Photo Credit: Scoopwhoop

Gender-just laws have always been opposed tooth and nail by patriarchal forces. The battle has always been a vicious and cruel one in which every anti-woman pronouncement of every scripture and every prophet – and these defy computation – has been hurled in the face of those, mostly women but with honourable exceptions, who have dared to demand that women be treated as human beings, equal human beings. The battles have also been long and drawn-out. Victories have been small and far between and never complete. The long battle for a legal victory is always followed by an even longer battle for the victory to be translated into reality.  Everywhere, the battle still rages – muted here, loud and clear elsewhere.

We often forget what the Suffragettes in ‘civilized’ and Christian England and America had to face when they demanded the right to vote (and, of course, the fact that it was the ‘Godless’ Soviet Union that was the first country to give all women that right immediately after the October Revolution). And even the millions who have read Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice do not really register the fact that daughters could not inherit their fathers’ property in England until just a century ago. That was why the Bennetts, parents to five daughters, were keen to marry their first-born to the distant relative who, although hardly known to them, was Mr. Bennett’s legal heir. 

In our own country, the struggle for equal rights for women has been a long and bitter one, with no end still in sight. Dr. Ambedkar fought valiantly to give Hindu women equal rights within the family and had to pay a heavy price for his pains. His Hindu Code Bill was received with howls of angry protest and indignation by self-styled upholders of Hindu tradition and law. He had little option but to resign as law minister and the reforms that he had formulated so painstakingly were enacted piecemeal over the next several decades. Even today, Hindu women are still ‘unequal’ in some spheres.

Women belonging to the Christian and Muslim communities have also had to suffer great setbacks and opposition to their efforts to access equal rights. Mary Roy’s heroic fight for the right to inheritance in the Syrian Christian community, which was strongly supported by the CPI(M) and leaders like Susheela Gopalan, invited the wrath of her community and family members. Christian women, despite tremendous support from many sections, including clerics, of their community have been repeatedly let down by governments of all hues that do not want to risk alienating influential Christian leaders, clergy and groups.

The rights of Muslim women has once again become an important issue of discussion and debate much as it had been some decades ago when the Supreme Court awarded  maintenance to the 74-year old divorcee, Shah Bano. This judgment was vociferously opposed on the streets and elsewhere by many Muslim organizations. Our Party was alone in its strong defence of the judgment. 

Inside parliament, CPI(M) MPs including the late Saifuddin Chowdhury made strong and eloquent interventions on the issue. AIDWA organised a procession of more than 2,000 Muslim women from all over the country demanding that the Supreme Court judgment be honoured. An AIDWA delegation met the then prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi, and handed over a memorandum signed by thousands of Muslim and non-Muslim men and women demanding that his government support the judgment.

Most unfortunately, despite the fact that he had assured the delegation of his support, he compromised not only the position of his government on a legal issue but on the question of a secular and gender-just approach to women’s issues. It must be kept in mind that Sec. 125 under which maintenance is granted is part of the criminal law procedure which is actually out of the purview of the personal laws of different communities.

Despite this, not only did various Muslim organisations fight tooth and nail against the judgment but they also succeeded in forcing the government to pass a law taking Muslim women out of the purview of this particular section of the law. This act of the government had very serious repercussions and gave the Ramjanmabhoomi movement launched by the Sangh Parivar a tremendous boost.

Since then, the sangh parivar, which led the charge against Dr. Ambedkar’s proposed Hindu Code Bill, has regularly demanded the enactment of a common civil code and posed as a staunch supporter of women’s rights, especially the rights of Muslim women. Of course, neither they nor anyone else has actually formulated the provisions of such a code and submitted them for discussion and debate. 

While our party, in principle, believes that patriarchal and unjust laws need to be changed or done away with, we are also opposed to the communalisation of this issue which is unfortunately what has occurred because of the campaign launched by the sangh parivar.

While our party, in principle, believes that patriarchal and unjust laws need to be changed or done away with, we are also opposed to the communalisation of this issue which is unfortunately what has occurred because of the campaign launched by the sangh parivar. While it supports khap panchayats and refuses to enact a law against ‘honour crimes’ it continuously raises the issue of the legal discrimination that Muslim women face in order to increase anti-Muslim feelings in society at large.

AIDWA had taken an early initiative to organise a workshop on ‘Equal Rights, Equal Laws’ where members of all communities had spoken about the injustice that women suffered from the way in which personal laws were interpreted and implemented in India and many reforms were demanded. Unfortunately, no government (including BJP governments) addressed these issues sincerely. The campaign for a common civil code, however, continued to figure prominently in sangh parivar campaigns and BJP manifestoes.

After the Shah Bano issue, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), an umbrella organsation of representatives of several Muslim sects, came into prominence and soon adopted for itself the mantle of representing all Muslims. This has been hotly contested by leaders of various Muslim communities, organisations and also eminent Muslim jurists and lawyers.

Recently, issues pertaining to the way in which Muslim Personal Law is interpreted and implemented in India are once again the focus of much public attention and debate.

In April, Shayara Bano approached the Supreme Court to ban the practice of ‘talaq in one sitting’ (talaq-e-bidat). She had been divorced through the sending of a letter by her husband of 15 years. She has challenged not only this form of divorce but also the heinous practice of ‘halala’ that is closely connected to it and also the right of Muslim men to polygamy.

Halala is a practice in which a woman divorced by a man in one sitting has to undergo if her husband later regrets his action and the couple wants to re-unite. For this to happen, she has to marry another man, consummate the marriage with him and then be divorced by him in the same manner. It is not difficult to imagine the humiliation and abuse that this inflicts on the innocent victim. It is also a fact that often the second husband refuses to divorce her leading to further misery. 

In his widely recognised Outlines of Mohammadan Law, the jurist Asaf AA Fyzee writes, “There is complete unanimity of opinions that in Islamic parlance the term ‘bidat’ is used for all those practices which originated after the Holy Prophet (pbuh).”  It is well-known that the Caliph Omar wanted to punish men who misused the Quranic provisions for giving talaq. He, therefore, said that those who divorced their wives for frivolous reasons and then wanted to reconcile could do so only after the women had undergone halala. It is, of course, a tragic irony that his pronouncement, in fact, punished the victim of the talaq rather than its perpetrator.

No Muslim country permits the unfettered usage of talaq-e-bidat. Most insist on the practice of talaq that becomes final only after the third pronouncement with a gap of 3 months between the first and the third so that there is adequate time for reconciliation and counseling. In India, the Shia community does not recognise talaq-e-bidat or   halala. In fact, the model nikah nama (marriage contract) devised and widely used by Shia clergy lays down a definite procedure for divorce over several months and also strengthens women’s right to demand divorce.

The affidavit also defends polygamy and says that it is “a blessing not a curse for women”. Its contention is that polygamy prevents promiscuity. Of course, there is not an iota of evidence in support of this.

The Ahl-e-Hadees sect (Sunni) also does not recognise triple talaq in one sitting.  Recently, important Barelvi clerics have also given an opinion (fatwa) that Muslim women can insist on including their right to ask for a divorce in their nikah namas.  Many organisations of Muslim women and also women’s organisations fighting for equal rights of all women have been agitating for decades against the practices of triple talaq in one sitting, halala and polygamy. The last, though sanctioned by the Quran, is not an unqualified but a conditional right. 

It is most unfortunate that the AIMPLB, in the affidavit that it has filed in the Supreme Court challenging its very right to ‘interfere’ in matters of Muslim Personal Law, has resorted to the most retrograde, untrue and patriarchal assertions. For example, it says, “Shariah grants the right to divorce to husband because men have greater power of decision-making. They are more likely to control emotions and not take a hasty decision”.

Further, in 78 (c) of its affidavit, the Board states, “Legal compulsions of time-consuming separation proceedings and expenses may deter him (the husband) from taking the legal course. In such instances, he may resort to illegal, criminal ways of murdering or burning her alive”.

Such statements are truly shocking, misleading and a justification for criminal behaviour. There are innumerable instances of talaq being pronounced for frivolous reasons and due to drunkenness. Since the Quran itself promotes a form of divorce that will take a few months, the very irresponsible resort to such false and provocative statements is most condemnable.

The affidavit also defends polygamy and says that it is “a blessing not a curse for women”. Its contention is that polygamy prevents promiscuity. Of course, there is not an iota of evidence in support of this. In fact, all the facts available show that the two have nothing to do with each other.
 
It is very interesting, that after having stated that the Supreme Court has no right to interfere with the interpretation and implementation of Muslim Personal Law, the Board goes on to state that the rights of Muslim women have been protected by the  “Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986 which has been upheld by the Supreme Court”.
 
Finally, the Board gives away the truth regarding its own character by stating in para 46 of its affidavit, “India is a patriarchal society, and therefore personal laws of all communities are aligned with the patriarchal notion…”  In other words, its interpretation of Personal Laws has little to do with religious scriptures or with the concept of justice and everything to do with strengthening patriarchy.

It is important to note that the AIMPLB’s intervention in the court has come in for strong criticism and outright condemnation from very large numbers of Muslim intellectuals, jurists, commentators and community leaders. Women’s organisations of all kinds have been unanimous in their condemnation. This is something that is not reported widely in the media which finds it more convenient to concentrate on the projection of the AIMPLB as the ‘true’ representative of Muslim opinion.

The CPI (M) is committed to the struggle for equal rights of all women. We extend our full support to our brave Muslim sisters who are displaying tremendous courage in challenging patriarchal norms and interpretations. We believe that the Supreme Court and the judiciary generally has not only the right but also the duty to see that constitutional provisions guaranteeing the equal rights of all citizens are used to protect the rights of women of all communities. 

The final word comes from none other than Shayara Bano herself.  She says, “Shah Bano got a ruling in her favour from the Supreme Court but it was later overturned by the government, denying divorced Muslim women their right to maintenance. Had her case been a success, it would have been one battle less for us.”  

The writer is former president, All India Democratic Women's Association (AIDWA).
 
 

The post The AIMPLB’s Affidavit is Retrograde and Patriarchal appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Born: May 11, 1918, Kerala
Died: January 21, 2016, Ahmedabad
​
Mrinalini was born to an unusually enlightened set of parents.  Her mother, Ammu, belonged to a matrilinear, Nair family of Palakkad, Kerala.  Her father though born a Palghat Brahmin, intensely disliked Brahminism, retrograde thinking and all aspects of caste superiority.  Their marriage had created a sensation at the time. 
 
Mrinalini’s father belonged to a very poor family.  Her maternal grandfather who was a petty government official had taken a great liking to the young boy who displayed his brilliance even at a very young age.  He helped him whenever he could and encouraged him to study hard.  Young Swaminadhan visited his benefactor’s home – his wife’s home was a Theravad named Vadakath in Anakara village – and he was very impressed by the imposing figure of the matriarch herself, A.V.Ammukutty Amma.
 
Many years later, Swaminadhan returned to Vadakath.  He had studied hard and won scholarships to study abroad and was now a lawyer who had started practicing in Madras and had become quite successful.  He felt it was time to marry and while the decision he took may seem patriarchal and patronising to us it was, for the times, quite revolutionary.  He had decided to offer to marry a daughter of his benefactor.  He remembered that he had had several.  When he entered Vadakath, however, and after he was affectionately greeted by Ammukutty Amma, he was told that not only was her husband no more but that all her daughters were now married.  ‘Except one’, she said. ‘But she’s very young’. 
 
Later, young Ammu, all of 13 years of age, joined them and Swaminadhan was much taken by her precocity.  He asked her, only half teasingly, if she would marry him and, after some thought, she said that she would if he accepted her conditions which were, that she would live in a city not a village; that she would be properly educated by an English woman and that he would never ask her where she was going and when she would be back, just like her brothers were never asked.  Much taken, Swaminadhan readily agreed to these conditions and marry they did.
 
But this was a time when the sambandhams (relationships) that were entered into between Brahmin men and Nair women were not marriages.  Swaminadhan, however, was determined to enter into a legally-binding relationship with Ammu and he not only married her in Vadakath but also at a registry office in London.  Tamil Brahmin society was appalled.  They were threatened with social boycott and met with derision. 

Swaminadhan, however, was determined to enter into a legally-binding relationship with Ammu and he not only married her in Vadakath but also at a registry office in London.  Tamil Brahmin society was appalled.  They were threatened with social boycott and met with derision. 
 
Swaminadhan’s success as a lawyer protected him and his family from caste-ostracism but they were all made aware of the hostility that the marriage had aroused.  This is what made all four of Swaminadhan and Ammu’s children – Govind, Lakshmi, Mrinalini and Subharam – extremely sensitive to the issue of caste prejudice.  All of them, in different ways, took a strong position against casteist intolerance and identified, in different ways, with those who were considered lowly in the caste hierarchy.  All of them experienced caste prejudice themselves although, of course, they were protected by their father’s success and economic well being.
 
Lakshmi and Mrinalini used to eat their lunch at their Brahmin uncle’s home, was near their school and they remembered being made to sit on the floor and eat by his mother-in-law.  When their father came to hear about this he insisted that meat with bones be included in their tiffin, everyday!
 
Later, their home became a hub of the national movement.  The Swadeshi movement was promoted by Ammu and both her daughters who were still children.  All of them participated in meetings, demonstrations and processions.  Their home was also a place where many singers, dancers and musicians who faced tremendous prejudice because of their mixed-caste origins were made welcome.  Women involved with the struggle of equal rights of whom their mother was a vocal one, were also to frequent their home.
 
Mrinalini went abroad to study at a very young age and this introduced her to Western culture, literature and liberal thinking.  She was obsessed with the urge to dance from an early age and in Switzerland and then the United States, she acquired a love for Western dance forms.  But they did not appeal to her as a vocation.  She returned thereafter to India and went to Shantiniketan where the open-mindedness and extremely emancipatory atmosphere created by Gurudev (Tagore) helped her to blossom and also find direction.
 
She then embarked on her journey of studying and mastering classical dance forms like Bharata Natyam and Kathakali, learning with the greatest living gurus.  The dedication and commitment that she displayed became part of her being. This dedication was to be her companion for the rest of her life.  Although she was not a healthy person and had been sickly throughout her childhood, her iron-clad determination to dance gave her the energy and strength to devote many hours, every day, to the rigours of classical dance training.
 
While she was studying dance, she met Vikram Sarabhai who was growing into an outstanding scientist.  They married soon after and made their home in Ahmedabad where Mrinalini developed Darpana which was first a dance school and then became a learning and teaching center for all the performing arts – dance, theatre, puppetry etc.
 
Mrinalini was uncompromising in her dedication to classical dance but she had the courage to use classical vocabulary for the depiction of social and contemporary themes.  She was extremely sensitive to the trials and tribulations of Indian women; to the fact that they became strangers after marriage in both their natal and their marital homes; to the denial of their individuality and autonomy; to the suppression of their talents.  She tried to make these the themes of many of her dance compositions and dramas and was a pioneer as a result.
 
Mrinalini was not a political activist who used her celebrity status to promote causes.  She said what she had to, through her art.  But sometimes she transgressed.  When the Gujarat carnage took place, she could not suppress the horror and agony that she felt.  She displayed exemplary courage in condemning what had happened and spoke out against those responsible.
 
Great artists are always inspiring.  When they are also extraordinarily committed and courageous human beings they are even greater sources of inspiration.

(Subhashini Ali, apart from being a political activist and former Member of Parliament from the Communist Party of India-Marxist is the niece of Mrinalini Sarabhai, daughter of Lakshmi, her older sister)
 

The post A Great Artist and a Woman of Courage, Mrinalini Sarabhai appeared first on SabrangIndia.

During a recent session of Parliament, held to commemorate the Constitution and pay homage to Dr. Ambedkar; and again, during the Parliamentary debate on ‘Growing Intolerance’, Babasaheb’s name was mentioned repeatedly.  It was recognized by all that he had made the greatest contribution to enshrine the principles of Democracy, Equality and Fraternity in the Constitution and fulsome praise and accolades were bestowed upon him, speciallyby members of the NDA II (read BJP) Government.  No one, however, except for Sitaram Yechury (CPIM, General Secretary) referred to his conversion to Buddhism or the reasons for this.

Despite the enormous and significant role he played in drafting the Constitution, Babasaheb had to, eventually abandon the religion of his forefathers.  Throughout his life he made untiring and valiant efforts to bring about a change in the attitude and thinking of high caste Hindus through argument, writings, historical research and continuous appeals to reason, humanity and compassion. The drafting of the Constitution and Hindu Code Bill were, of course, the most important of these efforts. 

Unfortunately, the bill did not bring about any real change of heart, mind and outlook.  Every one of his efforts had aroused the most vicious opposition and calumny.  Every promise that the Constitution made to bring about equality between all citizens was opposed tooth and nail during the Constituent Assembly debates by conservative elements determined to thwart all efforts to legislate equality into the existing unequal social hierarchies that they were determined to preserve.

The Hindu Code Bill was met by such howls of protest both inside the Constituent Assembly and outside on the streets that it had to be abandoned. Babasaheb resigned as Law Minister saying in protest that, “The Hindu Code was the greatest social reform measure ever undertaken by the legislature in this country. No law passed by the Indian Legislature in the past or likely to be passed in the future can be compared to it in point of its significance.

To leave inequality between class and class, between sex and sex, which is the soul of Hindu Society untouched and to go on passing legislation relating to economic problems is to make a farce of our Constitution and to build a palace on a dung heap.  This is the significance I attached to the Hindu Code.” (quoted from Dr. Ambedkar’s speech when he resigned from the first Indian cabinet of ministers).

The failure of his repeated and untiring efforts to bring about a change in the hearts and minds of his opponents was not unforeseen as far as Dr. Ambedkar was concerned.  As early as 1935, he had announced to his followers that although he had been born a Hindu he would not die as one because he was determined to abandon a belief system that refused to accept the principle of equality.  Finally, on the October 2, 1956, he embraced Buddhism along with many hundreds of thousands.  Tragically, within two months, on December 6, l956, he was no more.

On the same day, 36 years later, the Babri Masjid was destroyed by members of the Sangh Parivar.  This event is also commemorated, across the country, by some as “Shaurya (Valour) Diwas” and by others as a day of mourning.

There are also those, however, who feel that the choice of the date for the destruction of the mosque was no co-incidence.  They believe that it was Dr. Ambedkar’s Constitution that was the real target of the attack by the Sangh.  This is based not only on the choice of date but on the fact that the Sangh Parivar members who destroyed the mosque owed allegiance to the same RSS that had been in the forefront of the opposition to both the Constitution and the Hindu Code Bill.

The most uncompromising opposition both to the Constitution and the Hindu Code Bill came from Shri Golwalkar, head of the RSS.  Along with his supporters, he held fast to the view even after the Constitution was passed, that it was the Laws of Manu, the Manusmriti, alone that could be accepted as Law by Hindus.

As far as the Hindu Code Bill is concerned, Golwalkar castigated it by saying that it would reduce Hindu men to puny weaklings.  His views have never been repudiated by the Sangh Parivar. Today, Home Minister Rajnath Singh’s speech in Parliament is significant because while he heaped praise on the Constitution and Dr. Ambedkar, he also sharply criticized the later inclusion of the work ‘secular’ to describe the Republic that brought the Constitution into existence.

The reasons he gave for this criticism should be examined seriously by all Indian citizens.  He said “‘Secularism’ is the most misused word in the country… India’s religion itself is dharma nirpeksh. ..”Does the Constitution permit India to have a religion?  If India has a religion then can it continue to abide by its Constitution? Is it a co-incidence that the Home Minister who has now made known his commitment to a Religious State or a Hindu Rashtra was present at the site of the demolition of the mosque (Babri Masjid) on December 6, 1992?

Even at the time of its passage, Dr. Ambedkar feared for the future of the Constitution because he did not believe that the soil of India which had given birth to the worst forms of inequality would readily accept the seeds of democracy and fraternity.  Those who had opposed him then have given notice, time and again, that they continue to challenge the writ of this foundational doctrine.

The post India’s Sixth of December appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) organised a Convention against Communal Conflict in Delhi on November 16, 2011 in an attempt to breach the silence and apathy surrounding acts of violence against the minority community that have occurred in the last six months. In four states under very different political dispensations – the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) in Uttar Pradesh, the Janata Dal-United (JD-U) and BJP alliance in Bihar, the BJP in Uttarakhand and the Congress party in Rajasthan – incidents of police firing have taken place in which all the victims have been Muslims; shops and homes belonging only to the minority community have been looted and burnt and the overwhelming majority of those arrested have also been Muslim. In all the states, the political leaders have sought to cover up, justify or downplay the unforgivable and dangerous communal bias displayed by the police and administration.

Members of affected families from Forbesganj, Moradabad and Gopalgarh attended the convention. Unfortunately, no one from Rudrapur could attend because most of the victims are migrant workers whose families, along with thousands of other migrant families, have fled the town. While those who spoke at the convention, mothers, grandmothers, fathers, brothers and uncles who had suffered the unbearable losses of loved ones, expressed their unimaginable grief, they had come to Delhi to do more than that. They had come as part of their desperate search for justice and retribution.

Bihar

In Forbesganj, in an area inhabited only by Muslims, the state government was determined to build a wall denying them access to a road that had been built and then repaired by the state government because it was their only link to the mosque, to the schools, to their workplaces. However, to facilitate the interests of a local factory owner, the son of a BJP MLC, the government decided to build the wall across the road. Naturally, there was a protest. The police version is that the protesters resorted to stone-throwing but nothing more than this is alleged. The police responded by firing. On June 3, 2011 four Muslims, including a woman and an eight-month-old infant, were killed. One of those killed was 18-year-old Mustafa. A policeman was filmed jumping on his dead body and this horrific video, taken on a cellphone, has been seen all over the country.

Mustafa’s brother, Quddus, recited a poem that he had composed at the convention: “Jo soch nahin sakti duniya, woh manzar kal dikhlaya hai, Vardi mein darinda aaya hai, vardi mein darinda aaya hai; Kya kuch maanga tha humne, haq apna maanga bas humne, Purkhon se jo chale aaye hain, woh raah maanga tha bas humne; Fariyaad meri sun ke itni, seene pe goli chalaayi hai, Vardi mein… (What we saw yesterday defies imagination, when the devil in uniform comes calling, the devil in uniform comes calling. We asked for so little, only asserting our rights, the use of a path trodden for generations. But hearing our request, they fired bullets into our chests…).”

The state government has not taken any action at all – not even the photographed constable has been punished. Only the family of the eight-month-old infant has been given compensation, since no government can claim that such a small baby is capable of stone-throwing. The other three deaths remain uncompensated. More than four and a half months later, following the intervention of the Supreme Court on October 10, a judicial inquiry which had been announced by the Bihar government within a few weeks of the incident finally limped to a start.

Uttar Pradesh

The background to the events of July 6, 2011 in Moradabad is an incident of the kind that occurs in hundreds of villages and urban areas every day: two neighbouring Muslim families in Bagha village had been engaged in a long-standing dispute over various petty matters. In the first week of July, Yusuf, son of Kamrul, is alleged to have misbehaved with his neighbour, Muslim’s mother and Muslim is alleged to have misbehaved with Yusuf’s sister. While Kamrul complained to the police against Muslim, Muslim’s family was convinced by the village pradhan (head) not to go to the police and that the matter would be sorted out amicably ‘within the village’. The result was that the police came looking for Muslim early in the morning of July 6. By then all the male members of the family had run away and only his young sister, Noorjahan (about 14 years old), was at home. They ransacked the house and abused her (there is photographic evidence of this) and apparently threw a copy of the Koran on the floor. After they left, the terrorised young girl ran into the village and told everyone about what had happened.

The news of the ‘desecration’ of the Koran spread like wildfire through nearby villages which are heavily populated by Muslims and by 9 a.m. thousands of people had started collecting on the main road and a massive road blockade had started. The local police took the help of Muslim leaders from the area, including Haji Atiq and Kamil (pradhan of Dingarpur), and the roadblock at Bagha village was soon cleared. By the time they returned to the thana (police station) at Mainethar they found that not only had a large crowd collected there but that a jeep had been set on fire. Again, with the help of local people, the crowd was dispersed.

Meanwhile, the district magistrate (DM), Raj Shekhar, and the deputy inspector-general (DIG) of police, Ashok Kumar (large districts in Uttar Pradesh have seen senior superintendents of police replaced by DIGs), had left Moradabad for the area and they had to stop at Dingarpur where a mob had collected. All these large villages are located off the main road and have taken on the attributes of small kasbahs with large markets. As a result, there are always large crowds around the main road, as people from a large catchment area come for their daily needs, for work and also to go to school and college. At Dingarpur too, the crowd was large and angry. The DIG, thinking that his personal intervention would restore peace, got out of his vehicle and went to talk to the people. At this point, quite inexplicably, the DM along with his large armed escort turned around and left the area, leaving the DIG quite alone in the middle of an angry mob. Apparently, the DIG did fire his service revolver but the situation was out of control and he was badly beaten by members of the crowd. Soon Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) and police reinforcements arrived and he could be removed to hospital.

After this, it was the police that went berserk. They entered homes in Dingarpur village and beat men and women mercilessly and ransacked their homes. People were beaten and sent to jail with serious injuries. At least three minors suffered bullet injuries and among the 38 persons still in jail, there are at least a dozen minors.

One of those injured, 14-year-old Rehan, succumbed to his injuries on October 19. The district administration was interested only in his quick burial, not in his death or the reasons for it. His father is a daily labourer who sold his only possession, two bighas of land, to pay for his son’s treatment. The MLA of the area, Akbar Husain, a BSP minister, three MPs from Moradabad – Mohd Azharuddin, Rashid Alvi (Congress) and Shafiqur Rahman Barq (BSP) – have done nothing to alleviate the grievous injuries suffered by the people here.

In four different states over the past six months, incidents of police firing have taken place in which all the victims have been Muslims; shops and homes belonging only to the minority community have been looted and burnt and the overwhelming majority of those arrested have also been Muslim

Saimeen, wife of the Dingarpur pradhan, Kamil, told the convention angrily of the way in which the police had beaten both of them and ransacked their home. Salma, whose son Tauseef is one of the children arrested, showed the audience his school certificate and a photograph of him in his uniform. She carries these with her at all times, hoping that someone, somewhere will see them and do something.

Rajasthan

Ten Meos belonging to Gopalgarh, Bharatpur, were killed on September 14, 2011, most of them in police firing. Ostensibly, a property dispute is responsible: a plot of land adjacent to the mosque has traditionally been used as a graveyard and was declared as such a few years earlier. Parts of it however have been encroached upon by some Gujjar farmers. A few months earlier, there was a minor clash over this. The thana and main administrative offices are very near the village and the Meos had made several applications to the administration about these developments but nothing was done. On September 14, when matters reached a flashpoint, the police called both parties to the thana. A compromise was reached according to which the land would belong to the Muslims and they in turn would withdraw all their complaints after the sarpanch apologised for the attacks and abuse that they had suffered.

This angered some members of the majority community who came in large numbers to the thana, alleging that they were being ‘massacred’ by the Muslims in the village. Senior police officers and the district magistrate reacted to this completely false statement by declaring that ‘they’ would be taught a lesson and orders for firing were given even before they reached the village. Arms from the thana were distributed to the police personnel present and, it is alleged, to some lay members of the majority community as well. All of them proceeded to the village and indiscriminate firing was resorted to. After some Meos died from bullet wounds, their bodies were badly mutilated. Shamsuddin described the death of his son, an Industrial Training Institute student aged 16 years and 6 months, who was praying next to him in the mosque: “When we heard the gunshots, we ran out of the mosque. I could hide in a nearby thicket but my son was shot in the foot. When he fell down, he was attacked with lathis and shovels. Then kerosene was poured on his body and he was set on fire. Then his charred body was thrown into a well.”

The state government of Rajasthan has made some interventions – officers have been suspended, compensation to the families of those killed has been paid but the villagers involved in killing and incitement have not been punished and the lower-ranking policemen are all still in the neighbourhood.

Uttarakhand

Rudrapur, Uttarakhand, saw a deliberate attempt to incite communal clashes. In September, pig meat wrapped in pages torn from the Koran was thrown near a temple. The police did nothing to arrest the miscreants or to prevent further trouble. On October 2, 2011 the same thing happened again, this time near a mosque. When a large number of Muslims demonstrated outside the thana in protest, they were attacked by the police and by groups of people encouraged and incited by the police. At least eight Muslims were killed. Many shops belonging only to the minority community were looted and burnt. Their homes were also attacked. The state government has made some changes in the administration but has not bothered to meet anyone from the minority community.

The central government has failed to ensure protection to whistle-blowers through appropriate legislation and as a result, in a state like Gujarat, which is witness to the complete breakdown of constitutional institutions that protect citizens and guarantee their rights, important witnesses are being killed and terrorised with impunity. Even a senior police official who has the courage to perform his constitutional duty of naming those responsible for communal carnage is rendered completely insecure.

Shweta Bhatt, wife of Sanjiv Bhatt, suspended DIG, Gujarat, was a special guest at the convention, whose presence was a source of inspiration for the victims and for all those fighting against communal violence and hatred. She spoke of her experiences and said that all those who bear witness against the perpetrators of communal violence must be prepared for the worst when they do so. Brinda Karat, MP, felicitated Shweta and said that recent events served to highlight the acts of omission and commission on the part of the central and state governments. The Whistle-blowers Protection Act and effective legislation against communal violence are nowhere in sight and central agencies display great bias in their treatment of Muslim suspects and undertrials. In a state like Gujarat, constitutional institutions are crumbling while other states vie with each other to justify administrative bias.

The following resolution was passed by the convention:

“This AIDWA Convention against Communal Conflict

“Expresses deep concern about the number of incidents in several states where citizens of India belonging to the minority Muslim community have been targets of violence, primarily by forces of the state. It expresses its strong solidarity with the families of the victims and especially the mothers, sisters, wives, who bear the heavy burden of loss of their innocent loved ones.

“These incidents include:

• The police firing in Bharatpur district, Rajasthan, where 10 members of the minority community were shot dead by the police, many of them inside the masjid where they had taken shelter. This was the result of a long pending dispute on the issue of ownership of a graveyard which the administration had allowed to fester, encouraging communal elements;
• The police firing on villagers in Araria district, Bihar, who were protesting the forcible takeover of their land by a powerful local politician belonging to the ruling JD(U)/BJP alliance. Four Muslims, including a woman and her baby, were killed and a policeman performed the barbaric act of jumping on the dead body of a young man killed in the firing;
• The police firing on Muslim protesters in Rudrapur, Uttarakhand, and the razing of minority-owned shops and property by communal fanatics;
• The police firing in Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, killing a young man and then arresting several minor Muslim boys.

“In all these incidents many innocent people were injured and property of the minority community destroyed.

“This convention strongly condemns the communal bias of the police and administrations reflected in all these incidents.

“This convention also condemns the refusal of state governments involved to take strong action against the officers responsible. Particularly in the case of Rajasthan, the Gehlot government did everything to protect the officers involved. Similarly, the Nitish Kumar government refused to take prompt action against those responsible for the barbaric firing and no compensation has been paid to the families of those killed. This convention demands justice for the victims. It demands exemplary punishment against the police officials responsible and full compensation to the victims.

“This convention expresses its strong protest against the actions of the Gujarat government in threatening and intimidating those, including senior officers, who dare to expose the role of the chief minister and his government in the Gujarat genocide. Almost 10 years after the genocide, a large number of victims are yet to get justice. Instead, activists fighting for peace and harmony are being targeted and harassed.

“This convention demands justice for the Gujarat victims. It expresses its solidarity with those who are being threatened by the Modi government. It demands that the central government take action to protect witnesses who have given evidence against Modi and his government.

“This convention demands legislation against communal violence and for protection of secular principles and against attacks on minority rights.

“This AIDWA convention pledges to uphold the principles and values of secularism. It pledges to defend the rights of minorities against attacks by communal forces, including by administrations with a communal bias, regardless of the political party involved. It resolves to work for the unity of women and to mobilise women in the struggle against communal forces.”

After the convention, members of the victims’ families met the union home secretary, RK Singh, along with patrons and office-bearers of AIDWA: Brinda Karat, MP, Subhashini Ali, vice-president, Sudha Sundararaman, general secretary, and Sehba Farooqui, joint secretary. They gave him the following memorandum:

“We are grateful to you for having given us this appointment at such short notice. Our organisation held a Convention against Communal Conflict today in Delhi. Victims of communal violence and of police attacks and atrocities from: Forbesganj (Araria), Bihar; Gopalgarh, Rajasthan; Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh; Rudrapur, Uttarakhand, spoke about their experiences. The current situation in Gujarat where witnesses are being threatened and terrorised was also discussed. We are aware of the constitutional position regarding the federal structure. However, it is essential for the centre to intervene in the relevant states within the constitutional framework to ensure justice to the victims. We seek your intervention in the following:

“1. Gujarat: In spite of Supreme Court directions for witness protection, the situation for witnesses in the state in the ongoing cases of communal genocide naming important political leaders is critical. Only recently, six witnesses have appealed for protection in the special court. In Sanjiv Bhatt’s case also, the protection is extremely inadequate. A nodal officer must be appointed and a group of senior personnel deputed for this job.

“2. Bihar: Four people, including one woman and one infant, were killed in the police firing but compensation has been paid only to the family of the infant. No action has been taken against any of the police personnel involved. The judicial inquiry that was announced many months ago has only been advertised in the papers two days ago.

“3. Uttar Pradesh: A 14-year-old boy succumbed to his injuries from police bullets on October 19 but no cognisance of this has been taken. Two more adolescent boys have also been similarly injured but there has been no intervention by the state government. Additionally, nearly a dozen minor boys have been arrested in connection with the incidents of July 6. Despite the fact that their school certificates have been produced before the court, neither the administration nor the courts have accepted these. These children are not being tried in the juvenile court or being kept in the juvenile home as is required by law but are locked up in jail.

“4. Rajasthan: There has been some intervention by the state government. However, no action has been taken against the thana police. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has started its inquiry. Family members of the victims feel a bias in their questioning. Assurances which had been given by the government are yet to be implemented.

“5. Uttarakhand: Some compensation to the families of those killed has been paid. No action has been taken against the concerned police personnel.

“These incidents show only too clearly that, most unfortunately, not only lower-ranking police personnel but senior officers display a pronounced anti-minority bias. This is certainly an area that needs your urgent attention.”

A few days after the convention, inquiries into the July 6 incidents were started in Moradabad. Saimeen and others recorded their statements before the district administration and at least three minors are being transferred to the juvenile home.

Archived from Communalism Combat,December 2011,Year 18, No.162-Special Report

The post Destruction, discrimination, denial of justice appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Early Hindi cinema wins many accolades – for its idealistic themes, for its propagation of Hindustani and for its secular temperament. While it is true that the political atmosphere of the 1950s and 1960s, the Nehruvian era, was responsible for many of these attributes, the contribution of communist writers and poets to early Hindi cinema and to its idiom, language and content is often forgotten.
 

Obviously, a medium like cinema which is so responsive to public demands and public tastes does reflect its social and political context to a large extent. Therefore the values and excitement of the national movement, the heady brew of freedom from colonial bondage and the novelty of nation building and Nehru’s secular, modern outlook provided much of the inspiration for the best-remembered films of the era. But they would have been incomplete without the contribution of a galaxy of communist literary giants who chose this medium precisely because it was the most effective medium of mass communication.
 

It is important to remember that there is a basic difference between the way in which a communist uses the word ‘mass’ and the way others do. A communist uses the word with a feeling of reverence and respect and wishes to communicate with the mass in order to imbue it with what he considers to be the highest values and ideals and in order to help it achieve its historic mission to bring about universal equality. Others use the word mass contemptuously, in a pejorative way, with the objective of converting as much of it into mindless consumers of their products, including cultural works, as possible.
 

It was this attitude towards the mass combined with their enormous talents that made the communist contribution to early Hindi cinema so memorable.
 

Perhaps no country in the world has at any time in its history witnessed such a large number of first-rate talents harnessed to a common ideology. It is important to remember that communist writers, poets, actors and artists did not come from Hindi and Urdu backgrounds alone. All Indian languages were blessed by similar practitioners at the time.
 

They were all products of a unique blend of nationalist and revolutionary fervour that was peculiar to the 1930s when most of them came of age. This was complemented by the fact that many of them came from feudal and traditional families. For them the Communist Manifesto, the experiences of Soviet Russia and the national movement in their own country fused into liberating images far removed from the suffocating conservatism surrounding them. Patriarchy, feudal oppression, caste hierarchies and inhuman cruelty would all be blown away by the winds of change that they had not only begun to experience but which they themselves would fan into invincibility. This was the dream they dared to dream – not alone but in communion with each other, with their comrades – and which they longed to communicate to the masses.
 

Bombay, the working-class capital of the country, was the headquarters of the Communist Party of India. Its journals attracted the finest talents in the country. Sajjad Zaheer was able to bring writers and poets of the calibre of Kaifi Azmi, Ali Sardar Jafri, Jan Nisar Akhtar, Krishan Chander, Sahir Ludhianvi, Majrooh Sultanpuri and a host of others to work as party whole-timers. Without compromising the quality of their work they had the opportunity to test it every day against the touchstone of the people: the textile workers of Bombay, the handloom weavers of Bhiwandi, the fighting peasants of Bhiwandi.
 

It was this unique circumstance that would stand them in good stead when they brought their thoughts and verses from the world of cramped party offices, factory gates and vast public recitals to the world of cinema. Here they were joined by other comrades from the Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA) who gave Hindi cinema many of its earliest and finest actors and actresses.
 

A New World. The New Woman. These were the hallmarks of what is nostalgically referred to as the golden era of Indian cinema. Awara. Shree 420. Mother India. Pyaasa. Do Bigha Zameen. The era’s sheen was provided by the communists. Of course, their convictions underwent changes with the years but their commitment to secularism and to its language, Hindustani, never diminished. And the dross of crass commercialism could never completely dull the brightness of their earlier dreams…

Archived from Communalism Combat, September 2008. Year 15, No.134, Cover Story 5
 

The post A certain magic appeared first on SabrangIndia.