India puts lives ahead of nuclear energy

People’s life and livelihood versus nuclear power for industry JOHN DAYAL It is the life and the livelihood of the poorest of the poor versus a nation’s ambitions in nuclear energy for industry and super-powerdom in Koodankulam in south India. A lakh of men, women and children demonstrated earlier this month at the, several of them launching a ten daylong hunger-strike, demanding a stop to the Russia-assisted construction of a 1,000 megawatt nuclear power plant which has triggered a nagging controversy both on its physical safety, following the Fukushima disaster in Japan, and its impact on the environment affecting the livelihood of several million boatmen and fisher-folks along the Coromandel coast. It made international news was the presence of a large number of Catholic Priests and Nuns, many of them born in the area and umblically connected with the people whose cause they so openly espoused. Catholics and other Christian denominations form a significant part of the coastal population of Puducherry, Tamil Nadu, and of neighbouring maritime states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Kerala, most of them subsisting on fishing and prawn farming, both sensitive to a warming of sea currents because of unchecked waste water discharge. According to a UCAN report , the people came from 20 Catholic villages and a dozen others around Koodankulam from the districts of Kanyakumari, Thoothukudi and Tirunelveli. The agency interviewed some of the demonstrators.“Russian nuclear technology has failed in Chernobyl. Why should we use it here to endanger our lives,” said Bishop Yuvon Ambroise of Tuticorin and chairperson of the Office for Justice, Peace and Development (JPD) at the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India. Bishop Ambroise said the country should look to Europe and Japan as an example.“India should follow Germany and Japan, who recently announced that they are giving up their nuclear facilities after the Fukushima disaster.” “Our lives are in danger because of the nuclear plant,” said Bishop Peter Remigius of Kottar. “We want the facilities to be used for useful purposes.” Medha Patkar, who mothered the Narbada Bachao movement against big damns said questions remained over why the government had approved the facility in an inhabited area despite environmental concerns. After more than a week, the agitation was called off when the Union government and the administrations of Puducherry and Tamil Nadu, the two affected States, called a temporary halt to work on the nuclear plant and promised talks with the local people. The Tamil Nadu Cabinet of chief minister J Jayalalitha is to pass a formal resolution and send it over to the Union Government. Prime minister Manmohan Singh will have to take a call on the issue after he returns from New York where is attending the General Assembly of the United nations. It remains a moot question if the government will indeed halt further work and eventually shut down the existing units of the plant. Fears are it will not. Nuclear energy, for war and for peace, remains locked in a fierce stranglehold of hyper nationalism and the needs of the growing economy in a country whose people aspire to be a global superpower in the not too distant future. This nationalism has made real debate on safety and security issues all but taboo in the country, with just a handful of activists and academics involved in any genuine debate. Years of nuclear isolation, when its only technological support was from the then Soviet Union, accentuated India’s paranoia that the world wanted to keep it away from cheap power for its growth. A clandestine nuclear military experiment exploded India into the Big Power club when the regime of the late prime minister Indira Gandhi carried out an underground blast in the early 1980s in the desert sands of Rajasthan. Two decades later, the government of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, leading a National Democratic alliance collation headed by his own Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata party, carried out a series of explosions in the same testing grounds. Pakistan, neighbour and traditional enemy, followed suit with its own nuclear experiments. Both countries today have an estimated more than two hundred strategic nuclear warheads mounted on ground and air-borne missiles, and possibly also on warships. This show of might, and an end of the soft military alliance with Russia, has helped India reach pacts in nuclear material with the US and Europe who look on the expanding Indian market with deep interest. Electricity for industry and homes remains a critical need for India, which does not have great reserves of oil, and only limited reserves of high grade coal for hydrocarbon-fuelled thermal power plants. With most of its northern rivers flowing through unstable seismic regions prone to earthquakes, the safety of existing hydel power plants has been called into question. The collapse of the tunnels in the Teesta river project in the north eastern state of Sikkim in the recent earthquake had revived the paranoia first evoked when a quake hit the Koyna dam in Maharashtra some years ago. Jawaharlal Nehru and his scientific advisers thought succour lay in clean nuclear energy. In 1962 Homi Bhabha, the father of atomic energy in India, projected 20,000 mw in nuclear generation capacity by 1987 based on imported reactors. The target, and future targets, could never rally be achieved. The Department of Atomic Energy which owns the largely indigenous nuclear power program now has a target of 20,000 MWe for 2020 and expects to have 63,000 MWe nuclear capacity on line by 2032. It aims to supply 25 per cent of electricity from nuclear power by 2050. Because India is outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty due to its weapons program, it was for 34 years largely excluded from trade in nuclear plant or materials, which has hampered its development of civil nuclear energy until 2009. Due to these trade bans and lack of indigenous uranium, India has uniquely been developing a nuclear fuel cycle to exploit its reserves of thorium. Its current energy derived from nuclear plans is 5,000 mw. According to the government’s own assessments, quoted in the media, electricity demand in the country is increasing rapidly, and the 830 billion kilowatt hours produced in 2008 was triple the 1990 output, though still represented only some 700 kWh per capita for the year. Because of the massive transmission line losses, this resulted in only 591 billion kWh consumption. Coal provides 68 per cent of the electricity at present, natural gas 8 per cent, hydro-electric units giving 14 percent more The per capita electricity consumption figure is expected to double by 2020, with 6.3% annual growth, and reach 5000-6000 kWh by 2050. By the way, there are many who blame coal based units for pollution and question the security and safety, even the displacement potential, of dams meant for irrigation and power. The crippling of the Fukusima plant in Japan in the earthquake and tsunami in March 2011 has for once brought the safety debate into the public domain. The International Atomic Energy Agency’s global expert fact-finding group has in its June report said “there were insufficient defence for tsunami hazards” the likes of which devastated the Coromandel coast of India, as also Indonesia, Thailand and Sri Lanka, some years ago. The Nuclear Power Corp. of India has undertaken safety evaluation of 20 operating power plants and nuclear power plants under construction, suggesting a series of safety procedures, specially for plants along the coastline. The nuclear power lobby says the Russian VVER reactors of 1000 MWe are considered to be quite safe, unlike the Chernobyl graphite RBMK reactors. They have many safety features built in to them, and have an operating life of 40 years. The reactors at Koodankulam have an added “passive cooling” system for additional safety. The more advanced VVER 1200 reactors, with more safety features, are being built in Russia, and would be available for the future expansion of Koodankulam. While 30 VVER-1000 reactors have been built, 19 more are planned or are under construction. China has built two such reactors at the Tainwan nuclear power plant and is constructing six more. The VVER 1000 built in China has 94 per cent of its systems automated, i.e. the plant can control itself under most situations. The IDEA has referred to the Tainwan station as the “safest nuclear power plant in the world”. The lobby says the Koodankulam reactors can be considered to be adequate from the safety standpoint. “There would be no rational reason for stopping the project at this stage, when it is over 95 per cent completed.” The plant is far from major seismic activity, it is said, and therefore the risks are manageable. This is challenged by anti Nuclear activists such as the pioneering journalist Praful Bidwai who has carried out a safety campaign for more than twenty years. The environment impact on the ocean is a more urgent issue. The Koodankulam thermal power plant will require large amounts of cooling water, an estimated 70 cubic metres per second, which will be heated up while going through the coils of the nuclear power plant and will be discharged into the sea. The impact of this warm water on the marine environment is said to be difficult to assess, and would depend on the sea depth, flow rates, and ecology. There have also been some allegations of the health effects of radiation on people living in the vicinity of nuclear power plants elsewhere in India. But India has clearly indicated it will not abandon the quest for nuclear energy. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is emphatic about the future of India’s nuclear energy programme, saying “there would be no looking back on nuclear energy,: and in fact proposing expanding India’s civil nuclear energy with adequate safety measures. Indian civil society is not convinced if the measures will really be adequate to prevent a future disaster. Koodankulam and the fishermen in its neighbourhood remain apprehensive.

KILL BILL -- The turbulent course of the Communal Violence Prevention draft Bill in the National Integration Council meeting

JOHN DAYAL I must begin with a Disclaimer: I was a member of the Working Group of the Mrs Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council which drafted the Prevention of Communal Violence [Access to Justice and Reparations] Bill 2011. I am also a member of the National Integration Council. In the council’s belated meeting on 10th September 2011 in the magnificent Vigyan Bhawan, I was the solitary Christian Member – of the other two, St Stephens College principal Dr. Valson Thampu did not attend, and Delhi Archbishop Vincent Concessao was away in Rome – to speak and support the enactment of such a Bill, which otherwise came in for a brutal drubbing at the hands of Bharatiya Janata party’s parliamentary leaders Mrs Shushma Swaraj of the Lok Sabha and Mr Arun Jaitely of the Rajya Sabha, and the party’s chief ministers of Madhya Pradesh, Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand, leaders of most major non Congress parties and even the bosses of some Satellite TV channels. My views in this article may, therefore, be somewhat biased, and if they are, it is despite my trying hard to be absolutely neutral. I may also point out that during the framing of this draft Bill, I, together with jurists Vrinda Grover and Usha Ramanathan and activist Shabnam Hashmi, have been a critic of many a provision relating to a feared erosion of the federal character of our governance and possible allusions to “disturbed areas” which are anathema to many of us in the civil liberties movement. The NAC accepted over 57 objections before publishing its draft Bill. Having said that, I fear that there has been a possible attempt in some official quarters to kill this Bill even before it has formally seen the light of the day by being send to the Cabinet, then introduced in Parliament, discussed in select committees and then debate openly on the floor of the Rajya Sabha [where an apparition of a 2005 Bill still lives] before being passed and signed into law. The manner in which it was allowed to be mauled in the open meeting of the National Integration Council – just four of us really supported it, three being social activists – put a huge question mark on why the Bill was so prematurely put before political opponents for their views, and why no one from the government or from the Congress Party spoke, or was allowed to speak, in defence of either the Bill or the rational for coming up with suitable legislation to save religious minorities of all sorts from targetted violence. The Bill came into being from the group experiences of the anti Muslim pogroms of Gujarat in 2002, the attempted annihilation of Christians in Kandhamal, Orissa in 2007-2008, the haunting memories of the 1984 massacre of Sikhs in Delhi and other cities, together with attacks on Dalits and Tribals over the past few decades. The government had come up with a Bill in 2005, but when it presented its version in the Rajya Sabha, it was clear that the administration was empowering governments and police rather than protecting and defending the victims. It took five years of hard labour by civil society and specially by the Muslim groups, led by the likes of former Chief Justice Ahmadi and several retired high court judges, before the government agreed there was need to revise the Bill thoroughly. The National Integration Council took upon itself the task of drafting the proposed new Bill, together with other social legislation it was working on including the Right to Food. It set up a working group with members Harsh Mander and Farah Naqvi as coordinators and experts and activists representing the minorities, legal luminaries and others on the team. It took close to a year before the Bill took some share, seeing bitter and prolonged discussions between members to balance the needs of the minorities and reconciling it with constitutional provisions and the Indian penal Code. It was quite clear from the beginning that there was a felt need to identify and punish targetted violence, define who will be identified as victims and when, and how action would be taken to end impunity, enforce command responsibility, set up some mechanism to trigger state action. It was also clear that we did not want to repeat the experiments of the National Human Rights commission and the national Commission for Minorities which were either toothless, or as themselves as defenders of national honour by defending the government, or were toothless. It was also clear to us that the federal character of the state could not be trifled with. And above all, many of us were absolutely adamant that there be no reference to disturbed areas on the pattern of Jammu and Kashmir and the north eastern States which gave unfettered powers to the Armed Forces. Although most of the members had worked with the victims of communal violence, and therefore wanted some universal principles and equality to be introduced both in justice and in reparations and relief and rehabilitation, we did not want fears to be expressed about possible overthrow of state governmetns by the Centre and the introduction of President’s Rule. Therefore it was only the second part of Article 355 which was seen as an entry point for the Central government to encourage state governmetns to act swiftly when communal violence went out of hand, as had happed in Gujarat and Kandhamal. In defining groups, it was also clear to us that most groups could be in a minority in some state or the other, and in certain circumstances. Though Muslims, Sikhs, and Christians were the national minorities, even Hindus were a minority in as many as seven of the 35 States and Union territories of India. Other issues covered in the Bill in detail were Dereliction of Duty by public servants which was recognised both in omission and commission. The definition said public servants who act or omit to exercise authority vested in them and fail to prevent or offences or protect victims or act in a malafide or predicted manner will be guilty of punishable offences. They had of course first to identify the violence as targetted. The monitoring and grievance redressal, the bill said, shall be with the National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation (NACHJR) and corresponding State authorities (SACHJR). The monitoring mechanism of national and state authorities will also provide the “paper trail” to ensure robust accountability of public officials in a court of law. The critical clauses related to the identification of targetted and communal violence. The Indian Penal Code contains most offences committed during episodes of communal violence. These have been appended in a schedule to the Bill and shall be considered offences when they cross a threshold of being knowingly directed against any person by virtue of his or her membership of a minority group. Brutal forms of sexual offence as seen in Gujarat and Kandhamal have also been included in the bill, as is hate campaign and propaganda leading to alienation and targetted violence. Just to make it doubly sure that the Bill passed muster, the draft said advisories and recommendations of the NACHJR were not binding on State governments. All powers and duties of investigation, prosecution and trial remained with the State governments. The draft Bill, after being put in a legislative format by Additional Solicitor General Indira Jai Singh [she did only the formatting, not the actual drafting, it must be made clear] the draft was put on the Internet by the National Advisory Council to garner public opinion which would be sent to the Central government together with the suggestions came. In due course, the ministries were supposed to clear it before the Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister adopted a final version for introducing in parliament. That is why the developments in the NIC meeting surprised us. The government had not formally intimated its position on the Bill nor had it formally sent it to the opposition parties and the state governmetns for their official opinion and suggestions other than the NAC putting it on its website. The agenda formulation too made it seem that those who were to speak had either to accept it or reject it, rather than to critique and analyse it. As the formal NIC note put it, the agenda of the meeting was “measures to curb communalism and communal violence, approach to the Communal Violence Bill, measures to promote communal harmony and measures to end discrimination, specially against minorities, and finally, how to prevent radicalisation of youth”. Unfortunately, barring the preliminary remarks of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the discussion, along political divides, focussed on just the Draft NAC Bill. The tone was set by Sushma Swaraj who slammed the Bill and said it did not consider people as Indian citizens but divided them on line of religion or ethnicity and language. Her party, she said, would formally oppose the Bill. Arun Jaitely followed suit, saying the federal structure would be hit. In saying so, they almost verbatim followed the propaganda that had been let loose for weeks earlier by the RSS and its wings, the Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad whose leadership threatened a nationwide agitation to ensure that the bill, which they aid stigmatised the Hindu community, did not bring law. It was mostly the BJP chief ministers who were present in force barring Narendra Modi of Gujarat. They all opposed the Bill in the language similar to the Bajrang Dal and RSS. Nitish Kumar, Jayalalitha and Mayawati had stayed away, but the text they circulated criticised the Bill for infringing on the rights of the states. The CPM – and both Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechury spoke, also had grave apprehensions about the federal motives of the NAC. BJP’s allies at one time or the other, the Akali Dal and the Biju Janata Dal, also toed the line. What surprised observers was the stance of the UPA ally Trinamul Congress of Mamta Bannerjee which made common cause with other state governments in the issue of the rights of the states. Scholar Zoya Hasan and some media stalwarts also spoke against the Bill for a verity of reasons, but essentially implying that existing laws were more than sufficient. There were very few supporters. Ministers do not speak at NIC meetings as a matter of form. But other Congressmen do. They refrained this time from supporting a draft emerging out of a council headed by party president Sonia Gandhi.. The support came from Muslim members Navid Hamid and Asghar Ali Engineer and a few others. The Chairman of the National Commission for Minorities, Wajahat Habibullah, repeatedly asked for permission to speak, but in the end could not. In an interview later, he said he wanted to stress issues of Rehabilitation, Accountability and the plight of Internally Displaced persons, which in fact was added on NCM’s recommendation following Kandhamal, Ahmedabad and the situation in Tribal areas of Tripura. He also referred to the agenda item on youth, mentioning the victimisation of Muslim youth arrested In the Mecca Masjid bomb blast case and the governmetns” arresting them under laws on criminal conspiracy and sedition and so on. The matter of course is not over. The debate continues even among those of us who were members of the NAC Working group. Many have called for an urgent meeting of the Working group to revisit the issues of federalism and possible encroachment of the powers of the States. There is a feeling that even if the objections have been political, there is need to make the Bill go through parliament with consensus and dialogue, and therefore there is a need to engage with the states governmetns and with various political parties. There is a definite agreement, articulated by eminent law teacher Upendra Buxi that there is need for a law to prevent targetted and communal violence. Vrinda Grover said “we must also pay heed that criticism or anxiety is being expressed from across the board and not just the usual suspects.” Vrinda and Usha Ramanathan were among the first in the Working group to flag problematic provisions. “There is some merit in reconsidering some legal propositions presented in the final NAC draft of the CV Bill, 2011,” she says. “I am afraid the apprehension that this law is a device for the Union to usurp the power and role of the States and intrude at will, lingers on. The ill advised Clause 20 of the penultimate NAC Bill, still haunts public memory, with some reason. Despite Clause 20 having been dropped no corresponding change has been made the powers and functions of the National Authority. It is this that has invited the wrath of many regional, Left, 'secular' parties who would have otherwise been our allies and advocates of this Bill. Most of us agree with Vrinda when she says “tampering with the federal structure will not yield anything for those constituencies who need the protection of the CV law. It will however alienate critical allies, without whose support, it is unlikely that this Bill will ever translate into law, as the numbers will simply not add up.” All eyes are now on the NAC and the Union Government, though the hopethat the Bill would be placed before Parliament, possibly as government amendments to the Bill of 2005, are fading fast.

Justice issues of Kandhamal, Dalit Christian demands raised at meeting of National Integration Council

[The following is an abridged version of the points raised by Dr John Dayal, Secretary General, All India Christian Council, at the meeting of the National Integration Council at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi on Saturday, 10th September 2011. The Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh, chaired the meeting moderated by Union Home Minister Mr. P Chidambaram. Mr. L K Advani, BJP leaders Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitely, Defence minister A K Anthony, chief ministers of Orissa and other States, leaders of the Congress and other parties, leading industrialists were among the Members of the NIC present.]

“Mr. Prime Minister, Honourable Union Ministers, Honourable Chief Ministers, distinguished Members

I bring you greetings from the Christian community in India, proud to be Indians, and proud of the fact that our country has rule of law under a Constitution that guarantees us Freedom of Faith as a vital component of our Secular, Socialist Democracy.

At the outset, may I express our community’s strong condemnation of the recent bomb blast outside the Delhi High court, and express our solidarity with the victims and our fellow citizens. Terror has no place in Indian society. There is no cause big enough to merit mindless violence that targets innocent men, women and children. As people of Peace, we pray for the dead as we also pray for the speedy recovery of the injured. Above all, we pray eternal peace and prosperity for India, our motherland.

We ourselves are victims of a different sort of socio-political terror, the terror of communalism. Our data shows we are targetted across the country with at least one incident a day of hate-motivated violence at some town or village, in one state or the other. Some states are worse than others. Among the worst are Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh, and districts such as Udaipur in Rajasthan. In many states, the local police and administration are complicit. Often their actions and impunity blatantly encourage local violent elements. In Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh for instance, local police and administrative coercion and threatening of prayer services in homes, or house churches as they are called, almost immediately leads to acts of physical violence. Not every church has to be a large Cathedral. Jesus said “Wherever two or three are gathered in my name, I will be there”. That is the basis of house churches, small Christian communities and Basic Christian Communities as they are called in the Evangelical, Episcopal and Catholic denominations respectively.

Such targetting, intolerance and officially conducted so-called “surveys” and demands for “registration” of churches must end forthwith. It does not happen with believers of other faiths, and it must Not happen with Christians.
Hate campaigns must also end. We have identified, as I am sure the governmetns' intelligence agencies must also have identified, the origin of such hate from the headquarters of certain political groups who want India to be rid of its religious minorities, or wants them to live as second rate citizens. We are first class citizens, much as everyone else, and seek our rights, the first of which is security so that we can enjoy that other right – freedom of faith and worship. Government must take urgent steps to train its police and administrative personnel in the principles of secularism, and sensitize them on the needs of all minorities, and the Christian minority in particular.

The Targetted and Communal violence [prevention, reparation and justice] Bill 2011 drafted by the National Advisory Council seeks to ensure this. We still feel the Bill needs some fine-tuning on issues of protecting India’s federalism and the autonomy of States.. We also specifically seek Christian representation in the structures it envisages. We commend its early adoption by government and its enactment as law after checking the Constitutionality of every clause and sub clause.

It may come as a surprise to some, but our community also has its share and more of the poor and the deprived. The Dalit Christians are one such group. They must be restored their constitutional rights at the earliest as recommended by the Justice Rangnath Misra Commission. Other poor, specially among the tribals and the rural landless and fishermen, must be identified and receive the assistance of the Government’s many schemes. For this it is important they first be identified. We have repeatedly demanded a Prime Minister’s Committee, on the pattern of the Justice Sachchar Committee set up for the Muslims, to look into the socio economic and developmental status of the Christian community across the country. Such a survey will help the Church generate its own development strategies. And it will help the government implement its secular agenda of development.
There must also not be any confrontation and conflict between the educational rights guarantees for minorities in the Constitution, and the new Right to Education Act. Across the country, our educational sector is facing harassment in recent months with local authorities trying to intimidate school managements.

In the drafting of the 12th plan, we have suggested several measures for the uplift of those of my brothers and sisters who are deprived, in education, hostel facilities, employment and self employment. I commend those recommendations made to the Ministry of Minority Affairs and the Planning Commission. They must form part of government policy and must be implemented.

I close with reflecting on the many lapses that have taken place in ensuring justice, rehabilitation and reparation to the Christians of Kandhamal district in Orissa. Kandhamal saw an anti Christian pogrom in August, September and October 2008 and it seemed that the Connotation of India was not operative in that distant plateau in the centre of Odisha. Over 56,000 people were rendered homeless, over 5,600 housed destroyed, almost 300 churches torched, nuns raped. There was other and significant gender violence. According to our count, and the government differs, more than 90 persons lost their lives. Men and women lost livelihood and homes, jobs and fields. Children lost opportunities of education. Many villages banned the entry of Christians if they did not convert to Hinduism. Three years on, justice in the real terms remains a dream despite two Fast Track Courts which are known for witnessing the terrorizing of witnesses. Government aid for reconstruction was timid and small. The church helped out. But even then more than 2,000 houses remain unbuilt. It is shocking but many people have not been able to return home. Education, jobs, agriculture opportunities are missing. Even in the cases of murder, there has been no punishment in over 20 cases because the witnesses were scared or paid off. Sometimes their terrorizing took place in court, as I have witnessed personally.

Justice must be done, Dear Prime Minister and Dear Chief minister of Odisha. We look to you for justice.
I thank you for this opportunity to address the National Integration Council.”

Justice K T Thomas must know the truth of the RSS

Open your eyes, your Lordship (retired)
JOHN DAYAL

As a Malayalee who was also a judge of the Supreme Court of India, Justice Kallupurackal Thomas Thomas occupies an enviable place in the Kerala Christian social pantheon. No one in his right mind will dare say he is turning senile. Far from it. That man of justice, and of peace, remains as sharp as when he was on the highest Bench in the land. It therefore remains a mystery why Justice Thomas, invited often by right wing forums in his twin identity as jurist and Christian, always ends up praising the Hindutva lunatic fringe and denouncing the conversions of new people turning to Christ.

In an address in Kochi on 1 august 2011, Justice Thomas praised the RSS for its discipline and said the propaganda that the organisation was anti-minority was "baseless". The Press Trust of India reported that speaking at a function here, attended by RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat, he also said the ''smear campaign'' against RSS that it was responsible for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi must end. “There is a smear campaign that RSS was responsible for Gandhi’s assassination just because the assassin was once an RSS worker," he said, adding that the organisation had been ''completely exonerated'' by the court. This smear campaign must end against RSS," he said.

Gratuitously, Justice Thomas sought to expand his personal views to make them seem he spoke for the entire Christian community, including you and me. “I am a Christian. I was born as a Christian and practise that religion. I am a church going Christian. But I have also learnt many things about RSS," he said. He said he became an admirer of the RSS in 1979 when he was posted as district judge of Kozhikode, adding simple living and high thinking was its hallmark. During the Emergency, RSS was the only non-political organisation which fought against it. "We owe very much to RSS for sacrificing many lives for regaining our fundamental rights ...". "The propaganda that RSS was anti minority was also baseless," he said, adding he is a great admirer of the organisation as discipline is given importance.

This writer share some qualifications with the venerable justice. Like him, “I too am a Christian, a Catholic as a matter of fact. I was born as Christian and practice that religion. I am a church going Christian. But I have also leant many things about the RSS.”

One may in fact have learnt many more things about the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, for when he was rapidly going the ladder of jurisprudence, Reporting on the RSS forty years ago, visiting their shakhas, recording what their leaders said, and documenting their written statements and literature, one saw the training of youngsters and college students, and the excesses of fat pot bellied middle agenda traders in khaki shorts and white shirts, an hour before they went back to their shops in Chandni chowk and Chawri bazaar, the wholesale market of old Delhi.

It was perhaps too early in the day,, because one did not see what crowds in Jhansi saw decades later -- the frightening scene of RSS cadres practicing with mock and real rifle and double barrelled guns down the main thoroughfares of town, or of RSS chief ministers themselves firing military hardware while posing for photographs. But one did see how RSS cadres were trained in meetings early morning in public parks as much as in closed door vyayamshalas, their “boudhiki” intellectual brain washing, and their war games. “Exercises” no less frightening –elaborate handwork with thick lathis, or staves, the sort policemen carry at night. One also saw “children’s games” in which boys formed a string holding hands, and then swopped down on a rival group, trying to “abduct” or capture persons, presumably women. The “boudhikis” were given to reading the editorials and main articles in those poison-pen official mouthpieces of the Sangh, the Organiser in English, not read at the Shakhas, and the Hindi language Panchjanya, the mainstay of the morning discourses. They would then discuss what damage the Muslims had done to India. It would all conclude with another salute not to India, but to a mythical “Mother India”, more goddess than a symbol of the land which they shared with practitioners of all other religions.

And therefore it is quite obvious that Justice Thomas, as is his right, looked only at the pretty saffron flowers, and forgot to look at the blood which sullies the earth on which the RSS flag is hoist.

First things first. Let us get the Gandhi murder out of the way, so to say. And I am indebted to Professor Shamsul Islam, the global authority of the Sangh Parivar, for once again going me this documentary evidence. He remains, with Communalism Combat, Anhad, Sahmat and the All India Christian Council, the national libraries on this fascist organisation.

After the murder of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi on January 30, 1948 the RSS was banned on February 4, 1948. It was banned for anti-national activities and the government communiqué banning the RSS was self-explanatory: “In their resolution of February 2, 1948 the Government of India declared their determination to root out the forces of hate and violence that are at work in our country and imperil the freedom of the Nation and darken her fair name. In pursuance of this policy the Government of India have decided to declare unlawful the RSS.” [Cited in Justice on Trial, RSS, Bangalore, 1962, p. 64.]

The communiqué went on to disclose that the ban on the RSS was imposed because,” undesirable and even dangerous activities have been carried on by members of the Sangh. It has been found that in several parts of the country individual members of the RSS have indulged in acts of violence involving arson, robbery, dacoit, and murder and have collected illicit arms and ammunition. They have been found circulating leaflets exhorting people to resort to terrorist methods, to collect firearms, to create disaffection against the government and suborn the police and the military.” [Ibid, pp. 65-66.]

Prof Islam points out that the then Home Minister, Sardar Patel, reputedly had a soft-corner for the RSS. Patel continues to be a favourite with the RSS. However even Sardar Patel found it difficult to defend the RSS in the aftermath of Gandhiji’s assassination. In a letter written to the head of the RSS, Golwalkar, dated 11 September 1948, Sardar Patel stated: “Organizing the Hindus and helping them is one thing but going in for revenge for its sufferings on innocent and helpless men, women and children is quite another thing…Apart from this, their opposition to the Congress, that too of such virulence, disregarding all considerations of personality, decency or decorum, created a kind of unrest among the people. All their speeches were full of communal poison. It was not necessary to spread poison in order to enthuse the Hindus and organize for their protection. As a final result of the poison, the country had to suffer the sacrifice of the invaluable life of Gandhiji. Even an iota of the sympathy of the Government, or of the people, no more remained for the RSS. In fact opposition grew. Opposition turned more severe, when the RSS men expressed joy and distributed sweets after Gandhiji’s death. Under these conditions it became inevitable for the Government to take action against the RSS…Since then, over six months have elapsed. We had hoped that after this lapse of time, with full and proper consideration the RSS persons would come to the right path. But from the reports that come to me, it is evident that attempts to put fresh life into their same old activities are afoot.” [Ibid, pp.26-28.]

Hindu Mahasabha and RSS were jointly responsible for the murder of Father of Nation, Mahatma Gandhi, this fact was further corroborated by Sardar Patel in a letter to a prominent leader of Hindu Mahasabha, Shyama Prasad Mookerjee on July 18, 1948. Sardar wrote: "As regards the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha, the case relating to Gandhiji’s murder is sub judice and I should not like to say anything about the participation of the two organizations, but our reports do confirm that, as a result of the activities of these two bodies, particularly the former, an atmosphere was created in the country in which such a ghastly tragedy became possible. There is no doubt in my mind that the extreme section of the Hindu Mahasabha was involved in the conspiracy.

The activities of the RSS constituted a clear threat to the existence of Government and the State. Our reports show that those activities, despite the ban, have not died down. Indeed, as time has marched on, the RSS circles are becoming more defiant and are indulging in their subversive activities in an increasing measure.” [Letter 64 in Sardar Patel: Select Correspondence19450-1950, Volume 2, Navjiwan Publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1977, pp. 276-277.]

Congress secretary general Digvijay Singh, who was for ten years chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, and Union Home ministered P Chidambaram are supported by historical data when they called a focus on right-wing terror groups, specially the progeny of the RSS. Chidambaram recently has favoured a proper research and study of the phenomenon, asking the security forces to deal with the right-wing terror groups "sternly and fearlessly". He said that these groups were also radicalising the youth in the same manner as was done by banned SIMI or Indian Mujahideen. There was no difference between Indian Mujahideen and Hindu terror groups and both were enemies of the country."..so actually, we do not have one enemy within today, we have two enemies within and hope there will not be a third or a fourth or fifth," Chidambaram said.

Digvijay Singh has repeatedly said “I do not rule out anything. If they want evidence about Sangh’s involvement in terror activity, I have got evidence”.

Just in case Justice Thomas, and his friends such as Karnataka Minority commission member P N Benjamin, whose organisation BIRD provides occasional platform for the former judge’s fulminations and homilies, require judicial evidence, here is a brief summary of extracts from a series of judicial commissions that have investigated the role of the RSS in anti-Muslim violence since the Ahmedabad riots of 1969. That is over forty years of history.

"Here was not only a failure of intelligence and culpable failure to suppress the outbreak of violence but (also) deliberate attempts to suppress the truth from the Commission, especially the active participation in the riots of some RSS and Jana Sangh leaders." — Report of the Justice Jagmohan Reddy Commission on the Ahmedabad riots of 1969

“The organisation responsible for bringing communal tension in Bhiwandi to a pitch is the Rashtriya Utsav Mandal. The majority of the leaders and workers of the Rashtriya Utsav Mandal belonged to the Jan Sangh (the predecessor of the BJP) or were pro–Jan Sangh and the rest, apart from a few exceptions, belonged to the Shiv Sena.” — Report of the Justice D.P. Madon Commission on the Bhiwandi, Jalgaon and Mahad of 1970

“In Tellicherry the Hindus and Muslims were living as brothers for centuries. The ‘Mopla riots’ did not affect the cordial relationship that existed between the two communities in Tellicherry. It was only after the RSS and the Jana Sangh set up their units and began activities in Tellicherry that there came a change in the situation. Their anti-Muslim propaganda, its reaction on the Muslims who rallied round their communal organisation, the Muslim League which championed their cause, and the communal tension that followed prepared the background for their disturbances....That is what the rioters who attacked the house of Muhammad asked him to do. “If you want to save your life you should go round the house three times repeating the words, ‘Rama, Rama’. Muhammad did that. But you cannot expect the 70 million Muslims of India to do that as a condition for maintaining communal harmony in the country. This attitude of the of the RSS can only help to compel the Muslims to take shelter under their own communal organisation.” — Report of the Justice Joseph Vithyathil Commission on the Tellicherry riots, 1971

"The RSS adopts a militant and aggressive attitude and sets itself up as the champion of what it considers to be the rights of Hindus against minorities. It has taken upon itself to teach the minorities their place and if they are not willing to learn their place to teach them a lesson. The RSS methodology for provoking communal violence is: a) rousing communal feelings in the majority community by the propaganda that Christians are not loyal citizens of this country; b) deepening the fear in the majority community by a clever propaganda that the population of the minorities is increasing and that of the Hindus is decreasing; c) infiltrating into the administration and inducing the members of the civil and police services by adopting and developing communal attitudes; d) training young people of the majority community in the use of weapons like daggers, swords and spears; e) spreading rumours to widen the communal cleavage and deepen communal feelings by giving a communal colour to any trivial incident."— Report of the Justice Venugopal Commission on the Kanyakumari riots of 1982 between Hindus and Christians

"The dispute on the route of the procession became sharp and agitated reactions from a group of persons calling themselves the Sanyukt Bajrang Bali Akhara Samiti who systematically distributed pamphlets to heighten communal feelings and had organisational links with the RSS. A call for the defiance of the authority and the administration when it refused permission for one of the routes led to a violent mob protesting and raising anti–Muslim slogans and thereafter an incendiary leaflet doing the rounds of Jamshedpur that is nothing short of an attempt to rouse the sentiments of Hindus to a high pitch and to distort events and show some actions as attacks on Hindus that appear to be part of a design. A survey had already established that all policemen, havaldars, home guards etc. were at heart ready to give support to them (Hindu communalist organisations)." — Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Communal Disturbances at Jamshedpur, April 1979

“Even after it became apparent that the leaders of the Shiv Sena were active in stoking the fire of the communal riots, the police dragged their feet on the facile and exaggerated assumption that if such leaders were arrested the communal situation would further flare up, or to put it in the words of then Chief Minister, Sudhakarrao Naik, “Bombay would burn”; not that Bombay did not even burn otherwise.” — Report of the Justice B.N. Srikrishna Commission on the Mumbai riots of 1992–1993

Justice Thomas is invited to look up the full reports ,if he wishes too.

It would help the Church leadership, too, if it were to read those reports.

[ends]

Just a moment, Mr Narayan Murthy

Not suggesting a coup, Infosys Murthy?

Billionaire Narayana Murthy owes an explanation for his slur against Sonia

JOHN DAYAL

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, of course had the backing of the billionaires of his time, the Ghanshyamdas Birlas and the Jamnalal Bajaj families, if not of the Tatas who could be presumed to be leaning just a trifle towards the British with whom their community identified so strongly. Jawaharlal Nehru, with his perceived socialist political ideology, was all but an anathema to India’s industrial, corporate and business classes, and the landlords, who inevitably drifted towards the Swatantra party and eventually found a safe haven in the bosom of the Jana Sangh which is now the Bharatiya Janata party. So was Nehru’s daughter, Indira whose sweeping nationalisations of vital sectors such as banking and finance left the rich seething with suppressed anger.

Analysts understand this angst. This is a global phenomenon, as much as corruption and nepotism. Money bags in India or in the US want governments under their control. Historically, in India from the times perhaps of Dhhana Seth and Jagat Seths, Marwari money princes who financed caravans and armies going past their strategic locations in the Rajputana, money has also meant political clout. In the recent corporate history of India since Rajiv Gandhi, India’s corporate sector has sought liberation from the “Permit Raj” or stifling government regulations made in the public interest to prevent profiteering. But the same industrialists, including such giants as the Ambanis, have sought protection from western monopoly capital. That would seem strange to anyone with reason, but such is the logic of high competition.
While the middle and small traders continued with the BJP, it was being presumed that big industry had developed a soft corner for Rajiv Gandhi with his modernistic views and futuristic vision, and because of the thrust to technology that he gave during his short five year term in government.

The drift towards the Congress became a flood, again in perception, when Prime Minister Narsimha Rao brought in as Union Finance Minister the International Monetary Fund former economist Dr Manmohan Singh [and with him such luminaries as Planning Commission deputy chairman Dr Montek Singh Ahluwalia] and launched the liberalisation of the Indian economy. Despite a BJP interlude in power as the National Democratic Alliance for six years or so, with Dr Manmohan Singh’s advent into power as Prime Minister in United Progressive Alliance One and Two, one would have thought the Corporate sector, better known by its euphemism “India Inc.” were now firmly fixed in the Congress corner.

This of course did not happen.

Dr Manmohan Singh’s coalition regime’s fast-paced liberation in UPA-I has understandably sought time to consolidate in UPA-II. The rise in poverty, the land acquisition tension are all signs that the government is working for big business and not for the poor man in the parched fields. But this so called delay has created suspicion among India Inc.

It is not surprising that the biggest boys in industry support the BJP, and go as far on the limb as to support Narendra Modi, that icon of Hindutva and that persecutor of those who oppose him, specially Muslims. His role in the mass murder of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002 is well documented, and is now before the courts at various levels of investigation by a multitude of central and state agencies.
Two years ago, in an infamous statement, Ratan Tata, Sunil Mittal and Mukesh Ambani endorsed Narendra Modi as the “Next Prime Minister”

Fortunately, there was a popular uproar, and the troika was condemned in no uncertain terms. Political elements also took on big business and questioned its morality and short-sightedness, as much as its collective amnesia in forgetting what bloodletting had taken place in Gujarat. Ratan Tata got his small car project in Gujarat, but stopped carrying his love for Modi on his sleeve. His involvement in the Radia Tapes, which he has challenged in court, further silenced him as far as political indiscretions were concerned. The 2- G Scam has also made the Ambanis and the Mittals beat a hasty retreat from the public microscope.

It seems to have, however, taught no lessons to Infosys founder and chairman N R Narayan Murthy. Unless of course one were to argue that Murthy’s recent statement is part of an elaborate strategy to sow seeds of dissent and de-stabilisation in the UPA and the Congress with a much deeper conspiracy or agenda which could include a split in the Congress, the formulation of a new ruling alliance which marginalises the Nehru-Gandhi family. These have been tried before, the most recently during the Narsimha Rao era.

In an interview with the New Delhi Television channel 24x7, Murthy said UPA-II had failed to move ahead with reforms despite being in office for over two years. He put a part of the blame on the dual leadership structure with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh heading the government while Sonia Gandhi controlled the party. "You know, I mean, I understand that he (Singh) leads a coalition. I understand that we have two leaders in the whole set-up. There is a leader of the party (Sonia), there is a leader of the government. So, all these things do slow down the decision-making; but I think that's precisely why the reason that the prime minister must, in fact, take acute note of that and perhaps accelerate decisions," Murthy told NDTV.

As news reports said, the Infosys founder, who is due to step down, was highly critical of the slowdown in decision-making. In the past too, he had expressed concern over corruption but his remarks coincide with those made by the Prime Minister's Economic Advisory Council, which is headed by C Rangarajan, a close aide of Singh. The panel of economists had blamed the government's preoccupation with corruption-related controversies for going slow on decision-making. "Well, you know we have a culture of taking slow decisions, we have a culture of dithering. This is not just at Delhi, it happens in every state. It happens in corporations, it happens in educational institutions. Therefore, the need of the day is for all of us to realise that nothing is gained by dithering. Nothing is gained by postponing decisions. You have to take decisions quickly, no matter that they appear unpalatable in the short term. Well, if I look at the facts and data, then it is true that we haven't had, or you know, taken any decisions ever since this government came back to power in 2009. Which means it is already two years and about three months old. So, to that extent, I think we should all be concerned," Murthy said.

Incidentally, Murthy also spoke out against corruption saying economists have argued that graft shaved off 0.5 to 1.5 percentage points from economic growth. By controlling inflation, India could have growth at double-digit rates. And he had some advice for politicians too. "It's a good idea to have politicians retire at 60."

He did not speak against business dynasties, though his own son has not succeeded him at Infosys but will, of course, inherit much of his wealth regardless.
It is not that Murthy alone is concerned at the slowdown in the economy which robs them of some profit taking, specially for service sector tycoons who do not have much stakes in the long term vision of brick and mortar companies. Newspapers have carried warnings by various corporate leaders on the “policy paralysis” . One such outburst was at a meeting tycoons had with Union Finance Minister and trouble shooter Pranab Mukherjee . The minster brushed aside suggestions of policy paralysis, saying it was perception,

Those who keep a keen eye on India Inc have said they are not surprised at all that Murthy said what he said, and how he said it.” With success comes hubris. This seems to have hit Narayana Murthy too. One tends to believe that I am successful, so I must be right. Whatever I think, say and do must be right. Because if I was wrong, I couldn't be successful, my company couldn't be successful. So I am right. Since I am right, I have a right to lecture the world on what is right,” blogged one critic.
He was commenting on Narayana Murthy's writing in a recent issue of Smart Manager, reproduced by Rediff.com on its website. The article starts off with describing and defining leadership, mostly quoted from Robert F Kennedy and Mahatma Gandhi. “Sadly, Murthy has started off on a wrong note. Many of the quotes in his article apply equally well to leaders of the wrong sort, which Narayana Murthy has in mind. "Leadership is about raising the aspirations of followers and enthusing people with a desire to reach for the stars. For instance, Mahatma Gandhi created a vision for Independence in India and raised the aspirations of our people." So did Hitler, said the blogger. Or Chairman Mao. “It is good to use Mahatma's name to justify your statement. Only, when you take Mahatma's name, be careful that what is attributed to Mahatma or Martin Luther King does not apply equally well to Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. But it does. Good leaders need not always be impeccable men. While trying to describe leadership, Narayana Murthy unknowingly puts leaders of all kinds into the same box. He fails to distinguish the ideal leadership strain that he has in mind, thereby putting great names to disrepute.”

There is nothing theoretical when Murthy talks so directly of Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh.
There is no doubt that Murthy is critical of Sonia Gandhi’s leadership, and of her place as the chairman of the UPA, a position to which she wad democratically elected. Murthy also tends to forget that Sonia could well have been UPA chairman as also Prime minister if she so desired, but chose deliberately to enounce that option and chose a more democratic form of governance with a distinction between party and governance. The RSS would never understand this difference, for whenever the BJP was in power, so too was the RSS.

It is this duality in governance that has provided the correctives and kept a check on runaway liberalisation. The economic meltdown in the west is evidence that unchecked liberalisation is a recipe for disaster. The number of poor has grown in the USA in the last decade. In India, some tribals at least have been spared their land because the Congress party and its leadership cried a halt to the government’s plans. Ministers rooted in the party showed a human and political instinct. Rahul Gandhi’s recent sojourns in rural and Dalit and Tribal India could not have been done by mere economists of UPA-II. If the Congress returns to power next time, it will be in spite of India Inc, and because of the political will displayed by Rahul Gandhi, and by Pranab Mukherjee, come to think of it.

Murthy’s is, unfortunately, a direct call for a coup within the Congress. More so when it comes at a time that Sonia Gandhi is in a hospital, un-named, in an undisclosed country, presumably the US, where she has been operated upon for an unknown abdominal condition. In any other country including the US and the UK, this would be a reason for much political gossip and considerable political uncertainty. It speaks for the maturity of Indian politics that the country has taken this in its stride, respecting the Gandhi family’s privacy and allowing Sonia to convalesce without politics chasing her.

It also speaks for the dual system of political governance she has put in place. The party’s day to day affairs have been left to a small committee consisting of family and senior untainted advisers who have no agenda other than the welfare of the party. A K Anthony, the Defence Minister, loyal political trouble shooter Ahmad Patel, and Congress general secretary Janardhan Dwivedi have been appointed together with Rahul Gandhi. This is a core group that cannot be denied. Government has been left to Dr Manmohan Singh, with Pranab Mukherjee standing by with him. Manmohan Singh’s health itself is cause for concern, but there is no threat to the government.

The opposition seems to feel this is an opportune time to mount the most vicious attack it has done in the past seven years. The criss in Parliament on the 2-G scam and Commonwealth Games scams and the crisis on the roads on the Lok Pal Bill are signs of the BJP and the RSS flexing their collective muscles.

It is, therefore, a pity that there has been no major denunciation of Murthy’s statement by the party official spokesmen. Mukherjee has dismissed such talk. Even Manmohan Singh ahs chosen not to give it any credence. They must point out that the twin leadership is the best course for the country for the present times, when the UK burns and the US melts down in fires of their own making, fires fuelled by the greed of their own corporate sectors.

Too early to seeka second freedom struggle

Enough! said the People

But caution before one gets carried away with the rhetoric of a second freedom movement"

John Dayal

The problem with revolutions is that no one can predict how they will end up. That is as true of Cromwell’s in England’s hoary history as of Jose Marti and Bolivar in South America, and not forgetting Napoleon Bonaparte and Lenin in Europe. The jury is still out in the Indian subcontinent which saw “revolutions” in 1857 and 1942. The last one, a so-called “peaceful” one, led to Independence five years later in 1947 in the aftermath of one of the bloodiest unclassified religious civil wars in the history of the world, with at least a million dead, and tens of millions displaced in what are now Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.

And if you are of a religious bend of mind, the revolution started by Martin Luther. Not many would dare write about moral revolutions started by Jesus Christ, Mohammed and Nanak, which today face charges of paedophilia and prosperity doctrines, terrorism and xenophobia. Hinduism escaped a study because of its unforgiving allegiance to Brahminical exclusivity, and the Manu code, both proof against mere social, political and religious revolutions and analysis.

Retired Havildar Kisan Baburao Hazare, better known to TV news-channel audiences as “Gandhian Anna Hazare”, yoga teacher and tele-evangelist Ramdev, and for that matter Arya Samaj breakaway sect leader and former Haryana Minister Agnivesh, each promise India a new revolution which will cure “Bharat Mata”, the mythological icon common to their rhetoric, of such ills as corruption, hunger, mal-governance and homosexuality. Millions of middle class innocent and lumpens have sought instant nirvana in their arguments, “satyagrahas” and fasts unto death. No one has died for the cause so far, barring perhaps the death of credibility and a diminishing of a faith in parliamentary democracy and its instruments.

Faced with food shortages and corruption, rising prices in uncured inflation, a shortage of jobs and a rapidly widening gap between the haves and the have-nots, it is not spurring that in both the poor and the middle classes – who are not starving, but do feel the pinch of rising prices of fruit and television sets -- there is a desire to see the system change. For want of any other argument, they mistakenly also see the omen of systemic failure as a failure of democracy itself, and then seek solutions and instant cures outside the perimeter of Parliament and its structures. They lose faith in judicial institutions which, as wheels of justice are wont to, grind exceedingly slow, even if they occasionally grind exceedingly fine and do deliver justice. It remains to be seen if justice delivered in the rare judgments of the Supreme Court has the inertia to change systems of governance and of democracy in a permanent manner. Because such judgments are rare, as are the infrequent piece of legislation, they remain tantalizing in their hope. But they do not have the strength to reassure the masses, and stop them from pursuing mirages of permanent revolutions, and “new independence struggles.”

Early in the 1960s, a mere 15 years after the dawn of Independence, one of the grandsons of Father of the Nation Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, launched the Moral Rearmament Movement. Raj Mohan Gandhi, one of the three celebrity siblings – the others were his elder brother and philosopher Ramu Gandhi and the younger Gopal Gandhi who last was Governor of West Bengal – had reinvented for India a version of the MRA birthed as a moral and spiritual movement in 1938 from the Reverend Frank Buchman's Oxford Group. This was a response to the first indications of the second world war and the militarisation of Europe. The slogan was that moral recovery was critical to economic recovery. MRA was, in Europe at least as well as in emerging free nations after the second world war, important in bringing unity between groups in conflict, and helping ease the transition into independence.

In its initial phases, Rajmohan Gandhi’s MRA attracted the youth, and as a student of Delhi University, this correspondent participated in some of the meetings together with hundreds of others. MRA however failed to take off as a major social movement in India, fast losing even its youthful participants. But it did leave an impact on the discourse on politics and critiquing the state apparatus in a non violent way.

Ram Manohar Lohia, lifelong critic of Jawaharlal Nehru’s eliticism, and articulating a socialism of his own away from the Gandhi-Nehru brand of Congress politics after 1947, had even earlier attracted the young, together with the socialist elements in the Congress such as Acharya Narendra Dev, Aruna Asaf Ali and others who flirted with democracy, socialism and Marxism of the Russian variety through the early years of Independent and democratic India.

It was perhaps left to Jaiprakash Narayan, working in the economic and political crisis after the euphoria of the Bangladesh war of independence in 1971 and India’s transient victory over Pakistan -- remember the 90,000 Prisoners of War from the Pakistani army captured by India – had ended, to launch another, and the most powerful, movement in contemporary history. His version of a “sampoorna kranti”, or total revolution, based on morality, rebelling against all forms of corruption and dynastic rule, would perhaps have taken another route if it were not for Indira Gandhi losing a court case against her election to the Lok Sabha from Uttar Pradesh. Instead of accepting defeat and bowing to the judicial ruling, Indira chose a drastic way out. Believing that the people would eventually back her up, she suspended the Constitution, and imposed a state of internal emergency. Narayan, in hindsight, played into her hands, calling upon the army to revolt. That was the last straw. Opposition leaders were arrested overnight, the media shackled and democratic discourse banished. With no checks and balances, power, as it is wont to, soon passed into the hands of a apolitical coterie led by her younger son Sanjay Gandhi.

This was an extra-constitutional centre of authority. A vicious governance became the norm.. More people filled jails. Bulldozers cleared off slums an millions were banished to far off resettlement camps. Muslims rebelled in town after town in Uttar Pradesh, seeing a design to disperse them and disenfranchise them. Forcible sterilisations were the norm, but Muslims again saw themselves as the main targets. There was much violence. Obviously, a police state of this sort could not last long and Indira Gandhi had to lift emergency after 22 months and call for elections. A grand coalition in which the RSS was partners with the Marxists and all sorts of middle parties, many of them break way groups of the Congress, came to power as the Janata Party government under Morarji Desai. But JP's movement was quite dead in that government.

By the way, two major evils of today have roots in that rule of the Janata Party. One is the legitimisation of the Sangh Parivar [and what was then the Bharatiya Jana Sangh and is today the Bharatiya Janata Party], in its members’ shared incarceration in several jails with Marxists and rebel Congressmen. The second is the infiltration by RSS cadres into Media, the Police and other administrative and judicial structures which came under the control of this motley bunch in their brief “raj” or governance between mid 1977 and 1980 when Indira Gandhi swamped Parliament once again in a powerful resurgence.

It is always, therefore, good to remember a bit of history as one sees, or imagines, seeds of a revolution in the Hazares and the Ramdevs, Kiran Bedis and sundry self appointed leaders of civil society.

The people are today correctly and legitimately questioning the dispensation of the day. The IMF-ordered liberalisation and globalisation that the then Finance Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh unsheathed in India has not brought about the desired impact on the economy as it is visible at the grassroots. It has created thousands of Dollar Billionaires in India. It has sired a 200 million and expanding middle class, estimates say. But it has had a terribly negative impact on the poor in the villages and the small towns, and in the slums of the metropolitan cities.

Writing in a rent edition of the Tehelka magazine, that bright young journalist Revati Laul – who defied the trend by switching from satellite news channels to the print media – wrote “The Indian growth story has been written with the blood of famers and tribals” She is referring to sell-outs to big land mafias and multinationals such as Posco and Mittals, but also to home grown giants such as Reliance and Tatas.

India’s education, food and employment records – the so called quality of life index – make it shrink from a economic powerhouse to a pigmy not too far ahead of new Africa.

India’s record as presented in its UPR – the Universal Periodic Review that nations have now to face in the United Nations once every five years – makes for dismal nod tragic reading in just about every segment – from gender and dalits, farmers and landless peasantry, all the way to police atrocities, custodial deaths, miscarriage of justice, and the xenophobic treatment meted out to religions memories, specially to the Muslims and Christians.

At a recent hearing in Geneva, NGOs spoke at length of the “exclusion of the most vulnerable – Dalits, adivasi communities, the rural poor – being perpetuated by the current economic growth model”. The vast majority of India’s working population are employed in the informal sector as “flexible labour”. As a result of this, the vast majority of India’s working population has been reduced to further poverty – about 77% (850 million) of the working people of India subsist on Rs. 20 per day. With no social protection, their rights are totally denied to them. The “social cost” of India’s growth was also discussed, particularly the mass displacement of millions of families due to purported “development” projects. With the displacement, traditional livelihoods are being destroyed on an unprecedented scale.[Data from the NGOs document for the UPR]

Although the then Minister of State for Home Affairs Ajay Maken told Parliament of 6,000 communal riots [mostly attacks on Muslims, but also the Kandhamal atrocities against Christians] in the last decade, the Indian state has failed to acknowledge this. Or to address human rights violations, including: large-scale displacements resulting from development projects and communal violence; enforced disappearances in conflict areas, deaths through encounters. widespread use of torture and increasing attacks against human rights defenders. The curtailing of human rights in the state’s response to terrorism, and the need to interrogate this response and its impact on human rights, was also discussed in the UPR.

Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), the international associate of the All India Christian Council, specialising in religiousfreedom, told international for a of the widespread abuses in India, and the infringements of religious freedom, particularly that of the most oppressed castes, the Dalit Christians, “which are symptomatic of the extremist nationalist agenda of Hindutva.” It noted that the issue of caste lies at the heart of many of India’s human rights problems, including prejudicial violence, discrimination, labour exploitation and religious freedom infringements. “It should be considered as the main prism through which to view and interpret these problems; and the means of addressing these problems should involve reference to caste. The hierarchical caste system continues to dominate and shape Indian society to a considerable extent, detrimentally affecting the social status, treatment and socio-economic prospects of the Scheduled Castes, or Dalits, who comprise the ‘lowest’ layer of the caste system and represent 16% of the total population (at least 167 million), according to official 2001 census data. Dalits often bear the brunt of religious freedom violations in India, owing largely to proponents of Hindutva.

It is not just international agencies that have noted the extremist nationalist manifestation of Hindutva, which encompasses a vision of India as a Hindu nation in which minorities must assimilate to and revere the Hindu religion, race and culture and which, in practice, seeks to preserve and defend the cultural hegemony of Hinduism at the expense of minority religions.

CSW and others note that the chief victims of human trafficking, bonded labour, sexual slavery and other forms of labour exploitation, are Dalits or members of ‘low’ castes. The implementation of laws to prevent such exploitation is extremely poor.

Freedom of religion is infringed by legislative means: specially through religious discrimination in reservation policy and through state-level ‘anti-conversion’ laws. It is also threatened by religiously-motivated violence against the minority Christian and Muslim communities, which is typically committed with impunity.

Former Delhi high court chief justice Rajindar Sachhar, author of the eponymous report on the social and economic status of India’s Muslim community, recently noted “The cynicism of political parties is shown by the facts that inspire of warning in recent state elections which show another trend to criminal nexus in elections, thus of 824 newly elected MLAs of recent elections in the States a total of 257 have criminal cases pending against them. As is well known the politicalization of criminal is a stark and dangerous reality. Even in Parliament there are nearly over 100 MPs having criminal cases pending against them. There has been demand that tainted persons should not be allowed to contest elections. I feel that the law of Lok Pal should provide that the legislator has to be prosecuted for his misdemeanour, he should be deemed to be ineligible to continue as legislator till he is proved innocent.” Justice Sachhar was commenting on the controversy raised in the formulation of the Lok Pal, or Ombudsman Bill, with government keeping the Prime Minister, the senior judiciary and Members of Parliament out of its purview while the Hazare led group not only wanted all these groups to be coved by the Bill, but also demanded that government have no say in the choice of the ombudsman.

The furore over the Bill is an indication of the rot that has sent in. But the debate also shows that the voice of the pretty well off middle class – the same group that does not want affirmative action for Dalits in education -- has swamped the voice of the men and women in the village, the bonded labour, the homeless.

What sort of a second Freedom Struggle can we envisage for the poor. Not a freedom from Direct taxes, and certainly not the freedom to profiteer in the guise of free market economy.

Aruna Roy, perhaps one of the more sober human rights activists in the country – like many others, she too was a member of the elite Indian Administrative service, but resigned long before she would have become entitled to a pension – came up with some telling comments in recent reflection. “We have warned that in its current form, the Lokpal could become a Frankenstein Monster, concentrating power in a few, new, hands. Our key argument is over democracy itself. You know how easily one can become almost fascist in this country under its democratic overlay. To prevent that, one has to make sure he parliamentary process is strengthened, cleansed. But if you bypass the institution, you create very serious worries. Tomorrow, if three lakh RSS workers want a joint committee to look at changing the Constitution to make India into a theocratic state, will there be space for the/”

There is absolutely no question but that India needs reforms. Sensible economic reforms that put food into the mouth of babes and ensure cash transfers to the poor and the marginalised for all sorts of things, from education to clothing and a roof.

There must me a multiple pronged attack on corruption – the institutionalised payolas of the ministries and the nexus between the tycoon and the minister as exposed in the 2G scam have to be stopped. So also the corruption in the educational sector, and even in the private sector. It is common knowledge that in the entire private sector, including schools and colleges run by famous groups, the employees including teachers sign one certain amount as salary and get a substantially lesser one. There must be an end to the corruption which sends a soldier to the Siachin Glacier clad in ill suited uniform, and an end to the racket in coffins in which some of these soldiers return home.

Above all there must en end to the corruption – the bribe giving and the bribe taking – which impinges on the common man back in the village, in the small town, over every facet of life – from the making of a ration card to the money that comes from the Mahatma Gandhi National Employment Guarantee Scheme.

It needs a commitment and a political will to contain this corruption. It can surely be done. That is the sort of revolution that can bring a second Independence. Independence from the tyranny of corruption and the moral and physical poverty it breeds.
[end]

Hinduttva poisoning young minds globally

Any lessons from Norway on internal threat from xenophobic fanaticism of the Majority?

JOHN DAYAL

‎"The primary threat to democracy in Europe is not "Islamo-fascism" -- that clunking, thuggish phrase that keeps lashing out in the hope that it will one day strike a meaning -- but plain old fascism. The kind whereby mostly white Europeans take to the streets to terrorize minorities in the name of racial, cultural or religious superiority,” Prof Dilip Simeon wrote to me in a message on my Facebook profile. This was after I wrote that zealots and terrorists of all sorts live in a zone where it becomes difficult to tell them apart. Dilip is a younger contemporary from our days at St Stephen’s college. He faced a murderous assault in Ramjas College, Delhi, where he taught, and emerged as a major human rights voice after the anti Sikh violence in Delhi in 1984.

The Norway massacre of July 2011 is indeed Fascism with thick overlays of Racism and Xenophobia.
Islamophobia was common on the World Wide Web. So was Islamic intolerance of Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Buddhist and Sikh minorities in West and South Asia.

Islamic terror is well documented, more so since the bombing of the World Trade Towers in New York and the rise of Al Qaida. Despite Osama bin Laden’s assassination, it remains under the hawks-eye of the US and West Europe intelligence, who share their information on a real-time basis. It is also well documented in India where not only government agencies but also the common people – driven by the ceaseless propaganda by the Bharatiya Janata party and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, lapped up eagerly by our Hindi and English language TV Channels -- keep track of all things “suspicious” in their neighborhood.

Analysis of majority terrorism have, for now, overwhelmed WWW portals in the wake of the Norway bombing-and-massacre by Christian gunman and bomber Anders Behring Breivik who singlehandedly killed 76 youth in his twin acts of violence. There is some emerging evidence that the killer, a drug user, may have himself largely used the Internet to keep abreast of, if not actually in personal touch with, political allies as far away as in the United Kingdom. He was also in touch with the WebPages, if not some webmasters, of the Sangh Parivar in India. In another chilling parallel, he too used large quantities of phosphorous and nitrogenous fertilizers in his car bomb, the same ingredients used by the perpetrators on the recent serial bombings in Mumbai, and in earlier bombings traced both to Islamic and Sangh groups.

This reporter has some experience of Xenophobia, both at the academic level and at personal level when he was living abroad as a journalist in the late 1980s, and saw Britani’s skinheads wreck havoc on lonely passers on the underground railways late at night both in London and in Germany, or desecrate Jewish graveyards. Recent visits show that neo-Nazism and anti-Semitism remains an issue in West Europe. Even in Poland, a devout Catholic country, the authorities are looking deeply at signs of emerging anti-Semitism and fascist youth groups who in a unified Europe can travel across borders with ease. The fact that Poland is where the Nazi Germans set up the notorious mass murder camps of Auschwitz makes the task of containing these groups so much more urgent. Poland, current President of the European Union, is however, taking transparent measures to check this political trend.

However, some other countries have apparently started going the xenophobic way in the wake of the economic meltdown, particularly in Germany, Ireland, even Greece, Spain and Portugal. At a recent international seminar in Holland, this correspondent came face to face with how governmetns can take wrong decisions when pressured by populist moves from opposition or ruling political groups and their cohorts in the masses. Holland itself has a not very clean image on racial issues despite the large number of descendants of migrants from former African and Indonesian Dutch colonies. But it is now monitoring, in a scientific way, hate speeches and hate documents. The lawmakers are also waking up to face right wing politicians who work on the people’s insecurities, economic or personal. Demanding cultural assimilation, specially from Muslim migrants, but also for instance from Sikhs, is the tip of the iceberg. Majoritarian xenophobia is dangerous, and Europe has long been Islamophobic, one can all the way back to the first Crusades to wrest Christian Holy Lands from Muslim control.

The examples that were cited from Ireland however took the xenophobic cake. Ireland – south or Republic of Ireland – has had good relations with India for more than a century, sharing an anti-colonial and anti imperialist history opposing British domination. Ireland also has a wonderful history of trade Unions. Former Indian President VV Giri was a respected trade unionist in Ireland before he came back to Indian politics. Irish freedom fighters borrowed the weapon of the peaceful hunger strike from Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, and many Irish youth dies in jail while on fasts-unto-death. Irish men and women themselves suffered anti-Celtic racism when they came down to England looking for work.

And yet, Ireland is now in the midst of installing a system to stop “birthing tourism”. Ireland has a policy like some other countries, which grant automatic citizenship to a child born in the land. Apparently, leveraging this law, many pregnant women from poorer countries would take a flight to Ireland in the last month of their pregnancy, deliver a child in Ireland, and then stay back as a family of the newborn “citizen of Ireland”. Efforts are now on to plug this “loophole”. Birth Tourism will be soon a memory. {For Indian Catholics, it may be salutary to remember that Ireland has hit out sharply at the Vatican, attacking the Pope on issues of protecting children from sexual violence.

What should ring alarm bells in New Delhi, indeed in the whole of India, is the real or make-believe environment in which the Norwegian young man of the unpronounceable name reached his delusional but fatal conclusions. His personal manifesto hails Hindutva, noting that the goals of the Sanatana Dharma nationalists were identical to Justiciar Knights, a future group, and therefore it could be key ally in a global struggle to bring down democratic regimes across the world. That future campaign would wage a campaign that will graduate from acts of terrorism to a global war involving weapons of mass destruction — aimed at bringing down the “cultural Marxist” order. Breivik acquired some 8,000 e-mail addresses of “cultural conservatives” not just across Europe but North America, Australia, South Africa, Armenia, Israel, and India – ensuring scrutiny of anti-Muslim groups far beyond Europe.

Western media noted that India figured in a “remarkable” 102 pages of the 1,518-page manifesto. “Hindu nationalists are suffering from the same persecution by the Indian cultural Marxists as their European cousins,” he noted, condemning the Dr Manmohan Singh government of “appeasing Muslims and, very sadly, proselytising Christian missionaries who illegally convert low caste Hindus with lies and fear, alongside Communists who want total destruction of the Hindu faith and culture.”

An interesting sweep, as he goes on to applaud groups who “do not tolerate the current injustice and often riot and attack Muslims when things get out of control.” His advice is that the Indian groups “instead of attacking the Muslims, should target the category A and B traitors in India and consolidate military cells and actively seek the overthrow of the cultural Marxist government. It is essential that the European and Indian resistance movements learn from each other and cooperate as much as possible. Our goals are more or less identical.” Organisations figuring in that deadly manifesto include the BJP, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. They will have some explaining to do as the manifesto pledges military support “to the nationalists in the Indian civil war and in the deportation of all Muslims from India.”

Americans newspaper Christian Science Monitor’s Delhi based columnist Anders Behring notes that in the case of India, “there is significant overlap between Breivik’s rhetoric and strains of Hindu nationalism – or Hindutva – on the question of coexistence with Muslims.” Behrings records that Human rights activists have long decried such rhetoric in India for creating a milieu for communal violence, “and the Norway incidents are prompting calls here to confront the issue.”

The Hindu’s correspondent Praveen Swami, derided often for his apparent toeing of the line of the Indian Intelligence Bureau in his reportage, strikes a similar note saying “Like Europe’s mainstream right-wing parties, the BJP has condemned the terrorism of the right – but not the thought system which drives it. Its refusal to engage in serious introspection, or even to unequivocally condemn Hindutva violence, has been nothing short of disgraceful. Liberal parties, including the Congress, have been equally evasive in their critique of both Hindutva and Islamist terrorism,” he adds.

Human rights activists second the view that there are important lessons for India in the murderous violence in Norway: lessons it can ignore only at risk to its own survival.

It was left not to an Indian newspaper but to the Christian Science Monitor to recall that former East Delhi‘s BJP Member of Parliament Baikunth Lal Sharma ‘Prem' held a secret meeting with key members of a terrorist group responsible for a nationwide bombing campaign targeting Muslims. He has been quoted as saying “It has been a year since I sent some three lakh letters, distributed 20,000 maps of Akhand Bharat but these Brahmins and Banias have not done anything and neither will they do anything. It is not that physical power is the only way to make a difference, but to awaken people mentally, I believe that you have to set fire to society.”

In recent weeks, we have seen a sharp rhetoric coming from the BJP opposing the drat Communal and Targetted Violence Prevention Bill written by the civil society members of the National Advisory Council of the government of India. The BJP rhetoric seeks to rouse the common Hindu population by falsely trying to create ear among them from religious minorities. The BJP and RSS leadership, which targets individual activists as much as the NAC as a body, says the Bill crimeless the Hindu community while empowering the Muslims and Christians. This is a blatant lie. The draft bill – which has not yet been presented to the Union Cabinet and is still far away from the final shape that will be visible when it comes up before the Rajya Sabha -- merely ensures that a government response is triggered at the first indication of communal violence, and that the authorities are held responsible because it is their lethargy and complicity that has aggravated riots in the past.

Not surprisingly, mainstream political parties, among them the Congress, the Marxists and the socialist or Dravidian parties, have so far not challenged the BJP rhetoric. No senior leader has come before the media to denounce this blatant effort to whip up passions.

It has been left to the two persons outside the official power structure – Mani Shankar Aiyar and former Madhya Pradesh Chief minister Digvijay Singh – to come down to brass tacks and identify the Sangh Parivar for threatening Indian secularism and unity, and for itself being a purveyor of terror, including terror bombings.
Digvijay Singh is on record for saying repeatedly that bombings take place when the BJP is “politically cornered over something or the other. The timing of the bomb blasts is quite uncanny. Why does it always happen when the BJP is in trouble? That needs investigation”

Digvijay, an archetypal politician, speaks of the coincidences. “When the Tehelka issue was to be discussed in Parliament, the House was adjourned for three days. Then when the expose was to be discussed, the Parliament attack took place. When the Godhra incident took place, Congress was doing exceedingly well in the local body elections and Narendra Modi had won by only 6,000 votes as a chief minister and that too with great difficulty. During the recent Karnataka election, there was a bomb blast in Hubli on the very first day of polling. Similarly, two days before the polling in the second phase in Karnataka elections, there was a bomb blast in Jaipur. It really needs an investigation.”

Whatever investigations have taken place have unearthed a pretty large and well oiled ring whose nodes and modules involve Army officers, Sadhus and Sadhvi and men at the top of the RSS, the Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram and other groups. The national Intelligence Agency’s charge sheets in court make for chilling reading.
Digvijay Singh adds to the charge sheets by way of background, ”In 1992 there was a bomb blast in the VHP office in Madhya Pradesh, where one VHP member died and two were injured while making bombs. Then in 2002, there was a bomb blast in a temple in Mhow. When the police arrested the VHP activists after investigation, they confessed that they were even given training to manufacture bombs. I have a videocassette of that confession. Again, in 2006, in Nanded, there was a bomb blast in the house of a RSS activist where two RSS activists died. After that in March 2008, there were bomb blasts at two places in Tamil Nadu. Then too VHP activists were arrested by the Tamil Nadu police who confessed that they were involved. And how did the Gujarat police suddenly find eighteen bombs planted on trees in Surat. RSS, VHP activists have been caught making bombs, material for preparing bombs have been found at their office and there are three-four clear cases where they have been arrested and a case has been registered. Why is not anyone looking into this?

It remains a moot question why there has not been a real investigation into rightwing majority extremism in India. Intelligence agencies are looking to the political leadership to show some willpower in decision-making. The central government is so beset with its own problems of shrugging off charges of corruption against half the Union cabinet –a crisis that also afflicts the BJP in Karnataka and other states – it has little energy and less time to devote to deeper threats to the Indian Union.

As far as the Church is concerned, it may support media-driven anti corruption campaigns, but is far too timid to either research or speak about issues as grave as racism, xenophobia, religious fundamentalism, and majority communalism.