BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today
India, which has uneasy relations with most of its large neighbours, is now engaged in a diplomatic effort to minimise the fallout of a power struggle in the Maldives, its smallest neighbour, keeping in view the need to resolve it peacefully to ensure stability in South Asia.
The trouble in the Maldives, an island nation with a little over 300,000 people, is the result of contrary pulls by agents of change. Its transition to democracy suffered a setback when Mohammed Nasheed, who was elected President three-and-a-half years ago, handed over power to his Vice-President, Mohammed Waheed Hassan, last week.
A sultanate under British protection in the colonial era, the Maldives became a republic in 1968. In the elections of 2008, Nasheed defeated Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who was President continuously for three decades, heralding an era of multiparty democracy.
Within 24 hours of handing over power to Hassan, Nasheed said he was forced out at gunpoint. His supporters began staging demonstrations demanding his restoration in office.
High-ranking officials from the United States, the United Kingdom and India flew into the Maldivian capital of Male to take stock of the situation and help resolve the conflict peacefully.
International interest in the small nation’s political stability stems from two factors. One is its proximity to the sea lanes which connect Asia and Australia with Africa and Europe and through which a good deal of West Asian oil moves. The other is the growing influence of foreign extremist groups in the Islamic state.
India has an additional cause for worry. Located just 400 kilometres southwest of the Indian mainland, the Maldivian islands form part of a long chain that includes the Indian territory of Lakshadweep.
The extreme vulnerability of the Maldives was demonstrated when a local businessman and smuggler almost seized power in 1988 with the help of mercenaries recruited from among Sri Lanka’s Tamil extremists. The coup bid failed only because India flew in paratroops in response to President Gayoom’s urgent plea.
In the face of the latest coup bid, Nasheed too turned to India for help. However, India ruled out military intervention, and opted for diplomatic action. Nasheed complained later that India had not understood the ground situation in the islands.
While no one in India has questioned the government’s decision not to intervene militarily, some political observers feel the government acted with undue haste in granting recognition to the Hassan regime without waiting for the situation to crystallise. There is also criticism that it failed to anticipate the grave situation developing there.
The Maldives’ conservative Muslim society has been on the path of change since tourism developed following the appearance of an island resort in 1972 and transformed its economy. Today the atolls that constitute the republic are dotted by scores of resorts which attract about 90,000 tourists a year, most of whom arrive by chartered flights from Europe.
Even as tourism gave a fillip to a certain kind of modernisation young men who went abroad to study came back with ideas of reforming Maldivian society to bring it in tune with neoconservative sentiments prevailing elsewhere.
In 2007, a bomb blast rocked Male. Indian and US intelligence agencies linked it to Maldivians educated at a Karachi seminary, whose alumni include Al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Toiba activists.
The neoconservatives saw Nasheed, who was educated in Sri Lanka and the UK, as an obstacle to the realisation of their goal. It was the open association of sections of army and police personnel with them that forced him to quit.
Both Nasheed and Gayoom have unwittingly helped the radical elements at various times to further their political interests.
On coming to power Nasheed wooed them with inducements. Gayoom’s supporters lent support to their agitation against Nasheed. India’s effort to defuse the situation, which is backed by the US and the UK, revolves around Hassan’s offer to establish a government of national unity.
It wants all the major political forces to be represented in the new government. It does not think Nasheed’s suggestion to advance the presidential elections, due next year, is practical.
Considering the deep social and political divisions that have set in, the chances of smooth functioning of an all-party government are slim. In the present situation, elections, too, may not yield a decisive verdict. Obviously there is a long haul ahead for Maldivian democracy. -- Gulf Today, February 13, 2012.
New on my other blogs
13 February, 2012
08 February, 2012
Medha Patkar declines Karnataka award citing government’s failures
Social activist Medha Patkar has declined the Basava Award instituted by the Karnataka government in view of its inability to deal with various corruption cases. The National Alliance of People’s Movement said in a press release:
“It would have been an honour to receive this [Basava] award in the name of revolutionary saint poet, philosopher Shri Basaveshwara of 12th century who promoted social change, reform and communal harmony. However, collective opinion of movements I am associated with suggests that Karnataka government has not been able to deal with the mining scam and other scandals. The Lokayukta controversy is not yet over and there are disagreements with people's movements on certain policies related to farmers, workers, unorganized sector workers, slum dwellers and government's attempt at privatization and corporatization of scarce natural resources - land, water, forests and minerals. I, therefore, would like to state with humility my inability to accept the award which you may be free to give to any other deserving activist.” Medha Patkar said at a public meeting in Belgaum, Karnataka yesterday (February 7).
The Karnataka government’s Department of Kannada and Culture had announced bestowing the Basava Puraskar 2010 to Medha Patkar by a government notification dated December 3, 2011. The award contains a citation and Rs. 10 lakh for contribution towards social change and promotion of the principles which Saint Basaveshwara championed.
Medha Patkar is currently leading Lokshakti Abhiyan which started its fourth phase campaign on February 6 from Mumbai. The Abhiyan is being joined by farmers, activists, academics from different states and will travel through Karnataka, Goa and Maharashtra.
The Lokshakti Abhiyan has already been to Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkhand.
Other members of the Abhiyan in this phase include Suhas Kolhekar, Suniti S R, Roshanlal Agarwal, Nageh Tripathy, Vedvati, Raj Singh, Naseevar Babu, Kamlesh, Seela Manswanee, Madhuri Shivkar, Gee Ammena, Ashu and others.
06 February, 2012
Scientists under the scanner
BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today
The government’s decision to blacklist four former officials of the Indian Space Research Organisation for their role in the signing of a contract with a private company has turned the spotlight on the working of a sequestered establishment.
The blacklisted ISRO personnel are former chairman G Madhavan Nair, former scientific secretary K Bhaskaranarayana, former managing director of ISRO’s commercial arm Antrix KR Sridharamurthi, and former ISRO satellite centre director KN Shankara.
As a result of the government decision they stand barred from holding any position in establishments under its control. Accordingly, Madhavan Nair has relinquished the chairmanship of the governing body of the Indian Institute of Technology, Patna.
Under the contract, signed in 2005, Antrix undertook to provide Devas Multimedia Private Limited, Bangalore, 70 megahertz of S band wavelength by leasing out 90 per cent of the transponders in two satellites, GSAT-6 and GSAT 6A, which ISRO was to launch, for a payment of $300 million spread over 12 years.
ISRO later obtained the government’s sanction for launch of these satellites. Last year, ahead of the launch, the government annulled the contract following allegations that scarce spectrum, which could fetch a fortune, had been given to Devas at a throwaway price.
Two key officials of Devas, Chairman MG Chandrasekhar and chief technology officer D Venugopal, are former ISRO officials. Chandrasekhar had quit as ISRO’s scientific secretary in 1997 to join WorldSpace, a US-based satellite radio operator. Venugopal joined him in WorldSpace the following year. Both have been with Devas since its founding in 2004.
Soon after Madhavan Nair’s retirement, K Radhakrishnan, who succeeded him as ISRO chairman, instituted an inquiry into the Devas deal by a committee headed by former Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre director BN Suresh. It was asked to look into complaints about the way the deal was concluded and being operationalised.
Last year the Prime Minister’s office set up another committee with former Cabinet Secretary BK Chaturvedi and aerospace expert Roddam Narasimha as members to study the matter. Still later a five-member committee headed by former Chief Vigilance Commissioner Pratyush Sinha was set up to examine acts of commission in the deal.
The deal was scrapped after the first committee reported that it was not made in a transparent manner. The blacklisting came after the third committee’s report which said there had been “serious administrative and procedural lapses” and “suggestion of collusive behaviour on the part of certain individuals.”
The findings of all the committees were made public on Saturday after Madhavan Nair sought information about them under the Right to Information Act.
Like Army chief VK Singh, whose dispute with the government over the determination of his age is now before the Supreme Court, Madhavan Nair views the issue as one of personal honour. He is a highly decorated scientist. He had received the prestigious Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan awards in recognition of his role in the country’s space programmes, including a successful moon probe.
Madhavan Nair’s case, like Gen Singh’s, illustrates the ham-handed manner in which the political executive handles issues relating to high functionaries who are not part of the bureaucratic establishment. It also exposes the personal rivalries and jealousies in the science and technology sector.
Most of the retired space scientists have made common cause with Madhavan Nair, raising the issue to one of the honour of the entire scientific community. Narasimha, who was a member of the second committee, has disapproved of attempts to damn Madhavan Nair.
The issue is also getting politicised. The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has decided to use it against the government when Parliament reassembles.
Vital questions about the working of the scientific establishment, which has little original contribution to its credit, are not being raised. The highly acclaimed achievements of Indian science are mere replication or adaptation of foreign technology.
The Global Research Report, published by Thomson Reuters in October 2009, had pointed out that India lagged behind not only the West but also its BRIC partners in research investment and output. What’s more, availability of researchers did not keep pace with rise in investment.
Decades ago eminent scientist JBS Haldane, who left Britain in protest against the presence of US troops and made India his home, had identified scientists’ lack of professionalism, undue emphasis on academic degrees and subservience to political masters as impediments to the growth of science in the country. These maladies remain. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, February 6, 2012
Gulf Today
The government’s decision to blacklist four former officials of the Indian Space Research Organisation for their role in the signing of a contract with a private company has turned the spotlight on the working of a sequestered establishment.
The blacklisted ISRO personnel are former chairman G Madhavan Nair, former scientific secretary K Bhaskaranarayana, former managing director of ISRO’s commercial arm Antrix KR Sridharamurthi, and former ISRO satellite centre director KN Shankara.
As a result of the government decision they stand barred from holding any position in establishments under its control. Accordingly, Madhavan Nair has relinquished the chairmanship of the governing body of the Indian Institute of Technology, Patna.
Under the contract, signed in 2005, Antrix undertook to provide Devas Multimedia Private Limited, Bangalore, 70 megahertz of S band wavelength by leasing out 90 per cent of the transponders in two satellites, GSAT-6 and GSAT 6A, which ISRO was to launch, for a payment of $300 million spread over 12 years.
ISRO later obtained the government’s sanction for launch of these satellites. Last year, ahead of the launch, the government annulled the contract following allegations that scarce spectrum, which could fetch a fortune, had been given to Devas at a throwaway price.
Two key officials of Devas, Chairman MG Chandrasekhar and chief technology officer D Venugopal, are former ISRO officials. Chandrasekhar had quit as ISRO’s scientific secretary in 1997 to join WorldSpace, a US-based satellite radio operator. Venugopal joined him in WorldSpace the following year. Both have been with Devas since its founding in 2004.
Soon after Madhavan Nair’s retirement, K Radhakrishnan, who succeeded him as ISRO chairman, instituted an inquiry into the Devas deal by a committee headed by former Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre director BN Suresh. It was asked to look into complaints about the way the deal was concluded and being operationalised.
Last year the Prime Minister’s office set up another committee with former Cabinet Secretary BK Chaturvedi and aerospace expert Roddam Narasimha as members to study the matter. Still later a five-member committee headed by former Chief Vigilance Commissioner Pratyush Sinha was set up to examine acts of commission in the deal.
The deal was scrapped after the first committee reported that it was not made in a transparent manner. The blacklisting came after the third committee’s report which said there had been “serious administrative and procedural lapses” and “suggestion of collusive behaviour on the part of certain individuals.”
The findings of all the committees were made public on Saturday after Madhavan Nair sought information about them under the Right to Information Act.
Like Army chief VK Singh, whose dispute with the government over the determination of his age is now before the Supreme Court, Madhavan Nair views the issue as one of personal honour. He is a highly decorated scientist. He had received the prestigious Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan awards in recognition of his role in the country’s space programmes, including a successful moon probe.
Madhavan Nair’s case, like Gen Singh’s, illustrates the ham-handed manner in which the political executive handles issues relating to high functionaries who are not part of the bureaucratic establishment. It also exposes the personal rivalries and jealousies in the science and technology sector.
Most of the retired space scientists have made common cause with Madhavan Nair, raising the issue to one of the honour of the entire scientific community. Narasimha, who was a member of the second committee, has disapproved of attempts to damn Madhavan Nair.
The issue is also getting politicised. The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has decided to use it against the government when Parliament reassembles.
Vital questions about the working of the scientific establishment, which has little original contribution to its credit, are not being raised. The highly acclaimed achievements of Indian science are mere replication or adaptation of foreign technology.
The Global Research Report, published by Thomson Reuters in October 2009, had pointed out that India lagged behind not only the West but also its BRIC partners in research investment and output. What’s more, availability of researchers did not keep pace with rise in investment.
Decades ago eminent scientist JBS Haldane, who left Britain in protest against the presence of US troops and made India his home, had identified scientists’ lack of professionalism, undue emphasis on academic degrees and subservience to political masters as impediments to the growth of science in the country. These maladies remain. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, February 6, 2012
30 January, 2012
Unique identity number game
BRP Bhaskar
The Indian government has decided to expand the scope of its ambitious programme to give each citizen a unique identity number, ignoring concerns voiced by civil society groups who fear misuse of the data gathered by the authorities.
The 12-digit number is generated using a code, named Aadhar, and the individual’s identity is established by a combination of biometric data such as fingerprint and retina scan. The person will be given a letter with the number on it. Verification of identity will be done online.
So far more than 120 million people have been given UID numbers under the programme launched in 2010. By March end, 200 million are expected to be covered.
The programme is being implemented by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDIA), headed by Nandan Nilekani, one of the founders of the IT services major Infosys.
At a high level meeting, the government last week sorted out the differences between UIDIA and the Home Ministry which had cast a shadow over the programme.
The Home Ministry had felt that UIDIA was covering the same ground as the Census department which was preparing the National Population Register.
Under the formula agreed upon at the high level meeting, UIDIA will gather data in respect of 600 million people. To avoid duplication, UIDIA and the Census department will share the biometric data they collect.
As happens so often with government schemes in the country, the UID project is fast outstripping the cost estimates. Expenses for five years, originally estimated at Rs 32 billion, are now set to exceed Rs 88 billion. Officials are, however, unperturbed. They assert that the programme will yield substantial savings to the government by plugging the loopholes in the delivery of various services.
The government spends about Rs 3,000 billion a year on food and other subsidies and payment of wages under the National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme. A big chunk of the money goes into the pockets of middlemen. Once the beneficiaries of the schemes get UID numbers, all payments will be made directly to them, eliminating the middlemen.
A pilot project for direct distribution of NREG wages through an Aadhar enabled payment system has already been introduced in some parts of Jharkhand state.
While UID does not provide for profiling, critics say it will be possible for the authorities to create profiles by accessing the information stored at different locations. They argue that even if there is no invasion of privacy the project is unacceptable as it vests the state with awesome power over the citizens. They believe the UID project is a national security programme camouflaged as one meant for efficient delivery of service.
The government is proceeding with the UID programme without a legal framework. The National Identification Authority of India Bill it brought forward in 2010 was rejected by Parliament’s Standing Committee, which found it defective. The committee asked the government to come up with a new draft after reviewing the working of the Aadhar project but this has not been done.
Supporters of the project allege that politicians ganged up against the measure as it will minimise their role in the distribution of benefits under various government schemes.
In the absence of statutory backing, UIDIA is going ahead with the number game on the strength of an executive order issued by the Planning Ministry.
The law which governs the decennial census operations enjoins upon the state to protect the privacy of the people. It is, therefore, not possible to use census data for other purposes. To overcome this limitation, the government assumed the power to gather information for preparing a population register by getting Parliament to amend the Citizenship Act.
The National Population Register is an expanded version of a scheme prepared by the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance government, which was in power from 1998 to 2004, to issue multipurpose national identity cards to residents of border areas with a view to checking infiltration.
UID numbers are allotted on the basis of information provided by applicants at designated data collection centres.
Doubts raised by critics about the reliability of the data gathered in this manner remain uncleared. A sting operation conducted by a Hindi television channel showed that it is easy to establish false identities as there is no mechanism for proper verification of information provided by the applicants. - Gulf Today, Sharjah, January 30, 2012
27 January, 2012
Persons under Kerala police surveillance demand apology from government
Eighty-three of the 268 persons and institutions who were placed under surveillance by the Kerala police for alleged connections with the banned Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) have in an open letter expressed shock at the intrusion into their privacy and demanded an apology from the government..
The following is the text of the open letter:
We, the following citizens of India are shocked to understand our e-mail IDs have been included in an official letter (dated November 3, 2011), sent by the Special Branch Superintendent of Police, K..K. Jaya Mohan, on behalf of the Additional Director General of Police, A. Hemacahndran, to the Assistant Commander of High -tech Crime Enquiry Cell. The letter says `Please find enclosed a copy of the e-mail IDs of individuals who have connection with SIMI activities. You are directed to identify the individuals behind the e-mail IDs contained in the list by verifying the registration and log in details with concerned email Service providers and forward the names and addresses of the individuals who own the email IDs, and furnish the report to this office urgently.'
We also came to know from the various newspapers that the authorities have demanded the service providers of these IDs to provide the login details of the IDs which we have been using. We express our deep horror and dissent to note that the State Government is keeping a sceptical eye on us.
The Government elected by people like us has a duty to protect the privacy of the citizens of this country. We are shocked to see that the same Government is in reality infringing upon our privacy through such a move. We consider this as an open violation of one of our basic human rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
This official action violates a number of basic rights of the citizens guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India including Articles 14, 15, 17, 19 and 21 viz., the Rights to equality, dignity, privacy, expression and the right not to be discriminated against.
The Chief Minister of Kerala has openly admitted that the SIMI connection in the above letter issued by K.K. Jaya Mohan, was a `mistake'. However, no action on this police officer has yet been taken. We demand immediate action against the police officials involved in this encroachment on the privacy of citizens.
This unfortunate incident has affected many of our lives in many ways for being targeted by the Government. We are not yet ready to reshape our own lives for such surveillance by the police for leading `suspicious' identities. We are also threatened in our day-to-day social, cultural and economic spaces for being included in the `watch list' of the intelligence department. We demand an open apology from the Chief Minister of Kerala and the Police Department for having played with the lives of innocent citizens. We request the media, social activist organizations and human rights groups to create adequate pressure on the Government for a just intervention in this matter.
1. Adv. Shanavas (Activist)
2. V.M.Ebrahim (Journalist)
3. C.Dawood. (Columnist)
4. N.P.Jishar (Journalist)
5. Fasal Kathikod (Writer)
6. S.Kamarudheen (Academician)
6. A.Sakker Hussain (Journalist)
8. Riyas .P.A. (Marketing executive)
9. Navas.K.A (Activist)
10. Abdul Rasheed kadampott (Retd Teacher)
11. Solidarity Youth Movement, Kerala
12. Minority Watch (Human Rights organization)
13. ISA KERALAM (Student organization)
14. Prabhodhanam Weekly
15. MIT.Hospital Kodungallor
16. Cresecnt Hospital, Aalathoor
17. Camal bags (Small scale industry)
18. Cochin Orchids. ( Designing Centre)
19. Classy digital ( Designing Centre)
20. Badaru (P.K.Seal) (Business)
21. K.M.Muhammed Mukthar
22. Sajeer
23. Haris.K.K. (Abroad)
24. Shabeer (Abroad)
25. Sameer (Abroad)
26. Jalauddin Pullisseeri (Abroad)
27. Shakeer Kathiyalam (Activist)
28. Aliyar .K.M. (Abroad)
29. Althaf.M.S.
30. Haris Eriyad
31. Fasalurahman Melattur (Abroad)
32. Fayiz Cmr (Abroad)
33. Fazil Fareed
34. Hanif K.T.
35. Ahammad Salih Anwar
36. Mahion Abdul Rahman (Graphic Designer)
37. Majeed. M.T. (Business)
38. Rasheed.N.M. (Activist)
39. Kayyoom Kolliyil
40. Mukthar K.M. (Abroad)
41. Noor.K.V.MElattoor (Volunteer, Pain & Palliative)
42. Roshan F.S (Student)
43. Shafeeq Chennara (Abroad)
44. Abdul Khadar Kodinji (Abroad)
45. Abboobakkar Vadakkangara (Academic Scholar)
46. Anvar Vadakkangara (Abroad)
47. Atheeq Rahman (Abroad)
48. Iktiyar Pang (Abroad)
49. C.S. Ibrahim Kutty ( Retired Teacher)
50. Abdul Salam.N.M. (Abroad)
51. Noufal Velam (Activist)
52. Am Nadwi
53. HAseena Sajid
54. Firoz Thirurkad
55. Hakeem (Business)
56. FAissal Mimmi
57. Dhabin 2008
58. Cmarti2
59. Aachies (Business)
60. Nisam
61. Abdul Rasheed Kadambot
62. Sajid Rahman
63. Shabeer Kareem (Abroad)
64. Sabu Bin Habeeb (Abroad)
65. Haris (Abroad)
66. Rashid. (Abroad)
67. Riyas Kodungalloor
68. Riyas Kodungalor
69. Niyas
70. Muhammed Seethi
71. Muhammed rasheed (Abroad)
72. Humayun Kabeer (Abroad)
73. Fasalurahman
74. Aliyar KM (Abroad)
75. Mujeebulla k.v.
76. TC Mahboob ( Teacher)
77. Mohammed Ishaque Madari (Abroad)
78. Moidu Chalikkal (Abroad)
79. Abdul Ahad
80. Ali Modern
81. Haris Kannipoyil
82. Mohammed Rafeeque Thangal
83. P.A Mohammed
The following is the text of the open letter:
We, the following citizens of India are shocked to understand our e-mail IDs have been included in an official letter (dated November 3, 2011), sent by the Special Branch Superintendent of Police, K..K. Jaya Mohan, on behalf of the Additional Director General of Police, A. Hemacahndran, to the Assistant Commander of High -tech Crime Enquiry Cell. The letter says `Please find enclosed a copy of the e-mail IDs of individuals who have connection with SIMI activities. You are directed to identify the individuals behind the e-mail IDs contained in the list by verifying the registration and log in details with concerned email Service providers and forward the names and addresses of the individuals who own the email IDs, and furnish the report to this office urgently.'
We also came to know from the various newspapers that the authorities have demanded the service providers of these IDs to provide the login details of the IDs which we have been using. We express our deep horror and dissent to note that the State Government is keeping a sceptical eye on us.
The Government elected by people like us has a duty to protect the privacy of the citizens of this country. We are shocked to see that the same Government is in reality infringing upon our privacy through such a move. We consider this as an open violation of one of our basic human rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
This official action violates a number of basic rights of the citizens guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India including Articles 14, 15, 17, 19 and 21 viz., the Rights to equality, dignity, privacy, expression and the right not to be discriminated against.
The Chief Minister of Kerala has openly admitted that the SIMI connection in the above letter issued by K.K. Jaya Mohan, was a `mistake'. However, no action on this police officer has yet been taken. We demand immediate action against the police officials involved in this encroachment on the privacy of citizens.
This unfortunate incident has affected many of our lives in many ways for being targeted by the Government. We are not yet ready to reshape our own lives for such surveillance by the police for leading `suspicious' identities. We are also threatened in our day-to-day social, cultural and economic spaces for being included in the `watch list' of the intelligence department. We demand an open apology from the Chief Minister of Kerala and the Police Department for having played with the lives of innocent citizens. We request the media, social activist organizations and human rights groups to create adequate pressure on the Government for a just intervention in this matter.
1. Adv. Shanavas (Activist)
2. V.M.Ebrahim (Journalist)
3. C.Dawood. (Columnist)
4. N.P.Jishar (Journalist)
5. Fasal Kathikod (Writer)
6. S.Kamarudheen (Academician)
6. A.Sakker Hussain (Journalist)
8. Riyas .P.A. (Marketing executive)
9. Navas.K.A (Activist)
10. Abdul Rasheed kadampott (Retd Teacher)
11. Solidarity Youth Movement, Kerala
12. Minority Watch (Human Rights organization)
13. ISA KERALAM (Student organization)
14. Prabhodhanam Weekly
15. MIT.Hospital Kodungallor
16. Cresecnt Hospital, Aalathoor
17. Camal bags (Small scale industry)
18. Cochin Orchids. ( Designing Centre)
19. Classy digital ( Designing Centre)
20. Badaru (P.K.Seal) (Business)
21. K.M.Muhammed Mukthar
22. Sajeer
23. Haris.K.K. (Abroad)
24. Shabeer (Abroad)
25. Sameer (Abroad)
26. Jalauddin Pullisseeri (Abroad)
27. Shakeer Kathiyalam (Activist)
28. Aliyar .K.M. (Abroad)
29. Althaf.M.S.
30. Haris Eriyad
31. Fasalurahman Melattur (Abroad)
32. Fayiz Cmr (Abroad)
33. Fazil Fareed
34. Hanif K.T.
35. Ahammad Salih Anwar
36. Mahion Abdul Rahman (Graphic Designer)
37. Majeed. M.T. (Business)
38. Rasheed.N.M. (Activist)
39. Kayyoom Kolliyil
40. Mukthar K.M. (Abroad)
41. Noor.K.V.MElattoor (Volunteer, Pain & Palliative)
42. Roshan F.S (Student)
43. Shafeeq Chennara (Abroad)
44. Abdul Khadar Kodinji (Abroad)
45. Abboobakkar Vadakkangara (Academic Scholar)
46. Anvar Vadakkangara (Abroad)
47. Atheeq Rahman (Abroad)
48. Iktiyar Pang (Abroad)
49. C.S. Ibrahim Kutty ( Retired Teacher)
50. Abdul Salam.N.M. (Abroad)
51. Noufal Velam (Activist)
52. Am Nadwi
53. HAseena Sajid
54. Firoz Thirurkad
55. Hakeem (Business)
56. FAissal Mimmi
57. Dhabin 2008
58. Cmarti2
59. Aachies (Business)
60. Nisam
61. Abdul Rasheed Kadambot
62. Sajid Rahman
63. Shabeer Kareem (Abroad)
64. Sabu Bin Habeeb (Abroad)
65. Haris (Abroad)
66. Rashid. (Abroad)
67. Riyas Kodungalloor
68. Riyas Kodungalor
69. Niyas
70. Muhammed Seethi
71. Muhammed rasheed (Abroad)
72. Humayun Kabeer (Abroad)
73. Fasalurahman
74. Aliyar KM (Abroad)
75. Mujeebulla k.v.
76. TC Mahboob ( Teacher)
77. Mohammed Ishaque Madari (Abroad)
78. Moidu Chalikkal (Abroad)
79. Abdul Ahad
80. Ali Modern
81. Haris Kannipoyil
82. Mohammed Rafeeque Thangal
83. P.A Mohammed
26 January, 2012
Injustice remains an impediment to the Indian republic, says AHRC
The following is a statement issued by the Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong:
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) congratulates India on its 63rd Republic Day. From a nation that suffered the brutal consequences of colonisation and the lasting wounds of separation, for the past 63 years, the country and its people have brilliantly shown the resilience to hold close to heart the promise they made more than six decades ago, to remain a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic. The Indian experience of democracy is of immense value in Asia, since for the most of the continent; the concept has only made cameo appearances.
Despite this, the concept of democracy and republic is incomplete, as reiterated in the Constitution, unless justice, liberty and equality are ensured to the people, without exceptions. The integrity of the nation and the dignity of its people depend on this. It is in that the country has to shed its colonial hangovers, and if required reinvent itself, as a nation where these fundamental notions implied in the term 'democratic republic' remain not just as mere words mentioned in the basic law, but realisable guarantees, for which the state should not spare any of its resources.
A recent video that was mentioned in the country's media, of the officers from the Border Security Force (BSF) brutally assaulting a suspected cross-border cattle smuggler is to the point. The nationality of the victims apart, such an incident should not have happened on the first place. That it happened shows that the country's elite border guards have no respect to the country's basic law or to their operative mandate. The video is an exception only to the extent that it was probably for the first time that such an act by the BSF stationed along the Indo-Bangladesh border has been video documented. The AHRC and its partner organization based in West Bengal, MASUM, on more than some 800 separate occasions, reported similar incidents to the authorities, urging them to take action against the BSF officers, and suggesting that the incessant practice of manifest forms of custodial violence - ranging from torture to extra-judicial execution and rape - shows the moral wilt in the force which in itself is a threat to the security of the nation. The incident is ample proof to the fact that the agency today operates in an environment of impunity. Impunity has no place in a democratic republic.
Despicable forms of impunity are enjoyed not just by the BSF. Widespread practice of torture by the state police officers casts a dark shadow upon the very notion of the republic. The country is yet to wake up to the reality that the practice of torture, in its entire manifest forms, is incompatible with what has been guaranteed in the Constitution. While a considerable number of people in the country, including some respectable officers within the Indian Police Service, reiterate that the present state of affairs within the law enforcement agencies cannot coexist with the demands of a modern democratic republic, there is hardly any debate within the country as to what should be done to bring about a change to this unacceptable status quo. Even the country's civil society has ignored to engage with the subject, but for a few exceptional human rights organizations, which is a minority, in relation to the large number of human rights groups that operate in India, enjoying the relatively free space that the country guarantees for human rights work. Fair trial guarantees and the basic presumption of innocence cannot coexist with the practice of torture.
When the law enforcement agencies become incompatible to undertake their responsibility according to the demands of a democratic state, it challenges not only the very concept of democracy, but also encourages inequality and therefore injustice. The recent incident reported from Balangir district, Orissa state of the torching of 40 Dalit houses by the members of a militant dominant caste is an alarming reminder to the fact that prejudices based on inequality still haunts the realization of the true republic. The fact that an alarmingly high percentage of children from the marginalized and minority communities living in the impoverished rural backdrops of at least five states in the country do not have, nor do they expect, any hope to be saved from the certain death due to starvation and malnutrition reiterates that injustice is the practice though justice is the guarantee. A country with its law enforcement agencies enjoying impunity cannot be of any use to check this injustice.
So is the situation of the country's judiciary. That the judiciary too, and with that the country's justice framework has failed, is today no more the 'hyperbole' of human rights organizations. The country's law minister himself has reiterated this reality. In a country where its judiciary cannot expect the prosecution to be capable of assisting the court in its quest to find the truth, or a court where the trial can take anywhere between two to ten years to conclude, or worse, where the judiciary itself can guarantee that only seventy percent of its judges are honest, justice has no life. There cannot be percentages awarded to justice. There can only be either justice or injustice.
The annual remembrance of the day in which the country and its people declared for themselves a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic should not remain a day on which parades are held and speeches made. It must be also a day of introspection. Of what it implies by the sovereignty of the people, and by it, to what extent is India truly a democratic republic.
So far injustice has remained an impediment to the complete realization of the republic. Failing to address it is as bad as undermining the republic.
For information and comments contact:
Bijo Francis
Telephone: +852 - 26986339
Email:indiadesk@ahrc.asia, southasiadesk@ahrc.asia
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) congratulates India on its 63rd Republic Day. From a nation that suffered the brutal consequences of colonisation and the lasting wounds of separation, for the past 63 years, the country and its people have brilliantly shown the resilience to hold close to heart the promise they made more than six decades ago, to remain a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic. The Indian experience of democracy is of immense value in Asia, since for the most of the continent; the concept has only made cameo appearances.
Despite this, the concept of democracy and republic is incomplete, as reiterated in the Constitution, unless justice, liberty and equality are ensured to the people, without exceptions. The integrity of the nation and the dignity of its people depend on this. It is in that the country has to shed its colonial hangovers, and if required reinvent itself, as a nation where these fundamental notions implied in the term 'democratic republic' remain not just as mere words mentioned in the basic law, but realisable guarantees, for which the state should not spare any of its resources.
A recent video that was mentioned in the country's media, of the officers from the Border Security Force (BSF) brutally assaulting a suspected cross-border cattle smuggler is to the point. The nationality of the victims apart, such an incident should not have happened on the first place. That it happened shows that the country's elite border guards have no respect to the country's basic law or to their operative mandate. The video is an exception only to the extent that it was probably for the first time that such an act by the BSF stationed along the Indo-Bangladesh border has been video documented. The AHRC and its partner organization based in West Bengal, MASUM, on more than some 800 separate occasions, reported similar incidents to the authorities, urging them to take action against the BSF officers, and suggesting that the incessant practice of manifest forms of custodial violence - ranging from torture to extra-judicial execution and rape - shows the moral wilt in the force which in itself is a threat to the security of the nation. The incident is ample proof to the fact that the agency today operates in an environment of impunity. Impunity has no place in a democratic republic.
Despicable forms of impunity are enjoyed not just by the BSF. Widespread practice of torture by the state police officers casts a dark shadow upon the very notion of the republic. The country is yet to wake up to the reality that the practice of torture, in its entire manifest forms, is incompatible with what has been guaranteed in the Constitution. While a considerable number of people in the country, including some respectable officers within the Indian Police Service, reiterate that the present state of affairs within the law enforcement agencies cannot coexist with the demands of a modern democratic republic, there is hardly any debate within the country as to what should be done to bring about a change to this unacceptable status quo. Even the country's civil society has ignored to engage with the subject, but for a few exceptional human rights organizations, which is a minority, in relation to the large number of human rights groups that operate in India, enjoying the relatively free space that the country guarantees for human rights work. Fair trial guarantees and the basic presumption of innocence cannot coexist with the practice of torture.
When the law enforcement agencies become incompatible to undertake their responsibility according to the demands of a democratic state, it challenges not only the very concept of democracy, but also encourages inequality and therefore injustice. The recent incident reported from Balangir district, Orissa state of the torching of 40 Dalit houses by the members of a militant dominant caste is an alarming reminder to the fact that prejudices based on inequality still haunts the realization of the true republic. The fact that an alarmingly high percentage of children from the marginalized and minority communities living in the impoverished rural backdrops of at least five states in the country do not have, nor do they expect, any hope to be saved from the certain death due to starvation and malnutrition reiterates that injustice is the practice though justice is the guarantee. A country with its law enforcement agencies enjoying impunity cannot be of any use to check this injustice.
So is the situation of the country's judiciary. That the judiciary too, and with that the country's justice framework has failed, is today no more the 'hyperbole' of human rights organizations. The country's law minister himself has reiterated this reality. In a country where its judiciary cannot expect the prosecution to be capable of assisting the court in its quest to find the truth, or a court where the trial can take anywhere between two to ten years to conclude, or worse, where the judiciary itself can guarantee that only seventy percent of its judges are honest, justice has no life. There cannot be percentages awarded to justice. There can only be either justice or injustice.
The annual remembrance of the day in which the country and its people declared for themselves a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic should not remain a day on which parades are held and speeches made. It must be also a day of introspection. Of what it implies by the sovereignty of the people, and by it, to what extent is India truly a democratic republic.
So far injustice has remained an impediment to the complete realization of the republic. Failing to address it is as bad as undermining the republic.
For information and comments contact:
Bijo Francis
Telephone: +852 - 26986339
Email:indiadesk@ahrc.asia, southasiadesk@ahrc.asia
Gallantry award for sexual abuse? R-day honour for Chhattisgarh cop
Soni Sori in hospital. Photo by Sunil SinghThe following is a statement issued by Women Against Sexual Violence and State Repression (WSS), a national network of women’s organizations, other democratic rights organizations, and individuals, on behalf of groups all across the country which have been participated in the campaign to bring justice to Soni Sori:
We are deeply shocked and outraged by the conferring of the President’s Police Medal for Gallantry on Ankit Garg, Superintendent of Police, Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. Ankit Garg has been named by the Adivasi school teacher, Ms. Soni Sori, in several letters to the Supreme Court, of ordering and supervising her torture and sexual violence against her, on the night of October 8, 2011 when she was in his custody at the Dantewada police station.
In a case which is now before the Honourable Supreme Court, Ms. Soni Sori has written that while she was in police custody in Dantewada police station, she was stripped before the Superintendent of Police, Ankit Garg, and given electric shocks under his directions. Furthermore, not only did he use abusive language against her, he ordered three police personnel to “punish her” by sexually torturing her for disobeying his commands to name well-known social activists, such as Swami Agnivesh and Medha Patkar, as Naxal supporters. An independent medical examination carried out by the NRS government hospital in Kolkata under the direction of the Supreme Court has confirmed her sexual torture by recovering stones embedded in her private parts. This flagrant violation of Ms. Soni Sori’s person is what prompted the Honourable Supreme Court to reach the conclusion that she is clearly unsafe within the reach of Dantewada police, and needs to be transferred to the Raipur Central prison.
Is this, then, the “gallant” behaviour of our Dantewada police under the able guidance of SP Ankit Garg, which the government is now felicitating? Is this an award for ruthlessly torturing people? Does the government approve of these methods? Is this an accepted way of carrying out war against their own people in the name of anti-naxal operations?
It is shocking to note that in spite of wide publicity and protests over SP Ankit Garg’s inhuman conduct by a large number of women’s and civil liberties groups, nationally and internationally, the government has deemed it fit to confer him with a gallantry award. It is even more baffling to note that this has occurred at a time when the Honourable Supreme Court itself has expressed anguish at the happenings and is still looking into these violations. Compounding the very serious charges of a heinous crime of sexual violence against Ms. Soni Sori that SP Ankit Garg faces, is that fact that this crime happened when she had been entrusted into his custody as a senior police officer. After the report from the Kolkata NRS Medical College and Hospital, this is no longer a case of mere allegations against the police, but there is also solid evidence by a government medical team to support her charges. However, none of this appears to have placed even a shadow of doubt on the gallantry of this Officer as far as the government is concerned. By giving an award in the face of these complaints which have not even received a cursory investigation, both the Central and State governments are condoning this sexual violence which is being perpetrated in the name of anti-Naxal operations.
It is a dark day for Indian democracy today. While Ms. Soni Sori, the victim of this heinous torture languishes in the Raipur Central Jail, with a deteriorating health condition, and waits for her case to be listed in the Supreme Court, women’s teams who have been taking up the case of her torture have been refused permission to meet her. She is still under the custody of the same state police has that inflicted this torture on her.
We are also appalled to note that a majority of “gallantry” awards this year have been given out for anti-Naxal and counter-insurgency operations. Civil liberties organisations have been pointing out the widespread human rights violations that are taking place in these areas in the cover of counter-insurgency operations. This raises grave concerns and points to a movement in the direction of a military state, which can have no place in a democratic republic such as ours.
We condemn this action in the strongest words. There can be no excuse for torture and sexual violence in the name of anti-Naxal or counter-insurgency operations. To confer awards on a person accused of such heinous acts diminishes the respect and honour usually associated with a gallantry award.
24 January, 2012
Jamia teachers challenge Maharashtra ATS version of blast case investigation
The following is a statement issued by the Jamia Teachers’ Solidarity Association:
The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) claims to have cracked the 13/7 blasts case. Its chief has revealed in a press conference that Indian Mujahideen was behind the Mumbai blasts. And yet, the Ministry of Home Affairs remains far from impressed—indeed, it appears rather irritated. And the press, also unusually, has been circumspect about his revelations. The ATS chief says that he did not want to call a press conference. But the rumours about Naquee’s IB links were threatening the credibility of the ATS. Such were his compulsions when he launched into a monologue about the ‘breakthrough’ his team—under his guidance of course—had achieved. Despite his loud proclamations however, there are few who are willing to buy the ATS' arguments.
Here are some issues for the ATS chief to mull over:
Cracking the Case
The case was cracked within a day of Naquee being brought to Mumbai by the Special Cell. Did the Maharashtra ATS ever visit Delhi to pick up/question Naquee? It simply pounced upon him within moments of the Special Cell 'abandoning' Naquee in Mumbai after completing their own investigation work.
The Arrest of Naquee Ahmed
The ATS chief in his press conference clearly said that the arrest was made on 12th January 2012. His family alleges that he was picked up on the night of 9th January. Not only this, his brothers Rafi and Razi were also detained by the ATS. Nadeem was also arrested the same night.
Did Naquee just walk into the ATS office and offer himself up, or was the ATS tailing him? If they had him on surveillance, surely they knew how closely he was working with the Special Cell; his numerous trips to the Special Cell and their regular phone calls to him?
Naquee’s Mumbai Trips
The ATS boss says that Naquee had been visiting Mumbai’s Madanpura area since September-October 2010. Would he explain why the last two of those trips were made in the company of Delhi Police Special Cell? And may it be said that Naquee was not brought to Mumbai under detention or arrest.
Evidence Galore
Clothes of Naquee and Nadeem have been recovered from the house where the main suspects lived, claimed the chief. Is the chief familiar with their wardrobe and sartorial preferences—in the absence of any forensics tests—to claim that clothes belonging to Naquee and Nadeem have been recovered?
Stolen Bikes: The ATS says that these bikes would have been used in future terror acts. Implicating people in future conspiracies, where evidence need not be produced because the act hasn’t taken place at all is the oldest trick in the police armour. If indeed those bikes are stolen (the family disputes it), then book Naquee and Nadeem for theft, chief, not under UAPA.
Money Trail: The chief was emphatic that Rs 1.5 lakhs had passed through Naquee’s hands but could not explain when asked where the monies had come from. “Hawala”, he mumbled, and insisted that the investigations were still on. So, if the investigations were still on and nothing conclusive had been arrived at, why make grandiose claims in a press conference?
Harassment of Naquee’s family
While the ATS chief grandly declared that over 12,000 witnesses were questioned, we have no way of knowing how many of them were questioned in illegal detention. Will the ATS chief kindly explain why Naquee Ahmed’s elder brothers were detained? Why has his brother’s workshop of trolley bags been turned into a fortress, and reporters and outsiders denied access to them?
ATS-Special Cell: Healthy Competition!
Yes, there is competition, but no rivalry. The chief of ATS made a brave attempt at presenting a picture of blissful bonhomie between the ATS and Special Cell (“The head of Special Cell is my batch mate!”). But we saw the ATS team in Delhi grilling Naquee’s brother about what the Special Cell knew—about what he heard Naquee telling the Special Cell. If the two agencies are so friendly, should not they be sharing information rather than harassing and hounding family members? Why has the ATS been after Naquee's brother?
Too often we have seen these agencies turning into predators, consuming those very men it seeks out for help and cooperation. The Special Cell may be crying buckets now, but they have implicated IB informers as dreaded terrorists (remember Qamar and Irshad) earlier. The cut-throat grey world of unaccounted powers and funds ‘to tackle terror’ has veered out of control.
One last thing, does the Commissioner of Delhi Police feel no moral and ethical compulsion to officially and formally state the simple truth that Naquee was helping his department in their investigation?
The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) claims to have cracked the 13/7 blasts case. Its chief has revealed in a press conference that Indian Mujahideen was behind the Mumbai blasts. And yet, the Ministry of Home Affairs remains far from impressed—indeed, it appears rather irritated. And the press, also unusually, has been circumspect about his revelations. The ATS chief says that he did not want to call a press conference. But the rumours about Naquee’s IB links were threatening the credibility of the ATS. Such were his compulsions when he launched into a monologue about the ‘breakthrough’ his team—under his guidance of course—had achieved. Despite his loud proclamations however, there are few who are willing to buy the ATS' arguments.
Here are some issues for the ATS chief to mull over:
Cracking the Case
The case was cracked within a day of Naquee being brought to Mumbai by the Special Cell. Did the Maharashtra ATS ever visit Delhi to pick up/question Naquee? It simply pounced upon him within moments of the Special Cell 'abandoning' Naquee in Mumbai after completing their own investigation work.
The Arrest of Naquee Ahmed
The ATS chief in his press conference clearly said that the arrest was made on 12th January 2012. His family alleges that he was picked up on the night of 9th January. Not only this, his brothers Rafi and Razi were also detained by the ATS. Nadeem was also arrested the same night.
Did Naquee just walk into the ATS office and offer himself up, or was the ATS tailing him? If they had him on surveillance, surely they knew how closely he was working with the Special Cell; his numerous trips to the Special Cell and their regular phone calls to him?
Naquee’s Mumbai Trips
The ATS boss says that Naquee had been visiting Mumbai’s Madanpura area since September-October 2010. Would he explain why the last two of those trips were made in the company of Delhi Police Special Cell? And may it be said that Naquee was not brought to Mumbai under detention or arrest.
Evidence Galore
Clothes of Naquee and Nadeem have been recovered from the house where the main suspects lived, claimed the chief. Is the chief familiar with their wardrobe and sartorial preferences—in the absence of any forensics tests—to claim that clothes belonging to Naquee and Nadeem have been recovered?
Stolen Bikes: The ATS says that these bikes would have been used in future terror acts. Implicating people in future conspiracies, where evidence need not be produced because the act hasn’t taken place at all is the oldest trick in the police armour. If indeed those bikes are stolen (the family disputes it), then book Naquee and Nadeem for theft, chief, not under UAPA.
Money Trail: The chief was emphatic that Rs 1.5 lakhs had passed through Naquee’s hands but could not explain when asked where the monies had come from. “Hawala”, he mumbled, and insisted that the investigations were still on. So, if the investigations were still on and nothing conclusive had been arrived at, why make grandiose claims in a press conference?
Harassment of Naquee’s family
While the ATS chief grandly declared that over 12,000 witnesses were questioned, we have no way of knowing how many of them were questioned in illegal detention. Will the ATS chief kindly explain why Naquee Ahmed’s elder brothers were detained? Why has his brother’s workshop of trolley bags been turned into a fortress, and reporters and outsiders denied access to them?
ATS-Special Cell: Healthy Competition!
Yes, there is competition, but no rivalry. The chief of ATS made a brave attempt at presenting a picture of blissful bonhomie between the ATS and Special Cell (“The head of Special Cell is my batch mate!”). But we saw the ATS team in Delhi grilling Naquee’s brother about what the Special Cell knew—about what he heard Naquee telling the Special Cell. If the two agencies are so friendly, should not they be sharing information rather than harassing and hounding family members? Why has the ATS been after Naquee's brother?
Too often we have seen these agencies turning into predators, consuming those very men it seeks out for help and cooperation. The Special Cell may be crying buckets now, but they have implicated IB informers as dreaded terrorists (remember Qamar and Irshad) earlier. The cut-throat grey world of unaccounted powers and funds ‘to tackle terror’ has veered out of control.
One last thing, does the Commissioner of Delhi Police feel no moral and ethical compulsion to officially and formally state the simple truth that Naquee was helping his department in their investigation?
Al Jazeera report on Monsanto's biopiracy in India
Leo Saldanha of Environment Support Group writes:
If you missed watching Al Jazeera's The Stream special on Monsanto's biopiracy in India while advancing Bt Brinjal, and its implications, you can catch it on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=awT9CH1GhL8. (It is about 45 mins long). The programme covers many diverse issues, in addition to biopiracy.
The programme was hosted by Derrick Ashong, musician and social entrepreneur (@ashong, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/derrick-ashong; and Ahmed Shihab-Eldin, Al Jazeera journalist and producer (@ASE, http://www.ahmedeldin.com/).
Leo Saldanha of Environment Support Group and Glen Stone, Professor of Sociocultural Anthropology and Environmental Studies at Washington University in St. Louis participated as discussants.
More details about ESG's expose of Monsanto's biopiracy in India can be accessed at www.esgindia.org.
If you missed watching Al Jazeera's The Stream special on Monsanto's biopiracy in India while advancing Bt Brinjal, and its implications, you can catch it on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=awT9CH1GhL8. (It is about 45 mins long). The programme covers many diverse issues, in addition to biopiracy.
The programme was hosted by Derrick Ashong, musician and social entrepreneur (@ashong, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/derrick-ashong; and Ahmed Shihab-Eldin, Al Jazeera journalist and producer (@ASE, http://www.ahmedeldin.com/).
Leo Saldanha of Environment Support Group and Glen Stone, Professor of Sociocultural Anthropology and Environmental Studies at Washington University in St. Louis participated as discussants.
More details about ESG's expose of Monsanto's biopiracy in India can be accessed at www.esgindia.org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)