Communal Violence Bill – Dr.Subramaniam Swami file complaint on Sonia

October 27, 2011

From:

Dr Subramanian Swamy , President of Janata Party, A-77, Nizamuddin East, Sector 18, Rohini, New Delhi-110013:

To:

SHO/Insp: D.P. Singh, Sector 18, Rohini, Crime Branch, New Delhi.

Re: Registering of FIR u/s 153A & B, 295A & 505(2) of Indian Penal Code.

Dated: October 24, 2011.

1. In public interest I am sending by Courier service a complaint in my name against Chairperson Ms. Sonia Gandhi of National Advisory Council, which has its office at 2 Motilal Place, New Delhi-110011, Tel: 23062582, and also against unnamed other members of the said NAC for committing offences of propagating hate against the Hindu community of India by circulating for enacting as law a Draft Bill described as PREVENTION OF COMMUNAL AND TARGETED VIOLENCE BILL OF 2011. This Draft Bill has been posted on the NAC official website, is dated July 21, 2011 and sent for adoption by Parliament. That this 2011 Draft Bill is mischievous in content of targeting the Hindu community, malafide, unreasonable and prejudicial to public order, is apparent from the second section of Explanatory Note [Annexed herein] to the Draft Bill titled “Key Provisions of the Bill”, thereby inciting crimes against the Hindu community with impunity, and thus committing offences u/s 153A & B, 295A and 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The UPA Government in December, 2005 had introduced earlier a Draft Bill [2005] in the Parliament described as THE COMMUNAL VIOLENCE (PREVENTION, CONTROL AND REHABILITATION OF VICTIMS) BILL (2005).

3. The Draft Bill however did not find favour with any Party. Leaders of several political parties felt that the Draft Bill provided sweeping powers to the Central Government thus undermining the authority of the State Governments. But the most vocal opposition to this draft Bill came from the Muslim, Christian and so called secular quarters. Their contention was just the opposite of what the political leaders were saying. The view of Muslim and Christian groups was that the 2005 Draft Bill was “completely toothless”. They demanded that the powers of managing communal violence be vested in non-government actors and make governments and administration at all levels accountable them for communal violence.

4. The All India Christian Council was in the forefront of this campaign against the 2005 Draft Bill as being “too weak”. In a letter written to the Prime Minister, Ms Sonia Gandhi, herself a Christian, through the AICC had conveyed to the PM the Christian Council concerns about the 2005 Draft Bill, and then revised the same as the 2009 Draft Bill.

5. The Muslim bodies too joined in the protest campaign against the draft as being too weak. They wanted provisions to make police and civil administration and state authorities “accountable” to public bodies. The Joint Committee of Muslim Organizations for Empowerment (JCMOE) made the demand on behalf of these organizations. JCMOE also urged the government to convene a meeting of leaders of “targeted communities” to note their views on the Bill as follows:

“The Bill does not make police or administration or state authorities accountable and provide for timely and effective intervention by the National Human Rights Commission, if the communal violence spreads or continues for weeks, or by the Central Government under Articles 355 and 356 of the Constitution, duly modified. On the other hand, ironically, the Bill grants more power to the local police and administration, which, more often than not acts in league with the rioters by declaring the area as ‘communally disturbed area’ JCMOE statement said.

6. It is interesting to note that these two statements, the Muslim and the Christian, come at around the same time as though they were premeditated. They probably were.

7. From their arguments in opposition to the Draft Bill, it is clear that they wanted a Bill that would consider only the Christians and Muslims as the “generally targeted” victims of communal violence; and that the word ‘communal violence’ be re-defined in such a way that only the Muslims and Christians are treated as victims and Hindus as predators, and that the local police and administration, including the State administration, considered hand-in-glove with the perpetrators of violence. Hence the Bill should empower the Central Government to invoke Art. 355 and 356 of the Constitution against any state in the event of such communal violence.

8. Since the Prevention of Communal Violence Bill (2005) does not discriminate between the perpetrators and victims of communal violence on religious grounds and also it does not envisage the State administration as committed in preventing such violence, these groups wanted the Bill to be withdrawn.

9. The National Advisory Council (NAC) was re-constituted in 2009 by the UPA Government again under the chairmanship of Ms. Sonia Gandhi. The UPA Government promptly handed over the re-drafting of the Bill to the newly constituted NAC and asked it to come up with a fresh draft.

10. The basic communally provocative premise of the re-drafted Bill is that: a) there is a non-dominant group in every State in the form of religious and linguistic minority which is always a victim of violence; b) the dominant majority (usually Hindus) in the State is always the perpetrator of violence; and c) the State administration is, as a rule, biased against the non-dominant group.

11. The object of the re-drafted Bill thus was the basic premise of the NAC that the majority community – read Hindus – are the perpetrators of communal violence in India and the minority – read Muslims and Christians – are the victims, clearly is incitement of religious strife.

12. What is more important is to conclude is that in all cases of communal and targeted violence, dominant religious and linguistic group at the State level is always the perpetrator and the other the victims. Similarly the conclusion that the State machinery is invariably and always biased against the non-dominant group is a gross misstatement of the sincerity and commitment of millions of people who form State administration in the country.

13. This dangerous premise is the incitement of communal strife in this Bill.

14. One can safely conclude that the script writers of this Bill are themselves blinded with religious biases. In India communal violence happens mostly because of politico-communal reasons. In many instances, as documented by several Commissions of Inquiry, it is the so-called minority group that triggers the trouble. We hence need laws that can prevent such violence irrespective of whoever perpetrates it. To argue that since the administration is always biased in favour of the dominant group we need acts that are biased in favour of the non-dominant group is imprudent and puerile.

15. The final Draft is available on the NAC website now. One is not sure when the same will be placed before the Parliament. However, a close scrutiny of the Draft is essential to understand the serious implications of and threats from it to our national integration, social harmony and Constitutional Federalism.

16. This Bill when it becomes an Act will apply to whole country except the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Note that J&K is one of the two States in India (excluding the North East and other tiny UTs) that has Hindus as minority – the ‘non-dominant group’ according to this Bill. Punjab is the other State where the Sikhs constitute the majority, while in the rest of the entire country it is the Hindus who constitute ‘dominant group’ and by implication the perpetrators of communal violence, according to this Draft Bill.

17. The mischief in the drafting primarily lies in the ‘Definitions’ part contained in Art.3 of the first chapter. Art. 3 (c ) defines Communal and Targeted Violence as under:-

“Communal and targeted violence” means and includes any act or series of acts, whether spontaneous or planned, resulting in injury or harm to the person and or property knowingly directed against any person by virtue of his or her membership of any group”.

18. The mischief is centered round the word ‘Group’. Art 3(e) defines what constitutes a ‘Group’.

“Group” means a religious or linguistic minority, in any State in the Union of India, or Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes within the meaning of clauses of the Constitution of India;

19. Having thus established that the individual member of the Minority community is always considered a part of the Minority group the Draft Bill goes on to add several detrimental clauses subsequently. Art.3 (f) defines ‘Hostile environment against a group’ thus:

“Hostile environment against a group” means an intimidating or coercive environment that is created when a person belonging to any group as defined under this Act, by virtue of his or her membership of that group, is subjected to any of the following acts:

(i) boycott of the trade or business of such person or making it otherwise difficult for him or her to earn a living; or

(ii) publicly humilitate such person through exclusion from public services, including education, health and transportation of any act of indignity; or

(iii) deprive or threaten to deprive such person of his or her fundamental rights;

or,

(iv) force such person to leave his or her home or place of ordinary residence or livlihood without his or her express consent; or

(v) any other act, whether or not it amounts to an offence under this Act, that has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment.”

Note the Clause (v) – ‘Any other act, whether or not it amounts to an offence under this Act’. The intention here seems to be to make anything and everything an offence, even if it doesn’t come under any definition of an offence. It is clear that the entire definition of ‘hostile environment’ is malafide.

Clause (k) defines who is a ‘victim’. Here the draft makers are very explicit:

“victim” means any person belonging to a group as defined under this Act, who has suffered physical, mental, psychological or monetary harm or harm to his or hr property as a result of the commission of any offence under this Act, and includes his or her relatives, legal guardian and legal heirs, wherever appropriate;

“Victim” can only be belonging to a ‘group’ as defined under this Act. And the group as defined under this Act is the Minority – the ‘non-dominant group’. That means this act will consider only the Minority as the victims. And he or she will become a ‘victim if he or she has suffered physical, mental, psychological or monetary harm….’ Now, physical harm is measurable, mental harm is difficult to gauge, but how on earth can anyone define ‘psychological harm’? The Bill does not define it. Then how can be so-called ‘psychological harm’ be one of the reasons for victimhood?

Similarly, Art. 4 (a) states as follows:

4. Knowledge. – A person is said to knowingly direct any act against a person belonging to a group by virtue of such person’s membership of that group where;

(a) he or she means to engage in the conduct against a person he or she knows belongs to that group;

20. Art 7 of the draft Bill defines ‘sexual assault’. It is by far the most widely covered definition that is very much needed to protect women from becoming targets of sexual violence as part of communal violence. But against the problem is that this definition is applicable to the women belonging to Minority group and women of the Majority community cannot benefit from it. Secondly, it also states that in a case of communal violence sex by consent also can be construed as a crime.

21. Patriotic Indians now realize that the present draft Bill is a standing proof that neo Jinnah-ism – the belief that the minority is perpetually oppressed in India by the Hindu majority – is still poisoning our minds even today by mischievous minds..

22. The present Draft Bill will only promote disharmony. With these kind of laws the LeTs and Hujls across the border need not have to promote terrorism in our territory anymore. All that they need to do is to encourage a minor communal riot and they can achieve what they want – huge rift between the Majority and Minority communities.

23. Hence, the NAC, with Ms Sonia Gandhi as Chairperson, and other members have jointly committed offences under IPC Sections 153A & B, 295A, and 505(2).

24. It is significant that even well known persons of secular credentials have condemned this Bill as divisive. The Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Ms. J. Jayalalitha has in a Press Release dated July 29, 2011 [Annexed] has concluded that “the remedy sought [in the Draft Bill] to be provided against communal and targeted violence is worse than the disease itself”.

25. Therefore, this complaint be taken as a basis to register an FIR and conduct investigation into the communal mentality of the NAC chairperson Ms. Sonia Gandhi and other members and take necessary action under the law to prosecute the offenders under the cited sections of the IPC.

( SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY )

Source : www.samvada.org

3 Comments | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

Positive signals from Anna movement

October 15, 2011

Positive signals from Anna movement

By Dr Manmohan Vaidya

Anna Hazare-led anti-corruption campaign has been an unusual experience for Indians nationwide, particularly the young. This completely non-violent movement that found support from all sections of the society throughout the country was a pleasant experience. Slogans like Bharatmata ki jai and Vande Mataram that reverberated through the campaign almost became the catch phrases for citizens filled with a sense of nationalism and patriotism. The campaign coined its own metaphor and has left its own lessons that could serve as reference points for the future.
Connect with the New Generation
Many would have believed that the young in India, often described as 3-F generation, are people only interested in the 3Fs ‘Films, Facebook and Fashion’ and bother little about the country’s politics. With Anna’s campaign that opinion stands corrected. Anna’s anti-corruption drive brought these very youngsters out on the streets, armed with the tricolour, shouting Bharatmata ki jai quietly underlining a non-violent show of their strength. With this campaign, the youth of the country proved that when thrown a challenge they are willing to stand up and show the power that a united youth commands in India.
The campaign also revealed that when a parliamentary democracy stops understanding popular sentiments and turns apathetic towards the needs of its people, people’s power can show the way, forcing an apathetic government to listen to people’s emotions and understand the sentiments of the populace.
Not just that. Anna’s campaign much like the Youth Against Corruption and Baba Ramdev’s campaign against corruption also established the fact that the people in the country are both seriously worried and agitated over the issue of corruption. It also established that people were no longer ready to sit quiet and accept rampant corruption in the country. They were willing to come out and make themselves heard.
While the country was experiencing a new found awakening, ministers in the central government were still arrogant. The government’s attitude towards both Anna Hazare’s movement and Baba Ramdev’s campaign was unbecoming, intolerant and oppressive. Yet, finally it was people’s power it forced an arrogant government to relent, reconsider its decision and chart out a compromise. And it perhaps was the greatest success of Anna’s movement. For it gave the confidence to ordinary people that if they stand united and adopt non-violent means of protest, they can actually bend an unjust government and be heard.
Sangh’s Role in the Movement
A section of people tried dragging the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) into a controversy with Anna Hazare campaign. While the attempt was mostly unsuccessful, the truth is that Anna Hazare has never been associated with the RSS at the organisational level. Given his success quotient and impressed with the developmental work done by Anna Hazare in his village Ralegan Siddhi, the RSS had only sought Anna’s guidance and help in rural development projects. As an attempt to present Anna’s successful rural development model to the country, the then RSS Sarkaryavah, HV Seshadri had penned a book titled Ek Karmayogi Ka Gaon on Anna’s own village Ralegan Siddhi back then. A number of RSS workers even travelled to Anna’s village at that time, to get a first hand experience of work done by him there.
In its national conclave (ABPS) held in March 2011, the RSS had passed a resolution on corruption and discussed various effective ways and solutions to tackle the menace of corruption in the country. In a resolution the RSS had called upon all Indians to support and participate in all anti-corruption campaigns in the country. Accordingly, the swayamsevaks throughout the country had supported and participated in all anti-graft campaigns including the one led by Anna.
Worshipping the Motherland
Another good result of the Anna campaign was the fact that slogans like Bharatmata ki jai and Vande Mataram became common anthems and found wider acceptability with people as they echoed through the campaign. An attempt was also made to malign the two slogans by calling them anti-Islam but the propaganda did not find support from either the common people or the organisers of the campaign. Calling these slogans anti-Islam is a product of communal and divisive thinking. The good part is that the thinking did not find favour even with the Muslims. Few others called Vande Mataram an RSS slogan, and thereby communal. But since when did respecting the motherland and singing praise for one’s country become communal? Worshipping the motherland is an age old tradition in India. Vande Mataram had become an anthem for the freedom struggle all across the country even before 1925 when the RSS was established. That’s the reason why the British had banned the singing of Vande Mataram in 1905. In the year1907, as a student of Class X, RSS founder Dr Hedgewar, sang Vande Mataram in school as a mark of rebellion against the British ban also proving his utter patriotism. Dr Hedgewar was duly punished for his defiance.
The Journey of Vande Mataram
Vande Mataram was written by Bankim Chandra Chatterjee on November 7, 1876. It was included in the famous novel Anandmath in 1882. In 1886, Rabindranath Tagore sang Vande Mataram in the Congress convention held in Kolkata. Dakshranjan Sen got Congressmen to practice collective singing of Vande Mataram in the 1901 Congress Convention. In the Banares Congress convention held in1905, Rabindranath Tagore’s niece Sarladevi sang Vande Mataram despite the ban put by the British government on singing of the song.
The same year, when the British proposed the division of Bengal, Vande Mataram became the anthem of that movement that opposed the division. As Hindus and Muslims sang Vande Mataram together, in the face of relentless opposition, the British withdrew their proposal for the division of Bengal in 1911. After the Bengal success, Vande Mataram became the anthem for patriotism and the battle cry for freedom struggle. From 1915 onwards, the singing of Vande Mataram became a regular feature at all national conventions of the Congress. At that time, Vande Mataram was considered neither anti-Islam nor communal. At that time, Hindus-Muslims would not just sing Vande Mataram together but Vande Mataram also became the last words uttered by many freedom fighters whom the British punished by hanging to death.
Communal-Divisive Thinking
However in 1921, when the Khilafat Movment found support from the Congress, hardliners amongst the Muslims gained importance and prominence. This is when hardliners started opposing Vande Mataram calling it anti-Islam and communal. In 1923, in the Kakinada national convention of the Congress, the party’s then president, Mohammad Ali overtly opposed Vande Mataram. Under pressure from the hardliners and communally inclined people within the Muslim community, the Congress stopped singing Vande Mataram at its conventions. While there are hardliners in every society, it’s best for every national representation and awakened society to ignore such hardliners. Unfortunately, since 1921, this communal and divisive approach gained strength. As a result, despite the lack of inclination from the entire national leadership of the Congress, they had to accept India’s Partition.
For vested political gains, hardliners and those with a communal mindset kept getting importance even after the Partition. After the Emergency of 1975, communal and divisive forces were allowed to become more powerful in the guise of secularism. Given that background, Anna’s movement was the first time after Independence that the society as one kept communal and divisive forces aside and maintained one national voice.
Everyone’s Bharatmata
There were many who also tried to drag the RSS into a controversy over the issue of Bharatmata. The first leg of Anna Hazare’s anti-corruption movement held at Jantar Mantar had a picture of Bharatmata in the background. The picture had not been kept there by the RSS. Yet it was said that the Bharatmata picture at Anna’s stage was a picture popularised and presented by the RSS. Does Bharatmata belong only to the swayamsewaks of the Sangh? Bharatmata belongs to every Indian. The tradition to eulogise India as one’s Maatribhoomi, Karmabhoomi and Punyabhoomi has been an old one.
In 1897, when Swami Vivkeananda came back to India from America, he got off the ship he was travelling back in and prostrated on the sea shore as a mark of respect to the motherland and sprinkled sand on his body. As he got up, the wet sand of the seashore had got stuck to his clothes, prompting the many bystanders to ask him why had he done so? To which Swami Vivekananda responded by saying, ‘‘I have stayed away from the motherland in America for four years, from 1893 to 1897. During this time if I have acquired any bad habit then this touch of the motherland will cleanse me of all that.’’ In a public speech later, he called upon all Indians, urging them to keep aside their personal Gods and Goddesses for the next 50 years and only worship one Goddess-Bharatmata. Was Swami Vivekananda communal? In fact by this he had appealed to all countrymen to rise above the petty differences of caste, creed, religion and language and unite as children of one motherland to fight for the freedom of the country as one united people.
Learn from History
It is true that even the RSS has been successful in its attempt to unite people with the common emotional thread of ‘this is our Bharatmata, all of us her children and therefore brothers’, helping them rise over their caste, creed, language and religious differences. How can it be called divisive or communal? In fact this is the only sure shot cure for communalism and divisiveness.
In the second leg of Anna Hazare’s anti-corruption movement, the picture of Bharatmata was missing. Bharatmata’s picture had been replaced by a picture of Mahatma Gandhi. Could the organisers not have placed both the pictures of Bharatmata and Mahatma Gandhi there, together? It is true that the decision to place a particular picture on the stage rests with the organisers of the movement. It is also true that even if Bharatmata’s picture was replaced by Mahatma Gandhi, the movement led by Anna Hazare does not become less important. But to remove Bharatmata’s picture over the argument that it belongs to the Sangh and therefore communal is very unfortunate and alarming. This would be against India’s age old tradition of conduct and thought and proof that we haven’t learnt our lessons from history.
(The writer is Akhil Bharatiya Prachar Pramukh of RSS and can be contacted at mmohanngp@gmail.com)

2 Comments | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

Anna stir – a balance sheet

August 31, 2011

Anna stir – a balance sheet
By S Gurumurthy – 29 Aug 2011

http://expressbuzz.com/edition/print.aspx?artid=308507

With the ‘Sense of the House’ letter from the Speaker reaching Anna Hazare, the Anna fast has ended. And the Team Anna and the media have proclaimed victory. Now the nation is relieved from the non-stop 24×7 screams of the media. It can think now! It can now draw a balance sheet of the Anna stir to know what are its giveaways and takeaways. Now go back to where the agitation began.
What is now known as the Anna movement started as India Against Corruption (IAC), whose website says, “India Against Corruption movement is an expression of collective anger of people of India against corruption.”
The IAC website lists as founders besides Anna Hazare, Baba Ramdev, Mahamood Madani, Arcbishop Vincent M Concessao, Syed Rizvi, Justice D S Tewatia, B R Lall and others. Click the January 2011 archives of IAC website, it is full of “March against corruption” in every nook and corner of India from Agra to Chennai and Ahmedabad to Silichar.
The leaders of the IAC, particularly Baba Ramdev, had raised, besides corruption, the emotive issue of Indian black money abroad. But the IAC receded into the oblivion and the apolitical movement against corruption, got reduced to merely a fight for Jan Lok Pal (JLP) Bill. The Anna movement emerged, narrowed into just a battle for a just JLP Bill, marginalised other founders and reduced its leadership to just four, the ‘Team Anna’. See the effect of these changes.
This was how Jan Lok Pal Bill replaced black money and corruption as the core agenda of the IAC? In the Lok Sabha elections in 2009, thanks to L K Advani, the black money issue had become a huge issue; it remained dormant after the UPA victory. But after the Tsunami of corruption hit Indian politics, the public roar against black money stashed abroad by politicians, businessmen and criminals became stentorian.
The media alleged that Sonia Gandhi had huge monies stashed away abroad. It was then that the UPA II suddenly thought of a Lok Pal Bill to ride out of the tornado of corruption and black money. It was a trap. Soon IAC walked into the trap. It dismissed the government version of the Lok Pal Bill and insisted that the draft prepared by its think tank, the Jan Lok Pal Bill, should be accepted. The Congress party saw it as a blessing in disguise to make its Lok Pal Bill fight the Jan Lok Pal Bill, to keep corruption and black money out of headlines.
Meanwhile, the BJP committed a Himalayan blunder. L K Advani wrote a personal letter to Sonia Gandhi for the hurt caused to her. That was made public to make it appear that it was to regret the charges made in the BJP Task Force Report on black money that Sonia Gandhi family was keeping huge illegal funds abroad. The BJP’s move against black money became moot, leaving the issue to the apolitical Swami Ramdev, Anna being confined to JLP Bill.
The Congress, thrown on the back foot by corruption and black money issues, saw in JLP Bill an opportunity to obfuscate both. When Anna started his Jantar Mantar fast, Sonia Gandhi – charged with hoarding black wealth abroad – offered to partner him in his battle against corruption! The result, the Congress successfully divided the IAC agenda between Anna with JLP Bill issue and Baba Ramdev with black money and corruption issues.
The first fast of Anna was thus subsumed into this Sonia-led Congress strategy, leaving the BJP – thanks to its own follies – with no issues. The collateral benefit to the Congress was that Anna helped to depoliticise and rob the BJP of a highly political issue. The Congress strategy also did more damage to the BJP. It helped to club all political parties, including both the ruling party and the opposition – read the Congress and the BJP – as one and the same.
Clubbing the BJP with the Congress on issues other than secularism helps the Congress and harms the BJP. Yet the elite leaders of the BJP allowed the Congress to succeed in its strategy. So after the first fast of Anna the Congress virtually dictated the agenda. Meanwhile Team Anna got Anna, who had first praised Narendra Modi, to talk against him so as to move the Anna movement further away from the BJP. This was the setting for the second Anna fast.
But the simple Anna proved increasingly difficult. He demanded a JLP Bill that included the PM down to everyone in the net. The Congress raised the plea that Anna could not dictate to the Parliament and got the BJP into the trap again. It got the constitutionalists in the BJP to endorse its view, again clubbing the BJP with itself!
But, the Congress strategy to handle Anna like it handled Swami Ramdev failed miserably with the media, which had no other headlines, focussing on Anna 24×7. With the media screaming ‘Anna’ and ‘Anna’ all the time, the Congress was on the run. Alas the BJP also found itself running with the Congress, against Anna. But, RSS workers enthused by Anna’s cry of “Vandemataram” and “Bharat Mata ki Jai” – both branded as RSS slogans – joined the movement in large numbers forcing the BJP president Nitin Gadkari to disregard the BJP Parliamentary Party and write to Anna offering support to his demands.
This forced the BJP Parliamentary Party also to side with Anna, rationalising the shift as the “evolving” stand of the BJP! This tilted the scale in Anna’s favour. But again the Congress would not leave the BJP. It joined with the BJP in the ‘Sense of the House’ exercise. The media claimed victory for Anna and for itself.
Here is the balance sheet of the Anna movement as of date. The BJP bracketed with the Congress loses; the Congress does not. The Congress cannot take Anna for granted; Anna cannot trust the Congress. The nation waits for what the Parliament will do about JLP Bill. The RSS is pleased that the two slogans “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” and “Vandemataram” long ostracised by Secular India have been secularised by Anna.
The writer is a well-known commentator on political
and economic issues.
E-mail:comment@gurumurthy.net

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

Elephant and the dragon

August 17, 2011

Hillary Clinton’s advice to India to be more assertive and Barack Obama’s meeting with the Dalai Lama carry the same message to China — that the two democracies see it as a threat and have decided to counter the danger together. However, given the long background of the democracy vs autocracy conflicts, a lesson from history can be instructive.
Some of the similarities between Nazi Germany and communist China are obvious. Like the Third Reich, Red China is a militaristic dictatorship. It also harbours, like Hitler’s Germany, a sense of grievance over the humiliation it suffered in the field of international diplomacy and believes that the time has come for it to assert itself. Germany was riled by the Treaty of Versailles, the ‘20-year truce’ between the two world wars, as it was called. China was shamed by the ‘unequal’ treaties which were imposed on it by the West in the 20th century.
While Nazi Germany had fascist Italy as an ally in Europe, and monarchist Japan in Asia, China’s current all-weather friend is Pakistan, which is ruled by a junta in all but name. As in the case of the axis powers in the 1940s, the China-Pakistan ties are based on expansionist ambitions which seek to bring Arunachal Pradesh under Chinese rule and favour Pakistani control over Kashmir. These neo-colonial tendencies are also directed at Tibet and Taiwan in the case of China and Afghanistan where Pakistan is concerned.
Just as the Third Reich looked for lebensraum or living space in Europe, where the Germanic people would be the master race, China, too, wants a similar predominance for its own Han people over the Tibetans, the Uighurs, the Indians of Arunachal, and others. What is more, this xenophobia is fuelled by the need to counter the unease in the ruling elite caused, first, by the inherent uncertainties about a dictatorship’s grip on power because of civic unrest. And, secondly, by the simmering ethnic discontent in Tibet and Xinjiang, and Taiwan’s refusal to become a province of mainland China.
Since the fanning of nationalistic embers is a surefire way to maintain control over a restive population, China’s military adventurism against India in 1962 and Vietnam in 1979 were not unlike Germany’s annexation of Austria and invasion of Czechoslovakia. It will be speculative to wonder whether China will also emulate the Third Reich’s final fatal militarism, but there is little doubt that Beijing’s relentless efforts to rival and even surpass America as the numero uno do not augur well for world peace. It has even had the chutzpah to tell the US that its military budget is too big at a time of economic distress.
The Chinese threat is all the greater because a dictatorship is never at ease in the presence of a democracy like India. The former always experiences a sense of inferiority complex over the opprobrium it earns for not being an open society and for its inevitably poor human rights record. In China’s case, the feeling of disquiet may be all the greater because it could not have expected India to emerge as a major regional power. Beijing’s earlier presumption must have been that India will either fall apart because of fissiparous tendencies based on a myriad languages, cultures and ethnicity (“India is merely a geographical expression. It is no more a single country than the Equator”, said Churchill) or that India’s unruly democracy — a “functioning anarchy” in John Kenneth Galbraith’s words — will hinder its economic development.
But neither has happened. Instead, India is admired for its multicultural democracy and economic buoyancy while China is feared as an unstable giant. Since Beijing cannot expect to become a model for other Asian countries — as a Middle Kingdom should — for it cannot boast of a free society, free judiciary, free press and competitive politics, the only way it can proclaim its superiority is through military might and economic clout. However, the problem with economic growth is that it can also engender political aspirations and even trade union rights, which are anathema to an autocracy, and lead to social and political disquiet. In that case, a dictatorship’s response is either internal suppression or external aggression.
Interestingly, even when India was far from attaining its present status when it is an automatic choice for a permanent seat in an expanded UNSC, Jawaharlal Nehru had recognised the Chinese apprehensions about the challenge posed by India as the reason for the 1962 conflict. In his book, The Chinese Betrayal, former intelligence chief, B N Mullick, quoted Nehru as saying: “It was wrong to assume that the Chinese undertook this aggression only because they wanted some patches of territory … The real cause was something else. That something was the basic eternal conflict between India and China … China did not want any country near her which was not prepared to accept her leadership. So, India had to be humiliated. Though India would not interfere with what was happening within China, yet she came in China’s way by the mere fact of her separate political structure and pursuing a separate policy which was succeeding”.
The Sino-Indian civilisational affinity of a thousand years is a myth. Indian Buddhist missionaries might have gone to China while Chinese travellers like Fa Hien and Huan Tsang came to India and Mohammed bin Tughlak unsuccessfully tried to introduce the Chinese practice of using paper currency. But the Himalayan barrier remained an obstacle to any closer interaction. It is only in the modern age that the dragon and the elephant have come face to face in an atmosphere of unstated rivalry — the “eternal conflict” in Nehru’s words.
While India has left China alone, except for accommodating the Tibetans fleeing Chinese repression just as India accepted the Parsis 1,200 years ago who were escaping from the Muslim occupation of their country, China’s courtship of Pakistan shows that it wants to destabilise India by bleeding it ‘with a thousand cuts’. Yet, it made a foolish, though obvious, choice, which was surprising in the case of a country with a long history. For Pakistan’s dysfunctional nature was inherent in the flawed basis of its creation — the two-nation theory — which collapsed with the creation of Bangladesh. Just as Italy was of no help to the Third Reich’s grandiose dream to be the Middle Kingdom of Europe, Pakistan, too, is a liability rather than an asset to China. The scales are tilted, therefore, in India’s favour in the eternal conflict.
Amulya Ganguli is a
Delhi-based political
commentator. E-mail:
amulyaganguli@hotmail.com

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

Bharat’s Youth Will Overcome All Challenges

August 1, 2011

PUJANIYA MOHAN JI BHAGAWATH’S SPEECH AT MMRI, BI-DECENNIAL CELEBRATIONS
(24 July 2011, Satya Sai Nigamagam, HYDERABAD) – Translated into English by Sri Raka Sudhakar Rao

My speech today is about the youth. There are lots of youths here in this auditorium. Youth, by their very nature, are emotional. They are usually volatile and are naturally given to sloganeering. Indeed and in fact, that is how youth should actually be.

But, my subject is not about the josh (emotional), but about hosh (cool and collectedness). Youth should strive till the end and strain to the last of their nerves to achieve their aims. For this, not just youthful ebullience, but fair amount of patience too is needed. Jet black hair doesn’t merely make a youth. A lot of black-haired persons may actually be mentally old and a lot many white-haired could actually be youths in their mental make-up.
For instance, there was an RSS meeting in Assam recently and at the end of the meeting; a large number of our karyakarthas went on a trip to Parashuram Kund. Parashuram Kund is a place where the river Brahmaputra is nestled amid hills. Even at its slowest, the swirling river can sweep a person away off his feet. One has to climb 300 steps on a steep gradient to worship at the temple. The kund has freezing cool water. Some of the ‘black-haired oldies’ preferred to give the climbing up a miss and others refused to even sprinkle the water on their bodies due to excessive chill. But, 87-year-old Sudarshanji, who had recently emerged from surgeries, not just climbed up the 300 steps effortlessly, but also dared to venture into the freezing cold waters. In fact, he had a full-bath there. All this, after a grueling four-hour bus travel on a pot-holed road!

So, youthfulness is an aspect of mental attitude. We are fortunate to have a huge youth force in this country of ours, a force that is young both in age and mental character. While the rest of the world is ageing, India will remain a young nation for the coming 20 to 30 years. My speech is for those who are young in both body and mind.
This speech of mine is also directed towards those who feel that the challenges before the nation are his or her challenges and feel compelled to stand up to those challenges
CHALLENGES GALORE
Even after 64 years of independence, Bharat is besieged by a slew of problems and challenges. Challenges, indeed, will be the there and after all, what is life but for such challenges. Yet, no country in the world is facing as many challenges as Bharat. We have challenges so daunting that they make the weak quiver. We have a long list of problems and these problems have been dogging us for longer periods of time. The problems are indeed daunting. But, we must not allow ourselves to cower and cringe.
EXTERNAL CHALLENGES
Our borders are un-demarcated, not well-defended and porous. There are known enemies like Pakistan, whose anti-Indian intentions are clear and unambiguous. Pakistan keeps up threatening postures so long as India doesn’t bare its fangs. Once India becomes assertive, Pakistan will cower. So, Pakistan is not really a problem for us.
But, what we should be worried about are the Chinese intentions. China is using overt and covert means to destabilize and challenge Bharat. The Chinese are worried about Bharat emerging as a future global leader and are shaken by the prospects of Bharat upstaging them in the race for supremacy. Everyone knows about the Chinese intentions. Even the Government keeps talking about it. But, our borders roads are awful and next to non-existent. On the Chinese side, there are exquisitely laid out roads, missiles are put in place and the supply lines are well-laid out. But, on the Indian side, even today, the essentials are ferried across through a three-day long back-breaking mule trek through searing cold and chilly winds.
Then, there is the problem of illegal influx from Bangladesh, where our borders are porous and are not fenced. We, as a nation are utterly unprepared politically and diplomatically to tackle these challenges.
So much for the borders. Now to the situation within the country. Within the country, there is this spectre of terrorism exported by our unfriendly neighbor. Terror here is orchestrated from across the border and instances are also not lacking of the locals who reach out to Pakistan to become willing partners in destabilizing Bharat.
INTELLECTUAL AGGRESSION
Besides this aggression, there is an intellectual aggression through researches aimed at destabilizing and dividing Bharat. This research, mentored and manufactured abroad, is sought to be foisted on us. So, there is a sponsored terror as also a sponsored intellectual terror. This is a way to weaken Bharat and is an incipient war against us as physical war is both costly and diplomatically counter-productive.
Thus, we have all kinds of days like the mothers’ day and fathers‘ day as though the parents should be respected one day in an year and be left in the lurch for the rest of the days. If the same trend continues, we would soon be having a respiration day. There is no mention of Rakhi Bandhan, which fosters the spirit of friendship and camaraderie and Sankranti, which enjoins us to be polite. There is a concerted attempt to welcome everything Western and berate everything Bharatiya.
Those, who have a responsibility to set this right, are behaving in a strange manner. For instance, our journalists begin to support azadi when they go to Kashmir. Isn’t this strange? Kashmir is an inalienable part of India and there is a unanimous resolution of Parliament to this effect. Yet, there is such talk of azadi. The army is deployed where it should not be and is withdrawn from where it should be deployed. All this is vote politics for sure.
COMMUNAL VIOLENCE BILL
The politicians for their selfish ends are mortgaging national interests and are adopting divisive politics. The communal violence bill is a case in point. The NAC which has drafted the bill has no constitutional validity. Yet, the draft bill is already hosted on Government websites. This has made parliament, MPs and the constitution irrelevant. The committee members are of doubtful credentials and several of them have repeatedly been upbraided by the Supreme Court. The aim of the bill is to divide the country and set one community against other community in a state of perpetual war. The bill is made on the premise that the majority community alone is the aggressor, while the minority is always the one that has been wronged.
Bharat has been the only country in the world, where both refuge-seekers as well as aggressors have remained at peace and lived side by side with the indigenous people. Our culture is one of assimilation, not exclusion. An attempt is now being made to destroy this character.
LOOT OF BHARAT
The hard-earned money of our people is being robbed and is being stacked in safe havens abroad. When there is a hue and cry, some scapegoats are identified for punishment while the biggies go scot free. Sources say that the amounts illegally stacked abroad are just enough to pay all our national debts and ensure growth and development for the coming 40 years. This is truly shocking and mind-benumbing.
FISCAL POLICIES
Are our fiscal policies doing well to the country? Are they ushering in growth? The aspirations are growing and there certainly some benefits and some growth. But, this is jobless growth, which implies that there is bound to be unemployment. The prices are rising as a result of our economic growth, which is essentially inflation-based.
Only 20 per cent of the population is able to reap the benefits of these policies, while the remaining 80 per cent is sliding down into poverty. The rich are becoming richer and the poor are becoming poorer. This is leading to disaffection, violence and large-scale corruption.
I had recently visited Bihar, where I asked the locals about their current situation. They said they were now happy that they did not have to migrate in search of livelihood. What did migration gift them? Hitherto unheard of diseases like the TB and the AIDS! They had lost both their swasthya (health) and swatva (identity) due to migration.
Agricultural lands are being gifted away for industrial units. It is not just hitting the farm sector and food productivity, but a host of farm-based industrial units too are being irreparably hit. Who will benefit if the farmers are alienated of their lands without being provided with a sustainable alternative? Further, the industrial units are polluting the environs, leading to major catastrophe.
All these are due to our blind aping of the West. Our ancestors had said ‘Aano Bhadra Kratavo Yantu Viswataha” (Let noble thoughts come from all sides). But we should also have an idea as to how to use them.
EDUCATION
Education is becoming costlier and has turned into a lucrative business. While there is a spurt in the number of schools and colleges as also is there the rise in the aspiration levels for getting quality education, the access to education is being increasingly narrowed down. The current educational system is touting the toppers and their achievement, leaving behind the countless who could not even pursue their academic dreams.
For every topper, there are 1000s of those who dropped out at the primary level itself and 100s of those who could not make it beyond the matriculation and several who could not go beyond the graduation. Hardly five or six out of 10000 are making it to the final grade.
The ABVP has recently conducted an educational survey in the country. The survey threw up startling results. There was this case of a Chhattisgarh youth who had to leave his engineering course despite a meritorious record. The reason was that his father had already sold out everything to support his elder son’s education. Now, his younger brother too is aspiring for higher studies. His father, who could not afford the cost of education for both the sons, asked only one of them to continue studying. Consequently, the elder one had to opt out.
But, what is it that this educational system, churning out? There is no sense of pride about our nationhood. Nor is there an appreciation of our virtues. There are no opportunities for our students. For instance, a youth had a calculator prototype with him. But, could not mass produce and market them as there was a ban on importing one of the components. As a result, he had to give his prototype to a Singapore-based firm, which made them and earned huge profits.
Similarly, I visited a technology museum recently. There I found the bullock cart as an exhibit of technical innovation. I became curious. The organizers had told me that the bullock cart adopted 86 technological innovations. Unfortunately, we fail to see greatness in such indigenous things. The current system of education does not impart self-respect to the student. There is neither Swa (ownership) nor siksha (education) in our current system of learning.
CAPABLE, BUT BEREFT OF SENSE OF PURPOSE
Further, our society is bereft of a sense of unity and a sense of purpose. Former President Dr APJ Abdul Kalam has pointed out that the very Indians, who revel in breaking law and circumvent rules in the country, become paragons of good behavior and utmost discipline when they go abroad. Why this dichotomy? Though educated, most of us cause traffic jams due to our irresponsible behavior during rush hours. Why is this happening?
Then there are differences that are caste, community, region and language-based. We are divided on the basis of caste. I had recently met an Indian, who had settled in Brazil long time ago. He had shunned several things Indian. But, when I wanted to know about him, he said he belonged to such and such gotra. He had left many things behind, but caste consciousness continues to stay despite the fact that both scientifically as well as historically, the Bharatiyas have been one nation. Even the recent scientific studies have shown that the Bharatiyas have the same DNA since 40,000 years. Yet, we continue to believe in caste and class. Unfortunately, such differences persist even among the most discriminated castes.
Thus there are several internal, external as well as ethical challenges facing the country. We have the ability to overcome these. Our students are very capable. For instance, the students of the technology museum bagged second prize in technological innovations leaving behind Japan and Korea. This time they are aiming for the first prize. Such is the merit of our boys and girls.
We are also doing well in the realm of sports. The world has recognized Bharat as a great power. In a place like Chitrakoot, we have shown that with the cooperation from the locals, we could harvest three crops where we used to have one crop till the recent past. This has been happening in over 500 villages.
Similarly, we had a poor boy from an interior rural area in our Chhatravaas ( hostel). On seeing our highly qualified Pracharaks, he was inspired to work for the society and became one. He had spent close to 15 years as a full-timer. There is no dearth of such people in our country.
Ours is a young nation unlike the rest of the world, which is ageing fast. So long as we have people young in body and mind, we can achieve everything. The present era is the era of information. The era that would follow this is the era of knowledge and none but India is better placed to lead the world towards the knowledge society. There is no paucity of talent in our country. We keep hearing of management trainees successfully managing vegetable vending chains and making considerable profits. We are successful because we have the twin advantage of having a great knowledge base that we inherited from our great culture and also the benefits of modern education. We have traditional knowledge systems that handed over Vedas down the generations. We also have knowledge system in the realms of agriculture and technology. We have our own jugad technology that is both innovative as well as indigenous.

The pillar of our strength is the family. The family system offers us social security and is the driving force of our economy. For us, individual is never the basic socio-economic unit. We consider the family as the basic socio-economic unit. We save for our family. It is this saving for the family that has helped Bharat tide over the global economic crisis. Thus, we have several strengths, which need to be augmented.
Bharat is on the throes of a three-fold crisis. They are the crisis of Identity, the crisis of character and the crisis of credibility.
No other country in the world has such a confused and contrite view of one’s own self as Bharat. We have a long and continuous tradition of Dharma and identity. But, concerted efforts are on to prevent the future generations from knowing about this great dharma and identity. A society that has no knowledge of its past, will lack self-respect and a sense of purpose. The crisis of credibility is a natural corollary of the crisis of identity and character. There is utter loss of credibility. We do not know who we should believe in.
This three-fold crisis is the biggest challenge facing our country. Neither China nor Pak are our problems. Our problem is our loss of character and credibility and the crisis of identity.
I recall an anecdote. There was a rabbit that was mortally afraid of everything. Even when such an innocuous thing as a dry palm leaf comes down, the rabbit scampers back to its home in fear. Fed up with this, the rabbit asked the God to turn him into a big animal like the elephant. The God did accordingly. The elephant had one day tried to venture into waters of a lake. But, it was stalled by a crocodile. Unable to bear this, the animal wanted the God to make turn him into a tiger, which the God readily agreed and did accordingly. This tiger was attacked by a herd of oxen. The animal again approached the God. The God then said instead of asking for metamorphosis over and over again, he could very well have asked for instilling courage in him.
The problem lies within and we fail to notice this. We have problems that are seemingly insurmountable. But, before taking them on, we should address the inner struggle.
There is this story about Udayana. He is a great warrior and can single-handedly beat back 12000 enemies. At the end of his learning, his guru asked him: “how many people will you fight single-handedly.”
“12000 men,” Udayana replied
“Come again after six months “
Udayana returned a chastised man. The same question was posed again. Udayana said he could actually fight only the 27 people who form the inner core group.
“Come again after six months “
Udayana came back promptly after six months. Same query again. This time, Udayana said ”I can actually fight with only one person at a time.”
Six months later, Udayana came. He was a transformed man. He was asked the same question. This time Udayana said, “Why should I fight against anyone at all?”
The Guru then said. “Your learning is truly over now. You now know everyone is your friend.
KNOW YOUR STRENGTHS
The real strength lies in the concept of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam. India has always been democratic and non-violent. There is no place for violence in the society. We should be strong enough to protect ourselves, but should not become perpetrators of violence. Violence and undemocratic means can never become successful. This process should start from within.
One must overcome the crisis of identity and should go into the roots of Indian heritage and understand them. There should be pride about Bharateeya-ness and a sense of ownership about everything Bharatiya. One should rise above the narrow considerations of caste, language, sect, region, language and politics and feel a sense of pan-Indianness.
We should firmly believe that we shall be successful in this great mission where India will fulfill the needs of the world and will overcome all impediments. In fact, this is the only thing that is certain to happen. Bharatiyais the only hope for the battered world as it has Dharma. India is the only country where the body, mind and pleasures are leashed in a balanced manner and individual –society –nature continuum becomes one with God (Vyashti – Samashti –Srushti- Parameshti). All this is achieved through the practice of pursue Arth and Kaam that are firmly leashed in by Dharm and Moksh. The ultimate aim is attainment of complete and everlasting happiness for the whole world. This is the divinely ordained duty of India towards the world.
STAND UP FOR THE LOFTY AIM
We should stand up for this lofty aim with self-pride, belief and credibility. One should shun careerism. What is life it we cannot work for the society? Did not Savarkar say that all the great qualities are a mere unbearable wastage if they are not useful for the country? One should live by spending less and less resources while giving more and more for the country. We are here for the country and we are not here for name and fame. We should strive to do good, encourage the good and try to eliminate bad from the society. There will be crises, but we should overcome them and work actively for the betterment of the society.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a tendency to increasingly lose fighting spirit and dogged determination as we become more and more prosperous. We should shun this and work actively for the society. One should remember that our work should be both democratic as well as non-violent. Revolution is a myth. There is only an evolution. Even Mao Tse Tung’s revolution of 40 years was preceded by a 150-year-long struggle. We should be willing to work with all democratic and non-violent forces. More than my speech, it is the work that we do that will impact the society in a positive manner because actions speak louder.
There was a Bouddha Bhikku who had gone to China to spread the message of Lord Buddha. After preaching the message of Buddha for several years, he decided to bring out a book on the teachings of the master. He then set about collecting the money for publishing the book. Just as he was about to get the book published, the region suffered a massive earthquake and there was widespread destruction. The Bhikku spent all the savings to serve the needy. Later, he again pooled up money. But, again there was a calamity, this time in the form of a massive flood. The Bhikku had again spent the savings in serving the needy. Then he had again pooled up the money and eventually published the book. In the preface, he said this is the third edition of the book. The first two editions were dedicated to the service of the people and represented the teachings of the master in practice. Such should be our spirit when we set out for the work of rousing the national consciousness.
Let us remember Swami Vivekananda’s call to the nation asking it to stop worshiping all other Gods and pray only Bharat Matha. He had called upon the people to worship the Daridra Narayan (under-privileged, the impoverished and the dispossessed). Let us strive to protect Jan, Jal, Jameen, Janghal and Janvar of this country and service through the fullest strength of our Jeeva . The situation will surely change for the better. Let’s start working.

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

Supreme Court verdict on Salwa Judum – Can courts enforce ideology?

July 26, 2011

Supreme Court verdict on Salwa Judum – Can courts enforce ideology?
By Arun Jaitley

Source Organiser

THE Supreme Court of India has quashed the appointment of Special Police Officers (SPOs) by the State of Chhattisgarh as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The effect of the judgement of the Supreme Court is that the institution of SPOs working in the State of Chhattisgarh and under similar conditions in other parts of the country would cease to operate. SPOs have been appointed in areas where the environment has been threatened by insurgency to perform the functions of regular police by protecting themselves and their fellow citizens.

In Jammu & Kashmir it is these SPOs who constitute village protection committees which protect the village communities from insurgents. The same mechanism was effectively used in Punjab during the days of insurgency. SPO’s is a system where the members of the community are empowered to protect the Community. Policemen cannot be present in every house or every village, Areas where there is an apprehension of breach of peace and security due to insurgency requires the appointment of SPOs.

The Police Act 1861 provides for the appointment of SPOs. Various State police legislations have similar provisions for such SPOs to be appointed. The language of the legislations may be different. Those familiar with the ground realities of India would necessarily realise the utility of such SPOs. They are representatives of the community to protect the community. They supplement the normal police administration.

The judgement of the Supreme Court creates a crisis situation. The State would now have to recover arms back from the SPOs. This would itself be a daunting task. Every SPO realises that he would be on the Maoist hit list. He would have only two options left – either to join the Maoists or to continue to retain his arms to protect himself from the Maoists. Having been identified as an SPO without the backing of the State or arms to protect themselves, these SPOs would now be sitting ducks. The battle against the Maoists has been loaded against the Indian state. Maoists are now laying down terms for grant of amnesty to the SPOs. The vacuum created by their removal cannot be filled easily by the local police. The tranquility in the region is going to be disturbed.

A reading of the judgement of the Supreme Court prima facie indicates that ideology of the author of the judgement has prevailed over the constitutionalism. A legitimate question that arises is whether the courts enforce the constitution or do they enforce ideologies. The Maoists are no reformers. Their principal objective is to destroy India’s parliamentary democracy and establish a Communist dictatorship in India. The Maoists wish to dismantle every established democratic institution. If the Maoists were to take over India, the author of the judgement and others well meaning judges like him will not be manning the Supreme Court. The court would be controlled by ideology and ideological objects of the Maoists. The judgement itself makes an interesting reading. It is an ideological rationalisation of why the Maoists exist and fight for their causes. It is a denunciation of those who fight the Maoists. The judgement states –

“The State of Chhattisgarh claims that it has a constitutional sanction to perpetrate, indefinitely, a regime of gross violation of human rights in the same manner and by the same mode as done by the Maoists”.

It further states that – “Set against the backdrop of resource rich darkness of the African tropical forests, the brutal ivory trade sought to be expanded by the imperialist-Capitalist expansionary policy of European powers, Joseph Conard describes the grisly, and the macabre states of mind and justifications advanced by men, who secure and wield force without reason, sans humanity, and any sense of balance.”

The judgement rationalises Maoist ideology by stating—

“People do not take up arms, in an organised fashion, against the might of the State, or against human beings without rhyme or reason. Guided by an instinct for survival, and according to Thomas Hobbes, a fear of lawlessness that is echoed in our conscience, we seek an order. However, when that order comes with the price of dehumanisation, of manifest injustices of all forms perpetrated against the weak, the poor and the deprived, people revolt.”

The judgement approvingly quotes- the book titled ‘The Dark Side of Globalization’ where it is stated – “Thus the same set of issues, particularly those related to land, continue to fuel protest politics, violent agitator politics, as well as armed rebellion… Are governments and political parties in India able to grasp the socio-economic dynamics encouraging these politics or are they struck with a security-oriented approach that further fuels them?”

The judgement denounces a contrarian approach where it says–

“Rather than heeding such advice, which echoes the wisdom of our Constitution what we have witnessed in the instant proceedings have been repeated assertions of inevitability of muscular and violent statecraft. The root cause of the problem, and hence its solution, lies elsewhere. The culture of unrestrained selfishness and greed spawned by modern neo-liberal ideology, and the false promises of ever increasing spirals of consumption leading to economic growth that will lift everyone, under-gird this socially, politically and economically unsustainable set of circumstances in vast tracts of India in general and Chhattisgarh in particular.”

This judgement challenges India’s fragile national security. Undoubtedly, the judges have entered the political thicket. The court has acquired an ideology. It has chosen a preferred course of economic policy. It has also substituted the wisdom of the Executive for its own wisdom of how Maoism is to be tackled. The Judgement disregards the basic constitutional feature of separation of powers.

The law declared by the Supreme Court binding on all subordinate authorities now is – “Predatory forms of capitalism supported and promoted by the State in direct contravention of constitutional norms and values, often take deep roots around the extractive industries.”

After a detailed ideological discourse, the Court goes on to find faults with the deployment of SPOs even though the Centre and the State legislation specifically empower them. It is held to be violative of Article 14 because youngsters with little education background from amongst the tribals are being given these appointments. It is held to be violative of Article 21 the right to life and liberty because SPOs have low educational qualification and cannot be expected to understand the danger of fighting Maoism. Hiring such SPOs would endanger their lives and lives of others and therefore encouraging them is violative of Article 21. The payment of honorarium while performing the onerous task is yet another ground for quashing their appointments.

If the court found the honorarium inadequate it could always direct a more humane honorarium. If the court found that educational qualifications for becoming SPOs were inadequate, it could always direct the State to formulate a policy so that persons with reasonable qualification are appointed as SPOs. The court failed to realise that the life of ordinary citizens including SPOs is threatened by the Maoists. Their life and liberty is already in a jeopardy. With the facility available to a SPO they could protect themselves and others from the Maoist attack. Thanks to the Supreme Court, it is ‘advantage Maoists’.

A reading of the judgement unquestionably indicates that the reasons for quashing the institution of SPOs on grounds of unconstitutionality are weak. The rationale of the judgement is ideology not constitution. When a court acquires an ideology it decides to frame a policy. It dismantles the constitutional mandate of separation of powers. It enters the domain of the Legislature and the Executive. The rationale in this judgement has upset the constitutional balance. If the ideology of a judge decides constitutionality, the socio-political philosophy of the judge would become relevant. When the social philosophy of a judge is relevant you are back to the Emergency eve days. There is no greater threat to judicial independence than a judiciary committed to a socio-political ideology and not the Constitution. India’s political process and Parliament must seriously consider the consequences of this judgement.

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

Save Lord Padmanabha from neo-iconoclasts

July 9, 2011

Save Lord Padmanabha from neo-iconoclasts
Lord Padmanabha’s wealth belongs to Him only

Goddess Lakshmi resides where Lord Padmanabha is. For, the Lord is an aspect of Lord Vishnu himself, whose consort is Goddess Lakshmi, the Goddess of Wealth. No surprise that such huge amount of divine wealth has been unearthed in the locked up chambers of Lord Padmanabha’s temple in the present day Thiruvananthapuram, earlier known as the capital city of the Royalty of Travancore.

After finding such enormous wealth the right question to be asked first is as to how come a relatively smaller temple of Lord Padmanabha had so much wealth while much more popular shrines like the Balaji at Tirupati in Andhra Pradesh or for that matter the Guruvayurappan temple in Kerala itself seem to have much less? No one can dispute the fact that these two temples have been much more popular and have attracted many times more devotees for centuries. Nobody can also dispute the fact that they must have attracted lot more of public endowment in all these centuries. What happened to all that wealth of these temples?

Therein lies the answer to many issues being raised by the overzealous over the recently unearthed wealth of Lord Padmanabha. It is safe only and only in the hands of the Lord, and none – not even the Government-run trusts – deserve to handle it. By now it has become common knowledge that the wealth is the accumulated offerings by the successive kings of the royalty of Travancore and many other kings, rulers – Indian as well as foreign, traders and commoners.

One should acknowledge the enormous commitment of the royalty to Lord Padmanabha in safeguarding this wealth. I have had personal acquaintance with the royals of Travancore. It is known to many in Kerala that the royal family’s financial fortunes have dipped considerably in the last few years to an extent that they were finding it difficult to manage the temple affairs too. It has resulted in some problems between the temple priests and other staff and the royals who manage the temple. I am told that there were several such occasions earlier too when the royalty had faced acute financial strains. Yet they never dared to touch the temple wealth, an iota of which would have met many of their needs.

It is nobody’s case that we should condone the omissions and commissions of the royals, if any, in managing the temple affairs. However it must also be borne in mind that successive kings of Travancore deserve rich tributes for protecting this vast wealth with utmost devotion and sincerity. The British had looted several temples in the country and transferred all the booty to the Royal Palace in London. In fact the Queen must in great sorrow after the news of this unearthed wealth and cursing for sure the inefficient officers of the British Raj for failing to do that when they had the chance.

However the rapacious political leadership that succeeded the British has meticulously completed their unfinished task in the last 6 decades. Temples like Tirupati and Guruvayur and many more are a standing example of this domestic loot. The story of the loot of Hindu temples in India by our political masters post-Independence pales Ghori and Ghaznvi into obscurity.

On January 17, 1750 the then ruler of Travencore Anizham Thirunal Marthanda Varma stood before the Lord Padmanabha and offered his entire kingdom at His altar. After that the successive rulers had rechristened themselves as Padmanabha Daasa – vassals of Lord Padmanabha. Like loyal soldiers they not only protected the kingdom and the temple but also the enormous wealth it had earned over centuries.

Loot of Hindu temples by the political masters in post-Independence India has acquired humongous proportions. Lands and other property of many a temple have been nibbled away by the goons of local and sometimes provincial political termites. Jewellery, cash and artifacts including antique sculptures have been stolen from the museums directly or sometimes through sleight of hand by taking them to overseas destinations in the name of India exhibitions and replacing the valuables with duplicates and sending them back while the originals found their way into international markets for huge sums. There are serious allegations that this kind of loot has made several politicians billionaires while the temples have turned into paupers.

The ongoing litigation that has led to the opening of the locked chambers at the Padmanabha temple appears to be motivated by some such sinister designs only. There is no dearth of treacherous Hindus in our country. They become easy tools in the hands of greedy politicians – a breed for which too there is no dearth in India. The entire game plan appears to be to loot the wealth of Lord Padmanabha by hook or crook.

In a way this litigation has brought back into focus the critical issue of the control of Hindu temples by the political establishment. Temples and their entire wealth – whether it is lands or offerings or antiques – should belong to the Hindu society only. There is a need to amend or discard the Hindu Endowment Act so that the religious places of Hindus become the property of the society rather than the government. Travancore proved that devout Hindus can safeguard temples better than unscrupulous politicians.

Chief Minister of Kerala was sensible in declaring that his government has no interest in taking over the wealth or management of the Padmanabha temple. Suggestions by sections of the media and intelligentsia like creating a museum or trust are also too premature. What is needed is for the entire Hindu society including the saints and spiritual leaders to vociferously oppose any move to take over the temple or its wealth. Let it be protected by the management as before and let there be a larger discussion over the management of Hindu temples by Hindu society itself.

http://ram-madhav.blogspot.com/2011/07/save-lord-padmanabha-from-neo.html?showComment=1310224361797#c765094814770137789

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

Dalits stand up against ‘anti-Brahmin’ book

June 14, 2011

Dalits stand up against ‘anti-Brahmin’ book

http://www.punemirror.in/article/2/201106072011060700531413150288ba9/Dalits-stand-up-against-%E2%80%98antiBrahmin%E2%80%99-book.html

Five prominent Dalits have filed a police complaint against
Puroshottam Khedekar’s book, saying it is ‘anti-constitutional and
derogatory to Brahmins’

Devidas Deshpande

June 07, 2011

While Brahmins are still contemplating legal action against
Puroshottam Khedekar’s controversial book, prominent Dalits across the
city who had filed a complaint with the police on May 18, are now
demanding that it should be turned into a first information report
(FIR). However, the police are sitting pretty and have done nothing
about the complaint.

The cover of Khedekar’s controversial book
The controversy surrounding Khedekar’s book Shivrayanchya Badnamichi
Kendre has been going on for a while. Last week, a meeting was
organised by the Akhil Bhartiya Brahmin Mahasangh in the city to
condemn the book.

The speakers included veteran Sanskrit scholar Vasant Gadgil. Govind
Kulkarni, president of the organisation, told Pune Mirror, “This time,
we are asking the governor to act in this regard.

There is no use approaching the government because they are
hand-in-glove with Maratha organisations. At the time of Dadoji
Konddev’s statue removal, Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan had
promised to meet us, but till date, he has done nothing.

Kulkarni added that the community members are also thinking about
approaching the High Court to ban the book, but it depends on the
stand taken by the Governor. A delegation of the organisation will
meet the Governor, present him with a set of Khedekar’s books and ask
him to take action.

“Khedekar has written some 30 books with content against our
community. We ignored them, thinking that this is a lunatic tendency.
However, it is now turning into a Goebbels’ pattern — to turn lies
into truth,” he added.

While Brahmins are yet to take that final decision of filing a
complaint, five Dalits, including academicians and activists,
registered a complaint with then Joint Police Commissioner Ashok
Dhiware against Khedekar, who is president of Maratha Seva Sangh and
his book.

Professor Hari Narke, head of the Mahatma Jotiba Phule chair at the
University of Pune and Sanjay Sonawani, author of 62 books in Marathi,
are among those who signed the application. They are joined by Dalit
activists Madhukar Ramteke, Sham Satpute and Bhupal Patwardhan.

According to them, Khedekar has made certain obscene and malicious
observations in his new book and even exhorted his followers to carry
out systematic riots in the state. The complaint says, ‘Khedekar has
in his book appealed to his organisation members to carry out
systematic riots against Brahmins. This is anti-constitutional.

In the same book,he has written about Brahmin women in the most
derogatory language. All this deserves stringent legal action.’
Surekha Lokhande, leader of the Republican Party of India, even met
Home Minister R R Patil to take action against the book.

The complaint has been gathering dust in the police files. It is yet
to be turned into an FIR which will prompt the police to take action
against the book. A case under section 66 (A) of Information
Technology Act, 2000 was registered by the police immediately.
Meanwhile, Dhiware has been transferred as the Director, Criminal
Investigation Department.

Speaking to Pune Mirror, Sonawani said, “It is strange that the police
is not taking any action. I don’t know what kind of pressure has
forced them to turn a blind eye to the issue.” Narke said, “I raised
this issue on April 1 this year in the presence of Khedekar at a
function in Balgandharv Rangmandir. It has been over three months
since then but the police has done nothing. This inaction surprises
me.”

Meanwhile, the same police department acted swiftly in registering a
case against a Facebook user for allegedly defaming deputy CM Ajit
Pawar on the social networking website.

According to a complaint filed by a Nationalist Congress Party worker,
Arvind Gore, the user, Amit Jadhav, has posted a blackened picture of
Pawar on the social networking site, asking fellow users to post
abuses about him. A lot of obscene comments are being posted.

According to Sangita Alphonso Shinde, inspector, Pune Police Cyber
Cell, the police have asked for user information from Facebook to
trace the culprit.

► Khedekar has, in his book, appealed to his organisation to carry
out systematic riots against Brahmins. This is anti-constitutional. He
has also written about Brahmin women in most derogatory language, the
complaint states.

► It is strange that the police is not taking any action. I don’t
know what kind of pressure has forced them to turn a blind eye to the
issue.

- Sanjay Sonawani, dalit author

Laine-baiter Maratha author pens book to bash Brahmins

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_laine-baiter-maratha-author-pens-book-to-bash-brahmins_1546409

Published: Sunday, May 22, 2011, 23:28 IST
By Sudhir Suryawanshi | Place: Mumbai | Agency: DNA

Five years ago, Maratha Seva Sangh president Purushottam Khedekar
stirred up quite a storm over US research scholar James Laine’s book
on Maratha warrior Shivaji and made the state government ban it.
However, as he planned to expose what he calls the seeds of Shivaji’s
defamation, he seems to have left Laine far behind as he has made some
sweeping and obnoxious comments about Brahmins and their women.

In his book Shivrayanchya Badnamichi Kendre, published last month,
Khedekar has even said that non-Brahmins must take revenge on Brahmins
by fanning caste-based riots. His comments on Brahmin men and women
and their sexual habits have caused a stir in the hornet’s nest and
even liberals have been unable to digest them.

MD Ramteke, an Ambedkarite, has written a blog condemning Khedekar’s
malicious writing. “We should keep a distance from Khedekar and his
movement against Brahmins. Dr Babasaheb never stooped to this level.
If we continue to associate with him, it will malign our image. The
government should ban the book and the organisation,” he stated in his
blog.

In his comment, Dr Hari Narake, a Phule-Ambedkar historian, said:
“This is abusive language, not used by intellectuals. This will only
help the opponents of our cause.”

Khedekar, however, does not regret his remarks and language. “What I
have written is the truth. I need not produce any proof or evidence to
anyone. If people have any doubts, they should first raise objections
to traditional books like the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, in which
false information has been inserted. Why don’t you ask for proofs from
them? Even the Sanatan Prabhat indulges in false writing,” he said.

The state government, led mostly by Maratha politicians, has so far
been silent on Khedekar. It was the organisation led by Khedekar’s son
that was behind the vandalising of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute in Pune six years ago. They have also been instrumental in
removing the statue of Dadoji Konddeofrom Lal Mahal in Pune.

3 Comments | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

The Prevention of Communal Targeted Violence Bill 2011

June 9, 2011

The Prevention of Communal Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparation) Bill 2011 drafted by the “National Advisory Council” Chaired by Sonia Gandhi is based on the presumption that communal trouble is created only by the majority community and never by the minority community. Many of the moderate Muslim and Christian leaders accept that the character of Bharat is secular only because of the majority Hindus. Yet, the government seems to be hell bent on targeting the Hindus on some pretext or the others. This would be a very powerful tool in the hands of the rabidly anti-Hindu Congress. Some more important articles regarding the issue are documented below.

We must protest this. Kindly send your responses to wgcvb@nac.nic.in before 10th June 2011.

An online petition is also hosted at

http://www.adhivaktaparishad.org/?p=221

It is time to act NOW.

Communal & Sectarian Violence Bill, 2010

Drafting Committee

Gopal Subramanium
Maja Daruwala
Najmi Waziri
P.I.Jose
Prasad Sirivella
Teesta Setalvad
Usha Ramanathan (upto 20 Feb 2011)
Vrinda Grover (upto 20 Feb 2011)
Conveners of Drafting Committee

Farah Naqvi, Convener, NAC Working Group
Harsh Mander, Member, NAC Working Grou
Advisory Group Members

Abusaleh Shariff
Asgar Ali Engineer
Gagan Sethi
H.S Phoolka
John Dayal
Justice Hosbet Suresh
Kamal Faruqui
Manzoor Alam
Maulana Niaz Farooqui
Ram Puniyani
Rooprekha Verma
Samar Singh
Saumya Uma
Shabnam Hashmi
Sister Mary Scaria
Sukhdeo Thorat
Syed Shahabuddin
Uma Chakravarty
Upendra Baxi
Aruna Roy, NAC Working Group Member
Professor Jadhav, NAC Working Group Member
Anu Aga, NAC Working Group Member
Joint Conveners of Advisory Group

Farah Naqvi, Convener, NAC Working Group
Harsh Mander, Member, NAC Working Group
Important to note that the advisors are all from the NAC Working Group and most of the members of the Drafting committee are rabid anti-Hindus.

Who are the Members of NAC ?

NAC, National Advisory Council would be the extra-constitutional authority working like a super-cabinet governing the bill a. Some of the dubious profiles of the members are exposed below. I invite the readers to send any dubious information that you may have regarding the others as well.

Chair person – Smt.Sonia Gandhi – Nothing left to be said about her after all the exposes about her by Sri Gurumurthy and Sri Subramaniam Swamy. That she lived in the Prime Minister’s residence for 17 years without bothering to take a citizenship is testimony of the poor security system in the country. The actual power centre in the Congress..her role behind the attacks on the Sadhus, maths, plans to usurp temple lands, scams has to be investigated. More About Sonia

Ms.Aruna Roy -Magsaysay awardee and ex-IAS officer Aruna Roy, and self-proclaimed defender of ‘secular’ rights for Muslims in Gujarat. She along with Jean Dreze and Harsh Mander are one group. Roy is signatory to the ‘Decisions and Action Plan’ of the ‘People’s Conference against Globalisation, 21st-23rd March 2001, New Delhi’. Its full report appeared as a ‘special feature’ in the April 2001 issue of ‘Liberation, the central organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist)’. The CPI (M-L) is an avowed advocate of selective violence and has an established record of anti-nationalism and anti- Hinduism. Associated in the work of Parivartan are Harsh Mander, Aruna Roy and Shekhar Singh. The inference is obvious.

Ms.Farah Naqvi –Her road to fame was her role in the Bilkis Bano gang-rape case, which became the first Gujarat riot case to be reinvestigated by the CBI and transferred to Mumbai.

Shri Harsh Mander – He was awarded the Rajiv Gandhi National Sadbhavana Award for peace work, and the M.A. Thomas National Human Rights Award 2002. ( This person is a liar and an active participant in the Congress attempt to target Narendra Modi. He lied that he resigned from IAS due to the 2002 Gujarat riots whereas the fact is that he had applied for resignation much before the riots took place.

Dr.Jean Dreze – Jean Drèze, born in Belgium in 1959, has lived in India since 1979 and became an Indian citizen in 2002….( there is more to him than meets the eye). He along with Aruna Roy and Harsh Mander form a mutal admiration society.

Shri Naresh Saxena – Famously known to be the person who introduced Aruna Roy and later Harsh Mander to Sonia Gandhi and instrumental in gettting them into the NAC.

The above team is more than enough to exert influence over other members of the NAC. Some of the other members maybe well meaning, but on an issue like the Prevention of Communal Violence Bill, the above 6 persons intentions to demean Hindu society are well known. Their influence on such a bill is bound to be extremely high.
Prof. MS Swaminathan

Dr.Ram Dayal Munda

Prof Narendra Jadhav

Prof. Pramod Tandon

Shri Madhav Gadgil

Dr.A.K.Shiv Kumar

Shri Deep Joshi

Ms.Anu Aga

Ms.Mirai Chatterjee- SEWA

1. A fraudulent draft Communal Violence Bill

By Shivaji Sarkar

IT is a critically flawed move to usurp the powers of the state governments, devastate the federal structure of the country and create schism among different communities. The aim apparently is to create a unitary structure where the Central Government could function like a bully and interfere in the jurisdiction of the states, barred by the Constitution.

The draft bill called Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill is flawed also for the reason, its basic premise is against the secular spirit of the Constitution stated in the preamble.

No wonder. The bill is a creation of an extra-constitutional body – National Advisory Council (NAC) that is expected to function like a super-cabinet, surpassing the elected wisdom of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers. Technically NAC is created by the Prime Minister as a body to advise the government. The members are handpicked technically by the Prime Minister but in reality by the NAC chairperson.

Thus the NAC is not a representative body. It also leads to the question whether an elected government or its Prime Minister should have powers to create structures that are not enshrined in the Constitution.

The Prime Minister should have powers to function independently. But should he himself subjugate to the authority of his own creation? Who authorises him to do it? Why should he create a structure that is virtually neither responsible to him nor answerable to Parliament?

It is no wonder the NAC functions with populist views or indulges in vote bank politics to further the political objectives of some political party.

The NAC drafted the Food Security Bill not with the objective of providing food to the needy. Its primary objective was to create a political climate that would help the ruling party garner votes of the deprived classes. It has created enough rift between the officials of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), who found the “advice” beyond the capacity of the government to implement it. Any responsible body would have first evaluated the government’s physical and financial strength before jumping in to draft a bill.

The food security bill thus remains in the domain of discussion and may possibly not be given the final shape. Keeping it alive and finally blaming the bureaucrats would pay more dividends at the time of next elections than enacting a law that people are bound to forget even a year later. The NAC would serve the purpose of functioning like a permanent campaigning mechanism for the ruling party.

The proposed bill to prevent communal violence is yet another case of over-reach. It intends to arm the Centre with runaway powers to intervene in state affairs, creation of overlapping authorities and selective definition of victims. The bill, runs the risk of being struck down by the courts for falling afoul of federal principles set out in the Constitution’s seventh schedule that distributes legislative powers between the Centre and the states.

The bill defines that the victim in a communal violence would invariably be from a “group”. The definition of sufferers of communal violence as a “group” comprising only religious, linguistic or religious minorities or scheduled castes and tribes appears highly discriminatory as it can mean that even if a large number of majority community members bear the brunt of communal violence, they will not be victims of “targeted violence”.

If the bill is to meet the objectives of speedy justice and prevention of communal crimes, its framers need to recognise India’s political system is not unitary and states and political parties are bound to challenge the definition of a “group” and other provisions. Even if the bill gets through Parliament, it cannot escape constitutional and judicial scrutiny.

The Constitution does not allow interference on the issue of law and order of any state. Its role is limited to tender advice under Article 356. If the draft bill is enacted as law, it would provide sweeping powers to the Centre to intervene in the affairs of any state. This would be the technical provision but in reality states not ruled by the party at the Centre are to be targeted.

Is the bill targeting states like Gujarat? Is it finding in the rise of Narendra Modi, an efficient administrator with clean credentials, a threat to the pseudo-secularists? It is apparently so. Since Modi is emerging as a youth icon and no electoral politics can demolish him, a “secularist” bill with devastating intentions are sought to be drafted. The bill possibly for that reason does not include the majority community in the definition of a “group”.

Once the bill becomes law not only Modi but any leader of the majority community could be accused of “promoting ill will” against a minority community and he could be put behind bars. The provisions of the bill would provide enough ammunition to tar the image of a forceful leaders belonging to the majority community from any political party.

In fact, the Congress MP from Delhi, Sandeep Dikshit, son of Chief Minister Shiela Dikshit, could be arrested for his recent remarks that the St Stephen’s College promotes communal divide.

The draft bill is structured on the premise that the majority community could never be the victim of communal violence. It believes they would only be the perpetrators.

Those who have drafted the bill have forgotten the recurrence of communal violence by the minority community in 1960s in UP and Bihar. The states like Gujarat suffered recurrent minority violence till late 1980s. The Godhra burning of Ramsewaks in 2002 is too recent to be forgotten.

The bill has also no provision if two minority communities indulge in violence against each other. In fact, as per the provision of the bill even then any person from the majority community could be accused of inciting violence. He could have no defence under the draft bill. The accused would suo moto be considered “guilty” till he can prove his innocence. The bill virtually overturns the simple judicial norm of considering the accused not guilty till he is convicted.

So if there is a Shia-Sunni riot in Lucknow, the bill would not be applicable. It would also not be applicable if a Muslim group initiates violence against Christians, as witnessed recently in Kerala. No wonder it would give freedom to perpetrate crimes against Pandits and evict them from Kashmir for all times to come.

Nothing would also happen to the illegal Bangaladeshi infiltrators, who have captured almost a 20-km tract in West Bengal along the Bangladesh border and forcibly evicting the people of the majority community either through violent means or under threat of violence.

The draft bill also redefines crimes to suit its anti-majority mindset. According to the draft, the members of minority communities could not be accused for violence against the majority community.

Indeed it is “secular” exercise that could be done only in free (so far) country like India. The draft smacks of drawing inspiration from a theological state like Pakistan, where nobody except those following the state religion has the basic civic or human rights. Has the Wahabis or elements like that have penetrated the policy-formulation bodies of the Indian state?

The country needs to draw lesson from the recent developments in Nepal. Similar policy formulators many supported by the CPI-M and other Left parties from India changed the secular Hindu Constitution of Nepal and replaced the last Hindu monarchy. They even did not ponder the security threat it has created for India and the haven created for Pakistan-sponsored terrorists in the neighbourhood.

The Prime Minister is said to have wide international exposure. He is also stated to be a person of understanding. But it is difficult to understand why he has accepted the bill even to be discussed. The bill should have been dumped at the very first glance.

Even a discussion on the bill vitiates the atmosphere of bonhomie and tolerance that this country is known for. Co-existence of different communities and linguistic groups has been an age-old phenomenon.

The drafting a bill with such myopic and blatantly sectarian views would only create a divide that is not there in this country.

The bill needs to be immediately withdrawn and dumped. If the government tries to keep it in circulation it would only affect the social harmony.

But despite that if it is kept alive, it should be viewed as a move to communalise the political scenario in the country with a view to garnering votes of only one powerful minority community. The bill is not in the interest of any other minority groups either.

The draft Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill should be seen as a precursor to create another partition of the country and needs to be opposed by all right thinking people from all communities across the country.
Source : Organiser

2.
Kill the anti-Hindu Bill – NAC’S draft is rabidly communal
By Shyam Khosla

THE obnoxious Prevention of Communal Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparation) Bill 2011 drafted by the extra-constitutional “National Advisory Council” Chaired by Sonia Gandhi is based on the horrendous presumption that communal trouble is created only by the majority community and never by the minority community. Can a drafting committee be so biased and contemptuous of rationality and facts of life? How can a Bill to deal with a hugely sensitive issue like communal riots discriminate on religious and caste considerations? Senior BJP leader Arun Jaitley, famous for his legal and political acumen, has torn the Bill to shreds by his incisive analysis of the Bill’s several vicious provisions and questioned the very premise of the draft that implies that only majority community is responsible for all communal riots. The proposed law, he points out, will incentivise some communities to commit heinous offences encouraged by the fact that they would never be charged under the law and will encourage terrorist groups to incite communal riots knowing fully well that they too wouldn’t be covered under this pernicious piece of legislation. Church supported terrorist outfits operating in north-eastern states will be amongst the greatest beneficiaries as they too are outside the purview of the proposed law. They can indulge in crimes against the majority community with impunity. The Bill, if it is enacted as law by the Parliament, would keep jehadies who conspired and indulged in the Godhra carnage outside its purview. The NAC Bill would neither cover Shia-Sunni riots nor the heinous crime of chopping off the hand of a Christian professor by a Muslim radical group in Kerala as both the victim and the offender belong to the minority communities.

Hate propaganda against minorities is punishable under this stringent law. The law is likely to be abused in cases in which one were to make legitimate criticism of certain practices like discrimination against Muslim women under the Muslim Personal Law. However members and groups belonging to minority communities would not be liable to be booked under the law for spreading hatred against Hindus and their religious faiths and icons. Foreign funded Christian missionaries who indulge in fraudulent conversion of scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other deprived sections of the Hindu society though a systematic hate campaign against Hindu beliefs and practices can gleefully continue to do so as they too would not be covered by the law on communal violence. Minority community groups would be free to spread hatred against Hindus by calling them kafirs and heathens without any fear of being hauled up under the law.

Yet another fundamental infirmity form which the draft suffers is that it equates communal conflicts with terrorism. Communal flare ups may be triggered by minor incidents and rumours spread by mischief mongers. Instead of curbing communal divisions and identity politics, the Bill is bound to widen the gulf between communities and would lead to communal tensions. That is perhaps the hidden agenda of the drafters of the Bill most of whom are guilty of promoting vote bank politics. Congress party’s untenable defence of the draft is that there is no point in discussing each and every provision at this stage and that these objections could be taken up when the Bill goes to the Parliamentary Standing Committees. Why publicise such an atrocious piece of legislation full of infirmities, if the purpose is not to illicit public opinion on its concepts and premises. Or is it meant to send a strong message to communal-minded Muslims and Christians that UPA II is out to appease them even at the cost of hurting national interests? The other argument that is equally bogus is that the draft is based on the experience that most riots are initiated by the majority community and it is the minorities that are always at the receiving end.

One of the provisions in the draft is that it would be enforced by a seven-member national authority of which at least four members, including the chairman and the vice chairman, must be from a minority community, It has raised the hackles of all right thinking citizens who believe in the principle that law must have a level-playing field. It is a dangerous and mischievous move. The authors are so biased and contemptuous of Hindus that they presume that an enforcement authority with a Hindu majority would not ensure fair play. The Bill is so irrational and biased that even the pro-Congress English language daily Hindustan Times has editorially condemned the NAC draft saying, “Its biggest flaw is that it makes provisions for punishment only for violence against minorities. Surely, if communal violence were visited on members of the majority community, the law can’t ignore this fact. This could mean that subversive elements in the minority community could indulge in communal violence without any fear of the law”. It goes on to point out that the most disturbing aspect of this Bill is the underlying presumption that it is only the majority community which is responsible for communal violence. No law should have different yardsticks for wrong doers on the basis of religion, ethnicity, language or gender. Further it negates the federal structure of the Union as it infringes on the powers of the State governments that are bound to resist Centre’s attempt to interfere in matters pertaining to law and order that is the domain of the states.

Critics have rightly raised serious objections to the very source of the draft – the National Advisory Council comprising of NGO types unelected and unelectable so-called representatives of the civil society. All of them have been hand-picked by Sonia Gandhi who enjoys enormous power without accountability. NAC is an extra constitutional authority that has been mandated to provide policy and legislative inputs to the Government. It is accountable to none but Sonia Gandhi. Its functioning has never been subjected to any review by Parliament. Its policy announcements and legislative initiatives exert coercive pressure on the Government. The very concept on which NAC was constituted is undemocratic and totally unacceptable in a parliamentary democracy.

3. An Endeavour to Imbalance Inter-Community Relationship

- Arun Jaitley in Rediff.com

A draft of a proposed legislation titled ‘Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011′ has been put in the public domain. The draft bill ostensibly appears to be a part of an endeavour to prevent and punish communal violence in the country.

Though that may be the ostensible object of the proposed law its real object is to the contrary. It is a bill which if it is ever enacted as a law will intrude into the domain of the state, damage a federal polity of India and create an imbalance in the inter-community relationship of India.

What does the bill in effect state

The most vital definition of the bill is of the expression ‘group’. A ‘group’ means a religious or linguistic minority and in a given state may include the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The bill creates a whole set of new offences in Chapter II. Clause 6 clarifies that the offences under this bill are in addition to the offences under the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Can a person be punished twice for the same offence?

Clause 7 prescribes that a person is said to commit sexual assault if he or she commits any of the sexual act against a person belonging to a ‘group’ by virtue of that person’s membership of a group. Clause 8 prescribes that ‘hate propaganda’ is an offence when a person by words oral or written or a visible representation causes hate against a ‘group’ or a person belonging to a ‘group’.

Clause 9 creates an offence for communal and targeted violence. Any person who singly or jointly or acting under the influence of an association engages in unlawful activity directed against a ‘group’ is guilty of organised communal and targeted violence.

Clause 10 provides for punishment of a person who expends or supplies money in the furtherance or support of an offence against a ‘group’. The offence of torture is made out under clause 12 where a public servant inflicts pain or a suffering, mental or physical, on a person belonging to a ‘group’.

Clause 13 punishes a public servant for dereliction of duty in relation to offences mentioned in this bill. Clause 14 punishes public servants who control the armed forces or security forces and fails to exercise control over people in his command in order to discharge their duty effectively.

Clause 15 expands the principle of vicarious liability. An offence is deemed to be committed by a senior person or office bearer of an association and he fails to exercise control over subordinates under his control or supervision. He is vicariously liable for an offence which is committed by some other person. Clause 16 renders orders of superiors as no defence for an alleged offence committed under this section.

Any communal trouble during which offences are committed is a law and order problem. Dealing with the law and order is squarely within the domain of the state governments. In the division of powers between the Centre and the states, the central government has no direct authority to deal with the law and order issues; nor is it directly empowered to deal with them nor it can legislate on the subject. The central government’s jurisdiction restricts itself to issue advisories, directions and eventually forming an opinion under Article 356 that the governance of the state can be carried on in accordance with the Constitution or not.

If the proposed bill becomes a law, then effectively it is the central government which would have usurped the jurisdiction of the states and legislated on a subject squarely within the domain of the states.

India has been gradually moving towards a more amicable inter-community relationship. Even when minor communal or caste disturbances occur, there is a national mood of revulsion against them. The governments, media, the courts among other institutions rise to perform their duty. The perpetrators of communal trouble should certainly be punished.

This draft bill however proceeds on a presumption that communal trouble is created only by members of the majority community and never by a member of the minority community. Thus, offences committed by members of the majority community against members of the minority community are punishable. Identical offences committed by minority groups against the majority are not deemed to be offences at all.

Thus a sexual assault is punishable under this bill and only if committed against a person belonging to a minority ‘group’. A member of a majority community in a state does not fall within the purview of a ‘group’. A ‘hate propaganda’ is an offence against minority community and not otherwise. Organised and targeted violence, hate propaganda, financial help to such persons who commit an offence, torture or dereliction of duty by public servants are all offences only if committed against a member of the minority community and not otherwise.

No member of the majority community can ever be a victim. This draft law thus proceeds on an assumption which re-defines the offences in a highly discriminatory manner. No member of the minority community are to be punished under this act for having committed the offence against the majority community.

It is only a member of the majority community who is prone to commit such offences and therefore the legislative intent of this law is that since only majority community members commit these offences, culpability and punishment should only be confined to them.

If implemented in a manner as provided by this bill, it opens up a huge scope for abuse. It can incentivise members of some communities to commit such offences encouraged by the fact that they would never be charged under the act.

Terrorist groups may no longer indulge in terrorist violence. They will be incentivised to create communal riots due to a statutory assumption that members of a jihadi group will not be punished under this law. The law makes only members of the majority community culpable. Why should the law discriminate on the basis of a religion or caste?

An offence is an offence irrespective of origin of the offender. Here is a proposed law being legislated in the 21st century where caste and religion of an offender wipe out the culpability under this law.

Who will ensure implementation of this act

The bill provides for a seven-member national authority for communal harmony, justice and reparations. Of these seven members at least four of them including the chairman and vice-chairman shall only belong to a ‘group’ (the minority community). A similar body is intended to be created in the states. Membership of this body thus shall be on religious and caste grounds. The offenders under this law are only the members of the majority community.

The enforcement of the act will be done by a body where statutorily the members of the majority community will be in a minority. The governments will have to make available police and other investigative agencies to this authority. This authority shall have a power to conduct investigations and enter buildings, conduct raids and searches to make inquiries into complaints and to initiate steps, record proceedings for prosecution and make its recommendations to the governments.

It shall have powers to deal with the armed forces. It has a power to send advisories to the central and state governments. Members of this authority shall be appointed in the case of central government by a collegium which shall comprise of prime minister, the home minister, and the leader of the opposition in the house of people and a leader of each recognised political party. A similar provision is created in relation to the states. Thus, it is the opposition at the Centre and the states which will have a majority say in the composition of the authority.

What are the procedures to be followed

The procedures to be followed for investigations under this act are extraordinary. No statement shall be recorded under section 161 of the CrPC. Victim statements shall be only under section 164 (before courts). The government will have a power to intercept and block messages and telecommunications under this law. Under clause 74 of the bill if an offence of hate propaganda is alleged against a person, a presumption of guilt shall exist unless the offender proves to the contrary. An allegation thus is equivalent to proof. Public servants under this bill under clause 67 are liable to be proceeded against without any sanction from the state.

The special public prosecutor to conduct proceedings under this act shall not act in aid of truth but ‘in the interest of the victim’. The name and identity of the victim complainant will not be disclosed. Progress of the case will be reported by the police to the victim complainant. The occurrence of organised communal and targeted violence under this act shall amount to an internal disturbance in a state within the meaning of Article 355 entitling the central government to impose President’s Rule.

The drafting of this bill appears to be a handiwork of those social entrepreneurs who have learnt from the Gujarat experience of how to fix senior leaders even when they are not liable for an offence.

Offences which are defined under the bill have been deliberately left vague. Communal and targeted violence means violence which destroys the ‘secular fabric of the nation’. There can be legitimate political differences as to what constitutes secularism. The phrase secularism can be construed differently by different persons. Which definition is the judge supposed to follow? Similarly, the creation of a hostile ‘environment’ may leave enough scope for a subjective decision as to what constitutes ‘a hostile environment’.

The inevitable consequences of such a law would be that in the event of any communal trouble the majority community would be assumed to be guilty. There would be a presumption of guilt unless otherwise proved. Only a member of the majority shall be held culpable under this law.

A member of the minority shall never commit an offence of hate propaganda or a communal violence. There is a virtual statutory declaration of innocence under this law for him.

The statutory authority prescribed at the central and state level would intrinsically suffer from an institutional bias because of its membership structure based on caste and community.

I have no doubt that once this law is implemented with the intention with which it is being drafted, it will create disharmony in the inter-community relations in India. It is a law fraught with dangerous consequences. It is bound to be misused. Perhaps, that appears to be the real purpose behind its drafting. It will encourage minority communalism. The law defies the basic principles of equality and fairness.

Social entrepreneurs in the National Advisory Council can be expected to draft such a dangerous and discriminatory law. One wonders how the political head of that body cleared this draft. When some persons carried on a campaign against the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act — an anti-terrorist law, the members of the UPA argued that even terrorists should be tried under the normal laws. A far more draconian law is now being proposed.

The states will be watching hopelessly when the Centre goes ahead with this misadventure. Their power is being usurped. The search for communal harmony is through fairness — not through reverse discrimination.

16 Comments | Nationalist, Social Issues, Uncategorized | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

Medha Patkar & Company- How to win friends and influence poor people

June 1, 2011

How to win friends and influence poor people

http://expressbuzz.com/opinion/columnists/how-to-win-friends-and-influence-poor-people/278837.html

Ravi Shankar Etteth

Express News ServiceFirst Published : 28 May 2011 10:51:00 PM ISTLast
Updated : 29 May 2011 02:53:21 AM IST

Some have to go hungry in order to survive. The hunger for justice and
the hunger for publicity often go hand in hand. Professional
dissidents like Medha Patkar who live on newspaper ink are past
masters in the art of fasting. After Anna’s hunger strike and Baba
Ramdev’s imminent denial of nourishment until black money is brought
back to India, Medha chose to eschew food again in early May,
protesting the demolition of slums in Golibar, Mumbai until the
government caved in. Does anyone care?

The slum dwellers do.

More than 4,000 families from 46 cooperative housing societies
vehemently voiced their anger against Medha’s interference in the
Golibar slum redevelopment scheme. They want the project to be
expedited and social activists to be kept away. The slum dwellers even
took to the streets in support of the Slum Rehabilitation Authority
(SRA) with placards that proclaimed “Medhatai you are in the wrong
direction. Work for the welfare of the slum dwellers and not against
them.” Anna read his Delhi right, but it seems Medha hasn’t read her
Mumbai right.

India isn’t an easy read for anyone who storms into public life. When
Medha Patkar realised that the Narmada Bachao Andolan—her first major
production that featured poor, dispossessed villagers—was flawed in
its premise, she decided to change tack and adopted the larger
anti-development platform. Donning the swimsuit of ideology, Arundhati
Roy leapt into the Narmada that Medha had muddied, only to hastily
swim away. Later, Medha played an active role in getting Tata out of
Singur; but why did she keep schtum when villagers pleaded with Tata
to return and Ratan Tata questioned the source of her funds? Why has
Medha—who built her resume on land acquisition—refuse to participate
in the Jaitapur farmers’ protests? Anti-nuclear activists accuse her
of furthering her own purpose by taking up issues, only to abandon
them later. Arundhati, it seems has wisely decided to keep away from
Medha’s fast. Roy is smarter. And prettier. She has never gone on
fast; she is slim already. Besides, she needs energy to write long
articles on poverty that would do a school magazine proud, hold press
conferences that never fail to make at least page 2 in newspapers, and
attend snooty parties in New Delhi and New York.

Just as our country is pockmarked with politicians like Raja and
Kalmadi, activists like Medha Patkar, Teesta Setalvad and Mallika
Sarabhai also blight it. For social performers and politicians alike,
poverty is a constituency to be ploughed for public acclaim. The chefs
of dissent will cook up anything for hype; Teesta Setalvad had to take
anticipatory bail for manufacturing spurious victims of the Gujarat
riots and force-feeding confessions in court. Mallika Sarabhai woos
the limelight by criticising Narendra Modi as she enjoys the benefits
of Gujarat Shining. Even Anna Hazare, a political innocent was
presumably browbeaten by Sarabhai-bhais into denouncing corruption in
Gujarat.

Medha Patkar is no less than any venal politician who defrauds India’s
poor. One does it for power and money, the other for satisfying a
maniacally self-righteous ego and an insatiable hunger for media
attention. Along their path to awards and acclaim, the debris of a
million hopes—of abandoned villagers and idealistic followers—lie like
a ruined city of ordinary dreams.

ravi.shankar@newindianexpress.com

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by arisebharat

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 46 other followers