On Saturday January 11, 2020, the Jammu and Kashmir police stopped a car at the Kulgam checkpoint on the Jammu Srinagar highway. Inside it were three men; two members of the Hizbul Mujahiddin and one decorated policeman.

The terrorist group members were identified as Syed Naveed Mushtaq, a former policeman who joined the militant organization in 2017 and his associate Asif. But it was the third man in the car whose presence raised the most questions. Davinder Singh is a decorated policeman of the rank of Deputy Superintendent. Why was he accompanying two known members of Hizbul Mujahiddin?

It is noteworthy that Parliament terror attack convict Afzal Guru had also named Singh during investigations in that case. In 2004, Afzal Guru had reportedly written a letter to his lawyer Sushil Kumar claiming a DSP Davinder Singh who was posted with J&K police’s Special Operations Group at Humhama had asked him to take a Pakistani man named Mohammed to Delhi and help him rent a flat, and also purchase a car for him.

In fact, Afzal Guru recounted the same to journalist Vinod K Jose during an interview. The veteran journalist recalls this in this Facebook post. Jose raises some key issues in the aftermath of Singh’s arrest writing, “Do these attacks qualify as “terrorist” attacks on the feet of meritorious evidences, collected and tried legally with due processes, or do they stand on the shaky ground of politics and rhetoric done by incomplete and convenient investigations? And who are the agents who make most out of such acts politically?”

He also asks, “The second point is that the long pattern in Davinder Singh’s conduct, from 2001 to 2020, where Davinder Singh’s connection with militant organisations is more than evident, it must make every Indian raise questions on the logic of covert operations itself—for which India spends an unaccounted large sum of tax payer’s money year on year. What is the political and financial accountability of covert operations?”

Jose’s post goes on to say, “And foremost, at what levels does sanctions come for these acts? For eg, who asked Davinder Singh to send five terrorists with Afzal to Delhi in 2001 and who asked Davinder Singh to leave Kashmir to Jammu (or Delhi?) with Hizbul Mujahideen commanders in 2020? Also the question to be asked along with it: If Davinder Singh was useful on a longer leash of time, what does it mean suddenly today to see him behind bars for those leaders and officers who must have played a role in supervising him? Is it an inter-agency rivalry that got him arrested in the weekend with Hizb commanders, a mistake, and in which case, the superbosses of both agencies must be scripting a harmless way out as we speak.”

Jose’s complete interview with Afzal Guru may be read here.

The 2001 Parliament attack

The attack on the Indian Parliament was carried out on December 13, 2001. This was perhaps the most brazen attack on India and in fact the very idea of democracy appeared to be under threat from terrorist organisations. The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government led by BJP’s Atal Bihari Vajpayee as Prime Minister was in power at the time.

The perpetrators allegedly belonged to two terrorist groups; the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). However, LeT denied their involvement. 14 people, including five of the terrorists were killed in the attack. The terrorists had sneaked in using fake ID stickers on their car. The Delhi police later gave the names of the five terrorists as Hamza, Haider alias Tufail, Rana, Ranvijay and Mohammed. The last one was the same person Afzal Guru had claimed he had been instructed to find housing and a car for by Davinder Singh.

After the attack three Pakistanis were accused of planning the attack; Masood Azhar, Ghazi Baba alias Abu Jehadi and Tariq Ahmed. They could not be nabbed. Four other people were subsequently charged and tried in the case. They were Afzal Guru, his cousin Shaukat Hussain Guru, Shaukat’s wife Afsan alias Navjot and Delhi University professor SAR Geelani.

Davinder Singh tortured Afzal Guru in custody?

Interestingly, it was Davinder Singh who had admitted to journalist Parvaiz Bukhari that he had tortured Afzal Guru in custody but could not get him to divulge any information about Ghazi Baba and other Pakistani accused. Singh allegedly had quite a reputation for torture at the time. Writer Arundhuti Roy’s book on Afzal Guru mentions as much. Afzal Guru had also mentioned his torture to Jose detailing use electric shocks to private parts. Afzal allegedly dd not have any legal representation during his time between his arrest and filing of charges and has subsequently retracted his confession claiming it had been extracted under duress.

In fact, Roy also wrote this essay on Afzal Guru where she raises several important points. Roy writes, “Sadly, in the midst of the frenzy, Afzal seems to have forfeited the right to be an individual, a real person any more. He’s become a vehicle for everybody’s fantasies—nationalists, separatists, and anti-capital punishment activists. He has become India’s great villain and Kashmir’s great hero—proving only that whatever our pundits, policymakers and peace gurus say, all these years later, the war in Kashmir has by no means ended.”

The legal journey

The case was adjudicated by a Special Court by judge SN Dhingra over a period of six months during which testimony of 80 witnesses was presented. Three of the accused Afzal Guru, Shaukat Hussain and SAR Gilani were convicted for the offences under Sections 121, 121A, 122, Section 120B read with Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 120B of IPC, sub-Sections (2), (3) and (5) of Section 3 and Section 4(b) of POTA and Sections 3 and 4 of Explosive Substances Act. Afzal and Shaukat were also convicted under Section 3(4) of POTA. Afsan was acquitted of all the charges except the one under Section 123 IPC for which she was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine.

The other three were sentenced to death for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC and Section 3(2) of POTA. They were also sentenced to life imprisonment on as many as eight counts under the provisions of IPC, POTA and Explosive Substances Act in addition to varying amounts of fine. The amount of approximately Rs 10 lakhs recovered from the possession of Afzal Guru and Shaukat Hussain was forfeited to the State under Section 6 of the POTA.

But in a twist in the tale, SAR Geelani and Afsan were acquitted on appeal by the High Court on October 29, 2003! This was a body blow to the State’s case considering they had pitched Geelani as nothing short of the “mastermind” in the case. But the HC upheld Afzal and Shaukat’s death sentences. Afzal Guru was represented by legal stalwarts Shanti Bhushan and Colin Gonsalves.

When the matter went to the Supreme Court, Shukat’s sentence was commuted to 10 years in prison and he was subsequently released 9 months before the end of his term due to good conduct. Afzal Guru though was not that fortunate and was hanged on February 9, 2013 and his body was buried in the Tihar Jail premises. His family was informed about his death by post and was thus unable to meet him one last time, leading to speculation that he was executed in secrecy.

In wake of Davinder Singh’s arrest while in company of terrorist group members, one wonders if Afzal Guru’s conviction and subsequent execution will now once again become open to debate? Did a dirty cop send Afzal Guru to jail and did India hang an innocent man? Moreover, what was the extent of Davinder Singh’s operation? Did he have any more accomplices in the police force? Did they conspire with terror groups in any other cases? Were other terror attacks made possible due the complicity of such policemen?

The post The policeman, the patsy and the true tale of terror appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
Indian political culture sits atop a fine edged blade. Pushing down on it is the Extreme Right, whose political wing – the BJP – is currently in power. Intolerance is the order of the day. India’s celebrated Nobel Prize winning economist Amartya Sen recently said, “India is being turned intolerant. We have been too tolerant with the intolerance. This has to end.”

In the marrow of the Extreme Right is a demand for discipline enforced by violence. Anyone who strays from the authority of its world-view – Hindutva – is either anti-national or a terrorist. Political murders of well-regarded intellectuals and activists, such as Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare, and MM Kalburgi, put the nation on alert.

The death of a young student – Rohit Vemula – of the University of Hyderabad sent all kinds of people onto the streets. Rohit had been hit hard by social discrimination, which manifests itself as a political assault on socially oppressed communities. “From shadows to the stars,” wrote this young man who was fascinated by astronomy. It was an indictment of the social disorder.

“Mother India lost a son,” said Prime Minister Narendra Modi. “I felt the pain.” He had waited five days to react, and reacted only after mass demonstrations of great feeling across the country. Rohit Vemula’s family rejected the Prime Minister’s remorse. They want to know why their son died. The answers lie firmly in the tentacles of the Extreme Right. It is where blame will eventually rest.

When Richa Singh, the new student leader at Allahabad University, invited senior journalist Siddharth Varadarajan to campus to talk about free speech, the Extreme Rights’s students’ group (the ABVP) blocked him. They called Varadarajan, who had been the editor of The Hindu, a “Naxalite” (Maoist) and “anti-national.” This is the chosen vocabulary. Singh later said, “There is a surge in intolerance in this country. The ABVP leaders are not willing to listen to anyone who contradicts their ideology.”

For generations, the Extreme Right in India has sought to erase the Left. But the Left in India is not near as strong as it should be to pose a threat to the Right. So what is it about the Left that the Extreme Right fears? It fears that the Left has an alternative narrative of India’s history and of its possible future – it is one that is rooted not in social exclusion and economic inequality, but in the very opposite of that. Whereas the Congress Party is hated by the BJP for its history and for its hold on institutions of power, the BJP does not believe that the Congress has an alternative powerful enough to challenge its own vision. Talking to Extreme Right leaders about the Left is always an experience in paranoia and hatred – venom holds the words together in their sentences.

For generations, the Extreme Right in India has sought to erase the Left. It fears that the Left has an alternative narrative of India’s history and of its possible future – it is one that is rooted not in social exclusion and economic inequality, but in the very opposite of that

One of the great citadels of the Left in New Delhi, the nation’s capital, is Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) – founded in 1969. From then till now one or another part of the Left has won student elections, and the struggles of the broad Left have allowed the campus to be democratic and decent. In the first half of the 1970s, the Students Federation of India (SFI), the student front of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) or CPIM, fought alongside the workers on the campus to improve their wages and rights. It fought to ensure a powerful students’ union and to create structures where the students did not toil at the mercy of their professors. It fought for decent living conditions for the students. This struggle set the template for the JNU that has existed since then. As SFI leader Prakash Karat wrote at that time, the students “have used every opportunity to challenge the government’s educational policies, and to defend democratic rights.”

Over the years, the same issues have re-emerged – treatment of staff and rights of students. The Left – now much more fractious – has continued to dominate the elections, keeping out the forces of the Extreme Right. Punctually, the Extreme Right – and the national media, which is based in Delhi – attack the students for being pampered and for being political. It has been said – over the decades – that the tax-payer should not have to underwrite the political lives of the students. They are there to study. This argument intensified after India “liberalised” its economy in 1991. Since then, private universities have been formed in and around Delhi, putting pressure on this flagship to reform its curriculum and change its standards. But the JNU Students’ Union (JNUSU) is strong and unyielding – resisting any attempt by the management to change the character of the culture.

Last week, a group of students held a forum on Afzal Guru, who had been executed by the Indian state in 2013. At the forum, some people yelled anti-Indian slogans. It is not clear who raised these slogans. This provided the Extreme Right with an opening. Strangeness was in the air. This government seems to rely on protocols of evidence that mean nothing. A fake twitter account of Hafeez Saeed, a terrorist leader based in Pakistan, was cited by home minister Rajnath Singh as evidence of collusion from across the border.

Plain-clothes security forces entered the campus and arrested the JNUSU president, Kanhaiya Kumar – who is a leader of the Communist Party of India’s student wing, All India Students Federation (AISF). They took him under the colonial era Sedition Law (Section 124-A). During a parliamentary debate in 1951, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru – after whom the university is named – said, “Take Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code. Now as far as I am concerned that particular Section is highly objectionable and obnoxious and it should have no place in any body of laws that we might pass. The sooner we get rid of it the better.” It remained. Kanhaiya Kumar was arrested on that basis and held for three days [On February 17, a Delhi court has ordered 14-day judicial custody for Kumar].

Students knew intuitively that this was not about the forum,  it was an attack on their democratic culture. Large sections of the press merely repeated what the government said, drawing a stark connection between the tragic death of an Indian soldier – Lance Naik Hanamanthappa Koppad – on February 11 and the forum on Afzal Guru, who had been convicted on terrorism charges. It was enough to put these side by side to pillory the students. No one challenged the government, and previous governments, for failure to demilitarise the Siachen Glacier, where Lance Naik Koppad was serving. Since 2003, over two thousand Indian and Pakistani soldiers have died from frostbite and avalanches. It is anti-national and indeed anti-human to have soldiers at that altitude.

A close ally of a leading BJP politician, Jawahar Yadav said, “For the girls who are protesting in JNU, I have only one thing to say that prostitutes who sell their body are better than them because they at least don’t sell the country.” 

The JNU Teachers’ Association released a statement asking the administration “to maintain normalcy on our campus by immediately withdrawing the police and releasing all those detained.” It was not to be. A massive rally on campus brought leaders of the various Left parties and the Congress Party to campus. Students came to show solidarity for their president. Nearby, a small wake of Extreme Right students chanted slogans of disunity and anger. Defiance, by the rest of the students, was the mood against those chants These students would then form a human chain as a wall around their campus. Amartya Sen’s slogan – This has to end – seemed to inform their commitment.

Vandals of the Right targeted the office of the CPI-M, painting the words “Pakistan” across the signboard. Threatening phone calls came to the CPI-M general secretary Sitaram Yechury. A cartoon appeared in the world of social media that linked the communists to the terrorists, with a tag line that said “Jihadi Naxal University” (Naxal is a reference to the Maoists). The picture showed stereotypical images of “jihadis” and an image of a boy and a girl kissing, with a liquor bottle flying out the car – it condensed all the frustrations of the Extreme Right: against Islam, against Communism, against social freedoms enjoyed by young people.

The images of kissing are telling. Events such as this bring out the worst in the Extreme Right. Its toxic constipation ends. A close ally of a leading BJP politician, Jawahar Yadav said, “For the girls who are protesting in JNU, I have only one thing to say that prostitutes who sell their body are better than them because they at least don’t sell the country.” The Extreme Right likes to call journalists “presstitutes”. One person, on Twitter, sends out a tweet, “All anti-national pigs should be slapped with seduction charge by our PM.” It was a Freudian slip, seduction for sedition. But this is appropriate for the Right. Politics for them is suffused with the language of sex and with the fear of sexual freedom.

On Monday, Kanhaiya was to appear in court for the first time. A WhatsApp message went out amongst a network of lawyers. “Peacefully, we will teach these anti-nationals a lesson as per the law. We will show what it takes to be a patriot.” All the window dressing was there – peacefully, as per the law. But the venom tied these pieties together – teach these anti-nationals a lesson, show what it takes to be a patriot. They arrived for violence. As students and teachers went into the courts, these men – some in lawyers’ garb – beat them and went after the journalists. Some were beaten very badly. One of those who did the beating is a BJP Member of the Legislative Assembly – O. P. Sharma.

“There is no cause for despondency,” wrote Ayesha Kidwai, a professor of Linguistics at JNU. “I know that the orchestrated media campaign against JNU is very distressing. Let me assure you that the world knows this already, and knows why all this is happening.”
 

The post Why India’s Leading University is Under Siege appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This question assumes acute relevance after recent events at the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). A meeting called to mark the anniversary of the hanging of Afzal Guru by another group has led to the JNU Students' Union President Kanhaiya Kumar being arrested on charges of sedition.
 
Afzal Guru was hanged for his role in the 2001 Parliament attack case. While pronouncing sentence, the Supreme Court of India admitted that there was no evidence to show that Afzal Guru was a member of any banned organisation nor had any of the 80 prosecution witnesses said that Afzal was associated with any terrorist organisation.
 
The judgement states, 'The incident which resulted in heavy casualties, has shaken the entire nation and the collective conscience of the society will be satisfied (only) if the capital punishment is awarded to the offender.'   We have to ask ourselves whether this kind of ‘satisfaction of the collective conscience’ can be a reason enough for ending somebody's life, in a civilised society?
 
Are there not to be even questions raised over this judgement? It would be a disservice to Indian democracy if we all assume the collective guilt of an unquestioning silence.
 
Afzal Guru did not receive a fair trial. He was not allowed to have a lawyer of his choice. Neither did the court hear his version. He was made to accept his crime under duress and threat by the police. Simply put, he was made a scapegoat.
 
The truth is, if he had not been hanged, a ‘feeling’ would have prevailed that India was or is not able to take strong action against the perpetrators of the attack on Parliament (2001). Somebody needed to be hanged and it was the misfortune of Afzal Guru that he was the most vulnerable among the four who were made the accused in the Parliament attack case.
 
The then Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Omar Abdullah had sharply criticised the execution of Afzal Guru, saying clearly that it would reinforce the sense of alienation and injustice among Kashmiri youth. He asserted that the decision to hang Afzal Guru was more political than legal. It is this doubt over Afzal's hanging that persists even three years after his hanging. That is the reason why for some persons, he is even called a martyr.

There are people associated with Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) who would like to eulogise Nathuram Godse. Some even want to build a temple in his name. For those who would like to worship Nathuram as a hero, there can be no objections to others who consider Afzal Guru a martyr.
 
The NDA II regime has already termed the event(s) on JNU campus (having such a meeting to discuss the execution) as anti-national as there were some objectionable slogans raised.  It is time we asked some hard questions.  What will be considered to be more anti-national — ideologically motivated and uncritical defence of the hanging of a person whose crime was not conclusively proved or merely raising pro-Kashmiri and pro-Azadi slogans? It is this simmering sense of injustice done in the case of Afzal Guru (his hanging) that is reverberating in the form of slogans which (this time) happened to be raised at the JNU meeting.
 
It remains important to question the hanging of Afzal Guru so that no more such incidents occur in future.  
 
The right to free speech is under threat within Indian democracy today. The threat is posed from communal fascist forces. There are people associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) who would like to eulogise Nathuram Godse. Some even want to build a temple in his name. For those who would like to worship Nathuram as a hero, there can be no objections to others who consider Afzal Guru a martyr.
 
The authorities are also suggesting that the permission for the event was withdrawn just before it was to take place. This is a time-tested tactic. A similar thing happened when a reputed journalist was recently invited to speak at Allahabad University on invitation of the Allahabad University Students' Union President Richa Singh on January 20, 2016. The Vice Chancellor there also withdrew the permission at the last moment.
 
I would like to ask a question to the current ruling dispensation and their aggressive champions. Those who have made it their business to assume sole defence of ‘nationalism’, the torch bearers of desh bhakti.  Did they take any permission to demolish the Babri Masjid in 1992, an incident that remains a blot on our constitutional, secular ethos and which has, forever and seriously, compromised India's internal security?
 
Or, (did they seek permission) before they killed Mahatma Gandhi? Or, when they allegedly carried out bomb blasts twice in Malegaon (2006, 2008), in Hyderabad (Mecca Masjid Blasts, May 18, 2007), then in Ajmer (October 10, 2007) and in the Samjhauta Express (February 18, 2007)?
 
Or, did the NDA I government led by Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee at the centre take even their own Defence Minister (George Fernandes) into confidence, not to mention Parliament, before testing nuclear weapons in 1998, an act which adversely affected and worsened South Asia's security environment?
 
For those associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) who believe, that by being in the seat of government, they have un-checked, arbitrary powers which includes dictating what others should or should not do; preventing ‘others’, even violently, from carrying out their activities, the next elections will surely bring a rude shock. The people in this country have never tolerated tyrannical ways. Hitler may be a hero for the RSS but he is not for the masses in India.
 
The treatment meted out to journalists and JNU students and professors at the Patiala House court yesterday, on February 15, 2016, by lawyers associated with the RSS, is shameful. If the violence resorted to by terrorists and naxalites is condemnable how can the police and the ‘nation’ stand spectator to hooliganism indulged in by the Sangh parivar members? No other mainstream political organisation(s) exhibit the kind of lawlessness that organisations associated with this supremacist right wing ideology do.
 
They and their ideological associates have allegedly committed serious crimes; like murders of Dabholkar, Pansare and Kalburgi and have facilitated an atmosphere within which Rohith Vemula was forced to commit suicide, in addition to innumerable incidents when they are guilty of threatening and intimidating actions against people who simply do not agree with their ideology. This nonsense should not be tolerated in a democracy even if a price has to be paid for it. The RSS is hurtling this country towards a state of emergency which can only lead to civil war and anarchy.
 
The people who brought BJP to power with a thumping majority in 2014 must rethink their support and mandate. Is this party that is even fit to rule for five years?  Stalwart socialist leader Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia once famously said that “Live communities don't wait for five years” (the term of Parliament).  Today, these sharp and sagacious words must show us the way.
 
(Sandeep Pandey, a Magsaysay awardee for emergent leadership has trained in Mechanical Engineering but has been working on social justice issues; he is co-founder of Aasha)

The post Why the Controversy over Afzal Guru’s Hanging Refuses to Die appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Courtesy: http://newsclick.in/india/attack-jnusu-and-left-built-lies

In an unprecedented move, today morning (February 12, 2016) Kanhaiya Kumar, the president of the JNU students' union and an activist of AISF, was arrested by police in plain clothes, charged with sedition and conspiracy, and sent to custody for three days. The case was filed over holding of an event against hanging of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru. The move came as a shock for many as the JNU students union had come out with a statement criticizing the slogans raised in the event. It had explicitly mentioned that their protest was against the cancelling of the event by administration under the pressure created by the ABVP. The arrest has drawn criticism from various progressive groups and individuals. The left organisations and parties have criticised the slogans raised by a group of students but have also condemned the arrest in strong words. They pointed out that the entire propaganda by the right wing is to malign the left forces in the country and is built on lies. While this report was being written, more than thousand students were marching inside the JNU seeking immediate release of the JNUSU President. A source in the administration says that the newly appointed VC, and the Registrar have given a written authorisation to the Delhi Police to enter and take any action they want in the campus.

The CPI (M) in a statement issued on behalf of the Polit Bureau condemned the arrest and demanded his immediate release. The statement said that, “an isolated incident, which does not reflect the opinion of the vast majority of the students, is now being blatantly used as an excuse to clamp down on the progressive and democratic student movement. This has been a long harboured design of the RSS and its camp followers.  This anti-democratic authoritarian attack on JNU campus, seen in the light of State sponsored efforts by the BJP central government to silence dissent in premier educational institutions, has serious implications.” The General Secretary of the CPI (M) Sitaram Yechury also compared the times to that of emergency and said in a tweet that, “Police on campus, arrests and picking up students from hostels. This had last happened during Emergency.”

The deans of various departments of the university and the JNUTA have also come out in defense of the student’s community. The deans in a statement issued have said that, “As he belongs to the All India Students’ Federation, his views and political associations are well-known, and to accuse him of sedition is beyond the bounds of credibility. The only previous occasion when the President of the JNUSU had been arrested was during the Emergency of 1975-77, and the present situation on the campus brings back memories of the Emergency days.” The JNUTA extended support to the JNUSU and said that , “ The teachers of JNU have always stood for upholding the Constitution of India and values enshrined therein and are opposed to any unconstitutional activity in the campus or outside. This very sentiment makes us express our strong opposition to attempts to use the law and the police to suppress democratic dissent and conduct a witch-hunt on our campus. The fact that the JNU Students Union (JNUSU) President is the first to be arrested establishes it. The JNUTA, following its Emergency Meeting, expresses its deep concern on the recent developments on our campus. The teachers of the University condemn the massive police presence and the attempt to escalate tensions.”

The former JNU students who had been arrested during emergency have issued a statement condemning the act of arrest.  The statement read, “Coming in the wake of the dastardly conspiracy of connivance and blatant discrimination that forced Rohit Vemula to take his own life, the storming of the hostels and the arrest of the president of JNUSU are signs of the imposition of an undeclared emergency that need to be opposed, confronted and defeated.”

The events preceding the arrest could be closely compared to that of Hyderabad Central University. After a complaint lodged by BJP law maker Mahesh Giri and ABVP, the case was registered yesterday under Section of 124 A (sedition) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of IPC against unknown persons at Vasant Kunj (North) Police station.  Early morning the Home Minister took matters in his hand and said that, “If anyone raises anti-India slogans, tries to raise questions on country's unity and integrity, they will not be spared. Stringent action will be taken against them. “He was closely followed by MHRD minister Smriti Irani who is known for writing 5 letters to UoH asking them to take action of research scholar Rohith Vemula. Such interventions by the ministers are politically motivated and are attack on the autonomy of the insitutions.

Kumar, a third year student of PhD had won elections after an electrifying speech by securing 1029 votes.  He is known for his oratory skills and staunch logical critique of the right wing forces. In a event yesterday, he was vocal about the negligible involvement of the RSS in the freedom struggle. He pointed out that the JNU students community  does not need the certificate of being nationalist by organizations like RSS and ABVP which have not participated in the freedom movement and do not believe in the constitution.

References:
1. No, the slogans of the JNU students don't count as sedition under the law http://scroll.in/article/803522/no-what-the-jnu-students-did-doesnt-count-as-sedition-under-the-law
2. Freedom of speech at JNU: Is there really any difference between sedition and blasphemy? http://scroll.in/article/803511/freedom-of-speech-at-jnu-is-there-really-any-difference-between-sedition-and-blasphemy
3. Anti-national? Not my son, says mother  http://www.telegraphindia.com/1160213/jsp/frontpage/story_69039.jsp#.Vr7pyEDk8cA
4. Do not disagree: JNU arrests over Afzal Guru event are ill-judged, threatens basic rights http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/afzal-guru-film-jnu-student-protest-do-not-disagree/
5. JNU storm intensifies, students accuse Centre of political vendettahttps://sabrangindia.in/node/4296/edit http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/students-accuse-govt-of-vendetta-as-jnu-storm-intensifies/story-R1HHVXgCsg8ClxJgtB1etK.html
6. The problem with JNU: Too left for liberals, too liberal for leftists  http://scroll.in/article/803517/the-problem-with-jnu-too-left-for-liberals-too-liberal-for-leftists

The post Attack on JNUSU and Left Built on Lies appeared first on SabrangIndia.