CPI (M) CONGRATULATES THE PEOPLE OF EGYPT

The Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) issued the following statement on February 12, 2011.

THE Polit Bureau of the CPI (M) conveys its warm greetings and congratulations to the people of Egypt and particularly the youth for the brilliant success of their historic 18 day struggle against the despotic ruler Hosni Mubarak, which finally forced him to quite office. It hopes that the people’s aspirations for a just and democratic order, for constitutional changes, lifting of emergency and establishment of a government through free and fair elections will be met without delay.

Source: www.pd.cpim.org/

EDITORIAL OF PEOPLE’S DEMOCRACY (20-02-2011): SENSE OF DRIFT GRIPS UPA GOVT

THERE was great expectation that the prime minister’s interaction with the senior journalists of the electronic media would shed some new light and dynamism regarding the government’s efforts to tackle the two most important issues confronting the country and our people – relentless price rise and mega corruption. Far from doing so, this interaction confirmed that this UPA-II government is gripped by a sense of drift.

On the issue of the constitution of a joint parliamentary committee (JPC) on the 2G spectrum scam, the prime minister said: “There is entirely a wrong impression that I was blocking the JPC. I am not afraid of facing any committee….I have always said my conduct should be, like Caesar’s wife, above suspicion”. Pray, then tell us why the winter session of the parliament was wasted? Though he repeated earlier assurances that those guilty of corruption would be brought to book, this failed to carry conviction when it was pointed out that he had given a commitment that those involved in corruption relating to Commonwealth games would be brought to book within ninety days and that time limit had long expired. However for the sake of record, he once again, repeated that the guilty will not be spared.

There were repeated references to the fact that the UPA-II was a coalition government and the prime minister was compelled to follow a `coalition dharma’. By implication, this conveys that in order to keep the government in office, mega corruption at high levels must be tolerated. This is simply unacceptable to India and its people. It is specious to suggest that corruption not only occurs but becomes an accepted element of coalition governments. The Congress party alone had a three-fourths majority in the parliament when the Bofors scam took place.

Further, such references to `compulsions of a coalition’ suggest a sense of helplessness of the prime minister. He is either being prevented from doing what he wants, or, he has to digest what he may otherwise be disagreeing with. This sounds, to put it mildly, strange given the experience of the UPA-I coalition led by this very prime minister. UPA-I had a common minimum programme (CMP) which served as the agenda for the government. The Left parties that supported the UPA-I government from the outside publicly declared such support on the basis of this CMP. There was no reference to promoting a `strategic relationship’ with the USA, or, to the Indo-US nuclear deal. On the contrary, the CMP talked of “independent foreign policy”, “promote multi-polarity in world relations and oppose all attempts at unilateralism”. This very prime minister and UPA-I ruptured the `coalition dharma’ and went ahead with the nuclear deal breaking with the Left parties and engineering a majority in the Lok Sabha through an obnoxious display of monetary horse trading. Having done this, now to bemoan the `compulsions of coalition’ to justify its drift sounds hollow. It also reflects the class character of the UPA government which earlier risked the violation of `coalition dharma’ to cement India as a junior subordinate ally of US imperialism, to now take refuge behind this very coalition dharma and plead helplessness. Such sanction to justify lack of governance or, the naked loot of our country and people is simply unacceptable.

With regard to the amount of money lost in this 2G scam, the prime minister appeared to agree with the present telecom minister in saying that the CAG estimate of the loss was notional. The government had chosen not to collect these revenues in order to provide the licenses cheaply to the telecom operators which would vastly enlarge tele-density and provide services at lower costs. This is a deliberately misleading line of argument as some of those providing the services today had bought them from entities like Swam and Unitech at six times the price the latter had paid the government to acquire the license.

Worse, the PM likened this 2G spectrum allocation to food and fertiliser subsidies being provided saying that by not collecting the due price from the consumer, can the government be said to incur revenue losses. Such a comparison clearly brings out the class character of this government. The prime minister, in as many words, said that this 2G spectrum allocation was actually a subsidy being provided to the big corporate houses in the telecom sector.

This raises the much larger question of whom should the government subsidise – the poor and the marginalised who are struggling to make both ends meet, or, the super rich, so that they may enter the world’s list of billionaires? Even if the government’s argument that it had chosen not to collect this Rs 1.76 lakh crores is accepted for a moment, consider what such an amount of money could have done to improve the quality of life of our people. If this revenue was collected, then it could have been possible to provide 35 kg of food-grain at Rs 2 a kg to every single family (including APL) for two full years. This possibility of providing food security to our people has been forsaken. Look at it in a different way. This amount of money would have enabled the country to translate the constitutional right of education into a reality. With the construction of new school buildings, appointment of teachers, creating facilities for mid-day meal and providing uniforms and textbooks to students over five years, every single child in the age group of 6 to 14 years would have been in school.

This UPA-II government has chosen to not provide food security or education for all, instead it has chosen to provide super profits to the rich with its own share of the kitty. This is both material and moral corruption. Concessions to the needy are called `subsidies’ which are described as `bad’ for the economy, while concessions to the rich are called `incentives’ that are `necessary’ for the health of the economy!

Strangely, the prime minister had said that at the time of the cabinet formation of the UPA-II government, Mr. Raja was reappointed as the telecom minister because none of these facts relating to the 2G scam were known. These columns had reported that since the allocation of 2G licenses the concerned issues were brought into public domain. The CPI (M) parliament leaders had written to the prime minister pointing out these very irregularities as early as in February 2008. These have now been officially corroborated. However, at the time of the government formation of UPA-II, these issues were in public domain. Yet Mr Raja was sworn in.

It can only be hoped, now that the PM has compared himself with Caesar’s wife, the JPC would be constituted and the parliament allowed to function smoothly in the forthcoming budget session.

On the price front, the PM took refuge behind the fact that since the budget is due soon, he cannot make any policy pronouncements. Worse, he said that since India is now an open economy, there is little scope for the government to take effective measures. He, therefore, refused to give any assurance on prohibiting speculative trading in essential commodities or universalising the public distribution system. Neither of these are connected with the budgetary exercise. Yet, the PM chose not to make any reference to these issues.

Clearly, on both the issues of corruption and price rise, the prime minister has failed to give any confidence or assurance to the vast mass of the aam admi.

The prime minister, however, gave an indication that major economic reforms are round the corner, in response to a question that pointed out that the flow of foreign capital sharply declined by 31 per cent during the course of last year. This means that the reforms of financial liberalisation which the Left parties had prevented during UPA-I, like increasing the FDI cap in the insurance sector, banking reforms for further privatisation, full convertibility of the rupee and the privatisation of pension funds are in the pipeline. Thus, the strength of the Indian economy that helped us in resisting the disastrous impact of the global recession will now be weakened. This will spell doom to crores of Indian people while providing larger access to super profits to foreign and domestic capital.

(February 16, 2011)

Source: www.pd.cpim.org/

GUJARAT 2002: PUNISH THE GUILTY

From A Commentator

“The facts mentioned in this report clearly establish that chief minister Shri Narendra Modi is the chief Author and Architect of all that happened in Gujarat after the arson of February 27, 2002. It is amply clear from all the evidence placed before the Tribunal that what began in Godhra, could have, given the political will, been controlled promptly at Godhra itself. Instead, the state government under chief minister Shri Narendra Modi took an active part in leading and sponsoring the violence against minorities all over Gujarat. His words and actions throughout the developments in Gujarat show that he has been openly defying the Constitution and indulging in actions which are positively detrimental to the interests of the country.

….Shri Modi was the one who took Godhra to the rest of Gujarat. He was the one who directed the police and the administration not to act. He was the one who refused to help the likes of former member of parliament, Shri Ahsan Jafri and the large number of people in Shri Jafri ’s home, who were all butchered later on.

….He refused shelter and succour to the victims of the carnage.

….He refused, and continues to refuse, basic human amenities and was using coercion and other tactics to wind up refugee relief camps.

….He has refused to buy land and rehabilitate persons in new locations or to give transparent accounts of the Rs 150 crore rehabilitation package announced by Prime Minister Shri Atal Behari Vajpayee during his visit to the state on April 4, 2002. He has no remorse for the rapes, the butcherings, the loss of properties, the agony of displacement and the acute insecurity and lack of belonging felt by large numbers of the people of Gujarat.

…..As late as September 3, 2002, the international working president of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Shri Ashok Singhal made a shocking statement that received wide publicity, in which he described Gujarat as a "successful experiment" and warned that it would be repeated all over India. Shri Singhal further stated that the success of the Gujarat experiment lay in the fact that entire villages were "purged" of Islam and Muslims. This outrageous and pathetic statement was not only anti-constitutional but also in violation of the law itself, for which he could be prosecuted. But Shri Modi, by not expressing any outrage at Shri Singhal’s remarks, and by indulging in blatant minority-bashing himself, appears to have accepted Shri Singhal’s warning that whatever happened in Gujarat was an experiment, a precursor of things to come in the rest of the country. He has made no secret of his hatred for the minorities, and his utterances from time to time keep emphasising that he is still an RSS pracharak (propagator) with a hostile attitude. His role as CM is nothing short of an extension of his functioning as an RSS pracharak.”

---Report of the Concerned Citizens Tribunal, Crimes Against Humanity—Gujarat 2002 released on November 21-22 2002.

Justices VR Krishna Iyer, PB Sawant, Hosbet Suresh and Others.

EIGHT years and three months after the report of the independent Concerned Citizens Tribunal (CCT) that indicted chief minister Narendra Modi directly, two reports in the Tehelka magazine (12 and 19 February 2011) that revealed the report of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) on the Zakia Ahsan Jafri and Citizens for Justice and Peace Complaint, the revelations have vindicated the CCT Report and the consistent stand of victim survivors and legal rights groups of the well planned conspiracy behind the genocidal carnage of 2002. More than anything else, the revelations are a vindication of the prayers carefully laid out in SLP 1088/2008 -- Zakia Ahsan Jafri & CJP's praying for an FIR against Modi and transfer of investigation to the independent agency.

Critical to the CCT Report was the testimony of a minister in Modi’s cabinet, Haren Pandya recorded about two and a half months after the riots, on 13 May 2002. Pandya had deposed before two retired judges — Justice PB Sawant and Justice Hosbert Suresh — and admitted that ‘he had attended a meeting on 27 February 2002 night at the residence of Modi in which the latter had made it clear that should there be a backlash from the Hindus the police should not come in their way.’ Pandya was ostracised from the ruling BJP, denied a ticket in the December 2002 state assembly elections and murdered mysteriously a few months later.

MODI'S CRIMINAL CULPABILITY

The backbone of the Zakia Ahsan Jafri and CJP’s 119-page complaint first sent to the DGP Gujarat on 8.6.2006 was the detailed findings of the CCT Report that analysed critical aspects o constitutional misgovernance in the state of Gujarat. This breakdown of Constitutional Governance included influencing the entire police and administrative machinery into inaction and complicity, subverting justice by non recording of the first information records accurately, not arraigning powerful accused, appointing special public prosecutors with ideological leanings against the Indian Constitution (members of the RSS and VHP) and displaying of a criminal and communal mindset at the very top.

Both Justices Sawant and Suresh have also testified before the SIT confirming Pandya’s deposition before them, implicating Modi. Now, the latest Tehelka revelation states that Bhatt’s version of events coupled with the existing evidence pointed towards a strong possibility that on the night of 27 February, Modi had convened two meetings — one administrative and the second political — and on one hand gave VHP and BJP leaders a fatal signal to mobilise riotous mobs and on the other hand instructed the police machinery to turn a blind eye.

When Sanjeev Bhatt was summoned by the SIT in January 2010, he deposed for two days before them.

The SIT team had also reported that the most serious allegation against Modi — his alleged instruction to senior administrative and police officials that Hindus should be allowed to vent their anger — could not be substantiated. Inquiry officer Malhotra reported that such a meeting had indeed been held on 27 February, but none of the officers present, save Sanjeev Bhatt, would testify about what had transpired at the meeting. (Curiously, two claimed amnesia; four denied Modi had made such a statement; one denied he had been part of the meeting.) Malhotra also noted that most of these officers did not seem to be speaking their minds, either because they had been rewarded by the Modi government with choice postings, or because they were still in its service and feared the fall-out. However in explosive detail that can have far reaching consequences, on Page 149 of the SIT report, AK Malhotra of SIT has also noted that “Sanjeev Bhatt, the then DC (Int), has claimed off-the-record that the CM did utter these words.” In March 2010, when asked by SIT inquiry officer AK Malhotra about who was present at this meeting, Modi named seven bureaucrats and officers. Then, he singled out one police officer: Sanjeev Bhatt, deputy commissioner of internal security in the State Intelligence Bureau (SIB) and tried to discredit him.. Malhotra had asked Modi who was present at the meeting, not who was absent. But curiously, after he had listed the names of those present, Modi volunteered this unnecessary and unprompted piece of information: Sanjeev Bhatt, DC (Int) was not at the meeting, he said, because it was a “high-level meeting”.

OTHER REVELATIONS

Now with the criminal culpability of the man at the helm being established, the other revelations about the SIT Report become significant. According to the Tehelka expose, the SIT report makes the following observations:

1. The report says, 'The chief minister had tried to water down the seriousness of the situation at Gulberg Society, Naroda Patiya and other places by saying that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.' (Page 69 of the report) The enquiry officer also notes: 'His (Modi) implied justification of the killings of innocent members of the minority community read together with an absence of a strong condemnation of the violence that followed Godhra suggest a partisan stance at a critical juncture when the state had been badly disturbed by communal violence.' (Page 153). The SIT report further comments that Modi's statements were sweeping and offensive coming as it did from a chief minister, that too at a critical time when Hindu-Muslim tempers were running high.' (Page 13 of the covering report)

Incidentally the Editor’s Guild Report of 2002, Rights and Wrongs had dealt with, in detail the fact that the chief minister in his official capacity had written congratulatory letters to Gujarati newspapers like the Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar that had inflamed crowds into violence. Such letters had not been sent to those newspapers that played an objective or salutary role.

2. The report says, in an extremely 'controversial' move Modi had placed two senior ministers – Ashok Bhatt and IK Jadeja, whose cell phone records showed that they were in touch with rioters – in the Ahmedabad city police control room and the Gujarat state police control room during the riots with 'no definite charter', fueling the speculation that they 'had been placed to interfere in police work and give wrongful decisions to the field officers.'

3. The report affirms that police officers who took a neutral stand during the riots and prevented massacres were transferred by the Gujarat government to insignificant postings in a highly 'questionable' manner (Pages 7-8 of the covering report)

4. The report says 'The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless communication of the period pertaining to the riots.' It also adds, 'No records, documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the government during the riots had been preserved.' (Page 3)

5. The report says Modi displayed a 'discriminatory attitude by not visiting the riot-affected areas in Ahmedabad where a large number of Muslims were killed, though he went to Godhra on the same day, travelling almost 300 kms on a single day.' (Page 67)

6. In a highly unethical move, the report confirms that the government appointed VHP and RSS-affiliated advocates as public prosecutors in sensitive riot cases. The report states: 'It appears that the political affiliation of the advocates did weigh with the government for the appointment of public prosecutors.' (Page 77)

7. According to the report, the Gujarat government did not take any steps to stop the illegal bandh called by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on 28.02.2002. On the contrary the BJP had also supported the bandh. (Page 69)

8. The SIT report also says that, in an inexplicable move, the police administration did not impose curfew in Naroda and Meghani Nagar (Ahmedabad city) until 12 and 2 pm respectively on 28.02.02. By then, the situation had severely deteriorated at both places.

9. The SIT discovered that the state police had carried out patently shoddy investigations in the Naroda Patia and Gulberg Society massacre cases and deliberately overlooked the cell phone records of sangh parivar members and BJP leaders involved in the riots.

10. The SIT has also found evidence against the then minister of state for home Gordhan Zadafia (who was reporting directly to Modi) and top cops like MK Tandon and PB Gondia for his complicity in the riots. (Page 168, 169). The content of the report which has found Modi guilty on over a dozen counts is shocking and will come as a serious blow to the carefully cultivated image of Modi as an able administrator and man of governance.

In its concluding observations the very same SIT that has made these startling findings has concluded there is no ground for furthering legal investigations into Modi and others. This then is the greatest challenge before the three judge bench – D K Jain, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam – which will convene on March 3 and decide the future course of action. On 20 January 2011 the newly appointed amicus curiae Raju Ramchandran has already submitted a confidential note suggesting further action. The SIT has in its report to the SC in the past stated that it will be criminally prosecuting former minister of state for home Govardhan Zadaphiya and Joint Commissioner of Police MK Tandon and DCP PB Gondia. The SIT will also answer serious issues on non examination of documentary evidence like phone call records of the chief minister, other politicians and policemen and administrators. The moot question is why the high powered SIT, in such a high profile investigation, has failed to prosecute any person for the destruction of records and subversion of evidence. When destruction of records in financial scams can be the stuff of which newspaper headlines are made, one wonders at the media culpability and silence at the systematic destruction of evidence by Modi as home minister when a State sponsored genocidal carnage of 2,500 innocent members of the minority community took place.

P.S: The day after the Tehelka expose, Rahul Sharma (IPS) Gujarat, a serving officer responsible for first saving the lives of 400 Muslim children in a Madrassa in Bhavnagar and then for placing the mobile phone records of the Ahmedabad Crime Branch in the public domain, has been served with a show cause notice by the Gujarat government. Is it a sign of panic or vindictiveness of the Gujarat government?

Source: www.pd.cpim.org/

HYDERABAD: WHEN THE STATE TURNED INTO A BARBARIAN

N S Arjun

AROUND 450 families living in Hyderabad, mostly tribals, dalits and most backward classes who migrated from the adjoining districts in search of livelihood, are undergoing a painful experience in the aftermath of the barbarian actions of the State machinery. With their meagre shelters flattened by tens of bulldozers and all their “assets” and hopes crushed in the pre-dawn swoop on February 14, these daily wage earners have been living on the roads – the women, the old, the infants and all. Those who desperately tried to resist the eviction were brutally caned by the massive police force mobilised for the demolition job.

These 450 families have been living in the 4.1 acre vacant government lands in Singareni colony of Saidabad area since around 15 years. A private society claims that it bought the land from the government some 25 years ago and sought eviction of these families and restoration of the land. In the long process of litigation, the court has ruled in favour of the society but asked the government to follow “due process” before evicting these families. Armed with the court order, the government tried to evict these poor families on November 27, 2010 itself. But the huge forces mobilised for this purpose had to beat a hasty retreat following the death of a hut dweller due to heart attack after seeing the force. They decided to come back another day.

Come back they did, and this time with a barbaric plan to evict these families. The elementary norm of giving an eviction notice was dispensed with in order to prevent organised resistance. Even as the hut dwellers and those in pucca single room constructed houses were sleeping after a hard day's labour, the municipal authorities, the district administration and the police launched a blitzkrieg at 5 in the morning. They cut the power supply and moved in with JCBs and bulldozers. The police started dragging the inmates from the huts and dwellings, beating them up and throwing out few of their belongings. Even as the inmates were gathering their wits, the bulldozers crushed whatever hard-earned “assets” remained in the dwellings. Giri, an 18 year old Vaddera caste boy, showed the crushed plastic bucket and other things, with tears in his eyes. Children's books and clothes were strewn around crushed beyond utility.

The barbarity was just unfolding. The demolition mob decided that the best way to get rid of plastic sheet covered huts was to burn them, and a few plain clothes among them set fire to the huts. Later, they had the gall to report to the media that the hut dwellers themselves set fire to their huts in order to prevent their eviction! As the youth and others tried to resist this brutality, they were targeted and beaten mercilessly. Ramesh, a 23 year old lambada tribal from Mahbubnagar district, is an auto driver living in one of the huts. Seeing the barbarity, he tried to stop the police from beating up the youth. He was dragged away by the police into a vacant compound and beaten black and blue. Showing his wounds, Ramesh says that not only is he living on the road, now he cannot even drive his auto to earn his daily bread. Parveena Sultana presents one of the many poignant scenes in the fallout of this barbarity. This 30 year old Muslim woman was discharged from a hospital on 13 February after a major neck surgery. Even she was not spared in the war launched against these aam admi by the Congress state government. She is lying exposed to all the dust and debris post demolition.

The farce of providing of alternative accommodation to the evicted became apparent when they were taken to the site of relocation, Nandanavanam in Ranga Reddy district. The local people there, led by the Congress MLA, declined to let them into the land, saying they need that for construction of a college in the future. That was the level of preparation by the Hyderabad district administration. That all talk of alternative accommodation was just to fool the hut dwellers became clear when the joint collector, Smitha Sabharwal, said post demolition that they had not given any assurance of providing temporary accommodation. She however assured the evicted that in six to eight months time, the construction of permanent shelters for them in Nandanavanam would begin! Would the joint collector madam understand what it takes to live on the roads with kids and parents while scouting for a daily wage? If she knew, she wouldn't have led this barbaric operation against the poor. This attitude of the administration against the poor is in stark contrast to that when dealing with the rich and corrupt. Thousands of acres of prime land in Hyderabad and Ranga Reddy districts worth thousands of crores of rupees has been gifted away at paltry sums to the industrialists-politician-bureaucrat lobbies. But when it comes to providing 30 square yards of land for the poor, an entire military style operation is planned to thwart it. The so-called aam admi governments would be living in fools paradise if they think the poor cant see through this contrast. They only need to visit Singareni colony to see the rage of the aam admi.

CPI (M) STANDS IN DEFENCE OF THE POOR

Immediately after hearing the news of demolition of huts in Singareni colony, CPI (M) Central Committee member P Madhu and other city leaders rushed to the site to prevent the action. The police took them into custody at the entrance to the site itself. Later, CPI (M) Polit Bureau member and state secretary B V Raghavulu rushed to the site and met the evicted. He consoled them but more than that he gave confidence to them that this can be fought back. He unfurled the Red flag on the ruins of the CPI (M) local office in the locality that was first demolished by the administration. Raghavulu told the assembled poor that this hoisting of Red flag symbolised the resolve to resist the eviction. Raghavulu toured the entire area and saw first hand the brutalities inflicted on the poor.

Later, addressing the poor he asked the government whether it considers that the poor have a right to live or not. How can they be so cruel to the most vulnerable sections of our society, he questioned. He demanded that the government should pay compensation to the evicted for damaging their houses and household articles. He told the evicted people to remain in the same land until the government gave alternative constructed houses. Later, leaders of other opposition parties started visiting the place and assuring the evictees of justice to them. However, the local corporator belonging to TDP and the MLA belonging to MIM are yet to be seen anywhere near.

Source: www.pd.cpim.org/

J&K: CPI (M) WANTS INDO-PAK TALKS RESUMPTION

THROUGH a statement issued its secretary M Y Tarigami from Srinagar on February 11, the Jammu & Kashmir state unit of the CPI (M) has welcomed the agreement between India and Pakistan for resumption of the stalled dialogue process and urged upon the leadership of both the countries to re-initiate the process which unfortunately got derailed following the 26/11 Mumbai attacks.

The statement said the CPI (M) firmly believes that the dialogue is the only option to seek solutions to the outstanding problems including Kashmir. Terror can be defeated only if the peace process is strengthened. The people of Jammu and Kashmir, along with the people of the whole region, expect that the decision taken in the meeting of the foreign secretaries of the two countries at Thimphu would open new opportunities for reconciliation and peace in the region.

Source: www.pd.cpim.org/