In response to the said President’s address to the Parliament, the recently elected Member of Parliament for Inner Manipur, A Bimol Akoijam, came out swinging, accusing the BJP-led NDA administration of “ignoring” the state riven by violence. A professor at JNU, Akoijam made his political debut in the recently concluded Lok Sabha election of 2024, defeating BJP state minister TH Basanta Singh.

Addressing the Lok Sabha around midnight of July 2, Akoijam said “Is this silence communicating to the people of the Northeast and particularly Manipur that you do not matter in the Indian State’s scheme of things?”

Referring to the absence of the Manipur crisis in President Droupadi Murmu’s address to Parliament, Akoijam highlighted the high number of people that have been left displaced due to the violence as well as the number of deaths. He further highlighted the danger that still looms in the state, leaving the citizens anxious over the next breakout of violence. As per The Indian Express, Akoijam said: “This is not a simple absence. It is a reminder of the ‘rashtra chetana (national consciousness)’ which excludes people. You must realise that more than 60,000 people are languishing in relief camps in wretched conditions for the last one year… 60,000 people homeless is not a joke. Over 200 people have died. There has been a civil war-like situation where people, armed to the teeth, are roaming around and fighting each other, defending their villages and the Indian State is a mute spectator to this tragedy for one year.”

Akoijam also pointed to the irony of being allotted a time close to midnight to deliver his maiden speech, saying that he was “amazed” that his speech was being delivered when there was hardly anyone present in the House, including from the Congress ranks.

Despite the fact that “every square centimeter of the state is covered by Central forces,” Akoijam questioned how thousands of villages had been devastated and 60,000 people had been made homeless. “Yet our Prime Minister (Narendra Modi) remains mute. Not even a word. The Presidential address did not mention that (crisis). It is a reminder of what many scholars have said: there is a continuity between the colonial and post-colonial period,” he said.

Attacking the union government for neglecting the state of Manipur while claiming to move away from the colonial legacy attached to India, Akoijam cited the renowned political psychologist Ashis Nandy, and said colonialism is “a state of mind, it is a psychological phenomenon”. Akoijam then said “Today, we are observing a day where we implement new criminal laws, seemingly to discard colonial heritage… This continuity (of colonialism) is shown by neglecting the tragedy of a state which is the 19th state of the Union.”

Slamming the BJP’s nationalism, the MP said it was “sad to see a nationalist party like the BJP being comfortable with the silence on Manipur’s tragedy”. “Keep your hands on your heart and think about the homeless, the mothers and the widows. Think of them and then talk about nationalism,” he said.

Criticising PM Modi for standing as a mute spectator to the struggles of the people of Manipur, Akoijam, while wrapping up his speech, stated that “The hurt, the anger has thrown a nobody like me to be part of this temple of democracy, beating the BJP cabinet minister. Think about the pain… I will keep quiet the moment the Prime Minister opens his mouth and the nationalist party says that Manipur is a part of India and we care for the people of that state.”

A video of the speech can be accessed here:

Manipur MP Angomcha Bimol Akoijam explained why people elected “a nobody” like him to the Parliament. pic.twitter.com/WfsmexbAM0

— Brut India (@BrutIndia) July 2, 2024

Take out 1 minute of your time and listen to Manipur Congress MP Bimol Akoijam speak his heart out.

This will move you
pic.twitter.com/6g3EOYLGB3

— Roshan Rai (@RoshanKrRaii) July 2, 2024

It is essential to note that prior to Akoijam, Leader of the opposition and MP from Raebareli, Uttar Pradesh, Rahul Gandhi, had also heavily criticised the Modi government of pushing Manipur into “a civil war”, with its politics and policies. He highlighted how, since the beginning of the ethnic conflict in the state, PM Modi had not made one visit to Manipur.

“Despite our criticisms and urges, the prime minister has not stepped in Manipur, it is as if the state does not belong to India; the home minister has not gone to Manipur either.”

Speaking of a woman in Manipur who saw a relative being shot to death, Gandhi further said “For the Prime Minister, there is no state of Manipur. We urged him to give a message, to go there. But no, you cannot get a reply (from the Prime Minister).”

1st July 2024@RahulGandhi on #Manipur.
I don’t support him or Congress in any way. I just have major problems with people who ignores a CIVIL WAR in their own country for over 14 months ! pic.twitter.com/BphhReZ0Yf

— Adv. Siam Phaipi (@SiamPhaipi) July 2, 2024

On July 3, the Congress party hit out at the government over its second MP from Manipur, Alfred Arthur, not having been allowed to speak before Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s address in Lok Sabha. Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi had spoken to the media over the said issue and said “…Yesterday, we saw a saddening thing in the parliament. Congress, especially Rahul Gandhi has this demand that both of Manipur MPs should put forth their views on the Motion of thanks. Rahul Gandhi himself has gone to Manipur, he has witnessed the division that has been created within the societies of Manipur, a civil-war-like condition is there. Rahul Gandhi knew that if we didn’t allow them to speak, it would convey a wrong message to the people of Manipur. But, the sad thing is that the PM doesn’t want to listen to the grievances of Manipur. We didn’t get the 2 minutes but we had to listen to the PM for 2 hours in which he kept repeating all those old allegations, jokes and satire. He took the politics to a newer low… In the end, the PM just said that if you didn’t get the time, ask your party. If the PM can offer water to the opposition MPs, why doesn’t he have the patience to listen to the MPs of Manipur? PM Modi is showing his back in a planned way to Manipur, yesterday he ignored what Mohan Bhagwat had said…”

#WATCH | Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi says, “…Yesterday, we saw a saddening thing in the parliament. Congress, especially Rahul Gandhi has this demand that both of Manipur MPs should put forth their views on the Motion of thanks. Rahul Gandhi himself has gone to Manipur, he has… pic.twitter.com/SsNpA8VBFJ

— ANI (@ANI) July 3, 2024

On the other hand, a one had expected, in PM Modi’s 135-minute speech replying to the discussion on the Motion of Thanks on the President’s Address in the Lower House, he did not speak on the issue of Manipur and the violence that the state saw. During his speech PM Modi had to face with continuous slogan-shouting on justice for Manipur by opposition members.

Chants of Manipur – Manipur louder than Modi’s voice in Lok Sabha.

He is trembling.

Beauty of democracy pic.twitter.com/vBCs9JJNpP

— Roshan Rai (@RoshanKrRaii) July 2, 2024

Right now, in the Lok Sabha, Modi is finally understanding what the “VOICE” of the Opposition sounds like.

After 10 long years, the sound of the people drowns out his monologue.

Modi without a majority.

Mighty proud of ALL my INDIA colleagues in the Lok Sabha pic.twitter.com/dRfGhGuB17

— Saket Gokhale MP (@SaketGokhale) July 2, 2024

It is essential to point out that post-election results (June 4) to the Indian Express on June 9, CM Manipur N Biren Singh, had accepted responsibility for the 12 month long targeted conflict in the state, admitting that both the Centre and State had not met public expectations. (Details can be read here.)

Related:

Manipur: Violence surges as do displacements, CM Biren Singh finally admits that Centre & State are not meeting public expectations

Manipur conflict state-manufactured in order facilitate corporate loot: FACAM

Manipur: a year on, thousands of lives disrupted but the conflict continues

Supreme Court comes down heavily on Manipur government for failing to take undertrial to Court owing to his ethnic Kuki identity

The post Anguish of Manipur reverberates in Lok Sabha as Congress Manipur MP speaks against PM Modi’s “silence” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The said statement comes on days after the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), at the behest of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued emergency order directing top social media companies like Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, X and Snapchat to block 177 accounts and links related to the farmers’ protest in order to maintain ‘public order’. Notably, these blocking orders were issued on February 14 and 19 and demand that specified accounts be suspended for the duration of the protest and be restored after the same is over. The statement released on the X account of Global Government Affairs touches upon the issues of the issuance of these executive orders, the writ petition against the powers of the union and the lack of transparency, which has been provided and discussed below.

Issuance of executive orders of blocking by the union government:

The statement released by the social media platform stated that “The Indian government has issued executive orders requiring X to act on specific accounts and posts, subject to potential penalties including significant fines and imprisonment.  In compliance with the orders, we will withhold these accounts and posts in India alone; however, we disagree with these actions and maintain that freedom of expression should extend to these posts.”

Section 69A of the Information Act, 2000 (IT Act) empowers the union government to issue take down orders or blocking orders in India. The said legal provision states that the Union government can issue blocking orders to platforms in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of the country, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, and so on. These powers are being increasingly used by the Modi-led government to clamp down on any critical voices against his government and policies.

The writ petition by X Corp against these blocking orders:

In the statement released by X, it is further stated that “Consistent with our position, a writ appeal challenging the Indian government’s blocking orders remains pending. We have also provided the impacted users with notice of these actions in accordance with our policies.”

This sheds light on the ongoing legal proceedings taking place in the Karnataka High Court against the blocking orders being issued by the Union government by invoking Section 69A of the IT Act in complete darkness. On July 1, 2022, X Corp filed a writ petition in the Karnataka High Court after having complied with blocking orders issued by the Union government “under protest”. Through the petition, X had contested the blocking of 39 URLs out of a total of 1,474 accounts and 175 tweets. According to the platform, the directive to block all accounts violated Section 69A and that the banning orders “demonstrate an excessive use of powers and are disproportionate” and are “procedurally and substantially deficient of the provision”. The platform had further argued that the Central government lacked the authority to issue general orders requesting the disabling of social media accounts and that such orders must include justifications that should be made known to users. Moreover, it also specified that only when the nature of the content complied with the requirements set forth in Section 69A of the IT Act could a blocking order be issued.

On June 30, a single judge bench of the Karnataka High Court had dismissed the said petition brought in by X Corp (then Twitter Inc.) by holding the company’s argument to be “devoid of merits.” Interestingly, the bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit had also imposed the company with a 50 lakh rupee fee to be paid to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority within 45 days of the judgement.

In October of 2023, the appeal preferred by X Corp against the dismissal of its plea by a single judge bench was accepted by the division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil after MeitY had informed the court that the government will not be reconsidering the blocking orders. As the appeal was accepted, the bench indicated that it would consider the issue of whether reasons of the blocking orders passed by the Ministry are to be communicated to the platform, users of the accounts. It remarked that recording reasons is mandatory.

Notably, during the January 30, 2024 hearing of the case, X Corp had argued against the Union Government review committee’s non-disclosure of its orders upholding the blocking of several posts on the platform. A Division Bench consisting of Acting Chief Justice Dinesh Kumar and Justice Shivashankare Gowda was hearing the said case. The counsel for X Corp, Sajjan Poovayya, had informed the court that with several of the blocking orders having been upheld by a review committee, the appellants were yet to be provided with a copy of the orders as they were deemed to be “secret”. It was further submitted by the counsel that as contesting such the emergency blocking orders is not easy, which is even the case in issuance of regular blocking orders, around 1,500 pieces of content were removed with a one line order. With regard to the same, the counsel questioned how the orders could be kept secret when the relevant statute stated that reasons had to be recorded. The social media giant had also raised concerns that the Review Committee had never actually met as required under Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules (IT Rules).  Based upon these arguments, an Interlocutory Application (IA) had been moved by the appellants to gain access to the orders issued by the review committee upholding the blocking orders of the government, by deeming the same to be crucial to their case in contesting these government orders.

Ironically, on February 21, the union government had argued against the IA moved by the social media platform to gain access to the review committee reports by stating that they had no right to access to the same since X Corp is merely an intermediary and not the author or creator of the blocked content.

As per the government, a review of the decisions to block internet content under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act serves as a safeguard against arbitrary usage of power and only the creators of the accounts or tweets can invoke this safeguard. The government further contended that review under Rule 14 of the IT Rules is an internal and independent safeguard mechanism and there exists no requirement to hear any party before passing the review orders.

“A party aggrieved by the blocking orders has the option of seeking judicial review, and has no right to insist on access to the proceedings of the Review Committee. The appellant (X Corp), being an intermediary, certainly has no locus standi to seek access to the proceedings of the Review Committee,” the counsel for the union stated as per Bar and Bench.

Lastly, during the said hearing, the government also highlighted that in the writ petition, X Corp had only challenged the blocking of 39 URLs, while through the IA it is now questioning 1,096 blocking directions. The government had also challenged this move, terming it an attempt to widen the scope of X Corp’s challenge.

The next hearing in the X Corp’s writ appeal is slated to be held by the High Court’s division bench in March 2024.

Non-publishing of the executive orders by X Corp

The statement further specifies the legal restrictions prohibiting them from publishing these executive orders and stated “Due to legal restrictions, we are unable to publish the executive orders, but we believe that making them public is essential for transparency. This lack of disclosure can lead to a lack of accountability and arbitrary decision-making.”

It is pertinent to highlight here that since 2023, pursuant to the takeover of the social media platform by Musk, X had stopped sharing takedown notices issued by the Indian government with Lumen Database, a website that collects and analyses legal complaints and requests for removal of online material. The same had been specified by Lumen Database who had said “As of April 15, 2023, Twitter has not submitted copies of any of the takedown notices it receives to Lumen. According to Lumen’s persons of contact there, Twitter’s 3rd party data sharing policies are under review, and they will update Lumen once there is more information.” 

The complete statement uploaded on Global Government Affairs can be read here:

The Indian government has issued executive orders requiring X to act on specific accounts and posts, subject to potential penalties including significant fines and imprisonment.

In compliance with the orders, we will withhold these accounts and posts in India alone; however,…

— Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) February 21, 2024

It is also essential to point out here that while the said statement has been made public by X Corp, no list with specific names against whom actions based on the executive orders have been taken is provided.

Legal provisions required compliance by X Corp to government orders

Releasing the statement while distancing itself from the oppressive censorship tactics being followed by the government marked X’s first confrontation with the Indian government since Musk took ownership of the micro-blogging platform. The existing legal structure of India is such that the social media giant can face serious consequences in case it does not comply with the orders being issued by the government in taking action, including suspension, withholding and taking down of accounts, against certain accounts or content.

The infamous section 69A of the IT Act provides that “The intermediary who fails to comply with the direction issued under sub-section (1) shall be punished with an imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.” In simple words, if any intermediary, in this case X Corp, refuses to comply with the orders of the government, they may have to bear monetary fines as well as be subjected to a significant jail term. It is in this regard that in April 2023, Musk had deemed the social media laws in India to be ‘quite strict’ and that the company could not go beyond the laws of the country. Being compliant with India’s laws is better than having employees go to jail, Musk had stated as per the Economic Times.

Prior to Musk, Dorsey, who quit as Twitter CEO in 2021, had in an interview claimed that during his tenure as CEO, Twitter received requests from the Indian government to block accounts covering the 2020-2021 farmers’ protests and those critical of the government. Dorsey had also alleged that the Indian government had threatened the social networking platform with raids if it did not take down critical content during the farmers’ protests against the three farm laws.

“It manifested in ways such as: ‘We will shut Twitter down in India’, which is a very large market for us; ‘We will raid the homes of your employees’, which they did; and this is India, a democratic country,” Dorsey had said. It is important to highlight here that in the year 2021, Delhi Police’s special cell had ‘visited’ the Delhi and Gurgaon offices of Twitter, as was then known as, to serve notice to India’s managing director about an investigation into the social media giant’s tagging of a post by a ruling party spokesman, namely Sambit Patra, as “manipulated media”. While the aforementioned investigation had been used as a guise, the ‘visit’ had been a result of the current dispensation in 2021 asking Twitter to block certain provocative hashtags and the then Twitter initially gave in to the demand but it rolling back its decision citing ‘insufficient justification’.

In addition to this, the union government could also revoke X’s safe harbour that is granted to the platform under Section 79 of the IT Act. The said status protects intermediaries from being held responsible for “any third-party information, data, or communication link made available or hosted” on its platform.

Pressure building on social media platform to bow before the Modi government

The current regime has applied increasing pressure on social media platforms to control the information as well as the criticism that circulates on social media. With mainstream media already under control, and the independent media facing cases and suspension of licences,  the right to speech and expression as well as the right to information, both guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, are threatened. By employing these repressive and oppressive steps, the Modi-led government is following the path of other autocratic countries, such as Russia, that is trying to control how and where messages can spread on social media. One should not forget that in March of 2021, the Russian government had provided that it would slow access to Twitter and in turn control one of the few places where Russians openly criticise the government.

Recently, privacy advocate Apar Gupta had taken to X to write on this issue. He had stated:

“Blocking orders for Twitter accounts of farm leaders have been issued in advance. This form of pre-censorship is without any transparency or natural justice.”

Twitter under new ownership will no longer disclose the URLs to the Lumen Database taking away any transparency. It also lost the Karnataka High Court case which employed theocratic (as opposed to constitutional) reasoning. I wrote on this separately, but that’s an aside.

The government on its part will not disclose or submit to accountability. Why block entire accounts in advance? Is the account itself illegal? It will not bother asking these questions for fewer people will ask them today than two years ago. As its march towards total power becomes menacing it commands greater levels of social compliance. Either by discipline, despondency or indoctrination. This is not surprising, what does provide anguish is the vile commentary against farmers on social media. How easy it is to forget that close to 750 protestors who lost their lives? Have we as a society lost all civility in disagreement?”

His post can be read here:

Twitter was a reliable and timely medium for farmers during their protests in 2020-21.

They issued official press releases, documented police excesses, built community and sympathy for their cause with hashtags. It became a vital informational pipeline for farmers to convey…

— Apar (@apar1984) February 13, 2024

To know about the farmers’ Protest, read here.

Related:

Farmers protest: Death of a farmer after teargas shells dropped by Haryana cops, protests intensify as 77 SM accounts banned by MEITY/MHA

EXCLUSIVE: Three independent Tamil channels win battle against censorship by MeitY-YouTube after 6 months of a gritty battle

Police Case Filed Against Woman Editor Of Magazine In Kerala

The post ‘X’ distances itself from the clampdown on freedom of expression by blocking accounts on the executive orders of the Union government appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The video can be viewed here:

#WATCH | Shambhu Border | Farmer leaders reject the Government’s proposal over MSP.

Farmer leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal says, “…After the discussion of both forums, it has been decided that if you analyse, there is nothing in the government’s proposal…This is not on the… pic.twitter.com/W7FV6kIkIQ

— ANI (@ANI) February 19, 2024

As has been reported yesterday, during the fourth round of talks between the farmer leaders, namely Dallewal, Sarwan Singh Pandher (coordinator of the Kisan Mazdoor Morcha) and Jarnail Singh and union ministers, namely Piyush Goyal (Food Minister), Arjun Munda (Union Agriculture Minister) and Nityanand Rai (Minister of State for Home Affairs), a proposal by the Union had been tabled before the farmer leaders. Through the same, it was proposal that government promoted cooperative societies like NCCF (National Cooperative Consumers’ Federation of India) and NAFED (National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India) would be buying three pulse crops, maize, and cotton at MSP for five years after entering into a legal contract with farmers. It was also provided that there would be no limit on the quantity. Notably, the previous three talks between the union ministers and farmer leaders, which had taken place on February 8, 12 and 15, had remained inconclusive.

Reasons behind rejecting the proposal

Since the year 2020-21, the Sanyukt Kisan Morhca had fragmented into distinct entities, which are SKM (Punjab), SKM (Non-Political) and the Kisan Mazdoor Morcha. These entities have separately rejected the proposal of the Union. Notably, the KMM and SKM (non-political) are the two forums that gave the call of Dilli Chalo on January 2. The SKM had initially distanced itself from the protest, but later as the state and Union government started using excessive force on the farmers at the Punjab-Haryana borders, the SKM expressed their solidarity with the protesting farmers and started holding mass protests in support.

Sanyukt Kisan Morcha (Non–Political): As per a report of the Wire, Dallewal termed the proposal given by the government to be an eyewash and stated “Basically, it was a contract farming proposal. It was only valid for those who would switch over from paddy or wheat to crops like pulses, maize or cotton. Contract farming as a farming model has already failed and can’t guarantee sustainable income to farmers.”

Stressing on not leaving those farmers behind grow crops and pulses other than those specified in the proposal, the farmer leader further stated “Moreover, the government proposal was for five crops out of 23 on which MSP is announced and it was not justified to leave those who were not part of the government proposal behind.” He added that farmers of the movement believe that it is important to have a law on the MSP and guaranteed procurement of all 23 crops.

Referring to the noise that is being made by certain sections regarding the impossibility of guaranteeing MSP for all crops as it will plunge Indian economy into bankruptcy, Dallewal said various estimates by agriculture economy experts reveal that if the government ensures MSP for all 23 crops, total expenditure will not be more than Rs 1.75 lakh crore. “On the other hand, the Union government spends almost Rs 1.5 lakh crore just on the import of edible oils,” he said, as per the report of the Wire.

In furtherance to this, farmer leader Dallewal also emphasised on the lack of commitment shown by the Bharatiya Janata Party-led Union government regarding the other demands raised by the farmers, such as the loan waiver, stopping the privatisation of electricity, comprehensive public sector crop insurance scheme, Rs. 10,000 monthly pension to farmers above 60 years of age, the dismissal and prosecution of junior Union minister Ajay Mishra ‘Teni’ over the Lakhimpur Kheri massacre of farmers, among others.

It was asserted by the organisation that extensive consultations with stakeholders preceded their decision to ensure that the Union did not have a chance to claim that farmers immediately rejected its proposal without any debate.

Notably, Sarwan Singh Pandher, convener of KMSC, also added that they will stick to their demand of an MSP guarantee law on all 23 crops for which government announces MSP every year.

Sanyukt Kisan Morcha: Separately, the Sanyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM), which represents almost 40 farm unions across India, also rejected the proposal of the union government. Referring to the proposal of the Union, the SKM stated that the Union government has basically proposed to divert and dilute the demand of MSP based on the formula of C2+50% for all crops with guaranteed procurement which had been promised in the BJP Manifesto in the 2014 General Election and originally recommended by the National Farmers Commission chaired by M S Swaminathan and submitted in 2006. It has been declared by the SKM that nothing below MSP calculated at the formula of C2+50% for all crops with guaranteed procurement is acceptable to the farmers of India. “If the Modi Government is unable to implement the promise made by BJP, then let the Prime Minister be honest to tell that to the people,” said Prem Singh Bhangu, president of the All India Kisan Federation.

As per the report of Indian Express, Bhangu added, “It clearly indicates that government has virtually denied the demand for a legal guarantee for MSP for all agricultural produce along with an assured market based on Dr Swaminathan’s formula. The proposed agreement amounts to contract farming, which the farmers had rejected when the agitation against three farm laws (since repealed) was suspended. The proposal seems to have been made in connivance with the Punjab government to diversify agriculture in order to save underground water in the state. The proposal is silent on whether it will be a pan-India scheme.” Bhangu further provided that if farmers accepted the proposal, it would give an excuse to the central government to not procure paddy and wheat in Punjab.

Additionally, SKM sought for the Union Ministers to clarify upon the silence of the Modi government on the demands of loan waiver, no privatisation of electricity, comprehensive public sector crop insurance scheme, Rs.10000 monthly pension to farmers above 60 years age, dismiss and prosecute Ajay Mishra Teni, Union MoS (Home) the main conspirator of Lakhimpur Kheri massacre of farmers among others.

What awaits the farmers now?

Now that the farmer leaders and the farmer unions have rejected the “innovative” and the “out-of-the-box” proposal put forth by the Union, the farmers will continue with their protests to raise their demands. In its address with the media, farmer leader Pandher announced that they will be resuming with the ‘Delhi Chalo’ march, which had been put on hold for 2 day, from 11 am on February 21. As per his statement to ANI, Pandher said, “We will peacefully move towards Delhi on February 21 at 11 am.”

The video can be viewed here:

#WATCH | Shambhu Border | Farmer leaders reject the Government’s proposal over MSP.

Farmer leader Sarwan Singh Pandher says, “We will move towards Delhi on February 21 at 11 am…” pic.twitter.com/kMpV4iQyhi

— ANI (@ANI) February 19, 2024

With this, farmer leader Dallewal urged the state government of Haryana and the Union government to “to either resolve our issues or remove barricades and allow us to proceed to Delhi to protest peacefully.” They also appealed to the Haryana government not to halt their march and allow them to camp at the national capital for the fulfilment of their legitimate rights. Referring to their Constitutional rights, Dallewal said that the agitation for their demand is farmers’ constitutional right and cannot be taken away by force, as is happening at these borders.

It is essential to note that more than 10,000 farmers stay camping on the Haryana-Punjab borders, confined to Shambhu and the Khanauri border points, where security personnel have been deployed in huge numbers. The state force has been using excessive force through water cannons, rubber pellets and tear gas shells to stop the protesting farmers from proceeding on their march to Delhi. More than 100 protesting farmers have been injured from these suppressive and repressive tactics, leading to three deaths being caused till now. Journalists covering the protests have also sustained injuries.

During the press conference, farmer leader Pander said also referred to the injustice being meted out to the protesting farmers at the hands of Haryana police and said “The way farmers were treated at the (Shambhu) border is condemnable. The main reason for inviting Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann to the meetings was to raise the issue of barricading along the borders, and that people of his state (Punjab) are facing tear gas shelling from neighbouring state. He guaranteed to take notice of the situation, but he hasn’t. He should have put this issue in front of ministers. And today, Haryana DGP in his statement said that we haven’t used pellet guns and tear gas; we request Supreme Court to take suo moto cognisance against those who have done this act.”

The video can be viewed here:

#WATCH | On the ‘Delhi Chalo’ march scheduled for Feb 21, farmer leader Sarwan Singh Pandher says, “…The intention of the govt was very clear that they would not let us enter Delhi at any cost…If you don’t want to find a solution through discussion with farmers then we should… pic.twitter.com/fjxp7nU92u

— ANI (@ANI) February 20, 2024

In addition to this, SKM has announced plans for a black flag protest against BJP Members of Parliament on February 21 and has scheduled a meeting in Delhi on February 22 to strategise upon the further actions that need to be taken.

Apart from, Haryana farmers will also joining the ongoing protest with farmer leader Gurnam Singh Charuni announcing the same. As per the report of ANI, Charuni declared on February 19 said that Haryana will also join the agitation after February 21 in case the government does not agree to include oilseeds and bajra for procurement in their proposal for MSP.

“The government should think and understand that these two things (Oilseeds and Bajra) are very important (for procurement). Just like they mentioned pulses, maize, and cotton, they should include these two crops too. If these two are not included, we will have to think about it again…Yesterday, we took a decision that if the government doesn’t agree by 21st February, Haryana too will join the agitation,” ANI quoted Gurnam Singh Charuni as saying.

Related:

Farmers Protest: Union proposes contractual MSP for 5 years for three pulse crops, maize, and cotton, no law on MSP; farmer union to decide

Day 5 of Farmers Protest: BKU (Ekta Ugrahan) holds sit-in protests outside houses of 3 Punjab BJP leaders, farmer leader Pandher demands Ordinance on MSP

Day 4 of Farmer Protest: Excessive state force at protestors leads to death of elderly farmer, first death to be reported as of now

Bharat Bandh: Nationwide strike by farmers sees highways blocked, toll plazas opened up, rallies held

Day 3 of Farmers’ Protest: More than 100 farmers injured by rubber bullets, solidarity protests by BKU and SKM in Punjab

Farmers Protest: Braving tear gas, blockades, state obstructions, farmers journey towards Delhi to demand law on MSP

Farmers’ Protest: Physical repression, prohibitory orders, Delhi entry blocked – Déjà Vu?

The post Farmer Unions reject Union’s proposal for 5 year contractual MSP on three pulse crops, maize, and cotton, calls it “eyewash” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The panel of three union ministers, namely Piyush Goyal (Food Minister), Arjun Munda (Union Agriculture Minister) and Nityanand Rai (Minister of State for Home Affairs), had been engaging in talks with farmer leaders Jagjit Singh Dallewal (convener of SKM non-political), Sarwan Singh Pandher (coordinator of the Kisan Mazdoor  Morcha) and Jarnail Singh in hopes to find a solution to the demands being raised by the farmers as a part of their ‘Delhi Chalo’ protest and the said proposal comes as the latest development. The union ministers and farmer leaders had met earlier on February 8, 12 and 15 but talks remained inconclusive.

As per the statement given by Goyal in regards to the proposal tabled, “The government promoted cooperative societies like NCCF (National Cooperative Consumers’ Federation of India) and NAFED (National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India) will form a contract for the next 5 years and buy products from the farmers on MSP. There will be no limit on the quantity.”

Goyal further emphasised on their “out-of-the-box thinking” in regards to this proposal as it focuses on diversification into pulses, cotton, and maize, with assurances of MSP without quantity limitations. To his press address, he added “This approach will save Punjab’s farming, improve the groundwater table, and save the land, which is already under stress, from getting barren.” As per a report of the India Today, the Union Minister also mentioned that several policy matters discussed require broader representation and cannot be finalised immediately. He assured that these discussions would continue, taking into account the upcoming elections and the need for comprehensive policy solutions.

While the proposal can be deemed as a step forward by the union government, it does not fully cater to the demands being raised by the protesting farmers, which had asked for a law on MSP to be brought in that would provide a legal guarantee to all 23 crops of which the Union government decides MSP every year. It is in this view that after the proposal was tabled, the farmers refused to commit at the spot and sought time from the union ministers to discuss the proposal at their forums over the next two days and then decide the future course of action.

As per the report of the Wire, farmer leader Dallewal also addressed the media and stated that they will discuss the proposal by the government with their respective forums and experts and “Then, we will come to a conclusion.” Notably, the farmer leaders have also announced that their ‘Delhi Chalo’ protest will also be on stand-by till the farmers are perusing over the proposal. Pandher said a discussion on loan waivers and other demands is pending. It has been clarified by the farmer leaders that if no result is meted out by then on all issues, they will resume their protest from 11 am on February 21. As per media reports, farmer leader Pandher said, “Our ‘Delhi Chalo’ will continue from February 21 if no final result comes out in next two days. We have other demands apart from MSP.”

It is pertinent to highlight here that the ‘Delhi Chalo’ protest had begun on February 13 on the call made by the Samyukta Kisan Morcha- Non-Political and the Kisan Mazdoor Morcha, whereby more than 200 farmers’ unions, mostly from Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, and Punjab, were to march to Delhi to demand Union’s action on their long-standing demand of enactment of a law to guarantee MSP for their produce. Besides MSP, the farmers also demanded the implementation of the Swaminathan Commission’s recommendations which provided for safeguarding the interest of small farmers and addressing the issue of increasing risk overtaking agriculture as a profession. In addition to this, pensions for farmers and farm labourers, farm debt waiver, withdrawal of police cases and “justice” for victims of the Lakhimpur Kheri violence also form a part of the demands made. Lastly, farmers also demanded for 200 days’ daily wage and Rs 700 per daily wage for MNREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act) workers.

Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, who was also present at the talks on Sunday, advocated for crop diversification while also urging for the lifting of the internet suspension in certain areas. As per a report of the India Today, Mann stated that the next decisions regarding the government’s proposals will come from the farmer unions. “The ball is now in the farmers’ court,” he said, adding that “no door is closed” for further dialogue. It is essential to note that the suspension of internet services has been extended in certain areas of Punjab districts, including Patiala, Sangrur, and Fatehgarh Sahib, until February 24. The Haryana government has also suspended mobile internet services and bulk SMS in several districts, including Ambala, Kurukshetra, and Hisar.

Samyukt Kisan Morcha to continue with sit-in protests to maintain pressure on the government

Despite the temporary pause announced by the KMM and SKM (non-political) farmer leaders in the ‘Delhi Chalo’ protest, farmer leaders belonging to the Samyukta Kisan Morcha have announced further protests to maintain pressure on the government to meet their demands. As per the report of India Today, the farmers’ union plans to conduct mass protests outside the residences of Bharatiya Janata Party leaders in Punjab for three days, and make toll barriers free for commuters from February 20 to 22. The SKM National Coordination Committee and general body have also announced that they meet on February 21 and 22 to take stock of the situation and decide future plans of action to intensify the ongoing struggles.

Their main demand is for immediate action to be taken in accordance with the agreements that had been made by the union with the SKM on December 2, 2021, at the time of withdrawing the farmers’ protests against three farm laws. Notably, these MSP as recommended by the M.S. Swaminathan Committee, comprehensive loan waiver, no privatisation of electricity, dismissal and prosecution of Union Minister of State for Home Ajay Mishra Teni for his alleged role as a conspirator in Lakhimpur Kheri incident and stop the repression of farmers on the Punjab border.

As per a report of the Hindu, the SKM has also condemned the Narendra Modi government for legalising corruption through electoral bonds and piling up thousands of crores as party funds. This is in regards to the Supreme Court verdict delivered recently wherein they have held the Electoral Bond Scheme to be unconstitutional. As per the report, the SKM alleged that the pro-corporate farm Laws, labour codes, Electricity Act amendments, the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana in which insurance companies have amassed over ₹57,000 crores at the expense of farmers, pre-paid smart meters, sale of profit-making public sector undertakings, privatisation of airports and ports, a host of such legislation and policies are all favours returned to its corporate cronies. “The BJP had accumulated thousands of crores by legalising corruption, deployed it for toppling democratically elected governments as well as influencing elections through massive propaganda, impossible to match for any other political party. The SKM hopes that this verdict will also spur a movement to clear doubts over the EVM by making it a fool-proof mechanism,” the SKM said.

Related:

Day 5 of Farmers Protest: BKU (Ekta Ugrahan) holds sit-in protests outside houses of 3 Punjab BJP leaders, farmer leader Pandher demands Ordinance on MSP

Day 4 of Farmer Protest: Excessive state force at protestors leads to death of elderly farmer, first death to be reported as of now

Bharat Bandh: Nationwide strike by farmers sees highways blocked, toll plazas opened up, rallies held

Day 3 of Farmers’ Protest: More than 100 farmers injured by rubber bullets, solidarity protests by BKU and SKM in Punjab

Farmers Protest: Braving tear gas, blockades, state obstructions, farmers journey towards Delhi to demand law on MSP

Farmers’ Protest: Physical repression, prohibitory orders, Delhi entry blocked – Déjà Vu?

The post Farmers Protest: Union proposes contractual MSP for 5 years for three pulse crops, maize, and cotton, no law on MSP; farmer union to decide appeared first on SabrangIndia.

When the issue of Israeli spyware being used by government to spy on certain individuals was raised in the LokSabha on the second day of its current winter session, in an unabashed response, the Minister of State in the Home Affairs Ministry Kishan Reddy said that Section 69 of the Information Technology Act (IT Act) empowers the Central Government to intercept and monitor anyone. The question was asked on the floor of the lower house by MDMK’s A Ganeshamurthi.

This statement coming from the Home Affairs Ministry today, has silenced all speculation and can be considered as a clear admission by the central government that it did in fact spy upon lawyers and human rights activists, in blatant misuse of its powers.

Only 10 agencies can tape phones: Centre

In a written reply, the central government further also said there are only 10 agencies that are authorised to tape phones in India. These include the CBI, the ED and the Intelligence Bureau. The government said these agencies have to take permission from the Union Home Secretary approval before putting anyone on surveillance.

The 10 authorities that can intercept phones in India are: Intelligence Bureau, Central Bureau of Investigation, Enforcement Directorate, Narcotics Control Bureau, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, National Investigation Agency, R&AW, Directorate of Signal Intelligence and Delhi Police Commissioner.

The Law

Section 69 of the IT Act deals with provisions pertaining to Power to issue directions for interception or monitoring or decryption of any information through any computer resource, whereby, the government or its authorised officers, in the interest of “sovereignty or integrity of India, defence of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to above or for investigation of any offence” may intercept, monitor or decrypt any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource.

Sabrang India had recently done an analysis on how vague and arbitrary are the provisions that allow interception by the government, enabling the government to justify its surveillance activities by using such vague provisions as a shield.

In October this year,WhatsApp filed a complaint in a California Court against Israel’s NSO Group, many things have unravelled. The claims of the IT Ministry that WhatsApp did not inform them about the vulnerability in their service, were countered by Whatsapp stating that besides notifying the government in May about a vulnerability in its service, it sent a letter in early September that 121 Indians were compromised by the Israeli spyware Pegasus. To this, the IT Ministry responded saying that the September letter sent to them was very vague. The government had alleged that it was disturbed that the company had not brought the privacy breach of Indian citizens to their attention during the two meetings with the minister earlier this year.

On November 1, this year, Whatsapp confirmed that NSO Group’s spyware called Pegasus was used to spy upon  journalists and human rights activists in India who were informed by Whatsapp that their phones had been under state-of-the-art surveillance for a two-week period until May 2019

After this shocking revelation, the 19 affected Indian users who were contacted by WhatsApp wrote an open letter to the Central government saying, “It is a matter of public concern whether Indian tax payer money has been spent on this kind of Cyber surveillance… We seek an answer from the Government of India about whether it was aware of any contract between any of its various ministries, departments, agencies, or any State government and the NSO Group or any of its contractors to deploy Pegasus or related malware for any operations within India?” The government, back then, had neither confirmed nor denied the usage of the spyware.

However, by invoking section 69 of the IT Act when asked if the government was tapping Whatsapp conversations, the government has silenced all speculations and we have a clear admission from the horses mouth!

Related:

WhatsApp confirms: Israeli spyware was used to snoop on Indian journalists, activists

Besides May alert, WhatsApp sent another in September on 121 Indians breached

Phone tapping and now face scan, Govt. creeping into our privacy

What is Ravishankar Prasad Hiding on WhatsApp Hack?

The post Did GOI just admit in Lok Sabha to using Pegasus to spy on activists? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It is a policy move and development that has sent tremours down environmental human rights activists. The conservation/ no-mining zone in Saranda and Chaibasa in West Singhbhum district of Jharkhand may be opened for iron ore mining. The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) has decided to form a committee to explore the prospect of opening up these zones.

The Saranda forests in the hilly regions of West Singhbhum district of Jharkhand are dense forests that stretch over an area of 82,000 ha. These forests were one of the most pristine in India, and are the largest Sal forests in the country. They support a large variety of floral and faunal biodiversity, and are an important elephant corridor. An expert panel appointed by the Government of India in 2011, identified 480 new species of fauna and flora in the region. The core area of these forests are also ancestral home to about 56 villages which are mostly composed of the Ho and MundaAdivasi communities. The 36,000 strong tribal communities have lived sustainably within the forests for centuries and have played a key role in the maintenance and protection of the forests.

The Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MSPM) which came into existence in June, 2018 may be amended for the purpose of opening up the no-mining zones. Earlier, there have already been a flurry of modifications made to the MPSM like merging Zone I and II mining areas, removal of the clause for Impact Assessment and scrapping of the role of the forest department in creating the mining plan. These modifications also opened up mineral blocks in the no-mining areas of Ankua and Chidia. In the MPSM, the allowing of the 13 mines in this area was dependent on the government. However, MoEF has deleted this clause to bring these under the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act (MMDR).

Reportedly, the Jharkhand Chief Secretary, DK Tiwari wrote to the MOEF&CC in March 2019 and had sought a reassessment study to open up the conservation zone for mining.

Tiwari wrote to CK Mishra saying, “The conservation zone is a repository to huge iron ore resources and so the stipulation in the MSPM report for complete ban on mining in conservation zone should be revisited”.

“The reassessment study requested by the state may be carried out by the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education with representation from Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, and Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad in the study team,” the MOEF&CC wrote to Tiwari.

Per Down to Earth, the Jharkhand Chief Minister, Raghubar Das also wrote to the ministry seeking permission for Steel Authority of India Ltd (SAIL). He had argued that MSPM has affected SAIL financially as it had made huge investments to mine that area. Based on this, “the CM has asked the ministry to dilute the MSPM,” a state official told Down to Earth on condition of anonymity.

The MPSM was finalised in June 2018, soon after, the state government wrote to the MoEF&CC requesting to amend the plan on August 14.
As per the MSPM, the Saranda forest was divided into three zones- mining zone I (approximately 10,670 hectares), mining zone II (approximately 2,161 ha) and conservation zone/no-mining zone (approximately 43,000 ha). The no-mining area has mining proposals from SAIL, JSW Group, Vedanta Ltd and others. 

A committee comprising MoEF&CC, Union Ministry of Mines, Union Ministry of Steel, Union Ministry of Coal and the Jharkhand government was created by MoEF&CC to look into modifications/ amendments to the MSPM. On February 4, the committee met and amended some provisions of the MSPM. It did away with the clause that mining zone II can only be accessed after the ores in mining zone I were exhausted. A detailed study was proposed by the state government. The purpose of the study was to undertake the reassessment of the biodiversity richness and ecosystem services rendered by the conservation area so as to extract iron ore to meet the future steel demands.

“Concern for SAIL is just a front, the state government wants to open up the no-go mining area because a major chunk of the good quality iron ore is just lying there,” the official said.

In 2014, the MoEF had stopped giving fresh mining clearances in the area after the Shah Commission report found major violation of the MMDR by the mining companies in the area. The MoEF had mandated that fresh lease would only be given after the MPSM had been created.  

The Justice M. B. Shah Commission submitted its ‘First Report on illegal mining of iron and manganese ores (four volumes) in the State of Jharkhand’ October 14, 2013. In its first report on illegal mining in Jharkhand, the Commission said that despite a delay in renewal of the mining licence by the Jharkhand Government, miners continued to exploit the area leased to them without fresh green approvals. The Commission hadfoundand highlighted illegal production in 26 iron and manganese ore leases. These leases include iron ore mines of, among others, Tata Steel, Steel Authority of India Ltd, Rungta Mines, Usha Martin, Rameshwar Jute Mills, and Singhbhum Minerals Co.

As a response, the MoEF&CC awarded the carrying capacitystudy in Saranda Forest Division to Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE), Dehradun to suggest annual capacity for iron ore production. The ICFRE submitted its report on March 28, 2016, which was again examined by a committee constituted by the MoEFF&CC on April 4, 2016.Based on the committee’s recommendations the ICFRE report was accepted by the competent authority in the MoEF& CC. The ICFRE study was conducted to comply with the recommendations of Shah Commission of Enquiry.

Some of the observations included, “It was commented that IBM has approved mining schemes to increase production during the mining plan period without application of mind to the ingredient”

Further that, “For modification of mining plan, conditions mentioned in the Rules are required to be satisfied which was totally ignored and created multi fold environmental hazards to the Saranda Forest. The conditions have become more aggravated, since the mines are located in clusters and transport through common roads used by them. The roads cannot sustain this load and remain always in dilapidated conditions beyond repair, as observed by the Commission during its visit.”

In view of many such grave violations, the MPSM came up with an underlying principle “to divert minimum forest area for mining and producing maximum output depending upon the approved mining plan and Environment clearance (EC) under EP Act 1986”

The plan gave detailed outlines of forest area, conditions for sustainable mining etc.

However, the current BJP government in the state is all set to dilute many of these environment friendly provisions and make matters worse for one of the densest forests in India, a home to elephants and forest dwelling peoples.
 

The post Black clouds over Saranda: Centre set to open up 43000 ha of Jharkhand’s forests for mining appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post ‘Nationalist’ BJP Govt Invites Foreign Takeover, Offers Cheap Indian Labour! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Of the 35 cases under sedition charges (Section 124A of IPC), 12 were registered in Haryana, six in Uttar Pradesh, three each in Karnataka and Kerala and two each in Maharashtra, Telangana and Delhi, Minister of State for Home Hansraj Gangaram Ahir told the Lok Sabha in response to a question.

Replying to another question, Ahir said the National Crime Records Bureau has conveyed that it does not maintain record on sedition cases registered against individuals who have supported cricket teams post match
 

The post 35 sedition cases registered in 2016: GOI in LS appeared first on SabrangIndia.