by: MIRWAIZ UMER FAROOQ 

Along with your votes, give your elected leadership the task of resolving the Kashmir Issue once and for all.

Mirwaiz Umer Farooq (Pic courtesy: AP)

To the People of India,

India’s elections have begun and you are exercising your right to vote to choose your new political representatives. Whoever you end up electing will be momentously placed to exercise real leadership and take difficult decisions that are needed to shape a better course for the future of India and for peace in South Asia.

In this regard, there are two clear paths ahead — each with very different outcomes. Your newly-elected representatives (those in power and those in the Opposition) could collectively resolve to take a bold and visionary break from the past and pursue a serious political and diplomatic effort to resolve the Kashmir issue. Alternatively, they could relinquish their responsibilities and choose to follow the same old default policy approach that has allowed the issue to fester for more than six decades now, placing the region on the dangerous trajectory that it is currently heading toward. Ultimately, the direction that the next elected leadership takes vis-à-vis this issue largely depends on all of you — the people of India — and on how effectively you can influence and support your leaders to do what is both possible and necessary for peace.

Not an isolated issue

We urge you to recognise that this is not a peripheral or isolated issue. You must understand and be seized of this important matter. In the past we made many attempts to reach out to you personally, and aprise you of the grim situation on the ground, but all these efforts were thwarted by the use of brute force and hooliganism. On many occasions we were manhandled. The Kashmir issue continues to destroy lives and obliterate the rights and aspirations of our people in Kashmir who desire only to live free, peaceful and dignified lives.

The continuation of this tragic conflict is also a direct threat to your interests and well-being. In one way or another, this conflict directly affects all the other issues that are currently being discussed and debated during the election season. You have a direct stake in seeing that a just and lasting solution is reached. The conflict is not only a threat to millions of Kashmiris, it is a serious hazard to the region and the country. There is no better time than now to press your representatives to exercise their leadership to resolve this issue.

A peaceful solution would unleash immense prosperity and economic benefits for India and for the entire South Asian region. Unfortunately, rather than pursuing a political solution in Kashmir, successive governments in New Delhi have continued to waste your taxes and precious economic resources to pursue a militaristic policy in Kashmir. At a huge economic and human cost, this approach represents a failed policy. It has only ended up deepening the conflict. Today, it should be a matter of great concern to all of you that India ranks 136 on the UN’s Human Development Index, but has the distinction of being the world’s largest importer of arms, leading by a huge margin. While India’s economic growth has slowed in the last few years, arms imports have increased by a phenomenal 111 per cent in the past five years. This is draining your economy, while filling the coffers of other countries that are benefiting as arms exporters.

Threat to prosperity

Indeed, the Kashmir conflict is a direct threat to your prosperity. With more than 800 million people in India still living on less than $2 (Rs 120) a day, surely the estimated $37-47 billion per year that is being spent on military expenditure (which is 2 to 2.5 per cent of the GDP) could be used to lift more people out of poverty. If the Kashmir issue is resolved, not only would this costly arms race come to an end, it would open up the multipliers of economic cooperation and trade. Certainly, ensuring lasting peace and stability is the greatest foundation for your prosperity, economic growth and development.

You must ask your leaders why after so many decades, military approaches have failed to resolve the Kashmir issue. Today, this conflict is a direct threat to the security and stability of the entire region. It is the main driver of militarisation and there is every possibility that the situation could escalate and worsen in the coming years. If the Indian government continues to avoid a political solution to the conflict, if it insists on continuing the same unjust and hegemonic approaches, it will spell disaster for the region. This beaten path has already proved to be a policy failure long back. Delaying a political solution has made the situation more unstable and the conflict has only become more dangerous with time.

Today, Kashmir stands as a potential nuclear flashpoint which could consume the lives of millions of people in an instant. Engaging in a costly nuclear and conventional arms race with Pakistan and continuing to pursue militaristic approaches in Kashmir will only add to these dangers. You must ask your leaders whether these approaches are truly serving your interests. Allowing a dangerous political conflict to fester is no way to ensure the security of the Indian people; nor can it be a path to a stable future for the region. The issue continues to keep all the parties in a state of perpetual hostility and distrust. The conflict has become the biggest security threat to the region.

We also believe that you have a real moral stake in not letting your government continue to pursue what is a failed and unjust policy toward Kashmir. Kashmiris have legitimate rights and aspirations. Attempting to suppress them by force is no way to address a political conflict. Widespread human rights abuses have taken place and grave injustices have been carried out against our people. Crushing democratic rights to protest, restricting free speech, persecuting entire sections of the population, foisting black laws and continuing to keep hundreds of thousands of military forces deployed for decades on end in Kashmir — this represents both a moral and political failure. There has to be an end to all of this.

Please put yourselves in the shoes of our people and try to see the conflict through their eyes. Talk to any common Kashmiri and he or she can share with you the direct pain, injustice and indignity that people continue to suffer as a result of the conflict. Kashmir is a human issue and it requires a political solution.

For the sake of our children, we urgently need to resolve this dispute. Instead of a festering quagmire, we should hand over to our youth a chance to shape a peaceful, hopeful and prosperous future — for all parties concerned — for the people of Jammu and Kashmir, India, and Pakistan. We believe that every party must put forward serious efforts to resolve the conflict. For peace, many barriers and obstacles will have to be overcome. Furthermore, any lasting solution must be a just one and that means recognising and upholding the Kashmiri people’s aspirations and their right to self-determination. In this regard, we are seeking only what is due to the people — legal, moral, and historical rights.

Path of statemanship

For long, we have hoped that India’s leaders would tread precisely this type of approach — the path of statesmanship. We expected that your Prime Ministers would take bold decisions that would go against conventional thinking to break the status quo and resolve the issue. At various moments, both former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gave us some reason to believe that a honourable and lasting solution could be achieved. It was Mr. Vajpayee who went to Lahore and declared from the base of Minar-e-Pakistan: “It is my dream and wish to resolve the Kashmir issue.” It was also he who spoke of holding unconditional talks under the ambit of “insaniyat” and vowed that India “shall not traverse solely on the beaten track of the past.” He proclaimed that India’s leadership would act as “bold and innovative designers of a future architecture of peace and prosperity for the entire South Asian region.” Similarly, in 2004 and again in 2006 from Amritsar, Dr. Singh talked quite boldly about engaging in an irreversible process of dialogue to reach a political solution on Kashmir.

Unfortunately, these visions could not materialise and the attempts did not sustain. For the people of Jammu and Kashmir, half this century has only been one of continued uncertainty, misery, unfulfilled promises, false hopes and failed efforts to resolve the issue. Failure has bred cynicism and destroyed hope in Kashmir. The good intentions of Prime Ministers aside, we regret that the peace initiatives proved to be too fragile and the process too vulnerable. Ultimately these attempts were reversible. They failed to yield visible results and no progress was achieved. As a result, many in Kashmir have concluded that the Indian government is not sincere and has no desire to resolve the issue. Today, many people are questioning whether the political path of dialogue and negotiation is the best way to seek their rights and ensure justice.

The Kashmir issue is where it has always been — unresolved and causing great harm and suffering. Today, all of us continue to be held hostage to the past. In this regard, we must accept the fact that domestic politics in India has played a disabling role. It has held back leadership and statesmanship. Whenever parties find themselves out of power and in opposition, they have tended to take hard-line approaches on Kashmir. When ruling governments face domestic opposition, they become unable or unwilling to do what is necessary for peace. Worse still, even sitting governments take hard-line actions that worsen the situation.

Observing all of this, Kashmiris have now realised that it is not at all possible to expect any sitting Prime Minister in India (irrespective of the party he/she comes from) to pursue peace on his/her own. Individual political will and personal determination has not been enough to move the process forward. Therefore, in order to resolve the issue, your elected Prime Ministers need the consistent support of the opposition parties and they also need active support from all of you — the people of India.

Therefore, as citizens of India, you have a vital role to play for peace in the region. Ultimately, visionary leadership and statesmanship will be enabled by your public wisdom and active support for peace. Whoever you vote for and whoever forms the next government or sits in the Opposition, you must hold them accountable on the Kashmir issue. You must convince your elected leaders that the time has come to develop a peace process that is immune to domestic politics and power tussles.

The entire region is waiting for India to come forward for peace. There is already a broad political consensus in Jammu and Kashmir and in Pakistan that the issue must be amicably resolved. Similarly, you must ask your leaders to develop a political consensus. Let finding a solution become a goal for all the parties.

In this direction, it is our sincere hope that you will raise your voices. You must press the elected leadership to rise above domestic politics and work towards India’s strategic and moral interests. Through your resounding support for safeguarding India’s peace, prosperity and security, and through your vocal support for justice, you can make a real impact.

We hope that after the next election, those who are elected to power and those who are in the Opposition will all act in greater unison to move forward. There must be a serious, result-oriented and time-bound process of dialogue between the leaders of India, Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir.

Let this process start sooner rather than later. Over an intensive period of one year, let all the parties engage actively with each other. Let each party seriously consider whether it can find partners to end this conflict once and for all. We must all try our best to seek a peaceful solution. Perhaps together we will be able to find some way to take a historic step forward toward a real peace process.

We remain ready and willing to contribute positively and constructively toward this achievement.

India uses elections in Kashmir and votes of Kashmiries as a tool to assert that Kashmiris want to be with India. As the dates of the Lok Sabha polls were announced, the pro-freedom groups launched a massive campaign to keep people away from participating in elections.

Besides the veteran Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani, other leaders including Mirwaiz Umer Farooq, Muhammad Yasin Malik have also called for complete poll boycott. Not only the resistance camp but religious groups including influential Jamaite-Ahilhaidth, Jamaat-e-Islami have also called for the same.

The recently formed 3rd front of Hurriyat Conference, Hurriyat Conference Jammu Kashmir (HCJK) has pointed out 5 reasons why you should boycott elections that are being held in Kashmir. These are:-

(1) To be loyal to the sacrifices of great martyrs of nation.

(2) To revere the unmarked bodies buried across the valley.

(3) To ensure the secure future of our progeny.

(4) To secure the sanctity of our women and homes.

(5) Elections and freedom are contrary to each other. (to be far from elections is a call to freedom).

By: Bobby Naqvi

He has had a controversial 12-year record as the chief minister of Gujarat, a state his mentors in RSS proudly flaunt as a Hindutva laboratory where Muslims, Christians and tribals have been systematically persecuted in pursuit of a diabolic agenda to ‘purify’ it of non-Hindu population

India is inching towards a near inevitability liberal Hindus and Muslims have long dreaded. Right-wing hardliner and Hindutva poster boy Narendra Damodardas Modi is widely believed to be the next prime minister. A change of guard in Delhi will take place on May 16 when a decade-long rule of centre-left Congress ends and a right-wing dispensation assumes power. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party draws ideological strength from Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or RSS, an umbrella organisation of hardcore nationalists who seek a majoritarian Hindu rule anchored on a rigid, myopic uniformity — not necessarily a representative of religious, cultural, linguistic and geographical diversities gelled together by a glue called the Republic of India.

Modi is the most hated politician in India. He is arguably the most popular as well. He has had a controversial 12-year record as the chief minister of Gujarat, a state his mentors in RSS proudly flaunt as a Hindutva laboratory where Muslims, Christians and tribals have been systematically persecuted in pursuit of a diabolic agenda to ‘purify’ it of non-Hindu population. A career RSS leader, Modi rose through the ranks to become the head of government in 2001. The launch of his political career coincided with the burning of a train in which 56 Hindu pilgrims died on February 27, 2002 in Godhra. The train incident triggered a chain of events — mostly controlled, directed by his party and government — leading to widespread communal violence in which up to 2,000 people died, mostly Muslims. Soon after the violence ended, Modi launched a Gaurav Yatra to restore the ‘pride’ of Hindus, who, ironically, were the perpetrators in those anti-Muslim riots. A rabid orator, Modi went around the state creating an atmosphere of hatred and distrust between Hindus and Muslims in areas left untouched by riots. Later that year, elections held in a surcharged atmosphere resulted in his predictable victory. With Modi at the helm, Gujarat’s Muslims were beginning to face a powerful enemy: state-sponsored and state-designed systematic persecution that continues till date.
Since his election in 2002, dead bodies of Muslims appeared at alarming intervals. Between 2002 and 2008, a number of innocent Muslims were killed by Gujarat police under the guise of fighting terrorism. Most of these killings have turned out to be fake or staged encounters, carried out by eager cops either to impress this Hindutva Samrat (Hindu emperor) or to win bravery medals. Each encounter had a pre-written script: Muslim terrorists out to assassinate Modi were challenged and killed in controversial circumstances. Even the first information reports — a document police must file after each encounter — were identical in plot, language and content. Almost three dozen cops, including six high ranking officers are in jail for cold-blooded murder of innocent Muslims.

Today, the issue is not whether Modi will become the prime minister. The bigger question is should he become the prime minister of 1.25 billion people of this secular nation? Should Modi be crowned the ‘King of Hindustan’. Here are five reasons why he should not:
Mass murder and justice denied

Mass Murderer and Justice Denied:
On April 11, Gujarat High Court will hear a petition of Zakia Jafri seeking charges of criminal conspiracy to murder her lawmaker husband Ehsan Jafri and 68 other Muslim men, women and children in a horrific incidence of violence now known as Gulbarg Society massacre. She wants Modi and 59 others to be tried for murdering her husband and others who had taken shelter in her Ahmedabad home when anti-Muslim violence broke out on February 28, 2002. This incident and Jafri’s subsequent struggle to seek justice through India’s archaic judicial system forms a narrative of hopelessness Muslims face under Modi’s watch and guard. Ten years after Jafri was hacked and burnt alive at his residence, a Special Investigation Team or SIT appointed by Supreme Court ruled that it had no prosecutable evidence against Modi. The Supreme Court, without commenting on the report, sent it to a trial court. In December 2013, around a month after Modi was anointed BJP’s PM candidate, a magistrate in Gujarat accepted the SIT closure report, an order challenged by Zakia in the high court.
Since the SIT closure report in 2012, Modi and his supporters have cited this so-called ‘clean chit’ to argue that Modi’s detractors have carried out a campaign to tarnish his image. However, their suggestion that the Supreme Court gave Modi a ‘clean chit’ is far from the truth. The fact remains that the Supreme Court only supervised the SIT investigation and after following the judicial protocol, referred the report to a trial court. What is also conveniently overlooked by Modi supporters is that the Supreme Court had appointed an amicus curie or friend of the court to study the SIT closure report. The amicus curie, Raju Ramachandran, an eminent human rights lawyer, challenged the SIT report and recommended prosecution of Modi under various sections of Indian Penal Code. On April 11, the high court will consider both the SIT and Ramachandran’s report while hearing Zakia’s petition.

Clean-chit cover up
It is important to understand how the SIT, comprising of high-ranking serving and retired cops, concluded its investigation in Modi’s favour. A damning exposure of this SIT cover up was made in a recent-published book written by celebrated investigative journalist Manoj Mitta, an assistant editor with Times of India. Mitta’s book has accused the SIT head RK Raghavan of shielding Modi and disregarding a battery of circumstantial evidence against him. Raghavan was in charge of Rajiv Gandhi’s security when he was assassinated in 1991. More on him later. The book makes a compelling case that Modi was aware of the build-up of a mob outside Jafri’s residence in the middle-class Muslim neighbourhood of Gulbarg Society. A large number of Muslims had taken shelter in Jafri’s home when the riots broke out. Jafri contacted several top officials and even rang the chief minister Modi’s residence pleading for help. The build-up happened over a period of several hours on February 28, 2002 and emboldened by the absence of any police action, the mob began attacking Jafri’s house late afternoon.
By 4pm, 69 people were killed. First to die was Jafri who was hacked to pieces before he was burned. In his testimony to the SIT, Modi claimed he was informed about the killings in a routine law and order meeting at 8:30pm that day. What is baffling is that the SIT failed to challenge Modi on this claim that he was informed five hours after the killings had taken place. The SIT also failed to ask Modi if he took any action against officials who withheld information about Gulbarg Society. During Modi’s questioning on March 27, 2010, the SIT asked him 71 questions. But a transcript of this grilling shows that the SIT did not ask even one question to challenge his replies, most of which appeared to be lies.
Also baffling is SIT’s inability to challenge Modi’s account on what happened a day before in Godhra where 58 Hindus died when a train was burned by a Muslim mob. A court convicted 31 people and acquitted 63 others. The court, while accepting Gujarat prosecutors’ conspiracy theory, ironically acquitted the ‘chief conspirator’, a Muslim priest. A controversy remains on whether the burning of Sabarmati Express was a pre-planned Muslim conspiracy or a spontaneous act of mob violence, an incident cited by Modi to justify subsequent massacre of Muslims. On the day of this incident, a low ranking officer approved handing over of 58 bodies to Vishwa Hindu Parishad or VHP, a rabid outfit affiliated to Modi’s party and RSS. The transfer of bodies was cleared by the Modi administration and evidence of this lies in phone records proving close co-ordination between officials and VHP leaders on that day. The VHP then paraded these bodies through Ahmedabad, an act that inflamed passions and triggered attacks on Muslims. Mitta says the SIT chose not to pursue these phone records.
So why did Raghavan save Modi? Raghavan was Rajiv Gandhi’s head of security when he was blown up by a Tamil suicide bomber on May 21, 1991. Raghavan, who was only ten feet away from Rajiv moments before his death, admitted that a security breach resulted in the assassination and that the bomber managed to penetrate the ‘sterile zone’. This admission pushed him to relative obscurity and years later his career was resurrected by BJP government that came to power in 1999. He subsequently became the chief of India’s top investigative agency CBI and eventually the head of SIT. The SIT closure report and Zakia’s struggle is a telling commentary on how Modi has managed to subvert India’s criminal justice system. The SIT report is yet to pass judicial scrutiny of higher courts, Zakia’s only hope now.

Ishrat and stalking saga
On June 15, 2004 a 19-year-old Muslim student Ishrat Jahan was killed in an encounter by Gujarat’s notorious anti-terrorist squad or ATS. Ishrat, the ATS claimed, was part of a terrorist gang heading to Ahmedabad to assassinate Modi. Subsequent investigations have proved that she was not a terrorist and that she was killed in cold blood before automatic weapons were planted on her body by the ATS officers. A number of high ranking Gujarat police officers have been charge-sheeted and jailed, pending a trial. Leaked investigation reports have suggested that Modi’s closest aide and former home minister Amit Shah supervised Ishrat’s murder. Strong circumstantial evidence unearthed by investigators has found that Shah was in touch with the accused police officers minutes after Ishrat was killed. Shah, who is an accused in another fake encounter killing of a Muslim, has since become Modi’s election campaigner manager. Several reports have suggested Shah used ATS to stage these encounters in an attempt to create a perception that Modi was on the hit list of Muslim extremists. It is hard to believe that Modi was not aware of what his home minister was doing.
That Shah brazenly misused Gujarat’s ATS and top cops to further Modi’s political agenda and for his personal motives was clear when a news portal revealed last year he ordered stalking of a young woman architect because his ‘Sahib’ or master was interested in her. The portal released audio recordings of Shah directing his ATS officers to mount an illegal surveillance on the woman who had no criminal record. On a number of recordings, Shah was heard telling his officers that his master Modi was interested in knowing all about her: where she went, whom she dated, which restaurant she ate in and which movie she watched. The ATS cops even followed her on flights, an indication of Modi’s unexplained obsession with the woman.

Mirage of development
After attempting to wash off the stain of Gujarat riots, Modi has launched a campaign to project himself as a messiah of development. Modi has argued that under his rule, economy of Gujarat state grew by leaps and bounds, a claim widely contested by internationally-acclaimed economists. While it is true that Gujarat recorded an impressive economic growth, even his supporters agree that Gujarat ranks low on social, health and education parameters. On the FDI, other states have done better than Gujarat. Moreover, his idea of development is opposed by many who accuse him of granting undue favours to corporates, often at the cost of the poor and the state exchequer. For example, he took land from farmers and gave it to industrial houses for pittance. In recent months, Modi has attacked Congress’ failure to tackle inflation, rising unemployment, shrinking of economy but has said little on what he would do if he becomes the PM.

The idea of India
Early last year, Modi unleashed an unprecedented campaign on social networking websites, newspapers, TV and other media. This American style campaigning has created a large army of Modi bhakts or followers in several states of India. But critics have sought to puncture Modi’s popularity claims by pointing out that his campaign managers sourced Facebook approvals from ‘like farms’ in other countries. They have also pointed out that a significant majority of his 3.6 million Twitter followers are either fake or inactive. They argue that Modi has carried out a massive con job to deceive Indians into believing that he is the answer to all the ills this nation is facing today.
It is well accepted that an overwhelming majority of India’s 150 million Muslims consider Modi as their ‘enemy number one’. Also, he is disliked by the nation’s another minority — Christians who make up for 2.3 per cent of India’s 1.25 billion strong population. Most importantly, he is despised by a significant number of liberal Hindus, who, despite his Hindu nationalist stand, find him against the very ‘idea of India’. For the first time since independence, a man so many Indians hate may become the prime minister of the world’s largest democracy, a possibility that looks increasingly certain.

Bobby Naqvi is the Editor of XPRESS, sister publication of Gulf News.

By: Gulzar Bhat

The refugee population that has migrated to the country from West Pakistan continues to live in miserable conditions. Not only are these people devoid of many basic facilities, they do not even have papers to prove they are Indians, writes GULZAR BHAT

In the immediate vicinity of Vijaypur in Jammu is a 12x12 room outside which scores of people make a beeline every day. The sparse room has a wooden table laden with piles of files, a few plastic chairs, a couple of cabinets and a squeaky ceiling fan spinning slowly. This is the office of Labha Ram Gandhi, president of the West Pakistani Refugee Action Committee, fighting for the rights of the refugees living in wretched condition for sixty five years now.

After attaining superannuation from Jammu & Kashmir Light Infantry as Hawaldar, septuagenarian Labha Ram devoted himself to the cause of West Pakistani refugees who migrated to Jammu during the melee of 1947. “Only the wearer knows where the shoe pinches. Since I myself am a refugee I can best understand their agony and misfortune. Although I am no power-wielding man, I am working to get at least their small issues resolved by making frequent pleas to the authorities”, says Labha Ram.

About 21,000 families, 90 per cent Hindus and 10 per cent Sikhs, mostly belonging to a category ubiquitously called ‘disadvantaged’, migrated en masse from West Pakistan in the wake of the 1947 violence and have been living in deplorable conditions across the Jammu region since then. After more than 65 years of migration, they are still bereft of the civil and political rights exacerbating their living conditions.

This large chunk of refugee population is denied their basic rights in a plethora of matters including elections to State Assembly and panchayats, recruitment in State Government services and acquisition of immovable property — all because of the special constitutional status granted to Jammu & Kashmir under Article 370 of the Constitution. Section 6 of this Article recognises only those people as permanent citizens of State whose ancestors lived in Jammu & Kashmir for a minimum period of 10 years, till the cut-off date May 14, 1954.

“Because we aren’t recognised as subjects of J&K, the Permanent Residence Certificate — an important document making a person eligible for getting a Government job or owning immovable property and availing other benefits in the State — is not issued to us,” says Labha Ram.

Since West Pakistani refugees cannot acquire immovable property, they are deprived of the ‘absolute rights’ on the land allotted to them by the Government under Cabinet order number 578-C of 1954, in the wake of their migration and thus they cannot sell it or mortgage it for the purpose of loan.

For them, seeking admission in Government technical colleges or making a ration card is quite an uphill task as in both the cases, PRC is a ‘must produce’ document. “Every day, scores of people from different refugee localities visit my office with issues like denial of admission to students in technical colleges, reluctance of authorities in issuing ration cards and so on”, says Labha Ram.

 Although the Union Ministry of Human Resource Development has issued directions to the State Government, in 2008, to make necessary provisions for granting certain concessions including waiver of domicile requirements in providing admission to the children of West Pakistani refugees settled in the State, the concerned authorities are rather contemptuous of such directions.

Eighty-year old Dev Raj is dewy eyed as he recalls Bhishan Singh, the protagonist of Saadat Hassan Manto’s much acclaimed short story, Toba Tek Singh, when asked about his national identity. “I was just 15 when we fled our native town Shakarpur (now in Pakistan) in 1947. Sixty five years have passed since, but I am still searching for the identity I had in Shakarpur. We are the lost and right-less citizens of the world’s largest democracy”, says Dev Raj.

It is worth mentioning here that West Pakistani refugees have approximately 50,000 votes divided among 15 Assembly constituencies which are not being polled during the State legislative election owing to their non-voting right.

Most of the West Pakistani youth are unemployed, idling at home, inflicting a deleterious effect on their psychological well being and triggering a feeling of alienation amongst them.

 Sapna K Sangra of Jammu University says, “It has been seen that the problem of unemployment among displaced persons is affecting their psychological health. Alcoholism is common among them and, since they know they can’t get employment in State Government, they have lost interest in education.”

A West Pakistani refugee woman, who managed to become a graduate, concedes, pleading anonymity, that after going through a cumbersome process she managed to obtain a PRC with the hope of getting a Government job in future; else the years of toil spent on her studies will go waste.

In 2007, Mr Ghulam Nabi Azad, the then Chief Minister of the State, constituted a committee under GD Wadhwa to look into the problems concerning refugees. The committee made several recommendations in their favour but were, predictably, barely implemented.

Whatever said and done — Acts, legalities, amendments, boundaries — nothing is above humanity. Time is high when we should look at refugees as humans first and take care of their development issues. Everything else will follow.

Courtesy: The Poineer

By: Praveen Swami / The Hindu

Each bombing the Indian Mujahideen carries out is a medium for a political message enmeshed with India’s dystopic communal landscape: that democratic politics cannot defend India’s Muslims

“You who have ruled India for eight hundred years, you who lit the flame of the one true God in the darkness of polytheism: how can you remain in your slumber when the Muslims of the world are awakening?” the al-Qaeda ideologue Asim Umar asked India’s Muslims last summer. “If the youth of the Muslim world have joined the battlefields with the slogan ‘Shari’a or Martyrdom,’ and put their lives at stake to establish the Caliphate, how can you lag behind them? Why is there no storm in your ocean,” Mr. Umar demanded to know.

Last week’s arrests of key Indian Mujahideen operatives have led to speculation that India’s most feared terror group — responsible for savage serial bombings in major cities, including the 2006 attacks on Mumbai’s suburban train system — may be disintegrating. Tehseen Akhtar, its key recruiter, is now in prison; so is Muhammad Zarar Siddibapa, its operation chief.

For investigators though, these breakthroughs have brought forth disturbing new evidence that Mr. Umar, and other propagandists like him, are succeeding in calling a new army into being — an army born in Indian towns and cities scarred by communal warfare and hardened in the battlefields of Pakistan’s north-west.

The dusk that shrouds the Indian Mujahideen heralds, the evidence suggests, the coming of its second sunrise.

The new jihadis
Karachi residents Muhammad Fahim and Muhammad Abdul Walid, held by the Uttar Pradesh police last week, told investigators that they had first been recruited by the Lashkar-e-Taiba, and then broke with it to make their way to a Taliban training camp in Afghanistan’s southern Helmand district. Then, they were led by the fugitive Pune jihadist, Mohin Chaudhury to the Indian Mujahideen’s Karachi-based chief, Riyaz Shahbandri. Faisalabad-based bombmaker Zia-ur-Rahman, Mr. Akhtar’s recently arrested deputy, served with Taliban groups in Pakistan’s Punjab before volunteering to serve with the Indian Mujahideen fighting across the border.

Meanwhile, new jihadist cells have sprung up within India. The recruits include young people, their minds fired by Internet Islamism, as well as veterans once linked to the proscribed Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). Fugitive Ranchi resident Haider Ali, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) says, raised volunteers from both these groups for the bombing of the revered Buddhist shrine at Bodh Gaya last year, as an act of vengeance for communal violence against Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslim minority.

Mr. Ali’s cell, only loosely connected through him to the Indian Mujahideen, followed up that attack with an attempt to assassinate Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi at a rally in Patna, surprising the organisation’s leadership in Karachi.

In Tamil Nadu, volunteers at a Chennai college even signed up to serve with jihadists in Syria — recruited by local Islamists, and financed by a Singapore-based executive.

Key commanders of the Indian Mujahideen, meanwhile, remain active in Karachi, most important of them being Riyaz Shahbandri, his brother Iqbal Shahbandri and Abdul Subhan Qureshi. There are a host of second-rung leaders still at large, like Mirza Shadab Beg, Shahnawaz Alam, Muhammad “Bada” Sajid, Alamzeb Afridi, Zulfikar Fayyaz “Kagazi,” Rahil Sheikh and Ariz Khan. The man who financed them all, ganglord Amir Raza Khan, is also at large.

The western storm
From Internet chats between Mr. Shahbandri and Mr. Siddibapa, recovered by the NIA, we know that several of those men have sought combat training with jihadists in Pakistan’s north-west, and in Afghanistan, developing skills the Indian Mujahideen’s cadre never had.

It has long been evident that the gathering storm of violent Islamism in Pakistan would lash India, too. In 2010, al-Qaeda released a posthumous audio message from Egyptian jihadi Said al-Masri, claiming responsibility for the bombing of the German Bakery in Pune. “The person who carried out this operation was a heroic soldier from the Soldiers of the Sacrifice Brigade, which is one of the brigades of Qaedat al-Jihad [the al-Qaeda’s formal name] in Kashmir, under the command of Commander Illyas Kashmiri, may Allah preserve him.”

Mr. al-Masri’s message was wrong on several details of the operation, but for investigators, news that elements of al-Qaeda had developed links with jihadi groups acting against India did not surprise anyone.

David Headley, the Pakistani-American Lashkar operative now serving a life term for his role in the 26/11 attacks, had told the NIA of an anti-India “Karachi project” linked to global jihadi groups.

Driven by communal events
Following Pakistani military ruler General Pervez Musharraf’s 2007 siege of jihadists holed up inside Islamabad’s Lal Masjid, Mr. Headley told the NIA, that an ideological war broke out among Pakistan’s jihadis. In spite of efforts by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence, he said, the “aggression and commitment shown to jihad by the several splinter groups influenced many committed fighters to leave Kashmir-centric outfits and join the Taliban.”

In turn, al-Qaeda became increasingly interested in India, as a means of competing for influence and legitimacy with traditional jihadi groups like the Lashkar, which were supportive of the Pakistani state. In the wake of 26/11, al-Masri himself released a statement warning India of attacks if it struck against Pakistan.

The renewal of a jihadist constituency within India shouldn’t be a surprise: the rise of Mr. Modi, and the Hindu nationalist tendencies he represents, has unleashed existential anxieties among large numbers of Indian Muslims. Though the numbers of jihadi recruits are minuscule, the members of the new cells are also true to a familiar pattern. The earliest Indian jihadist formation, the Tanzim Islahul Muslimeen, was formed to protect Muslims against communal violence, and carried out its first strike, the 1993 bombings of inter-city express trains, to avenge the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

In interrogations, Indian jihad volunteers have repeatedly said they acted to avenge the Gujarat carnage of 2002. Feroze Ghaswala told police he had volunteered to join jihad training after witnessing the mass burial of 40 Gujarat riot victims. Peedical Abdul Shibly and Yahya Kamakutty, both successful computer professionals, are alleged to have prepared to carry out attacks in Bangalore. Men from Kerala trained in the mountains of Jammu and Kashmir with the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Zabiuddin Ansari, from Maharashtra, famously ended up in the 26/11 control room.

Founded in April 1977, SIMI, the fountainhead of the modern Indian jihadist movement, was itself driven by the forces of communal violence. From the outset, scholar Yoginder Sikand has said “that Islam alone was the solution to the problems of not just the Muslims of India, but of all Indians and, indeed, of the whole world.” It drew thousands disillusioned with traditional politics, Dr. Sikand has recorded, providing supporters “a sense of power and agency which they were denied in their actual lives.”

From December 1992, following the demolition of the Babri Masjid, SIMI’s language became increasingly aggressive. In a statement in 1996, it declared that since democracy and secularism had failed to protect Muslims, the sole option was to struggle for the caliphate. Soon after, it put up posters calling on Muslims to follow the path of Mahmood Ghaznavi, the 11th century warlord. In 2001, after the 9/11 attacks, SIMI activists organised demonstrations hailing Osama bin-Laden as a “true mujahid.”

Early in the summer of 2004, a group of young men fed up with SIMI’s inability to act on its own talk gathered in the small coastal town of Bhatkal in Mangalore — and founded what we now call the Indian Mujahideen.

The jihadi tradition
To understand the durability of the jihad within India, it is important to remember that its cadre are inheritors of a long political tradition. In a manifesto sent to the media after their September 2008 bombings in New Delhi, the group said the attacks were carried out “in the memory of two most eminent Mujahids of India: Sayyed Ahmed Shaheed and Shah Ismail Shaheed (may Allah bestow His Mercy upon them) who had raised the glorious banner of Jihad against the disbelievers.” The historian Ayesha Jalal has shown that the notion of jihad was an important theme in both pre-colonial and colonial India. Syed Ahmad and Shah Ismail were killed battling Sikh troops in a failed jihad involving the tribes of Pakistan’s north-west.

Historian Stephen Dale has observed that these ideas stretched to the south of India, noting the work of the Sixteenth Century author, Zayn al-Din al-Ma’bari, who chronicled the jihad against Portugal’s intrusions into the Indian Ocean, hoping to “inspire the Faithful to undertake a jihad against the worshippers of the cross.”

Each bombing the Indian Mujahideen carries out is a medium for a political message enmeshed with India’s dystopic communal landscape: that democratic politics cannot defend India’s Muslims. India’s intelligence and police services deserve credit for the long war they have fought, but it is time for politicians to act to heal our fractured nation.

praveen.swami@thehindu.co.in

Courtesy: The Hindu

By: Natasha Rather

Myths and misconceptions swirling around the Kunan-Poshpora case have served to distort facts and create confusion. The Support Group for Survivors of Mass Rape and Torture at the twin villages, which has been closely involved in the case, wishes to take this opportunity to dispel some of this misinformation.

1.   Villagers delayed filing an official complaint (an FIR was filed two-and-a-half-weeks later, on March 7, 1991) about such a serious incident. This shows they are lying
The mass rape and torture in Kunan-Poshpora took place during the intervening night of February 23-24, 1991. Villagers tried desperately to get a hearing from officials from the first day itself. A letter complaining about the incident, written by Jumma Sheikh, the chowkidar of the village, and carrying thumb-prints of about twenty-six villagers, is dated February 25/ 26, 1991. Despite heavy snow, Sheikh approached district authorities on February 25, immediately after the army cordon was lifted. Villagers held protests outside the police station through the week, and went to the Brigade Headquarters on February 27. Finally, after all this effort, the District Collector, SM Yasin, who heard about the incident, reported it to the Special Commissioner in Baramulla on March 3, got a written complaint on March 4, visited the villages on March 5, and wrote his report dated March 7 – which was then converted into an FIR.

2.   The number of victims keeps fluctuating. Some say 23, some say 32, some say 50, some say 100, some say all the women in the village were raped. This shows that the whole thing is a hoax
We may never know the actual number of victims, as proper investigations were never carried out, and many women, especially minors, hid their rapes. This is clear from the findings of the Human Rights Watch (Asia Watch) which says more than 50, up to 100 were raped. Twenty-one women gave official statements to the police, 32 medical examinations were conducted, all of which show signs of rape/sexual assault. Fifty women spoke before Wajahat Habibullah in his enquiry, 39 women were granted relief by the SHRC (after inquiry), before which cases of 11 women are pending. It is safe to say that at least 50, but probably many more, women were raped that night

3.   No police investigations were conducted at that time. So we have absolutely no proof of what happened, except what the villagers say
The State has always been reluctant in letting the police carry out investigations in any crime reported against the Indian Army. In 1991, police investigations were conducted but they were incomplete and improper. For example, women’s statements were recorded in public. Only 19 out of the 125 army personnel (whose nominal roll was available to the police), who were admittedly present, gave statements. The tehsildar, who was the first outsider informed officially, and the compounder who gave medical aid, were not questioned etc. But statements from witnesses, survivors and accused were recorded and medical examinations of 32 women, several men and an injured baby were conducted. When the first investigating officer stated that investigations were almost complete, the case was transferred to another officer, then to an SIT, and finally it was closed on the wrong advice of the Director Prosecutions, in October 1991.  Seized evidence in this case, which were wine bottles and torn pherans, were not produced before the court. Despite improper investigations, there are statements other than those of the survivors, medical reports and injury memos that corroborate and substantiate the villagers’ account.

4.   Villagers’ statements are contradictory and full of gaps
Every villager clearly says rape did happen, and that they were tortured. This is clear. Individual accounts may vary, based on the memories people have of that night. If it were a scripted story, it would have a similar version. Since the locations of people varied, so did their stories about that night. There may be minor contradictions, but their statements to the police are not contradictory. In fact they may be slightly similar because of the standardised police language. They did not give all details (mentioned only misbehaviour and not rapes explicitly) in their first letter, due to cultural reasons, but they have always stated the same version, which is clear in the police statements. Contradictions over the time of the baby’s birth, rising due to what that particular survivor may have said to SM Yasin and later to BG Verghese, are cleared up by the police statements, which are the most authentic and reliable account of the events, and which were given in March 1991 itself, when events were fresh in the victims’ memories.  Any other gaps, contradictions and variations are for the court to decide about. The villagers have already proved their case successfully before the SHRC, and are ready to do so in court if the army gives them a chance. A strange thing that comes up in this is that everyone has been questioning the victims’ story, but the story narrated by the army to the police is far more contradictory, very brief, and without any facts, because the army cannot fill every minute of the night with a fabricated account.

5.   Medical evidence of the victims is ‘anecdotal’, delayed etc, so there is no medical proof of rape
The ‘Nirbhaya Case’ brought to light the fact that India lacks basic kits to examine a rape victim. In comparison, Kunan-Poshpora happened in 1991, when even in 2014 hospitals are ill-equipped and doctors ill-informed to handle such cases. Considering this, there is still a lot of medical evidence available. Medical examinations of 32 women, as well as men and babies, were conducted. The report by the Block Medical Officer in Kralpora clearly states that the 32 women had severe injuries – multiple abrasions and contusions – on their lower bodies, thighs, abdomens, buttocks and chests. Vaginal lacerations are reported in some cases. According to the report, hymens of 3 unmarried girls were ruptured and there are resolving injuries on chest, buttocks, and abdomen.
Marks of grievous hurt / hurt using blunt instrument / electric shock to the penis for men, and evidence of fracture for the baby is also reported. So it is not true to say that there is no medical proof. Though examinations were conducted late (March 15 and 21) all the women reported being “raped against their will, multiple times about 26 days back.”

6.   The case has been closed since 1991, and the villagers have done nothing from then to now, about the case, until the PIL was filed
The victims of Kunan-Poshpora mass rape have been fighting tirelessly to have their voices heard. A Village Committee in Kunan-Poshpora was formed and villagers filed their case before the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) in 2004 and fought for justice, appeared before the Commission and gave their statements. The SHRC issued its final decision only in 2011, asking for the case to be reinvestigated and monetary compensation to be provided, but no action was taken to implement it. They have also been fighting at a local level so that their sufferings are not forgotten

7.   The PIL by the Kunan-Poshpora Support Group led to the case being ‘re-opened’
The PIL, when it was filed by a group of 50 Kashmiri women, created a lot of stir and buzz in the media and the civil society, but did not lead to the reopening of the case.  The PIL was dismissed, without being admitted, as being ‘premature.’ During the hearing on April 24, 2013, the judge stated that a PIL could not be a remedy to a 22-year-old case nor lead to the implementation of an SHRC decision. The police had heard about the plan to file a PIL and had filed the closure report on the case before the magistrate in 2013, something the police had failed to do when the case was closed on its files in October 1992. The State of J & K argued in favour of the closure. The victims filed a protest petition against the closure, and managed to get an order for further investigations on June 18, 2013. Virtually, no investigations were made. The case cannot be reopened, because it was never officially closed. Further investigations have been ordered to complete the incomplete and improper investigations the police had started in 1991

8.   Villagers have received compensation announced by the State Human Rights Commission
The SHRC decision on Kunan-Poshpora in 2011 included reopening of the case as well as giving compensation to the victims. No action was taken by the authorities, which was one of the reasons to file the PIL. After the petition was filed, a High Level Committee meeting was held in May 2013 to decide on giving compensation.
Thirty-nine women received Rs 1 lakh, but we do not know whether it was a part of the SHRC recommendations. In response to an RTI query, the state government has denied paying any money to the villagers as compensation. But the villagers were paid Rs 1 lakh each in cash by Ghulam Hassan Mir, in the presence of the thsildar, at his official residence. No one knows where this money came from.  The villagers were given the impression that this was for the SHRC compensation, and that they should take it immediately in cash as cheques could take a long time.

9.      The case has been fully investigated, no proper evidence was found, and the case was closed in 1991
A case can officially be closed only by a Magistrate. The police had tried to close the case on its file as ‘untraced’ (that is, the suspects were not found), but it has remained open all these years. Though three different investigations have been carried out by different police officials, they were never completed. The first investigation officer, who was trying to do his job by recording statements etc, was hurriedly transferred. Many witnesses, including accused army personnel present during the ‘crackdown,’ whose names were given to police were never questioned.

10.    Nothing can come out of fighting this case after so many years, that too before the Indian court system
This case is not about winning or losing because not a single accused covered by the AFSPA has ever stood trial in a civilian court. It is about refusing to accept that justice will be denied. The people of Kunan-Poshpora have been fighting relentlessly for more than two decades. Their standing has been sought to be discredited and their realities sought to be falsified. The State has tried to cover up facts, and sought to exhaust and discourage the victims in their struggle.
Fighting the case in Indian courts means that we won’t accept it being hushed up. Our aim is to push the army and the police to disclose information, expose their wrong-doing, and show the kind of impunity they enjoy from criminal prosecution.
Already, as a result of the case, we have got the police file, which was buried for 22 years. More witnesses like SM Yasin, the District Collector in Kupwara at that time, are speaking up. A more coherent story is emerging as we learn more and more. Each time the army or the police files something as a reply and gives us more information, and each time they have to come to court, it is a victory in itself for the villagers.
It is also a fight against forgetting, and against compromising with denial of justice.

By: Dr Sheikh Showket Hussain

Under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), a member of the armed forces can’t be subjected to a legal action unless permission for the same is secured from the Central government.

There exists similar provisions in various laws which exclude judicial intervention in some administrative actions.

The laws, however, have been interpreted to confer immunity upon only those Acts which are done in accordance with a particular legislation and remain covered by it.

A member of security agencies according to this interpretation remains protected as long as his action concerns the security of the state. If he on the other hand indulges in rape or extra-judicial killing of innocents irrespective of their none-involvement in any sort of security related activity.

Such actions ought not to be protected — this was the plea taken by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) when it approached Supreme Court on Pathribal killings.

The plea was simple, since the action of the security men was not anyhow related to security of the state they didn’t enjoy the protection of AFSPA should be tried by an ordinary criminal court.

The Supreme Court of India didn’t accept plea of the CBI and gave the desecration to army to deal with the act of the deviant soldiers through court martial. Army while referring the case to court martial gave the impression that its adjudicating mechanism is prompt and sufficient to take care of abuses of human rights by the soldiers.

The court-martial remains a procedure associated with army. Expecting justice from it remains an illusion as no institution or individual can be judge of his own cause, according to the basic principles of natural justice.

What was expected, turned out to be true when army recently closed the court martial against its soldiers on the pretext of insufficiency of evidence.

Decision of the army to close the court martial has invoked widespread condemnation across Kashmir and beyond.

While in Kashmir those who condemned the decision included even members of leaders of pro-Indian parties as well. Internationally, human rights groups like Amnesty International also expressed dismay on the outcome of the so-called court martial.

People genuinely ask if this can be the fate of a procedure to which CBI was a party, what can be the outcome of those complaints which are single-handedly followed by the victims of the Human Rights abuses.

Another equally important issue that is raised pertains to the level of defiance depicted by army in winding up the proceedings of an authentic and genuine case of Human Rights abuses.

CBI got involved in the case only after Pandiyan Commission established by the state government had acknowledged the abuses of the human rights and innocence of those killed.

The case was not an ordinary incident. It was an incident that occurred during the visit of the U.S. president, Bill Clinton to India. The incident attracted a lot of media coverage across the globe and even Bill Clinton conceded that killings in vicinity of Islamabad town had occurred because of his visit.

As a damage controlling exercise, it is now conveyed that the findings of the court martial can be challenged.

But the fact remains that there is no provision of appeal against the finding and sentence of a court martial. The Air Force Act, Section 161, states that an individual who considers wronged by the order of a court martial may present a petition to the convening authority before the confirmation of the sentence. After confirmation, the petition may be submitted to the Chief of the Air Staff or the Central government.

This remedy is illusory. There is no right to appeal against the order of the court martial. Article 136(2) of the Constitution stipulates that the Supreme Court Article 227 (4) for High Courts can’t give special leave to appeal against any judgment determination or sentence of a military court or tribunal.

The Supreme Court, in the case of Union of India v. Himmat Singh Chahar 1994 (4) SCC 521, has made it clear that the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution can exercise the power of judicial review over the court martial in a limited way only in cases where there has been infraction of any mandatory provisions of the Act which has caused gross miscarriage of justice; or there has been violation of principles of natural justice; or there has been a lack of jurisdiction.

It is obvious, that the power of judicial review under Articles 32 and 226 in context of military personnel is limited.

Widespread disillusion with the remedial mechanism exiting under Indian legal system has made people to raise voices for an international war crime tribunal. A demand that has been consistently made in the past and again reaffirmed by several Kashmiri leaders after winding up of the court martial proceedings in Pathribal case.

(Dr Shiekh Showkat Hussain is a expert of law and teaches at the Central University, Kashmir.)