The National Mission to improve the delivery of justice is at work.

In October 2009, on the basis of a Vision Document adopted at a judicial conference in New Delhi, the Government of India approved in principle a National Mission to reduce pendency and delays in the judicial system and enhance accountability through structural changes, higher performance standards and capacity-building. Many past attempts to achieve the goals did not yield results because of lack of institutional capacities, inadequate funding and want of a political will.

When it was realised that without judicial reform the development agenda cannot be carried forward, the 13th Finance Commission made specific recommendations for the grant of funds to improve justice delivery. The Union government announced a series of policy initiatives aimed at reducing pendency from an average of 15 years to three years — within a three year period. It was considered by many as too ambitious for a system used to chronic delays, outmoded procedures and indifferent management. With the money made available and strategies and plans worked out, the government has now come up with a National Mission to accomplish the goal within five years, coinciding with the period of the 12th Five Year Plan. This is a look at the Mission Goals, analysing the components of the Action Plan, examining the strategies proposed and evaluating the prospects, given the conditions on the ground and the constraints.

The catalyst

For a long time, the judiciary was outside the radar of the Planning Commission which distributed development grants. And when the Commission started providing funds, it turned out to be too meagre to make any capacity improvement. The State governments did not increase the number of courts required to handle the mounting number of cases, and the existing ones did not get the needed infrastructure. The judiciary is still to acquire information and communication technology (ICT) support systems to modernise processes, and continues to labour under the weight of over three crore pending cases.

Setting a condition that the government, the single largest litigant, frame a litigation policy aimed at reducing avoidable and unnecessary litigation, the Finance Commission recommended a grant of Rs. 5,000 crore to improve judicial outcomes through six strategic initiatives. These included increasing the number of court working hours, using the existing infrastructure but conducting proceedings in morning/evening hours under a shift system. Other measures involved increased use of Lok Adalats to ease pressure on courts, promotion of Alternative Dispute Resolution methods, training of judicial officers and public prosecutors to enhance capacities, addition of facilities in judicial academies, and the creation of posts of Court Managers in every judicial district to assist in administrative functions. The Central government issued a series of orders sanctioning funds and providing guidelines for the utilisation of the grants. The State governments have started issuing orders for utilisation.

Strategic initiatives
The Department of Justice, now headed by an independent Secretary-level officer under the Ministry of Law and Justice, has assumed the role of the Mission Directorate with the Secretary to Government as Mission Leader. Judicial reform is now as much a function of the government as it is of the judiciary. The Planning Commission has constituted a Working Group on Justice to prepare the demands of the justice system under the 12th Plan, and one can expect continued support, besides the Finance Commission allocations, for the Justice Department’s Mission initiatives. The time is opportune for a breakthrough in the delivery of justice through the National Mission. The first step is to understand the implications of the Strategic Initiatives of the Action Plan and respond to the role and responsibilities envisaged under it. The Action Plan contemplates five strategic initiatives: policy changes, re-engineering procedures, human resource development, leveraging ICT and improving the infrastructure of the subordinate judiciary.

Among policy initiatives, the government has moved legislation proposing to increase High Court judges’ retirement age and enhance judicial standards and accountability. National and State litigation policies are in the process of implementation as part of the National Mission. The All India Judicial Service is being taken up for Parliament’s consideration. Improving the capacities of the judiciary proportionate to the workload is under way through judicial impact assessment as part of the legislative process. To improve human resources, legal education reforms are being considered.

Re-engineering of processes by removing bottlenecks and fast-tracking procedures constitute a major strategy to reduce delays. This may require amendments to statutes and rules; the Law Commission is being asked to work on it. Together with Lok Adalats, mediation, plea bargaining and negotiated settlements, a large part of pending cases is expected to be resolved. Clubbing similar kinds of cases, leaving administrative functions to Court Managers, introducing modern management tools and systems for docket and case management and so on, are other strategies mooted. In 2007, the e-courts project was initiated at a cost of Rs.440 crore (now revised to Rs.935 crore) to provide ICT infrastructure in district and subordinate courts and to computerise judicial records. This is scheduled for completion by 2014, enabling the National Arrears Grid to be operational for integration with the Mission Plan. With the introduction of e-courts, along with video-conferencing, e-filing and related ICT-enabled services, the justice delivery system can be transformed to become people-friendly, less expensive and expeditious.

The human resource component will still be critical, and as such the Mission proposes not only to fill up judicial vacancies but also strengthen training through judicial academies. Efforts to provide continuing education and training for lawyers and public prosecutors are under way with the involvement of Bar Councils and law schools. Many of the shortcomings in the institutions and procedures can be overcome if motivated, competent personnel are available in adequate numbers.

Another component of the Mission involves the development of infrastructure in district and subordinate courts. During the 12th Plan period, all the 15,000 courts are expected to have buildings and equipment for them to be able to operate with efficiency. For this, substantial funds are sought to be provided by the Union government on 75:25 sharing basis. States have been asked to develop the design of modern court complexes in every district and estimate fund requirements. Hopefully, the judicial architecture will soon see a decisive change in terms of efficiency and towards a litigant-friendly atmosphere. Gram Nyayalayas to help rural folk access inexpensive justice at their doorsteps is another step envisaged. Again, with police modernisation, forensic science development, criminal tracking network system and similar initiatives being implemented, it is hoped that criminal justice will soon have a human face.
Popular support

The plan is ready and the funds have been made available. Now what is needed is time-bound implementation in mission mode by the functionaries, and popular support to sustain the momentum. Unfortunately, even informed sections do not believe that pendency and arrears can be controlled given the prevailing mindset of those in charge of the systems, and the undue benefits the vested interests enjoy by keeping the systems as they are. The litigant public seems to be reconciled to their fate and the powerful among them are increasingly using extra-judicial methods to get their due.

Of course, this was the sentiment in the early-1990s about the economy as well. A decisive leadership took the risk and made the change possible, which the people welcomed in due course. Can such a thing happen in the judicial sector in the present context when the political will seems to be forthcoming and the funds have been provided? Let there be a campaign for judicial reform among the public to get the actors motivated by the leadership to take the Mission seriously for the cause of justice and development.

(Dr. Madhava Menon is a former Vice-Chancellor of the National Law Schools in Bangalore and Kolkata, and a member of the Advisory Council of National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms set up by the Government of India.)

Curtousy: The Hindu

Looking back at six years of RTI, it’s clear that the battlefront has moved significantly from where it was in 2005. We RTI activists gained a large amount of ground, but we are also at risk of losing some of those gains if we are unwilling to promptly learn and adapt.

Krishna Raj Rao

Territories Gained

During the past six years, there has been a shift in public consciousness. In the first 58 years after Independence, the people of India received information (or misinformation) about governance through the media. Then, with the passing of the RTI Act in October 2005, the corridors of power were suddenly awash with the queries of citizens – a pent up force of decades of silence had burst forth.

To receive this sudden inflow, a mechanism consisting of millions of Public Information Officers was created all over the country in the initial months. To handle the appeals that followed, thousands of first appellate authorities were designated, and to handle their disputes in turn, second appellate authorities were appointed in the form of Information Commissioners in states and at the Center.

Empowered by this machinery, people started going straight to the source of the information, as in administrative offices, and getting detailed knowledge of how their tax rupees were being spent. Many citizens became RTI activists, and actually evolved into suppliers of information for press and television, rather than consumers.

RTI has bred a new generation of opinion-leaders. In the years since 2005, many RTI activists, having acquired deep knowledge of various domains of governance, have grown in social stature and gained respectability in the eyes of the media. Private individuals and groups who have probed deep into affairs of the state and various fields that impact society, are now discovering their public voice. They are carving out a public space. Their opinions, backed up with information, have gained legitimacy and power. Such people are leveraging social and mass media to make their voices ring out loud and clear. The common man is no longer the ill-informed and mute observer of events depicted by R.K. Laxman’s cartoons; he can no longer be ignored. This has been a very important gain.

Over the last five years, citizens have re-engaged with the government, undoing the ill effects of decades of disengagement and cynicism. There is an uprising against the old ways of doing things; people are calling into question legislations passed and every step that the state and governments take. RTI has claimed the scalps of half a dozen ministers at state and central levels, with a few now cooling their heels in judicial custody.

It isn’t only the administration at the receiving end. Profiteering business lobbies, who shared a cozy relationship with ministers and bureaucrats, are now feeling vulnerable. Activists are following the paper trails left by them in the corridors of power.

Territories at Risk

The success of the RTI movement carries within itself the seeds of its destruction. It is necessary for civil society to strategize and exercise restraint to prevent these seeds from taking root. To recap, RTI depends on a two-stage appeal process for its effectiveness. Information Commissioners at state and central levels are effectively the main custodians or watchdogs of the common man’s right to information. Despite there being around a hundred information commissioners, pendency has built up at this level, as more appeals pour in than information commissioners can handle. Countrywide, the queues of pendency have already crossed a year on average. If it gets much worse, then the Public Information Officers at the bottom will cease to fear the Information Commissioners, and will start denying information to citizens with impunity. If we allow this to happen, much of our gains will be lost.

To prevent this scenario, it is of course important for us to press for more and better-qualified Information Commissioners, and for better staff, office facilities and budgets. But even while we do this, it is crucial and urgent for RTI activists to show self-restraint in exercising the second-appeal option. Rather, we should think in terms of filing other differently worded RTI applications to achieve the goal of getting the desired information. Let us remember that as we are not barred from making new improved RTI applications from different angles, there is no need to contest each appeal to the bitter end. Also, we should leverage the power of RTI with other underused mechanisms available to us, such as complaints, petitions and public mobilizations.

As the RTI movement matures, we see that right to information is a limited resource. Now that the first flush of victory is over, let us learn to wisely allocate this strategic resource in the next round of our campaign to return power to We, the People.

(Krishnaraj Rao is a prominent Right-to-Information activist and journalist based in Mumbai.  The article was first appeared on Wall Street Journal)

The Indian Social Institute (ISI) in Delhi’s picturesque Lodhi Road institutional area was bustling with the activities planned for the day. The day being a Sunday, several small and big meetings, consultations and deliberations on various socio-political, economic and educational issues were in full swing. In one of the rooms of the Institute’s multi-storied building, a discussion had ensued on the growing militarisation and violence in Chhattisgarh and other tribal populated states of India. It was a meeting of the Citizens’ Initiative for Peace, and among the participants were Justice (retd.) Rajendra Sachhar, Prof Manoranjan Mohanthy, Prof Randhir Kumar and others in addition to some younger activists like me.

When the discussion was on, a man who was in his late seventies entered the room distracting the participants’ attention for a while. He was short in height, even shorter with his temper, but when it came to his stature in terms of the work he had done and was doing, the knowledge he had gathered in his life and the commitment he had displayed over a period of three decades, he was probably taller than the tallest person in the world. There was hardly any person whom he had met who was not impressed with his work; I should say, work done almost single-handedly without any institutional support, and I was not an exception. As a senior activist and former journalist would have us believe, he was ‘a one man army of documentation of facts related to issues of Muslims in India’. Yes, you must have rightly guessed that the person I am talking about is none other than Professor Iqbal Ahmed Ansari. After greeting the participants of the meeting, he occupied a seat and the meeting was once again in full swing.

On Sunday, October 11, 2009, when I was sitting next to Prof Ansari in the meeting referred above, I had no clue that I would not be meeting him again. Two days after the meeting, October 13, he breathed his last. His untimely death left most of us bewildered. It was an irreparable loss for human and civil rights’ movements in India. Prof Ansai, who was always at the forefront of these movements spread throughout the country for over a span of three decades of his life, left this world following a heart attack.

My association with Prof Ansari is not very long and dates back to 2007 when I assisted him in organizing a consultation meeting entitled “Towards Riot & Terror Free India” organized by Inter Community Peace Initiative (ICPI) on February 11, 2007, here in Delhi. After that, I got the opportunity to interact with him on various occasions and issues, mostly through the phone and Internet. He was very prompt in his replies. Whatever I know about him is the result of my brief interactions with him and his work. It was clear to me that his commitment for the protection of civil liberties and the advancement of human rights in India was unmatched. He was passionately committed towards the cause.

One of the most visible civil liberties’ activists in India, Iqbal Ansari took up a variety issues, ranging from communalism, religious freedom and communal harmony to minority rights. A teacher of English literature, he had turned full time to a human rights’ activist, and along with other well-known civil libertarians like V M Tarkunde, Justice Rajendra Sachchar, he championed the protection of civil rights in India.

Born in 1935, Prof Ansari served as a teacher of English at the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), Aligarh, for 33 years and retired as a professor in 1995. He was the visiting professor at Centre for Federal Studies, Jamia Hamdard (2001-2003), and Jamia Millia Islamia (2003-2004), New Delhi. He was associated closely with several international and national human rights organizations in different capacities. He was a member of the Amnesty International, National Council member of Peoples’ Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), vice president of Citizens for Democracy (CFD) and general secretary of Minorities’ Council. And towards the end of his life, he was active with us in Citizens’ Initiative for Peace, a newly formed group, which comprised of people like Justice Rajendra Sachchar, Prof Randhir Singh, Kuldip Naiyyar, Swami Agniwesh, Nandini Sunder and Kavita Srivastava.

He was a prolific writer and his writing used to appear in most of the national English dallies. Prof Ansari had written extensively on issues related to human rights, minorities & prevention and resolution of inter-community conflicts. His publications include Political Representation of Muslims in India (2006), Readings on Minorities: Perspectives and Documents, Vol. I & II (1996), Vol. III (2002), Vol. IV (2010, published after his death); Human Rights in India: Some Issues (1998); Communal Riots: The State and Law in India (1997); Muslim Situation in India (1989) and, Uses of English (1978). He was also the editor of the quarterly bulletin, Human Rights Today published from New Delhi.

He had travelled to almost every part of the country to intensify human rights movement and to expose the violation of human rights and the illegal activities of both the state and non-state perpetrators. It was Prof Anasri who took special interest and made constant efforts in matters relating to victims of communal violence, especially in Hashimpura and Maliana. His efforts resulted in the transfer of cases from Uttar Pradesh to Delhi. Moreover, he made a remarkable intervention in the form of a critical analysis of the proposed Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005.

One of the last contributions for the protection and advancement of civil liberties in India was his intervention in Justice (now retired) Markande Katju’s remarks on growing beards and donning the veil. He personally wrote to him and argued the matter.

Had he been alive today, we would have found him at the fore-front of the campaign for implementation of the proposed Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011, and other struggles.

As Prof Anand Kumar, a close associate of Iqbal Saheb and professor of political science at Jawaharlal Nehru University, once wrote to me, “(H)is articles and books about the lack of implementation of the recommendations of a large number of enquiry committees and investigation commissions and the real face of our system in terms of representation of Muslims and the other marginal groups have been great intellectual contributions towards the task of inclusive and just nation building.
His inspiring memory will remain the guiding star for all of us who are engaged in promoting freedom and human rights for every citizen of India.”

In short, he was a selfless intellectual, tireless human rights’ defender and a great human being. It is a harsh reality that Prof Iqbal Ansari is no more among us, but his legacy in terms of his work and the struggles he undertook will continue to inspire us in our struggle for the establishment of a just and equitable world. Today, when there is an onslaught on human rights’ activists throughout the country and the violence against religious and ethnic minorities and marginalised sections is growing day by day, let us pledge to fight against all injustices without any fear. That will be our real tribute and homage to Iqbal Saheb.

(Mahtab Alam is a Delhi-based civil rights activist and journalist. He can be reached at activist.journalist@gmail.com)

India is talking about transparency at every level; luckily we also have national movements against corruption leading lakhs of Indians to streets to pressurize government to be more transparent and accountable to citizens of country.

But transparency seems to be a distant thing, at least answers to RTI’s filed to the flagship organizations of India Against Corruption movement suggest this.

Right to Information, the path breaking law to transparency, is no doubt a thorn in flesh of the UPA government. But more surprising is that it is equally painful for those who talk about transparency and responsibility all day and night.

Beyond Headlines filed petitions under Right to Information Act to organizations of Shri Anna Hazare (Bhrashtachar Virodhi Jan Andolan Nyas), Shri Arvind Kejriwal (Public Cause Research Foundation) and Shri Manish Sisodia (Kabir). Although these non-government organizations do not come under the scanner of RTI act, as they do not take funds from the government, but we expected them to reply to the queries to maintain transparency in their movement.

Earlier RTIs of BeyondHeadlines have revealed that Kabir and PCRF get funds from many foreign sources, including dubious Ford Foundations. But this time Kabir and Bhrashtachar Virodhi Jan Andolan Nyas did not bother to reply to the RTI. PCRF gave a half hearted reply saying the information requested is already available on the website.

In our RTI we have requested information about funds, donations, expenditure and balance sheets of these organizations.

They also said that the information requested is posted on the website and organization is doing a special audit for expenditure on India Against Corruption Movement, which will be soon posted on the website.

The website nowhere has detailed information about expenditures of the movement. All it has to say is that the total donations received amount to 8287668 rupees including donations of Rupees 25 lakhs from Jindal Aluminium, 1 lakh from HDFC bank limited, 1 lakh from Safexpress Ltd. and from various other organizations and individuals. The website nowhere gives details of expenditure.

Ironically, Kejriwal and Anna Hazare have themselves worked in the enactment of the Right to Information Act. Their negligence of the RTI’s seeking information about their own organizations suggests that talking about transparency is different and being transparent is different.

Now a serious question rises, that when the flag bearers of the Right to Information Act find it difficult to provide info about their own organizations, how we can expect info from corrupt bureaucrats and government officials?

Afroz Alam Sahil

It is now increasingly believed in Nepal that since the Parliament started to strip off the powers of King Gyanendra in 2006; Nepal has been politically volatile and has seen four Prime Minister in five years. The constitution making process has gone through rough weather. As the Supreme Court of Nepal has set a no extension time beyond November 2011, the current Prime Minister Baburam Bhattrai has promised to produce the first draft of the new constitution by the deadline.

File photo of deposed King Gaynandra

But very few want to believe the words of the current PM.

The democratic process which started in 2006 to draft a new constitution has not been successful. In the meantime the royalists want the King back in power. The perception that in last five years the king has become weak no longer holds true. He is in fact rising in popularity largely due to the mistakes of the Maoists led governments. At a time when people are fed up with politics being done on issue like price rise, corruption, killings and kidnappings, many feel the need of the King at the centre. They feel their Nepal once known for beauty and serenity has now become increasingly intolerant and violent.

Raj Kumar Thapa of the Nepalese Supreme Court Bar Association is in pain to see that Nepalese politicians are dividing the country on caste lines. But he hopes that it should not last long as people would eventually reject it. He is of the opinion that some political leaders are opposing the so called democracy. He feels that “the Constitution making is also keeping the interest of the elite class. A national leader is required at this moment. Nepal does not have one national leader. All are confined to their political parties.”

To Thapa Constitutional Monarchy seems the only solution in dealing with the current crisis. He acknowledges that there were mistakes committed by the king and there were many dishonest and corrupt people around the King. One big lacuna was that king during his reign did not reach the common people and his coterie capitalized on it for their own benefit. It is now widely perceived that the King has realized his mistake and has started reaching out to common people and in turn has got immense support from them. Many Nepalese now want to see King Gyanendra back in power.

This is the first part of a series of articles on politics of democracy in contemporary Nepal. The author visited Nepal and interacted with people from a large spectrum of life.

Mahfooz Ahmed, barely 21 years old, hails from Rasoolabad Village of Azamgarh, a district of eastern Uttar Pradesh. A second year student of Bachelor of Arts at the town’s Shibli National College, Mahfooz also work with his college as a watchman of its guest house in order to support his studies as his family finds it difficult to make their ends meet. On September 22, 2011, he was sent to Varanasi by his college authorities to get some audit forms for the college, which was undergoing the process of some audits and the requisite forms were neither available in the college nor anywhere else in Azamgarh. By evening, Mahfooz had managed to collect the forms and was getting ready to catch a bus to return. He informed the college authorities accordingly.  But he was nowhere to be seen the next day. Worried college authorities and family members tried to contact him, but he cannot be reached as his cell phone was switched off.

Meanwhile, the next day, few local TV channels flashed the news of Mahfooz being detained by the Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS) from Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. It was claimed in media reports that he was detained by the ATS while taking pictures of the Hotel Taj in the Cantonment area of Varanasi, although, till the last minute, the officials denied the arrest. It was only after much public pressure that the Varanasi police accepted that Mahfooz was in their custody. He was subsequently released after 44 hours of illegal detention. The police alleged that Mahfooz was stopped at the hotel’s gate, where he was caught while making a video of the hotel campus and found with the possession of some Pakistani currency. According to agencies, Mahfooz told the police that it was given to him by a person who visited Azamgarh from Pakistan.

Mahfooz did accept that he took pictures of the hotel with prior permission but denied all the other charges. “I took photographs of the hotel with prior permission from the security guards at the gate. But when they got to know that I was from Azamgarh, I was communally abused and branded as a terrorist before being finally handed over to the police,” Mahfooz told Rajiv Yadav, an activist associated with human rights organisation People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), after his release.

“If the police have found Pakistani currency with Mahfooz, as they claim, why haven’t they produced it before a court?” asks Rajiv. “It is a clear case of unlawful detention, and we demand a proper clarification from the police and intelligence agencies,” he adds. This is not, after all, the first time that a resident of Azamgarh, particularly a Muslim, has been labeled as a terrorist or abused and subsequently detained.

In March 2009, Mohammed Ashad, an engineering student from Azamagah, who was then studying in Noida, was taken into custody on the grounds that he hailed from Azamgarh and that he was a Muslim. He was arrested in sector 18 of Noida, while he was driving a bike along with his friend Amar Deep Singh, and interrogated for 24 hours. In November 2008, members of a hockey team from Azamgarh were branded as terrorists. The team was on its way to Etawah from Kanpur on November 10 when some boys who had forgotten their jersey in the train’s coach they were travelling in, went back to collect it. Inside, the government railway police (GRP) personnel stopped them and asked their whereabouts. On being told they were from Azamgarh, the police officials detained the players and declared them terrorists.

There are many cases like this. Rajiv believes that the police and other agencies are doing so to malign the Muslim community and create a sense of fear among Muslim youths. “It’s nothing but communal witch-hunt and desperate attempts to give a bad name to Azamgarh,” he asserts. All of this started in the wake of the ‘encounter’ at Batla House, a locality in Jamia Nagar in southeast Delhi, on September 19, 2008, in which two boys from Azamgarh — Atif Amin and Md Sajid — were killed.

Thereafter, the police and intelligence bureau officials started claiming that ‘Azamgarh was slowly but surely, becoming a hotbed for terrorist activities’, which was unquestionably reported by the mainstream media houses. The residents’ demand for a judicial probe into the Batla House ‘encounter’ by a sitting judge of the Supreme Court is still pending and every year, they organise conventions and rallies to reiterate their demand. Residents increasingly face problems in getting their passports made or renewed. In my recent trip last week, I was told in a conversation by a local activist, Tarique Shafeeq, that “since three years, hundreds of residents have been denied access to new passports or its renewal,”. He further complained: “Wherever we go, we are seen suspiciously. We have to be extra cautious.” After every blast in the country, both the police and the media try to make some connection with Azamgarh, which has made the life of its residents more difficult.

As a result, there is a complete pall of insecurity and gloom that has been pervading its residents. The youth are scared and their parents afraid to send their children out of their homes, be it for studies or jobs. Moreover, residents of Azamgarh have been forced to vacate their rooms by landlords in Delhi and other places. Many youths have been missing. There is absolutely no knowledge of their whereabouts. Tarique Shafique’s brother, who studied para-medical sciences at Hamdard University, found it very difficult to find a place to stay in Delhi. “Is it a crime to be a Muslim and a resident of Azamgarh,” asks Tarique. The country, especially the state and it various agencies, need to answer this before it is too late.

(Mahtab Alam is a Delhi-based civil rights’ activist and journalist. He can be reached at activist.journalist@gmail.com)

John Dayal

I must begin with a disclaimer: I was a member of the Working Group of the  Mrs Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council, which drafted the Prevention of Communal Violence [Access to Justice and Reparations] Bill 2011. I am also a member of the National Integration Council. In the council’s belated meeting on September 10, 2011, in the magnificent Vigyan Bhawan, I was the solitary Christian member – of the other two, St Stephens College Principal Dr Valson Thampu did not attend and Delhi Archbishop Vincent Concessao was away in Rome – to speak and support the enactment of such a bill, which otherwise came in for a brutal drubbing at the hands of Bharatiya Janata party’s parliamentary leaders Mrs Shushma Swaraj of the Lok Sabha and Mr Arun Jaitely of the Rajya Sabha, and the party’s chief ministers of Madhya Pradesh, Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand, leaders of most major non-Congress parties and even the bosses of some satellite TV channels.

My views in this article may, therefore, be somewhat biased, and if they are, it is despite my trying hard to be absolutely neutral. I may also point out that during the framing of this draft bill, I, together with jurists Vrinda Grover and Usha Ramanathan and activist Shabnam Hashmi,  have been a critic of many a provision relating to a feared erosion of the federal character of our governance and possible allusions to “disturbed areas” which are anathema to many of us in the civil liberties movement. The NAC accepted over 57 objections before publishing its draft bill.

Having said that, I fear that there has been a possible attempt in some official quarters to kill this Bill even before it has formally seen the light of the day by being send to the Cabinet, then introduced in Parliament, discussed in select committees and then debate openly on the floor of the Rajya Sabha [where an apparition of a 2005 Bill still lives] before being passed and signed into law. The manner in which it was allowed to be mauled in the open meeting of the National Integration Council – just four of us really supported it, three being social activists – put a huge question mark on why the Bill was  so prematurely put before political opponents for their views, and why no one from the government or from the Congress Party spoke, or was allowed to speak, in defence of either the Bill or the rational for coming up with suitable legislation to save religious minorities of all sorts from targetted violence.

The Bill came into being from the group experiences of the anti Muslim pogroms of Gujarat in 2002, the attempted annihilation of Christians in Kandhamal, Orissa in 2007-2008, the haunting memories of the 1984 massacre of Sikhs in Delhi and other cities, together with attacks on Dalits and Tribals over the past few decades. The government had come up with a bill in 2005, but when it presented its version in the Rajya Sabha, it was clear that the administration was empowering governments and police rather than protecting and defending the victims. It took five years of hard labour by civil society and specially by the Muslim groups, led by the likes of former Chief Justice Ahmadi and several retired high court judges, before the government agreed there was need to revise the bill thoroughly.

The National Integration Council took upon itself the task of drafting the proposed new bill, together with other social legislation it was working on, including the Right to Food. It set up a  working group with members Harsh Mander and Farah Naqvi as coordinators and experts and activists  representing the minorities, legal luminaries and others on the team. It took close to a year before the Bill took some share, seeing bitter and prolonged discussions between members to balance the needs of the minorities and reconciling it with  constitutional provisions and the Indian penal Code.

It was quite clear from the beginning that there was a felt need to identify and punish targeted violence,  define who will be identified as victims and when, and how action would be taken to end impunity, enforce command responsibility, set up some mechanism to trigger state action. It was also clear that we did not want to repeat the experiments of the National Human Rights commission and the national Commission for Minorities which were either toothless, or as themselves as defenders of national honour by defending the government, or were toothless. It was also clear to us that the federal character of the state could not be trifled with. And above all, many of us were absolutely adamant that there be no reference to disturbed areas on the pattern of Jammu and Kashmir and the north eastern States which gave unfettered powers to the Armed Forces.

Although most of the members had worked with the victims of communal violence, and therefore wanted  some universal principles and equality to be introduced both in justice and in reparations and relief and rehabilitation, we did not want fears to be expressed about possible overthrow of state governments by the centre and the introduction of President’s Rule. Therefore it was only the second part of Article 355 which was seen as an entry point for the Central government to encourage state governments to act swiftly when communal violence went out of hand, as had happened in Gujarat and Kandhamal.

In defining groups, it was also clear to us that most groups could be in a  minority in some state or the other, and in certain circumstances. Though Muslims, Sikhs, and Christians were the national minorities, even Hindus were a minority in as many as seven of the 35 States and union territories of India. Other issues covered in the bill in detail were dereliction of duty by public servants, which was recognised  both in omission and commission. The definition said public servants  who act or omit to exercise  authority vested in them and fail to prevent or offences or protect victims  or act in a malafide or predicted manner will be guilty of punishable offences. They had of course first to identify the violence as targeted. The monitoring and grievance redressal, the bill said, shall be  with the National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation (NACHJR) and corresponding State authorities (SACHJR). The monitoring mechanism of national and state authorities will also provide the “paper trail” to ensure robust accountability of public officials in a court of law.

The critical clauses related to the identification of targeted and communal violence. The Indian Penal Code contains most offences committed during episodes of communal violence. These have been appended in a schedule to the Bill and shall be considered offences when they cross a threshold of being knowingly  directed against any person  by virtue of his or her membership of a minority group. Brutal forms of sexual offence as seen in Gujarat and Kandhamal have also been included in the bill, as is hate campaign and propaganda leading to alienation and targeted violence.

Just to make it doubly sure that the Bill passed muster, the draft said advisories and recommendations of the NACHJR were not binding  on State governments. All powers and duties of investigation, prosecution and trial remained with the State governments.

The draft Bill, after being put in a legislative format by Additional Solicitor General Indira Jai Singh [she did only the formatting, not the actual drafting, it must be made clear]  the draft was put on the Internet by the National Advisory Council to garner public opinion which would be sent to the Central government together with the suggestions came. In due course, the ministries were supposed to clear it before the Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister adopted a final version for introducing in parliament.

That is why the developments in the NIC meeting surprised us.  The government had not formally intimated its position on the Bill nor had it formally sent it to the opposition parties and the state governmetns for their official opinion and suggestions other than the NAC putting it on its website. The agenda formulation too made it seem that those who were to speak had either to accept it or reject it, rather than to critique and analyse it. As the formal NIC note put it, the agenda of the meeting was “measures to curb communalism and  communal violence, approach to the Communal Violence Bill, measures to promote communal harmony and measures to end discrimination, specially against minorities, and finally, how to prevent radicalisation of youth”.

Unfortunately, barring the preliminary remarks of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the discussion, along political divides, focussed on just the Draft NAC Bill. The tone was set by Sushma Swaraj who slammed the Bill and said it did not consider people as Indian citizens but divided them on line of religion or ethnicity and language. Her party, she said, would formally oppose the Bill. Arun Jaitely followed suit, saying the federal structure would be hit. In saying so, they almost verbatim followed the propaganda that had been let loose for weeks earlier by the RSS and its wings, the Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad whose leadership threatened a nationwide agitation to ensure that the bill, which they aid stigmatised the Hindu community, did not bring law. It was mostly the BJP chief ministers who were present in force barring Narendra Modi of Gujarat. They all opposed the Bill in the language similar to the Bajrang Dal and RSS. Nitish Kumar, Jayalalitha and Mayawati had stayed away, but the text they circulated criticised the Bill for infringing  on the rights of the states. The CPM – and both Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechury spoke, also had grave apprehensions about the federal motives of the NAC. BJP’s allies at one time or the other, the Akali Dal and the Biju Janata Dal, also toed the line.

What surprised observers was the stance of the UPA ally Trinamul Congress of Mamta Bannerjee which made common cause with other state governments in the issue of the rights of the states. Scholar Zoya Hasan and some media stalwarts also spoke against the Bill for a verity of reasons, but essentially implying that existing laws were more than sufficient.

There were very few supporters. Ministers do not speak at NIC meetings as a matter of form. But other Congressmen do. They refrained this time from supporting a draft emerging out of a council headed by party president Sonia Gandhi.. The support came from Muslim members Navid Hamid and Asghar Ali Engineer and a few others. The Chairman of the National Commission for Minorities, Wajahat Habibullah, repeatedly asked for permission to speak, but in the end could not. In an interview later, he said he wanted to stress issues of Rehabilitation, Accountability and the plight of Internally Displaced persons, which in fact was added on NCM’s recommendation following Kandhamal, Ahmedabad and the situation in Tribal areas of Tripura. He also referred to the agenda item on youth, mentioning the victimisation of Muslim youth arrested In the Mecca Masjid bomb blast case and the governmetns” arresting them under laws  on criminal conspiracy and sedition and so on.

The matter of course is not over. The debate continues even among those of us who were members of the NAC Working group. Many have called for an urgent meeting of the Working group to revisit the issues of federalism and possible encroachment of the powers of the States. There is a feeling that even if the objections have been political, there is need to make the Bill go through parliament with consensus and dialogue, and therefore there is a need to engage with the states governments and with various political parties.
There is a definite agreement, articulated by eminent law teacher Upendra Buxi that there is need for a law to prevent targetted and communal violence. Vrinda Grover said “we must also pay heed that criticism or anxiety is being expressed from across the board and not just the usual suspects.” Vrinda and Usha Ramanathan were among the first in the Working group to flag problematic provisions.  “There is some merit in reconsidering some legal propositions presented in the final NAC draft of the CV Bill, 2011,” she says. “I am afraid the apprehension that this law is a device for the Union to usurp the power and role of the States and intrude at will, lingers on. The ill advised Clause 20 of the penultimate NAC Bill, still haunts public memory, with some reason. Despite Clause 20 having been dropped no corresponding change has been made the powers and functions of the National Authority. It is this that has invited the wrath of many regional, Left, ‘secular’ parties who would have otherwise been our allies and advocates of this bill.

Most of us agree with Vrinda when she says “tampering with the federal structure will not yield anything for those constituencies who need the protection of the CV law. It will however alienate critical allies, without whose support, it is unlikely that this Bill will ever translate into law, as the numbers will simply not add up.”

All eyes are now on the NAC and the union government, though the hope that the Bill would be placed before Parliament, possibly as government amendments to the Bill of 2005, are fading fast.

(The views expressed in the article are author’s own. It does not necessarily reflect BH’s editorial policy)

Much has been said and written, in the past few days, about unearthing of the network of the terrorists killed and captured in and aftermath of the ‘encounter’ at L-18, Batla House, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi. In coming days and weeks, the nation would hear and read new details of briefing from security agencies regarding the plot to destabilise the country and that of new arrests in the conspiracy to terrorise the nation.

Nearly all captured and killed suspects belong to the lower middle strata of the Muslim community who have a highly brilliant educational profile and seem to be living a normal life with high dreams like any other young Indians would have.

The combing operation has come as a shock for the nation and the Muslim community. Till the black Friday of 9/19, the day on which the network of the ‘terrorists’ was brought to light, Indian Muslims have got words of praise even from the adversaries of Islam and Muslims, from Evangelist US President Bush to Hindutva mascot Advani in India, for keeping themselves aloof from the groups of the militants confronting the aggressions in Iraq, US-led operations in Afghanistan and armed struggle of the separatists from Jammu and Kashmir in India.

As news spread like a wild fire of the operation at Jamia Nagar, people across the nation watched TV sets in disbelief and confusion. By evening, the country got brief of claims from the security agencies about the combing operation and unearthing of the ‘terrorists’ group in the capital, responsible for the bomb attacks in Delhi and other parts of the country. From the claims of the security agencies and the live electronic media trial, the nation got first hand information of the indigenous Muslim terrorist network.

While the combing was still in process, the residents of the locality, civil rights groups and the Muslim organisations started raising serious reservations about the operations because of the history of the fake encounters along with the role of security agencies to demonise the Muslim community and the haste of the electronic media to sensationalise the news to raise their viewer ship rate.

Incidentally, the confusion, disbelief and shock remain even after so many days of the encounter. A substantial segment of the Indian society, even after 60 years of democratic journey of the nation, thinks that it is obligatory for Muslims to believe with blind eyes whatever the security agencies wishes to brief and if they dares to do analysis of the events and reports, the dangers of bracketing them with anti-national activities looms large over their heads.

In the Batla House shootout, with the death of a brilliant police officer, an encounter specialist and leader of the combing operation, who died due to excess bleeding and heart attack after gun injuries in the operation, the security agencies version got weightage and wide acceptability. But still more steps and transparency are needed to convenience the nation.

The shoot out has deeply divided the society and urgent steps are required to control the damage.

The incident has nearly polarised all sections of the Muslim society not only in the area around Jamia Millia Islamia and other Muslim concentrated localities in Delhi but also in the targeted villages and lanes around and in Azamgarh in Uttar Pradesh.

The official electronic channel and radio of the country felt it in national interest to give wide publicity to the news of transaction of Rs 30 million in one of the account of the suspect of the Delhi Bomb blast and the combing operation at Batla House, but the transaction of few thousands was discovered after cross check from the Bank in Azamgarh. Such conflicting versions strengthen the suspicion of the civil society and the Muslim community about ‘encounters’.

There should be no problem for initiating a judicial probe into the infamous Batla House ‘encounter’ if the slate of the security agencies is clean and they have ample evidences against the arrested and killed suspects.

It was nothing but to demonise the entire Muslim community when the Delhi Police paraded the arrested youths with heads covered with Arabian scarf with a desire to substantiate the theory of Islamic terrorists, which is unacceptable to every single Muslim in the country. The over zealots in the security agencies fails to understand that such acts are counter productive and harmful even in fight against terrorism.

The sense of ‘perceived injustice’ and demonisation acts is strengthening the anger and frustration, and it would be counter productive in the fight against terror and violence.

Now when the unbelievable has happened and confronting versions are coming with every passing hour, the country and the community should seriously ponder over the fall out of the incident. If we sincerely desire that Indian Muslims must accept the version of the security agencies about the Batla House operation, it is in the national interest to go in depth about the reasons behind the emergence of involvement of educated young Muslims in acts of violence and terrorism.

We have seen how madrasas have been targeted in the past for their alleged role in propagation of Jihad and anti-national activities. The Muslim community has expected that National Democratic Alliance (NDA) Deputy Prime Minister Mr Lal Krishan Advani would keep his promise and bring a white paper on the anti national activities of madrasas and their role in propagation of Jihad, but his government lost power without any progress on that front.

Now when the biggest Islamic institution in India, Darul Uloom Deoband, has categorically denounced the acts of terrorism, issued a fatwa against the misuse of Islam and had term the acts of violence against tenets of Islam and as we find not a single name from madrasas in India involved in any kind of violent or terrorist activity in any part of the country, new phenomenon has emerged in the recent past.

Wherever there have been arrests of Muslim youths for any kind of violent activity in recent past, majority of the arrested youths have highly modern educational profile with brilliant academic career. These youths have not even seen the gates of madrasa in their life.

As per the version of the security agencies, the arrested youths from Ahmedabad to Hyderabad and from Delhi to Mumbai and Karnataka in connection with different incidents in the past have claimed to be part of the terror network with one commonality, and the commonality is to take revenge of the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 and the Gujarat pogrom of 2002 in which more than 2,000 innocent Muslim youths, women and children were brutally killed and property worth billions were vandalised and torched.

If we accept the theory of the security agencies in black and white, every nationalist have a right to know about the measures taken to address the grievances.

We have silently witnessed that nothing seriously was done to give justice to the victims of the Mumbai riots of 1992 and the Modiete pogrom of Gujarat. Who can deny that few victims of Gujarat have got some kind of reprieve and justice due to the intervention of the Supreme Court only.

Home Minister Mr P. Chidambaram gave a courageous statement while delivering Filed Marshal Carriapa’s Lecture recently by admitting that alienation of the Muslim community in the country is taking educated Muslims on the “path of violence.”

It is well-known that more and more educated Muslim youths are loosing hope in the democratic system of the nation as in democracy, numbers are important. These youths feel that the political leadership of the nation is doing great harm to them by turning their faces away from them as they do not have numbers. They wish an inclusive policy for them but get cold response from the polity. Unfortunately, a majority of Muslim politicians are shy to advocate their case. They are busy in safeguarding their interests for their own survival.

It is high time that instead of jerk reactions, the Muslim leadership and community’s organisations should sit together to plan joint strategies to fight the onslaught and do urgent home work to consul the agitated young minds of the community before it is too late. The leadership has to convey a strong message in the community that the path of violence would lead us to nowhere and would do more harm to us beside strengthening the hands of community’s adversaries.

It is in the national interest that the political leadership of the country must find consensus for having an inclusive policy for all, including Muslims.

To convince the Muslim community and the civil society about the fair and impartial role of the security agencies, some kind of mechanism needs to be developed and the easiest ways seems to be constitution of the Judicial Commission to probe every terrorist activity in the country. This is necessary because the nation has witnessed that majority of the arrested Muslim youths in the past has got reprieve from courts during the trials as Anti-Terrorism Squad fails to convince the courts about its charges against the arrested youths.

It is a sad story that more and more Bar Councils in the country are passing resolutions, asking its members not to take cases of the arrested Muslim suspects. Hyderabad has witnessed violent assault on Muslim advocates when they decided to defend the arrested Muslim youths. Who can deny that a good majority from more than 180 Muslim youths arrested for terrorist activities were acquitted in the trial court in Andhra Pradesh and just two suspects are facing charges in the Hyderabad blasts.

In Delhi, an advocate withdrew himself from defending an arrested suspect. It would be great injustice if the nation expects that Muslims must also crucify the arrested suspects without fair trials.

Knives are out against Prof Mushirul Hasan, the then vice chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, the institution which was at the forefront of the freedom struggle and was established to strengthen the composite fabric and plural structure of the Indian society, for daring to take a courageous step to provide legal aid to two of its students who are suspects in the 2008 Delhi serial blasts. The purpose seems not to defend them but to give them a chance to prove their innocence in the court. For the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), it is an anti-national act.

Leave alone the perpetrators of the mass crimes against hapless Muslims in Mumbai riots and the Gujarat pogrom of 2002, even the killers of Father of Nation Mahatma Gandhi, Former Prime Ministers Indra Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi have a right to get them defended, but the arrested Muslim suspects deserves to be hanged without fair trial.

In an ideal state, it is paramount duty of the establishment to convince every group and race, by actions, about the impartiality of the state apparatus.

The nation has witnessed the casual behavior of state apparatus when it comes to take even notice of the activities of Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). Bombs were not only recovered from activists of Bajrang Dal from the state of Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Orissa but its activists were killed while making bombs at Kanpur in Uttar Pradesh. Camps of arms training were organized for its cadres, but we see no action from the security agencies against the militant Hindutva outfit.

In last two months, Bajrang Dal and VHP activists have killed and attacked Christians, vandalised and torched Churches from Uttarakhand to Orissa and Karnataka, but hapless nation waits for more attacks from them on minorities.

The acts of demonising the Muslim community would do more harm instead of solving problems and further alienate Muslims besides posing great dangers for the nation. The politicisation of terrorism and the victimization of the Muslim community would undoubtedly further breed real terrorists in the Muslim community.

The nation should rise above petty politics, and politicisation of terrorism must stop at once.

(Naved Hamid is a member of the National Integration Council. He can be reached at navaidhamid@gmail.com. The views expressed in this article are writer’s own, and it does not necessarily reflect BH’s editorial policy)

Three years ago on September 19, 2008, two young boys (Atif Amin and Mohamed Sajid) allegedly Indian Mujahideen (IM) terrorists, were killed in an ‘encounter’ in Batla House locality of Jamia Nagar in southeast Delhi. The shootout led to arrest of a number of local Muslim youths. Atif and some of the people arrested and detained were students of Jamia Millia Islamia.

The ‘encounter’ and subsequent arrests led to widespread allegations and protests by civil society groups, political parties, activists, including teachers and students of the university. The protesting groups refused to accept the police version with regard to shootout and termed it a ‘cold blooded murder’.

Subsequently, on the Delhi High Court’s directive on May 21, 2009, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in its July 22 report cleared the police of any violations of rights despite the fact that the police theory is full of contradictions and loopholes.

Since then, public speculations and debate continue till date. There has been a voice coming out of the secular progressive section of this country demanding an independent judicial inquiry into the whole episode but even after three years of the incident, the government remains adamant on its politically inclined stand of not responding to any such demands, which in turn creates a fear psychosis within a section of the country.

The fear is not confined to the Batla House locality only. Many states in the country is consistently living in such fear under the draconian laws like Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA) 1958.

What we witnessed in Batla House three years ago is something that happens every day in the north-eastern states of India and Jammu and Kashmir.

We strongly condemn all the bomb blasts taking place in this country, criticism of which in the strongest possible words is not enough. Innocent people are targeted in such attacks. Those involved in these attacks should not be spared at all; they deserve no mercy but at the same time, it is also important to ensure that no innocent person becomes a victim of torture in the name of investigations and careful analysis should be done before declaring anyone as a terrorist, considering every single life of utmost importance in the process of establishment of a true secular democratic state.

Recently, addressing a meeting of the National Integration Council, our honorable Prime Minister Shri Manmohan Singh admitted in his speech that Muslims in this country have to live in fear after such attacks because of the fact that the first needle of the investigation turn towards them. We welcome such concerns of Dr Singh and also appeal to him that something concrete should be done about it. Special provisions should also be made to bring them to the main stream of the society and help them play an inclusive part in the development process of the country.

We appeal all of you to join a peace march from Batla House to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) along with various civil right organizations and activists to put forth all these demands intended towards justice and peace in this country.

Muslims, or citizens of the diverse nation from as far as Manipur to Kashmir should all be allowed to breathe in an air “where the mind is without fear and head is held high,” as envisioned by Rabnidranath Tagore.

(Asad is a former student of Jamia Millia Islami and currently associated with Khudai Khitmatgaar, a rights group.)

Prof. PK Basu used to teach at Centre for Management Studies (CMS), Jamia Millia Islamia. He has been a well-known teacher in the student community. Basu has been teaching at Jamia for several years and also reportedly does not take any salary for his service to the university. The unfortunate incident happened on September 7, 2011, when he was taking a class of MBA students of the 2011-12 batch. He allegedly targeted a burqa (veil) clad student questioning the practice of veil. He allegedly further went on to make communally sensitive remarks, including belittling Jamia as a third class minority institution and labeling students as illiterates. He also questioned the utility of his teaching at such a university and to such ignorant students.

The students went on to complain to the director of CMS and the issue was allowed to flare up instead of discussion and faculty level investigation.

Jamia administration has clearly taken the decision in haste, relaying primarily on students’ complaint. It seems no one, including the director, thought it proper to ask Prof Basu to come up with explanation. In between, the matter attracted the attention of the media. It is true that the issue at hand was sensitive, and it was required to be dealt first within the university.

The local Muslim community was shocked and angry. They reacted strongly against the alleged statements of Prof Basu. The university administration has decided to severe contacts with the professor without giving him a chance to defend himself.

This knee-jerk response to the incident has created a negative image of the university. Jamia Millia Islamia has been known as a centre of higher learning in India and abroad. Having the ethical foundation of Islam and stress on social inclusion and communal harmony makes Jamia a unique institution in the entire world. The response to the episode was unbecoming of the reputation and stature of Jamia.

If it comes out that Prof Basu really used those abusive words, it must be condemned and he must be asked to tender an unconditional apology to the university. What is more interesting here is that people who raised their concern as Muslims at least could have used the message of Prophet Mohammad (PUBH) regarding dealing with people who question the faith of a devout Muslim. The Prophet (PUBH) treated the woman with respect who used to throw garbage on him. As per this Islamic teaching, Prof Basu could have been made to understand the religious and spiritual significance of the veil.  What is surprising is that no one from the university or the local community took the sacred pain to clarify the doubts of the professor.

(Afroz is pursuing M.Phil in comparative religion from Jamia Millia Islamia. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect BH’s editorial policy. Afroz can be contacted at  afroz.alam.sahil@gmail.com)