People | SabrangIndia

नमक, अवाम और सरकार

Sun, 13 Nov 2016 10:07:43 +0000

अफ़वाह, मानहानि, झूठ और दुष्प्रचार हमारा तरीका तो नहीं है न?

नमक मामले में जो आम जनता का मजाक उड़ा रहे है उनकी जेहनी हालत पर सिर्फ तरस खाया जा सकता है। हजूर, सरकार जिसे कहते है वो एक भरोसे का नाम होता है। वो भरोसा, जिसके दम पर एक हड्डी का सिपाही हज़ारों लोगों को दौड़ा-दौड़ा के पीटता है। वो भरोसा, जिसके दम पर गरीब किसान अपनी सारी फसल कागज़ के टुकड़ों के बदले दे देता है। वो भरोसा, जिसके बदले में जवान गोली खाने तक को तैयार हो जाता है। वो भरोसा ही लोकतंत्र की नींव है ।

अवाम आखिरी दम तक चाहती है कि वो भरोसा न टूटे। वो सारी बदतमीज़ी सहकर भी चाहती है कि सरकार की साख बनी रहे। उसे सुख की नींद मिलती रहे, चाहें रोटी आधी ही मिल जाए। उसकी आधी रोटी पर भी निगाह रखोगे तो ग़ज़ब हो जाएगा। सोने के अंडे देने वाली मुर्गी को हलाल कर सकते हो, उसमें सिर्फ माली नुकसान है। लेकिन जनता मुर्गी नहीं है सरकार…मैं चाहता हूं कि आप देखें, देश के लिए…चश्मा हटा कर देखें कि वो भरोसा दरक रहा है। और बहुत तेजी से दरक रहा है।

बच्चों की आपसी लड़ाई मुजफरनगर बन जाती है क्योंकि चंद गद्दार लोगो ने झूठे वीडियो झूठी बातें बनाकर, अवाम का कानून से भरोसा उठाने में मदद की। अपने दो पैसों के लिये आपने कितना नुकसान किया, इसका अंदाजा देश को जिस दिन हो जाए तो कानून पर जनता का उठा हुआ वही विश्वास, आपकी वो दुर्गति करेगा कि इतिहास याद रखेगा । किसी भगवान अल्लाह में विश्वास है, तो उसके लिये देखिये एक नमक ने सरकार की साख की धज्जियां उड़ा दी है। जनता को भरोसा नहीं है कि सरकार उन्हें नमक भी मुहैया करा सकती है।

बहुत भयानक हालात है। बजाय मरीजो का मखौल बनाने के बीमारी पर ध्यान दीजिये। अगर आपके बस में है तो बीमारी को बढ़ने से रोकिये । ज़ी न्यूज़ जैसे चैनल पर बैन लगाइए। अवाम चिप ढूंढ रही है। कागज के टुकड़ों और देश की मुद्रा में जो फर्क है वो फर्क खत्म होता जा रहा है…उसे रोकिये। देश की मुद्रा के बारे में अफवाह फैलाने वाले को सख्त सजा दीजिये।

मेरे अंदर की बेचैनी और गरीब लोगो के लिये दर्द आपसे हाथ जोड़ विनती करने पर मजबूर कर रहा है कि इस खेल को रोकिये। बावजूद इसके कि मुझे पता है, मेरी अर्जी की आपके लिये दो कौड़ी की भी कीमत नहीं है। फिर भी कह रहा हूँ नमक को पहचानिए…वो नमक ही था, जिसकी वजह से पूरे देश ने पूरी दुनिया जीतने वाली अंग्रेजो की बजाय एक बूढ़े इंसान पर भरोसा जता दिया था। सारी बंदूकें और सारी तोपें देखती रह गई थी। बहुत कुछ लिखना चाहता हूं पर लिख नहीं पा रहा। हालात ठीक नहीं है। नमक वालो का मजाक मत उड़ाइये, जिन्होंने अफवाह उड़ाई थी, उन्हें पकड़ के सख्त सजा दीजिये, ताकि अवाम का विश्वास लौटे। जो आधे भक्त हैं, देश के लिए नहीं तो आपके भगवान् के लिये अफवाहों का विरोध कीजिये। दिमाग़ पे जोर डालिये कोई चीज शेयर करने से पहले। विरोधी भी एक बार सिर्फ एक बार देख लीजिए कि आप किस स्तर पे खड़े है? अगर किसी लड़की की फोटो मोदी विरोध के कारण आपको शेयर करने में शर्म नहीं आती तो बिना शर्म के ही सही पर डूब मरिये। कार्टून व्यंग्य की सबसे मारक विधा है इसे दो कौड़ी की फोटो शॉप में मत बदलिये।

अगर संभव है, तो उस संभव संवाद की सूरत खत्म मत कीजिये

The post नमक, अवाम और सरकार appeared first on SabrangIndia.

How Every Goan Can Get Rs 9,000 Each Year

Sun, 21 Aug 2016 10:47:17 +0000

Citizens Rights and Exploitation of Resources: The Goan Case

It doesn’t happen often but doesn’t it feel wonderful when occasionally your bank account gets credited by the government? Some of us will have enjoyed this sensation with our LPG subsidies (now withdrawn for many), or the occasional income tax refund.

But what I’m positing is not occasional. It is a steady amount, paid every year, year after year, ad infinitum (well, for as long as you live!).

Sounds far fetched? Not really. Here’s how it would work –

Let’s start with a few facts. First is the fact that under Indian law, state government’s are the owner’s of mineral resources. However, governments own these in their capacities as Trustees for the people. In other words, the true beneficial owners of the resources are the people of the state.

Second, under Article 21 of the constitution future generations must have as much access to resources as our own. In other words, we are merely custodians of inherited resource wealth and cannot deplete the country of its resources leaving none of the value for our children.

Now, as we know, Goa has rich deposits of iron ore. While much of these have already been extracted (the first mining concessions were granted by the Portuguese as early as 1929, though relatively modest amounts were extracted till the last decade), estimates of mineable reserves currently remaining in the ground are in the region of just under 600 million tons. In the years immediately prior to a 2012 Supreme Court judgment, huge amounts were being mined each year, which if continued at the same pace in future could have resulted in no ore being left after 10 years. However, the judgment limited future iron ore mining in Goa to 20 million tons per year. Now using this cap on the amount that could be mined per year in the future, and simply selling the right to mine for just (say) the next 12 years, based on long term average iron ore sale prices and percentages of value historically obtained by efficient governments, the Goa government could reasonably expect to earn approximately Rs 45,000 crores from the sale of future mining rights over this period (these estimates are taken from a letter sent to the Chief Vigilance Officer by the NGO Goa Foundation in June, 2015). If the money thus collected was conservatively invested to earn a return of (say) 3% above the rate of inflation, with just this 3% ‘real’ (i.e. excess) return being distributed to citizens as an annual dividend (and the remainder retained in the fund to effectively ‘inflation proof’ the principal amount for the benefit of future generations), an annual dividend of Rs 9,000 could be paid to each man, woman and child living in Goa today (assuming a population of 1.5 million). Voila, it’s as simple as that!

And this will not be the first time that such a thing has been done. The concept of permanent funds for mineral wealth is a well established one. Take the case of the US state of Alaska. Soon after the Trans-Alaskan pipeline system was opened, allowing Alaska’s vast reserves of oil to find their way to market, and on the back of a popular perception that the government had historically not managed the revenue from these reserves well, the state set up a permanent fund in 1976. This fund started distributing an annual dividend to residents in 1982 and has done so in every year since then. The most recent annual payment was USD 2,072 per head. To be eligible for the dividend an individual needs to establish that he or she has physically lived in the state for at least 185 out of 365 days of the calendar year preceding the date of the relevant dividend distribution (which typically happens in October each year).

By law, at least 25% of the Alaskan state’s oil revenues must be paid into the fund. The revenues of the fund go towards meeting the expenses of administering it (this is done by a state owned company which is operated at arms-length from the government of the day), retaining a portion within the fund as a hedge against inflation, and paying the annual dividend to residents.

Now let’s get back to Goa. During the years of peak iron ore prices (2004-2012) the state secured for its coffers approximately 3% of the (declared) value of iron ore extracted by private parties from within its boundaries. This came from levying royalties on miners, set as a percentage of the value of the ore that they sold. This very low percentage of the total value that was secured by the owners of the resource compares extremely unfavorably with instances where reasonably efficient owners have secured between about 50 and 75% of the value.

Naturally, it would be wrong to assume that the full value of the resource can accrue to the state. After all it costs money to extract ore from the ground and sell it. Those doing so also need to earn a ‘reasonable profit’. So some of the value must accrue to the extracting parties. Taking this into account and assuming a generous profit to those parties, The Goa Foundation has estimated that during this 8 year period over Rs 50,000 crores (about 7.5 billion US Dollars) of value was lost to Goans due to the revenue system used by the state government. This is about twice the revenue that the Goa government earned from all sources during the period. Had this money been secured and invested in a permanent fund with 3% per year paid to residents as a dividend, it would have resulted in each Goan receiving Rs10,000 per year. The Rs 9,000 per year receivable from the sale of future mining rights, as previously mentioned, would of course come on top of this – so the dividend would grow as the pot grew. In short, what has happened in Goa in recent years amounts to a raw deal for the people on a massive scale.

But much of this is fairly well known.

In September 2012, following the report of a judicial commission (the so called ‘Justice Shah Commission), the Supreme Court banned mining in Goa. The judgment in April 2014 stated that a number of illegalities had occurred including mining after the expiry of leases (all mining leases expired by November 2007, yet mining continued until the Supreme Court order nearly 5 years later) and dumping waste outside mining lease areas, among others. It also specified that for mining to resume in the state fresh leases and environmental clearances would be required, an interim cap of 20 million tons per annum was placed on the amount that could be extracted each year, the government was required set up a permanent fund and to investigate and prosecute those who had broken the law.

Less than a year later, in January 2015 the central government issued an ordinance stating that henceforth all mining leases must be auctioned and no leases can be renewed on expiry (if desired, fresh leases could be granted following a fresh auction). However, in the weeks before the ordinance was promulgated, the government of Goa renewed the leases of 88 mines, extending them till 2027 while effectively backdating the renewals to 2007. It thus substantially weakened its position in recovering damages from parties that had been deemed to have mined illegally after 2007 as per the Supreme Court order.

Incidentally 56 out of these 88 leases were approved in the week before the ordinance was promulgated, presumably in the knowledge of the impending legislation. No auction was conducted.

So far so depressing.

But we should not be completely despondent. Much has been lost but there is still some hope for the future. If this (or a subsequent) government follows the orders of the Supreme Court it could attempt to recover at least some damages from those who acted illegally (bearing in mind that the Supreme Court pointed out several illegalities). Charges imposed could swell to nearly double the principal amounts if interest were taken into account. It could also cancel existing leases on the basis of current illegalities and auction new leases. This has recently been done in the case of coal blocks. The full proceeds from both sources of revenue could be put into a permanent fund.

A local movement called Goenchi Mati (see www.goenchmati.org) has as its chief aim the persuasion of political parties to do precisely this. It is asking politicians contesting the upcoming state elections to sign a petition saying that they promote this course of action. For the sake of our children it deserves our support.

The post How Every Goan Can Get Rs 9,000 Each Year appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Independent Versus the Hawk: Indian Commercial Television debates

Wed, 13 Jul 2016 13:47:41 +0000

The ongoing unrest in Kashmir, where 23 people including policeman have lost their lives after Indian security forces killed Hizbul commander, Burhan Wani, has also ignited a raging debate on whether some channels in Indian media have resorted to playing patriot games over a militant’s death.

And once again, two big names of Indian TV industry have locked horns with no holds barred attack against each other.

It all started with the veteran journalist, Rajdeep Sardesai, taking to his blog questioning the ‘patriotic’/nationalistic credentials of Indian journalists particularly during the coverage of Wani’s killing and the subsequent protests.

In his well articulated blog, Rajdeep recounted the role of the BBC during the Falklands War in 1983 when the British national broadcaster was criticised by the then UK prime minister, Margret Thatcher, for not taking side with the British forces in its coverage.

To which, the then Director General of the BBC, John Birt, was reported to have reminded Thatcher that the journalistic organisation was not an ‘extension of the political authority’; its first commitment was to the truth, not to the nation state.

Many felt that Rajdeep’s anguish was targeted at his former colleague, Arnab Goswami, and his channel Times Now, which has become notorious for whipping up often unnecessary nationalistic fervour, thereby throwing objectivity out of the window.

Hours later, a visibly agitated Arnab launched a blistering attack understandably against Rajdeep to counter the latter’s ‘patriot games’ jibe with his own headline, ‘Don’t Romanticise Terror.’ Arnab resorted to name calling and frequently used terms such as ‘pseudo-liberals’ for his critics while describing their criticism as a shameful act.

Many felt that Arnab’s reply pretty much confirmed what his former boss had highlighted in his blog.

You can read both Rajdeep’s blog and Arnab’s response during his Newshour debate below and decide for yourself who’s right on the issue of media ethics.

Rajdeep Sardesai:

‘BURHAN WANI AND PATRIOT GAMES’

During the 1983 Falklands war, a member of the Margaret Thatcher government angrily described the BBC as the ‘Stateless People’s Broadcasting Corporation’ because it referred to the forces as ‘British’ and ‘Argentinian’ forces instead of ‘our’ and ‘enemy’ forces. When an Argentinian ship was sunk, an incensed Thatcher responded, ‘only the BBC would ask a British prime minister why she took action against an enemy ship that was a danger to our boys’. That is when the BBC director general John Birt is said to have reminded the British prime minister that the journalistic organisation was not an ‘extension of the political authority’; its first commitment was to the truth, not to the nation state.

The Thatcher story is instructive at a time when the ‘patriotic’/nationalistic credentials of Indian journalists and news organisations are under the scanner for their coverage of the violence in the Kashmir valley. The newly minted I and B minister has already warned that he expects ‘responsible’ coverage from the media; army information teams have red flagged any attempt to send out any ‘negative’ news; the social media army of ‘proud Indians’ on Twitter has abusively accused journalists (including this writer) of being ‘terrorist sympathisers’, ‘anti national’ and questioned ones parentage.

Who is to tell my outraged friends in the Twitter world that journalism in its purest form doesn’t wear the tricolour on its sleeve. Yes, I am a very proud Indian, but my journalism demands that I tell the story of Kashmir, not as a soldier in army fatigues but as a mike pusher who reports different realities in a complex situation. Burhan Wani is a terrorist who has been ‘neutralised’ in the eyes of majority of Indians; he is a victim who has been ‘martyred’ for the thousands of Kashmiris who lined up for his funeral. A propagandist would only broadcast the narrative that suits the agenda of one side but a journalist must necessarily explore both stories: that of Wani the Hizbul terrorist who took to the gun and used social media as a weapon AND Wani as the posterboy for a localised militancy which feeds on tales of alleged oppression and injustice. A journalist must speak to the army which is trying to quell the protests on the street, but must also listen to the youth who have chosen to their vent their anger with stones. And he must then dispassionately and accurately report the ground reality without glamourising violence or terrorism but also without becoming a spokesperson for the Indian state.

It is maintaining this delicate balance that defines good journalism. Sadly, there are few takers it appears for this challenging task. Instead, in a polarised, toxic environment, journalists are being asked to take sides, to state their preferences, to place opinion ahead of facts, to show off their macho ‘nationalism’, to be part of a ‘them’ versus ‘us’ battleground in tv studios and beyond. Which is why I wish to highlight the BBC role in the Falklands war. Here is a genuine public service broadcaster that is able to ensure that its commitment is to the British people, not to the government, even in a war between countries. The philosophy is clear: the truth, however inconvenient it might be for the power apparatus, must be told.

In Kashmir too, we need to tell truth to power: the truth of disaffected youth with limited opportunities for growth, of failed, corrupted politics, of an unshaken ‘azaadi’ sentiment, of army excesses, of a neighbouring country which sponsors terror, of a nostalgic notion of Kashmiriyat which was eroded when Pandits were driven out of their homes, of radicalised youth seeking to romanticise violence, of hard working twenty somethings topping the civil service exams, of an unacceptable distinction between terrorists and freedom fighters. As a vibrant democracy, we must be able to look into the mirror with confidence and face these competing ‘truths’. Too many of the stakeholders in Kashmir, Delhi and beyond have lived in denial for too long. Wani’s killing and its aftermath must end this mood of denial even as we in the media must learn to stop playing patriot games.

Post script: Many years ago, while reporting a story on Kashmir, I described those who had targeted a bus as terrorists. That evening, a local colleague in Srinagar suggested that I might be better off calling the perpetrators as ‘militants’. I asked him why. “Sir, they maybe terrorists, but here it is safer to use the word ‘militant’.” When even simple wordplay can get tangled in the minefield of Kashmir’s bloody politics, you realise the complicated nature of the journalistic challenge.

Arnab Goswami on Newshour

“For over 72 hours now since the SUCCESSFUL killing and MUCH WANTED killing of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani, a section of misguided pseudo liberals have gone on and on about how the Indian State must be more responsible. About how the Indian security forces must be more sensible. Now, some of these highly confused elements, who are in journalism say that they are in a dilemma today about how to report a terrorist’s death. They say they are in a dilemma about how to report the fallout of a terrorist’s death with mobs breaking out of control and attacking a police station.

I feel sorry for these people, because they don’t realise that when it comes to right or wrong, black and white, nationalist and anti-national, for the Indian army, which protects us, and against the Indian army, for the tricolour and against the tricolour, for the sovereignty of the Indian State and against the sovereignty of the Indian State. there can be no prevarication, no grey area, no confusion and certainly no dilemma. Ladies and Gentlemen, this terrorist, Burhan Wani, had declared the Indian army as his biggest enemy. Burhan Wani was an identified and armed threat to the sovereignty of the Indian State. And just because he was KASHMIRI, does not make it ok for the pseudo liberals to build a case against his killing. He was a terrorist.

Today the self-proclaimed pseudo liberals, the same who speak of injustice to Afzal Guru and Yakub Memon have most unfortunately and SHAMELESSLY, come together to shy away from calling a known Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist a terrorist. To use the guise of human rights and peddle it to bestow martyrdom to slain terrorist and today we watch these pseudo intellectual brigade sitting in their high-armchairs refusing to call the killing of Burhan Wani, for what it is a FANTASTIC SUCCESS.

A GLORIOUS success of our brave security personnel. Viewers, let’s come together tonight and let us junk this group and junk their bluff.. Let us not romanticise or confuse terror…And if you agree with me because this rubbish has been going on for three days now, then join me as we together take on the pseudo liberals and the Pakistanis after that in debate number one and debate number 2 of the Newshour.”

This story originally appeared on Janta Ka Reporter.

The post Independent Versus the Hawk: Indian Commercial Television debates appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Video didn’t kill the radio star – she’s hosting a podcast

Fri, 08 Jul 2016 10:25:02 +0000

Podcasters P.J. Vogt, host of Reply All, and Starlee Kine, host of Mystery Show, addressed sold-out sessions at the Sydney Writers' Festival last month, riding the wave of popularity engendered by Serial, the 2014 US true crime podcast series whose 100 million downloads galvanised the audio storytelling world.

Over 12 weeks, using a blend of personal narratives and investigative journalism delivered in ultra-casual conversational style, host Sarah Koenig examined the case against Adnan Syed, a Baltimore high school student who had been convicted of murdering his ex-girlfriend, Hae Min Lee, in 1999.

In risky but inspired innovation, the series launched without a conclusive ending. It invited listeners to veer with Koenig through the unfolding evidence – a departure hailed as making journalism more transparent, in a genre not without ethical conundrums. The show fomented raucous chatrooms online and Koenig featured on the cover of Time magazine.

“Hosting” is at the heart of the vaunted podcasting revolution that has seen comedy, “chumcasts” (friends riffing on a theme) and deeply personal storytelling vie with established radio documentary, feature and interview formats for audience share. In radio institutions such as the ABC or BBC, programs have “presenters” and the organisation adds further brand identity. In the ever-expanding podsphere (over 350,000 podcasts are listed on iTunes), “hosts” speak directly into our ear.

This seductive intimacy affects both the form and content of the audio storytelling genre. It appeals to listeners from hitherto untapped demographics as well as to rusted-on audiophiles – a development being watched by both advertisers and activists.

In the predominantly English-speaking 12-year-old podsphere, producers and consumers of podcasts used to be mainly young, white, educated, affluent males. But, in the last two years, female listenership has doubled. Female hosts are storming the studio (or bedroom, where many an indie podcast originates, or garage, where US comedian Marc Maron famously conducted a deeply revealing interview with Barack Obama last year).

President Barack Obama discussed racism, gun control, his family and his fearlessness in a conversation podcast from comedian Marc Maron’s garage in LA. WTF Podcast with Marc Maron

“Hosts are really forming relationships in new ways with their listeners,” says Julie Shapiro, CEO of Radiotopia, “a curated network of extraordinary, story-driven shows” founded in 2014. It now has over ten million downloads a month of its 14 shows.

Radiotopia’s recent “Podquest” competition attracted 1,537 entrants from 53 countries. The finalists propose shows that feature marginalised voices and quirky perspectives, delivered as engaging crafted narrative.
Radiotopia and Gimlet, the independent US network that hosts Kine and Vogt, have been created by former public radio broadcasters. They still proclaim the editorial values and lofty mission articulated when National Public Radio (NPR) was founded in 1971.

The podsphere is unregulated – open slather for hate speech and religious rants, with the medium already exploited by groups like ISIS. But minorities are also colonising the space, with growing audiences for shows on transgender issues, gender, sexuality and race.

In Australia, both public broadcasters are developing podcast-first formats. SBS has True Stories, unusual tales of multicultural experiences, and the ABC offers First Run, which ranges from comedy to entertaining history.
But other organisations, from community radio to independents, are now able to compete for listeners. Longtime ABC star Andrew Denton partnered The Wheeler cultural centre in Melbourne to launch his excellent podcast series on euthanasia, Better Off Dead.

Media personality Andrew Denton chose the podcast medium for his euthanasia series, Better Off Dead. Credit:Edwina Pickles

Other veteran radio journalists are going solo. In 2015, US producer John Biewen, whose work has featured on prestigious outlets including This American Life, NPR and the BBC, launched his own show, Scene On Radio. He told me:

Liberation from broadcast gatekeepers and formats outweighed the advantages they bring … the only downside … is the loss of audience numbers. [But] the freedom to produce work in the tone and at the length that I choose is priceless.

Podcasts can be as long as a piece of string

Thrillingly, podcasts can be as long as a piece of string. Audio producers can focus on a natural narrative shape rather than artificially moulding a story to a pre-ordained duration. This enhanced Serial’s appeal and opens new structural possibilities for the form.

At one end, we may see podcasting develop further as a form of literary journalism: a poetic or narrative audio genre long established in Europe and articulated by the New Journalism of the 1960s and ‘70s. It incorporates qualities such as immersive reportage, scenes, evocative writing and a subjective point of view.

At the other end of the spectrum, cheaply produced podcast panel-fests are proliferating. The topics range from the elections in Australia and the US to race and popular culture. Some of these sound clunky and turgid – print journalists operating in a medium they don’t yet get. Others, such as Buzzfeed’s Another Round, have the chemistry and the tone spot on, snaring big names such as Hillary Clinton along the way.

This rapidly evolving podcast ecology is coming under increasing academic scrutiny.

Sarah Koenig, host of Serial podcast www.mirror.co.uk

Meanwhile, the race continues to find the next Serial. The second season of Serial, about the troubled Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, a US soldier held captive by the Taliban for almost five years, didn’t quite manage it. Canada’s CBC got close with Somebody Knows Something.

The best candidate yet is The Bowraville Murders, unexpectedly well produced by The Australian newspaper, in which rookie podcaster Dan Box investigates the unsolved murders of three Aboriginal children from the same small town 25 years ago, bringing raw pain and kneejerk racism directly to listeners.

Having received scant attention for his other crime reportage, Box was astonished by the reaction to the podcast: it has probably been instrumental in launching a fresh trial. Its power lies in fundamental aspects of the audio medium: its capacity to convey emotion and evoke empathy, imagination and intimacy. When those strengths are harnessed, podcasting becomes a formidable force for social engagement.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Cover photo credit: mobileday.com

The post Video didn’t kill the radio star – she’s hosting a podcast appeared first on SabrangIndia.

‘Spirituality lies in working against injustices, for truth. Without this emphasis what use is ritualistic faith alone?’

Thu, 30 Nov 2000 18:30:00 +0000

Father Hugh Fonseca

One of six children from Mumbai, I have been a priest for 33 years now. For all the years that I have been a priest, I have believed in getting involved with the problems of the people, in the real life issues that matter.

From 1975 until 1983, I was at the St Pius seminary, Goregaon (Mumbai), with Fr Raymond, his brother, Fr Alvyn and Fr. Alex Carvalho. It was while we worked there that ideas began to take shape and move in a particular direction. In 1980, when we had the consultation for priests, we started the social justice cells.

This work continued as we went into the parishes. I was in the Kurla parish for six years but I lived and worked in Saki Naka. Saki Naka was a very important experience for me as the parish was being controlled by a group of people, Catholics, who were under the sway of slumlords. Over a five-year period, we managed to get it out of the hands of the vested interests. Ultimately people began to take charge of their own lives.

We were, the four of us, idealistic, with strong notions of what faith should be and the role it should play in people’s lives. This churning and reflection within us was against the solely ritualistic faith that was prevalent at the time. The result of this reflection was a paper that we came out with to nudge the Church in the direction that we were going. It was titled, ‘The Faith that has Justice’.

We then took up two parishes, the Jeri Meri and Saki Naka parishes, as experiments; the result was the Jagruti Kendra established in 1989. All four of us worked as a team. There was the handa morcha that we took out to the ward office to protest on the question of water; we protested the shabby collection and depositing of garbage. Each protest sent out a deep inner message to people to take charge of their lives, not to feel helpless and insecure and empower themselves to get what is their due.

In the beginning there was resistance, too, to such a novel approach. At one meeting in Saki Naka where parish counsellors were present, vested interests who had controlled affairs for too long tried to show their strength. They threatened to attack me. That was a real test for the local population. When all of them stood up refused to be cowed down, stood around to protect me, that was the first public show of our victory.

Until then, no one had publicly challenged the authority of the vested interests. This was during 1992 and 1993. Thereafter, I was in Orlem, Malad, another suburb where I spent six years. There, too, a powerful local group, VOTE (Voice of the People Exploited), emerged.

The incident that initially motivated people was the demolition of a chapel at Srilankapada. This became an incident to rally against the local corporation officials, the Shiv Sena corporators and to establish healthy links with the police. The local people took up the initial mobilisation and what we see now is the existence of a strong voice of the laity in Malad. There is the VOTE group, there is also the Lourdes Community Centre that contributes to community service and health works in the area.

Now at Borivli, we are, laity and church together, involved in firming up yet another group, HELP. Here also the aim is to work together on issues that concern all of us, be it attacks on minorities or broader human rights issues.

As a priest, I have always believed that we must guide persons to take control of their lives and to fight for justice. When we began as priests, there was more emphasis on the spiritual and the ritualistic. Today, I see that spirituality lies in working against injustices, for truth. Without this emphasis what use is ritualistic faith alone?

The Church has played a historic role in this country providing education, health and other services. But it is a huge institution that gets tired and lumbers along. It, too needs to be nudged with new ideas, new pushes. We need to look beyond formal education, look at the question of values, civic values, values concerning justice, becoming good and responsive citizens.

In the broadest possible sense, following as we are the work of Christ, we must be prepared to think beyond ourselves, look at the misery and poverty around and do something about it. Like other institutions, the Church here and elsewhere has had aberrations, reflecting the concerns of only the powerful and the rich, the influential, echoing the caste biases that prevail. Yes, we have had our share of aberrations.

There were parts of India where only upper caste priests were accepted, in another case we have had a history of different castes being buried separately. This is something that violates the basic tenets of Christianity. We had one instance, in Goa, of the body of a person callously removed after burial, simply because he belonged to the ‘lower’ caste.

This happened because when the Portuguese came, there were actually mass conversions without any real change in attitude on questions of caste. In other words, your conversion did not change your attitudes.

But having said that, there are people within the church hierarchy and the laity who are trying to make a difference.

Under the theme, “He came to set us free” (the first sermon of Christ in the synagogue) we have recently begun a movement for civic and political cells in each parish within the Mumbai diocese. Through this the conscientisation of people will happen.

(As told to Teesta Setalvad).

The post ‘Spirituality lies in working against injustices, for truth. Without this emphasis what use is ritualistic faith alone?’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

‘Lay persons increasingly feel that the Church should get involved in politics, in civic issues’

Thu, 30 Nov 2000 18:30:00 +0000

Father Alwyn D’Silva

I am an MA in politics. My first appointment when I became a priest in 1975 I was in Vakola, Santacruz (E). Initially I was caught up in traditional priestly work. But slowly, faced with the realities of the world outside, I began to realise that faith has to be linked with justice. Especially, because there was little relation between what happened within the Church to was happening in society.

I remember, for example, that while I was vice-principal of a school at Vakola, I noticed that during the first period itself, students would be trooping out of class and roaming about in the school. Two years later, when I began some community work in the slums where the youngsters lived, I realised that there were no toilets there and so, naturally, they spent the first period releasing themselves.

A cloistered approach from the priest and parish need not get you involved in issues like these but if people are suffering outside, how can we not get involved?

This was also about the time that some four-six priests like us began reflecting on the role of the Church in the community. We used to call it a think tank. Slowly we evolved into an inspirational group concerned with making faith more relevant. This then slowly evolved into the social justice cell of Archdiocese of Bombay in 1981. Finally, a decade later, the official body of the Church accepted it and it now exists as the justice and peace commission.

The guiding principle of this mini-movement inside the Church was that people’s lives, rather than merely ritualistic faith, needs to be stressed. We got inspiration and guidance from Dominque and Nafisa, professors in social work from Andhra Pradesh –- from whom we evolved the idea of working within a community – the idea being to link faith with justice. There were four of us in this movement. My brother, Hugh Fonseca, Alex Carvalho and myself.

Initially there was scepticism from the Church, there was also resistance to work with other communities. But we were clear. That, when we are dealing with social and justice issues we have to get involved with all communities. Jeri Meri, one of our experimental parishes, was where we had a children’s group, a women’s group, a youth group. The main thrust was on the organisation of people, encouraging them to solve their own problems.

There were also difficulties with the hierarchy; but it was a new understanding of faith and action so there were bound to be questions and some friction. I recall an incident when a bishop, Bishop Bosco Pena, was quite supportive. He actually challenged me to begin work with other communities.

So we took up this challenge, managed to work out the dynamics and succeeded. Within Mumbai we had some type of community organisations like Seva Niketan and Bandra East Community Centre. But they were not linked to the parish, they were individual centres. Here the idea was to link each parish with such a cell.

Today this sort of idea has become part of the official mandate; it took us 10-15 years to convince the hierarchy that we need to move with the times. Now we have 35 centres all over Mumbai. (Mumbai has about 80-odd parishes).

In the recent past, with increasing attacks on democratic freedoms of different communities, it becomes even more pertinent that the Church and its units are alert to questions of justice. During the 1992-1993 communal violence in Mumbai, many men and women of the Church opened their church doors for relief and rehabilitation. Now that nuns and priests are also under consistent attack, we need to mobilise on the issue as a threat to democratic freedoms.

The fact that Christian institutions are working in education, health and other areas, with the most marginalised sections and in the context of our country this means oppressed castes, it is inevitable that our work itself comes under attack. However, these women and men of faith are not dithered; at the Seminary I meet them from all parts of the country and they are unshakeable in resolve, determined to complete their life’s mission.

A true Christian believes that it is only under threat, martyrdom and pressure that the church grows –- not necessarily quantitatively but qualitatively. So we have to carry on.

The Church, both as a link with faith and as a physical presence in the parish, has tremendous potential to be a genuine link with the people who live there. To show compassion and caring for their problems. While acceptance to this approach is not 100 per cent, it is slowly growing as the centres become successful, identify with people’s problems and attract young and fresh talent.

Basically it boils down to this. What should faith stand for? Justice issues, real life issues or should we only concentrate on the ritualistic dimension of faith.

While this is a positive development, as in other faiths, the conservative and inward-looking traditions within Christianity are also visible. These persons with a narrow definition of faith and worship don’t see their involvement or the involvement of the Church in politics and civic life. It is growing everywhere; it is a type of spirituality, which is only concerned with personal salvation.

However all said and done, I feel that partly because of the community centres started by some of us, partly because of other pulls and pressures, lay persons increasingly feel that the Church should get involved in politics, in civic issues. These lay persons are taking the initiative. The first step is get people involved.

(As told to Teesta Setalvad).

The post ‘Lay persons increasingly feel that the Church should get involved in politics, in civic issues’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.