“Now, after nearly two years of the SIT saying that these records, as per the government of Gujarat’s version, are destroyed, you mentioned when I (Teesta Setalvad) brought this to your attention to be recorded in my 161 statement, that then commissioner of police PC Pande has, after the hon’ble court directed the SIT to go into the report filed by the amicus curiae, thereafter produced the entire documentary record that he had scanned and kept aside before they were ‘destroyed’! You also mentioned that there was 3,500 pages of such evidence which the SIT is now, after nearly two years of the inquiry, examining.

We wish to express, as co-petitioners and co-complainants, our distress and consternation at what we believe is a belated attempt by Shri Pande to save his skin or those of his political bosses, as all this while – including in the report submitted by yourself and Shri Raghavan to the hon’ble Supreme Court – you have maintained that these records have been destroyed. Shri Pande has, we have been given to understand, twice before been examined by the SIT in the Zakiya matter, between May 2009 and May 2010. Surely in the 12-month period he ought to have produced this record that he had so carefully scanned and preserved?

It may be assumed that if the inquiry had not reached this stage i.e. if the hon’ble Supreme Court had not impelled or compelled the SIT to go further, Shri Pande’s sudden and generous manoeuvre would have never happened, that is, the “destroyed” records would have remained buried!

Sir, We were particularly disturbed by your interpretation of the actions of Shri Pande, which seemed to be interpreted as his astute generosity (Shri Pande’s) in actually scanning and producing these records at this belated stage. The following questions arise that we wish to place specifically before you:

1. The timing of the “destroyed” records “reappearing” in the action of Shri PC Pande suddenly handing over the scanned CD of all destroyed documents to you post-March 15, 2011 i.e. the last directions of the hon’ble Supreme Court.
2. Since Shri Pande’s role of collusion in the conspiracy has been specifically alleged, we at least cannot see this either as a stray or innocent act and would therefore urge that a hard, objective inquiry into the previous evasion and suppression of evidence, and thereafter the sudden disclosure, takes place and offences against Shri PC Pande are also registered for the earlier suppression and subsequent disclosure.
3. When a senior officer like Shri Pande states that records are destroyed, in the preliminary inquiry, and thereafter turns up with the vanished documents, what are we to make of this? Similarly, we believe that videos will turn up.
4. Shri Pande’s role in the overall conspiracy and his subsequently being rewarded for his silence and suppression make him liable to be inquired into. His personal assets and accounts and those of his family members as also the assets and accounts of other IPS and IAS officials who have been favoured by the government of Gujarat need to be part of the inquiry.
5. We thought it imperative that this matter be placed on record…

I would like to end by stating that the fresh revelations by Shri Pande amount to an effort by a highly placed officer of not merely attempting a cover-up of his suppression of crucial records for nine-plus years but subverting the inquiries into various cases by not making available these records in the individual trials and thereby committing grave contempt of the judicial process. We would like to state that though partial records in the Gulberg cases (police control room and fire brigade, etc) were made available, this happened only after applications under 173(8) were filed by witnesses and did not logically form part of the charge sheet as they should have done from the very beginning. Why were Shri Pande and other senior officials suppressing these records? Allegations of high-level involvement and complicity have been made by victim survivors since immediately after the incidents. Was this suppression related to protection of the mighty and powerful?”

The SIT in 2010

“The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless communication of the period pertaining to the riots… No records, documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the government during the riots had been kept” (p. 13 of the Preliminary Inquiry Report).

The SIT makes this observation but recommends no action for this criminal act.
 

 
Archived from Communalism Combat, April-May 2012. Year 18, No.165 – Introduction, Gujarat 2002

The post Destroyed records resurface appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Having savoured this drama, however, some reflection on the mandate and the task ahead may be in order. India voted, and voted decisively against the cynical, ‘feel good’ campaign of an NDA that sought to ignore the common man. It was deprivation, hunger, starvation even, farmer suicides and unemployment that made a decisive difference in this year’s election results. But the populace that identified the NDA as architect of a Marie Antoinette-like cold distance from it’s own people nationally and simultaneously dealt a blow to BJP faithful, Chandrababu Naidu in Andhra Pradesh, were equally unsparing of Congress’ version of Naidu in neighbouring Karnataka – SM Krishna. In this state, the BJP has not only broken new ground but also cornered 29 per cent of the vote share in the assembly polls and 18 of the 26 parliamentary seats with 36.7 per cent of the vote share in the parliamentary elections.

So, though the BJP is definitely and deservedly down, it is by no means out. The clear message from the mandate is that the majority of Indians have given the marching orders to parties and politicians for whom people didn’t seem to matter. The NDA’s misery was compounded by the firm rejection of its politics by the socially ostracised and oppressed, be it the religious minorities or the Dalits. The BJP’s rhetoric in ‘wooing Muslims’— remember the Najmas, the Arifs and the oh-so-many ‘Atal Himaayat Committees’ — fell flat. The drama that hogged headlines obviously did not impact on the numbers game. Analysis of poll results 2004 show that a huge 47 per cent of Muslims voted for the Congress while only 11 per cent (two per cent down from 1999) cast their lot with their baiters, the BJP! Among Dalits, at a national level, the Congress still commands 35 per cent of the vote; the Bahujan Samaj Party is a major competitor with 30 per cent of the Dalit vote share while the NDA got only 23 per cent.

While we breathe more freely now, analysis of the poll results should awaken us to the reality that the BJP and its allies remain serious players and contenders for power in Indian politics. The Congress plus its allies won 35.82 per cent of the votes, 26.59 per cent of this being the Congress’ own tally. This is 1.6 per cent down from 1999, but since the Congress contested only 417 seats its vote share in these seats is up by two per cent. The NDA polled 35.91 per cent of the vote with the BJP’s share in this being 22.16 per cent. Of the 361 seats that the BJP contested, its vote share is down by five per cent.

However, the NDA still commands 55 per cent of the caste Hindu vote and 40-50 per cent of the OBC vote. Besides, the traditional adivasi voter base of the Congress stands reduced to 9 per cent with the BJP making serious inroads here and gaining 5 per cent of the tribal vote. Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh continue to ride a BJP wave with 21 of the 25 Lok Sabha seats in Rajasthan going to the BJP (49.0 per cent of the vote share) and 25 seats in Madhya Pradesh being retained by the BJP with 47.1 per cent of the vote share.

The task ahead for all Indians concerned with issues of social justice and deepening of democracy lies in keeping the spotlights focussed on the dark spots of our polity. India can remain one and whole, body and soul, only if it remains a secular democracy. But fresh life and meaning need to be given to these terms. Issues of gender disparity and deprivation cut across class, community and caste. So, while the Dalit and/or the Muslim woman remains thrice oppressed bearing the burden of both her community, gender and class label, feticide is rampant among upper caste Hindus.

While Dalits continue to suffer rank indignities as urban yuppies cringe in horror at the very mention of the word ‘caste’, Muslim plight is worse than ever before in socio-economic terms. Not enough schools for secular education, mushrooming madrassas, less jobs, gross under-representation in the police force are part of the problem. With violence against religious minorities increasingly assuming the form of full-blown pogroms, with Gujarat 2002 being a case of state sponsored genocide there is an urgent need for a special legislation on mass crimes. (See Crimes Against Humanity, CC November 2002). For the Muslim woman, its worse. The abhorrent practice of triple talaq continues unchecked because of the stranglehold of an insensitive male-oriented community leadership. We hope that some of these real issues that impinge on, give life and meaning to the word secularism and democracy figure in mainstream political discourse over the next five years.

Gujarat, however, was for us the real story, and victory of polls 2004. Voters from 12 parliamentary seats out of 26 rejected the BJP under chief minister, Narendra Modi, a politician who shows no remorse for the brutalisation of Gujarat and the carnage of 2002. The tribal belts of Gujarat that, unfortunately, had succumbed to sectarian violence in 2002 – Sabarkantha, Mehsana, Panchmahals, south Gujarat –rejected the BJP and voted for Congress candidates. Acute farmer discontent translated into the Patels’ (who account for 29 per cent of the vote share) disenchantment with the ruling party. All things combined the writ of Modi and the BJP in Gujarat stands seriously challenged today. In several seats, the BJP’s margin of victory has also reduced. For example, the vote share of Kashiram Rana, who was elected from Surat for the sixth consecutive time, has fallen. In Baroda and Dahod, the BJP won by small margins. Top BJP leaders like LK Advani and Haren Pathak managed to increase their vote share in their traditional stronghold Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad but this was due to multiple opponents.

This verdict then is a vindication of the people of Gujarat who, with nearly half the electorate rejecting the BJP’s cynical politics even in the December 2002 Assembly polls. In 2002, 49 per cent of Gujaratis expressed displeasure with the ruling party and 51 per cent cast their lot behind the BJP. This time, 47.2 per cent of the votes polled in Gujarat went to the BJP and 45.1 per cent to the Congress.

This turnaround is only one of the reasons behind our cover story of the month. Gujarat, ravaged as it has been by suspicion and violence, has always thrown up accounts of individual and collective acts of bravery and conviction. These we have documented in past years. The cover story this time documents more such examples that give hope for a new dawn in the state. The people of Gujarat in their small and myriad ways are striving to break out of the clutches of an administration and government that does not believe in the credo of peaceful co-existence and non-discrimination.

We thank the Centre for Dialogue and Reconciliation for permission to publish some of the stories that are part of a special volume to be released by them soon.

— Editors

Archived from Communalism Combat, June 2004 Year 10   No. 98, Editorial

The post Polls 2004: A welcome breather appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The minister of information and broadcasting, government of India issued an advertisement
on 2nd October 2003, in almost all newspapers in which Gandhi was quoted as having said: “I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should in cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour.”

We were horrified to see the advertisement issued by the government of India on Gandhi Jayanti, quoting Gandhi on the need to take up arms rather than suffer dishonour. The mischievous intent of the advertisement is obvious. Given its preoccupation with reinventing histories to suit its agenda and the discomfort of living with the internationally-famed Gandhian legacy of non-violence, it is no surprise that the present government should choose a line from Gandhi’s writings, totally removed from its context, to prove that even the great Apostle of Peace endorsed violence in the name of nationalism.

The quote used in the advertisement is a line from Gandhi’s article in Young India dated August 11, 1920, titled, ‘The Doctrine of the Sword’. The article was written by Gandhi in the wake of countrywide violence following the passing of the Rowlatt Bills and the Jallianwalla Baug massacre in 1919, and centred on the call for non-cooperation from August 1, 1920. It sought to explain his concept of non-violent non-cooperation, and the spirit of non-violence itself. The article, unlike its misrepresentation by the line used in the advertisement, is devoted to the real possibility of non-violence as a political strategy, and its moral significance.

The opening sentence of the article reads: “In this age of the rule of brute force, it is almost impossible for anyone to believe that anyone else could possibly reject the law of the final supremacy of brute force.” Gandhi goes on to explain how violence can be resorted to where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence. However, the real intent of the article is made clear in the sections following the line quoted in the advertisement issued by the government on Gandhi Jayanti: “But I believe that non-violence is infinitely superior to violence.”

Gandhi goes on to explain how violence is resorted to by the helpless, whereas the people of India should not see themselves as being helpless. The advertisement could just as well have quoted his other famous lines in this article: “I am not a visionary. I claim to be a practical idealist. The religion of non-violence is not meant merely for the rishis and saints. It is meant for the common people as well. Non-violence is the law of our species as violence is the law of the brute. The spirit lies dormant in the brute and he knows no law but that of physical might. The dignity of man requires obedience to a higher law, to the strength of the spirit; or, I am not pleading for India to practise non-violence because it is weak. I want her to practise non-violence being conscious of her strength and power. No training in arms is required for realisation of her strength. We seem to need it because we seem to think that we are but a lump of flesh. I want India to recognise that she has a soul that cannot perish and that can rise triumphant above every physical weakness and defy the physical combination of (the) whole world.”

Perhaps the most apt quotation that could have been used to honour Gandhi in these conflict-ridden times would have been one of the closing lines from the same article: “India’s acceptance of the doctrine of the sword will be the hour of my trial.” More than 80 years later, this is precisely what is coming about: we seem to be accepting the doctrine of the sword, subverting Gandhi’s ideals to legitimise an agenda of violence. That this is now being done even through an official agency of the government like the department of I & B, is a shame and a tragedy. Gandhi could only have grieved if he were alive today.

(The above statement was issued jointly by human rights activists Rohit Prajapati, Nandini Manjrekar, Anand Mazgaonkar, Johannes Manjrekar, Trupti Shah, Deeptha Achar on October 4, 2003).

Archived from Communalism Combat, October 2003 Year 10   No. 92, Saffronwatch

The post Ahimsa, not arms appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The new NCERT syllabus is a brazen reflection of the sectarian agenda of the BJP-led NDA regime and has been announced despite widespread protests against the moves to doctor education in social studies and history

Undeterred by the countrywide criticism on the New Curricuilum Framework for Value Education, a criticism that has pointed out over a whole year of heated debate – that education ministers of states were not consulted before the syllabus was framed (CC, Jan01), that CABE concurrence was not obtained, that Parliament was bypassed – the NCERT went ahead and published it’s new syllabus in late January 02.

Two months earlier, in November 01, textbooks authored by eminent historians, Romila Thapar, R.S. Sharma and Satish Chandra had been subject to the saffron sledgehammer and politically inconvenient paragraphs were summarily deleted.

SAHMAT, one of the organisations that has been at the forefront of the mobilisation against these developments challenged the new syllabus through written analyses proferred by eminent historian Irfan Habib.

The yearlong and countrywide protests have drawn in a wide section of Indian academia and social activists. Within Parliament, a handful of thinking Parliamentarians had launched the cross-party Parliamentary Forum of Education and Culture (see CC, May 01). Khoj –education for a Plural India and Communalism Combat had intitiated a debate on the New Curricular Framework as early as January 01, through a letter addressed by independent Member of Parliament, Shabana Azmi. Azmi’s letter to the chief ministers and education ministers of all states accompanied by a detailed note that explained the implications of the new thrust in education policy, urged them to call for an Education Minister’s Conference.

The movement against these developments received a fillip when SAHMAT organised a national convention against the communalisation of education, drawing in nine education ministers to oppose these developments in the beginning of August 01.

Regardless of the depths of these protests, the NCERT, under hard-liner, union HRD minister, Murli Manohar Joshi, has carried on with the proposal to limit and doctor the vision that drives Indian education especially in the area of social studies. New NCERT textbooks written by persons whose names the NCERT refuses to divulge are also expected out in March this year.

A detailed note prepared by eminent historians was released by SAHMAT in New Delhi on January 31, 02. Stung by the opposition, NCERT’s director J.S. Rajput resorted to mudslinging, questioning the ‘willful misrepresentation’ by SAHMAT, to which the organisation has promptly replied. Meanwhile, in a seemingly unrelated development, SAHMAT was evicted from its small premises at VP Bhavan, a space that it has occupied for over a dozen years.

According to the analysis collated by SAHMAT, there are some Specific Errors, Omissions, Comments on the Content Outline in History-Related ‘Themes’ . These include:

Class VI: People and Society in the Ancient period

• Vedic culture has been made a part of the Bronze Age along with Harappan and Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Chinese civilisations.
• Iron Age’s relevance only to the Megalithic culture of Deccan and South India
• No reference to the early South Indian Kingdoms (Cheras, Cholas,Pandyas) and, more importantly, even to the Satavahanas and Indo-Greeks, Sakas, Kushans, Parthians, etc and their contribution to developments during the period 200 BC–AD 300 supposedly covered by the words ‘Central Asians’.
• ‘Contributions of India to world civilization’ until before 6th Century BC.
• Projects activities–Konarak, Lingaraja temple, Nataraja at Chidambaram-nothing to do with the period covered in this course.

Class VII : People and Society in the Medieval Period

• Cholas and Delhi Sultanate along with some others as small kingdoms-Pallavas whose power ended in the 9th century are here as well as in class VI-Turkish rule and Delhi Sultanate as different entities.-The idea of ‘resistance’ introduced here; No art, culture, etc. for this period ( up to about early 16th century)
• Mughal empire and rise of small states and assertion of independence clubbed together– ‘Assertion of independence’ by Sikhs, Marathas and Rajputs

Class VIII: People and Society in the Modern period

• World scenario in the Modern period ends with European conquest of Asia and Africa while Indian developments conclude with independence.
• American and French Revolutions and German and Italian unification placed after Indian independence.
• Because the world scenario ends with the 19th century, Russian Revolution, the two world wars, etc. are not a part of ‘People and society in the Modern Period’.
• The Moderates and Extremists referred as Petitioners and Radicals, ‘division of Bengal’ but no reference to anti-partition movement; 1942 movement-the only mass movement referred to.

Class IX : India in the Twentieth century world

• The 20th Century world presented here covering the period from colonialism to Peace Treaties ( after World War I),
• ‘Towards to New World’ comprising, among others, ‘Development of fascism and nazism and ‘World After 1945’ in which ‘use of Atom Bomb’ comes after UN Charter and Cold War.
• ‘India in the Twentieth Century world’ begins, besides some other topics, with the uprising of 1857.

ClassX : The only history-related topic is ‘ Heritage: Natural and Cultural’.

Classes XI: XII : ( History as an ElectiveSubject)

Semester I : Ancient India

• Unit 1: The relevance of sub-topics relating to tradition and traditional history here will depend on how they are treated in the textbooks. The notion of ‘Eternal India’ introduced here may be unhistorical obfuscation.
• Unit 3: On the Harappan civilization refers to its ‘Vedic Connection’ which may be unhistorical.
• Unit 4: is entitled Vedic Culture. The period which this unit is supposed to cover is not clearly stated though the period third to first Millenium BC is mentioned with reference to ‘Mathematics and Science’. Does the Vedic period begin in the third millenium BC The way some sub-topics are worded e.g. ‘Spiritual and religious traditions of the Vedic India’, ‘India as described in Vedic literature’, ‘The antiquity of Vedas and Vedic people’ and various others is meant to project a mythical view. Is the germination high philosophy (unit 6) post-Vedic and does the spiritual and philosophical thought of ancient India consist of Upanishads, Brahmanas and Sutras only and India’s only contribution to the philosophical thought of the world?
• Unit 9: refers to Chanakya’s efforts for geographical and political unity as well as to Maurya attempts at political unity of India. In unit 12, Guptas attempts to unite India. No such attempt is attributed to the Sultans and even to the Mughals in the syllabus outline for medieval India.
• No political unit of the Deccan and South, except the Rashtrakutas .is mentioned—not even the Satavahanas, the Pallavas, the Chalukyas, not to speak of the early Cholas, Cheras and Pandyas.
• There is no reference to the Varna system in the period before 300 BC. The only reference to caste occurs in unit 11 which deals with ‘Social life as reflected in contemporary literature from 200 BC to 300 AD.
• Numerous units refer to India’s influence on world civilisation in general and some specific regions but none whatsoever of other cultures’ influences India.

Semester II: Medieval India
The content outline of this period of Indian history reflects the total incompetence and appalling historical ignorance of those who have drafted it and is a reflection on the credentials of the academic body which has published it. The denigration of the Sultanate of Delhi and the Mughal empire is clearly meant to ensure that students do not develop any understanding of the place of this period in the country’s history in the growth of India’s composite culture.

• The syllabus for the period is organised in the form of three units. Unit II which is entitled ‘ The Rise of Ghaznavis’ begins with the first Turkish (Ghaznavid) invasions and covers the history of the Sultanate which had nothing to do with the Ghaznavis (sic) (who had been supplanted much before the end of the 12th century) and some of its successor states. The period covered, though nowhere stated, may be, for some parts of India, up to the 15th century.
• This unit is followed by the third and the last unit in medieval Indian history which is, oddly given the title ‘ The political Conditions’. Though again the specific period this unit is supposed to cover is not stated, a number of dynasties that it refers to such as the Cholas, had arisen in the 10th century and most of them had ceased to exist before the disintegration of the Delhi Sultanate.
• It also perfunctorily refers to the Mughal Empire but, of course, not to the political unification brought about by them. The unit also introduces the concept of ‘ resistance’ in the context of Mughal Empire. There is not even a reference to the Bhakti and Sufi movements or to the birth of Sikhism.
• There was a reference in the media some months ago to the suspicion that the NCERT is going to more or less do away with the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal empire. The present syllabus tends to confirm that suspicion. 

Archived from Communalism Combat, January-February 2002 Year 8  No. 75-76, Debate

The post NCERT Syllabus: Joshi’s Shastras appeared first on SabrangIndia.