LEST WE FORGET

TOGADIA WANTS VOTING RIGHTS IN INDIA ONLY FOR HINDUS

Bharat has seen how viciously many governments are going after Hindus, creating NIA and giving simple cases to NIA so that they get Muslim votes…
Solution? There should be voting rights only to the Hindus. Those whose forefathers opted out for Pakistan and those who do not follow 2 kids norm have no right to vote in Bharat. The political parties who loot national coffer on Muslims in the name of minority should be banned from elections. There must be a common civil code - if it is not now then there will sure be a common civil code but that will be Sharia in Bharat. [Dr Pravin Togadia, International Secretary General of VHP. Contact: drtogadia@gmail.com] [From the column TogadiaSpeak, the Organiser, published from New Delhi, edition dated 13 March 2011. http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=388&page=34 ]

US panel puts India on Watch List for anti Minorities violence

India Chapter

Addition to the 2009 Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom

August 2009

USCIRF 2009 Annual Report –Chapter on India

India

The Commission views India as a critically important country in terms of religious freedom, given its experience with democracy following its colonial past. India is the world’s largest democracy, is home to a multitude of religious communities that have historically coexisted peacefully, occupies a key geopolitical position, and enjoys increasing stature on the global stage even as it faces violent acts of terrorism on its soil. Nonetheless, several incidents of communal violence have occurred in various parts of the country, resulting in many deaths and mass displacements, particularly of members of the Christian and Muslim minorities, including major incidents against Christian communities within the 2008-2009 reporting period. Because the government’s response at the state and local levels has been found to be largely inadequate and the national government has failed to take effective measures to ensure the rights of religious minorities in several states, the Commission decided to place India on its Watch List

The Commission grew concerned about religious freedom conditions in India in 2002 after observing a disturbing increase in communal violence against religious minorities associated with the rise of organizations with Hindu nationalist agendas, including the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), one of the country’s major political parties. Under the national leadership of the BJP, whose term heading the government ended in 2004, the Commission found the Indian government’s response to violent attacks against religious minorities to be inadequate. In response to severe riots in the state of Gujarat and elsewhere, the Commission recommended that India be designated a “country of particular concern” (CPC) in 2002 and 2003.

Following the election in 2004 of the Congress Party, the Indian government espoused an inclusive platform and has repeatedly pledged its commitment to religious tolerance. This commitment was reiterated by the Congress Party in the 2009 general elections for the Lok Sabha, or lower house of Parliament, in which the Congress Party emerged victorious. Although the BJP retained a strong presence in certain states, including Gujarat, some viewed Congress’s victory as a repudiation of the BJP, and other analysts claimed that the surprisingly large margin by which the Congress Party won is statistically attributable to decreased support for “Left Front” parties, rather than decreased support for the BJP. Despite the Congress Party’s commitment to religious tolerance, communal violence has continued to occur with disturbing results, and the government’s response, particularly at the state and local levels, has been largely inadequate. Following incidents and reprisals at and after Christmas 2007, the murder of an influential Hindu leader in August 2008 sparked a prolonged and violent campaign targeting Christians in the state of Orissa. Over several weeks, at least 40 individuals were killed, the vast majority of whom were Christians, church properties and thousands of homes were destroyed, and an estimated 60,000 or more Christians fled their homes, seeking refuge in the jungle or in government relief camps. The inadequate police response failed to quell the violence, and early central government intervention had little impact.

Mass arrests following the Orissa violence did not translate into the actual filing of cases. Also In June 2009, USCIRF requested to visit India to discuss religious freedom conditions with officials, religious leaders, civil society activists and others, but the Indian government did not issue visas to the USCIRF delegation. Nor did the Indian government offer alternative dates for a visit, which the Commission requested. Efforts continue to lag to prosecute the perpetrators of the 2002 Hindu-Muslim riots in Gujarat, in which over 2,000 were killed, the majority of whom were Muslim.

India is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-lingual democracy of more than a billion people that boasts the vibrant representation of all the world’s major religions. In this majority Hindu country with one of the world’s largest Muslim populations, the current, two-term Prime Minister is Sikh, the past president is Muslim, and the national governing alliance remains headed by a Catholic. India is the birthplace of Buddhism, the current host country to the Tibetan government-in-exile, and home to small Jewish and Parsi (Zoroastrian) communities that have lived for centuries without persecution. Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, and Parsi holidays are recognized as public holidays. Nevertheless, despite this remarkable pluralism and general commitment to religious freedom, Hindu nationalist organizations retain broad popular support in many communities in India, in part because some provide needed services or function as community social organizations. Many of these organizations exist under the banner of the Sangh Parivar, a “family” of over 30 organizations that includes the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Bajrang Dal, Rashtriya Swayamsevaks Sangh (RSS), and the BJP. Sangh Parivar entities aggressively press for governmental policies to promote their Hindu nationalist agenda, and adhere in varying degrees to an ideology of Hindutva, which holds non-Hindus as foreign to India.

Unlike many of the other countries of concern to the Commission, India has a democratically elected government with a tradition of secular governance dating back to the country’s independence. India also has an independent judiciary, an influential and independent media that is relentlessly critical of the government, and a dynamic civil society with numerous on-governmental organizations (NGOs) that act as government watchdog groups. In practice, however, India’s democratic institutions charged with upholding the rule of law, most notably state and central judiciaries and police, lack capacity and have emerged as unwilling or unable to consistently seek redress for victims of religiously-motivated violence or to challenge cultures of impunity in areas with a history of communal tensions.

The failure to provide justice to religious minorities targeted in violent riots in India is not a new development, and has helped foster a climate of impunity. In 1984, anti-Sikh riots erupted in Delhi following the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguard. Over 4 days, nearly 3,000 Sikhs were killed, allegedly with the support of Congress Party officials. Few perpetrators were ever held accountable, and only years after the fact. In April 2009, the Congress Party dropped Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar from its roster of general election candidates over their suspected role in the 1984 riots. In the late 1990s, there was a marked increase in violent attacks among members of religious communities, particularly Muslims and Christians, throughout India, including incidents of killings, torture, rape, and destruction of property. Perpetrators were rarely held responsible. For example, there has been little justice for the victims of riots between Hindus and Muslims after the 1992 destruction of the Babri mosque at a contested religious site in Ajodhya. At least 900 people, mostly Muslims, were killed in Bombay in the 1992-1993 riots, but few have been successfully prosecuted. For instance, several high-profile trials that commenced over 10 years after the riots resulted in acquittals. A probe by India’s Central Bureau of Investigation into one high-profile act of riot violence was announced in February 2009, 16 years after the riots.

Gujarat Violence in 2002

In February 2002 in the state of Gujarat, a fire on a train resulted in the death of 58 Hindus returning from Ayodhya. Following this, 2,000 Muslims were killed across Gujarat by Hindu mobs, thousands of mosques and Muslim-owned businesses were looted or destroyed, and more than 100,000 people fled their homes. Christians were also victims in Gujarat, and many churches were destroyed. India’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), an official government body, found evidence of premeditation in the killings by members of Hindu nationalist groups, complicity by Gujarat state government officials, and police inaction in the midst of attacks on Muslims. In 2007, the investigative newsmagazine Tehelka revealed further evidence of state government and police complicity in the riots, including the complicity of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi. Since the riots, Chief Minister Modi has been re-elected twice, and enjoys the support of the central BJP and numerous prominent Indian business leaders.

Court convictions since the Gujarat riots have been minimal. Efforts to pursue the perpetrators continue, albeit slowly, and human rights groups report that many cases will likely continue to be closed or result in acquittals, due to alleged lack of evidence or insufficient effort on the part of local police officials. Since there were many eyewitnesses to these public acts of brutality, this suggests that endemic impediments to justice exist within the police, the judiciary, and the state government apparatus. In August 2004, the Indian Supreme Court ordered the Gujarat government to reopen its investigation of the 2002 violence, criticizing the local police officials for poor investigative practices and inadequate follow-up. In July 2006, a report from a committee attached to the Prime Minister’s office again chastised the Gujarat government for failing to improve the situation for Muslims in that state, noting that a “state of fear and insecurity” still existed for many Muslims there. This was corroborated by the January 2009 report of the UN Special Rapporteur for the Freedom of Religion or Belief, Asma Jahangir, who visited India in March 2008 and noted the systemic, economic, and social marginalization of members of Gujarat’s Muslim community.

International human rights groups have named the VHP, RSS, BJP, and Bajrang Dal as perpetrators of the violence in Gujarat, as well as other acts of violence against non-Hindus.

After a controversial 2002 non-governmental organization report described links between a Maryland-based charity and India’s RSS and other “violent and sectarian Hindu organizations, “Silicon Valley companies Cisco and Oracle suspended matching company donations to the charity. India’s central and state police and judicial apparatuses have neglected to consistently or adequately examine evidence linking Sangh Parivar entities such as the VHP, RSS, BJP, and Bajrang Dal to acts of violence.

Orissa Violence in 2007 and 2008

Attacks on Christian churches and individuals, largely perpetrated by individuals associated with Hindu nationalist groups, continue to occur across the country, and perpetrators are rarely held to account. In December 2007 in Orissa’s Kandhamal district, violence between Christians and Hindus resulted in several deaths, dozens of injuries, the destruction of at least 20 churches and hundreds of homes, and the displacement of hundreds, many from minority religious communities. According to reports by India’s National Commission for Minorities (NCM), the tensions between the Christians, many of whom are from low-caste communities, and the Hindus, many of whom are from tribal communities, were well-known and longstanding.

According to Christian groups and news reports, the influential local VHP leader Swami

Lakhmanananda Saraswati played a central role in fomenting and encouraging the December 2007 violence against Christians.

In the wake of unresolved communal tensions from the December 2007 violence, the August 23, 2008 murder of Swami Saraswati in Kandhamal sparked a prolonged and destructive violent campaign targeting Christians in Orissa. Unlike the rest of the state, the Kandhamal district is 25-27 percent Christian and several of Kandhamal’s 2,500 villages are entirely Christian. Over several weeks, newspapers reported at least 40 individuals were killed, although some Christian groups report more; thousands of church properties and homes were destroyed; at least 20,000 fled their homes to government-run relief camps; and approximately 40,000 were driven into hiding in jungles, the majority of whom were Christian. The displaced persons reportedly lived in squalid conditions in the camps, and according to interviews with Indian Christian leaders; religious leaders and aid agencies were denied access by state and/or district officials to refugees in Kandhamal, the hardest-hit area. In January 2008, after the December 2007 violence targeting Christians, the Kandhamal District Collector also prevented religious organizations from conducting relief work. This disproportionately affected Christians, as those killed and displaced in the Fall 2008 riots were overwhelmingly Christian, though some Hindus were killed and displaced as well.

By March 2009, several state and central police units remained in Kandhamal, and at least 3,000 individuals were still in government camps, reportedly because of their inability to return to their homes unless they “reconvert” to Hinduism. Numerous press and NCM reports document widespread forced conversions of Christians to Hinduism in villages and relief camps in Orissa, following the Fall 2008 attacks. The Orissa state VHP chief declared on September 12 that the death of Swami Saraswati was an impetus to halt Christian conversions in Orissa. About two weeks later, a month-long series of so-called “reconversion” ceremonies and processions of the Swami’s ashes throughout Kandhamal was announced. There was no immediate police or state government reaction. Insecurity and the threat of harassment, property destruction, and/or additional violence allegedly have caused many Christians to partake in “reconversion “ceremonies. According to the NCM report, even retired high-ranking officials were “threatened with every sort of retaliation if they did not forthwith change their religion and embrace Hinduism.”

In both 2007 and 2008, inadequate police forces failed to quell the violence in Orissa, and initial central government intervention was largely inadequate. According to news reports, prior to the violence, only 500 police officers at 13 stations served Kandhamal’s population of

740,000. Inadequate police equipment and training for riot control also impeded an effective emergency response. As with the 2007 violence, the synchronization of some attacks across wooded and remote terrain suggests premeditation, as well as the awareness and perhaps assistance of local officials and/or police. While the violence was still ongoing, the Orissa state government permitted a funeral procession for Swami Saraswati to cover a distance of 150 kilometers across Kandhamal two weeks after his murder, despite calls from religious leaders that such a procession could further inflame communal tensions. According to news reports, some police prevented individuals from filing police reports, and other watched passively as violence occurred. Central government paramilitary forces did not arrive in Orissa until August 27, but were reportedly prevented from reaching the most sensitive areas because of the strategic felling of trees across key access roads. Mass arrests following the riots did not translate into the actual filing of cases, exacerbating the existing culture of impunity. According to the NCM, 187 people were arrested and 127 cases were registered following the December 2007 violence. By April 2008, only 14 individuals had been formally charged with a crime. In March 2009, the BJP nominated one of the main individuals accused in the anti-Christian violence for an assembly seat in the general elections. Despite remaining imprisoned for the duration of the elections, he won the seat. Also in March 2009, Orissa’s ruling party, the Biju Janata Dal (BJD), ended its 11-year coalition with the BJP, a decision fueled in part by the BJD’s repudiation of the BJP’s Hindu nationalist agenda, and the alleged support of some state BJP officials for the VHP, the Sangh Parivar entity implicated in riots. Several high-profile state and central government investigative teams have visited Orissa. Almost none of the dozens of recommendations for state reform offered by the NCM, the UN Special Rapporteur, and Indian Christian organizations have been implemented. Nevertheless, fears that violence would resume in Orissa on Christmas 2008 were assuaged by a series of preventative measures undertaken by the government, and the holiday occurred without incident.

Other Recent Incidents

On September 14, 2008, shortly after the outbreak of violence in Orissa, over a dozen prayer halls and churches in three Karnataka state districts were attacked by individuals allegedly associated with the Bajrang Dal, a Hindu nationalist organization. In one district, six individuals were injured after attacks on two New Life Church prayer halls. The New Life Church has been accused of distributing pamphlets denigrating Hinduism. Police cases have been registered following some, but not all of the incidents. Apart from this spate f violence, violent, sporadic attacks against Christians and church properties were also reported throughout 2007 and 2008 in Karnataka and in Chhattisgarh. For instance, in November 2007, a mob of 150 members of a Hindu extremist group attacked a church in the state of Chhattisgarh, destroying the church building, beating the pastor, and kidnapping a young member of the church, who was later found dead. Despite the fact that the police were provided with the names of the attackers, officials reportedly waited until the following day to file a complaint. In January 2008, also in Chhattisgarh, more than 80 people were injured in an attack on a large Christian meeting carried out by extremists. The attackers reportedly beat the Christian worshippers and vandalized the makeshift church structure. The State Department also reports communal clashes between Hindus and Muslims in several districts in Maharashtra and Gujarat in 2007 and 2008, causing injuries and the destruction of property.

The state response to these attacks has been inconsistent. Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yeddyurappa did not order additional state security for churches and prayer halls until over a week after the first attack. On September 19, 2008, Karnataka state leader of the Bajrang Dal, Mahendra Kumar, was arrested by state police after he publicly announced his group’s leading role in the attacks. However, in the aftermath of the attacks, Mr. Yeddyurappa attributed the violence to conversion activity.

Hindu nationalist groups have been implicated in attacks against Hindus as well. In January 2009, about 40 members of the right-wing Hindu nationalist group, the Sri Ram Sena, attacked a group of women at a pub in Mangalore, Karnataka, on the premise that the women’s behaviour violated Hindu values. The attacks sparked a national outcry from activists, and several arrests were made, although all were released on bail. In September 2008, a bomb attack in Malegaon, Maharashtra that killed seven and injured over 70 was traced to “Hindu extremists.”Eleven individuals were arrested by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad amidst a national debate regarding the contours of emergent “Hindu terrorism” and allegations of anti-Hindu bias by political parties seeking to appease minority electorates.

Responses to Terrorism and the Prevention of Communal Violence

India witnessed a wave of terrorist bombings in 2008, and unlike with the cases discussed previously, swift state and central government action followed to prevent communal violence. Calls for peace and calm by local religious leaders also followed many of the attacks. In May 2008, bomb attacks killed almost 100 bystanders in crowded markets next to Hindu temples in Jaipur. At least 45 individuals died in bomb blasts in November 2008 in Ahmadabad, the capital city of Gujarat. Severe casualties also resulted from 2008 bomb attacks in Delhi and Bangalore. The central government’s immediate appeals for calm and peace and the rapid response of state police helped prevent communal riots, despite varying religious undertones to the attacks, some of which occurred near places of worship, and/or were orchestrated by Islamic extremists. In November 2008, 163 people were killed in coordinated attacks on ten prominent Mumbai sites, including two luxury hotels and a Jewish center. These attacks were carried out by members of the extremist Islamic organization Lashkar-e-Taiba, a group active in Kashmir and widely believed to enjoy the backing of Pakistan’s intelligence agency. The attackers purposefully sought out an American-born rabbi and his Israeli wife residing in the upper floor of an apartment building as targets for their murder. This attack on Jews on Indian soil by foreign actors stands in marked contrast to the fact that India is one of the few countries in the world in which a Jewish minority has lived for centuries without persecution by its nationals. Threats and fear of terrorism in India, perpetrated or threatened by both domestic actors (including Maoists) and foreign, regional actors (particularly Pakistanis and Bangladeshis) remains high. This has been exacerbated by the July 2008 attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul, in which 41 people were killed, and by persistent acts of violence along the India-Bangladesh border.

Legislative Climate

The Indian Constitution protects the right of citizens to change and propagate their religion. However, five Indian states, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Orissa have controversial laws against “coerced” religious conversions. Laws restricting religious conversions in the states of Rajasthan and Arunachal Pradesh are pending further government action before implementation. The anti-conversion laws require government India officials to determine what is or is not a “sincere” conversion. These laws provide for fines and imprisonment for anyone who uses force, fraud, “inducement,” and in some cases, the threat of “divine displeasure” to convert another.

To date, there are few, if any, reports of persons having been arrested or prosecuted under these laws. According to the NCM, there have been no cases of forced conversions registered in the Kandhamal district of Orissa, the locus of violence between Hindus and Christians in 2007 and 2008, in the 40 years of the Act’s existence in that state. No action has been taken on the two formal requests for “permission for conversion” that have been filed in the past 10 years. Nevertheless, these laws can create a hostile atmosphere for religious minorities, particularly given that they exist in states in which attacks by extremist groups are more common—and often happen with greater impunity—than elsewhere in India. For example, a June 2006 report by the NCM found that in the state of Madhya Pradesh, which remains headed by the BJP after the 2009 elections, Hindu extremists had frequently invoked the state’s anti-conversion law as a pretext to incite mobs against Christians. The NCM report also found that police in Madhya Pradesh were frequently complicit in these attacks. Similarly, the NCM report on the December 2007 violence in Orissa concluded that an important factor behind the attacks was the “anti-conversion” campaign carried out by groups associated with the Sangh Parivar. The UN Special Rapporteur has also expressed her concern over the impact of these laws on religious minorities and their inconsistency with international norms guaranteeing the freedom to change one’s religion, and has called for their repeal.

An additional factor exacerbating tensions between Hindus and Christians in Orissa — tensions that erupted into violence in 2007 and more prolonged rioting in 2008—is a quota scheme offering certain benefits to India’s most disadvantaged groups, the Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes (also known as Dalits or “untouchables”). In Orissa, Hindus who are members Scheduled Castes receive job quota benefits, but Christians and Muslims from Scheduled Castes do not, as they are considered to have removed themselves from the caste system. Although affirmative action is not an internationally recognized right, the quota system, which was enacted because Scheduled Castes and Tribes represent a historically underprivileged and impoverished demographic, is oftentimes applied discriminatorily so that disadvantaged Christians and Muslims are excluded from benefiting. However, in many cases, the economic and social challenges facing this demographic do not appear to be eliminated by their religious affiliation. The UN Special Rapporteur has condemned this discriminatory system and called for the abolition of links between religion and caste or tribal status. After a central government-appointed panel, the Sachhar Committee, acknowledged in a November 2006 report that Indian Muslims face discrimination and other hardships, Prime Minister Singh pledged to do more to “address the imbalances,” although reports conflict about how many of the 22 recommendations have actually been implemented. In November 2007, the government adopted new rules enabling members of all religious communities to adopt children, ending a long period in which only Hindus were given this right. In January 2009, the government announced that madrassa degrees would be equivalent to university degrees.

However, the positive impact of these measures in the Muslim community may be mitigated by incidents of police profiling of Muslim youths in areas affected by recent bomb blasts, leading to allegations of harassment and detainment. At least 40 unarmed protesters were killed and hundreds were detained during weeks of violent protests and counter-protests in May 2008 regarding the Jammu and Kashmir government’s decision to transfer 100 acres of forest land to the government-run, Sri Amarnath Shrine Board for the lodging of Hindu pilgrims. The state government’s decision to transfer the property in the Muslim-majority state was seen by many Kashmiri Muslims as an expression of pro-Hindu bias and an attempt by the Indian government to increase Hindu religious tourism and skew state religious demographics. In January 2009, thousands of Muslims protested the death of two young Muslim men shot by police during a sweep following bomb blasts in Jaipur. In March 2009, at the urging of the Election Commission, BJP general election candidate Varun Gandhi of the Gandhi political dynasty was arrested by Uttar Pradesh state police under the National Security Act on charges of hate speech against Muslims during a campaign rally. After over two weeks in jail, the Supreme Court ordered Gandhi’s release on bail, pending his upholding of a commitment not to promote “disharmony or feelings or enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religion, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities.” Varun Gandhi was elected to the lower house of India’s national parliament in the 2009 national elections but subsequently faced a legal challenge on the grounds that his alleged hate speech rendered his victory invalid.

Recommendations

The Commission notes that although the infrastructure for investigating and prosecuting cases of religiously-motivated violence or harassment exists in India, the capacity of the legal system is severely limited and is utilized inconsistently. These deficiencies have resulted in a culture of impunity that gives members of vulnerable minority communities few assurances of their safety, particularly in areas with a history of communal violence, and little hope of perpetrator accountability.

The Commission thus recommends that the U.S. government urge the government of India to undertake the following measures to make more vigorous and effective efforts to halt violent

attacks against members of religious minorities, as well as women and individuals deemed to be of lower caste, to conduct timely investigations and prosecutions of individuals alleged to have perpetrated violence, to hold state governments and officials accountable for violence and unlawful acts in their states, and to enact policies to encourage religious tolerance, in accordance with India’s rich history of religious pluralism and the peaceful coexistence of different linguistic, ethnic, and religious groups.

I. Strengthening Law Enforcement and the Judiciary

The Commission recommends that the U.S. government urge the government of India to:

• Strengthen the ability of the state and central police and other law enforcement bodies to provide effective measures to prohibit and punish cases of religious violence, and protect victims and witnesses by

o ensuring that complainants are able to file “First Information Reports;”

o ensuring that cases relating to religious violence are processed in a timely manner, including by ensuring that a sufficient number of investigators and public prosecutors are supplied to districts in which acts of communal violence have occurred, and that

o providing protection for witnesses in danger of retaliatory violence;

o ensuring that all complainants are able to obtain legal representation, regardless of religion or caste status;

o ensuring that standardized procedures for documenting and collecting evidence are promptly followed in instances of communal conflict; and

o ensuring that trials at all levels of the justice system are impartial, including by investigating allegations of corruption or official complicity in any acts of alleged religious violence;

• Strengthen the state and central judiciary by implementing measures to ensure that:

o cases involving religious violence or harassment are processed and resolved in a timely manner; and

o survivors of communal violence are made aware of their rights and avenues for legal recourse, for example by establishing free or low-cost community legal aid clinics in riot-hit areas;

• Ensure that the state and central police and other law enforcement agencies have the training and resources necessary to avert future communal violence, including by sharing information among central and state law enforcement bodies about measures that successfully prevented outbreaks of violence in previous high-tension situations;

• Provide training on human rights and religious freedom standards and practices to members

of the state and central police and judiciary, particularly in areas with a history or likelihood

of communal violence;

• Ensure that the perpetrators of terrorist attacks are brought to justice, and the victims and their families are provided aid and counselling; and

• Fulfill a pledge made in 2004 to enact a law criminalizing inter-religious violence.

II. Reforming Existing Legislation That May Undermine Freedom of Religion or Belief

The Commission recommends that the U.S. government urge the government of India to:

• Establish an impartial body of interfaith religious leaders, human rights and legal experts, and other civil society representatives to study religious conversion activity and any allegations of forced, induced, or otherwise illegal or improper conversions in states with legislation regulating conversions and to make recommendations as to if and how such laws should be changed to comply with international standards on the freedom of thought,

conscience, and religion or belief; and

• Investigate job allocation and government benefit schemes for Scheduled Tribes and Castes to assess whether religion is used unfairly to provide or deny access to benefits.

III. Taking New Measures to Promote Communal Harmony, Protect Religious Minorities, and Prevent Communal Violence

The Commission recommends that the U.S. government urge the government of India to:

• Call on all political parties and religious or social organizations, including entities of the Sangh Parivar, including, but not limited to the Bharatiya Janata Party, Rashtriya Swayamsevaks Sangh, Bajrang Dal, and Vishwa Hindu Parishad, to 1) publicly denounce violence against and harassment of religious minorities, women, and low-caste members, 2)acknowledge that such violence constitutes a crime under Indian law, and 3) communicate to all members and affiliates that acts of violence or harassment will not be tolerated, and will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law;

• Take immediate legal action against any charitable, social, or political organizations, or individuals associated with such organizations, about whom evidence of participation in acts of communal violence is found;

• Establish effective State Minority Commissions charged with the responsibility for examining minority affairs, including minority religious communities, issuing recommendations, and serving as a repository for minority grievances in those states that do not currently have such commissions, including Orissa, and ensure that these commissions are transparent, adequately funded, inclusive of women and minorities, and subject to periodic independent review; and

• Establish measures to build confidence among religious communities in areas with a history

or likelihood of communal violence, including truth and reconciliation councils and social and cultural programming.

IV. Addressing Communal Violence in Gujarat

The Commission recommends that the U.S. Government urge the government of India to:

• Continue to pursue, investigate, and lay charges against any individuals responsible for the deaths at Godhra, and the perpetrators of the killings, sexual violence, and arson in Gujarat in

2002;

• Ensure that any efforts to bring a case against Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi are

allowed to proceed in accordance with the law; and

• Send a central government investigative team to Gujarat to assess the security of individuals

displaced by the 2002 riots, and reports that such individuals are systematically economically and socially marginalized, and provide recommendations for improving communal harmony in Gujarat.

V. Addressing Communal Violence in Orissa

The Commission recommends that the U.S. Government urge the government of India to:

• Initiate a Central Bureau of Investigation probe into the murder of Swami Lakhmanananda Saraswati and the ensuing violence.

• Continue to pursue, investigate, and bring charges against the perpetrators of the killings and arson in Orissa, as well as any forced reconversions [see specific recommendations under 1. Strengthening Law Enforcement and the Judiciary];

• Allow aid groups, regardless of religious affiliation, access to internally displaced persons

still unable or unwilling to return to their home communities;

• Establish appropriate mechanisms to ensure that 1) all compensation schemes, including those promised by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh soon after the outbreak of the Fall 2008 violence, are carried out in a timely manner, and 2) any families unable to produce the body of an individual killed by rioters are not excluded from compensation schemes;

• Take steps to ensure police access to Kandhamal district and other areas that may be prone to communal violence, including by improving road infrastructure and building capacity;

• Mobilize the necessary security forces over the timeframe necessary to ensure that internally displaced persons residing in government relief camps or elsewhere are allowed to safely return to their villages, without the threat of violence or harassment;

• Ensure that the use or threat of violence or harassment to bring about forced conversions or “reconversions” are prosecuted promptly under existing laws prohibiting harassment and violence; and

• Recognize the unique link between poverty, tribal identity, and communal violence in Orissa, and implement development schemes to address poverty, disadvantages associated with tribal or caste status, the lack of economic opportunity, and the lack of adequate education and health infrastructure.

Angana Chatterji testimony in USA on Orissa anti Christian violence

To: The Congressional Task Force on International Religious Freedom 

From: Dr. Angana Chatterji
Associate Professor, Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology 
California Institute of Integral Studies
1453 Mission Street, San Francisco, California 94103
achatterji@ciis.edu; 415.575.6119 (office); 415.640.4013 (mobile) 

December 30, 2008

Re.: Recommendations for action, as requested, following a briefing held on December 10, 2008, on 'The Threat Religious Extremism Poses to Democracy and Security in India: Focus on Orissa', at 2168 Rayburn in Washington D.C.

I thank the Congressional Task Force on International Religious Freedom for honoring me with an invitation to testify at the hearing. I submit the following recommendations for consideration related to United States policy in its continued association with India, in ensuring mutual respect for, and commitment to, freedom of religion, a secular state, and the attendant human rights and civil liberties of disenfranchised, including minority, groups and peoples. 

The following submission is mindful of the political/policy borders and boundaries that mediate issues of national sovereignty. The implicit assumption is that actions to uphold human rights, civil liberties, and democratic governance by the United States Government contributes significantly to international discourse in ways that are beneficial globally as well as to United States domestic policy and practice. The following submission is an appeal for ethical negotiation between India and the United States as the most powerful (United States) and populous (India) democracies seek to fulfill their commitment to human rights and its attendant freedoms. In so doing, various constituencies in both nations remain hopeful that any opportunity for association between these states will assist in enabling mutual adherence to responsible and democratic governance. 

The following is in addition to the dossier of my research that I submitted at the hearing.

Note: 
I am a Citizen of India and a Permanent Resident of the United States. My observations are based on research on religious freedom and minority rights conducted by me in Orissa. I have undertaken 16 trips to the state since June 2002, and undertaken work in 66 villages, 11 towns, and 4 cities across 17 districts in Orissa. In 2005-2006, I co-convened the Indian People's Tribunal on Communalism in Orissa through the Indian People's Tribunal on Environment and Human Rights with Advocate Mihir Desai, with a panel led by Former Chief Justice K.K. Usha of the Kerala High Court.

Religious violence and the religionization of social life by Hindu nationalist organizations have continued to endanger life and livelihood for minorities in India, as witnessed in Gujarat (2002), Jammu-Kashmir (2008), Orissa (2007-2008), Karnataka (2008), Assam (2008), and elsewhere. The violence against Christian minority communities in Orissa in August-October 2008 was not unexpected. In Orissa, since the mid-1990s, a formidable mobilization has been established by Hindu nationalist groups, including in Kandhamal district. These groups have acted with egregious impunity with adverse impact on society, economy, culture, religion, polity, and security in the state. The Sangh Parivar 'family' of Hindutva, Hindu supremacist, organizations has a visible presence in twenty-five of thirty districts in Orissa. The Sangh Parivar has amassed between 35 and 40 major organizations with numerous branches (including paramilitary hate camps) in 25 districts in Orissa, with a massive base of a few million operating at every level of society, ranging from, and connecting, villages to cities, in their campaign to 'convert' Orissa for the 'Hindu nation'. 

Following the recommendations for action listed below please find a note on actions proposed by concerned citizens in India, and a brief note on the context of Hindu nationalism in Orissa today.

Recommendations for action in the United States:
Various diasporic charitable organizations affiliated with Hindu nationalist ideologies operate in the United States. This has been well documented with details submitted by me in the dossier. These organizations routinely maintain links with Hindu nationalist leaders and organizations in India, including in Orissa. As well, these diasporic organizations seek to influence public discourse and policy in the United States that relates to India. They also fundraise to export capital and resources to counterpart/affiliate organizations in India, including in Orissa, that assist in various ways in promulgating Hindu nationalist ideology. It is imperative that charities involved in work that promulgates and maintains an infrastructure of hate and violence against minorities be so designated. A list of such charities must be responsibly developed in consultation with academics, researchers, and independent bodies with relevant expertise on the subject. Following such identification, investigations must be undertaken by relevant authorities into the actions of these organizations operating with charitable status. Note: The categorization of organizations that promulgate divisiveness, hate, and violence must occur with the utmost care and in a transparent manner, so as to not infringe on the freedoms, rights, and entitlements of organizations that legitimately undertake charitable work, or ensue the demonization of vulnerable groups and marginal, even unorthodox, perspectives. The objective is not to further involve the state in public life, but to note that the state is already involved in the ability of these organizations to function. Hindu nationalism operates as a transnational movement and the reach of its affiliated 'charitable' organizations in the United States continues internationally through groups they fund and support in India. Halting their interventions requires new ways of thinking about domestic and foreign policy and necessitates coordination between the United States and India as a tenet of bilateral cooperation.

Toward the above and further:

1.     Undertake a systematic, routine, and detailed investigation into the actions of diasporic Hindu nationalist groups to identify and investigate their status, actions, finances, and the actions and affiliations of their membership in the United States, as well as their affiliates and cadre. These groups must be investigated and monitored, and, as appropriate, requisite action must be taken and sanctions must be imposed on their activities. 

2.     Many of these organizations, registered as charitable entities in the United States, routinely allocate sizeable amounts of money under 'program services', disproportionately directed to Hindu nationalist and affiliated groups in India. The effects of this have been documented in the organized violence against Muslims, aided by officials of the state government at the highest level, in Gujarat in 2002.

3.     Certain diasporic organizations affiliated with Hindu nationalism, such as the India Development Relief Fund (IDRF, Tax identification number 52-1555563) and Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHP-A, Tax identification number 51-0156325), Sewa International (Tax identification number 20-0638718), and Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation of USA (Tax identification number 77-0554248) are registered as charity organizations in the United States. As their work appears to be political in nature, they should be audited and recognized as political organizations. A serious concern is whether the activities of these fall within the objectives of their tax-exempt status; whether in fact these organizations should have been registered as 501(c)3 groups given the nature of their activities, whether the monies collected are indeed used for the purposes for which they were collected, and whether illegal and political activities are being carried out in the name of social work. Given these concerns, the charitable status, and the rights and privileges thereof, enjoyed by these groups should be reviewed, and, where appropriate, revoked. Further, their activities should be monitored to determine their role in fomenting hate and undermining the human rights of various individuals and groups in India. Note: The VHP failed to gain recognition at the United Nations as a 'cultural organization' in 1999 because of its philosophical underpinnings, even as the VHP-A continues to function as an independent charity, registered in the United States since the 1970s. 

4.     The Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh-USA (Tax identification number 52-1647017, an ideological affiliate of the militant Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in India) and VHP-Overseas (Tax identification number 04-3576058) are registered as 501(c)3 groups and operate as cultural organizations, seeking to mainstream and lobby Hindu nationalist concerns in the United States. The impact of their activities in promulgating hate and perpetrating 'terror' and communal violence in India must be investigated.

5.     Monitor visa issuance to, and the travel of, Hindu nationalist leaders and activists charged with involvement in criminal acts. A case in point is Mr. Narendra Modi, the incumbent Chief Minister of Gujarat, who has been implicated in the violence orchestrated against Muslims in 2002, and whose visa was revoked by the United States in 2005, following advocacy on part of civil society groups and academics in the United States and support from Congressional members. 

6.     Ensure that appointees to federal and state positions, or those that serve in an advisory capacity, or as experts to state officials are scrutinized for affiliations or linkages they may hold within Hindu nationalist groups. These affiliations, where they exist, should not be treated as benign, and a reasoned investigation must be undertaken to determine whether the prospective appointee or advisor is able to fulfill requisite service obligations with ideological and practical distance from Hindu nationalist agendas. A case in point is Ms. Sonal Shah, who was appointed to President-elect Barack Obama's 15-member Transition Team in November 2008. While her list of accomplishments and expertise run high, she has worked as a National Coordinator for the VHP-A and served on its Governing Council, and her organization, Indify, affiliated with Ekal Vidyalaya of India, and supported the ideological and political premises of Hindu nationalism, and their action programs.

7.     Ensure that international human rights and independent monitoring groups are invited to India on a regular basis to monitor the status of religious freedom and human rights of minority communities and allied faith and secular peoples and groups. The ability of international human rights and independent monitoring groups to work in alliance with local civil society institutions is crucial to interrupting the isolation disenfranchised/minority groups experience and producing accountability.

8.     Ensure that the constitutionality and transparent implementation of security laws of India, as they pertain to religious groups and religious freedoms, are able to be rigorously monitored by international human rights and independent monitoring groups in alliance with local civil society institutions. These laws have been, without due cause, disproportionately and variously used by law enforcement agencies in India against minority communities and those dissenting unethical practices of the state, and their rights have not been duly protected.

9.     All bilateral projects must be assessed for their human rights implications, and cost-benefit analyses undertaken to determine/ensure that these projects are in fact positioned to make contributions that are empowering for disenfranchised groups, including minorities, so as to enable the restructuring of inequitable and institutionalized relations of power that lead to majoritarianism and communal violence. 

Actions applicable to Orissa and at the national level in India:
Reciprocally, it is important to note certain actions that have been proposed by concerned citizens in India that the Government of India and Government of Orissa must undertake toward effective intervention into the organization and growth of Hindu nationalism. Toward this:

1.     In India, the Central Bureau of Investigation must be required to expeditiously investigate the activities of the Bajrang Dal, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in Orissa, and apply, wherever necessary, relevant provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Section 2G of the Act, 'unlawful association' denotes: (1) 'that which has for its object any unlawful activity, or which encourages or aids persons to undertake any unlawful activity, or through which the members undertake such activity'; or (2) 'which has for its object any activity which is punishable under Section 153A or Section 153B of the Indian Penal Code 1860 ([Central Act] 45 of 1860) or which encourages or aids persons to undertake any such activity; or of which the members undertake any such activity'. 

2.     A review panel must be appointed by the Government of Orissa, in consultation with the National Human Rights Commission, the National Minorities Commission, and other relevant independent bodies, such as the People's Union for Democratic Rights and People's Union for Civil Liberties, to identify and investigate the status, actions, finances, and membership of Hindu nationalist groups and their affiliates and cadre, and the actions of their membership. These groups must be investigated and monitored, and, as appropriate, requisite action must be taken and sanctions must be imposed on their activities, and reparations must be made retroactively to the affected communities and individuals. The Government of Orissa must act to stop instances of communalization from escalating into violent episodes.

3.     Hindu nationalist leaders, activists, and organizations in Orissa charged with involvement in criminal acts and involvement in actions that have led, or may lead, to communal violence must be investigated and prosecuted. 

4.     Certain organizations, such as the VHP and Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram, are registered as cultural and charitable organizations. As their work appears to be political in nature, they should be audited and recognized as political organizations. A serious concern is whether the activities of Hindu nationalist charitable organizations fall within the objectives of the social trust/public charitable trust and whether in fact these organizations should have been registered as social trusts given the nature of their activities; whether the monies collected are indeed used for the purposes for which they were collected and whether illegal and political activities are being carried out in the name of social work. Given these concerns, the charitable status, and the rights and privileges thereof, enjoyed by these groups must be reviewed and necessary action taken.

5.     The Government of Orissa and the Central Government must make concerted efforts to identify, investigate, and eradicate paramilitary hate camps being operated in Orissa by the Hindu nationalist groups that instruct cadre in arms training and militancy with the express purpose of threatening and destroying disenfranchised and minority populations through social and economic boycotts, sporadic and organized intimidation, arson, rape, murder, and other forms of social, gendered, sexualized, economic, and physical violence. 

6.     Various police and court investigations related to crimes against minorities have not been undertaken in Orissa. On various occasions, the police have refused to file First Information Reports (FIR). Police desks should be set up for registering minority grievances and filing FIRs, and the Government of Orissa must appoint a team of Special Public Prosecutors to conduct proceedings as necessary. Toward this, independent monitoring bodies must be supported and protected.

7.     The Government of India and the Government of Orissa must take adequate and expeditious steps to ensure that those who convert voluntarily to Christianity, Islam, or any other faith are allowed to practice their religion. Failing to do so is in serious violation of Articles 25-28 of the Constitution of India, which define the Fundamental Rights of every citizen of India, and those that the Government of India and the Government of Orissa are obligated to uphold. Toward this, independent monitoring bodies must be supported and protected.

8.     Hindu nationalist organizations are forcibly converting Christians and other non-Hindus in Orissa to Hinduism. Sangh Parivar activists claim India to be a Hindu nation and all Adivasis (tribals, indigenous peoples) and Dalits (erstwhile 'untouchable' groups) to be 'originally' Hindus, even as Adivasis and Dalits often do not self-identify as such. Drawing on such rationales, Hindu nationalist organizations justify coercion in 'bringing back' Adivasis or Dalits to Hinduism. Urgent steps should be taken to stop the Hinduization of these communities by means of coercion or duress. The police and courts must act immediately and authoritatively to stop Hindu nationalists from enacting forcible conversions or 'reconversions', and the police must be required to submit regular and public reports documenting their work in this matter. 

9.     The disparagement, demonization, and vilification of any religion should be statutorily prohibited and held punishable under the Indian Penal Code. 

10.     The Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967, must be reviewed and repealed.

11.     The Orissa Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1960, must be reviewed and repealed.

12.     The Government of Orissa must establish and activate the State Minorities Commission.

13.     The BJD-BJP coalition government in Orissa must honor the Constitutional mandate requiring the separation of religion from state.

14.     Police, judicial, and governmental reform, including diversity training, must be addressed by relevant state institutions, and action taken against officers of the law and political servants who abuse their position of public trust by using their power to influence and support Hindu nationalist organizations and sustain a climate of communalism in Orissa.

15.     The Government of Orissa must adopt an integrated and sustainable approach to community development, and take concrete efforts to stop further ghettoization of minority communities. The Government of Orissa must promote non-segregated localities, housing complexes, housing societies, clubs, educational, and recreational institutions, and that the Government of Orissa must publicly support social interactions, including voluntary inter-caste, inter-faith, and inter-class unions, marriages, and partnerships.

16.     The Government of India must issue a White Paper on bomb blasts and terror attacks in India and constitute a Joint Parliamentary Committee that investigates such incidents.

17.     The law should be amended to obviate the requirement of prior sanction of the state before prosecuting anyone for hate speech.

18.     The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005, introduced in the Parliament of India in December 2005 and approved by the Union Cabinet in March 2007, must be passed, and with the requisite clauses to ensure state accountability. The bill, advocated by citizen motivated efforts for the prevention of genocide and crimes against humanity, in its official formulation as introduced by the Congress government, remained deficient in defining procedures for state and public accountability. As presently drafted, the law will become applicable only selectively. An amendment should do away with the law being made applicable only selectively, at places and times as convenient to the state. In addition, there exist no dedicated provisions for reparation and rehabilitation of victims/survivors. The bill fails to address issues of negligence displayed by state authorities in preventing and controlling communal violence, and in disbursing timely and just compensation and psychosocial rehabilitation, as well as establishing parameters for witness protection and for soliciting and recording victim testimonies. It fails to chart measures to bring justice and accountability with regard to gender and sex-based crimes in the event of communal violence (which is not effectively addressed by the Indian Penal Code or separate legislation), and in imposing checks and balances on the state and its police and security forces, whose inertia and majoritarianist complicity in communal collisions have been consistent.

19.     On 29 November 1949, India became a signatory to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, approved by the United Nations General Assembly resolution 260 A (III) of 9 December 1948. On 27 August 1959, India ratified the Genocide Convention. However, India is yet to fulfill its obligatory commitment to enact legislation to implement the convention, which it must be compelled to undertake.     

Context of Hindu nationalism in Orissa:
Conscription into Hindu activism is coordinated through political reform, propaganda/thought control, cultural and religious interventions, developmental/social service and charitable work, sectarian health care, unionization, and revisionist education. Hindu nationalists have inaugurated various trusts and branches of national and international institutions in Orissa to aid fundraising, including, reportedly, the Friends of Tribal Society, Samarpan Charitable Trust, Sookruti, Yasodha Sadan, Utkal Bipanna Sahayata Samiti, and Odisha International Centre. It is noteworthy that since March 2000, the state government has comprised of a coalition of the Biju Janata Dal and the Bharatiya Janata Party (the parliamentary wing of Hindu nationalism).
The Sangh Parivar has built a cadre comprised of Hindus, men and women, in targeting Christians, Muslims, Adivasis and Dalits, and other disenfranchised, progressive, and secular groups in Orissa. Orissa has a population of 36.8 million (Census 2001). Of this, 761,985 - 2.1 percent - are Muslims. Orissa Christians number 897,861 - just 2.4 percent of the state's population per the census of 2001 (in 1991, it was 2.1 percent, and in 1981, 1.7 percent). There are 6.08 million Dalits in Orissa, 16.5 percent of the population. Adivasis are 8.14 million in number, 22.1 percent of the population, the largest among all states in India.

The Sangh Parivar's agenda is enabled by the staggering inequities present in the state, where severe social and institutionalized forms of caste, class, and gendered oppressions are rampant, facilitative of regularized violence, including sexualized violence. Unemployment is on the rise in Orissa and abysmal daily wages prevail; 47.2 percent of the total population lives in poverty while 48 percent of the rural population is poor (87 percent of the state's population lives in villages currently and per the 2001 census, there are 51,352 villages in Orissa). Among the Adivasi population, 63.6 percent are poor while 40.5 percent of Dalits live in poverty. Among the Muslim population, 70 percent are poor in Cuttack, Jagatsinghpur and Puri districts, where they are concentrated. 

During the 2008 violence in Orissa, various militant Hindu nationalist organizations acted with impunity. The violence was led by the following groups -- the Bajrang Dal, VHP, and RSS. Following the riots and extended violence against Christian communities in Kandhamal district of Orissa in August-October 2008, the Government of Orissa and police, military, paramilitary forces deployed in the state failed to respond effectively, efficiently, or appropriately. This posed a serious threat to democratic governance in the state and the ability of government to ensure the security and sanctity of peoples and groups made vulnerable through majoritarian communalism as perpetrated by Hindu nationalist organizations in the state. The Central Government in New Delhi as well failed to respond in a timely and effective manner and with due concern. 

It is only after the violence drew significant national and international attention, and began to generate other and political consequences, that both state and central governments responded to stop the violations against Christian minority groups in Orissa. The outrage and response of the state failed to match the proportion and extent of violence perpetrated by Hindu nationalist organizations. As of 25 December 2008, rehabilitation measures and provisions ensuring the security of vulnerable groups in rural areas and towns in Kandhamal district remained vastly inadequate. 

The matters and circumstances that led to the Kandhamal violence of 2007 and 2008 in Orissa continue to pose a threat to the sanctity and security of human rights in the state, particularly of religious and ethnic minorities such as Christians and Muslims, disenfranchised Adivasi, Dalit, and caste groups, and other vulnerable groups such as women, and secular organizations and active individuals across the state. Failure to take preventative and effective action continues to jeopardize the rule of law, the right to life and livelihood, freedom of religion, of speech, movement, assembly, inquiry, and the right to information in Orissa. As I write this, the situation in Orissa remains beleaguered and volatile, de facto in a state of emergency.
______________________________