Civil Liberties Monitoring Committee (CLMC) on the occasion of five years of Makkah Masjid bomb blast and subsequent police firing, pay homage to the Martyrs and express its solidarity with the family of victims of bomb terror and police terror. This committee expresses its grief and sorrow on the conditions of victims and their families and also expresses concern over the negligence of government and inaction by the investigating agencies. It seems that the government and investigating agencies are not serious to investigate this case instead are behaving in biased manner. If carefully examined the Makkah Masjid bomb blast, subsequent police firing and the other bomb blasts in the country it can be said that there is something suspicious that is being shielded and the real culprits are being protected. By this the fact comes out that the investigating agencies are not serious and insincere.

CLMC strongly feel that the blasts that took place in Hyderabad at some or the point has nexus between a group of Hindutva police officers and Hindutva organizations. Actually the blasts that took place in Hyderabad were the part of greater conspiracy hatched by Hindutva elements present in the government and non-government agencies There is a reason to believe on this because immediately after the blast at Makkah Masjid, police opened fire on the Muslims who were helping the victims of the blast and also blamed the Muslims for the blast which is reported in the secret report of police. In this report it is mentioned that because of the differences between Ahle Hadees and Sunnatul Jamaat, Ahle Hadees people targeted Sunnatul Jamaat people through bomb blast. Police department registered two FIRs of Makkah Masjid bomb blast. One case was handed over to CBI and another case was retained by the Hyderabad police.

By taking the advantage of blast and on the name of investigation, police started picking hundreds and hundreds of Muslim youths, illegally detained and tortured mercilessly. Police forced the Muslim youths to say “Hey Ram” and disrespect the Holy quran and commented on religion Islam in insulting manner and forced them to take the responsibility of blasts. They propagated through media that Muslim youths have taken the responsibility of bomb blasts. They also disclosed the tampered recordings of Narco analysis test to the media. This clearly reflects the intentions of the investigation agency as they wanted to divert the blast investigation so that many aims can be fulfilled with a single shot. This may be to divert the attention from Sohrabuddin encounter, to bring down the morale of Muslim community, so that they cannot live with human dignity etc. Muslim leaders completely failed to tackle the situation and become defensive in this issue and the Hindutva terrorists succeeded in their aims initially. Due to the continuous pressure from the Muslim community, secular forces and the self confidence of Muslim youths the Hindutva terrorists did not succeed. Now the real terrorists have been exposed as well. All these terrorists belong to RSS gang.

Civil Liberties Committee strongly condemns the dual standard of the government. . The police officers those who were involved in implicating the Muslim youths have been rewarded with awards and promoted to higher post .Ramchandran and Harish Kumar Gupta who are actually responsible for the torture of Muslim youths, are today at the higher positions. The government is shielding the tainted police officers in the courts by appointing top most lawyers. The state government has dumped the State Minority Commission’s Advocate Ravichander report in which it is clearly mentioned that police torture took place and recommended that the tainted police officers should be punished, measures should be taken to build the confidence of Muslim community, 24 hours help line should be provided and the complaints should be heard and recorded by the chief secretary of Andhra Pradesh government. Instead of implementing the recommendations of Advocate Ravichander’s report, the government has dismissed the State Minority Commission itself. In fact, to get rid of implementing these recommendations, the government has tendered apology to Muslim community. By giving meagre amount on the name of compensation, it wants to cool down the emotions of Muslims, but don’t want to take any action against police officers because government it self depend on these police officers as they belongs to right wing group.

This committee wants to say that giving meagre amount on the name of compensation is not justice. Justice should be based on equity. Even after the completion of 5 years of Makkah Masjid bomb blast, the government has not taken any measures to provide justice. The demand of justice is that first of all government should close all the cases registered against Muslim youths in connection of blasts in the year 2007 (these cases are still open) Advocate Ravichander’s report should be presented in the Assembly and its recommendations should be implemented immediately. Tainted police officers should be punished, measures should be taken for the rehabilitation of Muslim youths, and the government should withdraw the advocates who are appointed to defend the tainted police officers in the courts.

On the completion of five years of Makkah Masjid bomb blast, Civil Liberties Monitoring Committee demands the Muslim ruling class to come into consciousness at least now and pressurize the government to present Advocate Ravichander’s report in the Assembly, it is a matter of great concern that even the MLA’s belongs to Muslim community or Congress,TDP,TRS,CPI,CPM,etc didn’t raised this issue in the assembly, this committee condemn the reckless attitude of political parties. Civil Liberties Committee wants to make it clear that the links of all the bomb blasts that took place in the country are connected with the Makkah Masjid bomb blast. For this purpose, the investigation should be done immediately in the greater interest of national security.

Civil Liberties Monitoring Committee on this occasion demands the Prime Minister of India to intervene into the situation and monitor the investigation of Makkah Masjid as the state government completely failed to full its responsibility. Victims are denied justice; therefore justice should be done as soon as possible. Advocate Ravichander’s report should be presented in the Assembly and implemented immediately.  Immediate measures should be taken to curb the Hindutva terrorism.

Noted civil rights activist Shabnam Hashmi has written to Congress president Sonia Gandhi regarding brutal attack on a Muslim youth by Mumbai police for unintentionally crossing a traffic signal.

Bilal Abdul Qadir Sheikh was brutally thrashed by four Bhiwandi Police personnel in Mumbai for crossing a traffic signal on May 2. While assaulting him they passed communal remarks against Bilal.

He suffered serious injuries and was admitted to Rajmukhi hospital in Mulund where he underwent life saving surgeries.

Bilal was discharged from the ICU on May 14 with doctors’ advice to take complete rest for four weeks.

However, his troubles did not end here, he was sent to the 14-days judicial custody on Wednesday by a Mumbai court on false charges leveled against him by the traffic police.

Shabnam Hashmi, along with Bilal’s brother met Maharashtra chief minister Prithviraj Chavan on May 14 seeking action against the accused policemen. But, nothing has been done in this regard yet.

Here is the full text of Ms Hashmi’s letter to Sonia Gandhi:

Dear Mrs. Gandhi,

Bilal a young man was brutally attacked by Bhiwandi police on May 2, 2012 for crossing a signal. he offered to pay the fine as it was his mistake. The policeman took out the key from his motorcycle, dragged him by holding his caller, used highly abusive and communal language and then joined by three more brutally attacked him constantly using communal abuses against him. His shoulder and right hand joint broke, the joint ball came out. He had to spend days in ICU.

I came to know about this on May 9th, immediately raised it with media and some Mumbai based leaders. Met the Chief Minister on May 14th with Bilal’s brother Dr Salim and Mr. Yusuf Abrahani . We showed him the x ray of Bilal told him the fact that he will never fully recover but probably 90%. He said he will talk to the Police commissioner I don’t think he ever did.

DCP, ACP OF Bhiwandi had met Bilal in hospital a few days before this meeting past midnight and threatened him to compromise as he will not get anything by fighting.

Despite talking to everyone in media, senior political leaders ( and I happen to know quite a few), meeting the CM, the police has shown its all power and have against doctor’s advise of two weeks complete rest, Bilal was sent to jail by putting charges against him, while the four policemen roam free.

Looking back I think it was our foolishness to advise him to fight against injustice because one should stop thinking that minorities, Dalits, Adivasis & poor can ever get justice .

With every day and with every case the minorities are loosing faith in all the promises given by UPA. Your being very secular or Dr Manmohan Singh being very ‘nice’ does not help those who are hounded , tortured , beaten up , demonised every day. The Institutional bias has only increased because Dr Manmohan Singh did not want to be vindictive.

Cleansing the system and removing the institutional bias and removing communal cadre, sensitizing them is following the Indian Constitution and not being ‘vindictive’.  UPA has allowed highly communal elements to penetrate very deep at every level.

What all should we forget? Batla House, Kazmi, Bilal, hundreds of boys who have been tortured, encountered?

Shabnam

Kamala Kanta Dash, BeyondHeadlines

A group of parents whose children have been denied admission to pre-primary classes in a number of private schools in Delhi through a Special Leave Petition (SLP) have approached the Supreme Court to intervene to ensure fair and inclusive practices in admissions. The petition filed by Snehasshish Mukherjee has been signed by Dr. Midhat Hussain, Tarique Akhtar, Syed Md. Talha, Masood Alam and Afroz Alam Sahil and the legal support has been provided by lawyers like Advocate Sarim Naved and  Political Activist  Adv. Adil Hasan.

The petition establishes how the private schools continue irrational admission policies for pre-primary school admissions which have led to a bias against children living in certain areas of the city which happen to have a high concentration of Muslim residents.

The petition complains that despite Muslims being 12 percent of Delhi’s population, the number of Muslim children being admitted to the nursery classes in these schools as a percentage of the total number of admissions is a mere 0.5 percent. It is indeed a matter of grave concern that while roughly one out of eight persons on the streets of Delhi is a Muslim, only one out of two hundred of the children admitted to pre-primary schools is a Muslim.

The petition has not only identified this practice as unfair and worrying in the context of children’s education, but in the context of a larger worry, that is leading to increasing ghettoization of Muslims in Delhi. The petitioners have gone further and have asserted that they now strongly believe that the attempts to marginalise students from the Muslim localities and from the Muslim Community in particular are nothing but deliberate. This is a dangerous situation of deliberate exclusion and the government and the Supreme Court need to take immediate steps to intervene and set it right.

Moreover, private schools cannot shy away from their responsibilities and cannot discriminate against students on the basis of their religion.  The action of private schools in discriminating against Muslim neighbourhoods and Muslim children does violate their fundamental rights of access to education. The applicants have requested the court to ensure a situation where admissions to private schools are carried out in a fair, transparent and inclusive manner.

Note: BH has a copy of this Special Leave Petition and the author has used the petition as the base to write this article.

(The author is Honorary Editor of Beyond Headlines and is working on the Engagement of the Muslim Community in Policy making in India and Australia for his PhD at Monash University. He can be reached at kamaljnu@gmail.com)

While turning the pages of history of the colonial Indian Muslim politics, only issue that comes immediately to our mind is their engagement with the question of Hindu-Muslim relations, communalism, and power sharing formula in various sectors/ institutions. Here is a case a little away from all such issues.

It is a relatively lesser known aspect of history that Mr. Md. Yunus earns the distinction of having served as the first Premier (Prime Minister, now called Chief Minister) of Bihar during April- July 1937.

Starting his career as barrister, he also flirted with journalism by bringing out English daily, Patna Times, an English weekly, edited by Shambhunath Jha. He was elected on the symbol of the Muslim Independent Party (MIP) in 1937, which had emerged as the second largest party in Bihar, almost routing the separatist political formations like the Syed Abdul Aziz led Muslim United Party, i.e. MUP (launched in December 1936, subsequently it merged with the Muslim League, which was organizationally almost non-existent in Bihar till the 1937 elections), and Ahrar. As many as 20 candidates were elected on the symbol of MIP, 6 more independent candidates and 3 Muslim candidates belonging to the Congress (including Dr. Syed Mahmud, 1889-1971) won with the support of the MIP.

In the 1937 provincial elections the Congress and the MIP contested elections with seat adjustments. The MIP won 15 out of 40 reserved seats and the Congress won five seats. The Muslim League was unable to secure any seats.
Such ideological affinity and electoral adjustment gave rise to an impression in the public mind that the Congress and MIP would jointly form the government in Bihar. The Congress, however, reneged on the tacit understanding, giving a rude shock to the Muslims. The Congress, on the issue of ‘Governor’s discretion’ initially refused to form the ministry. The Congress insisted that it would form the ministry only after an assurance from the Governor that he would not use his special/ discretionary powers. The deadlock in Bihar continued from April to July 1937; till then the MIP, the second largest Party, formed its ministry under Md. Yunus, making it clear that it would give way to the Congress, once it decided to accept office. The plea of the MIP was that the Act of 1935 itself provided for Governor’s special powers, and the very fact that the Congress contested elections on the basis of the Act was evidence of the Congress’ acceptance of the condition (Governor’s special powers). Some Urdu sources indicate that the MIP wished to form a coalition ministry with the Congress, which was not acceptable for the latter, even in July 1937. Accordingly, the MIP, being the second largest party, formed its ministry (for about 120 days during April-July 1937), though making it pretty clear that it would give way to a new ministry as soon as the Congress reconsidered its decision. However, there took place a sort of ‘Hindu backlash’ against the MIP, whereby, according to Taqi Raheem, even the Socialists, including Abdul Bari, were embittered by the fact of the MIP’s formation of the interim ministry. (For details see my essay in SAHC, London, vol. 2, no.1, January 2011, It details how the Congress outrageously denied legitimate share in power to the Muslims)

What was MIP? 

The Muslim Independent Party (MIP) was a political party launched on 12 September 1936 by the Imarat-e-Shariah, under the leadership of Maulana Abul Mohasin Mohd Sajjad (d. 1940) of the Jamiatul Ulema-e-Hind. This [the Imarat-e-Shariah] was an agenda of Maulana Azad, in whose, “scheme of things, in countries like India where Muslims were a minority and did not hold political power, the Imarat would function as an institution of political authority and state power…He envisaged it maintaining a relationship with the country’s government through a collective agreement” (Papiya Ghosh, IESHR, 1997). Assisted by ulema and mashaikh, in order to prepare a legitimate popular support base, the Imarat had to establish shariat courts (Darul Qaza).  The MIP was described as a party for the emancipation of the poor and the uplift of agriculture. The MIP supported the Congress goal of independence but aimed at securing constitutional safeguards for religion and culture. For bearing ‘an unmistakable resemblance with the Congress’ the MIP earned lamentations of the Bihar Muslim League (The Indian Nation, 9 November 1934). Its leaders like Usman Ghani, Hafiz Md sani and Shaikh Adalat Husain of Bettiah had suffered imprisonment for having participated in the Civil Disobedience movement of 1930-32 (The Indian Nation, 10 November 1934). Imarat-e-Shariah’s mouthpiece Imarat, an Urdu fortnightly (banned during the Civil Disobedience Movement) and subsequently giving birth to Naqeeb, Urdu weekly articulated the muttahidah qaumiyat (composite nationalism) and contested the two nation theory of Jinnah’s Muslim League till very end.

How did Yunus’ ministry perform?

Displaying his deep concern for being accommodative towards all social groups, Yunus made it a point to have people from a cross section in his cabinet.  He kept the departments of Law and Order, Judicial and Jail, Education and Registration with himself. Babu Guru Sahai Lal was given Rural Development; Kumar Ajit Prasad Singh Dev was given Local Self Government, and Abdul Wahab Khan got the Revenue dept.

Agrarian issues seem to have been addressed on priority basis by the Yunus led ministry. An Urdu account (1987) written by his contemporary, Asghar Imam Falsafi (1902-1997), in his, Mr Mohd Yunus ke Daur-e-Wizarat ka Ek Aks, records that Mr. Yunus was very accessible to the common people, undertook mammoth visits of the villages, directly hearing the problems of the peasants; he paid special attention to the production of sugar-canes and to control flood. [Taqi Raheem has also compiled Tazkira-e-Yunus.] In 1931 food grain prices had fallen. He, therefore, reduced the burden of rent to be paid by the tenants. The Hindi-Urdu tension and the Hindu-Muslim tension was a subject nobody could afford to ignore then. He was a type of politician who never tried to shift the blames. He never allowed the personal prejudices to influence his professional business. For example, his decision to accept the office of the ministry was met with great uproar by the Congress and the Socialists. On 31st March 1937, they staged a huge dharna before the house of Mr Md Yunus; which had turned violent and stone pelting was done on Yunus’ house.  Thus they were arrested by the police. On 1st April, immediately after accepting the office, the first order issued by Mr Yunus was to release them, and other under-trial prisoners/ freedom fighters unconditionally. Frequent jail inspection to look after the inmates (mostly freedom fighters), where he had hours long detailed conversations with the inmates, and it was a testimony of his style of functioning. Responding to a communal tension in Aurangabad, on 22 April 1937, he rushed to the place of occurrence, involved the two communities in talks and persuaded them to agree for peaceful living, without calling even a single extra policeman; he personally led the procession of idol immersion. This exercise consumed his four hours and things were settled effectively. Lord Zetland is said to have got highly impressed with such a prompt, effective and judicious way of dealing with such sensitive matter, and therefore he showered laurels for his administrative management. The Hindus-Muslims of Aurangabad jointly hosted a feast in which Yunus was the chief guest.

His ministry restored the Local self Government (Democratic Decentralism), convened elections for it. Then in late 1937, he undertook a survey of the Diara lands (the then Monghyr district) along with the collectors, commissioner and the Member of the Revenue Board, and asked them to prepare a master plan for the agrarian development of that region. In 1915-16, a 15 year land settlement was made which expired on 31 March 1930, and then this settlement was again extended. But the Yunus ministry substantially reduced the rent (raiyati) to be paid by the peasantry of Diara.  It included complete waiver of the arrear of the rent for 1933-34, which was Rs 5039. And for the subsequent three years the waiver was up to 50%. This was not done out of electorally dictated hasty populism, but Yunus got done a comprehensive survey by Nagendra Lal Bose, the Deputy Collector. A proper legislation was done (Act 112), applications for the reduction of lagan were invited by the Settlement officers of the thanas, on four anna stamp paper, without requiring signature of an advocate. This was done by extensive campaign in the villages so that the peasants don’t fall prey of bureaucratic corruption (bribery).

Earlier in 1908, he had participated in the Lahore session of the Congress of 1908. For many years he served as the President of the Bihar Students’ Association. In 1916, he represented in the Imperial Legislative Council and during 1921-32 he was a member of the Bihar Legislative Council.

He called a comprehensive meeting with the owners of the sugar mills of the Tirhut Division, and persuaded them to operate the mills till entire crop of sugarcane reaches the mills, for it he also got reduced the rail fares by 60% so that import of the sugarcane from the adjacent provinces could be encouraged for the mills. These steps helped in mitigating the peasants’ restlessness, and thereby rural indebtedness was sought to be fought. For further achievement on this aspect of rural indebtedness, he undertook following four steps:

(a)    Establishment of a board to arbitrate the loan related disputes,
(b)   A ceiling on the rate of interest taken by the moneylenders,
(c)    Establishment of Land Mortgage Banks,
(d)   Registration of the moneylenders and ways of monitoring them

For this, he asked Y.A. Godbole, ICS to undertake journey of some of the provinces who was supposed to propose for a Conciliation Board of Cooperatives. The moneylenders were asked to furnish a list of the borrowers.
Similarly, to control flood, he personally joined the labourers working with spades to dig soil for embankment in the Adampur village of Siwan Subdivision. It earned him great popularity, and people greeted him throughout his journey from Adampur to Chapra. Every district was provided with at least 100 boats, before the rainy season and onset of flood. He also kept soliciting suggestions from the experts on containing flood.

On 16 May 1937, he rushed to Dumraon to resolve the dispute between the industrialist Ramkrishna Dalmia and the Maharaja of Dumraon. With a peace between the two, Dalmia invested a capital of Rs 5 crores, and factories of cement, lime, and paper were opened. This effort at industrial development heralded a big opportunity of employment.

In 1929, on an experimental basis, the colonial government had permitted the use of Urdu script, along with Nagri, only in Patna Division. In June 1937, Yunus extended this to entire province. [In Manbhum (then in Bihar, now in West Bengal) district, Bengali was also allowed along with Nagri].  In fact, the Bihar branch of the Anjuman Taraqqi Urdu had convened a meeting in the Anjuman Islamia Hall of Patna on 27 May 1937 pressing for this demand, and they had convened around one thousand meetings in different parts of Bihar, including some in rural areas. The Tribune is said to have given wide coverage of this movement for Urdu, and editorialized in appreciation of this step.

The magnificent, imposing buildings of the Assembly and Council, and that of the Patna Civil Court were constructed by his ministry.

He remained lifelong President of the “Theosophical Society” and “Mel Milap Association” of Annie Besant (Mahamaya Prasad was the Secretary); had donated his one of the personal houses to it. It also launched a magazine Mel Milap, it was a bilingual journal (Urdu and Nagri), which also published poems of Yunus.

He kept reiterating that the day the congress will decide to accept the office, the MIP will step down, this decision came on 7 July 1937, but as an officiating Premier he had to continue in the office till 19 July 1937. He was particularly fond of debates in the assembly/council (in fact his own election as the Premier of Bihar was done after 4 day long debates participated and arbitrated also by Maulana Azad), had 3-4 day long debates on the Act of 1935 and then proposed amendments and moved Agriculture Income Tax Bill, and a Bill for exempting the Waqf properties from taxation. He also proposed Bills for:

(a) Protection of the personal laws of the Muslims,
(b) A draft proposal for proportionate representation of Muslims in the municipal and district boards,
(c) Protection and maintenance of the Muslim Waqf properties

Besides, after quitting the office of the Premier, he did not remain silent and inactive. He spoke in the assembly on the issues like the riots of Tilkori (Hazaribagh, 10 May 1938), Giani Nabiganj (P.S. Sikandra, Monghyr, 7 July 1938), Deawan (26 July 1938), Bhagalpur (2 August 1938).

Early Life of Yunus

Born at Penhara (P.S. Naubatpur, Subdivision Danapur, Patna), he belonged to the descendents of a Sufi, Hazrat Shah Ibrahim Malik, whose tomb is on the hills of Bihar Shareef (Nalanda). His father was Moulvi Ali Hasan, a zamindar of the village, and advocate in the Patna Court. Yunus was the younger son, [elder being Yusuf, also Bar at law], got Bar at law from England in 1906 and came back to Patna. He was very fond of games and sports. He was married to Zaibunnesa, daughter of Moulvi Abdul Jabbar, an affluent zamindar and a leading lawyer of Mirzapur (UP); this family originally belonged to Patna from where they had migrated to Mirzapur. Md Yusuf Imam, barrister and leader of Congress was brother of Zaibunnesa. Besides being a successful lawyer, Yunus was thrice elected to the Legislative Council of Bihar and he was on the Patna Municipal Board during 1917-23. He also served as Director, Bihar Bank, and Bihar & Orissa Provincial Cooperative Bank., and also of Bihar United Insurance Company. He was the Chief Whip, Bihar Legislative Council, 1921-26. Yunus had a sudden attack of coronary thrombosis, while walking in a street of London, where he died on May 13 1952, and was buried in the graveyard of Brooklyn, a suburb, 7 kms away from London.

His sons Yasin Yunus and Yaqub Yunus were also advocates, and the elder (Yasin) acted his secretary. They preserve his diary and two collections of poems, Kalam-e-Yunus, and Payam-e-Mohabbat. [Yaqub Yunus, probably an Alig, was also associated with the All India Muslim Majlis Mashaweraat of Syed Mahmud (1889-1971) in 1960s.   (Courtesy: bihardays.com)

(Mohammad Sajjad is Assistant Professor at Centre of Advanced Study in History, AMU, Aligarh)

The Gulbarg Society massacre case has taken an ironical turn as the Supreme Court appointed SIT has concluded in its closure report that firing by Congress leader Ehsan Jafri provoked the violent mob to set the society on fire.

The SIT report says that it was Mr. Ehsan Jafri who fired at the violent mob first, which had assembled there to take revenge of Godhra incidents from Muslims, which provoked the rioters to set the society on fire that led to the killing of Jafri and 69 others.

Giving a clean chit to Modi, the SIT in its report has proudly endorsed his ‘action and reaction’ theory by calling the massacre a reaction to Jafri’s firing.

“In his interview the CM has clearly referred to Jafris firing as ‘action’ and the massacre as ‘reaction’. It may be clarified here that in case late Ehsaan Jafri fired at the mob, this could be an immediate provocation to the mob, which had assembled there to take revenge of Godhra incidents from Muslims,” the report says.

SIT report states that no criminal case is made against Modi as he took all the necessary steps to control the situation and to contain the communal violence.

The SIT headed by RK Raghavan said that even if Modi had asked police to let the Hindus take the revenge of Godhra train burning incident, the mere statement of those in the confines of a room does not constitute an offence.

“Interpretations made on alleged illegal instructions given by the Chief Minister by RB Shreekumar and Sanjiv Bhatt, appear to be without any basis. Further, even if such allegations are believed for the sake of argument, mere statement of alleged words in the four walls of a room does not constitute any offence,” says the report by the SIT.

The SIT has also questioned the intentions of Zakia Jafri for filing the case against Modi and others four years after the incident.

It says Zakia was first questioned by the police on March 6, 2002 but she did not came up with the allegations Modi and others then.

“She appeared before the Nanavati Commission, probing the riots, on August 29, 2003 but did not disclose the facts given in this said complaint. In September 2003, she filed an affidavit in the apex court but did not level allegations against Modi and others,” the report stated.

The report further stated that the allegations in her complaint are vague, general and stereotyped.

The SIT has also dismissed all the allegations levelled against Modi by amicus curie Raju Ramchandran, who had opined that Modi can be prosecuted for “promoting enmity among different groups.” (Courtesy:Pratirodh)

In the first major operation against suspected Maoists in Assam, a joint team of the CRPF, Assam police and the Indian Army gunned down 4 men in a remote village in Tinsukia district. One police constable was also injured.

Denouncing these killings as ‘fake encounters’, Maoist ‘sympathizer’ and the President of Revolutionary Democracy Front, Varavara Rao has demanded an independent inquiry by the Assam government. According to the Union Home Secretary RK Singh, “the Maoists are trying to set up bases in Assam. This encounter would certainly halt their operations and hamper their activities in a big way”.

The RDF statement explains the spread of Maoist movement into Assam, “as a response to the continued exploitation and oppression of the people by the Indian ruling classes in collusion with the regional ruling elite of Assam, whether they belong to the Congress, BJP or AGP”.

The statement issued is as following-

Press Statement

Condemn the fake encounter of four alleged Maoist cadres in Assam by the Indian Army, CRPF and the Police!

Demand an impartial enquiry into the incident and punishment for the personnel guilty of perpetrating this cold-blooded murder!

RDF strongly condemns the cold-blooded murder of four alleged Maoist activists in Sadiya of Tinsukia district, Assam. The Assam government has claimed that a joint team of Assam Police, CRPF and Indian Army has killed four armed cadres of the Upper Assam Leading Committee of CPI (Maoist) in a ‘fierce gun-battle’ at around 10.30 a.m. on 9 May at Borgora-Deopani Nepali Gaon under the Saidya police station.

The family members of the deceased and the residents of the area have rubbished this claim by the government and the circumstances in which the four youths – Siddhartha Buragohain (Telikola village, Sadiya), Medang Gogoi alias Rajib Gogoi (Topsinga village), Hiren Chetia alias Rajat (Tokajan village) and Kamala Buragohain (No.2 Tokajan village) – all between 25 to 30 years, were killed. As per the news reports in the local media which referred to the testimonies of the villagers, this was nothing but a cold-blooded murder which was later staged as an ‘encounter’. According to the residents of the village published by the media, a commando unit of Sadiya Police arrived early in the morning and forced the villagers to move away from the house of one Bal Bahadur Limbu where they suspected that Maoist cadres were taking shelter. Thereafter the house was encircled from all directions. Two of the cadres who were on sentry duty outside the house ran to safety by firing at one of the police teams, while another police team entered the house from the rear. The police found the four youth taking food and asked them to raise their hands. There was no resistance from the unarmed youth. Subsequently all four were shot by the police from point-blank range and killed in cold blood. Later the police resorted to heavy firing on the house to manufacture evidence of a ‘heavy gun fight’ as a result of which the house was severely damaged.

The Assamese newspaper Asomiya Pratidin reports that this fake encounter has generated discontent among the people of Saidya region. They have criticised the role of the armed forces by saying that they could have arrested the four youth as per the law of the land instead of murdering them in a staged extra-judicial killing. The fake ‘encounter’ of the four alleged Maoists is the latest in the series of thousands of such extra-judicial killings by the Indian Army, CRPF and the Assam Police in the name of ‘counter-insurgency’ operations against United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) and other proscribed organisations in the last two decades of Indian Army deployment in Assam. Only four months back on 26 December 2011, three youths – Siva Moran, Dhiraj Duara and Janak Moran of Makum, Tinsukia district – were picked up and killed in a fake encounter in the Assam-Arunachal Pradesh border by the Army and the police, and were termed as ‘hardcore ULFA’ cadres who were killed in ‘retaliatory fire’! Even though the family members of the deceased have filed FIRs against the Indian Army and large demonstrations have taken place, no enquiry has been ordered into the incident by the state government, which is desperate to shielding the culprits rather than bringing the truth to the open.

The horrors of state repression during Operation Bajrang and Operation Rhino conducted by the Indian Army in the 1990s against ULFA are still fresh in the memory of the people of Assam, and so are the hundreds of so-called ‘secret killings’ orchestrated by LK Advani, Prafulla Kumar Mahanta and co. during the AGP government in the same decade. The latest fake encounter in Saidya once again displays the reality of Indian occupation of Assam, its colonial militaristic approach towards the people of Assam and crushing of their genuine struggles including the struggle for national liberation. Here any political dissent and peoples’ rebellion is dealt with the coercive might of the Indian state, and in doing so the latest method adopted by the state’s armed forces to brand activists and peoples’ movements as having affiliation or links with the Maoist movement.

The state has already branded peoples’ organisations like – Assam Students’ and Youth Organisation (ASYO), Asom Chah Jonogosthi Surakhya Samiti (Assam Tea Community Protection Committee), Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS) etc. as Maoist fronts, and are persecuting them. More than 60 activists and individuals have been arrested in Assam over the last one year from its different parts by falsely implicating them for being Maoists. Thus, in this way, the ‘hallowed’ promises of the Indian constitution – be it the right to life, liberty or justice – are conveniently trampled under the jackboots of the army in the name of protecting ‘national security’ and ‘integrity’. The expansion of the Maoist movement into Assam is a response to the continued exploitation and oppression of the people by the Indian ruling classes in collusion with the regional ruling elite of Assam, whether they belong to the Congress, BJP or AGP.

Only a strong mobilisation of public opinion and peoples’ protest in Assam and outside can prevent these cold-blooded murders from recurring. Given the highly suspicious circumstances of the Sadiya ‘encounter’ and the testimonies of the local residents challenging the police version, RDF demands that the Assam government institute an immediate independent enquiry and file FIRs against the concerned army/police personnel involved in the killings. RDF also calls upon all the progressive and democratic organisations and individuals to protest against this fake encounter, and strengthen the fight for bringing the culprits to justice.

President

Varavara Rao

09676541715

General Secretary

Rajkishore

09717583539

Guwahati, The police in Assam have filed a charge-sheet in the court against a doctor for raping his patient. The charge-sheet under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 has been filed by the officer-in-charge of the Dholai police station (PS) on 13 March 2012 at the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate in the district of Cachar after investigation of a case filed by a minor girl on 27 November, 2011. This is disclosed recently by the district superintendent of police (SP) in Cachar in a report (vide No. G/SR/1281 dated 16/03/12) submitted to the Deputy Registrar of the Assam Human Rights Commission (AHRC) in response to a notice of the AHRC.

The report states that the survivor lodged a First Information Report (FIR) at Dholai PSinter alia alleging that on 27 November, 2011 at about 4 PM the complainant being accompanied by her sister in law (name withheld to protect identity) had been to the chamber of Dr. Dilip Paul at Sadagram (Dholai Bazar) where he refused to check her up. Instead, he asked her to be in his residential chamber for her check up and treatment. On her arrival at his residential chamber the accused doctor asked her to go inside while her sister in law was asked to wait outside. As soon as she entered the house, the accused doctor closed the door and window from the outside and forcibly raped her.

The AHRC issued a notice to the SP for a detailed report about the case after it registered a case of human rights violations (vide AHRC Case No. 302/2/11-12.) on the complaint filed by the Barak Human Rights Protection Committee (BHRPC).

The report of the SP, however, mentions that the medical test conducted after the investigation of the case started do not corroborate the allegations of the victim as well as those of the BHRPC against the doctor. It says that (1) evidence of recent sexual intercourse not detected, (II) evidence of violent mark not detected in her private parts and (III) her age is above 18 years and below 20 years.

The BHRC claimed that the victim/survivor is a minor girl studying in class IX.

However, on the examination of the witnesses of the complainant, witnesses of the accused and the place of occurrence the investigating police officer found that charge under section 376 of the IPC which provides punishment for rape is established, states the SP.

When the AHRC asked the BHRPC for its comments on the report of the SP the latter submitted a detailed response pointing out why the medical report can not be relied upon. According to the BHRPC the medical report can not be relied upon because (i) there was inordinate delay in conducting the test; (ii) the report goes against the circumstantial evidences; (iii) the report goes against the accounts of the witnesses as recorded by the police; and (iv) the element of sympathy of the doctors who conducted the test towards the doctor who is the alleged violator creeping in and vitiating the objectivity of the findings can not be ruled out as both of them are colleagues and belong to the same profession.

The BHRPC also said that the filing of charge-sheet by the police will facilitate the criminal court to conduct trial on the criminal aspect of case in order only to fix criminal liability and proportionate penal measure called for under the law. It is not the domain of the trial court to consider human rights liability of the violator and remedies to the victim/survivor. Therefore, it comes under the jurisdiction of the Commission to fix human rights liability and more importantly to provide redress to the victim/survivor in terms of adequate compensation.

The BHRPC in its submission urged the AHRC to recommend to the authorities to provide an adequate amount of compensation to the victim/survivor; and while fixing the quantum of the compensation the AHRC should take into consideration the aggravating factors involved in the case such as (a) that the alleged violator is a government servant paid from the state exchequer for acting as savoir for those who are in physical distress; (b) that the victim/survivor went to the alleged violator in full trust as his position demands; (c) that the alleged violator took benefit of position of custodian of the victim/survivors at the moment of commission of the violating acts; (d) that the case has a clear custodial angle; (e) that the age and social and other circumstances of the victim/survivor are such that the minor girl has had an entire life full of colours but which has been destroyed beyond repair for no faults of hers and her life has become an undesirable and unbearable burden on her fragile shoulders.

Maoists have clearly taken the role of blackmailers. After setting on abduction spree, Maoists are dictating their demands to the government. Some in government are of the opinion that the abduction spree of Maoists is desperate measures in desperate situations. This is for the reason that the security forces are closing in on them, while the government is showing the glimpse of development works to tribals.

Maoists who practice the art of guerilla warfare must have desperately sought breather from the continuous security operations deep into the forest. By setting off on an abduction spree, they have clearly ensured a kind of “ceasefire” for the moment. This helps them in regrouping, fine-tuning their strategy and at the same time asserting their positions among the tribals.

There are about 20 districts in the country, which are said to be in strong control of the naxals. These districts are in southern Chhattisgarh, western Odhisa and southern Jharkhand. The Maoists call these districts a “liberated” zone. However, there are 78 districts, which the government recognises being naxal infested, and are administered through Integrated Action Plan (IAP).

Sukma was the recently carved out as a district from Dantewada which is considred the den of the Maoists in Chhatisgarh. Sukma happens to be the most southern part of Chhattisgarh too seen part of the “liberated” zone. Alex Paul Menon, 31 years old collector of Sukma, has all the zeal that one can associate with a young blood drafted into civil services only five years ago. Menon was abducted while he was going to a village to inaugurate a government centre there on a two-wheeler. Driver and a security guard were killed and Menon taken hostage.

Critics rushed in to suggest that Menon did not need to show such zeal to move around in a two-wheeler and should have been adequately secured. However, the gruesome fact is that just a few days before Menon was taken hostage the Bijapur collector, Rajat, was ambushed and he survived only because of the stroke of luck, as he had decided to sit in an another vehicle than the normal one. The Maoists ambused the vehicle, which Rajat should have been sitting in. This makes it very clear, that security or no security we are in a very difficult situation. In fact, most of the civil servants are said to be holed in their offices most of the time in these 20 districts across the three states. Menon was brave and tried to take government to the tribal villages.

Ask R Vineel Krishna, former collector of Malkangiri district in Odhisa, who was the first civil servant abducted in over two decades why it’s so difficult to work in these areas. “The problem is of terrain, which is mostly hilly and forested. Most of the roads are mined,” said Krishna. Clearly, Menon should not be faulted.

In the recent months, Maoists have taken to abduction as their new strategy in fact. They took two Italian tourists to hostage in Odhisa and alter on a legislator too. In a first of its kind, the Maoists took two Italians – Paulo Basusco and Claudio Colangelo – from Daringbadi area of Kandhamal district in Odhisa. Later on the Maoists abducted Jhina Hikaka, an MLA of the ruling BJD in Odhisa, from Narayanpur in Korapur district, which is also considred badly in the clutches of the naxals. Menon is also alleged to have been taken to Odhisa after his abduction.

While the Maosists have released two Italians, Hikaka and Menon continue to be in their captivity. Hikaka is likely to be tried in a “kangaroo” court of the Maoists. Krishna too was tried in a “kangaroo” court, where he was declared not “guilty” and was released.

Though the “kangaroo” court is a clear sham given the Maoists release their demands within hours of taking people hostage. In fact, the Maoists finding that the Odhisa government is agreeing to their earlier set of demands are further adding to their list of demands clearly following the adage, that when someone is bending make him crawl.

Same is true in the case of Menon also, as list of demands are now growing only, which includes sending security personnel to barracks permanently.

The Chhattisgarh government has named two negotiators from its side – Nirmala Buch and Suyoga Kumar Mishra, former chief secretaries of Madhya Pradesh and Chhatisgarh respectively – to talk to the mediators picked by the Maoists.

Human Rights activist and academician Hargopal and All India Adivasi Mahasabha president Manish Kunjam, former National SC and ST Chairman B D Sharma and Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan were named as negotiators by Maoists. Bhushan declined, saying that he did not like the idea of talking by putting gun the temple of somebody, though empathizing with the demands of the Maoists.

Notwithstanding the immediate challenge of freeing Menon and Hikaka from the clutches of the Maoists, the government is faced with the utmost task to free these 20 districts from the Maoist control.

Union minister of rural development Jairam Ramesh advocates “PDS” approach to deal with the Maoists. The PDS stands for political, developmental and security. So, the PDS in complete coordination can only defeat the Maoists.

Ramesh’s prescription is not off the mark either. One just needs to look at Jangal Mahal in West Bengal where the Purulia and Bankura districts are also affected by the Maoists. However, the Maoists in Jangalmahal are strongly challenged by the local political leadership.

Jairam has praised Lok Sabha Shubendu Adhikari in particular for standing up to the challenge of the Maoists.

The Centre is in fact making efforts to implement this “PDS” approach. The move has begun by strenghening the Gram Panchayats so that the local leadership can be groomed.

Another move is in the form of the first batch of 152 young people currently being trained in Hyderabad for Prime Minister’s Rural Development Fellowship (PMRDF) programme.

These young people would be working with the collectors in the 78 Left Wing Extremism (LWE) affected districts.

Krishna is of the view that even if 25 of these people choose to opt for a career in rural development there could be a strong beginning to expose Maoists’ credentials, that the government neglects tribals.

(This article was first published in Sopan Step)

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect BH’s editorial policy.

Guwahati: The New Delhi based statutory child-rights body the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) asked the deputy commissioner of Hailakandi district of the North East Indian state Assam for a report on how the first child of Mr. Bijoy Dev and Mrs. Tumpa Dev of Ward No. 13 at College Road in Hailakandi town died on 1 April 2012 after delivery.

The child rights watchdog of the nation moved into actions after receiving a complaint from the Barak Human Rights Protection Committee (BHRPC) on 11 April alleging that the child died due to negligence and dereliction in duties by the doctors of the Sontosh Kumar Civil Hospital of Hailakandi. The NCPCR registered a case based on the complaint as case No. 13016/32389/2010-11/COMP.

The BHRPC alleged that Mrs. Dev when went in labour was brought to the S K Roy Civil Hospital at about 1pm on 30 March. No doctors saw the woman and with the help of nurses she had to give birth to a male child. It was a forced birth as some doctors who later examined the baby and his mother told that she was in need of caesarian section and that the complicacies leading the death arose due to the injuries caused to the baby during delivery. The conditions of both the mother and child started to worsen soon thereafter. Still no doctors in the hospital saw them. They then went to the Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar (SMCH) and the baby died there at about 6pm on 1 April.

According to BHRPC, this appears to be a clear case of causing death by negligence within the meaning of section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 even if keeping in mind the rules laid down by the Supreme Court of India in Jacob Mathew Vs State of Punjab (2005) (Appeal (Crl.) 144-145 of 2004) for application of the section in cases of negligent and rash acts or omissions of doctors. Most importantly, it is a prima facie case of violations of fundamental right to life as laid down in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In a catena of cases the Supreme Court held that the right to health care is a part of the right to life.

The rights group also claimed that the negligent conduct of the doctors, particularly that caused the death of the baby also amounts to violations of the rights enshrined in Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948. The allegations also constitute violations of provisions of legally binding human rights instruments to which India is a state party. Such as the right to life provided under Article 6 of the International Covenant o Civil and Political Rights, 1966. As a positive entitlement the right to health and health care is recgonised in Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966. Further, it is also a case of violations of relevant provisions of other United Nations convention such as Article 12 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979 (CEDAW) and Article 6 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 (CRC).

As the case also falls under section 13 (1) (j) of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 took cognizance of the matter and its member-secretary Lov Barma wrote on 17 April 2012 (vide No AS-13016/32389/2010-11/COMP/10930 dated 17 April 2012) to the Hailakandi DC asking for a report within a moth. It is reported that the in-charge DC Mr A Nandababu Shingh after receiving the notice formed a three-member inquiry committee on 3 May 2012 headed by the Hailakandi circle officer Dhrubajyoti Dev, other two members being the joint director of health and the district programme officer of the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM). Mr. Shigh asked the committee to file report within 15 days.

RANCHI – More than three hundreds of tribal children today marched to the Raj Bhavan demanding immediate intervention to stop the ongoing forceful land acquisition by state government to build the Indian Institute of Management and National University for Study and Research in Law (NUSRL) campuses.

The march has come out as the part of Kakenagri villagers struggle to save their fertile agricultural land that is being acquired forcefully by government of Jharkhand to build Indian Institute of Management and National University for Study and Research in Law (NUSRL) campuses.

Children of age 5 to 13 years belonging to the victim families in their hand-written memorandum to the Governor appealed, “We the small children of Kakenagri village are very much worried to see our parents struggling to protect the agricultural land. It is being taken away forcefully from them at the gun point.  Lands are source of livelihood for us. Because of this land they are able to feed us and able to send us to schools. We request you to kindly stop the acquisition.”

Children started marching to Rajbhavan from  Marabajji Ground and reached Rajbhavan, while secretary to the Governor received the memorandum.

The government has announced it would acquire 227 acres of the village land. A boundary wall is being built around the area the government wants to acquire. The administration has deployed more than 500 policemen and imposed five Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which bans gatherings of five people or more.(Courtesy: Newzfirst)