Arundhati Roy
KOLKATA: Accusing the Centre of waging war against the “poorest people,” under the pretext of fighting Maoists in the mining belt, with the purpose of creating a “good investment climate,” author and social rights activist Arundhati Roy on Wednesday said creation of an atmosphere conductive to negotiations between the government and left-wing extremists was the only way out of the ongoing violence in the red corridor of India.
Addressing a press conference here, Ms. Roy said: “Let the State governments make public the terms of the hundreds of memorandums of understanding signed with corporate houses, rehabilitate the thousands of people displaced by the violence perpetrated by the security forces and the Salwa Judum [state-backed vigilantes in Chhattisgarh] and also restore a sense of confidence among the tribal population about their positive intentions. That is the only way out.”
Reacting angrily to questions why she did not condemn Maoists for the April 6 massacre of 76 CRPF jawans in Dantewada in Chhattisgarh, she said the “condemnation industry is a hollow and cynical industry where people do not care about the people killed.”
Claiming that most people were living under an “undeclared emergency,” Ms. Roy said: “I feel that every single death, whether that of a police or Maoist or an Adivasi, is a terrible tragedy. The system of violence imposed on us in the structural process is increasingly becoming a war between the rich and the poor. I condemn the system of militarisation of people that sets the poor against the poor.”
Though she admitted that several Maoist crimes could not be justified and deprivation did not validate violence, Ms. Roy said ‘violence of resistance' could not be condemned when hundreds of Central forces cordon off tribal villages — killing and raping people with impunity.
Saying she did not have the skills for mediating between the Centre and the rebels, Ms. Roy added that her message to the Maoists was they should not dominate the cause of the tribal population for motives of their own in the future.
That 99.9 per cent of the Maoists were tribal people was “a coincidence of political aims,” she said.
The practice of both the tribal population and Maoist ideologues using each other had its roots in their loss of faith in institutional democracy.
Asked whether the blowing up of schools by the Maoists, on the pretext that the security forces could use them as camps, could be justified, Ms. Roy said: “Wherever there is a guerrilla warfare going on, schools are used as barracks. Those schools were not functioning anyway as teachers did not attend. The Maoists, however, welcome the teachers.”
We deify women, yet we treat them as doormat!
DR. SHAH ALAM KHAN
Why do we have to plunder a Lakshmi in the name of dowry? Why can't we give justice to the Durgas of this land?
I am a man because I have the right and power to molest a teenager and abet her to commit suicide. I am a man because I have the courage to throw acid on any girl who refuses to marry me. I am a man because I have the audacity of ripping apart the modesty of the girl next door. Finally, I am a man because I was born in India, the land which gives unconditional supremacy to its masculine gender, right from the inception of life. In fact, I was allowed to be born because I was a man! India is not short of such men of substance.
Dismal sex ratio
The events of the past few years and months have heated up the urban debate on sexual chauvinism in this country; as if sexual chauvinism never existed in India. With a female sex ratio of 865 to every 1000 males in the cosmopolitan and modern Delhi (in 2001), we can only imagine how hideous things are in the rural heart of India. Rape, molestation, dowry deaths — can you imagine any single day when you had picked up a newspaper and hadn't come across this ugly jargon? What do we mean when we say that Goa has become dangerous for women? The truth is that it was never safe.
As a doctor, I am horrified by parents deliberately forgetting to count female siblings when asked, ‘how many children do you have?' Apathy to the birth of a baby girl in India is well known. I can recall all those sad faces waiting outside the labour ward, when told that their “daughter” has given birth to a “daughter.” It is usually left to an experienced hospital ayah to break the news, “ bechari key larhki hui hai” (the poor lady has given birth to a baby girl). I think we are the only nation on the face of earth where a mother becomes miserable on giving birth to a baby girl!
From womb to tomb
The fight for survival for the Indian female starts in the womb. If she is lucky to be born, she becomes ready meat for men of substance in power — prominent politicians or their siblings or even senior police officers. I presume it is easy to molest a girl in India than to get a mobile phone connection. We worship Durga, we revere Sita, but we fail in the fundamental duty of sexual equivalence. Male dominance in India is a natural occurrence of birth. Indian society should share this collective blame.
Why do we sacrifice mothers, daughters and sisters for fathers, sons and brothers? Why do we have to plunder a Lakshmi in the name of dowry? Why do we deprive our Saraswatis of basic education? Why can't we give justice to the Durgas of this land? Things can change only if we change. Female upliftment is a sine qua non for social progress. Civil society needs to understand the dynamics of sexual equivalence. Horrible crimes against women can be prevented only if we start loving our daughters and treating them on a par with our sons.
(The writer is Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, AIIMS, New Delhi.
— FILE PHOTO: A.M. FARUQUI
RALLY BY THE DAM-AFFECTED PEOPLE: In a climate where environmental and human rights issues are increasingly being sacrificed at the altar of ‘development,' the Narmada Bachao Andolan has been persevering untiringly with its struggle for decades.
The Second Interim Report of the Experts' Committee set up by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) of the Government of India to assess the planning and implementation of environmental safeguards with respect to the Sardar Sarovar (SSP) and Indira Sagar projects (ISP) on the Narmada River is a clear finding, by a government committee, of the egregious failure of the government machinery on virtually all the aspects studied.
The report covers the status of compliances on catchment area treatment (CAT), flora and fauna and carrying capacity upstream, command area development (CAD), compensatory afforestation and human health aspects in project impact areas. (The scope of the committee did not include the issues of displacement and rehabilitation or hydro-meteorological issues, which were dealt with by other groups.) The report is a severe indictment of the governments of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra and of the bodies set up by these governments to implement the projects for the ‘integrated development' of the Narmada Valley. Peppered with phrases like ‘gross violation', ‘negligence', ‘highly unsatisfactory,' ‘inadequate,' ‘serious lapse' and ‘non compliance' it states in strong and unequivocal terms that with respect to virtually all of the aspects under consideration compliance is either highly inadequate or absent altogether (a partial exception being compensatory afforestation). Construction, on the other hand, has been proceeding apace: the ISP is complete and the SSP nearing completion. The report recommends that no further reservoir-filling be done at either SSP or ISP; that no further work be done on canal construction; and that even irrigation from the existing network be stopped forthwith until failures of compliance on the various environmental parameters have been fully remedied.
This is a major development. It must be seen against the backdrop of the protracted legal battle fought by the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) against the various lapses, failures and deficiencies in these projects. In a climate where environmental and human rights issues are increasingly being sacrificed at the altar of ‘development,' the NBA has been persevering untiringly with its struggle for decades. Those who have tended to become impatient with that struggle must now re-examine their thinking in the light of the present report.
The legal history of the NBA's petitions is a long one. We need not go into the High Courts' or the Supreme Court's earlier pronouncements, some of which affirmed the fact of lapses and inadequacies several years ago. What needs to be noted is that even the majority verdict of the Supreme Court in 2000, which rejected the NBA's petition and allowed the project to proceed, and was widely perceived as indicating a shift in judicial thinking in favour of ‘development' and against public interest litigation on environmental and displacement aspects, did reaffirm the importance of those aspects. While directing the government to ensure the speedy completion of the projects under consideration and taking the view that the existing machinery for environmental protection and relief and rehabilitation (R&R) must be presumed to be working properly unless proved otherwise, the SC made an important mandatory stipulation for the continuance of work, namely, that further progress would be subject to checks at every stage (every increase of 5 m in dam height) on the status of these measures. Subsequent litigation over the years has related largely to the issue of compliance with this condition.
The first interim report of the Expert Committee, dealing with the issue of backwater effects, rejected the project authorities' contention that on recalculation the backwater level of SSP was going to be much lower than earlier stated. That contention had been used to assert that gates and other proposed structures could be proceeded with without concern over any additional submergence over that relating to the approved level of 121.7 metres. The report showed this to be untrue. Now the second interim report comes up with a strong finding of non-compliance on virtually all environmental aspects. This is a clear vindication of the NBA's assertions over the years.
It is a matter of grave concern for more than one reason. One, this is not a non-official committee or a committee of environmental activists, but a government committee consisting almost entirely of technocrats, retired forest officials and the like; two, its findings point to a fundamental and near total violation of significant aspects of the Supreme Court's judgment; and three, the severe environmental damage documented in its pages is largely irreversible.
Even assuming that ‘development' can be pursued without any concern for the environment, and that some argument can be found to defend the flouting of a Supreme Court judgment, there are several other concerns that should worry the votaries of ‘large infrastructural development at all costs.' Untreated catchments can shorten the life of projects through siltation, thus altering their cost-benefit ratios; they can also bring about increased run-off and washing-off of soil nutrients with adverse consequences for the productivity of irrigated land (as also for the aquatic and river-bank species and fisheries); dam operations in such unstable catchments can lead (and have led, in at least one incident already here) to flash floods with tragic consequences; and so on. These are hard, practical and often economic consequences that can be noted by all and not only by ‘environmentalists'. One hopes that Indian society as a whole — citizens and government alike — will take at least these concerns seriously.
In the meanwhile, the SC, possibly not having yet been seized of the second environmental committee's report, has said that work on canals can start subject to the approval of the MoEF of the CAD plans submitted for the Omkareshwar Hydroelectric Project (OHP) and the ISP. However, since the report is itself in pursuance of court directives, the MoEF can and should halt all further work on the project, bringing this anomaly to the court's attention.
Where do we go from here? We cannot say, but many will be watching keenly to see how the government responds to the recommendations of its committee. We must hope that the response will not be such as to make us doubt the seriousness of its professions of concern for the environment.
India's polity has an unerring taste for the irrelevant. That is why the controversy over a sitting Chief Minister being summoned to answer questions about mass murder has made way for an unseemly debate about the morality of an ageing actor. After his embarrassing, nine-hour appearance before the Special Investigation Team, one would have thought Narendra Modi presented a large enough target. Instead, the Congress has chosen to launch a full-throated campaign against Amitabh Bachchan for choosing to become a brand ambassador for tourism in Mr. Modi's State. The party has accused the Bollywood superstar of being indifferent to allegations of State complicity in the massacre of Muslims which took place there in 2002. And it has started boycotting him in a manner that is as crude and mean-spirited as it is ineffective and pointless. Thanks to this, the mass media are today discussing Big B rather than the Little Men whose role the SIT is now investigating.
As can be expected, the Gujarat Chief Minister is thrilled. The spotlight which was earlier on him is now being trained elsewhere. Instead of being forced to rally others to his own defence, Mr. Modi has happily mounted the barricades on behalf of Mr. Bachchan. In keeping with his party's fondness for technology and Islamophobia, he has blogged that the actor's critics are ‘Talibans of untouchability'.
If Mr. Bachchan is guilty of overlooking mass violence today, it is because equally illustrious gentlemen, including some industrialists, did the same when they declared Mr. Modi prime ministerial material. For that matter, the actor himself has done this sort of thing before. In his movies, Mr. Bachchan was a crusader for the underdog. In real life, he is attracted to the kind of powerful men he once fought on the big screen. His fans have a right to feel cheated. Political parties, especially the Congress, do not have that right.
The party finds fault with him for representing Gujarat in the wake of 2002. But in 1984, barely weeks after the blood in the streets of Delhi had dried, the actor accepted a Congress ticket for Allahabad and got elected to Parliament. “As a brand ambassador does he endorse or condemn the mass murder in Gujarat?” Congress spokesperson Manish Tiwari asked the other day, adding: “It is high time Amitabh Bachchan came out and said what his position on [the] Gujarat riots is.” Despite the party having ‘apologised' for its role in the massacre of Sikhs following Indira Gandhi's assassination, I doubt Mr. Tiwari or any other Congress spokesman will ever ask Mr. Bachchan what his position on the Delhi riots was or is.
But if the Congress prefers to forget the history of 1984, the BJP and its leaders act as if history ended that year. In their telling, 2002 either didn't happen or pales in comparison with what preceded it. And so begins the sordid exercise of weighing the suffering of victims and, worse, of playing the plight of one set against another. Mention the suffering of the Muslims of Gujarat and the BJP will start talking about the plight of the Pandits, driven by terrorism from their homes in the Kashmir Valley in 1989 and 1990. Try talking about the injustice done to the Sikhs of Delhi and the Congress will insist on speaking only of Gujarat. And the minute the microphones in the studio are switched off, the politicians are quite happy to forget about the shared travails of all victims.
The reality is that the Delhi and Gujarat massacres are part of the same excavated site, an integral part of the archaeology of the Indian state. Eighteen years separate 2002 from 1984. Eighteen is normally the age a human being is considered to have become an adult. Inhumanity also seems to take 18 years to fully mature. In an act of conception which lasted four bloody days, something inhuman was spawned on the streets of Delhi in 1984; by 2002, it had fully matured. Paternity for the ‘riot system' belongs to both the Congress and the BJP, even if the sangh parivar managed to improve upon the technologies of mass violence. Both knew how to mobilise mobs. Both knew how to get the police to turn the other way. Both knew how to fix criminal cases. Both knew what language to speak, even if one set of leaders spoke of a ‘big tree falling' and the other paraphrased Newton. Both had the luxury of not being asked difficult questions by criminal investigators. Until now.
There is one school of thought that Mr. Modi's summons and interrogation have come eight years too late. There is a lot of merit in that point of view. But the reality is that the call for a leader to render account for mass crimes committed on his watch comes 18 years too late. Veteran journalist Tavleen Singh said recently that if Rajiv Gandhi had been interrogated in 1984 about what happened to the Sikhs, Gujarat would not have happened. She is right. Had the courts and the entire edifice of the Indian state not failed the victims of 1984, many, many politicians, police officers and officials would have gone behind bars. Had that happened then, every leader would have been forced to think a hundred times about the legal consequences of instigating mass violence or allowing mobs to go on the rampage.
The debates on Mr. Modi over the past two weeks have been so incredibly divisive because neither the Congress nor the BJP is interested in a discussion on systemic remedies. Justice is about punishing individuals, rehabilitating victims and dismantling the infrastructure of communal terrorism. But our biggest parties want nothing to do with any of that. Gujarat 2002 should go unpunished because Delhi 1984 never saw justice, says the BJP. ‘No SIT ever interrogated Rajiv Gandhi so why is Mr. Modi now being interrogated?' is the party's self-serving refrain. On its part, the Congress is unwilling to incorporate in the draft Communal Violence Bill clear-cut legal provisions that could deter politicians and policemen from again abusing their power as they did in 1984 and 2002.
One of the questions the SIT was expected to ask Mr. Modi during his interrogation on March 27 was what exactly he said when Ehsan Jaffrey called him up on February 28, 2002, asking for help. The question is important because soon after the former MP put down the telephone, he was killed by a mob along with 58 other innocent people. I have no idea whether that question was put to Mr. Modi, let alone what his answer was. But when the same question was put to Jai Narayan Vyas, official spokesman of Mr. Modi's government, in a televised debate a few days ago, the answer was atrocious. Ehsan Jaffrey had been a Congress MP, said Mr. Vyas. “So I demand to know what the Congress party did to help him.”
There was, of course, nothing the Congress could have done to save the doomed member then. The BJP was in power in both Gujarat and the Centre. But the party has a chance to do something now: Pass a law with real teeth. It's been more than a quarter-of-a-century since a big tree came crashing down upon us. It is time for the earth to stop shaking.
The Budget presented by the Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee is a flop and anti poor. Though the friendly business groups and the upper class of society is already hailing it in loud voice. The FM abolished the income tax for people earning up to Rs. 800,000 and where as increased the excise duty for petrol, diesel and cement. No viable measure was taken to reduce the inflation which is increasing and causing price hike of food and other product of daily necessities.
With food prices showing no signs of abating and the impact of the fuel price hike in the latest budget making its presence felt, inflation moved fast towards the double-digit mark, touching 9.89 per cent in February, the highest in 16 months. The wholesale price-based inflation stood at 8.56 per cent in January. This could well cross the double-digit mark in March, experts said.
Among food items, prices of sugar, pulses and potatoes increased by 55 per cent, 36 per cent and 30 per cent, respectively, in the 12 months ended February. The fuel price index shot up by over 10 per cent, mainly on account of higher prices of petrol and diesel. While petrol became dearer by 11.73 per cent, diesel prices increased 8.85 per cent.
Inflation for food items was at 17.70 per cent in February, while for manufacturing it was 7.42 per cent. Sugar prices rose by 55.47 per cent on yearly basis. The government only expecting food inflation to cool down in the months ahead as it expects the rabi (winter) crop to be much better. No measure has been taken so far against hoarders and speculators.
The FM pointed to the global economic crisis for his flop budget. This is nothing but an eye wash.
The global financial crisis is not the real cause of India's economic crisis as claimed by the FM. Indian economy is not so much export oriented in comparison to China. Because the volume of India's export is a small ratio of GDP.
The sub-prime loan default crisis in the U.S and its after effect is also not the cause of it. Indian banks unlike U.S are strictly regulated by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), and it is binding for them to hold reserves in the name of statutory liquidity ratio (SLR) and credit reserve ratio (CRR), and to purchase of government treasury bonds. In fact, except for HFDC Bank no bank in India collapsed or even made losses during this period. Whereas in U.S about 53 banks collapsed.
The financial crisis in the U.S. was officially acknowledged following the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the U.S. government-owned loan providers, followed by that of Lehman Brothers in September 2008. A liquidity crunch developed in the U.S. and later in Europe. Interest rates rose as liquidity froze and funds were in demand.
But India has a different reason for its economic debacle and the FM simply avoided to throw any light on this.
The Indian economy had a setback not because of any financial contagion spreading from the U.S., or because of the interdependent global trade system, but because of the perfidious financial derivative called Participatory Notes (Pns).(Participatory Notes mean Financial instruments used by investors or hedge funds that are not registered with the Securities and Exchange Board of India to invest in Indian securities. Indian-based brokerages buy India-based securities and then issue participatory notes to foreign investors. Any dividends or capital gains collected from the underlying securities go back to the investors.) In many ways, this is similar to an informal ADR process, where brokerages hold on to stocks for foreign investors. However, Indian regulators are not very happy about participatory notes because they have no way to know who owns the underlying securities. Regulators fear that hedge funds acting through participatory notes will cause economic volatility in India's exchanges. Exactly that is what had happened.
“Its effects have been compounded by an anti-national agreement with Mauritius to permit even companies with a paid-up capital of $1 incorporated in that country to invest in Indian stock markets and not be subjected to capital gain tax.
The PNs, which were “hot money,” were then just shipped out of India without any hindrance — to the tune $60 billion — in October 2008-January 2009, causing a stock market crash in India that was symbolized by a steep fall in the Sensex. It is this that caused the financial crisis in India and not the U.S. sub-prime loan defaults or exports drying up.”- S. Swamy, ex-commerce minister Janata govt- -The Hindu
Two previous Finance Ministers, Yashwant Sinha and P. Chidambaram, gave free access to PNs and caused siphoning of money. The present FM did not take any measure to nullify the PNs and scrapped the Mauritius agreement to insulate the Indian economy from the future crisis.
“ So the free flow of PN continues without accountability. Thus, billions of dollars of “hot” money enter every year into the Bombay Stock Exchange, and these are used to buy and sell shares with PNs almost in the manner of cash transactions. In fact, it is better because cash purchases of over Rs.10,000 have to be reported with details to the Income Tax Department. Moreover, since PNs came via Mauritius, the speculators did not have to pay capital gains tax. By September 2008, PNs accounted for 60 percent of the foreign institutional investor funds in the stock market, from near-zero level in 2003. Moreover, by a special order the Finance Ministry under Mr. Chidambaram had exempted PNs from the purview of the Securities and Exchange Board of India, the RBI, the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation. SEBI, headed then by M. Damodaran, protested and repeatedly wrote to the Ministry to permit it to require reporting of the buyer and the seller as also the source of funds as with any other stock market transaction. RBI Governor Y.V. Reddy kept warning of the dangers from PNs. But these were ignored.
The Tarapore Committee on Financial Reforms strongly condemned PNs and wanted the system scrapped. National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan made bold to warn the country that terrorists too were earning on the Indian stock market (obviously via anonymous PNs) to finance the killing of Indians, but he was silenced. Now he is a State Governor.”S. Swamy- The Hindu
Simultaneously the money pumped in by loosening bank credit norms, and printing currency notes, has gone into the hands of people who are now manipulating food prices through forward trading and hoarding. Naturally galloping inflation and increase in food prices are the result. The FM announced loudly about 7% growth in economy and forwarded lame excuses about 0.4% growth in agriculture. He also failed to mention that only 25%-30% people share the growth of economy where as according to govt. statistics 27%(30 crore) people are under poverty line. But considering World Bank criteria of poverty( 1$ per day) 70%( 80 crore) people are below poverty line.
The revenue budget is in a huge deficit which is covered by taking more loans from public sector banks. India is heading for a situation where loan repayments will exceed the new loans the government will take. At present the government pays back 96 paisa for every rupee for new loans. Public debt is now over 90 per cent of GDP and on an exploding trajectory.
The nature of capitalism itself and the associated theological devotion to free markets are clearly at the root of the problem, and so the solution, too, has to go beyond capitalist markets and profit motivation. It may be too much to expect those who have invested their lives, imagination and resources in this system to consider moving away from it, but the vast majority of people who are suffering under abject poverty cannot find solace with the philosophical jargon of capitalism. We need a system which will neutralize the power of the economic oligarchies and promote economic democracy.
Ac. Krtashivananda Avadhuta
INTRODUCTION
The Tata Group, a family-owned Indian multinational with 2005 revenues of Rs. 76,500 crores ($17.8 billion), has an unjustifiably good reputation. The corporation’s flagship company Tata Steel made its riches through large-scale takeover of tribal lands in Jharkhand and Orissa and opportunistic business deals with the British colonial powers and the East India Company.
Until the onset of liberalisation, Tatas remained the undisputed king of the license-raj, covering its trail of human rights, labour and environmental violations with liberal philanthropic give-aways. As the realities of operating in a globalised environment began sinking in within Tatas, more and more people, including its loyal employees, are beginning to understand that talks of nation-building and corporate social responsibility aside, Tata companies have no obligation to anybody but their own shareholders.
As the rap sheet below will corroborate, the corporate house’s reputation is a result of Tata’s successful public relations strategy rather than a reflection of reality.
HELPING KILLER CARBIDE
In December 1984, when the Government of India arrested Union Carbide Chairman Warren Anderson for his role in causing the Bhopal gas disaster, Mr. J.R.D. Tata was one of the few Indians to condemn the arrest. Decisions made by Anderson to save costs by eliminating safety systems and approving untested technology at the Bhopal factory were directly responsible for the disaster. Incidentally, significant sections of the Bhopal factory’s sewage and utilities were constructed by Tata Consulting Engineers.
In November 2006, Ratan Tata offered to bail out Union Carbide, and facilitate investments by Carbide’s new owner Dow Chemical, by leading a charitable effort to clean-up the toxic wastes abandoned by Carbide in Bhopal. At a time when the Government of India has held Dow Chemical liable for the clean-up and requested Rs. 100 crores from the American MNC, Tata’s offer of charity is aimed at frustrating legal efforts to hold the company liable. Also, admittedly, the offer is motivated by a desire to facilitate Dow’s investments in India. The company has restrained itself from major investments in India out of fear that the campaign for justice by Bhopal victims will derail plans and increase risks of any Dow venture in India.
BYPASSING DEMOCRACY
Dictating Indian Policy: In 2005, prompted by the corporate-friendly overtures of the Manmohan Singh Government and the Bush administration, business houses in the US and India set up the US-India CEO Forum comprising a select coterie of US and Indian CEOs. The forum has “a mandate to develop a road map for increased partnership and cooperation between the two countries at a business level.” Co-chaired by Ratan Tata, the Forum has made several recommendations to craft new laws, change existing laws and establish policy to make India more investor-friendly. The Forum is pushing for weaker labour laws, facilitation of Special Economic Zones, increased focus on post-graduate education, relaxing liability laws and expediting resolution of disputes especially following events such as the Bhopal disaster. The high-level consent that the Forum has from Indian and US Governments makes it a force parallel to the Indian parliament in law-making.
Holding on to Corporatocracy: Tatas own and operate the only private city in India. The steel city of Jamshedpur, which was founded by Jamsetji Tata in 1904, is one of few Indian cities that does not have a municipality or any local elected Government. Tata Steel-owned Jamshedpur Utilities and Services Company administers the entire town with population of nearly 600,000. The 74th Amendment to the Constitution of India devolves powers to locally elected urban bodies such as municipalities, and requires that all states enact laws to hold regular elections to such local bodies. Converting the Tata-controlled town to a democratically controlled municipality met with stiff resistance from Tata Steel who seemed to suggest that a benevolent rule, such as Tata Steel, was more desirable than a democratic set-up. Defending corporate rule over democracy, Tata Steel’s managing director B. Muthuraman is reported as saying “While you have one successful model which has been there for a hundred years, would you like to bring in some other model which however lofty may not yet have been tried.”
Business with Military Junta: The Myanmar military government which is shunned by the world for its blatant human rights violations has found a friend in India. At a time when several multinationals like PepsiCo have pulled out of Myanmar in a bid to pressure the military government to give way to democratic forces, Tata Motors is striking deals to supply the oppressive regime with hardware and automobiles. The Myanmar military junta is accused of widespread rape and pillage, and the use of forced labour to construct infrastructure for the exploitation of Myanmar’s rich natural resources. For more than two decades, tribal groups have fought a hard and violent battle against the military junta for autonomy. Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has been under house arrest since 1989.
DESECRATING TRIBAL LANDS
Parched Earth Tactics: Tatas’ steel town came up in close proximity to thickly forested lands that had the misfortune of carrying some of the richest iron ore deposits. Tribal people then and now seldom have paper titles to their lands. The company initially acquired 3564 acres of land comprising villages at the cost of Rs. 46,332. When the lands were handed over to Tatas for mining in Noamundi and for the Jamshedpur township by the British-controlled Government of India, the tribals were evicted.
In 1907, after Tatas had taken over the Noamundi area for mining iron, local adivasis refused to work the mines. In a bid to tame them, Tatas reportedly mowed down the Kusumgaj (Kosam) trees. These trees were the lifeline for the adivasis who collected lac from the lacworms that nest on these trees. In desperation and with no other recourse for a livelihood, more and more adivasis started digging iron ore for Tatas.
In 2000, Tata Steel allegedly bulldozed a spring that was the only source of water for the indigenous people of Agaria Tola – a 22-household hamlet on the periphery of Tata’s coal mines. Besides yielding water, the spring was the centre of social interaction for the nearby villagers.
Chrome Poisoning: The Down to Earth magazine reports that the Comptroller Auditor General of the Government of India singled out the chromite mines in Sukhinda Valley as a highly polluted area. Tatas are one of the largest mining companies in the valley. The Domsala River and 30 streams that run through this valley are contaminated with dangerous levels of hexavalent chromium leaching from overburden dumps. Hexavalent chromium causes irritation of the respiratory tract, nasal septum ulcers, irritant dermatitis rhinitis, bronchospasm and pneumonia.
One study funded by the Norwegian Government under the Orissa Environment Program found that almost 25 percent of people living less than 1 km from the sites suffered pollution-induced diseases.
VIOLENCE AND MASSACRES
Gua Massacre: State violence against tribal people is commonplace, particularly in the mining districts of Eastern India. According to an eyewitness, on 7 September, 1980, villagers whose lands were taken over to accommodate a Tata aerodrome in Noamundi went to the aerodrome to confront then Tata Steel chairman Russi Mody and present him a memo. On seeing the crowd, Mody’s aircraft returned to Jamshedpur without landing. All this happened at a time when long-oppressed tribals were asserting their rights, and the struggle for a tribal state was at its peak in the Jharkhand region of Bihar. Tatas and other vested interests are said to have pressed the State Government to take stringent action against tribal activists. The 8 September firing against innocent tribals in the Gua marketsquare, and the subsequent killing of 8 unarmed tribals inside a hospital was the “strict action” that was taken to quell tribal discontent.
Kalinganagar Massacre: On January 2, 2006, a police battalion armed to the teeth opened fire into a crowd of tribal villagers in Kalinganagar, Orissa. The tribal people were protesting the illegal construction of a compound wall by Tata Steel on lands historically owned by them. The local people had made it clear that Tata Steel was not welcome. Just days before the massacre, Tata Steel had three meetings with the chief minister of Orissa. Five corpses returned after post-mortem were mutilated; one dead woman’s breast was ripped off, and a young boy (also killed in the firing) had his genitals mutilated. All had their palms chopped off. Tata has said the incident was unfortunate, and that it will continue with plans to set up a steel plant at the location despite the opposition.
Singur Oppression: In 2006, Tatas obtained a bonanza. More than 900 acres of fertile agricultural lands in Singur, near Kolkata, was handed over to Tata Motors by the West Bengal Government for a project that will churn out Rs. 100,000 ($2000) cars. Farmers, many of whose lands were forcibly acquired, opposed the handover of their lands to Tata. Goaded by Tatas, the West Bengal Government has come down heavily on the Singur farmers and their supporters, converting this once-peaceful village into a war-zone with round-the-clock presence of armed police providing protection to Tata Motors site and workers.
TOXIC DUMPING
Saline wastes: In September 2003, an effluent spill from Tata Chemicals’ soda ash factory in Mithapur, Gujarat, spread over more than 150 acres of the sea in the Gulf of Kutch Marine National Park. The National Park covers one of the most biodiverse regions – mangroves, corals, mudskippers, whale sharks -- in the coast of India. About 10 km_ of the marine protected area has been considerably degraded due to the settlement of solids associated with the effluent of the industry, according to the National Institute of Oceanography. The salt pans in the Mithapur area are also named as the cause for the rapid salinity ingress into the groundwater. Several villages have lost their farmlands to accommodate open unlined dumps for Tata’s saline effluent.
Hell on Earth: Patancheru, a chemical industrial estate near Hyderabad, is referred to as Hell on Earth owing to the unlivable environmental conditions in that area because of industrial pollution. Rallis India, a Tata subsidiary manufacturing pesticides here, was singled out by the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes which identified the company’s toxic waste dump to be a toxic contamination source of concern. The company’s wastes are stored in massive solar evaporation ponds that stinks up the air with poisonous chemicals, villagers say.
Mountains of Waste, Jugsalai: Thousands of tonnes of boiler ash generated from Tata Steel units are dumped in the open in the middle of Jugsalai town near Jamshedpur. During the dry months, the heavy metal laced dust from the mountain of ash flies in the air causing visibility problems and breathing distress. Groundwater in the area is polluted, as per Tata Steel’s own admission, and contains higher than permissible levels of hardness and dissolved solids.
Joda Mines: Begun in the 1950s, the mining boomtown that houses Tata, Birla and Jindal iron ore mines, has fuelled the riches of several corporates but has gained nothing in the process. Joda town and the road to it, according to one journalist, is one big pothole. The constantly plying ore trucks, and the round-the-clock mining has meant that local residents, workers and commuters have no fresh air to breathe. It is a wonder that these dustiest of dusty mines are located at the edge of the Sidhamatha Reserve Forests, home to the elephant and tiger.
Coal Slurry Dumping: Tata Steel’s collieries in West Bokaro and its coal washeries in Bokaro have been discharging a coal-dust-rich slurry into the Bokaro River, effectively killing the river by smothering the river bed. The process also uses large quantities of freshwater and discharges it along with the coal-dust as effluents.
HAZARDOUS INCIDENTS
Founder’s Day Fire: On March 3, 1989, a fire broke out in the VIP gallery during the Founder’s Day celebrations. Sixty children were killed and 111 injured in the fire that was caused by negligence and poor planning that prevented fire tenders from arriving at the scene of the accident in time. The problem was further exacerbated when Tatas refused to move the injured and dying to a burns speciality hospital in a bid to cover up the event. A Factories Inspectorate report lays the blame squarely on Tata Steel. More than 10 years after the tragic event, Tatas had still not paid compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased or to the injured. Even the Supreme Court alluded to pay-offs by TISCO, asking TISCO how much it was paying the Court-appointed arbitrator.
ANTI-LABOUR ANTECEDENTS
In the 1920s and 1930s, when it was still called Tata Iron and Steel Company, TISCO’s largely tribal workers fought pitched battles with the European and Parsi management. Work conditions and the right to organise were important rallying issues, and over the years, the company developed a reputation for union-busting often by violent means.
Worker Suicides: After Ratan Tata took over in 1991, the Tata Group companies have witnessed aggressive streamlining and down-sizing. In 2003, two contract workers who were part of the Tata Hydrocompanies Employees Union doused themselves with kerosene and set themselves on fire outside the Tata headquarters. Along with 68 other workers from the Tata Power Company, the two suicidal workers were protesting the illegal termination of their contract in 1997 by Tata.
As land prices skyrocketed in Mumbai in the 1980s, textile mills sitting on prime real estate in Mumbai (formerly Bombay) began starving as mill managements failed to invest in modernisation and upkeep. Mill-owners preferred to run their establishment into the ground in the hopes that lucrative land deals would allow them to shut down the mills and make money in the process. Tatas, which ran Svadeshi Mills -- one of the oldest textile mills in Mumbai – had earlier obtained permission to sell a fourth of its landholding, and hand-over half the land for a recreation ground, a public housing scheme and a public sector factory to employ retrenched labourers from the textile mill. While a fourth of the land was sold, the latter did not happen. Workers allege that whatever was sold was undervalued to allow the company to siphon funds meant for mill revival or rehabilitation of workers to other group businesses. Driven to desperation, at least one Svadeshi mill worker committed suicide after the August 2000 closure of the mill forced 2800 factory-floor workers into destitution.
Sub-contracting: Fostering Insecurity: According to highly placed sources within the Tata company, Tatas have resorted to large-scale deployment of contract labour in a bid to cut costs. In contravention of the Contract Labour and Regulation Act, contract workers are engaged in prohibited activities, including those that can only be performed by trained permanent staff, and works of perennial nature. Workers allege that the company discriminates between its employees and contract workers. At Tata Steel in Jamshedpur, for instance, company employees eat better food in superior ambience than contract workers. Wage differences are also wide although the nature of work performed by contract workers is no different from that of company employees. Contract workers also work longer hours on harder jobs. Lack of skill and work pressure has meant that contract employees meet with more accidents.
Lay-offs: Contrary to Tata’s much-touted credentials of providing employment security, the corporate house’s massive downsizing at its flagship Tata Steel provides a case in point. Tata’s workforce stood at 78,000 in 1994. By 1997, it was down to 65,000. By 2002, another 15,000 jobs were eliminated, and the total workforce in 2006 stands at 38,000, slightly more than half of what it started out with at the onset of liberalisation. Of this, more than 25,000 people received voluntary retirement benefits. However, many allege that the scheme was not all that voluntary. Able-bodied workers were rendered jobless as they succumbed to intense emotional pressure. Reports allege that teachers were asked to sweep roads if they did not take up “voluntary retirement.”
Union busting: In 1989, workers belonging to the trade union Telco Kamgar Sanghatana at Telco’s plant in Pune struck work demanding wage hikes. Tata management attempted to break the strike by offering a wage hike to rival unions and warning every employee of dire consequences if labour unrest continued. In September 1989, about 3000 workers went on an indefinite hunger strike. As the strike progressed with workers fainting and no signs of a rapprochement, the State Government came under intense pressure from Tatas and other capitalists. On September 29, under cover of darkness the State Reserve & Pune City Police launched Operation Crackdown. 80 buses were deployed to round up and take fasting workers to jail. Tata had managed to break the strike with the help of the police.
Killings:In the past, at least two prominent Tata trade unionists – Abdul Bari and V.G. Gopal – were gunned down by rival unionists as they were setting off for negotiations with the management. In both instances, Tata workers and independent observers allege the behind-the-scenes involvement of Tata management.
TATA BYE-BYE
Tata’s unpopularity is evident from the fact that local people in various places around India have successfully thwarted the company’s attempts to set up businesses on their lands. The struggle in Singur, the stand-off in Kalinganagar are merely the most recent and prominent.
About a decade ago, protests by tribal residents in Orissa forced Tatas to pull out of a venture to mine bauxite from the sacred Baphlimali hills in Rayagada district. In 2000, three tribal youth were shot dead by the police during a peaceful demonstration near the proposed mine site.
In 2000, Tatas were forced to abandon a proposal to set up a steel plant in Gopalpur-on-Sea, a coastal town in Orissa following massive protests from the more than 20,000 people that were to be evicted to make way for the plant. This project too ended only after blood was shed. In August 1997, the police opened fire at a protest rally in Sindhigaon, where two women were crushed to death in the ensuing pandemonium.
In the late 1990s, Tatas shelved a proposal to convert large portions of Lake Chilika – a massive brackish water lake of international prominence – into an aquaculture farm after protests by the 120,000-strong fishing community that depended on the lake for a livelihood.
IN SEARCH OF NEW SOUL
Two kinds of democratic states can be recognized in the Islamic countries. The basis of this distinction has to do with how comprehensively Islam is incorporated into the affairs of the state.
The compatibility of Islam and democracy
Most Islamic democracies fall under the first definition, leading many analysts to dismiss the compatibility of Islam with democracy. Critics of the concept of Islamic democracy argue that Islam and are opposite forces, that theocracy is incompatible with democracy, and that Muslim culture lacks the liberal social attitudes of democratic societies.
It is to be remembered that along with democracy all the Islamisation programme have failed so far.
Sunni viewpoint
The democratic ideal of a “government by the people” is compatible with the notion of an Islamic democracy. Deliberations of the Caliphates were not democratic in the modern sense (rather, decision-making power lay with a council of notables or clan patriarchs), they show that some appeals to popular consent are permissible within Islam.
In the early Islamic Caliphates , the head of state, the Caliph had a position based on the notion of a successor to Muhammad’s political authority, who, according to Sunnis, were ideally elected by the people or their representatives. After the Rashidun Caliphs, later Caliphates had a lesser degree of democratic participation, but since "no one was superior to anyone else except on the basis of piety and virtue" in Islam, and following the example of Muhammad later Islamic rulers often held public consultation with the people in their affairs.
Much debate occurs on the subject of which Islamic traditions are fixed principles, and which are subject to democratic change, or other forms of modification in view of changing circumstances. Some Muslims allude to an "Islamic" style of democracy which would recognize such distinctions. . Another sensitive issue involves the status of monarchs and other leaders, the degree of loyalty which Muslims owe such people, and what to do in case of a conflicting loyalties (e.g., if a monarch disagrees with an imam).
Shi'a viewpoint:
According to the Shia understanding, the Prophet Muhammad named as his successor (as leader, not as prophet--Muhammad being the final prophet), his son-in-law Ali. Therefore the first three of the four "Rightly Guided" Caliphs recognized by Sunnis ('Ali being the fourth), are considered usurpers, notwithstanding their having been "elected" through some sort of consular deliberation. The largest Shi'a grouping--the Twelvers branch which rules Iran--recognizes a series of Twelve Imam the last of which (the Hidden Imam) is still alive and the Shi'as are waiting for his reappearance. The second-largest Shi'ia sect, the Ismaili recognize a different lineage of Imams.
Since the revolution in Iran, Twelver Shi'a political thought has been dominated by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini . Imam Khomeini argued that in the absence of the Hidden Imam and other divinely-appointed figures (in whom ultimate political authority rests), Muslims have not only the right, but also the obligation, to establish an "Islamic state." To that end they must turn to scholars of Islamic law (fiqh) who are qualified to interpret the Qur'an and the writings of the imams.
Khomeini divides the Islamic commandments or Ahkam into three branches:
This last includes all commandments which relate to public affairs, such as constitution, social security, insurance, bank, labour law, taxation, election, congress etc. etc. Some of these codes may not strictly or implicitly pointed out in the Quran and generally in the Sunnah.
Khomeini emphasized that the Islamic state has absolute right to enact state commandments, even if it violates the primary or secondary commandments of Islam. For example an Islamic state can ratify (according to some constitution) mandatory insurance of employees to all employers being Muslim or not even if it violates mutual consent between them. This shows the compatibility of Islam with modern forms of social codes for present and future life as various countries and nations may have different kinds of constitutions now and will may have new ones in future.
Muhammad Iqbal(1877-1938) claimed that Islam had the “germs of an economic and democratic organisation of society”, but this growth was stunted by the idea of Islamic conquest and Islamic empire. Islam thus became political Islam, and its democratic essence disappeared.
Today, two groups prevent the genuine reform movement seeking religious democracy: One group consists of those who think the less freedom a society enjoys, the stronger religion will be. They oppose the democratic process. The second is the group including those who believe that religion should be put aside from the scene of life in order to establish democracy and freedom.
Two major arguments against the possibility of a democratic Islamic state are as follow:
Islamic democratic systems have the same human rights issues as other democracies, but some matters which may cause friction include appeasing anti-democratic Islamists, non-Muslim religious minorities, the role of Islam in state education (especially with regard to Sunni and Shia traditions), women's rights.This is further complicated by the deriving of punishments from Fiqh, or Islamic jurisprudence, where, as in other legal systems, precedent assists the judiciary to come to a decision. Since the judiciary is not independent of a system of religious codes that are essentially the collective reasoning of often highly conservative scholars, the system is inherently conservative, and thus is less flexible and able to adapt to developing views of the subjects listed above.
To control political power, wealth and domination over women is the essence of political Islam and not so much about spirituality. They do not want encroachment over their space- economical, political, social or cultural. Cultural pluralism or political pluralism is a contradiction to political Islam. Hence in such a mental make up democratic values cannot flourish.
In India, women's exploitation was cloaked in religious injunctions. Patriarchal society took advantage of women’s emotional nature, creating many unjust laws and slogans to rob all their freedom in the economic, social and religious spheres. In India, women’s struggle for liberation did not emerge as a distinct movement, but as a corollary of the social reform movement.
In nineteenth century Bengal, Rammohan Roy, and later many writers and social reformers, including Ravindranath Tagore, exposed the exploitative character of Hindu priesthood through the Brahma Samaj movement. After gaining freedom from British rule, widespread education brought about great changes in values and thought all over India. Ultimately, women struggled to restore their rights to education, and fuller participation in the economic, political and social spheres. Patriarchal society had imprisoned them within their homes, and now they emerged, breaking the walls of dogmas without much fanfare, and without a movement similar to a trade union. Due to this, Indian women did not create any antagonistic class like that of early feminism in the West. The so called social guardians simply lost their domination when a greater social consciousness awakened. Another significant aspect of this movement is that the family, as the integral unit of society, was not challenged.
In 1927, women formed their own autonomous organizations, the most important of which was the All India Women's Conference. In 1934, when AIWC introduced a bill for equality in marriage, divorce, and property rights, they drew upon the nationalist rights discourse; and after independence in 1947, Hindu women were granted constitutional equality. However, the Islamic religious community retained jurisdiction over civil or personal law, derived from Shariat law.
The second wave began as grassroots organizations focused not only on gender, but also on caste, class and culture, as the roots of women's oppression. The groups in this movement were affiliated with grassroots labour, peasant, and tribal movements, as well as with leftist opposition parties. Among their activities were protests by tribal women against alcohol-related domestic violence, and by the Chipko movement of economically disadvantaged women to protect their forest resources and highlight women's unrecognized economic contributions. The Self Employed Women's Association (SEWA), a union of women working as street vendors and rag-pickers, and in home-based industries, established the first women's bank for poor women.
Sustainable, grassroots development as a priority of the Indian women's movement organizations was exemplified by the organization Stree Mukti Sangarsh (Women's Liberation Struggle). They envision development that promotes equality between men and women and overcomes the economic and environmental ravages of the rural areas precipitated by large multinational corporations, whose focus on short-term gains have created unsustainable forms of development.
In the late seventies, autonomous, avowedly feminist women's movements arose. Outraged by the dismissals of cases of girls raped by police, and by religiously sanctioned violations of women's human rights, their campaigns refocused on violence against women, dowry deaths (the murder of brides for their dowries), sex-selective abortions, and sati( burning of women).
The success of women's movement organizations has met with an antifeminist backlash, which calls upon familial, communal, and religious identities, in an effort to push back women's gains. Since poverty and insecurity fan the flames of reactionary fears, the feminist strategy of promoting grassroots-based sustainable development is a double-pronged one it addresses both the economic independence of women and the long-term security and well-being of the whole community. This is similar to ecofeminism.
In the year 1950 the constitution of India was adopted. In the year 1955 Hindu Code bill or civil code was passed in the Parliament as law. Subsequently in the year 1956 Hindu marriage act, heritage act etc. was adopted. These laws was valid only for the Hindus and not applicable to Muslims and other religious groups. In the year 1961 Dowry Prohibition Act was passed.
India is one of the signatories of SODO Treaty of 1978. One of the clauses of that treaty is: state parties shall take all appropriate measure to modify the social and cultural conduct of men and women with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of inferiority of the sexes or on stereotyped role of men and women. It was further agreed that,States to take all appropriate measure to eliminate discrimination against women in political and public life and in particular shall ensure to women equal rights with men.
In spite of all the measures mentioned above the finding show: Gender equality exists in various aspects of social and economic life--health, education, assets, incomes and resources.
Due to age old social prejudice, in the following areas women are victims of humiliation and violence:
Latest statistics shows: In 20 years, 10 million fetus were aborted simply because they were girls; every 3 minutes a girl is raped; 40% are victims of family torture and 70% are covert violence victims.
What happened to the slogans of high sounding words of great civilization? Materialistic values that promotes hedonist culture, dogma and greed for money, degrading the humanistic norms.
To eradicate these social evils all round social awakening is essential.
Recent Comments