SACW | Oct. 23-24, 2007
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at mnet.fr
Tue Oct 23 23:17:25 CDT 2007
South Asia Citizens Wire | October 23-24, 2007 |
Dispatch No. 2463 - Year 10 running
[1] Pakistan:
(i) Bhutto's Bloody Return: A Massacre Foretold (Tariq Ali)
(ii) Ripple Effect - The judiciary and the executive (Omar R. Quraishi)
[2] Bangladesh: Is it not yet time for justice? (Asma Kibria)
[3] Sri Lanka: Needs And Aspirations of
Ethnically Cleansed Northern Muslims (Shahul
Hasbullah)
[3] India: When Modi Invokes Mahatma Gandhi's Name (J. Sri Raman)
[4] India: Blatant Double Standards (Jyoti Punwani)
[5] India: Judges In Unchartered Territory (Ajay K. Mehra)
[6] Announcements:
(i) India - Appeal: "National Consultation on the
Role of Theatre in Socio-Political Conflicts" (8
- 11 January 2008)
______
[1] PAKISTAN:
(i)
counterpunch.org
October 20 / 21, 2007
BHUTTO'S BLOODY RETURN
A Massacre Foretold
by Tariq Ali
The massacre in Karachi had been widely
predicted. Benazir Bhutto herself has stated that
she was aware of the dangers. The government
pleaded with her to delay her return. Jihadi
leaders, angered by her slavish support of US
foreign policy, had publicly threatened to kill
her. She survived but a few hundred people have
been killed without reason.Her husband, who
decided not to accompany her, has accused
Pakistani intelligence of complicity in the
attacks. Benazir Bhutto herself has preferred to
attack the followers of a dead military dictator.
Once it had become obvious that something was
being planned, she would have been better advised
to make a quiet return, but she insisted on a
show of strength. The planning had been going on
for over a month. The 130,000 people who were
brought to welcome her in trucks and buses from
allover the province(how many of them were paid
is still not clear). In addition there were
20,000 police and paramilitary personnel for her
protection. All to no avail. It ended in a
bloodbath, remind us once again of the volatile
nature of politics in Pakistan.
More trouble lies ahead. Benazir may be the
preferred politician of Washington and the EU,
but the Supreme Court is considering five
separate petitions to reject the Ordnance that
pardons corrupt politicians. Were the court to
accept these petitions, Ms Bhutto would have to
serve time in prison. This would not displease
the government. They would pretend to bow before
the dictates of justice.
The tragedy of Pakistan is that the People's
Party of Bhutto and its rivals offer no real
alternatives to the policies currently being
pursued. The State Department notion of Bhutto
perched on Musharraf's shoulder parrotting
pro-Washington homilies was always ridiculous.
Now there are doubts as to whether she will even
reach the General's shoulder.
o o o
(ii)
The News,
Oct 21, 2007
RIPPLE EFFECT
The judiciary and the executive
by Omar R. Quraishi
A story in this newspaper last week by Hamid Mir
claimed that the government was angry with the
new-found judicial activism of the Supreme Court
and was planning to do something in this regard.
It said that one option was to specify the tenure
of the chief justice in such a manner that the
incumbent chief justice would end up
relinquishing his post by November of this year.
However, he would continue to remain a judge of
the Supreme Court, which comes across as a
supremely odd situation unlikely to be the norm
in any country. As a corollary, would the army
chief agree to step down after a specified time
period and agree to continue to work as a
four-star general but not as head of the army,
and report to a colleague who would then be
elevated to take his place?
The above debate may be academic because the
story, which was picked up by several Indian
newspapers, was swiftly denied by the government
with a minister saying that no move was afoot to
curtail the tenure of the chief justice. However,
then came another report, according to which the
same option was deliberated around a month ago by
the government but obviously not acted upon.
There are those who support the view of the
government: that the courts should not be
indulging in judicial activism to the extent that
the court's own impartial role comes into
question. And there are those who support the
opposing view: that in the context of the state
of Pakistani society and the quality of
governance its people are subjected to, the
people look to the courts for justice and hence a
Supreme Court that takes cognizance of this and
acts on it is better than one which does not.
For instance, the recent ruling on farmhouses
allotted by the Capital Development Authority to
many people in high places is something that
would be universally applauded by ordinary
Pakistanis. Since they don't get such favourable
terms from their local municipal land-owning
agency for acquiring a plot, why should the rich
and the powerful benefit and who but the Supreme
Court to come in the way of the rich and the
powerful -- this is probably how many of them
would reason.
In the Anglo-Saxon view, and this is something
that our law is based on, all three pillars --
legislature, executive and judiciary -- are
separate but equal. The Supreme Court acts like a
referee telling the legislature and the
government, and the many agencies and
organisations that work on their behalf when
their actions are out of bounds of the
Constitution. But the powers of the Supreme Court
are limited in that if the legislature wishes, it
can pass legislation to curtail the authority of
the courts or even abolish them. The latter is of
course theoretically possible and can only be
done if there are enough votes to pass a
constitutional amendment -- which would be
two-thirds in all houses of parliament, including
the provincial assemblies.
Some might consider this power of parliament
extreme but it makes sense because the parliament
-- when a country has a truly representative and
unfettered democracy -- represents the will of
the people and if it wishes to take a step as
extreme as abolishing a branch of government,
then so be it, since that, according to the
interpretation of the passage of a constitutional
amendment, would be in line with the wishes of
the people.
Of course, the Supreme Court has the power to
tell the president, the prime minister, any
particular minister or other senior functionary
that an action of theirs is wrong and out of tune
with the law and the Constitution. This power of
the Supreme Court to consider and overturn any
law passed by parliament or a provincial assembly
is called judicial review of the court and is
something practiced by courts in many countries
but considered controversial in many cases.
In the case of the US, a country with a Supreme
Court rich in history and experience and whose
many cases are well-documented and quoted
extensively even in other countries, the exercise
of judicial review became formalised in 1803 with
Marbury vs. Madison. The then Chief Justice of
the US Supreme Court, John Marshall, ruled that a
law passed by Congress was out of line with the
Constitution and hence illegal. In his ruling,
Justice Marshall wrote that it was "emphatically
the province of the judicial department to say
what the law is" and in doing so pioneered the
view that it necessarily followed from the
judiciary's jurisdiction and constitutional
mandate that it be able to review all laws passed
by parliament and the executive.
Of course, this would -- and it did through the
course of American history -- bring it into
confrontation with both the federal as well as
several state governments. Several examples on
how the US Supreme Court came to the aid of the
civil rights movement and how it sought to
disband the 'equal but separate' system of
segregation in the mid-twentieth century (of
course, the court by some of its own rulings in
the 19th century, helped in the establishment of
this discriminatory race-based system in the
first place).
However, with reference to the situation in
Pakistan, it is perhaps appropriate to quote
excerpts of a recent email that I received. It
came from Ali Khan, who wanted me to read
something that he had written for his college law
magazine, The Jurist (Ali studies at Washburn
University in the US state of Kansas)
He wrote: "The Pakistan Supreme Court has
successfully created a constitutional mess that
may do more harm than good. Its judicial activism
and bravery in defying President Pervez
Musharraf's efforts to humiliate the judiciary
and in reinstating suspended Chief Justice
Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry was appreciated in
legal circles throughout the world.
"Its exercise of suo motu jurisdiction to protect
fundamental constitutional rights has also been a
beacon of light for lawyers in Pakistan and other
Muslim countries where state officials commit
gross violations of rights with little
accountability.
"Despite these admirable successes, the Supreme
Court has begun to venture into political
minefields, raising serious questions about the
long term sustainability of its judicial
activism... Of course, rights cannot be separated
from politics. And violations of rights which the
Court must monitor are related to political
forces that determine governmental policies. Yet
a responsible judiciary must constantly
distinguish between the calculus of rights and
the dynamics of politics. The Supreme Court rests
on firm ground when it intervenes in public
matters to preserve constitutional rights.
"It treads shaky ground, however, when the Court
wishes to engineer political forces for the good
of the country. Take the October six Presidential
election. The Supreme Court may exercise its
authority to hold whether a candidate holding two
public offices, one civilian and the other
military, may contest a Presidential election.
This is not judicial activism. The Court may also
rule whether the Presidential election for a
five-year term ought to be held before or after
general elections of the Electoral College. This
is not mere politics. However, the Court's
decision to split the baby between competing
political forces has been most prejudicial to the
nation's stability. The Court prohibits the
Election Commission from announcing the result of
an otherwise validly-held Presidential election.
This sort of judicial engineering that throws the
future into uncertainty is anything but the
protection of rights. It invites forces of
disobedience.
"According to Pakistani folk wisdom -- sometimes
superior to untested constitutional
interpretations -- the best time to stop the cat
from drinking the milk is before it drinks the
milk. No strategy is effective in squeezing the
milk out of the cat's belly. This folk wisdom
dictates that it will be highly adventurous for
the Supreme Court to now declare that General
Musharraf could not lawfully contest the
Presidential election. Any such ruling would be
harmful to the protection of rights. The time to
shoo away the cat has passed... In the US, the
doctrine of 'political questions' provides
useful, though imperfect, guidance for the
judiciary. The political question doctrine clears
the path for political forces to contest with
each other, win and lose. Judges may have a
preferred dog in the fight. The political
question doctrine, however, mandates that judges
leave dog fights to dogs.... Let the general
elections in January 2008 sort out the politics."
The writer is Op-ed Pages Editor of The News
______
[2]
The Daily Star
October 24, 2007
IS IT NOT YET TIME FOR JUSTICE?
by Asma Kibria
Almost three years have passed without a proper
investigation into the brutal killing of my
husband Shah A.M.S. Kibria, M.P., in a grenade
attack in his Habiganj constituency on January
27, 2005. My nephew, Shah Manzur Huda, and three
others were also killed in the attack. Like me,
so many wives, mothers and children who have lost
loved ones in grenade and bomb attacks still cry
in anguish, with the forlorn hope of justice. So
many families have been torn apart by these
attacks. For these families there can never again
be carefree laughter and joy -- the dark shadow
of these brutal killings will haunt them for the
rest of their lives, a constant source of sorrow
and depression. The great shame is that they are
even denied the scant consolation of knowing that
the killers will be brought to justice.
That is the reason why, with grief that is still
difficult to express, I have sat down to write
again about the terrible events of the recent
past. I cannot remain silent at the injustice
being done to me and others like myself. Will the
killers go scot-free? Will we never obtain
justice in this country?
My husband's assassination was one of the many
brutal political killings that took place in
Bangladesh under the BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami
government. After a carefully limited
investigation some local BNP leaders were
identified as the culprits. Some other local
people -- a night guard, a truck-driver -- were
also caught. If these people were involved, they
could only have acted on the instructions of much
more powerful individuals who could realistically
have had a motive to kill someone of the stature
of my husband, a former UN under-secretary
general and former finance minister and foreign
secretary of Bangladesh.
A local BNP leader named Abdul Qayyum was shown
as the principal accused. No confessional
statement (under Criminal Procedure Code 164 --
confession before a magistrate) was ever taken
from him. Do not court records indicate that he
wished to make such a statement? Was this request
suppressed on the instruction of higher
authorities? Did the killers obtain the
cooperation of the local administration? Why was
there no police security at the political meeting
of a sitting MP? Why, despite the fact that the
prime minister herself admitted in parliament
that administrative lapses lay behind the
killing, was the deputy commissioner rewarded
with inclusion in her entourage for an official
visit overseas? Was not the charge sheet a
misleading document that raised more questions
than it answered?
No mention was made of the masterminds behind the
killing, or the source of the grenades used in
the attack. It was obvious to all except the
investigators that this was no ordinary killing
and that careful planning and preparation were
involved.
As my husband lay mortally wounded, no attempt
was made to provide him with even rudimentary
medical assistance. In fact, it is reported that
the gates of the local hospital were deliberately
kept closed as his vehicle approached. No saline
drip, no blood transfusion, no proper ambulance
was provided, let alone a helicopter. My husband
died from loss of blood arising from horrendous
injuries (hundreds of grenade splinters all over
his body with both his feet virtually blown off),
in a run-down ambulance (without any medical
equipment), during the four-hour road journey to
Dhaka.
The speaker's failure to make any attempt to save
one of the MPs whose welfare and security he was
responsible for is by now known to most people in
Bangladesh. At whose direction did this man take
the decision not to provide any help to my
husband?
My heart breaks at the thought that a person who
was covered by generous UN medical insurance (as
a former staff member), that would allow
virtually cost-free treatment anywhere in the
world, could die in such a way, without any
medical treatment whatsoever, in his own country.
After his death, I received no message of
condolence from the president, prime minister or,
indeed, the speaker. With local BNP leaders
quickly identified as being involved, is it not
then natural to suppose that some central BNP
leaders could have been involved? Given the
events I have described, is it not possible to
conclude that powerful elements in the
BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami government itself were
involved? Did they not then apparently place the
investigation in the hands of those who seemed to
be acting to protect the real murderers? Why were
the investigators rewarded with a presidential
award for a failed investigation?
To seek justice from such a government was too
much to expect, but we did believe that a
sustained campaign for justice would expose the
truth, and supported by family and friends in
Bangladesh, the United States and Europe, we
began a peaceful program of weekly protests. Time
and time again we demanded a further
investigation and the involvement of foreign
investigators, given that local investigators,
whatever their competence, could not be expected
to stand up to pressure from powerful quarters in
the ruling party.
My husband was an internationally known figure,
and from all around the world there were
representations to the government to undertake a
complete investigation into his killing. The
BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami regime rejected all these
requests. We then made the same request to the
first caretaker government of October 2006, but
once again this was ignored.
When the new caretaker government took office on
January 11, I was filled with new hope that at
last there was a chance of a unbiased and
comprehensive investigation of my husband's
assassination. I wrote to the chief advisor and
was assured that every effort would be made in
this regard. I was informed that a 5-member team
had been formed to undertake a fresh
investigation. However, a few days later I was
horrified to read in the newspapers that the same
investigating officer (IO) who had been placed in
charge of the investigation under the BNP-Jamaat
regime had once again been placed in charge of
the "new" investigation.
A new IO has since been appointed, but valuable
time has once again been lost. We believe that
the eyewitnesses to the attack, as well as those
responsible for security and administration at
the time of the killing, should have been
questioned in depth. To the best of our
knowledge, this has not been done. Most
disturbingly, there seems to be a concerted
effort to pin the blame on Harkat-ul-Jihad (Huji)
operatives. Is this not a blatant attempt to
deflect attention from the BNP-Jamaat-I-Islami
regime? From the numerous press reports of the
Huji bombers caught so far, they have admitted to
many killings and assassinations but have always
expressed their lack of knowledge of the Kibria
assassination.
As my husband's murder took place during the
BNP-Jamaat regime, they must bear some
responsibility, given their total control over
the administration and security apparatus. There
were obvious political motives behind the
assassination. Perhaps it was done to push back
the opposition campaign for election-system
reforms that would have interfered with the
BNP-Jamaat's election rigging plans. It is now
widely recognised that the falsification of the
voter rolls was a key element of their strategy
(although the perpetrators of that crime go
unpunished). My husband was very concerned about
this issue, as can be seen from the paper on
election reforms he was to have presented on
January 30, 2005.
A second motive relates to electoral advantage --
both nationally and locally. My husband was a key
strategist of the Awami League. Across the
nation, his exceptional skills as a macroeconomic
manager were increasingly recognised, and he will
be remembered for having delivered strong growth
with low inflation, as well as undertaking
important structural reforms in the financial
sector during his period as finance minister.
Also, his constituency was the heart of an Awami
League cluster of four seats. It was expected
that with his death these seats would be captured
by the BNP-Jamaat-I-Islami.
It is not, therefore, surprising that most people
believe that the local BNP party men identified
as being involved in the attack were hired agents
of higher-level leaders.
In early 2004, a huge shipment of arms and
explosives was intercepted at Chittagong port and
released (to persons unknown). There is still no
information available as to whom these explosives
were handed over to, but the fact that the type
of grenades the shipment contained matched those
used in various political killings (mainly of
opposition figures, mainly belonging to the Awami
League) is a continued source of unease in
Bangladesh.
These weapons are still largely unaccounted for,
and the presumption is that, as they were used
under the BNP-Jamaat regime, they will be used
again. Do not these weapons represent a source of
strength for the BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami and the
extremist forces they nurtured? And are they not
a threat to the holding of any elections free
from fear? As a concerned citizen, I would
request the government to look into this matter.
The public seeks assurance that these weapons did
not fall into the wrong hands.
There have been such a large number of bomb,
grenade and other attacks in recent years that it
may be useful to list at least some of them: the
Udichi bomb-blast; the suicide bombing at Ramna;
the grenade attack on the Awami League meeting of
the August 21, 2004; the killings at Rajshahi and
Khulna, the attack in Sylhet on the British High
Commissioner; the murder of Ahsanullah Master,
MP, the assassination of Shah Kibria on January
27, 2005; the bombings at Netrakona and Gazipur;
the synchronised bombings of August 17; and the
murder of the judges at Jhalukati. Almost all
these attacks took place under the
BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami government.
The case of the Jhalukati murders has been
concluded, in the Ahsanullah Master case some
lower-level BNP operatives were convicted, and a
charge-sheet has been submitted in the case of
the attack on the British high commissioner.
However, in virtually every other case, the
victims' families still await a full
investigation, and the identification and
punishment of the killers. On behalf of all the
victims' families, I would urge this non-party
government to give priority to ensuring that the
justice denied for so many years is finally
assured through the initiation of proper
investigation into each incident.
As a citizen, the right to justice is a most
basic one. Are we to be denied this right in
Bangladesh? I hope that the government will give
this issue the importance it deserves, as murder
is among the most serious of crimes, and
unpunished political murder in particular
destroys the integrity of the democratic
political system. Punishment of the murderers is
important for ending the climate of impunity that
prevailed under the BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami
government in every sector.
Given the extreme partisanship of the
BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami regime -- a partisanship that
was undermining most of the institutions of the
country -- a full and impartial investigation of
my husband's assassination was not possible
during the their rule. That is why we demanded
that foreign investigators be invited to assist
the local team. This could be done through a UN
Commission of Enquiry (as in the Rafik Hariri
case in Lebanon), but only at the request of the
government.
The failure of the current investigation into my
husband's killing -- despite the fact that a
neutral regime is in power -- would suggest that
BNP-Jamaat loyalists who still remain active in
the administration may have been able to stifle
any efforts to find the real masterminds.
It is true that the FBI briefly came to help, but
it must be remembered that they left when they
realised that they would not receive the full
cooperation of the authorities. It is not that I
doubt the competence of local agencies and
investigators -- I just doubt that they are
capable of withstanding political pressure. I
believe that events over the last three years
have borne out our family's concerns in this
regard.
I still cannot accept that my husband was
targeted to be so brutally murdered. He was an
honest and deeply patriotic individual who gave
up a life of ease and comfort (on a United
Nations pension) to serve his country. At every
point in the nation's history he demonstrated his
courage and commitment to the nation -- from
going to jail during the Language Movement of
1952 to joining the Liberation Struggle of 1971
as a diplomat who quit the service of Pakistan to
support the efforts of the Mujibnagar government.
In his lifetime he never received -- nor sought
-- any recognition of his many contributions to
the nation. That is why when, after his death,
there was a petition by many eminent citizens of
the country to rename a portion of the Satmasjid
road (in front of our house) as "SAMS Kibria
Avenue" we were hopeful that this would be done.
However, we have received no reply from the city
authorities, perhaps because they are still
dominated by the BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami's loyalists.
Shah Kibria was even-tempered and moderate in his
statements, and focused on policies rather than
on individual failings. He spoke on the important
issues of the day in a firm but gentle voice,
demonstrating that strength in parliamentary
debate lay not in the loudness of one's voice but
in the clear articulation and conviction of one's
views. Was just being in the opposition his
"crime"? This is possible, given the murders of
numerous opposition figures during the
BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami years -- in sharp contrast to
the previous Awami League government of 1996-2000
during which not a single opposition figure of
national stature was assassinated.
After my husband's death, I had undertaken
various peaceful protest programs calling for an
investigation into all the killings and an end to
political violence. These programs included an
international signature campaign with a stitched
together a signature sheet stretching about one
mile, with tens of thousands of signatures, that
was displayed in front of parliament on March 31,
2005. Our weekly program of silent vigils at dusk
("Blue for Peace") every Thursday (the day he
died) in different locations is now well-known
throughout in the country, largely due to the
coverage of a sympathetic media.
I received much support from ordinary citizens
and will be forever indebted to those who joined
our family in these programs. I don't know what
effect all this had on the government, but
perhaps we were able to stir the conscience of
the nation. Our activities have been suspended
since January 11, as we have not received
permission to hold any protests under the
emergency regulations that remain in force.
However, our resolve to seek justice remains
undiminished. We hope that the people of
Bangladesh realise that it is important, not just
for the victims' families but for the entire
nation, that the killers are punished and the era
of routine political violence is brought to an
end.
______
[3]
Campaign to Restore the Rights of the Ethnically Cleansed
Northern Muslims (Release One)
NEEDS AND ASPIRATIONS OF ETHNICALLY CLEANSED NORTHERN MUSLIMS
The highlights of the Fact Finding - 2007
Shahul Hasbullah
(On behalf of research team*)
FACT FINDING MISSION
In October 2007, a month long campaign to
"restore the rights of the ethnically cleansed
Northern Muslims" was launched. In pursuance of
this a team of researchers set up a fact finding
mission to investigate the current conditions,
future needs and aspirations of displaced
Muslims, living mainly in Puttalam district, and
to highlight the above in order to find durable
solutions to this problem. The fact finding
mission attempted to answer the following
questions: What prevents Northern Province
Muslims to return homes? What impact has the 17
year long displacement made in the lives of the
displaced?
BACKGROUND
Forcible Expulsion and inability to return home:
Seventeen years ago, the LTTE forcibly evicted
the Muslims of the Northern Province at gunpoint.
Continuing war and conflict in the north and the
absence of meaningful efforts to facilitate
return has meant that the internal displacement
of Northern Muslims has continued to present day.
As a consequence, the probability of return
en-masse in the near future is remote. The
impacts of 17 years of displacement: The
northwestern coastal area of Puttalam district
has been the temporary home of the majority of
the Muslim displaced for the last 17 years. With
an influx of nearly 100,000 displaced, the total
population of this region doubled. Over the
period, displaced Northern Muslims have moved
from temporary shelter (for six months) to camp
lives (for 6 years or more) and then to semi and
permanent self-settlements. While about half of
Puttalam displaced do not own any land, the rest
are confined to a standard land piece which is
commonly 10 perches. The quality and quantity of
relief and rehabilitation assistance to Puttalam
IDPs has declined over a period. The changes in
the strategies in assisting the Puttalam
displaced has forced the displaced seek
alternative income sources which have created
stiff economic competition and tension between
displaced and host communities in the above
areas. The tensions between these two communities
have further spread into larger social,
educational and political spheres as well. The
condition of the place of origin: About 5 per
cent of evicted Muslims returned home to the
government controlled areas of the north.
Movable and immovable properties and other social
and cultural interests left behind in the north
by Muslims after Eviction have now been either
taken by others or have been abandoned. The 2002
Peace Talks did not make any significant
break-through especially concerning the return of
Muslim displaced to their original places. For
Northern Muslims, the strong bond that Northern
Muslims and the majority Northern Tamils had
prior to Eviction continues to provide strong
hopes for the possibility of future return to
their homes.
FINDINGS ON THE NEEDS AND ASPIRATIONS OF NORTHERN MUSLIMS
October opinion survey reveals that the Northern Muslims want
- To secure and stabilize their lives during this prolonged displacement
- To seek assistance to protect assets and
properties in their place of origin
- The recognition of their right to return
and the facilitation of return when the time is
appropriate.
Key words:
- Secure and stabilize lives during displacement
- Protect assets and properties in the place of origin
- Recognize right to return and
- Facilitate return when appropriate
DETAILS OF THE FACT FINDING (DURING DISPLACEMENT)
Reasons to secure and stabilize lives during
displacement: There is little indication of an
end to current displacement. The last seventeen
years has created profound uncertainly about the
future. Unless the war ends
and the conflicting parties reach consensus on
ethnic question, the possibility of the return of
all Northern Muslim is remote. To date, those
representing Tamil nationalism (e.g., LTTE) have
not spelled out their stand on the right to
return of expelled Muslims. However, the
displaced cannot continue to live in uncertainty
forever. They were faced with many problems.
One of the major problems has been the
possibility of suitable dwelling places. Nearly
half of the displaced do not possess their own
land for living and continue to live in
camp-style settlements.
Those who do own land are restricted to land 10
perches or under. One premise of 10 perches may
contain many families, including parents, married
children and their children. Population has
continued to grow in
these displaced settlements through natural
growth and in-migration. At the same time,
displaced people are faced with economic
problems. Jobs are not available for men and
whatever available jobs there are for women
in cash-cropping vegetable gardens are for very
low wages. Local schools are overcrowded and
faced with shortage of educational, physical, and
human resources. While the children of both
communities (displaced and
host) faced immense hardships, the quality of
education of children of those schools has
continued to decline. In addition, displaced
people are faced with social, psychological and
cultural problems. Women and children were
affected most by these. Naturally, displaced
people feel these negative trends must be
arrested. Thus, they wish to secure and stabilize
their lives in the place of displacement until
they return home or find alternatives to return.
Challenges faced by displaced in the place of
displacement Shrinking employment opportunities
is one of most important challenges that are
faced by IDPs and the host community together in
Puttalam. Similarly, the non-availability of
land for housing and economic activities, limited
public services such as medical, educational,
transport are also major challenges for both.
This is exacerbated by the fact that both
populations are concentrated in the most limited
resource area of the northwestern coastal areas
of Puttalam.
The above issues naturally invite tensions and
confrontation between IDPs and the host community
in Puttalam. So far, the frictions have not
escalated to dangerous levels, but unless the
larger issues are addressed and arrested the
possibility of higher levels of tension and
conflict seem likely. How these problems should
be addressed: In order to prevent further
aggravation in the present situation, there is an
urgent need for development initiatives in the
areas where the IDPs are living. The local
community and the IDPs share not only physical
space but also religious and cultural space in
the region. So far, both communities have found
ways of accommodating each other. This
relationship could be further strengthened if the
increasing tensions between these two communities
over the use of the limited resources and over
the employment opportunities are minimized
through proper economic development initiatives.
DETAILS ON THE ASPECT OF RETURN TO THE PLACE OF ORIGIN
Protection: The right to return to northern homes
is the inalienable right of displaced Muslims.
The assurance of future protection will make
future return for displaced people more possible.
At the same time, the places
of origin of the Northern Muslims which had been
abandoned for nearly 17 years will have to be
prepared for the return of displaced upon their
decision to return.
Challenges in the place of origin: Long term
abandonment has taken its toll on Northern
Muslims' former homes and environments. Thus,
these places of origin require considerable
preparation and development before return can be
effected. Moreover, the social fabric of the
north has also changed in the last seventeen
years. Younger generations of the Northern Tamils
have no memories or experiences of the formerly
multi-ethnic northern communities where Tamils
and Muslims co-existed peacefully for hundreds of
years. There should be attempts to revive such
memories and undertake initiatives to promote the
renewal of relationships between Tamils and
Muslims.
The way to address these problems: The
protection and preservation of the assets and
properties of Northern Muslims, the restoration
of political, economical, social and cultural
rights, and the re-establishment of Tamil-Muslim
relationships are some of the steps that should
be taken to ensure the smooth return of Northern
Muslims.
DURABLE SOLUTION
The inability of Northern Muslims to return to
their former homes is a national not local
problem and must be solved as such. It is not
advisable to find permanent solution for them in
the resource poor northwestern Puttalam district.
Therefore, the problem of the Muslim refugees has
to be considered as a national problem and a
durable solution has to be found in consultation
with all parties concerned. In this respect, an
effective resolution must be discussed and
politically resolved in a broader arena that
includes displaced Muslims and parties to the
conflict.
"Peace with justice to all"
* October campaign was undertaken by Shahul
Hasbullah (University of Peradeniya) and his
team, S.H.M. Rizni, M.A.C.Rafeek, A.G. Aneis,
M.M. Thawfeek, M.S. Thameem, A.C. Nawfeer, M.M.
Niyas, D.M. Foumeen, Ms. M.
Juwairiya, Ms. M.S. Janoofa, Ms. K.M. Sifana, Ms.
A.G. Jesmi, Ms. S. Sabeera and Ms. M.K. Sharmila
in association with Research and Action Forum for
Social Development (RAAF), Nuraicholai, Puttalam
and was
financially supported mainly by National Peace Council.
______
[4]
truthout.org
23 October 2007
WHEN MODI INVOKES MAHATMA GANDHI'S NAME
by J. Sri Raman
Mahatma Gandhi, the foremost symbol of
India's freedom struggle, has died several
deaths. He has met his martyrdom again, every
time India and Indians departed from the path of
peace and equitable progress. The most painful
illustration, perhaps, came when the country was
proclaimed a nuclear-weapon power in 1998. Not a
very distant second, to many, would be Narendra
Modi's declaration the other day that he was a
devout disciple of Gandhi.
The comical absurdity of the claim should be
obvious. The Mahatma fell to a fanatic's bullet
in 1948 while fighting for interreligious
harmony, while Modi rose to his full stature
after presiding over a grisly pogrom against the
Muslim minority in the State of Gujarat in 2002.
Obvious, too, to Indian observers, was the motive
behind Modi's metamorphosis. All were quick to
see an electoral compulsion in his attempted new
avatar.
Gujarat is going to only State-level polls,
scheduled for December 11 and 16. But the
elections, which will decide Gujarat's political
dispensation for the next five years, are of much
wider interest - national and regional. It is
Modi's involvement that invests the event with
such extra-Gujarat significance.
The carnage of about 3,000, carried out six
years ago under the watchful and winking eyes of
Modi's police, also attracted attention far
beyond the State's borders - in places including
the columns of Truthout, as our long-time readers
will recall. So did the State-level elections
held in December 2001, eight months after the
massacre, which gave Modi another five years of
far-right power.
He and his political camp left little doubt
about the meaning and message of the months-long
orgy of violence. They claimed that that this
Indian variant of "ethnic cleansing" was an
experiment in the "laboratory of Hindutva (as
they called a horrendously misrepresented faith
of the common Indian majority)." While blood
flowed in Gujarat's streets, with the police
acting as benign onlookers if not active
accomplices of the far-right bands, Modi hailed
it all as a holy vendetta. He talked of it as "an
equal and opposite reaction" to an incident of
arson (which, at least one inquiry based on a
forensic report suggests, was imaginary).
Even as the violence raged again, Modi issued
orders to his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for
its full electoral use. By thus manufacturing and
manipulating mass hatred, he returned to power
with a considerably increased majority. The party
and the "parivar" (the far-right "family")
created fears across the country, especially in
the north where the BJP had a traditional base,
by talking of "repeating Gujarat everywhere."
They might not have been able to repeat the
holocaust elsewhere, but Modi's Gujarat has
continued to serve as a model of Indian fascism
and a moral booster for the far right in other
states. Modi has proceeded to reinforce the
antiminority sectarianism in the state with a
campaign equating terrorism with Muslims.
Justice has been delayed to the point of
being denied in most of the well-documented cases
of the pogrom. Courts have continued to pass
strictures on the Modi regime in this regard
without eliciting anything but a contemptuously
indifferent response. Meanwhile, the state police
have gone on with their "fake encounters," as the
media felicitously describe incidents in which
"suspected terrorists" are just shot dead and
busybodies like rights activists are told not to
ask bothersome questions.
Modi's has never been a message of merely
domestic significance. The carnage took place at
the same time as a massive deployment of Indian
and Pakistani troops across the border in
Kashmir, when the subcontinent was taken to the
brink of nuclear war.
Modi's public defense of the pogrom during
those months of murder and mayhem and after
always included mocking references to "Mian
Musharraf" (the epithet added to emphasize the
religious identity to Pakistan and its
president). Barbed-wire fences were put up around
Muslim areas with sign boards calling them
"Pakistan."
The message was carried further following the
train blasts of July 11, 2006, in Mumbai
(formerly Bombay). Speaking at a public rally in
the city still reeling from the shock of the
blasts, Modi proclaimed: "All Muslims are not
terrorists. But all terrorists are Muslims." He
thus supplied a new war cry to the far right and
its friends, for whom terrorism of the kind
witnessed in Gujarat and India's northeast did
not exist.
It is this ideological and political package
that has endeared Modi to sections of the
"parivar" that want the party to "return to its
roots." It is an open secret that they would like
to see Modi at the helm of the BJP at the
all-India level. His success in the coming
elections, they calculate, will spell a
significant stride towards a position that will
help him decide the country's political discourse
much more than the pogrom did.
Strangely, however, religious sectarianism or
antiminorityism would seem to be no electoral
issue at all in the state, or at best a marginal
one. Modi has done his job so well that no
political party would seem to be standing up for
the minority. Modi claims to have discovered
Gandhi, but he does not associate the Mahatma
with the cause of interreligious harmony to which
he died a martyr. He identifies Gandhi only with
village self-rule, which, according to the chief
minister, can be achieved only by scrapping
village-level elections!
Modi faces no serious opposition in Gujarat
from the Congress, heading the coalition
government in New Delhi. Manmohan Singh has
strongly criticized the BJP for calling him a
"weak prime minister," but his party in the state
depends only on dissidents in Modi's party for
their electoral campaign. And the dissidents, in
turn, while talking of "democracy" in New Delhi,
assail Modi in Gujarat only for not being
antiminority enough.
The people of Gujarat, however, have not
spoken up, and people can spring surprises. Does
Modi's invocation of Gandhi, perhaps, indicate a
politician's instinctive perception of a change
in the popular mood? We must hope that the ballot
box will at least help to restore the backbone of
forces that have been fighting extremely shy of a
frontal engagement with the far right.
We must hope so, because peace in South Asia
itself may be among the stakes in these otherwise
petty-looking polls.
A freelance journalist and a peace activist
in India, J. Sri Raman is the author of
"Flashpoint" (Common Courage Press, USA). He is a
regular contributor to Truthout.
______
[4]
Times of India
23 October, 2007
BLATANT DOUBLE STANDARDS
by Jyoti Punwani
With Islamic groups "not being ruled out" as
culprits in the Ludhiana bomb blast, and
Bangladeshis being interrogated for the Ajmer
blast, it is clear that in India's fight against
terrorism, one group of terrorists is being
completely excluded.
This is despite the Nanded blast in April 2006,
in which two persons died while making bombs in
the house of an RSS member, and the recovery of
fake beards from the house. This is despite the
revelations during narco-analysis of the accused
that the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was
training Hindu youth to commit terrorist acts
outside mosques. Neither the RSS nor any of its
militant wings are ever suspected by the police
of being behind any of the bomb blasts that have
targeted Muslims with regularity since the 2003
Parbhani blast.
This newspaper highlighted the sensational letter
written from Tihar jail by an ex-Intelligence
Bureau (IB) informer detailing how IB, working
with the Delhi Police's Special Cell, plants its
own "jehadi maulvis" to lure Muslim youth to
commit terrorist acts. The Central Bureau of
Investigation, directed by the Delhi high court,
has corroborated the most important accusations
made by the informer. Every politically conscious
Muslim, thanks to the Urdu press and the
internet, now knows this story.
These two factors taken together are enough to
destroy the credibility of the intelligence
set-up and the police. Yet, the latter continue
to act true to type after every blast, as though
nothing's changed. The same automatic blaming and
arrest of the usual suspects; the same revelation
that the IB/home department had warned about such
a blast.
It is ironic that the very congregations of
Muslims that have always been treated with
suspicion by the police have become the targets
of terrorist killings since 2003.
The depositions of senior policemen before the
Srikrishna commission were marked by a
Friday-namaz-phobia; they made it a point to
stress that "bandobast was tightened for the
Friday prayers and no untoward incident took
place". The implication was clear: with Muslims
gathering in such large numbers to listen to
sermons in mosques, there was every chance of
them going berserk thereafter.
Yet, there is little evidence of the high-profile
Anti-Terrorist Squads (ATS), set up in
Maharashtra and elsewhere, having conducted raids
on RSS outfits. In fact, the Maharashtra Control
of Organised Crime Act has not even been applied
to the Nanded RSS accused, while it has to those
accused for the July 11, 2006 train blasts, the
Malegaon blasts and the alleged Naxalites.
Nanded's Muslims had to move the court before the
state even called in the ATS to investigate the
case.
You don't need to be the IB to fear a blast
during Diwali. Imagine the backlash if that
happens. Yet, a blast on the eve of Ramzan Eid at
India's best-known Muslim shrine created no such
reaction. The Ajmer dargah was teeming with
devotees who had fasted the entire month and
planned to spend their most important religious
festival at their favourite shrine. Even the
return of the bodies to their homes in Mumbai's
slums passed off peacefully. Compare this extreme
restraint with the threats given by the Modis,
Thackerays, Togadias and Singhals in similar
circumstances.
After every bomb blast targeting Hindus, these
self-styled Hindu leaders ask why Muslims have
not condemned it. Their logic is clear: Because
some Muslims have targeted Hindus, the entire
community has to distance itself from them or
else share their guilt. But not once in the
recent blasts targeting Muslims has such a demand
been made by Muslims of Hindus; neither have
Hindu organisations condemned such acts.
The state's agencies have different yardsticks
when dealing with terrorist acts targeting Hindus
and Muslims. What's more disturbing is the
difference between the conduct of the victim
communities in the aftermath of such acts. Isn't
this difference an indication of the power
equation between the majority and largest
minority in our secular democracy?
(The writer is a political commentator.)
______
[6]
______
[6]
Indian Express
October 22, 2007
JUDGES IN UNCHARTERED TERRITORY
by Ajay K. Mehra
Judicial activism has suddenly emerged as a major
theme ever since the recent observations of a
Supreme Court judge earlier this month that the
DMK government could invite dismissal for not
conforming to the court's stance on the bandh it
had announced over the Sethusamudram project.
As V.R. Krishna Iyer argues, 'judicial activism'
has developed as a philosophy motivating judges
to depart from strict adherence to judicial
precedent in favour of progressive policies.
Since occasionally these decisions represent
intrusions in legislative and executive matters,
he calls for "benign interpretation within the
parameters of Corpus Juris". Considering that the
contribution by the Indian judiciary in this
arena for the past 25 years has been
considerable, the restraint implicit in Krishna
Iyer's observations is important.
In fact, despite support for judicial activism by
prominent judges like Justice John Marshall and
Justice Earl Warren to safeguard individual and
collective rights, the US judiciary has not shied
away from the accountability debate. The ABA
Commission on Separation of Powers and Judicial
Independence in 1998 admitted loss of public
confidence in the judiciary. Gallup polls between
1986 and 1994 revealed that the percentage of
respondents expressing strong confidence in the
Supreme Court declined from 54 per cent to 42 per
cent. The Commission recommended a number of
measures to arrest the trend of increasing
confrontation and criticism of the judiciary.
Obviously, there are lessons in judicial
restraint for India in this experience, despite
increasing instances of the executive proving
remiss.
The judiciary's intervention in ensuring
individual as well as collective rights of the
citizen is an area in which judicial activism has
been welcomed worldwide. The contribution of the
Indian judiciary since the onset of public
interest litigation has been pioneering and
rightly lauded. Clearly, executive decisions that
impinge on such areas should be scrutinised on
request and even perhaps suo motu as well. But
those falling in the politico-administrative or
governance domains are more difficult to
categorise. For instance, bargaining and
compromise is an important aspect of political
decision-making. Trained in adjudging complaints
on the legal balance of right and wrong, the
judiciary could trip badly when it comes to
pronouncing on intricate issues of governance.
For example, the complex aspects - political,
policy, administrative and political - of Delhi's
urban policy and the traders' protests over the
sealing of commercial establishments in
residential areas has cast a shadow on the
reputation of a former chief justice of India,
Justice Sabharwal, which he must clear. The
intelligentsia's protest over contempt charges on
journalists and the recent threat to use Article
356 on the Tamil Nadu government reflect the
dangers of judicial activism.
Even though the space for the judiciary to
pronounce on executive matters has been created
by a growing tendency on the part of the
executive to indulge in wrongdoing of various
kinds, suo motu judicial pronouncements on
uncharted issues lying in the executive domain
raise both constitutional and governance
questions. The executive has the political and
constitutional mandate to govern the country.
This necessarily limits the judicial domain to
constitutional and rights issues.
There is an additional problem. The judiciary
lacks the expertise to pronounce on policy
guidelines on the varied issues it has now begun
to tackle. In dealing with urban issues in Delhi,
for instance, the apex court appointed a
committee of experts. Such a move raises
questions of accountability vis-à-vis the elected
executive and the bureaucracy appointed in
accordance with constitutional provisions. Often
the executive and political parties are happy to
leave sensitive matters - such as
commercialisation in residential areas in Delhi -
to the judiciary, so that they themselves can
shrug off their own responsibility. The judiciary
is therefore sometimes compelled to step in and
address issues that it much rather not, and in
fact should not.
There are well-advised justifications for
judicial restraint. There is no way the judiciary
can put behind bars an entire cabinet for
non-compliance and contempt without raking up a
huge political controversy and inviting ridicule
for an intervention that falls outside its
domain. Second, if judicial activism begins to
invite public protests, politicisation of the
judiciary could follow. Finally, democratic
politics is a messy collage of various shades of
opinion. Attempts by the judiciary to sort out
the mess in black and white could leave it in a
difficult position and compromise its own
credibility and independence, which are in fact
its greatest strengths.
The writer is director, Centre for Public Affairs, Noida
______
[8] Announcements:
(i)
___
___
APPEAL
Dear All,
Theatre, evolving at the dawn of human
civilisation out of the early language and
enculturation process, today seems to be
distancing itself from human lives and societies.
This in no way signifies the absence of serious
efforts here and globally to usher theatre based
on contemporary realities. Yet, the harsh reality
is that it now wields very little influence on
mainstream society.
The journey of modern theatre in India started
about 6 decades back. Theatre remained
consistently active in modern India. It
highlighted the socio-political-economic-cultural
contradictions of a rapidly modernising India. It
experimented with various forms. Modern theatre
made a notable contribution to the creation of a
civil society in India. Yet, its pace slowed down
in the 70s. Nationally and globally,
socio-political structures foreshadowed the
changes which were to come in the 80s and the
90s. This led to a search for a new language of
theatre – nationally and internationally. In
India playwrights and theatre activists like
Badal Sarkar, Girish Karnad, Vijay Tendulkar,
Mohan Rakesh, Ibrahim Al-Kazi, Satyadev Dubey,
Gursharan Singh, Habib Tanvir, were involved in
giving a new meaning and perspective (taaseer) to
theatre. Dramatists/ playwrights like Augusto
Boal, Peter Brooke, and Grotovsky were involved
in a similar struggle in Latin America, Europe
and other parts of the world.
Today Globalisation has made the market
all-powerful. Mainstream theatre has begun to
cater to the market demands. The gloom in the
people’s movements has affected theatre too and
led to its dissipation. Pro-people political
agitations are rudderless. They are yet to find
their bearings and their theatre is similarly
caught.
The development sector, in the last four decades,
has tried to link theatre with the grassroots
issues of the people. However, the modern IT
technologies have attracted both the development
sector as well as the theatre activists. These
changed circumstances have posed several and
serious challenges and raise questions of
relevance and orientation to theatre.
What can be the role of theatre in such
situations? In our country, cultural activists
and artistes are struggling but most efforts are
isolated and un-connected. These efforts are
largely ignored by mainstream media, while even
the alternate media is not able to project these
efforts well.
We, the theatre and social activists of Gujarat,
have come together to hold a "National
Consultation on the Role of Theatre in
Socio-Political Conflicts". This is planned as a
4-day event to be held between 8 and 11 of
January 2008.
The main objectives of the consultation are:
1. To initiate a nationwide process of
sharing experiences of socio-political theatre.
2. To seek newer approaches of effectively
addressing socio-political realities through
theatre.
3. To initiate the process of developing a
common platform for Gujarat based socio-political
theatre groups.
The event will see many discussions on the role
that theatre has historically played in
addressing the current issues of the day and what
it could be in the future. It is hoped that this
will become an annual event to be held in
different parts of India, with the ultimate aim
of rejuvenating theatre and its intervention in
our lives.
Approximately 125 – 150 students, academicians
and practitioners of theatre, human rights
activists and professionals from the development
sector are expected to participate in this event.
The main target groups for this consultation are:
1. Active socio-political theatre groups/activists
2. Theatre students [Gujarat]
3. People’s movements working on conflict issues
4. Young theatre artists [Gujarat]
5. At least 2 representatives from all the states of India
The Host committee for the consultation comprises the following individuals.
Mallika Sarabhai
Darpana, Ahmedabad
Hasmukh Baradi
Theatre And Media Centre, Ahmedabad
Manvita Baradi
Garage Studio Theatre, Ahmedabad
S.D. Desai
Theatre Critic, Ahmedabad
Janak Dave
Theatre Teacher, Writer, Director, Thinker, Ahmedabad
Rajoo Barot
Ahmedabad Theatre Group, Ahmedabad
Aditi Desai
Jaswant Thaker Memorial Foundation, Ahmedabad
Rajkumar Nagar
Lok Kala Manch,
Kabir Thakore
Writer, Director, Designer, Ahmedabad
Saumya Joshi
Fade-In Theatre, Ahmedabad
Stalin K.
Drishti Media Collective, Ahmedabad
Mahesh Champaklal
Teacher, Performing Arts College - M. S. University, Baroda
Vrundavan Vaidya
Teacher, Drama College, Guj. University, Ahmedabad
Saroop Dhruv
Writer, Poet, Darshan, Ahmedabad
Fr. Cedric Prakash
Human Rights activist, Prashant, Ahmedabad
Prasad Chacko
Action Aid, Ahmedabad
Wilfred D’Costa
Insaf, New Delhi
Hiren Gandhi
Samvedan Cultural Programme, Ahmedabad
Persis Ginwalla
Development Consultant, Social Activist, Ahmedabad
The event is likely to cost approximately Rs. 8.5
lacs, of which Rs. 5.5 lacs have already been
pledged by an institutional source. The remainder
amount of Rs. 3.0 lacs is yet to be raised. We
appeal to you to contribute according to your
capacity towards this cause.
Your contributions may be sent in the name of "Darshan" to:
Darshan (Samvedan Cultural Programme),
A-9/4, Shahjanand Towers,
Behind Railway Overbridge, Jivraj park,
Ahmedabad 380 051
For more information contact Hiren Gandhi – 9426181334
079- 2681 5484 / 6541 3032.
We request you to kindly forward this appeal to your friends and contacts.
_____
_____
----
_____
_____
o o o o
---
---
---
- - -
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit
citizens wire service run since 1998 by South
Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
SACW archive is available at: http://insaf.net/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.
More information about the SACW
mailing list