As I prepare to Ieave to surrender before the NIA headquarters in Delhi I am glad that Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Indira Banerjee gave me another week of freedom when they passed the order on April 8, 2020. A week of freedom means a lot in my condition, even in the age of lockdown. Their order resolved the predicament I encountered in complying with the March 16th order of the apex court, which obliged me to surrender by April 6th before the NIA, Mumbai. The lockdown that followed prevented me from travelling. Also there was no direction from NIA (Mumbai) regarding what I should do under the circumstances. I know now that I have to surrender myself to the NIA Head quarters in Delhi.

The Indian Prime Minister has likened the challenge posed by Covid19 pandemic to a state of “national emergency”. Meanwhile the apex court itself recently intervened in the matter of jail conditions, and issued guidelines to the authorities regarding the overcrowding of jail inmates and the threat posed to the prisoners and detenues, jail staff and other personnel assigned jail duties. This concern remains although no case of Covid19 infection has come from any jail so far, somewhat reassuring for me. However, I am affected by the fear that my near and dear ones harbour about my captivity amidst Covid19.

I cannot help but feel disappointed that the terse order of the Supreme Court on 8th April had no reference to the Covid19 pandemic, which has overtaken the world, including all of us in India.

However, I can now begin to face the actual legal process, which accompanies cases where provisions of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act are invoked. Such Acts turn the normal jurisprudence upside down. No longer is it the axiom that ‘a person is innocent unless proven guilty’. In fact, under such Acts, ‘an accused is guilty unless proven innocent’.

Draconian provisions of UAPA are not accompanied by stricter procedures regarding evidence, especially electronic, considering the stringent punishment provided for under the Act; the procedures, which otherwise provide tighter rules regarding evidence, are instead made elastic. Under this double whammy, jail becomes the norm, and bail an exception. In this Kafkaesque domain, process itself becomes punishment.

My hope rests on a speedy and fair trial for myself and all my fellow co-accused. This alone will enable me to clear my name, and walk free, having also used the time in jail to rid myself of acquired habits.

Until then,
“Won’t you help to sing
These songs of freedom
‘Cause all I ever have
Redemption songs
Redemption songs.
These songs of Freedom……” (Bob Marley)
Gautam Navlakha
April 14, 2020, New Delhi.

Gautam Navlakha

The post Gautam Navlakha’s Call for Freedom appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 

The post Chhattisgarh: Talks, Not Bullets as Solution appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In other words, Rafale deal offers us insight into how dangerous this dogmatic faith in privatisation can become.
 

 
 

The post Rafale Deal and Government’s Smoking Gun appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 

That Minor Girl abduction, rape and strangulation, a particularly gruesome crime, aroused a virulent response from Jammu High Court Bar Association, as well as the Kathua Bar, in the name of “sentiments of the (Hindu) people”, invites attention to a phenomenon which has long been there but rarely acknowledged. The case was investigated by the SIT constituted and supervised by the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir, when J&K police bungled the initial investigation, in lieu of money according to the charge-sheet. The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Kathua was reluctant to accept the charge-sheet and relented only after five hours when orders were issued by his superiors. All this went on while the Hindu Ekta Manch supporters had a field day staging protests inside the Court premises unhampered by the J&K Police. There were no preventive detentions, lathis charge, tear gas, pellet guns and guns, which is the norm in Kashmir. And now comes the news that the authorities are going to appoint Sikh prosecutors to ensure that Hindu-Muslims divide does not widen. In other words, starting from January 23 when HEM was formed by RSS supporters to now, this vicious campaign was allowed a free run. No police force displays such generosity towards people protesting atrocities and persecution as they do towards rabble-rousing Hindutvawadis for imagined “hurt”.

The High Court and local Bar’s demand of handing over the matter to CBI rested on the argument that gruesome abduction, rape and killing of the 8-year-old girl ought to be investigated by Hindu police personnel, because SIT’s credibility is suspect as it comprises of more Muslim personnel in the team, was led by a Muslim police officer and which then pinned the blame on eight accused all of them Hindus, including four police personnel. The High Court and local Bar Association could carry on with their vituperative campaign, strike call, ‘bandh’ etc because they enjoyed the patronage of Jammu-based BJP, Congress and the National Panthers Party as well as BJP ministers in the state and at the Centre, especially the Minister in PM Office Jitendra Singh. Lending legitimacy to the demand for CBI inquiry the Minister in PMO reportedly said on February 22 that “If people feel that they do not have faith in the police or crime branch investigation and the case needs to be handed over to the CBI, I don’t think, there is any problem in handing over the case to the CBI”. But why carry on with the protest when charge-sheet has been filed and the veracity of the evidence presented by the SIT will be determined during the trial. Samar Halarnkar writing in Scroll.in [12/04/2018] is right when he says that India is being pushed into becoming “an apartheid state, a Hindu Rashtra where the Hindu has first claim to everything”, and evidently want the criminal justice system to favour them.

The sight of remorseless ‘Hindutvawadis’ waving the tricolour flag and mouthing abuse & provocative slogans, indulge in arson, plunder, molestation and even lynching in the name of “Gau Mata” or “Bharat Mata” or some imagined “hurt” represents the new ‘normalcy’ manufactured by pseudo-patriots of ‘Sangh Parivar’. That these luminaries of Hindutva in Kathua have been covering their crimes using the national flag to agitate in favour of perpetrators (which included four police personnel) of heinous crime against a girl child, promote ethnic cleansing by ridding Kathua district of Muslims and can carry on their murderous politics, is evidence of the official patronage and clout they enjoy. That the Union Government and its security apparatus still point fingers at Muslims of Kashmir and ignores the danger posed by Hindutvadis, illustrates that the religious radicalization Indian Government focuses on studiously ignores the radicalization of Hindus and the vicious politics they engage in India and in particular in Jammu.

In the aftermath of 1947 massacre of Jammu Muslims by the Dogra Maharaja’s troops, backed by RSS and the Akali Dal, the emergence of Sheikh Abdullah, led National Conference to power in 1947-48. The agitation by the Praja Parishad and then Jana Sangh was a thinly disguised attempt by the old ruling class under Dogra Rule (1846-1947) to retrieve what they had lost with the demise of the kingdom. In the process, they kept alive the communal fault-lines in J&K, while claiming to be represent the “nationalist force”.

These faultlines got exacerbated in mid-1990’s when Village Defense Committees were set up in Doda and Kishtwar comprising 95% Hindus as Special Police Officers mostly drawn from Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena. They still function and carry weapons. Lest we forget the entire Jammu and Kashmir Division has been declared as “Disturbed”, with extraordinary powers provided to the soldiers under AFSPA andto the police force. The charge-sheet filed in the Kathua case speaks of the crime meant to terrorise Muslims to vacate Kathua, which in a “disturbed” area would have invited extraordinary laws to be invoked. Not in this case. Although in border/LOC areas, sedition charges have been filed byJ&K Police on migrants for merely condemning the BJP government and PM Narendra Modi for betraying the border residents! Likewise, there are severe restrictions onownership, use and display of arms, being a “Disturbed Area”. However, in Jammu, the Army itsel fhas held weapon training camps for Bajrang Dal and such rabble-rousers. Authorities have also allowed Hindutvawadis to carry and publicly display weapons under the name of religious ritual. In a manner of speaking for the ‘Hindutvawadis “Disturbed” conditions has been an enabling condition for self-perputuation whereas for the rest of the population encumberances and restrictions are the norm, their constitutional Freedoms virtually suspended.

In 2008 too, Jammu surpassed itself by emerging as the centre for regressive ideas and promoted not only hatred and hostility towards Kashmiri Muslims, including of imposing economic embargo (an act of war under International Humanitarian Laws), targetted on the “National Highway’ anyone they suspected of being a Kashmiri Muslim. Then too, Hindutvawadis carried national flags, while they committed crimes. Lest we forget, in 2008 the only criterion for Lt General (retd) S K Sinha and also for Governor of J&K, to characterise the agitation in Jammu as “nationalist” and the one in the Valley as “anti-national” was because in Jammu “agitators have been carrying (the) national flag” whereas in Kashmir “they have been carrying Pakistani (actually they were green) flags”. The then National Security Adviser, M K Narayanan, not to be left behind, opined that security forces could not accept the Indian flag being abused by the agitators in Kashmir. However, then as now neither the sentiments of security forces nor the Government apparently got “hurt” when rape, lynching and plunder were carried out or being carried out by flag waiving criminals. So the subtle message to Hindus is that all will be fine if they commit heinous crimesso long as it is carried out in the name of “nationalism” and they keep waiving national flag. Unsurprisingly, this denigration of the tricolour goes on without anyone finding anything wrong with it. One wonders if the ‘sangh parivar’ which always derided the tricolour and wanted saffron colour as national flag now encourages its rank and file to carry the tricoulr flag to terrorise people, a clever way to demean and abuse the tricoulur they never wanted?

As in 2008 so even now the authorities treat agitation by Hindutva groups with kid gloves. Security Forces always claim that they use force as per the scale of provocation. What the forces do not say, however, is that while they used live bullets and pellets on the protesting civilians in Kashmir, they handle rioters gently in Jammu. Notice that none of the leaders of Hindu Ekta Manch was prevented from carrying on with their campaign in defiance of Public Order and clearly aimed at impeding the course of justice. They were inciteful which invites registering a complaint and possible arrest. Contrast this with Kashmir where at drop of a hat Kashmiri protestors are subjected to bullets, pellets, tear gas, lathicharge, detention, roughed up or tortured, booked under dreaded Public Security Act for years on end or accused of cognisable offence with years of gruelling trial. After such display of partisanship, there ought to be nothing surprising about what is taking place in Jammu where Hindutvawadis have had a free run.

So the point is we can continue to live in a state of denial and pretend that the problem facing India in J&K is radicalisation of Muslims inspired by Pakistan, when we are reminded again and again of the demon in our midst in the shape of Hindutva. This officially patronised ‘nightmare’ that is India, has been long in making. So we have no one else but ourselves to blame for ignoring this for far too long. Now that its there for all to observe its ‘naked glory’, it is time we connect the dots and see the reality for what its is being turned into.

Courtesy: Newsclick.in
 

The post The Repellent “New” Idea of India at Work appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
An unnamed  youth — one among the 25 injured in Darbugh village, near Chadooora town in the district of Budgam, in Kashmir; where three civilians also lost their lives to the bullets fired by the Indian government’s forces on 28^th March 2017 — answered  a question posed by a reporter as to why he threw stones during military operations. He said, “I had come to help the militant escape. He (militant) had taken up gun, and I picked up stones, to fight oppression.”

The answer encapsulates a widely shared view among young Kashmiri men and women today.  India’s army chief, Bipin Rawat, issued a public statement on 15 February, 2017 in which he warned Kashmiris that those among them who “create hurdles during (Army) operations” will face “harsh action.” By calling them “over-ground workers of terrorists” and equating stone-pelting, and flag-waiving of Pakistan and ISIS banners, as acts of “terrorism” carried out by “anti-nationals,” he was, essentially, justifying the increase in blood-letting, and also widening the net of the military crackdowns to include civilians. Equating civilians with terrorists is a common practice among nation-states waging wars outside their borders or at home. The Indian policy towards armed militants since 1989–90, when the Kashmir insurgency began, was captured pithily in the movie Haider, which carried a scene in which a graffiti on the military barrack walls reads, “Catch them by the balls and their hearts and mind will follow.”

The 15 February, 2017 statement by the Army chief came in the wake of two incidents, one on 12th February, 2017, and another one on 14 February, 2017. In both the incidents, people not only gathered to protest the killing of militants in an encounter, but the funeral thereafter of the four dead militants saw a mass gathering of people. The fact that people were defying the Indian army, the fourth largest in the world, and extending support to the militants, is yet another reminder that the popular mood in Kashmir remains defiant. However, if 600,000 soldiers have failed to resolve the Kashmir dispute militarily; and, when armed militancy — which has shrunk in numbers from 15,000 in 1992–94 to less than 400 armed militants — is still made out as a grave threat, then the resilience of the popular defiant mood and their demand for a political resolution cannot be belittled.(17)

 Why do Kashmiris, who know full well that they will suffer grievous harm, still come out to protest and express solidarity with militants, and join their funerals in thousands? Why, in the past two years, have they begun to gather at actual sites of military operations, to shout slogans against the government forces, exhort the militants to fight on, and even pelt stones to disrupt military operations? It is no ordinary militancy when non-combatants come together to save their own combatants, inviting all of us to ask how and why have the unarmed Kashmiris been driven to this point, willing to risk their lives. What desperation makes them determined to offer resistance and express solidarity with militants when the government forces, especially the army, warns them to stay away or else face harsher measures?

(…)

The changes brought about by deposing Sheikh Abdullah in 1953 are far too significant to be dismissed as, simply, a faulty handling of the situation by the government. One after another, various symbols of Kashmiri autonomy and self-identity were attacked. Even before the J & K Constitution was adopted by a truncated CA, in 1954, through Presidential Orders, the Indian administration had acquired legal cover for turning “friendly advice” into decree. The subsequent years saw the extension of Article 312 in 1958, bringing J & K under All India Services. By January 1965, Articles 356 and 357, enabling the Centre to bring a state under the Governor’s rule without the consent of the State Legislature, was made applicable for J & K. In 1986, the Central government managed to extend Article 249, enabling the Indian parliament to legislate even on matters in the State List, on the strength of a resolution passed by the Upper House of the Parliament. 

All this created fertile ground for the armed militancy, which emerged in Kashmir in 1989–90.

(…)

… [S]ince the 1990s, the people of Kashmir have been facing “harsh action” in the form of massacres, mass arrests and detentions, custodial torture, murder, sexual violence, and enforced disappearances. Justice still evades most of the victims of this violence perpetuated by the armed forces. Getting the police to register complaints against the armed forces is not easy. But, without one, there can be no police investigation into the alleged crime. Investigation itself can take a long time, depending on the cooperation of the armed forces with the investigators. Delay or exoneration is the norm here. If, despite all this, a charge-sheet is filed by investigators, it cannot proceed beyond this point without the consent of the Indian government. In the rare event of such a sanction being granted, it is left to the armed forces to decide whether their accused personnel will be tried by the court-martial or a criminal court. Thus, the armed forces enjoy multi-layered protection. In other words, a civilian, a nominal Indian citizen, has no recourse to justice in a criminal court and has no “locus standi” in courts-martial, since such courts are meant to discipline army personnel. Thus, the civilian, caught in a war zone, has no redress. The resulting pent up anger of the people finds its way into protests, where they are met with “non-lethal” pellet guns, tear gas shells, pepper spray, and bullets. From 8 July, 2016 to 31 December,2017, the Indian armed forces killed 100 people; caused eye injuries to 1,100; blinded more than 300; and caused grievous injury to at least 10,000 other civilians, of all age, from children to the aged. In a mass display of civil disobedience, people stayed at home and followed the schedule announced by the Azaadi Movement, for the opening and closing hours of offices and shops, for over six months. Even this was met with soldiers forcing their way into people’s houses to force them out. Empty streets, closed shops and offices, these were not good for the government’s “perception management,” which was trying to sell “normalcy”.
 

 Gautam Navlakha is a civil liberties, democratic and human rights activist and a journalist.

This article was first published on Indian Cultural Forum

The post Why do Kashmiris Keep Fighting the Indian Army? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It would be churlish to criticize the Government of India for appointing a new interlocutor for “sustained dialogue” but for the fact that the same official statement qualifies “aspirations” with a prefix “legitimate” and evident that even this dialogue will be conditional. We know that for successive Governments any espousal of demand outside the confines of Indian Constitution is considered anathema. With the RSS-BJP Government contours of “legitimate” has narrowed as their understanding of Constitution is informed by their ideological demand for doing away with Article 370 and 35A as well as their championing of settling “nationalists” in Kashmir, an euphemism for demographic transformation of Kashmir. As a result list, of what constitutes illegitimate aspirations to the votaries of RSS-BJP is long. The other problem is that the intended focus of the interlocutor is reaching out to youth and there is ambiguity over talking to votaries of “Azaadi”. Because NIA is neither climbing down from targeting Hurriyet (Geelani) nor relenting in its efforts to make high profile arrests, as they did within 24 hours of announcing dialogue by arresting son of Hizbul Mujahideen leader Syed Salahuddin. The message is that ‘separatists’ are on backfoot,  militants on the run, and people in disarray, so the time is propitious for engaging in dialogue.

This is the fourth such effort since Atal Bihari Vajpaye Government appointed KC Pant in 2001 followed by appointment of NN Vohra (current Governor)  in 2003-08, and the 3 member interlocutors appointed by UPA II Government in 2010 comprising Dileep Padgaonkar, Prof MM Ansari and Radha Kumar. While first two were boycotted by Hurriyet, the third one submitted a report which was rejected by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs. So why should the appointment of a fourth interlocutor, a former head of the Intelligence Bureau arouse confidence, especially when RSS-BJP has vitiated an already worsening situation with its support for military suppression of not just armed militants but even unarmed civilians..

Not too long back, on October 14 Union Minister of State in PM’s Office, Jitendra Singh was reported as saying that militancy is in the “last phase” and militants’ “lifespan…. has been shortened.” Same day Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh disclosed that Army has been given a “free hand” to act against “terrorists”. The news reports citing official data show how successful ‘Operation All Out’ has been and senior officials of Police claimed that this year 12 commanders and 140 other militants have been killed. Although they hastened to add that “recruitment” carries on unabated. Official and corporate media have been over the moon for Government backing military solution, setting NIA sleuths after Hurriyet (Geelani), and for challenging Article 35A in the apex court.

What has receded into background is the fact that since last year, July 8th 2016 killing of Burhan Wani,  90 civilians were killed by the Government forces, 15,000 protestors were injured due to bullets, pellets, tear gas, 1100 suffered eye injuries which blinded scores of people. This apart 11,000 people were detained/arrested and threat of criminal prosecution hangs over them which could financially ruin their families or jeopardize their future. In addition NIA’s targeting of Hurriyet (Geelani) in the name of cracking down on foreign support for resistance, while simultaneously the BJP Government and leaders rake up the issue of Article 35A of the Constitution muddied the ‘troubled waters’. As though this was not bad enough, since September J&K has been gripped by incidence of braid chopping.

Is militancy on its last legs and a military solution achievable through Operation All Out?

If killings were to be measure of success then killing of 12 commanders and 140 militants in encounters is an achievement. But it is always advisable that when looking at J&K we look closely at data thrown at us. Militancy had declined from the peak of 20,000 militants in 1990s to few hundred by 2012-13. This ought to have heralded de-militarisation in J&K.  That it did not was because this decline in number of militants did not mean that people had given up on “Azaadi”. Therefore, number of Government forces deployed in Jammu and Kashmir remained by and large unchanged. Also exultation at the decimation in ranks of these 250—300 militants is tempered by anxiety over recruitment. The reason is not far to seek. For all its military successes it has not brought about a transformation in attitude and will of the people. When on October 16 militants attacked a former Sarpanch and PDP leader Mohammed Ramzan Sheikh in which he died and so did a militant of Hizbul Mujahideen the thing to note is that thousands came for funeral of the militant but few went to PDP leader’s funeral. Who is owned as their own and who is disowned tells its story. At encounter sites people still gather and hold protest, shows that although more militants are getting killed the popular mood remains defiant.

Look at the braid chopping incidents which have brought to surface the utter distrust expressed by people towards the Government, military forces and agencies whose presence is ubiquitous. The claim of the Police that it is an issue of mass hysteria and that anti-socials are helping fuel it, finds very few takers. Neither the Chief Minister nor the State Women’s Commission is convinced of this and the latter has begun its own investigation to get to bottom of it.  

My own visit to Boniyar last week to inquire into one such incident brings out the difficulty in sifting chaff from the wheat. On October 12 at around 7.30 pm a young mother of two Tabassum in village Batangi A said that while she was moving towards the bathroom someone came from behind used her ‘dupatta’ to cover her face and her braids were chopped. No spray was used. When she recovered and screamed neighbours gathered and some saw two men fleeing. Later three persons were picked up by villagers of Bernatt a short distance from Batangi A. A FIR 37/2017 was registered and Tabassum went to the Boniyar Police Station the very next day and recorded her statement under section 161 of CrPC, in which she also identified two persons from among the three caught by Bernatt villagers.  She claimed that these two had come in the afternoon to the village of 12th October to sell Tarpaulin. The Police on the other hand say that they suspect that Tabassum was prompted by villagers to identify two persons. They accept that   although two of the three were “Army sources” (locals who work for the army) they were not in the area in the afternoon of 12th October, but actually somewhere else. They further claim that the two “army sources” were on anti-militancy work and had come to meet Manzoor Ahmed Mir of Bernatt who had assured them to effect surrender of a militant presently in Pakistan. Call records would verify their movement and location but police had not asked for this to corroborate their story. The point is that Police go to great lengths to rubbish the braid chopping incident and exonerate the ‘army sources”.  
Trouble does not end there as the communal divide between Jammu and Kashmir regions continues to widen.  The resignation of Maharaja Hari Singh’s grandson Vikramaditya Singh from PDP because the Party was reluctant to include 100 years of Dogra Rule in school curriculum, declare September 25th as holiday to commemorate Maharaja Hari Singh as well as refusal of the Government to throw out 3000 Rohingyas exposes the attempt to widen polarization  between Jammu and Kashmir along communal lines.

It is important to note that Kashmir was sold in 1846 to Raja Gulab Singh in lieu of services rendered to East Indian Company against the Lahore’s Sikh rulers. And they remained the staunchest supporters of British Rule. Besides, Dogra Hindu rule was an unmitigated disaster for people of J&K, in which Kashmiri Muslims bore the brunt of feudal exactions and excesses. So to push for teaching 100 years of Dogra rule to appease the old ruling class which lost power post-1947 arouses strong resentment in Kashmir. As for throwing out 3000 Rohingyas from Jammu it smacks of being a deliberate pursuit of communal fear mongering.

Against chasms which exist in J&K the appointment of a new interlocutor has to be weighed. If it does not inspire confidence in Kashmir the reasons are not far to seek. Successive governments have made it clear that dialogue is a ruse because Indian Government has nothing concrete to offer. Lest we forget Article 370 has been reduced to an empty shell and Government has reiterated that ‘clock cannot be turned back’, implying that what has been eroded cannot be restored. So what is it that the RSS-BJP Government, wedded to repression, to offer when they consider even this eroded autonomy unacceptable?

The charade continues.

Courtesy: Newsclick.in

The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.
 

The post Kashmir: Charade of Dialogue appeared first on SabrangIndia.