Sunita Viswanath | SabrangIndia

Unsealed: Suhag Shukla’s Deposition in Hindu American Foundation’s Failed Defamation Case Against Us

sabrang — Mon, 01 Jul 2024 04:25:57 +0000

The Hindu American Foundation (HAF) filed a defamation lawsuit against the two of us, as well as against three others, Rasheed Ahmed, John Prabhudoss, and Audrey Truschke, on May 7, 2021. HAF’s claims arose from our statements to an Al Jazeera journalist about the federal emergency COVID-19 funding garnered by several Hindu nationalist organizations in early 2021, including the HAF:

Sunita in Al Jazeera, Apr 2, 2021: “All these organizations are sympathetic to the Hindu supremacist ideology. Their parent organizations continue to spread hatred in Hindu communities towards Muslims and Christians,” and “Any American non-profit that perpetuates Islamophobia and other forms of hate should not receive federal relief funds in any form.”

Raju in Al Jazeera, Apr 8, 2021: “The rise of HAF and other organizations linked with Hindutva has emboldened Hindu supremacist organizations in India, while also stifling the moderate Hindu voices here in the US.”

Nearly twenty months after the HAF filed its complaint, Judge Amit P Mehta of the U.S. District Court in D.C. dismissed the case on all counts: “…the court has reviewed the allegedly defamatory statements attributed to Defendants Viswanath, Rajagopal, Ahmed, and Truschke, and finds that HAF fails to plausibly plead that any statement made by any defendant is verifiably false. Most of the statements are clearly statements of opinion …[Also] Because the underlying defamation claim against Prabhudoss fails, Plaintiff’s civil conspiracy claim fails.” [p 26]

A Lawsuit with Zero Evidence

Earlier, on March 15, 2022, the judge issued an order questioning whether HAF had lost any donations at all on account of our statements, “much less an amount in excess of $75,000.” [But] “rather than dismiss the complaint outright, the court will…stay the motions to dismiss and allow for a limited period of jurisdictional discovery as to the amount in controversy.”

This meant that our attorneys had an opportunity to look into the veracity of HAF’s claimed financial losses by examining granular details of donations received by HAF in recent years. This was the primary purpose of the virtual deposition by Suhag Shukla of HAF on May 16, 2022. The deposition remained sealed from public view until recently, when the court ordered 385 pages of unredacted evidence unsealed, including 45 pages of Shukla’s deposition (p 268+).

Shukla’s day-long deposition with attorneys from both sides was nothing short of a disaster. She was unable to back up any of HAF’s allegations in its complaint with evidence – not one! The result was a deposition peppered with evasive and intransigent responses by Shukla before she would finally admit the truth: See highlights of the deposition.

Our Supplemental Brief

Based on Shukla’s deposition, the defendants submitted a Supplemental Brief on June 10, 2022: “discovery…confirms the Court’s suspicions: Plaintiff is unable to identify any evidence of economic harm, let alone damages meeting the jurisdictional minimum. Indeed, discovery has established that not a single existing or potential donor ever told HAF it was reducing, eliminating, or not making initial contributions due to the challenged statements.”

The brief also dismissed assertions of “reputational damage” to HAF as a result of our statements: “HAF has no one but itself to blame for its expulsion” from the Alliance Against Genocide. It referred to some of the other assertions by HAF as “fanciful” “speculative,” “without foundation,” etc.

To make a long story short, Shukla had failed to support with evidence any of HAF’s claims: NO evidence of defamation, NO evidence of a conspiracy, and NO evidence of financial losses. Not surprisingly, HAF did not refute any of the conclusions in our Supplemental Brief, thanks to the terrific work of our pro bono lawyers who came to our aid because of their commitment to the First Amendment.

So, when the final judgment to dismiss the case came down on December 20, 2022, HAF was left scraping the bottom to find some “good news” for its donors and supporters: see SuhagShuklaOnLinkedin.

So they quickly jumped on a footnote by the judge, which explained that only one statement by Sunita and another by Audrey had the potential (“plausibly”) to be proven false, [i.e., had the case proceeded.] They maliciously modified the judge’s legalistic phrase, “plausibly verifiably false,” into “verifiably false” on social media posts, thus implying that the judge had made a determination that Sunita and Audrey had lied. The judge did no such thing!

HAF later added back the word “plausibly” in their posts, but some of their earlier doctored posts were not deleted, hence perpetuating the impression that Sunita and Audrey had lied. In our view, HAF has done itself and its supporters great disservice by attempting subterfuge to eke out a “silver lining” out of an ignominious defeat.

What Were They Thinking?

As one of our attorneys observed during our debriefing following the dismissal of the lawsuit, “Even a first-year law student can differentiate between statements of opinion and defamation.” With two senior attorneys on their Executive Team, is it possible that HAF really thought that they had a winnable case? If not, what were they really thinking when they chose to spend several hundred thousand dollars of donated money on a foolhardy defamation lawsuit?

Perhaps, HAF felt threatened by our progressive Hindu voice – which does not seek to divide the world into haters and the hated — challenging them from within the community and in D.C. spaces. And they decided to scare us through a high-profile SLAPP lawsuit, with expensive Trump family attorneys to boot. If that was their thinking, they have failed miserably. Instead, HfHR and our allies have together only gotten stronger, bolder, and wiser in our work of resisting Hindutva and casteism.

But it’s also entirely possible, knowing the litigious track record of HAF, that their ultimate goal was to create enough hype and narratives of victimhood around the lawsuit to help raise funds. That would explain their surprising fundraiser just months after filing the lawsuit, provocatively titled, How to sue your haters. In a classic case of projection, those who sued had become the victims, and the victims had become the haters! Sadly, the tactic seems to have worked: Looking at the list of donations in the days following the event (from the unsealed deposition), HAF appears to have collected over $ 70,000 within a day and close to $300,000 in a week! Total donations to HAF went up from $1,580,784 in 2021 to $2,583,102 in 2022! Clearly, their claim that our statements had led to financial losses was an outright lie and Shukla’s deposition was the clinching proof.

Whatever may have been HAF’s intent, we know from their history of lawsuits (mostly ending in defeat), that they have successfully leveraged them to raise funds – sometimes both before and after the case. An important lesson to take home for those opposing Hindutva: Legal failures do not necessarily lead to loss of donors and donations.

Therein lies the opposition’s challenge: If we’re to dislodge the caustic presence of Hindutva in the diaspora, for every dollar of donation received by Hindu supremacists, we must raise at least one dollar to counter their divisive hate politics. Moral successes aren’t enough anymore; we must aim for equally successful fundraising programs.

The good news is that with an outpouring of support from our donors, activists, academics, allies, our families, and our super-energized team, HfHR has already made a headstart in increasing our national and regional presence, in forming new alliances, and taking on more projects in 2023 and 2024. And now, we are appealing to you, all Indian Americans who are concerned about democracy and minority rights in India, to help us on an emergency footing so we can ramp up our efforts to propagate a progressive and pluralistic Hindu voice as a counter to the divisive voices of Hindutva. You can do so by becoming a member of the HfHR community today and by making a financial contribution.

Sunita Viswanath and Raju Rajagopal are co-founders of Hindus for Human Rights USA.

Courtesy: https://americankahani.com

The post Unsealed: Suhag Shukla’s Deposition in Hindu American Foundation’s Failed Defamation Case Against Us appeared first on SabrangIndia.

God Is Everywhere: A Hindu Reflects on A-Yodhya

Sat, 16 Nov 2019 05:08:29 +0000


Painting of Lord Hanuman by M.F.Husain

As a person who cares about justice and peace, the Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya was distressing. Many notable Indians have written about the verdict since it was declared five days ago, and I offer links to a small sample of well-informed and thoughtful responses below.

What stood out to me the most were the following, perhaps obvious points:

In a secular democracy, how can a deity be a plaintiff in a court case? If Lord Rama (Ram Lalla) was the plaintiff, does that mean Allah was the defendant? Could Jesus be a plaintiff in another suit?
If the placing of the idols and the demolishing of the mosque by Hindus were both illegal acts, then why have the criminals been rewarded with a Ram temple at the site?
if the Hindus’s use of the mosque for prayer was determined by a “preponderance of probabilities,” then why did the Muslims have to provide evidence to prove “exclusive use” of the mosque?
we are to understand that the verdict kept the peace. That is, thousands of people would have been killed if the verdict had gone the other way. It was Hindus that were violent in their destruction of the mosque, and it was Hindu violence that was averted by this decision that skews towards Hindu interests. If Muslims are so violent then why do we seem to be more worried about the possibility of Hindu violence?

Apart from concern with the technical and legal anomalies, I was pained that the most basic tenets of Hindu faith were betrayed.

For Hindus, God is everywhere: inside Lord Hanuman’s heart when he rips it apart, inside the pillar which Hiranyakashipu breaks with his mace, in every single river, leaf and pebble. If God is at the site of the demolition of Babri Masjid, he is equally present seven feet away and seven miles away and across the seven seas.

When we sing Eshwar Allah Tero Naam, we are saying whether it is a masjid or a mandir, it is God’s home. Lord Rama is worshipped as Maryada Purshottam — the perfect human being who embodies love, compassion and justice. Where is the maryada (decency, integrity) in demolishing God’s home? And would Lord Rama be pleased that his temple is being built on the site of such carnage?

Our scriptures teach us that all of us, even our gods and our demons are capable of good and evil, and of transformation. I pray fervently that we see the folly of the dangerous course we are taking, where violence is rewarded and dissenting voices are silenced. If we revere Lord Rama, then our only hope is to build not just a Ram Temple but a Ram Rajya, an A-Yodhya (place of no war), a nation and a world where peace reigns and justice is the right of all.

First published in https://www.hindusforhumanrights.org/

Sunita Viswanath, cofounder, Hindus for Human Rights

The post God Is Everywhere: A Hindu Reflects on A-Yodhya appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Why I joined protests at JFK against Trump’s immigration order – and all Indian-Americans should

Mon, 30 Jan 2017 06:56:11 +0000

'If any Indian thinks they are superior to immigrants from Yemen, Iraq, or other Muslim countries, they are in for a rude awakening.'

This past week has been like one from an alternate reality: it started with the incredible Women’s March on January 21, when close to five million people, led by women, insisted on justice and equal rights for all in a series of protests across the world. And then, the assault of Trumpian executive orders began.

In just one week since he assumed office as US president on January 20, Donald Trump had reinstated the “global gag rule” that bans US-funded non-profits to advocate or counsel women about abortions, thereby denying safe access to pregnancy termination and birth control; revived the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the US and the Dakota Access Pipeline that was stopped after protests by native Americans, thus thwarting valiant efforts of indigenous peoples and environmental advocates; eliminated 25 grant programmes for organisations addressing violence against women and denied federal funding to sanctuary cities like New York and San Francisco that protect and shelter illegal immigrants.
Then came the much-feared Muslim ban – Trump’s latest executive order came on Friday and bars immigration from seven Muslim countries (Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen), although the list is likely to grow.

Growing clamour

On Friday night, I went to bed wondering how long it would take for these executive orders to be implemented – on Saturday morning, I had my answer. I woke up to the news that dozens of people from Muslim countries were already being detained at airports around the US. These were people who had green cards and valid visas, parents visiting their children and grandchildren settled in the US, a refugee family from Syria that was finally leaving the hell of a camp to start a new life, and even people who consider America home because they have lived here for many years and have lives, families and homes here. The implementation of policies rooted in bigotry, xenophobia and Islamophobia had begun.

I was one of the 2,000 protesters who spent a freezing Saturday at the Terminal 4 Arrivals at New York’s Kennedy International Airport, chanting: “Let them in!” and “Love not hate, makes America great!” and “No hate, no fear, immigrants are welcome here!”

There were similar protests in airports across the US, with a strong showing from elected officials denouncing the ban. Legal advocates and elected officials have tirelessly worked on behalf of the detainees, but so far, only one has been allowed to enter the country.

On Saturday evening, we celebrated a victory: the American Civil Liberties Union won a temporary stay on President Trump’s immigration order and at least for now, deportation of those who are legally permitted to enter the US will not be allowed. No doubt this will be challenged, and we will need to keep fighting.

Speak up

I am a Hindu American from India, an immigrant myself. My parents moved from Andhra Pradesh to England when I was a child to give us a better life. I grew up in both Chennai and London, and moved to the US as a young adult. I visit India regularly, and have been painfully aware of the Hindu nationalism that has taken power there with Narendra Modi’s election. This is a time in India when the civil rights of Muslim, Dalit, LGBT and other minority communities are in peril. Freedom of expression is under threat. I fear that the US is on that same path under Trump.

It is important for all immigrants, including Indian Americans, to speak up against these racist and Islamophobic laws and policies. Most of us left our homelands and came to this country seeking new opportunities, eager to build new lives.

The immigrants from these Muslim countries are no different from us. If we open our eyes and hearts, we will see ourselves in all immigrants, including those who are currently being cruelly detained, harassed and in many cases, denied entry. The fear is that these people might be terrorists, but so many of them are fleeing the very violence and terrorism they are suspected of.

I am a women’s rights activist and work daily with Muslim men and women who devote their lives to this cause. My Muslim colleagues tell me that their faith obligates them to work for the rights and empowerment of women and girls. Many of my colleagues and their families will be affected by this heartless and unconstitutional ban.

Policies rooted in racism and bigotry may target only one group today but can just as easily target another tomorrow. India may not be on the target list at the moment, but certainly could be in the future. Furthermore, such racist policies embolden bigots in the society and have already led to an increase in hate crimes towards all people of colour. A bigot sees no difference between Indians, Iraqis and Yemenis or Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs.

If any Indian thinks they are superior to immigrants from Yemen, Iraq, or other Muslim countries, they are in for a rude awakening. I truly believe that justice denied on the basis of religion or race shakes the very foundations of democracy and leads to justice being denied for all.

As a mother, as an immigrant, and as a Hindu who believes to my core that we are all one, Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, I pledge to resist the Trump administration’s policies of hatred. And I ask all Indian Americans to resist with me.

Sunita Viswanath is a co-founder and board member at Sadhana: Coalition of Progressive Hindus.

This article was first appeared on Scroll.in

The post Why I joined protests at JFK against Trump’s immigration order – and all Indian-Americans should appeared first on SabrangIndia.