sinragp@nvuxg.UUCP (R. P. SINGH) (09/18/86)
From uucp Thu Sep 18 06:53 EDT 1986
>From balaji%bacall.uucp@usc-cse.usc.edu Thu Sep 18 05:43:53 1986 remote from bellcore
Received: by usc-cse.usc.edu via UUCP (4.12/S2.6) id AA21222; Wed, 17 Sep 86 10:28:25 pdt
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 86 10:28:25 pdt
Message-Id: <8609171728.AA21222@usc-cse.usc.edu>
To: sinragp%nvuxg.uucp%bellcore.arpa@usc-cse.usc.edu
To: sinragp%nvuxg.uucp%bellcore.arpa@usc-cse.usc.edu
Subject: India Now - part 3
INDIA NOW
September 1986
Part 3 of 5
News and Views from Indian newspapers and magazines
Contents:
Part 1:
Introduction
Shiv Sena Blamed for Nasik Communal Riots
Parliament Debates Communal Riots
Procession as Incitement
Gastro-Enteritis in Ahmedabad
Book Reviews - Eight Lives: A study of Hindu-Muslim Encounter
by Rajmohan Gandhi
- Indian Muslims: A Study of the Minority Problems in
India
by Asghar Ali Engineer
Part 2:
Behind the Killings: State of Democratic Rights in Patna, Gaya,
Singhbhum
Stop It Now! Attacks on Women
A Pilgrimage to Punjab
Part 3:
One Year Later, Punjab Accord is Faltering
Zail Singh's Problems
Part 4:
Ahmedabad Divided
Ranchi Mental Asylum
Punjab Grain Production Up
Dowry Prohibition Bill
Injectible Contraceptives Opposed
Children in Jails
Sanctions Against South Africa
Nayar on Security Threats
Action Against Union Leader Stayed
Krishna Iyer Calls for Terrorist Act Repeal
Inquiry Commission Bill
Bill of Security Belt
Hutment Demolition in Madras
National Anthem Controversy
Part 5:
Arwal Massacre and Government Coverup
Laldenga to head the coalition govt. in Mizoram
Riots in Ahmedabad: Excerpts from Press
Indian Writers walk out of Commonwealth writers conference
A new watch by Congress High Command
Hindu and Sikh amity quite prevalent in Punjab
Indefinite Detention Without Trial Possible
Floods kill over Hundreds of people
Central policing of Border Areas planned
Bill to withhold inquiry commission reports enacted
Farooq forsees worst J&K Crisis
Assam accord not being implemented
Rajiv's new Kitchen cabinet
Parliament asks for global sanctions
Bombay Our City Chosen Best Non-feature Film
Over 45,000 Arrested in Bihar
Gold Medal for Debshishu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Introduction
Dear Friends:
In the past the response to News Bulletins from Deepak Kapur has been
overwhelmingly positive. This has encouraged us to produce an expanded
version of the bulletin, in the current form of a news digest. We hope
you will continue to find this voluntary news service interesting
and informative.
The material is being assembled as a joint effort by a number of us.
Editing is by Sekhar Ramakrishnan at Columbia University, New York.
Please let us know if you have any suggestions.
You can send mail to Sekhar at RBDMG@CUVMB.BITNET,
to KAPUR@GE-CRD.ARPA, to balaji@usc-cse,
to MKS@SUNY-SBCS.CSNET, or to JAY@CADRE.ARPA.
Due to the considerable amount of material, each issue of India Now
will be in 2-5 parts. If you would like a hard copy version on a
regular basis, please write to India Now, P.O.Box 37, Westmount,
Quebec H3Z 2P1, Canada. There is a cost of roughly $1.50 per issue
to cover xeroxing and mailing.
The news digest is in a format suitable for use with the rn command
for skipping individual items in the digest [ctrl-G].
You are reading part 3 of the 5 parts of the issue dated September 1986.
------------------------------
Subject: One Year Later, Punjab Accord Is Faltering
A.G. Noorani
A year after it was concluded, the Punjab accord survives only as
a cripple hovering between life and death. It is impossible to
exaggerate the importance of ascertaining how it came to be
maimed and who is responsible for maiming it. The accord was
universally hailed in the country. It was not meant to be a
final solution of the Punjab question. But it clearly charted
the steps towards that goal. Those steps were approved because
they marked a U-turn from the gory path of confrontation.
Internationally, India's prestige soared. Its political system
was lauded for its ability to resolve such a problem. Prime
Minister Rajiv Gandhi was deservedly praised for his courage in
making the U-turn. No single act of his since he became prime
minister received greater praise. He staked his prestige on the
success of the accord by affixing his own signature to it.
Today, the country is baffled that the bloodshed continues
unabated. A systematic attempt is being made to squeeze out the
Hindu population from the border districts. The chief minister
of Punjab, Surjit Singh Barnala, is confronted with the
terrorists who are behind this sordid attempt, with dissident
Akalis who seek his office and with dark hints by some at the
Center that "he has been wanting" in the qualities of leadership.
The prime minister's prestige and credibility have suffered
precisely in the measure they would have risen if the accord had
worked out. And worked out, it can still be. It was maimed only
as a result of crude attempts to bend it to suit partisan ends.
It can be restored by an honest resolve to respect its structure.
Simply, by following its terms.
The accord's 11 clauses varied in importance. Some merely
exhorted virtue - "protection of interests of minorities." Some
others embodied the Center's assurances of conciliatory measures
- "rehabilitate and provide gainful employment" to those
discharged from the army. One does not hear much about these
matters. Not even about the Misra Commission inquiring into the
November 1984 riots in Delhi, Bokaro and Kanpur. Do not be
surprised at protests when a summary of its conclusions is
published. It has worked in secret. Its terms of reference
deliberately omit the causes of the riots and allegations of
culpability. On April 8, 1986, the Citizens' Justice Commission,
headed by a former chief justice of India, S.M.Sikri, withdrew
from participation in the commission's proceedings. Its
grievances are well-founded enough to affect the commission's
credibility.
One hears a lot about the dispute concerning the sharing of the
waters of the Ravi-Beas system. The accord stipulated two
things. The rival claims of Punjab and Haryana will be referred
to a tribunal presided over by a Supreme Court judge. "The
decision of this tribunal will be rendered within six months and
would be binding on both parties." The steps required to set up
the tribunal would be "taken expeditiously." The accord was
signed on July 24, 1985. The government of India set up the
tribunal, headed by Justice Balkrishna Eradi, very
"expeditiously" indeed. Exactly six months later, on January 25,
1986.
That was only when a huge blow had been inflicted on the accord.
A deadlock had been reached on the promised transfer of
Chandigarh to Punjab on Republic Day 1986. The promise was
broken. It was the section on "territorial claims" spelt out in
four subparas of Para 7 of the accord which constituted its
heart. It touched the sensitive issues which had foiled repeated
attempts for a settlement.
But the sole territorial issue was not Chandigarh. It was the
small but economically profitable Fazilka-Abohar area. Mrs
Indira Gandhi doggedly refused to accept Punjab's just claims to
Chandigarh unless it agreed to give this area to Haryana.
So determined was she that her famous award of January 29, 1970,
mapped out a corridor "in order to provide contiguity" between
this area and Haryana. In her broadcast on June 2, 1984, on the
eve of Operation Bluestar, she offered reference of "the whole
territorial dispute including Chandigarh and Abohar-Fazilka to a
commission."
The Akali demand as set out in her White Paper was the transfer
of Chandigarh to Punjab and reference of "all other claims and
counterclaims, including those on Abohar-Fazilka, to a
commission." But with a major condition which is extremely
relevant today. The commission would decide "on the basis of the
village as the unit and language and contiguity as the principle"
- the triple criteria. This would have ruled out Haryana getting
Fazilka and Abohar altogether. It was admittedly not contiguous
to this area. Hence, the corridor.
Mrs Gandhi rejected the triple criteria. Rajiv Gandhi accepted
it in the Punjab accord. It is falling apart today because its
vital provision - the triple criteria - has been abandoned openly
by the government. This is the nub of the matter. Let us see
how it has come about.
The accord says in Para 7.1 that Chandigarh will go to Punjab.
Adjoining areas added to it from the Punjabi and Hindi regions of
the former undivided state of Punjab will be asssigned to the
respective states. This spells for Punjab loss of parts of the
Golf Club and the railway station area, about two dozen tubewells
which supply drinking water to the city and local police lines.
This dispute centers on the other provisions, Para 7.2 and 7.4.
Para 7.2 reads thus:
"It had always been maintained by Smt Indira Gandhi that when
Chandigarh is to go to Punjab, some Hindi-speaking territories in
Punjab will go to Haryana. A commission will be constituted to
determine the specific Hindi-speaking areas of Punjab which
should go to Haryana, in lieu of Chandigarh."
"The principle of contiguity and linguistic affinity with a
village as a unit will be the basis of such determination. The
commission will be required to give its findings by 31st
December, 1985, and these will be binding on both sides. The
work of the commission will be limited to this aspect and will be
distinct from the general boundary claims which the other
commission referred to in Para 7.4 will handle."
"There are other claims and counterclaims for readjustment of the
existing Punjab-Haryana boundaries. The government will appoint
another commission to consider these matters and give its
findings. Such findings will be binding on the concerned states.
The terms of reference will be based on village as a unit,
linguistic affinity and contiguity."
In between, Para 7.3 says that "actual transfer" of Chandigarh
and "areas in lieu" of it to Haryana will take place
"simultaneously" on January 26, 1986.
The accord explicitly accepts the triple criteria in all
respects, unlike the previous offers to the Akalis. Its
departures from the 1970 award are all the more striking for the
similarities in drafting. The award assigned Chandigarh to
Punjab and Fazilka-Abohar to Haryana straightaway. Next, it
engisaged a single commission, "for readjustment of the existing
interstate boundaries." However, Chandigarh's transfer was not
linked with the recommendations of this commission. Only the
transfer of the Fazilka area was to be made "simultaneously" with
the transfer of the areas recommended by the commission.
In her broadcast of June 2, 1984, Mrs Gandhi wanted Haryana to
"get its share of some Hindi-speaking areas." She characterized
these as "the transfer of areas to Haryana in lieu of
Chandigarh."
In contrast the accord provides for two commissions. The
commission under Para 7.2 would demarcate "the specific
Hindi-speaking areas of Punjab which should go to Haryana in lieu
of Chandigarh." The commission under para 7.4 will consider
"other claims and counterclaims for readjustment" of the
boundaries of the two states.
The "specific" one (7.2) was to consider Haryana's claim alone.
It had a deadline - December 31, 1985. The general one, which is
yet to be set up, is to consider the claims of both at leisure.
No deadline is set. This is because the specific Hindi-speaking
areas to go to Haryana "in lieu" of Chandigarh have to be
transferred "simultaneously" with the city. Whereas the
Punjabi-speaking areas in Haryana and other Hindi-speaking areas
in Punjab would be exchanged later. In the commission dealing
with the "specific areas," Haryana alone is the claimant. In the
other, both are claimants. That is the only difference. The
triple criteria govern both commissions in the clearest terms.
Therefore, an area which can well go to Haryana after the general
inquiry (7.4) can also be the subject of an earlier transfer as a
specific area "in lieu" of Chandigarh (7.2). Note there was no
reference to compensation or the adequacy of the areas. The
triple criteria alone mattered.
The terms of the accord differed from Mrs Gandhi's offers as much
as the policy of conciliation it expressed differs from her
policy of confrontation. After the accord came disingenuous
moves to approximate the terms of the accord to her offers while
professedly maintaining the policy of conciliation. Those moves
have been at total variance with the policy.
The stray phrases were invoked. One was the reference to Mrs
Gandhi's intention in Para 7.2 despite the fact that it ran
totally counter to the triple criteria accepted in the para
itself. The other was the expression "in lieu of Chandigarh." It
was used to mean "compensation" and to confer on the commission
power to decide on the adequacy of the area. The result in
either case is the same - jettisoning of the triple criteria.
Prakash Singh Badal revealed (January 16, 1986) that the late
Sant Harchand Singh Longowal, who had signed the accord with the
prime minister, had told him and other Akali leaders that he had
been given an "unwritten understanding" that the Fazilka areas
would not be touched. It was on this basis that the Akalis had
ratified the accord at Anandpur Sahib. It rings true. On any
fair interpretation of the accord, these areas are out of
Haryana's reach.
However, when Justice K.K.Mathew was appointed to the Commission
of Inquiry, on August 20, 1985, under Article 7.2 for the
specific areas, the terms of reference came as a rude surprise.
The triple criteria were coupled with a virtual carte blanche to
ignore it "and may also take into consideration such other
factors as it may deem relevant or appropriate."
Rajiv Gandhi said, on October 11, 1985, that it was an
"unintentional and unfortunate" error in drafting. It would be
difficult to chagne the terms of reference since the commission
had already begun its work. The plea was manifestly
unconvincing. The terms of refernce of the Madon Commission on
the Bhiwandi riots of May 1970 were altered after it had begun
its work.
The prime minister's assurance that no Congress-I government
would take advantage of the error implied assumption of
responsibility for controlling Bhajan Lal's conduct before the
commission.
The prime minister's stand was most unfortunate. The accord had
by then been sealed with the blood of Longowal. He was
assassinated on August 20. It had also received the people's
mandate in the Punjab elections on September 25.
With a judge who had adopted controversial positions on the
L.N.Mishra Commission, on the Second Press Commission, and on the
Law Commission was recalled for this task remains a mystery. So
does the Union government's willingness to go along with his
disastrous "enumeration" and, what is often forgotten, his
interpretation of the Mrs Gandhi clause of Para 7.2 of the accord
- "it had always been maintained by Mrs Indira Gandhi that when
Chandigarh is to go to Punjab, some Hindi-speaking territories in
Punjab will go to Haryana."
The intent underlying the accord was plain. When Mathew
misconstrued it, it was the clear duty of the Union to tell him
so. It should have stood by the meaning on the basis of which
Longowal signed the accord. It did not.
Haryana claimed nothing but the Fazilka-Abohar areas before
Mathew. He, in turn, considered nothing else. Punjab's offer of
13 villages in Rajpura tehsil to Haryana was "rejected outright
by the state of Haryana and therefore the commission was not
called upon to examine the same." Pray, why not?
The commission interpreted Para 7.2 of the accord - the specific
areas - in the light of Mrs Gandhi's award of 1970 as expressing
her intent. It next ordered an enumeration of 54 villages of the
Fazilka and Muktsar tehsils. It discovered what everyone knew.
What had been reported by correspondents who had made detailed
investigations. What he himself ought to have perceived in the
light of Mrs Gandhi's famous corridor - that the areas were not
contiguous to Haryana "with village Kandu Khera breaking the
contiguity."
Belatedly, he opined that "although the particular intention of
Mrs Gandhi regarding the areas has not been fulfilled, 'the
general intention' of transferring some Hindi-speaking
territory... is still there." Have another commission to define
those areas, he recommended after his irresponsible performance.
The deadline extended to Republic Day was not met. Thanks to the
Center's failure to stand by the accord before the commission.
The atmosphere had been fouled by the enumeration which was a
virtual plebiscite on communal lines. And by Bhajan Lal's
rhetoric.
At the Congress centenary celebrations, while other speakers were
given hardly ten minutes' time, Bhajan Lal was actually allowed
to declaim Haryana's case for 30 minutes in the presence of the
Center's leaders. Barnala had ably tackled the traffic blockade
proclaimed by the AISSF on January 10. He had secured a mandate
from his party to deal with it firmly.
But already by October 1985, terrorism had reared its head again.
A trap was carefully laid for the capture of the Golden Temple -
the Kar Seva for the reconstruction of the Akal Takht. The SGPC
president, no foe of extremists, announced plans for a Kar Seva
from January 27; Bhindranwale's Damdami Taksal, backed by the
AISSF, for January 26 - the day Chandigarh was to have been
transferred. Tohra accepted this date. On the pretext of a Kar
Seva, the extremists captured the Temple.
It is perverse to suggest that the rise in terrorism had nothing
to do with the failure to implement the accord. One
correspondent reported that "Union home ministry officials
confirm that there was a lull in extremist activity between
Longowal's assassination in August last year and January 26, the
deadline set for the implementation of the Punjab accord. It was
only after the deadline had been given the go-by that there was a
sharp upswing in terrorist activity."
On April 5, another commission was appointed consisting of
Justice E.S.Venkataramaiah of the Supreme Court. On June 19,
1984, he had to try two habeas corpus petitions in the wake of
Operation Blue Star. He referred them to a larger bench. But
only after delivering himself of political observations.
He had a simple task to perform. "To take into account" the
Mathew Report and "determine and specify the other Hindi-speaking
areas," i.e., other than the Fazilka-Abohar areas. He was
mandated to follow the triple criteria - village as unit,
language and contiguity. Not adequacy.
The very first issue he posed departed basically from the accord:
"What should be the reasonable extent of land that should be
transferred from Punjab to Haryana in lieu of Chandigarh?" He
goes on to talk of "a just equivalent" to Chandigarh and says an
"area of 70,000 acres should be transferred." He fixes the size
first and next suggests "another commission to find out those
Hindi-speaking villages whose total area is about 70,000 acres."
He ignored his clear mandate to "determine and specify" the areas
that satisfied the triple criteria.
The judge "picked out" 30 villages covering 45,000 acres which
met the criteria but characterized them as "inadequate." The
adequacy of the areas was not a matter for the commission to
opine. But he repeatedly talks of what Haryana would have got if
it had been given Fazilka and Abohar and tries to award land "in
lieu" of these areas, rather than Chandigarh. Unprecedentedly
but significantly, both reports have been suppressed. Only
extracts have been published.
When the report was submitted on June 12, the Akalis had already
split. After the proclamation of Khalistan on April 29, Barnala
approved of the commando action the next day which flushed out
the extremists from the Golden Temple. Some of his cabinet
colleagues led by Amrinder Singh resigned and joined hands with
Tohra, Badal & Co. The split was formalized on July 5 with the
election of Badal as leader.
Yet, Barnala accepted the figure of 70,000 acres. He only
suggested that the transfer of Chandigarh fixed for July 15 be
linked to that of the 45,000 acres already identified. The rest
could be left to the "general" boundary commission.
Now, Home Minister Buta Singh did the incredible. On June 18 he
wrote to Barnala saying that his offer of 45,000 acres "is
clearly inconsistent with Para 7.2 of the accord." Why? Because
"the majority of these villages offered will obviously have to be
considered by the commission to be stipulated under para 7.4."
The work of a commission set up under Para 7.2 "will be limited
to this aspect (compensation to Haryana for Chandigarh) which
will be distinct from the general boundary claims for the other
commission referred to in Para 7.4." Never before had the Center
taken this position. At least not openly.
Since both commissions are bound by the triple criteria, Buta
Singh implied clearly that he was abandoning it for the
commission to be set up under Para 7.2. He invoked the
compensation theory and discarded the triple criteria although it
is clearly set out in Para 7.2. The two judges had been asked
explicitly to follow the criteria.
But Buta Singh now argued that "these 30 villages cannot be
considered as constituting territory in lieu of Chandigarh"
although they met the criteria. Evidently, only territory which
is not contiguous or is Punjabi-speaking - only territory which
does not fulfil the triple criteria - can be awarded as
compensation. Else, it can go to Haryana under Para 7.4 as part
of a boundary settlement. Justice Venkataramaiah had asked the
parties to arrive at another accord "without insisting on proof
regarding the question whether they are Hindi-speaking or
Punjabi-speaking." Buta Singh is imposing just that on Punjab.
Accordingly, Justice D.A.Desai was asked on June 20 to specify
the 70,000 acres for transfer to Haryana without any criteria
whatever to guide him. He was asked to report within hours "not
later than the forenoon of June 21, 1986." This was the deadline
for the transfer of Chandigarh fixed on May 31.
On June 21, the terms were modified. Desai "should keep in view"
the triple criteria and "consider the 30 villages measuring about
45,000 acres identified" by Justice Venkataramaiah. The deadline
was extended to July 15. A vital binding provision of the
accord, the very basis of Akali acceptance, the triple criteria,
was abandoned. Buta Singh's theory was woven into the amended
terms - "provided they (the 45,000 acres) fall within the purview
of Para 7.2 of the accord." But then, if they did not, why did
Justice Venkataramaiah, appointed only under Para 7.2, identify
them at all?
As far back as February 10, the prime minister had hinted that
the terms of reference of the commission would be altered. Those
of the Mathew Commission were done in a hurry and were defective,
he said. The terms (read, the accord) have now been unilaterally
modified. The mess in Punjab has not resulted because the accord
was followed but because it was repeatedly violated by New Delhi.
It is pointless to consider the rival charges of bad faith in
respect of the Desai Commission. Barnala wrote to the prime
minister on June 20 asking for the transfer of Chandigarh and the
identified 45,000 acres the next day and suggesting the
appointment of the commission under para 7.4.
One June 23, significantly two days after Punjab rejected the
Desai Commission, the prime minister asked Barnala to give
priority attention to the law and order situation. Three days
later Arjun Singh hinted at President's rule and Kamalapati
Tripathi delivered a month's ultimatum.
Rajiv Gandhi's fulsume tribute to Barnala on July 2 could not
have been due to any substantial progress in curbing terrorism
since June 23.
It is pathetic to see failure keep one deadline (January 26)
after another (June 21) with uncertainties bedeviling the third
(July 15) as well. The Center's policy on the transfer of
Chandigarh has been a shoddy one. It has all but abandoned the
Punjab accord on this aspect.
Not that Barnala is blameless. He was pledged to complete the
construction of the Sutlej-Yamuna Canal by August 15. The pledge
has been violated. Nor has he exerted himself to infuse
confidence in the Hindus of Punjab. He has fostered the image of
a panthic rather than a Punjabi government. He knew that some of
his colleagues were in league with terrorists but took no action
against them. He has been woefully weak in providing leadership
for stamping out terrorism.
Rajiv Gandhi deserves by far the greater blame. He knew what the
accord meant and implied. He saw it being twisted and distorted.
He did nothing to set matters right. Buta Singh surely spoke on
his behalf. The prime minister's credibility has suffered in
consequence. It can be repaired. But only by the fullest
implementation of the Punjab accord.
------------------------------
Subject: Zail Singh's Problems
The President's customary broadcast to the nation on the eve of
Independence Day came in for some last minute change on August 14
when the Prime Minister's Secretariat reportedly objected to one
paragraph in his speech.
It is learnt that Zail Singh had even completed his recording for
All-India Radio and Doordarshan when the request for deletion of
these remarks came from P.V.Narasimha Rao and Buta Singh.
The deleted paragraph reads as follows: "A government gets the
support of the people by its handling of issues with a liberal
but firm approach. Consideration for the sentiments of the
people earns their affection and goodwill. It is most essential
for the government to protect the life, property and honor of
every citizen. Any government that is unable to discharge these
obligations will lose its credibility."
Earlier, during the debate in Parliament on the suppression of
the report of the Thakkar Commission, which inquired into Indira
Gandhi's assassination, it was suggested by some opposition
members that the report had not been shown to Zail Singh.
------------------------------
End of INDIA NOW news digest
****************************sinragp@nvuxg.UUCP (R. P. SINGH) (09/22/86)
INDIA NOW
September 1986
Part 5 of 5
News and Views from Indian newspapers and magazines
Contents:
Part 1:
Introduction
Shiv Sena Blamed for Nasik Communal Riots
Parliament Debates Communal Riots
Procession as Incitement
Gastro-Enteritis in Ahmedabad
Book Reviews - Eight Lives: A study of Hindu-Muslim Encounter
by Rajmohan Gandhi
- Indian Muslims: A Study of the Minority Problems in
India
by Asghar Ali Engineer
Part 2:
Behind the Killings: State of Democratic Rights in Patna, Gaya,
Singhbhum
Stop It Now! Attacks on Women
A Pilgrimage to Punjab
Part 3:
One Year Later, Punjab Accord is Faltering
Zail Singh's Problems
Part 4:
Ahmedabad Divided
Ranchi Mental Asylum
Punjab Grain Production Up
Dowry Prohibition Bill
Injectible Contraceptives Opposed
Children in Jails
Sanctions Against South Africa
Nayar on Security Threats
Action Against Union Leader Stayed
Krishna Iyer Calls for Terrorist Act Repeal
Inquiry Commission Bill
Bill of Security Belt
Hutment Demolition in Madras
National Anthem Controversy
Part 5:
Arwal Massacre and Government Coverup
Laldenga to head the coalition govt. in Mizoram
Riots in Ahmedabad: Excerpts from Press
Indian Writers walk out of Commonwealth writers conference
A new watch by Congress High Command
Hindu and Sikh amity quite prevalent in Punjab
Indefinite Detention Without Trial Possible
Floods kill over Hundreds of people
Central policing of Border Areas planned
Bill to withhold inquiry commission reports enacted
Farooq forsees worst J&K Crisis
Assam accord not being implemented
Rajiv's new Kitchen cabinet
Parliament asks for global sanctions
Bombay Our City Chosen Best Non-feature Film
Over 45,000 Arrested in Bihar
Gold Medal for Debshishu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Introduction
Dear Friends:
In the past the response to News Bulletins from Deepak Kapur has been
overwhelmingly positive. This has encouraged us to produce an expanded
version of the bulletin, in the current form of a news digest. We hope
you will continue to find this voluntary news service interesting
and informative.
The material is being assembled as a joint effort by a number of us.
Editing is by Sekhar Ramakrishnan at Columbia University, New York.
Please let us know if you have any suggestions.
You can send mail to Sekhar at RBDMG@CUVMB.BITNET,
to KAPUR@GE-CRD.ARPA, to balaji@usc-cse,
to MKS@SUNY-SBCS.CSNET, or to JAY@CADRE.ARPA.
Due to the considerable amount of material, each issue of India Now
will be in 2-5 parts. If you would like a hard copy version on a
regular basis, please write to India Now, P.O.Box 37, Westmount,
Quebec H3Z 2P1, Canada. There is a cost of roughly $1.50 per issue
to cover xeroxing and mailing.
The news digest is in a format suitable for use with the rn command
for skipping individual items in the digest [ctrl-G].
You are reading part 5 of the 5 parts of the issue dated September 1986.
------------------------------
Subject: Arwal Massacre and Government Coverup
Kishan Bajwa
Congress(I) government of Chief Minister Bindeswari Dubey in
Bihar came up with a rather familiar justification for the
massacre at Arwal in Jehanabad district on April 19 in which
according to official accounts, 23 poor people were killed in
police firing. According to the government, "Those killed at
Arwal were extremists." In a very highly arrogant manner, the
Director General of Police Shashi Bhushan Sahai even boasted of
the actions of the security force a newspaper, the Indian
Nation, and vowed to respond even more ferociously when faced
with a similar situation. He said, "If they (extremists) fire,
we cannot keep our guns silent. Their every shot will be replied
with 10 shots, firmly and with full aim. The extremists have
already tasted this at Arwal a few days ago." On August 21, the
Bihar government arrested over 45,000 people in the state in an
attempt to curb the protests against the Arwal massacre (see a
separate story on this).
The following report on the police firing in Arwal and
background of the incident is based on an article by S N M Abdi
in the June 22-28 issue of the Illustrated Weekly of India. The
article, which is based on two visits by the reporter to Arwal,
interviews with DGP Sahai, Superintendent of Police C R Kaswan,
District Magistrate Ashok Kumar Singh of the area, Dr. Vinayan
of Mazdoor Kisan Sangram Samiti, and others, sets the record
straight in terms of what exactly transpired and exposes the
lies of Dubey government and the police.
Abdi came to the conclusion that the police justification that
firing was in self-defence is hardly tenable since the
protestors were not armed and quite a number of them were women
and children. The article goes on to add that in fact, it was
the worst carnage since Jallianwala Bagh.
Police Firing
The scene of the firing was the Mahatma Gandhi library at Arwal.
It was in the campus of the library that a few hundred poor men
and women were holding a meeting to protest the blatantly unfair
allotment of government land to a rich engineer. The library
campus is bound on one side by a six feet high wall. There is a
small opening in the wall. On the other side, the campus
is separated from the Arwal thana (police station) by a wire fencing. The
entrance to the library compound is from the road. On that
fateful day, the Jehanabad SP Kaswan reached the library campus
through the main entrance. Kaswan alleges that he was attacked
with a farsa (a sharp-edged traditional weapon) and constable
Ojha subsequently shot the assailant. This was followed by 50
rounds of fire from the thana which claimed 22 lives.
Official Versions
The first authoritative report from Arwal to the state
secretariat described the police firing as 'unrestrained.' Gaya
District Magistrate Ashok Kumar Singh's wireless message to the
home commissioner and the chief secretary on April 20 clearly
stated, "prima facie it appears to be a case of unrestrained
police firing without the orders of any magistrate deputed
there." In an interview with Abdi, Singh informed, "Magistrates
and police personnel were deputed in the area by SDO, Jehanabad;
Section 144 was also clamped as we had information that a
section of the people would attempt to demolish the wall
constructed on the disputed plot of land. So there was a
definite apprehension of breach of peace. As it appeared to be a
small affair, magistrates and police personnel were deputed by
the SDO and not by me... I decided to go to Arwal along with the
SP, Gaya, as soon as I heard about the first firing. ... On our
way to Arwal, I was informed in my vehicle over the wireless
that the police had opened fire again." In response to a
question about the contents of his message to the secretariat,
Singh added, "I thought 53 was rather a big number. Fifty-three
rounds could have claimed 53 lives."
BK Singh, Home Commissioner, and DGP Sahai quickly visited
Arwal. The first thing that they did on their return from Arwal
was to justify the firing to newsmen. They explained to
journalists that the police had fired 53 rounds on extremists
who had attacked the Arwal thana. The Chief Minister also
justified the police action.
FIR Report
According to Abdi, the first information report (FIR) number 57,
1986 of the Arwal police station, is replete with lies. It
lays bare certain facts which reveal the firing as illegal and
unconstitutional. For instance, it states, "SP Saheb ki jaan
bachao. Goli Challao (Save SP's life. Start shooting.)" Were 51
rounds fired and 23 persons killed to save the life of SP? The
FIR also states that the two deputed magistrates, Sahdev Bhagat
and Ramesh Lal, shouted "Thana bachao, hathiar bachao, janmal
bachao" before ordering the firing. The wording of the order is
baffling. For not a single alleged attacker was shot dead in the
thana compound, not a single firearm looted or any property
damaged. According to the FIR, the alleged mob was not given a
warning which makes the firing totally unconstitutional.
The FIR charges that a large mob of extremists under the
leadership of the Mazdoor Kisan Sangram Samiti (MKSS) demolished a wall
that Rameshwar Rajak had constructed on his property. The
important issue that the plot of land where the controversial
wall was constructed was itself under dispute is evaded in the FIR.
SP Kaswan's version
In an interview with Abdi, SP C R Kaswan described the events
this way, "the gathering at Arwal was neither peaceful nor
legal. They had violated section 144. They did not disperse
despite two rounds of firing and bursting of teargas shells
earlier in the afternoon. They demolished a wall and chased away
policemen." About his role, Kaswan had this to say, "my role at
Arwal was limited to one minute. I could not even meet a single
police officer or magistrate. As my jeep approached the spot,
people ran helter-skelter. I could see them carrying swords,
lathis and spades. I wanted to catch a few of them; it is very
important to arrest miscreants. But before I could even get down
from the jeep, I was attacked with a farsa. I managed to dodge
it. The SDO Jehanabad was sitting next to me. I jumped out of
the vehicle. I was attacked again. This time I shouted, 'bachao,
bachao,' and took position near the well. Next I heard the SDO's
order: 'SP ko bachao.' The first shot was fired at my assailant
and the assailant dropped dead."
As per the subsequent firing of 50 rounds, Kaswan said, "It is
still a mystery to me as to who gave the order for firing from
the thana which claimed 22 lives. As soon as my assailant was
shot dead, I ran to the thana and stopped the firing. But within
the short span of a minute, 50 rounds had been fired. I want to
put on record that I became the commander of the force after 53
rounds had been fired: 2 in my absence and 51 in my presence."
Background
In 1984, Rameshwar Rajak of Arwal suddenly claimed that roughly
one-fourth acre of land in the adjoining Wasilpur village was
gifted to his forefathers by the erstwhile zamindar. In support
of his claim, Rajeshwar Rajak produced a hukamnama (zamindar's
decree) which was alleged executed by the landlord in 1932 in
favor of Rajak's forefathers. On the basis of this doubtful
document and irrespective of the fact that the Rajaks had not
paid a paisa to the government as rent until 1984, the then
circle officer opened a demand in the name of Rajaks which made
Rajaks the legal tenants of the plot.
At the time of settlement, the plot was significantly not free
from encumberances. Nine destitute families of backward classes
had built their thatched huts on the plot. The Rajaks went about
their task in devious fashion. First, they showed the hukamnama
to the poor occupants of the huts. When the nine families were
not impressed, the Rajaks took recourse to the 'legal' and
'police action'. While the Circle Officer had obliged the rich
Rajaks by opening a demand in their favor, the police registered
cases under Sections 107 and 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code
against male members of the nine poor families. The
'challengers' were arrested and tortured at the local thana.
While the menfolk were in police custody, the Rajaks demolished
the huts after beating up the women.
When former Jehanabad SDO Vyas was petitioned by the nine
families in January 1986, Vyas immediately
ordered the Circle officer to investigate whether the opening of
the demand in favor of the Rajaks was legally correct. If
incorrect, the land was to be allotted to the petitioners,
provided they were landless. Vyas also ordered that no
construction should be permitted as the plot was under dispute.
But in violation of SDO's written instructions, the Rajaks, with
the help of the local thana, built a wall around the disputed
plot. Vyas was abruptly transferred in February 1986 on the
charge that he was a Naxalite.
When no relief came from the police and bureacracy, the nine
families approached the MKSS, an organization devoted to the
protection of the rights of the rural poor. The MKSS announced
publicly and even distributed leaflets declaring the wall would
be demolished on April 19. According to the publicized
programme, a meeting was scheduled to be held in the campus of
the Mahatma Gandhi library after the demolition.
Abdi's Investigation and Conclusions
The application filed by Rajaks was not screened properly. No
attempt was made to establish whether the hukamnama was genuine
or forged. Notices were not issued at large before the demand in
favor of Rajaks was opened. This was despite the fact that 9
families had already built huts on that piece of land.
Fifty-three rounds of firing was not only unrestrained but illegal and
unconstitutional. Even if SP Kaswan had been killed by the mob,
the thana had been attacked, the police firing of 50 rounds in
one minute without prior warning to the crowd would have been
illegal and unconstitutional. As for now, SP is alive and thana is intact.
The highlights of the police action are:
(i) All the victims sustained bullet injuries above their
waists. The objective of police firing is not to kill people but
to disperse them. That is why the Police Manual lays down that
in any case, aim must necessarily be low. Further, it is
prohibited to fire blindly at a crowd. At Arwal, the police shot
dead a young girl and a rickshaw-puller among others. The
rickshawpuller's crime was that he was listening to the speeches
from a distance.
(ii) One of the conventions governing police firing is that
firing will not be resorted to even on any illegal assembly if
there is no escape route for the alleged law breakers. At Arwal
police fired at a crowd which literally had its back to the
wall.
(iii) The crowd was not given any warning. People were shot dead
even as they took to their heels.
(iv) Three country-made revolvers and a rifle were shown
which were allegedly used by the mob against policemen.
According to Abdi, those arms were incapable of firing at all.
SP Kaswan insisted that some policemen had sustained pellet
injuries but he failed to produce a single injured policeman;
instead of displaying hard evidence to justify the firing, he
told lies.
Giving statistics of previous police firings in Bihar the last
13 months, Abdi observed that 77 people had been killed in 45
police firings and not a single person belonging to the affluent
section of society died in police firing. The victims have
invariably been the poor: 40 alleged Naxalites and 15 tribals.
They were 'guilty' of demanding their rights enshrined in the
constitution. The police opened fire on 13 occasions out of 45
on the pretext that they were attacked by the Naxalites. Ten
such firings claimed 40 lives. Significantly, police bullets
always found their mark with deadly accuracy when aimed at
Naxalites. However, in 13 instances of firing, not a single life
was lost nor did anyone sustain injuries.
In this relation, Abdi posed three questions to DGP Sahai:
1. Why don't brahmins, bhoomihars and rajputs who belong to the
rich class die in police firings? Why is it that the poor,
harijans and backward classes inevitably face police bullets?
2. Why don't persons belonging to the rich communities become
Naxalites or extremists?
3. Why hasn't a single policeman been hanged to death in
independent India?
Sahai brushed aside the question and stepped into his car saying
"No comment." When Abdi sought an appointment with Chief
Minister Dubey for an interview, he said, "I know you will ask
me questions about the Arwal firing. I do not want to answer
them."
Abdi concluded his report as follows:
"The crux of the matter is that administrative accountability
alone is not sufficient to safeguard the lives and rights of
citizens. There must be legal accountability as well. Every
policeman who shoots down a person should be tried in a court of
law along with his superior officers. If the court is not
convinced about the justification for the firing, the policeman
should be hanged to death.
"The government can go to any extent to cover its excesses; it
will lie in the legislative assembly and Parliament, it will lie
to the press, it will lie to the people. One official will lie
to the other. The chief minister will lie to the prime minister.
The prime minister will lie to the nation; the scenario is
alarmingly familiar. Dissident voices are choked. Inquiry
commissions serve no purpose. Because, all along, it is the
government reporting to the government. The government, as in
inquiry commissions, become both plaintiff and accused! Can
anything be more ridiculous?
"The poor are living in a fool's paradise. Make no mistake about
it: if you are poor and you demand your rights, you stand the
risk of being physically eliminated. As in the case of 23
poorest of the poor at Arwal."
------------------------------
Subject: Laldenga to head the coalition govt. in Mizoram
Laldenga, a leader of the Mizo National Front, who was in exile
for 20 years, will be inaugurated as head of an interim coalition
government on August 12 in Mizoram. He will head the cabinet made
of 5 members of Congress party and 4 members of the Mizo National
Front. This follows the peace accord signed by central Home
Secretary RD Pradhan and Laldenga on June 24 after years of
negotiations. In an interview, Laldenga asserted that
implementation of the accord depended on both sides and that
unless there was mutual trust, no accord could be implemented.
Laldenga was responding to a remark by Central Minister of State
for Home Ghulam Nabi Azad that implementation of the Mizo accord
depended upon how Laldenga would behave in future.
------------------------------
Subject: Riots in Ahmedabad: Excerpts from Press
According to a well-known social worker and winner of Magsaysay
award Ela Bhatt, who was recently nominated to Rajya Sabha, the
violence might have been started by some Hindu fanatics and
anti-social elements. Her observation is supported by some of the
details of the events which have appeared in an investigative
article entitled "Why Ahmedabad burns every year" in the weekly
magazine Sunday.
According to the article, the rath (chariot) procession had
almost ended peacefully in Ahmedabad starting 7:30 in the
morning and going on its traditional route passing through many
Muslim localities. This was despite shouting of the provocative
slogans including "Jai ranchod, miyan Chor" and "Jo mangega
Pakistan, usko milega kabristan" in Muslim localities; but the
Muslims did not lose their cool. At 5:35 pm, when the procession
was to end at Jordan road and the police was diverted, there were
stones thrown on the procession which later resulted in Hindu
groups attacking Muslim shops and houses. In a memo submitted to
Union Minister P. Chidambaram, incharge of Gujrat affairs, a
group of doctors, lawyers and other professionals said that the
attack was preplanned. The memo also added that a Muslim
(Muslims) would never dare throw a stone at a procession in a
Hindu-dominated area because if he did so, he would never come
out alive. They have asked how come the police had not caught the
culprits.
------------------------------
Subject: Indian Writers walk out of Commonwealth writers conference
Writer Mulkraj Anand and painter Balraj Khanna were among many
intellectuals who walked out of the commonwealth writers
conference last weekend in Edinburgh. They were protesting
British government's refusal to impose sanctions against the
apartheid regime of PW Botha in South Africa. According to Anand,
"when the rest of the world has given up racial discrimination,
for Britain to stand firm on the sanctions issue in a manner
seemingly supporting apartheid is disgraceful." Khanna added, "it
would be immoral for him to ignore the suffering and agony of
black south Africans and participate in this conference." Two
other Indian writers Nissim Ezekiel and Eunice de Souza
reportedly stayed in the conference.
The conference passed a resolution expressing regret over
Britain's stand on sanctions against Pretoria regime.
------------------------------
Subject: A new watch by Congress High Command
Congress High Command has apparently come up with a new watch
costing around Rs 500. It has its second hand bearing the
Congress election symbol on the hand; when it touches numeral 3
or 9, Rajiv Gandhi's face lights up on the dial. The watches were
made to order by the Hindustan Machine Tools (HMT).
------------------------------
Subject: Hindu and Sikh amity quite prevalent in Punjab
A recent report in India Abroad suggested of widespread
cooperation and unity among Hindus and Sikhs to deal with
terrorists in rural Punjab. Correspondent Narayan Swamy who
recently visited areas in Amritsar and Gurdaspur districts
observed that a number of Sikhs he spoke to, emphasized
togetherness and love. According to one old Sikh villager, "we
Hindus and Sikhs have lived together for generations. Can you
tell me any good reason why we should go different ways now?"
Near Fatehabad in Amritsar district the correspondent was told
that in that village, Sikh families had gone from house to house
requesting Hindu families not to leave the village. But they
alleged that many left after workers of the Hindu Shiv Sena
descended on Fatehabad with a truck and jeep. So far, 5 people
from the village have been killed by terrorists. And, every time
a Hindu was killed, the entire village which is mostly inhabited
by Sikhs was reported to have mourned.
A young Hindu police officer said "If I start telling you the
number of times Sikhs have come to the rescue of Hindus in
Punjab, you could plan to write a book."
A Hindu resident opined in one village that there was fear and
everyone was uncertain about the future because of terrorism. "No
body knows what is going to happen. When I say nobody, I mean
both the Sikhs and Hindus."
------------------------------
Subject: Indefinite Detention Without Trial Possible
According to a civil liberties activist and professor of
Mathematics K Balagopal, a person can be kept in jail for ever in
India without being convicted of any crime. In an article
published in the Economic and Political Weekly, Balgopal opined
that the police's procedure is quite algorithmic. The police
arrests a person on a charge serious enough for which granting of
bail can be delayed. The police then harasses the guarantors of
the bail bond. If that does not work and the detainee is released
on bail, the police picks him on another charge especially under
the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act for which no victim
is needed. Further, this is a crime of intent and not of
execution.
According to Balagopal, the procedure for this has been
successfully implemented in many cases in Andhra where Balgopal
has been actively involved in exposing police and government
violations of human rights. Last year, Balagopal himself was the
victim of police anger because of his activities and courage; he
was arrested last fall under the Terrorist and Disruptive Act and
National Security Act and spent over 4 months in jail till human
right organizations in India as well as reputed journalists and
intellectuals pressurized the Andhra government to release him.
------------------------------
Subject: Floods kill over Hundreds of people
Heavy floods killed over 200 people in Andhra recently; over
100,000 houses collapsed and standing crops on over 1 million
acres of land were submerged under floods. Over 2200 villages in
13 districts were affected.
Over 250 people were reported to have been killed in recent
floods in northern India also. Over 100 people were killed in
Uttar Pradesh alone. The Ganges has flooded almost the entire
Ballia district and a total area of about 1.5 million acres
spread over 2000 villages. Over 20 were reported killed in heavy
rains in Jammu and Kashmir. Floods have hit Bihar, MP, Rajasthan
and Assam also.
------------------------------
Subject: Central policing of Border Areas planned
A resolution invoking article 249 of the constitution that
empowers the parliament to make laws on matters under the
jurisdiction of states was adopted by the Rajya Sabha on August
13. Its passage needed 2/3 majority of those present. The ruling
Congress(I) got the support of the BJP and the Anna DMK. Other
opposition parties opposed the resolution.
According to the government, the immediate objective of the
resolution is to enact a law enabling the Central government to
take over the policing of the western borders to stop terrorist
inflitration into Punjab.
The Akali Dal government in Punjab is opposed to the resolution
because it is afraid that such a move will further alienate the
Sikh population living in the border areas. According to Chief
Minister Surjit Singh Barnala, the resolution would further erode
the states' powers and would create political problems without
improving administrative efficiency. Barnala met with central
leaders in New Delhi to convince them not to pass the amendment
but was not successful.
------------------------------
Subject: Bill to withhold inquiry commission reports enacted
Earlier, the Rajya Sabha approved on August 6 the commission of
inquiry amendment bill which empowers the government to withhold
the report of any inquiry commission in the interest of public
and state. The opposition condemned the adoption of amendment as
a "trend towards authoritarianism" and walked out. On July 30,
the Lok Sabha had passed the bill which replaced the Commissions
of Inquiry (Amendment) Ordinance, 1986. The law allows the
government not even to table the report of an inquiry commission
to the parliament if the government decides that this may go
against nation's interst.
The Lok Sabha was also notified by the Minister of state for Home
Affairs P. Chidambaram that the goverment intended to withhold
the Thakkar commission report on the assasination of Indira
Gandhi. The minister said that the publication of the report
would prejudice the ongoing trial of the accused.
------------------------------
Subject: Farooq forsees worst J&K Crisis
The former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir Dr. Farooq
Abdullah recently said that he visualized the worst crisis in the
history of the state "if something is not done to end the
political stalemate" there. He called for an end to the
governor's rule and demanded fresh elections. He warned of
growing divide between the Hindus and Muslims in the state and
the rise of fundamentalist and communal politics on both sides.
------------------------------
Subject: Assam accord not being implemented
The All Assam Students Union charged the Rajiv Gandhi government
on August 16 with not making any serious effort to implement
several crucial clauses of the year-old Assam accord. Officers of
the organization which spearheaded the agitation in Assam for
over 5 years told a news conference, "there is a growing feeling
in Assam that the government had formulated the accord only to
defuse the situation in the state."
------------------------------
Subject: Rajiv's new Kitchen cabinet
According to Kuldip Nayar, a new trinity has emerged in Rajiv
Gandhi's sanctum. It comprises of External Affairs Minister P
Shiv Shankar, Rajiv Gandhi's former colleague in Indian Air Lines
and a new Rajya Sabha member Captain Satish Sharma and Prime
Minister's political secretary Makhan Lal Fotedar. The
triumvirate replaced another made of Arun Nehru, Arun Singh and
Arjun Singh. According to Kuldip Nayar, Shiv Shankar is known for
his views opposing the Punjab accord signed between Rajiv Gandhi
and the late Sant Longowal last July.
------------------------------
Subject: Parliament asks for global sanctions
Indian parliament unanimously adopted a resolution on August 7
appealing to all governments to impose comprehensive mandatory
sanctions against the South African regime. It also condemned the
nations supporting the racist goverment there. The government
promised to take stringent actions against companies found to
have illegal trade links with South Africa.
------------------------------
Subject: Bombay Our City Chosen Best Non-feature Film
Anand Patwardhan's documentary, Bombay, Our City, won the
national award for the best non-feature film, of the year. The
movie depicts the plight of slumdwellers and their struggle for
survival and against eviction. When the slumdwellers of Sanjay
Gandhi Nagar in Bombay came to know about the news, they
organized a ceremony honouring Patwardhan who has been playing an
active role in organizing support for the slumdwellers against
demolitions and evictions. Recently, Patwardhan, along with other
eminent personalities including Govind Nehlani, Shabana Azami, Om
Puri, Vijay Tendulkar, Uma Sehgal, and Asghar Ali Enginer,
participated in a procession and courted arrests. Anand also
participated in a hunger strike demanding alternate housing site
for slumdwellers.
Patwardhan debated whether to accept the award in view of the
continued state of sponsored violence against the poor. He
decided to accept the award as a "sign that there are ears in
this country," therefore "it is our democratic duty to speak in
as many forums as possible." However, he wanted the award to be
seen as a recognition of the intelligence and courage of the
working people of the country. To symbolize this, Vimal Hedau, a
50 year old woman who moved to Bombay 18 years ago when her land
in her village was usurped, accepted the award on Patwardhan's
behalf from the President of India on June 12 in New Delhi.
Note: This movie is available for screening in North America.
Those interested may contact Deepak Kapur at 49 Pinewood Avenue,
Albany, NY 12208, (518)-482-4370, Kapur@GE-CRD.ARPA.
------------------------------
Subject: Over 45,000 Arrested in Bihar
August 21 reminded people of Bihar of emergency when the Congress
government of Chief Minister Bindeswari Dubey arrested 45,000
people. Over 25,000 were arrested in Patna, whereas 20,000 more
were detained in other parts of Bihar. The official estimates of
the arrests were however 2000 only.
This was apparently in a response to the program of laying siege
to the state assembly by Janasanghar Virodhi Sangram Morcha to
protest the Bihar police's shooting dead of 23 unarmed peasants
at Arwal on April 21. Two mass organizations- the Indian
Peoples' Front (IPF) and Mazdoor Kisan Sangram Samiti (MKSS),
which have been organizing the organizing landless poors and
dalits for demanding minimum wages and other rights are actively
involved in the protest. Earlier, the government banned the MKSS
under the pretext that the organization posed law and order
problem and constituted a danger to the public; the government
has declared the Samiti an unlawful association. The MKSS has
been very active in Arwal, Gaya and other parts of Bihar in
organizing the landless peasants.
On August 21, the governent had Patna sealed off by security men.
All entry points were kept under surveillance by police and
paramilitary forces. However, despite the government's efforts to
curb the protest, thousands of protestors who had sneaked into
the captial the previous nights in small groups, headed for the
state assembly. They were led by the veteran Naxalite leader and
IPF chairman Nagbhushan Patnaik. But before they could reach the
assembly, security men used staves to break up the procession and
the demonstrators were arrested.
In the assembly, the opposition staged walkouts in quick
succession demanding a high-level inquiry into the Arwal massacre
and Dubey's resignation over the police action on August 21
against peaceful demonstrators.
------------------------------
Subject: Gold Medal for Debshishu
Debshishu, a Hindi film of the Bengali director Utpalendu
Chakraborty won the gold medal for direction at the 39th
International Film Festival at Locarno, Switzerland. The film
also won the "ecumenical" jury award for depicting a deep-rooted
cultural tradition and exposing exploitation.
Chakraborty's earlier feature film, Chokh, was also widely
acclaimed and had won many awards.
------------------------------
End of INDIA NOW news digest
****************************