The Indian Express - August 19, 2004 | Editorial
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=53340
Justice, in Gujarat
The SC’s directive on reopening riot cases is the most damning indictment of Modi’s govt yet
When the Supreme Court transferred first the Best Bakery case and then the Bilkis Rasool case out of Gujarat, it seemed the wise thing to do under the circumstances. The circumstances were framed, of course, by the continuing inaction of the Narendra Modi government in bringing the culprits of the 2002 riots to book, its staunch refusal to let justice prevail. But even then, the apex court’s intervention seemed in some ways to be skirting the point in Gujarat. The point was that the state government’s failure to convict a single murderer in the riot cases spoke of a very massive breakdown and transferring individual high-profile cases out of the state seemed to be a very small cure. What about the Zaheera Sheikhs and Bilkis Rasools whose tragedies had escaped the eye of the media or other civil society organisations? The point, surely, is that something should be done to make Gujarat itself more hospitable to the processes of justice. That’s where the rubble lies. That is where truth and justice need to be resurrected. Transferring out cases seemed like an inadequate response.
The Court’s latest directive on Tuesday meets that challenge full-throttle. In asking the Modi government to set up a high-level team headed by the director general of police to review, one by one, the 2000 or so of the cases — nearly half of the total number registered — in which the police arbitrarily filed closure reports instead of chargesheets, and in putting the onus squarely on senior officials of the same police force to explain why each case must not be investigated afresh, the court has crafted a far-reaching response indeed. It has given justice another chance in Gujarat. In doing so, it has held out hope to a much larger number of the survivors and families of victims of the carnage in 2002. Finally, it has given the Modi government an opportunity to make amends.
There is another way of reading the court’s order. By directing the Modi government to reopen cases that had been closed under its watch, by asking it to account for the prosecution’s failure to appeal against acquittals by trial courts, and by associating activists and NGOs with the entire process of review, the court has passed its most damning indictment yet of the Modi government. What the highest court of the land seems to be saying is that the state government is completely incapable and unwilling to uphold the rule of law, that it requires a special combination of measures and unrelenting oversight to make it perform its basic constitutional duty. This is unprecedented. A constitutional breakdown, no less. Its seriousness must be lost on no one. Narendra Modi’s government has nowhere to hide.
|
August 19, 2004
Supreme Court order on Gujarat cases (Edit., Hindustan Times)
The Hindustan Times, August 19, 2004 Pg 10: Edit Page
Shut and open case
August 18
The Supreme Court order to the Gujarat government to set up a high-level police team headed by the director-general of police to examine which of the 2,000 post-Godhra massacre cases need to be reopened is a triumph for Indian democracy. Credit for this must go to civil society groups, which have fought against all odds to keep the issue from being relegated into the forgotten corners of history.
The apex court’s firm and unyielding pronouncements in cases related to the Gujarat pogrom have shown that state governments cannot take recourse to state’s rights when they bypass the fundamental rights of the citizens. This is a principle that is being increasingly applied to even nations that turn a blind eye to the rights of their own citizens, witness the UN Security Council warning to Sudan on the Darfur affair. While the court’s direction is for the police to re-examine riot cases, hopefully it will not require the trials to be moved out of the state because of the lack of cooperation by the officials.
The Supreme Court’s harsh indictment of both the state government and the police for their inaction in first curbing the violence, and then prosecuting the accused, is unprecedented. But as in the case of Nazis in Europe, there can be no statute of limitation when it comes to murder. There is no reason why even now, authorities take another look to see why justice has not been done in the Sikh massacres in Delhi in 1984. As for the Gujarat cases, it is much too early to celebrate. It is important to keep pressure bearing on our law-enforcing agencies till the guilty are brought to book. Accounts of the Gujarat police’s senior officers before the Nanavati and Shah commissions are bringing out their disgraceful conduct in the face of the massacres. The apex court order now gives the police force an opportunity to redeem its shameful reputation.
Shut and open case
August 18
The Supreme Court order to the Gujarat government to set up a high-level police team headed by the director-general of police to examine which of the 2,000 post-Godhra massacre cases need to be reopened is a triumph for Indian democracy. Credit for this must go to civil society groups, which have fought against all odds to keep the issue from being relegated into the forgotten corners of history.
The apex court’s firm and unyielding pronouncements in cases related to the Gujarat pogrom have shown that state governments cannot take recourse to state’s rights when they bypass the fundamental rights of the citizens. This is a principle that is being increasingly applied to even nations that turn a blind eye to the rights of their own citizens, witness the UN Security Council warning to Sudan on the Darfur affair. While the court’s direction is for the police to re-examine riot cases, hopefully it will not require the trials to be moved out of the state because of the lack of cooperation by the officials.
The Supreme Court’s harsh indictment of both the state government and the police for their inaction in first curbing the violence, and then prosecuting the accused, is unprecedented. But as in the case of Nazis in Europe, there can be no statute of limitation when it comes to murder. There is no reason why even now, authorities take another look to see why justice has not been done in the Sikh massacres in Delhi in 1984. As for the Gujarat cases, it is much too early to celebrate. It is important to keep pressure bearing on our law-enforcing agencies till the guilty are brought to book. Accounts of the Gujarat police’s senior officers before the Nanavati and Shah commissions are bringing out their disgraceful conduct in the face of the massacres. The apex court order now gives the police force an opportunity to redeem its shameful reputation.
Supreme Court Review order on Gujarat Cases ( Edit., The Telegraph)
Source: The Telegraph - August 19, 2004 | Editorial
URL: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1040819/asp/opinion/story_3641727.asp
JUST AFTER
The history of the Gujarat riot cases is a fable of determination and faith. The Supreme Court’s recent order for a review of all 4,200-odd cases, including the 2,000 declared “closed”, is of remarkable significance particularly for this reason. The court came to its decision in response to more than 15 petitions, which had among them one from the National Human Rights Commission and others from organizations such as the Citizens for Justice and Peace, which had helped get the Best Bakery case transferred to Mumbai. In spite of the resistance from state bodies, these organizations have kept at the job, painstakingly collecting evidence and witnesses and drawing right-thinking people to their side. The lid blew off the state government’s righteousness with the exposure of coercion of witnesses in the Best Bakery and Bilkis Bano cases. The Bharatiya Janata Party and friends of the chief minister, Mr Narendra Modi, had put on a brave face when these cases were transferred to a special court in Mumbai. Their smiles and arguments are in tatters now, because the court’s direction that a 10-member committee of senior policemen, headed by the director-general of the Gujarat police, should review all cases, hardly suggests confidence in the state government.
But the real story is about what determination and faith can achieve. The court’s decision is so reassuring for all those who had given up the hope for justice that promises of evidence are now pouring in. Many people are now willing to come to court as witnesses; by making protection for witnesses a key condition, the rights bodies struggling for justice have provided an assurance of security that has been the greatest need of Gujarat’s minority community since February 2002. The fact that the court’s detailed instructions indicate the nature of its response to the petitions is also reassuring in a different way. It not only says how the committee should go about the review, but also that if a “closed” case is reopened, the officer in charge shall not be part of the team that originally recommended closure. Besides, non-governmental organizations, so long at the forefront of this battle, would be allowed to point out which cases need further investigation. It would seem that the people’s voice is being heard in the highest institution of justice at a time when their elected government refused to hear it.
URL: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1040819/asp/opinion/story_3641727.asp
JUST AFTER
The history of the Gujarat riot cases is a fable of determination and faith. The Supreme Court’s recent order for a review of all 4,200-odd cases, including the 2,000 declared “closed”, is of remarkable significance particularly for this reason. The court came to its decision in response to more than 15 petitions, which had among them one from the National Human Rights Commission and others from organizations such as the Citizens for Justice and Peace, which had helped get the Best Bakery case transferred to Mumbai. In spite of the resistance from state bodies, these organizations have kept at the job, painstakingly collecting evidence and witnesses and drawing right-thinking people to their side. The lid blew off the state government’s righteousness with the exposure of coercion of witnesses in the Best Bakery and Bilkis Bano cases. The Bharatiya Janata Party and friends of the chief minister, Mr Narendra Modi, had put on a brave face when these cases were transferred to a special court in Mumbai. Their smiles and arguments are in tatters now, because the court’s direction that a 10-member committee of senior policemen, headed by the director-general of the Gujarat police, should review all cases, hardly suggests confidence in the state government.
But the real story is about what determination and faith can achieve. The court’s decision is so reassuring for all those who had given up the hope for justice that promises of evidence are now pouring in. Many people are now willing to come to court as witnesses; by making protection for witnesses a key condition, the rights bodies struggling for justice have provided an assurance of security that has been the greatest need of Gujarat’s minority community since February 2002. The fact that the court’s detailed instructions indicate the nature of its response to the petitions is also reassuring in a different way. It not only says how the committee should go about the review, but also that if a “closed” case is reopened, the officer in charge shall not be part of the team that originally recommended closure. Besides, non-governmental organizations, so long at the forefront of this battle, would be allowed to point out which cases need further investigation. It would seem that the people’s voice is being heard in the highest institution of justice at a time when their elected government refused to hear it.
August 18, 2004
Back to Basics: CABE Examines Social, Cultural Basis of Education (Anil Sadgopal)
THE TIMES OF INDIA - AUGUST 18, 2004| EDITORIAL
Back to Basics: CABE Examines Social, Cultural Basis of Education
ANIL SADGOPAL
The Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), now reconstituted, met recently after a gap of more than 10 years. The recent meeting was completely dissimilar in tenor and content to the previous one, the only commonality being HRD minister Arjun Singh's presence on both occasions. The reasons for this dissimilarity are not far to seek: In the intervening decade, Indian education had to struggle against two major assaults, one from the global market forces and the other from communal and divisive forces. While market ideology considerably diluted the notion of social justice and equality guaranteed by the Constitution, the communal forces challenged the multi-ethnic, multilinguistic and multicultural foundation of Indian nationhood.
The two-day CABE meet squarely confronted these challenges. It not only took up the education policies of the previous government, but also delved into perennial problems pertaining to universal access and quality of instruction. The minister, among other things, said the time had come to review the 1986 policy. He announced the formation of seven committees, each focusing on a key issue.
The first would take a fresh look at the Free and Compul-sory Education Bill drafted by the NDA government which came under criticism from several quarters. The Bill is a political declaration of state's retreat from its constitutional obligation towards education. It also promotes control through extra-constitutional authorities. Yet, the decision for its review was least expected from a minister who had stated in a recent television interview that he did not find anything particularly objectionable about the Bill.
Still more unexpected was the subject of the second committee, viz common school system (CSS). The last time this subject was uttered at CABE was in 1988 when it constituted a committee under the leadership of Prof D S Kothari, former chairperson of the Education Commission (1964-66). But its report was so threatening that it was put on the back burner. The concept of the common school system was, however, incorporated thrice in education policy — in 1968, 1986 and 1992. Yet, the past decade played havoc with the idea by instituting a variety of parallel, low quality educational streams, such as non-formal centres, alternative schools and EGS centres, essentially through World Bank-sponsored school interventions.
The regular teacher was replaced by an under-qualified, untrained and underpaid para-teacher. The Operation Blackboard norms approved by the Parliament for the number of teachers, classrooms and educational aids were diluted. These policy dilutions were dictated by the structural adjustment programme of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The committee will review this thrust.
The subject of the third committee surpasses even the second in its departure from established policy stance. It will deliberate upon universalisation of secondary (not elementary) education. It has been argued that the constitutional goal of providing eight years of elementary education is not adequate anymore. The new goal must, instead, be to guarantee education at least up to the high school stage, if not the plus-two stage, without which most opportunities for technical education and employment, including reservations for SCs and STs, would remain inaccessible.
The fourth committee will dwell on the autonomy of institutes of higher education. The NDA government attempted to undermine their autonomy in more ways than one. The UGC Model Act for universities was designed to this end. This issue, of course, came into the limelight when Murli Manohar Joshi tried to dictate the fee structure of the IIMs.
The fifth committee will look at ways and means of integrating cultural education in the school curriculum, with a critical focus on the Hindutva thrust. As opposed to Hindutva, the introduction of issues relating to the pluralist character of Indian nationhood will be examined by this committee.
The sixth committee will explore regulatory mechanisms for what is taught by parallel textbooks outside the government system, e.g., in Saraswati Shishu Mandirs and madrassas. This is in response to a growing concern that certain bodies use schools to propagate communal prejudice.
The seventh committee will deal with the issue of financing of higher and technical education. This task includes the challenge of privatisation and commercialisation, which cannot be delinked from the state's role in regulating global market forces. The committee may also have to deal with India's stance vis-a-vis the General Agreement on Trade in Services.
What does all this mean? We must recall that at least three of the seven subjects — Free and Compulsory Education Bill, Common School System and universalisation of secondary education — do not find a mention in the UPA government's common minimum programme. The inclusion of these issues in the CABE agenda is indicative of the pressure created by educationists and social activists on the government and the impact of the electoral mandate against neo-liberal and communal politics. The intelligentsia will have none other than itself to blame if it fails to widen the political space that CABE has created after a decade.
(The author is Professor of Education, Delhi University.)
Back to Basics: CABE Examines Social, Cultural Basis of Education
ANIL SADGOPAL
The Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), now reconstituted, met recently after a gap of more than 10 years. The recent meeting was completely dissimilar in tenor and content to the previous one, the only commonality being HRD minister Arjun Singh's presence on both occasions. The reasons for this dissimilarity are not far to seek: In the intervening decade, Indian education had to struggle against two major assaults, one from the global market forces and the other from communal and divisive forces. While market ideology considerably diluted the notion of social justice and equality guaranteed by the Constitution, the communal forces challenged the multi-ethnic, multilinguistic and multicultural foundation of Indian nationhood.
The two-day CABE meet squarely confronted these challenges. It not only took up the education policies of the previous government, but also delved into perennial problems pertaining to universal access and quality of instruction. The minister, among other things, said the time had come to review the 1986 policy. He announced the formation of seven committees, each focusing on a key issue.
The first would take a fresh look at the Free and Compul-sory Education Bill drafted by the NDA government which came under criticism from several quarters. The Bill is a political declaration of state's retreat from its constitutional obligation towards education. It also promotes control through extra-constitutional authorities. Yet, the decision for its review was least expected from a minister who had stated in a recent television interview that he did not find anything particularly objectionable about the Bill.
Still more unexpected was the subject of the second committee, viz common school system (CSS). The last time this subject was uttered at CABE was in 1988 when it constituted a committee under the leadership of Prof D S Kothari, former chairperson of the Education Commission (1964-66). But its report was so threatening that it was put on the back burner. The concept of the common school system was, however, incorporated thrice in education policy — in 1968, 1986 and 1992. Yet, the past decade played havoc with the idea by instituting a variety of parallel, low quality educational streams, such as non-formal centres, alternative schools and EGS centres, essentially through World Bank-sponsored school interventions.
The regular teacher was replaced by an under-qualified, untrained and underpaid para-teacher. The Operation Blackboard norms approved by the Parliament for the number of teachers, classrooms and educational aids were diluted. These policy dilutions were dictated by the structural adjustment programme of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The committee will review this thrust.
The subject of the third committee surpasses even the second in its departure from established policy stance. It will deliberate upon universalisation of secondary (not elementary) education. It has been argued that the constitutional goal of providing eight years of elementary education is not adequate anymore. The new goal must, instead, be to guarantee education at least up to the high school stage, if not the plus-two stage, without which most opportunities for technical education and employment, including reservations for SCs and STs, would remain inaccessible.
The fourth committee will dwell on the autonomy of institutes of higher education. The NDA government attempted to undermine their autonomy in more ways than one. The UGC Model Act for universities was designed to this end. This issue, of course, came into the limelight when Murli Manohar Joshi tried to dictate the fee structure of the IIMs.
The fifth committee will look at ways and means of integrating cultural education in the school curriculum, with a critical focus on the Hindutva thrust. As opposed to Hindutva, the introduction of issues relating to the pluralist character of Indian nationhood will be examined by this committee.
The sixth committee will explore regulatory mechanisms for what is taught by parallel textbooks outside the government system, e.g., in Saraswati Shishu Mandirs and madrassas. This is in response to a growing concern that certain bodies use schools to propagate communal prejudice.
The seventh committee will deal with the issue of financing of higher and technical education. This task includes the challenge of privatisation and commercialisation, which cannot be delinked from the state's role in regulating global market forces. The committee may also have to deal with India's stance vis-a-vis the General Agreement on Trade in Services.
What does all this mean? We must recall that at least three of the seven subjects — Free and Compulsory Education Bill, Common School System and universalisation of secondary education — do not find a mention in the UPA government's common minimum programme. The inclusion of these issues in the CABE agenda is indicative of the pressure created by educationists and social activists on the government and the impact of the electoral mandate against neo-liberal and communal politics. The intelligentsia will have none other than itself to blame if it fails to widen the political space that CABE has created after a decade.
(The author is Professor of Education, Delhi University.)
Gujarat: Former intelligence top cop blows Modi's cover
The Times of India - August 18, 2004
Former intelligence top cop blows Modi's cover
LEENA MISRA
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2004 06:45:54 AM ]
AHMEDABAD: A former head of the intelligence wing of the Gujarat police has sent a shudder across the establishment by filing an explosive affidavit before the judicial commission probing the post-Godhra riots.
A copy of the 172-page affidavit filed by additional director general of police R B Sreekumar has been procured by The Times of India officially from the commission. It lists instances of complicity of the police and politicians in the post-Godhra violence which rocked the state two-and-a-half years ago. It cites specific instances of police subversion in controlling the riots and manipulating investigations to help the perpetrators.
The affidavit annexes an analytical note sent to the then additional chief secretary (home) Ashok Narayan, on April 24, 2002, quoting senior police officers on "officers at the decisive rung of the hierarchical ladder, like inspectors in charge of police stations, ignoring the specific instructions from the official hierarchy on account of their getting direct verbal instructions from the senior political leaders of the ruling party."
Sreekumar says in the affidavit, "Such officers have become quite adept in doing the art of deceptive law enforcement for the benefit of their political friends, who ensure their placement and continuance in their choicest executive posts, at the cost of the spirit and letter of the laws of the land." The jitters caused by the affidavit are already evident. The Narendra Modi government says it is "highly sensitive" and "should not be made public."
Sreekumar, who became additional DGP (intelligence), about 40 days after the riots started, was later transferred from the intelligence department because the political leadership suspected his role in the leakage to the media of the infamous Modi tapes. Now in-charge of police reforms and modernisation, Sreekumar cites specific intelligence reports about how a sarpanch owing allegiance to Shiv Sena led a conspiracy to incite communal disturbance even in the relatively peaceful Kutch to deter riot-affected Muslims in other parts of the state from migrating here.
There is also a departmental order forwarded to the then Ahmedabad police commissioner P C Pande and DGP K Chakravarthi, (dated April 26, 2002) talking about "Bajrang Dal (BD) leaders likely to distribute lethal weapons like swords, daggers, acid bulbs, petrol bombs on Hanuman Jayanti to their workers." The affidavit also talks about possible attacks, led by named VHP leaders, on Muslim pockets in several areas of Ahmedabad.
Former intelligence top cop blows Modi's cover
LEENA MISRA
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2004 06:45:54 AM ]
AHMEDABAD: A former head of the intelligence wing of the Gujarat police has sent a shudder across the establishment by filing an explosive affidavit before the judicial commission probing the post-Godhra riots.
A copy of the 172-page affidavit filed by additional director general of police R B Sreekumar has been procured by The Times of India officially from the commission. It lists instances of complicity of the police and politicians in the post-Godhra violence which rocked the state two-and-a-half years ago. It cites specific instances of police subversion in controlling the riots and manipulating investigations to help the perpetrators.
The affidavit annexes an analytical note sent to the then additional chief secretary (home) Ashok Narayan, on April 24, 2002, quoting senior police officers on "officers at the decisive rung of the hierarchical ladder, like inspectors in charge of police stations, ignoring the specific instructions from the official hierarchy on account of their getting direct verbal instructions from the senior political leaders of the ruling party."
Sreekumar says in the affidavit, "Such officers have become quite adept in doing the art of deceptive law enforcement for the benefit of their political friends, who ensure their placement and continuance in their choicest executive posts, at the cost of the spirit and letter of the laws of the land." The jitters caused by the affidavit are already evident. The Narendra Modi government says it is "highly sensitive" and "should not be made public."
Sreekumar, who became additional DGP (intelligence), about 40 days after the riots started, was later transferred from the intelligence department because the political leadership suspected his role in the leakage to the media of the infamous Modi tapes. Now in-charge of police reforms and modernisation, Sreekumar cites specific intelligence reports about how a sarpanch owing allegiance to Shiv Sena led a conspiracy to incite communal disturbance even in the relatively peaceful Kutch to deter riot-affected Muslims in other parts of the state from migrating here.
There is also a departmental order forwarded to the then Ahmedabad police commissioner P C Pande and DGP K Chakravarthi, (dated April 26, 2002) talking about "Bajrang Dal (BD) leaders likely to distribute lethal weapons like swords, daggers, acid bulbs, petrol bombs on Hanuman Jayanti to their workers." The affidavit also talks about possible attacks, led by named VHP leaders, on Muslim pockets in several areas of Ahmedabad.
Instructions re Secularism in the Indian Army
The Pioneer - August 18, 2004
Indian Army's new Enfield rifle
Abhijit Bhattacharyya
Traditionally, the Indian defence for an Indian civilian is a "forbidden territory". Very few, like "The" K Subramanian, have so far dared cross the "boundary" to the "forbidden" land. Today, however, this Indian citizen ventures into the "prohibited" zone to focus on a reported instruction given to all Army Commanders "to ensure that the Indian Army's secular credentials are not questioned".
One may ponder on the word "questioned"! Who will question the Indian Army's "secular credential"? Why and what for? Is there any "cause of action"? For now, let us see the variety of "instructions" issued:
"All religious symbols must be avoided by all officers and men when on active duty" and "no religious symbols, no devotional music, no sacred threads and no statues of deities". Direction for women officers are also in place. "Women will not wear ear studs or sport jewellery and only sindoor will be allowed if it is covered by a beret or peak cap". The instruction also strictly forbids religious symbols like "bibhuti, tilaks, birthstone rings or bracelets".
One is curious. What is the provocation for imposing so many do's and dont's on an institution with a glorious tradition of valour and apolitical professionalism (Tehelka and other aberrations notwithstanding)? Did the Army show any sign of fundamentalism, lack of objectivity and fairness? From all accounts that does not seem so. Far from it. The Indian Army's credentials are time-tested. Even the strongest critic, if any, would not (like to) resort to such falsehood.
One would now like to draw the attention (of all) to the core competence of the Army; its training and preparation for war by the Infantry, the spinal chord of the fighting machine. Who constitutes the Army's fighting units? Where do they come from? How do they go to war? What is their battle cry? The battle cries of the various combat units show that contrary to what has been instructed, the Indian Army consists of deeply religious soldiers from the countryside, the majority of who are Hindus and Sikhs. Understandably, their battle cries are a revelation.
The battle cries of the Bihar Regiment, consisting of 17 battalions, are "Jai Bajrang Bali" ("Victory to Lord Hanuman") and "Birsa Munda Ki Jai" ("Victory to Birsa Munda"). The latter war cry, obviously, is resorted to by the sizeable number of soldiers recruited from the tribal belts of Jharkhand and Chhota Nagpur regions. For the 19-strong battalions of the Rajputana Rifles, its war cries are: "Raja Ram Chandra Ki Jai" ("Victory to Raja Ram Chandra") chanted by the Rajput, Kshatriya and Thakur soldiers and "Bole Nara Haidiri Ya Ali" meant for the Muslim companies of the Rajputana Rifles (which consists mainly of Rajput Muslims, implying the Rajputs who had embraced Islam during Muslim rule).
For the 19 battalions of the Punjab Regiment, the twin war cries are "Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal" ("He who cries God is Truth, is ever happy") for the Sikh soldiers and "Bol Jwala Ma Ki Jai" ("Say Victory to Goddess Jwala") for non-Sikh combatants. For the 19 battalions of the Rajput Regiment which consist of Rajput, Muslim, Bengali, Oriya, Gujar and Ahir (Yadav) soldiers, the battle cry is "Bol Bajrang Bali Ki Jai" ("Say Victory to Lord Hanuman")". The 18 Battalions of the Mahar Regiment go to the battle chanting "Bolo Hindustan Ki Jai". (Late General K Sundarji was a product of Mahar Regiment).
The 19 battalions of Kumaon Regiment, which produced three Army Chiefs (Srinagesh, Thimayya and Raina) has four battle cries: "Kalika Mata Ki Jai", "Bajrang Bali Ki Jai", "Dada Kishan Ki Jai" and "Jai Durge Naga" meant for the 1st and 2nd Naga Regiment attached to the Kumaonis in their regimental training centre. For the 18-battalion Garhwalis, the war cry had to be "Badri Vishal Lal Ki Jai" ("Victory to the Great Lord Badri Nath"). The Dogras, with 18 battalions, chant "Jawala Mata Ki Jai". Incidentally, the present Army Chief is the first Dogra officer of this regiment with glorious history.
To the Sikh Regiment and the Sikh Light Infantry, the war cry is identical - "Bole So Nihal Sat Sri Akal". General VP Malik (Army Chief from 1997-2000) was from the Sikh Light Infantry. The 19 Battalions of Jammu & Kashmir Rifles start war with the chorus "Durga Mata Ki Jai". For the 14 Battalions of Jammu & Kashmir Light Infantry and the two Battalions of Ladakh Scouts, the mantra is "Bharat Mata Ki Jai". Although the famous Gorkha war cry is universally known as "Ayo Gorkhali" ("The Gorkhas are here"), at least one regiment, that is, the 11 Gorkha Rifles, starts its battle with "Jai Mahakali". Field Marshal SHF J Manekshaw was from 8 Gorkha Rifles.
After this explicit and deeply entrenched reality on the ground, one is surprised at the attempt to "secularise" the Indian Army. The soldiers, by their very nature, are religiously motivated, deeply committed and God fearing individuals. And their sensitivity and self-respect emanate from their background as well as the stark reality of possible (at times) and certain (most of the times) death in combat zone. When man faces danger and death, he inevitably remembers God. That is a universal formula. There are no ifs and buts. However, religious sensitivity is the Indian soldier's precious possession.
And any attempt, even if done unknowingly, unwillingly or unwittingly to hurt it, can backfire. The Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 saw en masse revolt of the Hindu and Muslim soldiers. In 1984, India faced the unprecedented revolt of the Sikhs. Both the revolts were born out of a deep sense of hurt to religious feelings as Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs are all deeply religious and God fearing humans. Yet, none can accuse them of being religious fanatics and lunatics once they join the Indian Army. Such was the ethos of an Army built and nurtured by a foreign country (Britain) that had nothing in common with India or its people.
Today, therefore, the press report on Army instructions banning "birthstone, bracelets, religious symbols and ear studs" and camouflaging of sindoor, perhaps, runs counter to the time-tested ethos, traditions and conventions of Indian soldiers' way of life in the regiments.
Here one may like to distinguish between the normal religious commitment of a human being and the distorted religious interpretation of a fundamentalist, fanatic and abnormal individual. The soldiers of the Indian Army are normally not known to be religious lunatics and fanatics. Nor does one visualise them to be so in future, "instruction" on "secularism" notwithstanding.
(The author is an alumnus of the National Defence College of India and is Member, International Institute for Strategic Studies, London. The views are his own)
Indian Army's new Enfield rifle
Abhijit Bhattacharyya
Traditionally, the Indian defence for an Indian civilian is a "forbidden territory". Very few, like "The" K Subramanian, have so far dared cross the "boundary" to the "forbidden" land. Today, however, this Indian citizen ventures into the "prohibited" zone to focus on a reported instruction given to all Army Commanders "to ensure that the Indian Army's secular credentials are not questioned".
One may ponder on the word "questioned"! Who will question the Indian Army's "secular credential"? Why and what for? Is there any "cause of action"? For now, let us see the variety of "instructions" issued:
"All religious symbols must be avoided by all officers and men when on active duty" and "no religious symbols, no devotional music, no sacred threads and no statues of deities". Direction for women officers are also in place. "Women will not wear ear studs or sport jewellery and only sindoor will be allowed if it is covered by a beret or peak cap". The instruction also strictly forbids religious symbols like "bibhuti, tilaks, birthstone rings or bracelets".
One is curious. What is the provocation for imposing so many do's and dont's on an institution with a glorious tradition of valour and apolitical professionalism (Tehelka and other aberrations notwithstanding)? Did the Army show any sign of fundamentalism, lack of objectivity and fairness? From all accounts that does not seem so. Far from it. The Indian Army's credentials are time-tested. Even the strongest critic, if any, would not (like to) resort to such falsehood.
One would now like to draw the attention (of all) to the core competence of the Army; its training and preparation for war by the Infantry, the spinal chord of the fighting machine. Who constitutes the Army's fighting units? Where do they come from? How do they go to war? What is their battle cry? The battle cries of the various combat units show that contrary to what has been instructed, the Indian Army consists of deeply religious soldiers from the countryside, the majority of who are Hindus and Sikhs. Understandably, their battle cries are a revelation.
The battle cries of the Bihar Regiment, consisting of 17 battalions, are "Jai Bajrang Bali" ("Victory to Lord Hanuman") and "Birsa Munda Ki Jai" ("Victory to Birsa Munda"). The latter war cry, obviously, is resorted to by the sizeable number of soldiers recruited from the tribal belts of Jharkhand and Chhota Nagpur regions. For the 19-strong battalions of the Rajputana Rifles, its war cries are: "Raja Ram Chandra Ki Jai" ("Victory to Raja Ram Chandra") chanted by the Rajput, Kshatriya and Thakur soldiers and "Bole Nara Haidiri Ya Ali" meant for the Muslim companies of the Rajputana Rifles (which consists mainly of Rajput Muslims, implying the Rajputs who had embraced Islam during Muslim rule).
For the 19 battalions of the Punjab Regiment, the twin war cries are "Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal" ("He who cries God is Truth, is ever happy") for the Sikh soldiers and "Bol Jwala Ma Ki Jai" ("Say Victory to Goddess Jwala") for non-Sikh combatants. For the 19 battalions of the Rajput Regiment which consist of Rajput, Muslim, Bengali, Oriya, Gujar and Ahir (Yadav) soldiers, the battle cry is "Bol Bajrang Bali Ki Jai" ("Say Victory to Lord Hanuman")". The 18 Battalions of the Mahar Regiment go to the battle chanting "Bolo Hindustan Ki Jai". (Late General K Sundarji was a product of Mahar Regiment).
The 19 battalions of Kumaon Regiment, which produced three Army Chiefs (Srinagesh, Thimayya and Raina) has four battle cries: "Kalika Mata Ki Jai", "Bajrang Bali Ki Jai", "Dada Kishan Ki Jai" and "Jai Durge Naga" meant for the 1st and 2nd Naga Regiment attached to the Kumaonis in their regimental training centre. For the 18-battalion Garhwalis, the war cry had to be "Badri Vishal Lal Ki Jai" ("Victory to the Great Lord Badri Nath"). The Dogras, with 18 battalions, chant "Jawala Mata Ki Jai". Incidentally, the present Army Chief is the first Dogra officer of this regiment with glorious history.
To the Sikh Regiment and the Sikh Light Infantry, the war cry is identical - "Bole So Nihal Sat Sri Akal". General VP Malik (Army Chief from 1997-2000) was from the Sikh Light Infantry. The 19 Battalions of Jammu & Kashmir Rifles start war with the chorus "Durga Mata Ki Jai". For the 14 Battalions of Jammu & Kashmir Light Infantry and the two Battalions of Ladakh Scouts, the mantra is "Bharat Mata Ki Jai". Although the famous Gorkha war cry is universally known as "Ayo Gorkhali" ("The Gorkhas are here"), at least one regiment, that is, the 11 Gorkha Rifles, starts its battle with "Jai Mahakali". Field Marshal SHF J Manekshaw was from 8 Gorkha Rifles.
After this explicit and deeply entrenched reality on the ground, one is surprised at the attempt to "secularise" the Indian Army. The soldiers, by their very nature, are religiously motivated, deeply committed and God fearing individuals. And their sensitivity and self-respect emanate from their background as well as the stark reality of possible (at times) and certain (most of the times) death in combat zone. When man faces danger and death, he inevitably remembers God. That is a universal formula. There are no ifs and buts. However, religious sensitivity is the Indian soldier's precious possession.
And any attempt, even if done unknowingly, unwillingly or unwittingly to hurt it, can backfire. The Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 saw en masse revolt of the Hindu and Muslim soldiers. In 1984, India faced the unprecedented revolt of the Sikhs. Both the revolts were born out of a deep sense of hurt to religious feelings as Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs are all deeply religious and God fearing humans. Yet, none can accuse them of being religious fanatics and lunatics once they join the Indian Army. Such was the ethos of an Army built and nurtured by a foreign country (Britain) that had nothing in common with India or its people.
Today, therefore, the press report on Army instructions banning "birthstone, bracelets, religious symbols and ear studs" and camouflaging of sindoor, perhaps, runs counter to the time-tested ethos, traditions and conventions of Indian soldiers' way of life in the regiments.
Here one may like to distinguish between the normal religious commitment of a human being and the distorted religious interpretation of a fundamentalist, fanatic and abnormal individual. The soldiers of the Indian Army are normally not known to be religious lunatics and fanatics. Nor does one visualise them to be so in future, "instruction" on "secularism" notwithstanding.
(The author is an alumnus of the National Defence College of India and is Member, International Institute for Strategic Studies, London. The views are his own)
Armour for Gujarat's victims ; Supreme Court to reopen 2000 closed riot cases
The Telegraph
August 18, 2004
Armour for victims
BASANT RAWAT
Ahmedabad, Aug. 17: After the Best Bakery and Bilkis Bano cases, the Supreme Court order that a high-level Gujarat police committee reconsider about 2,000 riot cases closed for want of evidence has come as relief to the victims, many of whom seem emboldened to speak out.
Minutes after the order, Citizens for Justice and Peace, a non-government organisation fighting for the riot victims, said it received several calls from people willing to speak up to ensure the cases are reinvestigated, like the two most well-known among the riot cases.
The forum was instrumental in getting the Best Bakery case transferred to Mumbai.
Raees Khan Pathan, the forum’s Gujarat coordinator, claimed the callers said they were willing to come forward and share “with me and the police” evidence relating to certain cases to ensure the culprits are punished.
He described it as the most perceptible and positive change in the psyche of the victims, who had lost all hope of getting justice in Narendra Modi’s Gujarat.
The order has come as another slap in the face of the BJP chief minister and an opportunity for the dissidents to regroup and seek his removal.
State government spokesman I.K. Jadeja was mum on the order which, Modi’s critics believe, can pave the way for imposition of central rule. But the Congress-led government in Delhi is unlikely to make a martyr of Modi by sacking him.
State home minister Amit Shah put up a brave front, saying the order was not an indictment of the Modi regime. He said it was just a directive to review closed cases which is not a jolt to the government and promised the high-level police committee would be set up as soon as the government gets a copy of the ruling.
State police chief A.K. Bhargav, who will head the committee, said some of the cases might have been closed because there was no one to give a lead. The victim could have died and there were no witnesses, he explained.
He assured that now they would investigate each case and see that if there is evidence to file a chargesheet.
August 18, 2004
Armour for victims
BASANT RAWAT
Ahmedabad, Aug. 17: After the Best Bakery and Bilkis Bano cases, the Supreme Court order that a high-level Gujarat police committee reconsider about 2,000 riot cases closed for want of evidence has come as relief to the victims, many of whom seem emboldened to speak out.
Minutes after the order, Citizens for Justice and Peace, a non-government organisation fighting for the riot victims, said it received several calls from people willing to speak up to ensure the cases are reinvestigated, like the two most well-known among the riot cases.
The forum was instrumental in getting the Best Bakery case transferred to Mumbai.
Raees Khan Pathan, the forum’s Gujarat coordinator, claimed the callers said they were willing to come forward and share “with me and the police” evidence relating to certain cases to ensure the culprits are punished.
He described it as the most perceptible and positive change in the psyche of the victims, who had lost all hope of getting justice in Narendra Modi’s Gujarat.
The order has come as another slap in the face of the BJP chief minister and an opportunity for the dissidents to regroup and seek his removal.
State government spokesman I.K. Jadeja was mum on the order which, Modi’s critics believe, can pave the way for imposition of central rule. But the Congress-led government in Delhi is unlikely to make a martyr of Modi by sacking him.
State home minister Amit Shah put up a brave front, saying the order was not an indictment of the Modi regime. He said it was just a directive to review closed cases which is not a jolt to the government and promised the high-level police committee would be set up as soon as the government gets a copy of the ruling.
State police chief A.K. Bhargav, who will head the committee, said some of the cases might have been closed because there was no one to give a lead. The victim could have died and there were no witnesses, he explained.
He assured that now they would investigate each case and see that if there is evidence to file a chargesheet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
