|
|
From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 5,
Issue 11, Dated Mar 22, 2008
The War Against ‘Sympathy’
The recent arrests of five
journalist-activists show the State’s
increasing hostility towards worldviews
that empathise with the extreme Left,
reports
SHOBHITA NAITHANI :
ON
DECEMBER 20, 2007, while addressing a chief
ministers’ conference on internal security,
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
made a dramatic remark: “They (Naxalites)
are targeting vital economic
infrastructure so as to cripple
transport and logistic capabilities and
also slow down any development activity…
They have also got involved in local
struggles relating to land and other
rights. I have said in the past that
Leftwing extremism is probably the
single biggest security challenge to the
Indian State. It continues to be so and
we cannot rest in peace until we have
eliminated this virus.” He went on to
assure states of greater investment in
the police forces “to cripple the hold
of Naxalite forces.”
The PM’s statement came in the wake of
an ongoing crackdown by police in
various states on anyone who remotely
resembles a ‘sympathiser’ of
extreme-Left ideology. The tools: the
1967 Unlawful Activities (Prevention)
Act, the Chhattisgarh Special Public
Security Act 2005 and the Andhra Pradesh
Public Security Act, 1992 — laws that
allow the government to arrest virtually
anyone with political leanings or
associations it does not approve of, and
thus threaten the fundamental rights
guaranteed to citizens by the
constitution.
Govindan Kutty, Prafull Jha, Pittala
Srisailam and Lachit Bordoloi — all of
them journalists (or ‘former
journalists’ as some would correct) and
human rights activists who were arrested
on charges of being Naxals or “sympathisers”,
with the exception of Bordoloi, who has
been charged with having links with the
ULFA. This spate of arrests indicates a
disturbing pattern. In most of the cases
there is no charge of violence or any
actual crime committed. There is merely
empathy, tenuous links with extremist
groups, or the accusation of such links.
These arrests therefore reveal the
government’s growing intolerance of
people who hold political beliefs that
are not statist and go against the new
economic polices pursued by the
government.
This, in brief, are the case histories
and the story of the arrests so far.
PRASHANT RAHI
A 48-year old human rights
activist and former Uttarakhand
correspondent of The
Statesman, Prashant Rahi
was arrested on December 22,
2007 from the
forest
in Hanspur Khatta in Uttarakhand.
Charged that he is a Zonal
Commander of the banned CPI
(Maoist) group, Rahi has been
implicated under various
sections of the Indian Penal
Code and the Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act. When asked
about it, PVK Prasad, SSP,
Rudrapur, said: “You go speak to
him in jail. I am not supposed
to discuss the activities he is
involved in.” Rahi’s daughter,
Shikha Rahi, who works and lives in
Mumbai, however, tells you what
her father told her when she met
him at Nanak Matta Police
Station in Uddham Singh Nagar
district on December 25, 2007.
“He was arrested on December 17,
2007 in Dehradun. The next day
he was taken to Haridwar, where
they hit him and threatened to
pump kerosene into his anus.
They also told him that they
would force him to rape me in
their presence. It was only on
December 22, 2007 that they made
his arrest records.”
“Rahi’s arrest is perfectly
timed with the PM’s statement
that the Maoist insurgency is
the single largest threat in the
country and the state Chief
Minister subsequently demanding
Rs 208 crore from the Centre for
modernisation of the police
forces,” says Hardip, a
freelance journalist and former
colleague. Ashok Mishra, another
former colleague and the editor
of Garhwal Post, feels
Rahi is being persecuted because
of his beliefs. “He has a
Leftist ideology and was
involved in various people’s
movements like the one for the
creation of the new state, and
the agitation against Tehri Dam.
They picked him up because he
was mobilising people against
the land, liquor and builder
mafia in Uddham Singh Nagar that
works in tandem with the police.
I am only happy that the police
didn’t plant an AK-47 on him and
kill him in a fake encounter.”
PRAFULL JHA
Prafull Jha, in the words of
Rajendra Sail, the president of
PUCL in Chhattisgarh, is “one of
the top 10 anthropologists in
Chhattisgarh and a journalist
whose analysis has been used by
national TV channels many a
time.” The 60-yearold former
bureau chief of Dainik
Bhaskar was arrested on
January 22, 2008 for his alleged
links to a cache of arms seized
by the police in Raipur. “He and
his sons were given money by the
Naxals to buy cars to transport
their leaders and ply weapons.
He was also translating their
internal literature into Hindi,”
says Chhattisgarh DGP Vishwa
Ranjan Jha, adding, “Please
don’t call him a journalist.”
Sunil Kumar, editor, Daily
Chhattisgarh, picks up from
where the DGP let off. “His case
has nothing to do with the media
and the suppression of freedom
of expression. He was an active
and a paid worker of the Naxals.”
Kumar says Jha was thrown out of
a publication he earlier worked
with on charges of embezzling
money. Sail however thinks that
the arrests, whether of Dr.
Binayak Sen or Jha, are
calculated to silence voices
that spoke out against official
policies. “It is my belief that
Jha is not a Naxal. It would be
improper to say he is not a
journalist,” he affirms.
GOVINDAN KUTTY
On
December 19, 2007, the Kerala
police picked up Govindan Kutty,
the 68-year-old firebrand editor
of People’s March, for
his alleged connection with the
banned CPI (Maoist) group.
Charged under the 1967 Unlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act
among others, he was released on
bail on February 24, 2008. On
returning, Kutty found an order
of the District Magistrate of
Ernakulam pasted outside his
house. It said that the
registration of People’s
March was cancelled as it
contained materials that are
“seditious in nature, bringing
about contempt and disaffection
against the Government of India
by projecting ideologies and
activities of CPI (Maoist).”
But why now, seven years after
it started publication? “The
articles go against the spirit
of the Indian state. Police say
they wanted to ban the magazine
earlier, but attention was paid
to it only after the arrest of
Kutty,” says District Collector,
Ernakulam, APM Mohammed Hanish.
Kutty meanwhile feels it has
become easy for the police to
brand those who oppose
government policy as Maoists,
and audaciously admits that one
is free to call him a Maoist if
supporting the ideology makes
him one. “There is violence
everywhere. Corruption is
violence, prostitution is
violence, not paying minimum
wage is violence, child labour
is violence, caste
discrimination is violence,” he
says, adding, “I am a
law-abiding citizen.”
PITTALA SRISAILAM
Pittala Srisailam, the
35-year-old editor of online
television Musi TV and
co-convener of Telangana
Journalists Forum (TJF) was
arrested according to him on
December
4, 2007, but according to the
police (as reported in the
papers) on December 5 in the
Prakasam district of Andhra
Pradesh on the pretext of acting
as a ‘courier’ of the Maoists.
“I had gone to interview a
Maoist leader and they slapped
false charges on me (Andhra
Pradesh Public Security Act,
1992 for abetting and helping
the banned CPI (Maoist)),” says
Srisailam, who was released on
December 13. Both Musi TV and
TJF support the idea of a
separate statehood for
Telangana. His colleague and
convener of TJF, Allam Narayana
sees this as a conspiracy by the
government to silence those
opposing the government. “After
Srisailam’s arrest, the
government implicated the TJF of
having links with the Maoists.
But we are journalists and know
our limitations. Our only goal
is Telangana and we will achieve
it through a parliamentary
system.” Srisailam explains that
it’s not unusual for journalists
or activists working with the
poor and marginalised in the
hinterland to encounter, or even
interact with Maoists at some
point. “But that doesn’t make
them Maoists,” he clarifies.
LACHIT BORDOLOI
A human rights activist and
freelance journalist, who is
actively involved in mediation
between the government and the
United Liberation Front of Asom
(ULFA), Lachit Bordoloi was
arrested on January 11, 2008
from Moranhat in Assam’s
Dibrugarh district. He was
charged with links to ULFA’s
alleged plan to hijack an aircraft
from Guwahati airport; to the
recovery of arms and ammunition
seized by the police in Assam’s
Rangia town in 2007; and fund
collection for ULFA. When asked
about the charges, Guwahati SSP
VK Ramisetti said, “In the
hijack case, we got a statement
from an apprehended ULFA
militant in which he implicated
himself and Bordoloi.”
The police’s claim is dismissed
outright by Bubumoni Goswami,
chairman of human rights body
Manab Adhikar Sangram Samiti
(MASS), of which Bordoloi is
secretary general. “Some
officials in the government and
the police don’t want the ULFA
problem to be solved. The Centre
has always allocated a huge fund
to tackle rebel activity in the
state. If the situation
continues, they will continue to
benefit,” he points out.
Bordoloi’s lawyer, Bijan Mahajan
trashes the allegation of his
client’s involvement in the
Rangia case. “The investigating
agencies should have picked him
up immediately if it was true,
but they didn’t. It is simply
pick and choose politics that
the State is indulging in,” says
Mahajan.
The timing of the five arrests and the
nature in which they were carried out
indicates the government’s growing
impatience with what the prime minister
called “the single biggest security
challenge to the Indian State.” The
facts bear this out. Under the 11th Five
Year Plan, an outlay of Rs.2500 crore
has been approved to tackle internal
security threats and beef up the Central
and state security apparatus, which is
nearly four times more than the
allocations during the 10th Five Year
Plan. Under the revamped Police
Modernisation scheme, from 2005 onwards
76 districts affected by Naxalism will
be provided Rs 2 crore each every year
(for the first five years) for
strengthening basic police
infrastructure.
The government’s treatment of Naxalism
purely as a law and order problem, while
ignoring its socio-economic roots, has
often come under sharp criticism. “The
government is targeting all Left-wing
activists who are exposing the
government’s policies towards Maoists
and Naxals or those who are involved in
movements resisting the government’s
land grabbing activities,” says civil
liberties lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who
practices in the Supreme Court.
“Targeting peaceful activists will only
fuel Naxalism in the country because it
will force them to go underground and
eventually join the Maoists,” he adds.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 5,
Issue 11, Dated Mar 22, 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
click here for a story in
'The Sunday Indian' 6th April '08
issue
click here for a story in
'Combat Law' March
- April '08
issue
click here for Shikha's
appeal in
'Combat Law'
click here for a story in DNA India,
27th May '08
|