100 in Kerala jails under UAPA, 92 of them Muslims, rest alleged naxalites

The Popular Front of India held a massive rally in Thiruvananthapuram on Thursday evening at the end of its march against the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act which began at Kozhikode earlier in the month.

PFI State President Karamana Ashraf Moulavi said at the meeting there are 100 persons in jails in Kerala under UAPA, of whom 92 are Muslims.

UAPA was invoked in the State for the first time by the last Left Democratic Front government -- against PFI members arrested in connection with the chopping of the hand of T. J. Joseph, a college teacher, for allegedly insulting Prophet Mohammed.

The present UDF government has slapped UAPA against PFI members arrested in connection with the case of alleged arms training at Narath as also against a group of persons arrested at Mavelikkara for alleged Naxalite activities.

All the charges levelled against the persons arrested in connection with these cases are such as can be dealt with under the IPC and other ordinary laws. Yet the police invoked the UAPA also primarily to deny the accused the benefit of bail and to evade the responsibility to prove their case in a court of law by adducing evidence against the accused.

UAPA was enacted in 1967 making use of a constitutional amendment made in 1963, in the wake of the border war with China, which empowers the state to restrict fundamental freedoms to check activities detrimental to the country's sovereignty and integrity. The government has been increasingly relying on this law after popular protests forced it to abandon the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act (TADA) and Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA).

Since 1967, UAPA has been amended several times. After every major terrorist attack, taking advantage of the anti-terrorist sentiments of the public, the government has been making the law more harsh but it has not been producing results..  

Draconian laws are instruments of harassment rather than tools to be used to bring the guilty to book. According to official statistics, TADA was invoked against 76,000 people. Only 1.5 per cent of them was convicted. Charges under POTA were slapped against 1,031 persons. Only 13 of them were convicted.

Barking up the wrong tree

BRP Bhaskar

Gulf Today

 

An ill-conceived attempt by the government to impose censorship in cyberspace, where the tech-savvy urban middle class usually gives vent to its anger, has misfired.

Taking advantage of the concern that arose in the country in the wake of exodus of people from the northeastern states who are working or studying elsewhere in the country as a result of panic created by motivated Internet propaganda, the government asked social networking sites to block prejudicial material. The list of accounts and pages it supplied included some that contained criticism of the ruling party but no exhortation to violence.

There had been violent protests in Mumbai and Pune against the attacks on Muslims in the Bodo areas of Assam. Later, following rumours of possible attacks, northeasterners in Chennai and Bangalore rushed to railway stations to board home-bound trains. Attempts by the authorities to dissuade them from leaving failed.

Sectarian elements have been using the Internet for some time to promote divisive ideas resulting in polarisation of the society on communal lines. One of the groups active in social networks comprises members and sympathisers of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, whom critics have dubbed Internet Hindus. Their popular themes include the exodus of Pandits from Kashmir following the rise of extremist violence and infiltration of Muslims into the country from Bangladesh.

After Muslims came under attack in Myanmar recently, some groups in India took up their cause in social networks. Gory pictures from elsewhere were posted on websites and spread through mobile phones to inflame passions. After the Assam clashes morphed pictures were distributed to exacerbate feelings further.

The government tied itself in knots by offering unconvincing explanations to justify the censorship attempt. It said its cyber security agency had identified the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al Islami, a banned Bagladeshi outfit, and the Popular Front of India, a New Delhi-based oraganisation of Kerala origin, as the sources of the objectionable material. It also claimed the offensive stuff was uploaded from Pakistan.

Both the PFI and the Pakistan government denied the charges. Later the government said it only had the URL of the sites which hosted offensive material and did not know the identity of the account holders.

At the instance of the government, social networks removed or Internet service providers blocked more than 300 web pages with communally-sensitive content. In an attempt to limit flow of information through mobile phones the government directed telecommunication companies not to allow more than five text messages a day. The limit was later raised to 20.

Sixteen Twitter accounts were blocked. Among them were those of a few high-profile Hindutva advocates. Inexplicably, the Twitter handle of a minister, who was using the medium to defend the government action, also disappeared. The network restored his account and tendered an apology for the interruption.

Cyber warriors quickly launched a vigorous counteroffensive. Posts and tweets protesting the government’s repressive steps and comparing them to the 1975 Emergency measures flooded the networks. Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde said only accounts used to post inflammatory material were blocked and there was no need for others to worry. However, the protesters were not pacified.

The government also received some gratuitous advice from the United States administration. WikiLeaks’ tormentors in Washington asked New Delhi to respect Internet freedom.

The government soon realised that its knee-jerk reaction to the communal propaganda in the social networks had done more harm than good. It reversed some of the steps.

Technical experts sympathetic to the government’s effort to check incendiary propaganda said it was perfectly in order to take steps to eliminate hate material from cyberspace but the authorities had handled the matter ineptly.

While reiterating the concept of Internet freedom, companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter, with their bitter experience of China, have been ready to cooperate with the government in keeping out objectionable content. They certainly do not want to lose the huge Indian market.

In going at the social networks the government is barking up the wrong tree. The real problem is not what is going on in cyberspace but the fragmentation of Indian society as a result of the alarming growth of religious, regional, linguistic and other identities, promoted by diverse forces, including political parties and the media. Concerted efforts are needed to strengthen forces of unity.

The exodus of northeasterners may have been triggered by malicious rumours but the government must face the harsh reality that it is unable to inspire confidence in the people, especially minority groups of every kind, about its ability to ensure peace and justice.-- Gulf Today, Sharjah, August 28, 2012.

Have I joined the Popular Front?

J. Devika

In the past few weeks, I have been asked over and over again, not always in jest, if I had joined the Popular Front. I am not surprised. The police investigation around the violence against the college teacher at Muvattupuzha has broken all previous records in not only the violation of human and civil rights, but also in the silence of Kerala’s enlightened intellectuals. If I recall right, only Nandigram evoked such a dense and deliberate silence from them. No wonder, anyone who speaks up against the manner in which the police is being armed and authorized against ‘bad muslims’ is immediately dubbed a supporter of the Popular Front. But I am intrigued by this simple question, by which the entire history of that person’s engagement with discussions around religion and the state is erased.

For the rest of the article, please go to Kafila