Yadav–on unsubstantiated allegations that they were aligned with Maoists. Both Nag and Yadav remain jailed.

In unity lies the answer to the Hindu nationalist agenda

February 11, 2016

What the remarkable success of the Grand Alliance in Bihar shows is that all secular forces have to be able to work together to defeat fascism in India

Excerpt from the second edition of the book published by Three Essays Collective

Fascism: Essays on Europe and India was published a little over a year before the fateful Lok Sabha elections of May 2014 which brought the BJP and its allies to power following an intense media campaign and blitzkrieg of election rallies, all dominated by the seemingly formidable and largely media-driven figure of Narendra Modi. Although the BJP polled only 31 per cent of the votes, the lowest ever of any party winning the Indian general elections, and its allies a further 7.5% per cent at best, the opposition to the BJP was badly fragmented. The 60%+ anti-BJP vote was thus widely dispersed and ineffective. The result of the Bihar assembly elections shows that this state of fragmentation is not an inevitable feature of parliamentary politics in India and can be tackled in the face of a fascist threat.

What has emerged in the eighteen months that the BJP has been in power is an increasingly overt assertion of the power of the RSS, whose proclaimed vision for India is to make it a Hindu state with or without the trappings of democracy. This is the first government of independent India where the RSS is openly in charge. Having gained power, it now seeks to expand its own power and entrench itself even further. In the long term the most dangerous aspect of this seizure of power will be the wholesale takeover of educational institutions, the rewriting of school and university textbooks, and the attempt to purge the Indian past of its non-Hindu, cosmopolitan strands.

The essays in this book that deal with India suggest that communal mobilisation is the ‘organic strategy’ of the RSS. This view has been vindicated by the way the present government’s parent (the RSS) and their sprawling network of Hindu organisations have been encouraged by the BJP’s victory and had the freedom to mount hate campaigns[1] that have led to a spate of lynchings and contributed decisively to the sort of political ‘climate’ where outfits operating in the shadow of the RSS can openly assassinate anti-superstition campaigners like Narendra Dabholkar.

Venom-spewing figures from the ruling party who have been conspicuous in these hate campaigns have had a field day in the past year and a half, since neither Modi nor other BJP leaders seem to care that hate speech is a crime and the hate campaigners in their ranks are openly stoking the flames of communal violence.

The structured duplicity that characterises Modi’s regime reflects both the division of labour within the Sangh parivar between ‘state’ and ‘movement’, government and mass base, Modi and the RSS, but also repeated reminders to Modi about who he owes his position to and who ultimately calls the shots. The primacy of the RSS (as ‘movement’) has meant the emergence of a pattern of low-intensity communal warfare that may well spread to new parts of the country in a drive to communalise India. It is possible that before Modi’s term expires the RSS will have succeeded in transforming the Northeast into a new cauldron of communal violence unless the resistance to this is created from now.

Communal conflagrations are carefully organised episodes of violence and every round of ethnic cleansing drives Muslims and Christians into relief camps where they fester with no hope of ever returning to their villages. This pattern, driven by the RSS and its vision of an India where the minorities become second-class citizens, is creating legacies of hatred at the ground level that pile up like the blood-soaked debris of India’s failing democracy.

It is Modi’s silence about the recent spate of violence that has attracted most attention both from the ‘liberal’ media and from the government’s critics within the intelligentsia. India has just seen a remarkable groundswell of protest among writers, film makers, historians and scientists, and the government’s response, characteristically, has been to attack and vilify the protesters, denouncing them as ‘leftists’, ‘Communists’, agents of the Congress party and even agents of an ‘international conspiracy’ hatched to defame the country!

As if this infantilism was not enough, in a characteristic trope of fascist politics the aggressor emerges as the victim, Modi himself is said to be the object of ‘intolerance’, and every discourse about the growing climate of authoritarianism and hate politics in the country is converted into a sign of the illiberal nature of the opposition. ‘Liberal’ in the BJP’s lexicon seems to mean a willingness to submit to (be ‘tolerant’ of) a deeply authoritarian political culture, one that polices how we think, what we read or how we express ourselves and our eating habits as much it does the clothes women wear, one’s freedom of worship (or the freedom to reject all worship) and, crucially, sexual partnerships.

Meanwhile, in rally after rally across the state of Bihar [during the Assembly elections], Modi himself is scarcely ‘silent’, he fuels communal phobias with references to the ‘Darbhanga module’ (subtext: Bihar’s Muslims are terrorists, potentially) and to the incumbent chief minister of the state (who has now won a third term) having designs to deprive Dalits, Mahadalits and OBCs of reservations meant for them in favour of Muslims.

Wearing his election hat, the prime minister of the country has no compunction pitting one community against another on the basis of pure falsehood. This is the same political figure who, in his official avatar, is on his best behaviour as he interacts with world leaders like Obama (recall that he had mocked Obama unconscionably while campaigning in April 2009) and with royalty in Britain!

At another level, the past year has seen a gradual disenchantment with Modi and his government in business circles (key funders of Modi’s campaign), fuelled both by the BJP’s defeat on the Land Acquisition front and by the growing sense of a paralysis at the level of government. The leadership cult that was the BJP’s main strategy in the Lok Sabha elections has thrown up a style of governance (post election) characterised by massive centralisation of power in the hands of their ‘leader’ coupled with a serious lack of expertise at the level of the PMO; hence paralysis.

But resistance within the bureaucracy may well be a second factor. The economy was a major area of the campaign Modi had mounted in the months preceding the general election and this is where the sense of disquiet among his elite supporters has been most visible. At the end of July a major business daily could write: ‘India has…shown its steepest decline in a decade over the last year in AT Kearney's FDI confidence index, dropping out of the top 10 for the first time since 2002’ (Business Standard 29 July, 2015). Manufacturing remains sluggish, there has been no major inflow of foreign investment into manufacturing in spite of innumerable ‘summits’ and international trips.

For the present regime propaganda matters vastly more than policy, growth figures are reworked to sustain the illusion that India is actually doing well economically when the world economy is in recession and exports are falling, credit-rating agencies are lambasted if their warnings about growing ‘intolerance’ seem damaging to the country’s image (‘anti-national’), and domestic businesses realise that there is a charmed circle of industrialists who gain vastly more thanks to their closeness to the prime minister than most of them are ever likely to.[2]

More disturbingly, Modi’s government, driven by an extreme version of its one-sided commitment to capital (‘neo-liberalism’), is quietly engaged in dismantling even the minimal welfare provisions introduced by the two previous governments, witness the attempt currently underway to sabotage the functioning of MNREGA by withholding funds scheduled for wage payments under the scheme; or the slashing of the country’s public health budget from its appallingly low levels to an even more shocking one percent of GDP, which risks plunging India into major health disasters, even as pulses, a major protein source for the poor and middle class, become unaffordable for the mass of the population.

One aspect not taken up in these essays is the way what Wilhelm Reich called ‘organised mysticism’ is used to mobilise mass support for political figures like Modi. Reich used the term to refer to religious ideologies and their patriarchal-authoritarian hold over the masses. These themes are of pivotal importance to the nature of the emerging fascism in India, not least because of the light they throw on the repression and control of sexuality. Moreover, the spate of killings of rationalists starting with Dabholkar shows how deeply invested in these ideologies the right-wing in India remains.

‘Godmen’ like Ramdev and Asaram Bapu are publicly associated with support for the BJP. Indeed, in Modi’s case a major role was played by the Hindu leader Asaram endorsing Modi’s political ambitions. In 2006 the then chief minister of Gujarat repeatedly invoked the ‘blessings’ (ashirvad) of this religious scamster whose ashram would soon become embroiled in scandals involving rape, murder and black magic, and who would himself be arrested a few years later on charges of sexually assaulting a minor.

It is hard to imagine any other major democracy in the world electing a prime minister with these past connections! Yet elected he has been, thanks to the role of the sangh parivar in building a ‘mass base’ through decades of molecular work (a labour of fascism) and deploying that base decisively for electoral purposes. As the preface and introductory essays in this book have shown, fascism only succeeds as a mass movement. ‘Ideology’ plays a major role in that process but ideology here has to be understood as a material force grounded in what Reich saw as the ‘psychic structures’ moulded from childhood by family, ‘tradition’ and the repression of sexuality in the young.[3] These are not aspects of fascism developed in the essays above but they deserve much more attention, especially in India.

A final word: there has been a lot of talk about the Congress Party reinventing itself to be able to recover its loss of ground. The same of course should be said of the Left parties which are now close to extinction as national parties. But parties can only reinvent themselves to the extent that they engage in a learning process. In the case of Congress today, it lacks any serious grassroots presence that can counter the mobilising thrust of the RSS. But it also has to confront the hard reality that much of the blame for the return of the BJP and for the current state of India’s democracy lies with earlier Congress regimes. As Kershaw said about the Nazis, fascism always taps ‘the rich vein of raw anger…opened up by the perceived failure of democracy amid mounting crisis’.[4]

In India this is obvious at three levels. The terrible culture of impunity that has allowed the BJP to get away with the Gujarat massacres is a direct legacy of the Congress leadership’s refusal to prosecute those within its ranks responsible for the horrific anti-Sikh violence of 1984. Failure to carry through prosecutions where they were due legitimised the use of mass violence as a means of political consolidation, a strategy that was fully exploited by the Sangh parivar. It is this that has created the bind that every time Gujarat 2002 is brought up the perpetrators are able to counter that with ‘1984’.
Again, successive Congress administrations showed a singular incapacity in dealing with hate speech and fascist mobilisations (they allowed the Shiv Sena to flourish in Maharashtra, allowed the demolition of Babri masjid, allowed the Bombay pogroms of 1992/3, and so on). Most spectacularly, UPA1 simply failed to make any effort to bring Modi to book on grounds of command responsibility for the violence of 2002.

Second, the culture of venality that grew up in UPA 2 in particular was a key factor in throwing the Indian middle class into the hands of the BJP. Even if much of the rage and rhetoric against corruption was artificially constructed by the absurd computational exercises of the CAG, the perception that Congress had allowed ministers and allies to get away with massive scams in coal and telecoms fuelled a surge of revulsion that played straight into the hands of the radical Right. Corruption, of course, is more deeply embedded in the bureaucracy than it is in the political class, but it remains the most powerful weapon parties can use to engineer each other’s downfall.

And finally, at the most basic level of all, the failure of the secular parties (the Communist parties included) to make any serious headway in confronting the backlogs of deprivation in the country (widespread malnutrition and landlessness, mounting unemployment and lack of access to public health being the chief among these), inequalities that are also largely related to caste but not confined to it, has provided fertile ground for the right-wing to exploit the accumulated underlying sense of deprivation and injustice.

This is of course equally true of the Left parties where they were in power at the state level, notably in West Bengal, and failed to build popular capacities. This backlog of failure is why ‘development’ has become such a powerful abstraction, one so effectively exploited by Modi, even if in practice he has a dilettantish fascination with new technologies and no conception of economic management beyond exhortations to capital (most often, foreign capital) to invest.

Having said this, it would be a mistake to write off the Congress either as a party without a future or as one irredeemably compromised by its failure to uphold secularism. What the remarkable success of the Grand Alliance in Bihar shows is that all secular forces have to be able to work together to defeat fascism in India. This includes the Left parties, which stayed outside that alliance and which, as noted, have never been closer to extinction as national parties than they are today.

Jairus Banaji
8 November 2015

[1] The main ones have been ‘love jihad’, ghar wapsi (forced conversions), the beef ban, and scaremongering about Hindus being demographically drowned out by the minorities. UP and Karnataka have been bastions of much of this hate campaigning.

[2] An extraordinary public display of this partiality was the way the SBI chief was pressured into announcing a loan of $1 billion (the biggest ever for any private business) for one of the least viable projects thought up by any Indian industrial magnate, Gautam Adani’s Australian coal-mining project (in the Galilee Basin in Queensland) which none of the major international banks were willing to touch. It is inconceivable that the announcement would have been made without pressure from Modi.

[3] See Wilhelm Reich, The Mass Psychology of Fascism, Chapters 1 and 2; the best translation of Reich’s classic is the one by Theodore Wolfe, available here: http://www.relatedness.org/Mass_Psychology_of_Fascism.pdf

[4] Kershaw, Hitler, p. 332.

NWMI condemns the attack on Malini Subramaniam

February 11, 2016

First published on: January 8, 2016

Image: Malini Subramaniam

We, members of the Network of Women in Media, India, strongly condemn the shocking attack on the residence of Malini Subramaniam, a journalist based in Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh and correspondent for the news site Scroll.In, and the continuous attempts to intimidate and threaten her into silence.

According to reports in the news site, Scroll.In, a group of around 20 persons had come to her residence at about 6p.m. on February 7, and shouted slogans attacking her, including 'Naxali Samarthak Bastar Chodo. Malini Subramaniam Mordabad' (Naxal supporter, leave Bastar. Death to Malini Subramaniam). The mob apparently tried to instigate neighbours to attack her and said that she was a Naxal supporter. Early on February 8, morning, at around 2.30a.m., a motorcycle slowed down her home and threw stones at her residence.

Ms Subramaniam has identified two of the men in the mob – Manish Parakh and Sampat Jha. Both had visited her residence on January 10 last month and were members to the Samajik Ekta Manch, a Jagdalpur based forum formed to counter Naxalism in Bastar and support the work of the police in the area. Parakh is the secretary of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s Yuva Morcha and that Sampat Jha is a member of the Congress in Jagdalpur.

The online news site, Scroll, has documented the level of intimidation faced by Ms Subramaniam and has pointed out that, over the last year, she has been writing consistently on issues of adivasis and of displacement, mass sexual violence as well as other human rights violations. It is these reports that the Manch appears to have targeted as being 'pro-naxal' and anti-police. Subsequent to the Jan 10 'visit' by members of this Manch, Ms Subramaniam also received late night enquiries from the local police and had to face a number of questions and submit documents giving proof of her identity. The news-site had tried to take up the instances of intimidation with Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh but received no response.

It is clear that the local police, which is tasked with protecting its citizens, has chosen to look the other way while the mob demonstrated outside her residence. It has made no attempt to register an FIR or investigate the incident, much less ensure the safety and protection of MsSubramaniam and her daughter.

Already, journalists across the country have lodged strong protests over the arrest and continued incarceration of two journalists from Chhattisgarh, SantoshYadav and Somaru Nag. Now, in this incident, the indifference of the police and the state administration as well as the Chief Minister is a dangerous portent for freedom of expression and for the safety and security of media persons.

We demand that Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh immediately announce a full and thorough investigation into the incident and take steps to ensure the safety of Ms Subramaniam. His failure to do so can only be taken as an indication of his tacit support for such heinous and coercive tactics.

Bohra Clergy Bows to Australian SC, cries halt to FMG

February 11, 2016

Photo of Convicted Vaziri

A huge victory for young Bohra girls who were tortured for centuries making them undergo Female Genital Mutilation (FMG)

After Shabbir Mohammed Vaziri, a high ranking Bohra cleric, was subjected to jail term(s) for conspiring in the ‘khatna’ of two 7-year-old Bohra girls[1], and after the Australian Government threatened further action, the Bohra Dai, who boasts of divine legitimacy — command over Farishta (angels), and who promises Bohras of a place in paradise (jannat) if the simple act of touching the hand of the Syedna is performed – has crumbled under the threat of legitimate civic action. He has quietly ordered the Australian Bohra Jamat to make a public announcement banning Female ‘khatna’. This inhuman procedure, kept under wraps for decades, includes clipping the clitoris of young seven year old Bohri girls, aimed to prevent enjoyment of sexual pleasure.

The belief is premised on a desire to control sexuality: if girls do not experience sexual pleasure, they will not be drawn to involvements or encounters with men not have illegitimate sex. This is a twisted, flawed and inhumane logic. In reality, clitoridectomy generates unhealthy relationship and frustrations with husbands. The psychological damages due to forcible ‘khatna’ of girls as young as seven years, in fact can lead to other complications in relationships.

It is often argued among Bohra and African tribes that the practice of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) or ‘khatna’[2] is a command from the Prophet or Imams from some 14 centuries ago, even though only a small percentage of Muslims follow the practice. The context of justification for the practice is the wars of 14 centuries ago, when soldiers were killed and the winning army captured women and children of vanquished slaves and even sold them.

In those days, many men married four wives and also had several slave girls. When the master died, the slave girls were sold, inherited, or freed. These slave girls did not undergo clitoridectomy (cutting of clitoris) in a bid to curb or control their sexuality. The relationships between men and women, including sexual relations, were more natural. The practice of FGM, apart from being inhuman and painful, has generated deep perversions within relationships.

“Khafd (also known as khatna or female circumcision) has recently been interpreted by the Supreme Court of NSW to be within the meaning of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) as defined in section 45 of the Crimes Act of NSW. It is likely that the practice will be interpreted to fall within the specific laws in relation to FGM in other states or territories of the Commonwealth of Australia. Consequently, khafd is illegal, whether it is carried out within any of the states of Australia or overseas.” (From the notice, emailed to all Australian Bohras in the form a resolution letter, came a day after the Anjuman-e-Burhani (Sydney) – a trust managing Bohra affairs in Australia – held a meeting to discuss khatna)

I have been writing against practice of ‘khatna’ for several years. Some Bohra women have written to me about their childhood ‘khatna’ trauma. Some men have talked to me about their sexual frustrations; some Bohra women wrote of their ingrained belief that ‘khatna’ makes Bohra woman pure (“pak”). Other girl’s wrote of their belief that the ‘khatna’ was a religious command. Few of them said they were lucky that their parents saved them from the torture of ‘khatna’.

Fortunately, over the last year, brave Bohra women have come forward and formed a group called Sahiyo (friends). Through their blogs and contacting various editors, columnists, and media around the world, they have brought about an awareness about the ills of this draconian practice. Fortunately, for Bohras women khatna or FMG perpetrators in Australia was caught red-handed and the perpetrators were given harsh punishment forcing the Bohra chief priest Syedna Mufaddal to ban the practice in Australia.
I had thought and hoped that England, France or USA with larger Bohra population would be the first to take such action. They should learn a lesson from Australia and act now.

I appeal to one and all: write to all governments to ban the practice especially the government of western countries. In India and Pakistan, there is no specific law against FMG or ‘khatna’.
My appeal is to all those who value human dignity all over the world: please impress upon your government to pass strict laws against forcible genital mutilation of seven-year-old girls in the name of religion.

[1] In November 2015, three Bohris were convicted of conspiring to commit FGM in a landmark trial by a jury in Austrialia. The convicted included the mother of two young girls, who were victims of the practice, the person who conducted the procedure and Shabbir Mohammed Vaziri
[2] Khafd (also known as khatna or female circumcision

Public Disclosure of CAG Report essential in public interest: Prashant Bhushan

February 11, 2016

On February 10, 2016, senior advocate, Prashant Bhushan was called to appear before the Rajya Sabha Privilege Committee, in relation to the breach of privilege notice against him. The matter was regarding the premature disclosure of the CAG report. While making a detailed submission on the legal position on Breach of Privilege, Bhushan laid down how the public disclosure of this report was essential in the public interest and that the breach of privilege notice is misconceived in law, and under the given circumstances of the case.

Legal Position on Breach of Privilege

The position of law on the matter according to Prashant Bhushan is as follows:

1. The motion of parliamentary Privileges has a colonial origin from British Parliament which was regarded as sovereign. In India, people are the sovereign and Parliament is it's representative.

2. The constitution has empowered its citizens with Fundamental Rights, including the right to free speech. The Supreme Court of India has held this to include the Right to Information holding that citizens have the right to know what their representatives are doing in every aspect.

3. The Supreme Court has also held that Parliamentary Privileges would include only those for allowing the Parliament to function, without impediment. The following judgments may be relevant to substantiate the aforesaid view:

The Supreme Court in its judgment in Raja Ram Pal’s case [2007 (3) SCC 184] has thrown light on the nature and scope of parliamentary privilege in the following words: “The raison d’etre for these privileges is again succinctly explained by Sir Erskine May thus; The distinctive mark of a privilege is its ancillary character. The privileges of parliament are rights which are absolutely necessary for the due execution of its powers’. They are enjoyed by individuals Members, because the House cannot perform its functions without unimpeded use of the services of its Members; and by each House for the protection of its Members and the vindication of its own authority and dignity.”

This is has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Lokayukta vs State of M.P., (2014) 4 SCC 473, wherein the Supreme Court has also held that privileges do not extend to administrative matters. Supreme Court held: “It is made clear that privileges are available only insofar as they are necessary in order that the House may freely perform its functions… Privileges do not extend to the activities undertaken outside the House on which the legislative provisions would apply without any differentiation. In the present case, the action taken by the petitioners is within the powers conferred under the above statutes and therefore, the action taken by the petitioners is legal. Further, initiation of action for which the petitioners are legally empowered, cannot constitute breach of any privilege.”

It is clear that the disclosure of the report has not impeded the functioning of Parliament in any way and therefore it cannot constitute Breach of privilege.

4. Though it has sometimes been held by the Parliament that premature disclosure of Parliamentary Proceedings or its committee may amount to Breach of Parliamentary Privileges. A CAG report is not a part of the Parliamentary Proceedings or its committee; rather it is an autonomous body created by the constitution. Merely because it is required under law to be tabled in the parliament doesn’t make it the report of the parliament or its committee.

5. The CAG report complained of in the present case was the draft audit report of the CAG prepared prior to submission of its final report.

6. The Central Information Commission (Manohar Parrikar & Ors. V. Accountant General, Goa) vide its order dated 10.06.2010 held that that the disclosure of the draft report, or even the final report of the CAG would not amount to breach of parliamentary privileges. The same view was taken by the Attorney General in 2012 when the issue of premature disclosure of the CAG reports or its draft was raised by the CAG with the government.

In this instant case, the draft CAG report in question contained important information about the manner in which the RIL- the operator of KGD-6 gas basin has cheated the government and caused loot of the public exchequer. It brought to light that: a) Reliance hugely and wilfully overestimated the reserves, b) Reliance hugely increased its capital expenditure, which is cost recoverable by over invoicing etc, c) Most of the procurement made was over-invoiced, d) Reliance failed to adhere to its production commitments, e) Reliance did not relinquish its fields as required by the contract, f) Reliance did not pay the full profit petroleum to the Government.

In light of the above, the public disclosure of this report was essential in public interest & breach of privilege notice is misconceived in law, and under the given circumstances of the case.

1...2,6032,6042,605...2,697 Page 2,604 of 2,697

Islam guarantees rights but where are the women theologians?

Why the idea of an Islamic state is full of holes

Stop the deification and appropriation of Babasaheb: Dalit youth to the Sangh Parivar

Whither Freedom: The Chhatisgarh attack on journalists

In unity lies the answer to the Hindu nationalist agenda

What the remarkable success of the Grand Alliance in Bihar shows is that all secular forces have to be able to work together to defeat fascism in India

NWMI condemns the attack on Malini Subramaniam

Bohra Clergy Bows to Australian SC, cries halt to FMG

Public Disclosure of CAG Report essential in public interest: Prashant Bhushan

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT