Nasheman

India's largest selling Urdu weekly, now also in English

You are here: Home / Archives for Narendra Modi

Nanavati Commission: Another hoax on people of India!

by

Photo: AFP

Photo: AFP

by Fr. Cedric Prakash

Finally, on November 18, 2014, exactly 12 years 8 months and 12 days after it was first constituted by the Gujarat Government on March 6,h 2002 to probe the burning of the Godhra train and the subsequent carnage which broke out in several parts of Gujarat, the Commission headed by GT Nanavati (a former judge of the Supreme Court of India) submitted its report to the current Chief Minister of Gujarat, Anandiben Patel.

It was originally known as the KG Shah Commission but it was later reconstituted to include Justice Nanavati, after several civil rights groups and individuals protested over the closeness that Justice Shah had with Narendra Modi. Justice Shah died in 2008; and Justice Akshay H. Mehta (who granted bail to Babu Bajrangi in the Naroda Patiya case) was appointed on April 5, 2008 to be a member of this Commission.

The content of this more than 2000-page report has not yet been made public but if one goes by the grapevine and what seems to be “leaked out” to sections of the media, then one can very easily conclude the following: that those really responsible for the law and order in the State have been given a ‘clean chit’; that the burning of S-6 Coach of the Sabarmati Express on February 27, 2002, just outside the Godhra railway station was a ‘meticulously planned act of conspiracy’ (this was already said in the Commission’s interim report in 2008); and finally the only people who seemed to be ‘responsible’ for not preventing or controlling the violence are some lower rung policemen and some apparently anti-social elements.

The Commission which has claimed to have looked into 4,160 cases of violence in Gujarat between February 27th and May 31st 2002 also states that it has gone through 46,000 affidavits submitted by over 4,000 victims of the violence that paralysed Gujarat and continues to be one of the darkest and bloodiest chapters of independent India. It was given 24 extensions (of almost six months each) before it submitted its report.

Till July 2012, the Commission ran up an expenditure bill of more than Rs 5.00 crore with an additional miscellaneous expense of Rs 1.62 crore. It has been past two-and-a-half years since; so the final cost of this Commission (including the disguised expenditure) will surely run to a mind-boggling amount and all at the cost of the state exchequer (a Gujarati newspaper puts a conservative cost of Rs.9.00 crore).

Several concerned citizens like the late Mukul Sinha of Jan Sangharsh Manch, Sanjiv Bhatt and others have tried their level best to bring the Commission – any thinking citizen will know – on track and ensure that truth prevails and that the victim-survivors are given justice. The Commission has been full of inconsistencies, lapses and loopholes. Sinha, who cross-examined several witnesses, has consistently demanded that Modi, who was the Chief Minister of Gujarat at that time, had to be interrogated, too. Why the Commission took the pains to deny this request from Sinha and several others does not leave much room for doubt!

Even though the Commission has submitted its report, many for the victim-survivors (and several others who have accompanied them) are the Gujarat Carnage of 2002 is not a closed chapter. The relentless pursuit for truth and justice will continue until those who presided over this carnage are brought to book. Only then, will they truly be able to sing our motto emblazoned on our national emblem “satyameva jayate” (truth alone triumphs!)

Fr. Cedric Prakash is the Director of Prashant, the Ahmedabad-based Jesuit Centre for Human Rights, Justice and Peace.

India opts out of admonishing Israel

by

Union home minister Rajnath Singh (left) during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (right). Photo: PTI

Union home minister Rajnath Singh (left) during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (right). Photo: PTI

by Ninan Koshy

While every other ally of Israel has distanced itself from Israel’s policies after its offensive in Gaza this summer – especially on settlements – India has pledged to strengthen its relations with the country.

A visit by India’s Home Minister Rajnath Singh to Israel this month became an chance for India to proclaim its steadfast support for the country. During the trip, Singh said India sought closer ties with the country adding, “Israel plays a major role in world politics”. India has invited Israel to become a partner in a “Made in India” initiative in the defense sector and Israel has expressed a desire to share cutting edge weapon technologies with New Delhi.

Even before the ink on the indefinite ceasefire agreement in the Gaza conflict had dried in August, Israel announced a decision to grab nearly 1,000 acres (404 hectares) of Palestinian land to build Jewish settlements. This expansionist act was condemned by the US, the UK, the European Union and the United Nations. British Prime Minister David Cameron called it “utterly deplorable”.

Israel had two objectives in the war against Hamas. One was to delegitimize Hamas as a political movement and degrade it to a sheer terrorist organization and if possible to destroy it. The other was to scuttle the process of Palestinian unity which had strengthened with the formation of a unity government.

Israel failed in both objectives. The world witnessed the increasing acceptance of Hamas as a legitimate political movement of Palestine and Palestine as a state. The Swedish government officially recognized the state of Palestine on October 30. Before that came a non-binding resolution in the British parliament, with similar votes in the pipeline in France, Spain and Ireland.

New European Union foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini last week appealed for the establishment of a Palestinian state, saying the world cannot afford another war in Gaza. “We need a Palestinian state. That is the ultimate goal and this is the position of all the European Union”, Mogherini said during a trip to Gaza. “We cannot just sit and wait. If we sit and wait it will go on for another 40 years. We have to have act now”

Israel’s other objective of scuttling the process of Palestinian unity also failed – Fatah-Hamas relations have strengthened since the ceasefire.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s meeting with his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu in September, the first such meeting between the prime ministers of the countries in more than a decade, was significant for a number of reasons. During the meeting, Netanyahu said that “the sky is the limit” in terms of prospects for cooperation.

It was also made clear that Modi would seek the views of the Israeli prime minister on the Islamic State. “The two leaders discussed the situation in West Asia. Given that Israel is well-placed in that region PM [Modi] requested and was given a briefing of their understanding of the situation”, the amiable spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs helpfully explained. The Indian Prime Minister did not need any briefing on the situation from any other West Asian leader.

The conversation came just before Modi’s dinner with President Barack Obama in Washington and the prime minister’s address to the Council on Foreign Relations, to outline his government’s foreign policy objectives. Netanyahu’s views were sought by Modi in his preparations for these two events.

In fact there was no need to seek Netanyahu’s views on the Islamic State in Modi’s conversation, since the Israel prime minister had clearly stated his views in the UN General Assembly, “Hamas and the Islamic state group are branches of the same poisonous trees, both bent on world domination through terror just as the Nazis were.”

India’s relationship with Israel was sparked by L K Advani, a senior leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), following a visit to Israel in 1995. He returned with rhetoric on civilizational bonds, but also on terrorism. Five years later, Advani returned to Israel, this time as India’s Home Minister.

During the visit in June 2005, Advani said at the Indian Embassy in Tel Aviv, “In recent years we have been facing a growing international security problem. We are concerned with cross-border terrorism launched by proxies of Pakistan. We share with Israel a common perception of terrorism as a menace, even more so when coupled with religious fundamentalism. Our mutual determination to combat terrorism is the basis of discussions with Israel whose reputation in dealing with such problems is quite successful.”

Rajnath Singh had a helicopter tour of the Jordan valley and Israel’s northern and southern regions with National Security Adviser Yossi Cohen “to get a sense of the security situation there”. The security situation there is simply the military preparedness of Israel, mainly against the Palestinians.

Of course, Rajnath Singh was following in the footsteps of his illustrious predecessor Advani who in 2000 had “visited northern border areas to study border management that Israel has displayed so successfully”.

The talk about cross-border terrorism and border areas seems unlikely considering Israel has refused to define its borders and is grabbing more and more Palestinian territory borders on legitimizing occupation. During the Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres’ visit to New Delhi in January 2002, the Foreign Ministry’s spokesperson had said, “India finds it increasingly beneficial to learn from Israel’s experience in dealing with terrorism since Israel has long suffered from cross-border terrorism”.

What are the borders of Israel crossed by terrorists, the spokesperson was speaking about? As Robert Fisk asked, “Which particular Israel? The Israel of 1948? The Israel of the post-1967 borders? The Israel which builds and goes on building vast settlements for Jews and Jews only on Arab lands, gobbling up even more of the 22% Palestinian land still left to negotiate?”

India-Israel cooperation in counter-terrorism is based on equating the Palestinian struggle with cross-border terrorism. It is this flawed and skewed stance that is reflected in India’s attitude to Israel’s periodic wars against Palestinians.

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing. Articles submitted for this section allow our readers to express their opinions and do not necessarily meet the same editorial standards of Asia Times Online’s regular contributors.

Ninan Koshy is a political commentator based in Trivandrum, Kerala, India, and formerly Visiting Fellow, Harvard Law School, is the author of War on Terror: Reordering the World and Under the Empire: India’s New Foreign Policy.

(Copyright 2014 Ninan Koshy)

Nanavati Commission submits final report on 2002 Gujarat riots

by

Photo: AFP

Photo: AFP

Ahmedabad: After 12 years and 24 extensions, the two-member Nanavati-Mehta Commission of Enquiry submitted its much-awaited final report on the 2002 Godhra train carnage and the subsequent communal riots, here Tuesday.

The commission, consisting of retired Supreme Court judge Justice G.T. Nanavati and retired high court judge Justice Akshay Mehta, submitted the report to Chief Minister Anandiben Patel at her residence Tuesday afternoon.

The last extension of the commission’s term had ended Oct 31.

The contents and recommendations of the final report by the Commission are not yet known.

The report delved into the burning alive of 59 passengers in the ill-fated S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express near Godhra station Feb 27, 2002, followed by communal riots in many parts of the west Indian border state – killing 1169 people – ranked among the worst in the country’s post-Independence history.

The then Chief Minister Narendra Modi – now India’s Prime Minister – had appointed a one-man commission of retired Justice K.G. Shah, March 6 that year to probe the train carnage and the communal riots.

Later, it was made a two-member commission with Justice Nanavati as its chairman; retired Justice Mehta was appointed to the commission after the demise of retired Justice Shah in 2008.

The Gujarat government Aug 5, 2005, modified the commission’s Terms of Reference whereby it was empowered to probe the role of Modi and other ministers and officials into the two incidents.

In Sep 2008, the commission submitted its 168-page first report on the train incident in which 59 Kar Sevaks were burnt to death in S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express near Godhra.

In that report, the Commission had termed the incident as “a pre-planned conspiracy involving some individuals”, and “a premeditated crime and not an accident.”

It had also concluded that there was “absolutely no evidence to show that either Narendra Modi, the then CM of Gujarat, and/or any other minister/s in his council of ministers, or police officers had played any role in the Godhra incident, or that there was any lapse on their part in the matter of providing protection, relief and rehabilitation to the victims of communal riots or in the matter of not complying with the recommendations and directions give by the National Human Rights Commission.”

Over the years, the Commission received nearly 46,500 documents, affidavits and statements of officials and members of the public, and it carried out a spot visit of the burnt train coach as part of its enquiry.

(IANS)

India, Australia ink five agreements

by

india_australia_deal

Canberra: India and Australia Tuesday signed five agreements, including on exchange of sentenced prisoners and on tourism, as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Australian counterpart Tony Abbott held bilateral talks here.

The agreements are on social security, to “strengthen people-to-people contacts and facilitate and regulate the regulations between the two countries with respect to social security benefits and coverage”.

“It will provide for social security and superannuation benefits for those who have been residents of the other country on basis of equality of benefit, export of benefits and avoidance of double coverage.” an official statement said.

“It will lead to greater economies and promote the flow of professionals,” the statement said.

The agreement on transfer of sentenced prisoners is to “enhance cooperative efforts in law enforcement and administration of justice and to cooperate in the enforcement of penal sentences”.

“It will facilitate, regulate and lay down procedures for the transfer of sentenced persons and enable rehabilitation and reintegration of sentenced persons into society,” the statement said.

The MoU on Combating Narcotics Trafficking and Developing Police Cooperation, is to “address concerns regarding illicit trafficking and drug abuse”.

The fourth agreement is on Cooperation in the Field of Arts and Culture, and “will promote cooperation through exchange of information, professional expertise, training and exhibitions in the field of culture”.

The fifth agreement is in the field of tourism, to encourage “interaction between tourism stakeholders, training and investments in hospitality sector and promote the importance of the tourism sector in economic development and employment generation”, the statement added.

(IANS)

India and Australia agree to collaborate on rejuvenating Ganga

by

A devotee taking a dip in the polluted waters of river Ganga in Allahabad. Photo: The Hindu

A devotee taking a dip in the polluted waters of river Ganga in Allahabad. Photo: The Hindu

Canberra/ANI: India and Australia on Tuesday announced plans to collaborate on rejuvenating the River Ganga during the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi here.

In a joint statement issued during Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Australia, both sides welcomed the two-way exchanges and cooperation in river basin planning under the water partnership, and a new program of joint research on agricultural water management.

Both sides also welcomed co-operation between Australian and Indian universities, and in particular, the joint PhD programmes to encourage research.

During his visit here, Prime Minister Modi renewed his invitation to Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott to visit India again at his convenience. They also agreed that high-level visits played a key role in enhancing the strategic partnership between the two countries.

Prime Minister Modi kickstarted his day’s engagements with a visit to the War Memorial here, where he paid his tributes to those Australians who had died at war while serving their country.

He was also accompanied by his Australian counterpart Tony Abbott, where he laid a wreath in the Hall of Memory . Prime Minister Modi observed few minutes of silence at the memorial as a mark of respect and signed the visitor’s book here before he left.

Later, Prime Minister Narendra Modi was given a warm ceremonial reception here at the forecourt of the Australian Parliament and offered a gun salute.

He also inspected a guard of honour during his visit here.

During his opening statement at a joint press conference with Prime Minister Tony Abbott, Prime Minister Modi said that both nations were seeking early closure to a civil nuclear agreement that will give Australia a chance to participate in one of the world’s most safe and secure nuclear energy programmes. Besides, the two nations also decided to sign five pacts on several areas.

While addressing the joint session of the Australian Parliament, he placed Australia at the centre of India’s vision of a prosperous and regional order, at the juncture of the Indian and Pacific oceans, at a time when security and maritime navigation were valued more highly than ever before.

After addressing the Australian Parliament here, Prime Minister Modi has arrived in Melbourne where he is scheduled to address expatriate Indians at the the 161-year-old Melbourne Cricket Ground and attend two other events hosted by Prime Minister Tony Abbott, before departing for Fiji for the third leg of his three-nation, 10-day trip.

(ANI)

RJD, JD-U likely merge ahead of Bihar assembly polls

by

RJD JD-U

Patna: Bihar will witness the biggest political realignment of the decade ahead of the assembly polls in 2015 with likely merger of Lalu Prasad’s Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and the ruling Janata Dal-United to counter the surging BJP.

“After results of Haryana and Maharashtra assembly polls, Lalu Prasad and JD-U president Sharad Yadav and former chief minister Nitish Kumar have agreed in principle to merge the two parties to take on the BJP,” a RJD leader close to Lalu Prasad said Monday.

This development has come nearly four months after Lalu Prasad and Nitish Kumar joined hands in Bihar and 10 days after leaders of the Samajwadi Party, the JD-U, the RJD and the Janata Dal-Secular announced a united front to counter the Narendra Modi government at the Centre.

A JD-U leader said: “Merger of the RJD and the JD-U is on cards to strengthen secular forces…”

He said none other than Nitish Kumar himself said that “we resolved to work together and in the near future there is a strong possibility we might merge and form one party”.

According to the JD-U and the RJD leaders here, if both parties contest next state assembly polls as an alliance, there will be serious problem of seat sharing.

The JD-U, which has 118 legislators in the house, will bargain for more seats and the RJD, which has 23 legislators, will put its claim for more seats on the basis of its performance in the last Lok Sabha polls.

In August, Lalu Prasad and Nitish Kumar jointly campaigned during the by-elections in Bihar. The JD-U, the RJD and the Congress won six of the 10 assembly seats.

That was the first time the two leaders came together after a gap of 20 years. It was in the 1991 Lok Sabha polls that Lalu Prasad and Nitish Kumar last campaigned together.

Lalu Prasad then said he and Nitish Kumar wanted to send a strong message across the country to unite non-BJP forces.

Nitish Kumar, who quit as Bihar’s chief minister in May after his party was routed in the general elections, has been repeatedly targeting Modi.

He said Modi has failed to bring back black money stashed abroad by Indians within 100 days of taking power.

In a bid to expose Modi’s double speak, Nitish Kumar said: “Modi had promised to bring back black money after being elected to power. But he has failed to do that even after 150 days.”

The JD-U ended a 17-year alliance with the BJP last year after Modi was declared the prime ministerial candidate of the party.

Modi govt to lend $1 billion for Adani Australia coal mine

by

Photo: Pradeep Gaur/Mint

Photo: Pradeep Gaur/Mint

Melbourne/Agencies: Adani Enterprises (ADEL.NS) won support on Monday from the State Bank of India (SBI) and an Australian state to help it build a $7 billion coal mine, defying a slump in coal prices to 5-1/2 year lows that has stalled rival projects.

The trading and infrastructure conglomerate signed a memorandum of understanding for a loan of up to $1 billion from the SBI for the mine, rail and port project in Queensland, which it aims to build by end-2017.

“The MOU with SBI is a significant milestone in the development of our Carmichael mine,” Adani Group Chairman and founder, Gautam Adani, who has close ties with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, said in a statement.

Adani was in Brisbane with a business delegation for the G20 summit, which Modi attended over the weekend.

The company also won a commitment from the state government to take short-term, minority stakes in rail and port infrastructure needed to unlock massive coal reserves in the untapped Galilee Basin. Coal from the region must be sent 400 km by rail to Australia’s east coast.

Adani aims to reach a final investment decision on the Carmichael project in late 2015.

Australia’s federal and Queensland governments are eager to see the mine built following the loss of more than 4,000 coal jobs over the past two years, but analysts and project finance experts believe Adani may have underestimated the challenge of raising funds for the project.

“People have been very sceptical about the financing of this project. As we always said, we’ll keep getting this, one by one. The pieces are falling in place,” Adani Mining CEO Jeyakumar Janakaraj told Reuters.

Adani, which is also facing a campaign by anti-coal campaigners, is counting on securing A$1.2 billion to A$1.5 billion in funding from South Korea’s export credit agencies, as well as a loan from the U.S. Export-Import Bank.

The company’s apparent momentum on Carmichael is in stark contrast to rival Indian firm GVK’s slow progress on another huge coal mine in the Galilee Basin, the Alpha project, which is co-owned by Australian billionaire Gina Rinehart.

Much bigger coal rivals, like BHP Billiton (BHP.AX) and Glencore (GLEN.L), have shelved coal developments at a time when a third of Australia’s coal output is making losses.

Janakaraj dismissed comments by Indian Power and Coal Minister Piyush Goyal that the country may be able to stop importing thermal coal within three years.

Supreme Court of India Orders Day to Day Trial in Gulbarg Society massacre case

by

Zakia Jafri and Teesta Setalvad visit her Gulbarg Society home in Feb ’10

Zakia Jafri and Teesta Setalvad visit her Gulbarg Society home in Feb ’10

by Teesta Setalvad

Today i.e.. November 13 2014 the Supreme Court of India Ordered Day to Day Hearing of the Gulberg Trial and completion of the Trial within 3 months. It did not Its Vacate Stay on the Trial Court Judgement (operative since May 2010) (as requested by SIT). The state of Gujarat tried to confuse the issue but fortunately our team, Ms Aparna Bhat had a detailed status report prepared by us which was read out to the Hon’ble Court.

Detailed Background / Status report on Gulberg Trial is Pasted Below

SIT has filed an application to Vacate Stay on Judgement. Our Advocate Ms Aparna Bhatt pointed out to the Court that over two years delay had been caused by the SIT refusing to produce documents related to Witness Application under Section 319 seeking to make MK Tandon, PN Gondia and others accused in the Trial. Finally after the HC rejected their obstructionist attempts they produced the documents in August this year. We have still not been given a copy. (Detailed Dates and SIT instructions given below).

Gulberg Case – SC No. 152/02

Update

Trial Suspended from July 2012 until March 2014 when the Gujarat High Court rejected SIT’s frivolous application challenging the Order of the Sessions Court dated May and June 2012.

Background:-

Special Court Judge BJ Dhandha in Sessions Case No. 152/02 and others through an order 31 May 2012 (Order at Exhibit 1577) directed the SIT to produce documents related to joint commissioner of police, MK Tandon and P.B. Gondia as the papers were related to the further investigation directed by the Supreme Court. The further investigations into the Gulberg trial, especially vis a vis the alleged criminal conduct of these two police officers were sought to be prevented from coming on record by the SIT by deliberately confusing this case with the wider criminal conspiracy in the Zakia Jafri v/s Narendra Modi and 59 Others case.

The further application u/s Section 319 ( Exhibit 1577) was moved by us witnesses in Special Sessions court dated 12.5.2012 and it was on this application that the Court pronounced the order on 31.5.2012 stating inter alia that, while at this stage no order is passed in this application.

The SIT did not comply with the said order dated 3.7.2012 passed by the Sessions Court

[Exb.1661] and in fact moved the Sessions Court to review its own Order. This was also turned[ down by a final Order of the Sessions Court passed on 3.7.2012. (Exb.1748 and 1730) In this context the affidavit filed by Himanshu Bhatt of the SIT dated 18.6.2012 resisting the application of the Sessions Court Order (Exhibit1754) is noteworthy. It is important to note that the Special PP RC Kodekar had noted that he had no objection to the documents being prayed for in our application. The SIT continued to play a dilatory and destructionist role.

The SIT submitted the closure report filed before a lower court in the Zakia Jafri case but this has been kept in a sealed cover and sought to leave to challenge the orders in the High Court. The SIT thereafter on 24.7.2012 moved the Special Criminal Application (SCR) 2249/2012 in the Gujarat High Court. (Exhibit 1730 and 1748).

Witness Survivors have filed their Affidavit-in Reply in the said SCR but were distressed that no hearings have taken place in the Gujarat High Court and the entire the Trial process has been stalled.

Judge BJ Dhandha retired in September 2013 and another Judge KK Bhatt has been assigned to hear the Trial but not a single hearing has taken place.

The closure report in the Zakia Jafri case was filed on 8.2.2012 before the Magistrate (a lower court than the Special Court hearing the Gulberg trial) and the protest petition therein was argued through 2013. While the Magistrate hearing the case rejected the protest petition by it’s Order dated 26-12-2013, the SIT is seeking shelter under this to conceal critical evidence about the allegedly criminal conduct of Tandon and Gondia before a higher court, the Sessions Court hearing this, i.e. the Gulberg trial.

In effect therefore, the Trial in the Gulberg Society Carnage case had been completely stalled since July 2012 largely because of the SIT’s reluctance to make available relevant documents.

In December 2009, witnesses had moved an application under Section 319 of the CrPC seeking to arraign more accused (Exhibit Nos exhibit 738) including former joint commissioner of police MK Tandon and former deputy commissioner of police PB Gondia. In its order passed on 18.1.2010 vide Exb.738 the Special Sessions Judge allowed the application vis a vis one accused namely Rajesh Dayaram Jingar, rejected it vis a vis three accused namely (1) Manish Somabhai Patel @ Manish Splendar (2) Mahendra Pukhraj (3) Jagrupsing Rajput but kept the issue of arraigning the two senior policemen pending since further investigation into their criminal negligence was still being conducted by the SIT on 3.10.2011,

Witness Victim Survivors thereafter moved an Application (Exhibit Nos 1661) to access the relevant documents of investigation. An application to stay the proceedings until these documents were brought on record was rejected by the Sessions Court and the matter appealed by Victim Survivors in the Gujarat high Court (SCR 3322/2011). While rejecting the application, the Hon’ble Gujarat high court in its order dated 29.12.2013 (Para 17) observed, “I have given thoughtful consideration to this aspect of the matter. There is no dispute that the Hon’ble Apex Court directed the SIT to comply with the directions issued in paragraph no.9 in the order dated 12.9.11 and thereafter even the Sessions Court vide order dated 9.11.11 almost issued the said direction to the SIT and till date no report is filed either before the Court having competent to take cognizance of the matter and till date no copies of such report and documents have been furnished to the Court of Session. In the above view of the matter. The respondent no.2 should take immediate action and the submissions advanced by Mr.A.C. Choksi. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.2 that the report shall be submitted at the earliest should be followed in its true spirit.”

The entire evidence in this trial has been recorded and final arguments have been virtually concluded in the trial. It was a pending application under Section 319 CrPC where a judicial order had kept the issue of arraigning joint Commissioner of Police MK Tandon, DCP P.B. Gondia, (Note No.2) Police Commissioner P.C.Pandey and I.O. S,S,Chudasma A.C.P. Crime Branch pending, that the applications by Witness Survivors for additional documents were made. The next date of hearing in SCR 2249/2012 was then on 19.2.2014

Finally the Gujarat High Courtr dismissed the Application by the SIT ruling against it. The SIT finally submitted the Index of Documents from which Witmess Advocates have to indicate the relevant documents on 05.08.2014. The next date for hearing is 25.07.2014

ROZNAMA (while SIT had effectively stayed the Trial by Its application against the Sessions Court Order granting documents dated May and June 2012).

Date Details

17.9.13 Formal date is given.

1.10.13 Accused produced in the ‘E’ Court. Accuse No.17 and 49 accused exception from appearance application submitted in the court and granted vide exb. No. 1822

12.10.13 Addl Session Judge K.K. Bhatt. [Sp. P.P. Shri R.C. Kodekar was absent} SIT moved for medical relief for accused [PC Mehboobbhai was present] Accused No.17 Kalpesh Purohit’s medical certificate produced vide exb. 1823 in the court. Notice issued to guaranteer and NBW against accused No. 1 to 7.

25.10.13 Matter adjourned to 11.11.13 for final arguments due to matter pending in High Court

11.11.13 Matter adjourned to 25.11.13 for final arguments due to matter pending in High Court

25.11.13 Matter adjourned to 10.12.13 for final arguments due to matter pending in High Court

3.12.13 Accused produced in the court today. Accused No.3 Sandeep @ Sonu Ghungruvado ( SC. No. 167/03) And accused No.3 Surendrasing Digvijay Singh ( SC. 152/02) and Accused No. 43 Narayan Sitaram (S.C. No. 194/04) application about discussion and to take guidance vide exb.1829. Exb. 1829 application of the accused rejected.

10.12.13 Matter adjourned on. 26.12.13 due to matter pending in High Court

26.12.13 Pursis vide Exb.1832 about death certificate of Accused No.17 Court is on leave today. So, next date on 9.1.14

Matter adjourned to 9.1.14 due to matter pending in High Court

9.1.14 Order as per Exb.1834. Recorded Nodel Officer to File The report

Matter adjourned to 21.1.13 due to matter pending in High Court

21.1.14 Report not submitted vide Exb. 1835 accused no.17’s death

Matter adjourned to 4.2.14 due to matter pending in High Court

24.1.14 Order to take necessary action against Transfer warrant of Accused No.1 Kailash Lalchand Dhobhi by DCB II Cr.No.3132/13 and send to criminal department II. SIT submitted report to inquire about the death of accused no.17 vide exb.1836

Matter adjourned on. 17.2.14 for final arguments due to matter pending in High Court

17.2.14 Matter adjourned on. 3.3.14 to submit arguments due to matter pending in High Court

20.2.14 Copy of order by the Gujarat High Court in Cr.Mis.A. No. 136/14 submitted in the court by accused Jayesh Ramjibhai Parmar vide exb.1838.

3.3.14 Speedy Trial Application submitted in the court vide exb. No.1839 on behalf of witnesses Sayraben Sandhi, Firoz Gulzar Pathan, Rupa Dara Modi and Salim Noor Mohammed Sandhi by Advocate S.M. Vora. Copy was received by Prosecution. Next date of hearing on 10.3.14

Matter adjourned to. 18.3.14 due to matter pending in High Court

5.3.14 Received the copy from criminal department II vide exb.no. 1841 about Writ in the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court Cr.M.A. No. 2249/12

10.3.14 Court is on leave so hearing of Exb.1839 postponed.

18.3.14 Written reply submitted in the court by Sp.P.P. about SIT officer application vide exb.1839. which submitted Exb.1843

Matter adjourned to 15.4.14 to, submit arguments

Hearing of Exb.1839 on dt.7.4.14

Next date. 31.3.14

31.3.14 Court is on leave. Next date 15.4.14

7.4.14 Rejoinder affidavit Exb.1845 submitted in the court against the witnesses vide exb.1843 reply by the SIT.

For hearing vide exb. 1839 on dt.18.4.14 in the noon around 2.45 pm

11.4.14 Writ certified copy of Honble Gujarat High Court in Cr, M.

A.No.3911/14 vide exb.1846 submitted in the court.

15.4.14 Matter adjourned to 29.4.14

For hearing vide exb. 1839 on dt.18.4.14 in the noon around 2.45 pm

18.4.14 Court heard arguments in Exb.1839 and admitted SIT IO Sur-Rejoinder vide Exb.1848 Court heard Sp.PP’s Arguments

Court adjourned for argument reply by Sp.PP .

Next date.22.4.14

22.4.14 Court heard in Exb.1839 Sp.PP argument reply by S.M. Vora. So, adjourned and on order vide exb.1839.

Next date.9.5.14

29.4.14 Matter adjourned to. 13.5.14 to for final arguments due to matter pending in High Court;

For further hearing and order in Exb.1839 . So, adjourned to

dt.9.5.14

13.5.14 Matter adjourned to 27.5.14 to submit arguments in favour of Accused due to dilatory tactics by the SIT. For further hearing and order in Exb.1839 . So,

adjourned to dt.27.5.14

27.5.14 Matter adjourned to 10.6.14 to submit arguments

For order in Exb.1839 . So, adjourned on dt.27.5.14

10.6.14 Court is on leave. So next date.24.6.14

Matter adjourned to 24.6.14. For orders in Exb.1839 .

24.6.14 Matter adjourned to 08.07.2014 to submit arguments in favour of accused due dilatory tactics by the SIT For order in Exb.1839 . So, adjourned on dt.8.7.14

8.7.14 Order declared in Exb.1839- Witness application for Documents was finally allowed

Matter adjourned to 22.7.14

22.7.14 Court is on leave. SIT IO Himanshu Shukla given application to take

15 days time to submit the copies in the court to Sp.P.P. vide Exb.1839 and this exb. No. 1856.

Application granted…..

Matter adjourned to 5.8.14.to submit arguments in favour of accused due to Supreme Court stay order

2.8.14 Cr.M.A. No. 11343/14 of the Gujarat HC Xerox copy of writ vide exb.1858

Cr.M.A. No. 11260/14 of the Gujarat HC Xerox copy of writ vide exb.1859

Cr.M.A. No. 10494/14 of the Gujarat HC Xerox copy of writ vide exb.1860

Cr.M.A. No. 9491/14 of the Gujarat HC Xerox copy of writ vide exb.1861

5.8.14 Order’s copy submitted in Exb.1839 by the Sp.P.P. in the court vide Exb. 1863

Order to “abate” Accused No.17 Ratilal Ganeshji Kumbhar on cause of death.

Matter adjourned to 19.8.14 for arguments

INDEX of Documents submitted to Witness Advocates by the SIT

7.8.14 Cr.M.A. No. 11260/14 of the Gujarat HC Xerox copy of writ vide exb.1864

19.8.14 Application to provide documents in favour of witnesses in Exb.1839 by Advocate S.M. Vohra’s with Exb.1866.

Fixed for hearing. Matter adjourned to. 2.9.14 to submit arguments in favour of accused due to Supreme Court stay order

2.9.14 Copy of order by the Gujarat High Court in Cr.Mis.A. No. 12643/14 submitted to the court by accused Jayesh Madanlal Jingar vide exb.1868

Copy of Letter of High Court Ahmedabad about the order of the Supreme Court by Deputy Registrar of the Supreme Court wide Ex.1869

Matter adjourned on. 11.9.14.for final arguments

For hearing in Ex.1866

Next date 11.9.14

11.9.14 Court adjourned for requested by Advocate Salim in favour of witnesses and Sp.P.P. Kodekar to give copy of documents oraly.

Next date 25.9.14

Matter adjourned to 25.9.14 for witnesses to submit list of documents needed to press Section 319 application

Update for 13.11.2-14

Note:- Judge K.K. Bhatt retired on.30.9.2014 and the new designated Judge P.B Desai was appointed on 15.10.2014

(Note: List of Documents from Index along with all documents pertaining to more accused sought to be arraigned in the Section 319 application i.e. MK Tandon –then Joint CP, Ahmedabad, PB Gondia, then DCB Crime Branch, Ahmedabad etc submitted by the SIT to the Court on 5.8.2014. Witness Survivors moved application before the Court to provide them with a copy on 19.08.2014 (Exhibit 1866). Though the Court fixed the date for hearing of the application on 2.9.2014, the said application has not yet been heard by the Court and no documents have been received by us to this day.)

25.9.14 Matter adjourned to 9/10/14 for Submission of documents

9.10.14 Matter adjourned to 20/11/14 for Submission of documents

20.10.14 Matter adjourned to 5/11/14 for Submission of documents

05.11.14 Matter adjourned to 19/11/14 for Submission of documents

There is no Order in Gulberg for Fixed days for hearing in the Week

Next date of Hearing is now 19.11.14

Criminal Case filed in Australia against Prime Minister Narendra Modi

by

Modi

The American Justice Center (AJC), an organization established to bring human rights abusers to justice, has announced the filing of a criminal complaint in Australia against visiting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for his role in aiding, abetting and inciting organized attacks against the minorities of Gujarat state before and during the horrific genocide of 2002.

The lawsuit is being brought under the aegis of AJC, by Mr. Asif Vahora, a survivor of the 2002 massacres, in which over 2,000 people were killed and over 150,000 displaced. The complaint refers to the destruction of “20,000 Muslim homes and businesses and 360 places of worship.”

The complaint against Prime Minister Modi has been lodged under Australia’s “The Criminal Code Act 1995” which provides Australian courts jurisdiction over cases involving crimes against humanity worldwide (Id. §§ 268.117(1) & 15.4). Justifying the prosecution of Modi in Australian Courts, the complaint states that Modi’s actions during February-March 2002 violate sections 268.3,4,5,8 & 9 of Australia’s Criminal Code Act of 1995.

The complaint, lodged with Honorable Robert Bromwich SC, Director Commonwealth Public Prosecutions, Australia, charges Mr. Modi with crimes against humanity and genocide resulting in the killing of more than 2,000 Muslims and displacement of several hundred thousand.

“Our relentless pursuit of justice has now taken us to the Australian shores, where Mr. Modi will have to account for his criminal misdeeds in Gujarat,” said Mr. Joseph Whittington, Jr., President of AJC, and also the 2nd Ward Alderman of Harvey, Illinois.

Mr. Modi’s rise to power comes in the backdrop of increasing persecution of religious minorities in India. In August this year, India’s Christian population, numbering about 24 million, marked the sixth anniversary of horrific anti-Christian massacres in the state of Odisha, considered the worst anti-Christian pogrom of the 21st century. Prominent watch-dog group “International Christian Concern,” reported an alarming rise in the attacks on rural churches in recent months. In May 2014, several villages in the Indian state of Chhattisgarh passed local ordinances banning all non-Hindu religious activities, in effect banning Christianity. Vatican Radio, the Holy See’s official news outlet, reported on the possibility of Christians being “purged,” from villages across three states.

Recently, AJC spearheaded an Alien Tort case against PM Modi during his visit to the United States in September. Following the AJC complaint, a US federal court issued a summons against the visiting PM. The case is currently under review by the US Federal Court. As in the Tort case brought against Mr. Modi in the US, AJC is providing legal support and advice to the survivors in their effort to hold Mr. Modi accountable for the loss of lives and property that was caused by his complicity in the Gujarat massacres.

“Under Australia’s criminal code, mere presence of the accused foreigner in Australia is a sufficient basis for jurisdiction over acts of genocide and crimes against humanity committed abroad,” said Mr. Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, legal advisor to AJC. “Thus it adopts a mode of jurisdiction equivalent to universal jurisdiction,” added Mr. Pannun.

The Gujarat genocide of 2002 was one of the worst episodes of sectarian violence in independent India, and was marked with horrific crimes against humanity, including the rape of several hundred women. Many of the victims were subsequently burned alive. Although the Special Investigation Team (SIT) investigating the mass violence did not prosecute Mr. Modi, an amicus curiae appointed by the Supreme Court had recommended

Mr. Modi’s prosecution. A case filed by Mrs. Zakia Jafri, widow of slain Parliamentarian Ehsan Jafri, is pending against Mr. Modi in the Gujarat High Court.

The American Justice Center (AJC) is a human rights organization dedicated to holding human rights abusers and perpetrators of mass violence accountable. AJC provides legal aid and support for international judicial redress to victims deprived of legitimate and legal means to justice.

REFERENCES:

Criminal Complaint in Australia Against Indian PM Narendra Modi
http://www.americanjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Modi-CriminalComplaint-Filed-Australia-Nov-13.pdf

Supporting Evidence for Criminal Complaint in Australia Against Indian PM Narendra Modi
http://www.americanjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Supporting-Evidence-Criminal-Complaint-Against-PM-Modi-Australia.pdf

US Court issues summons against Indian PM Modi ahead of his arrival
http://www.americanjusticecenter.org/press-release/

AJC challenges Narendra Modi’s immunity; announces $10,000 reward for serving US Court’s summons
http://www.americanjusticecenter.org/ajc-challenges-narendra-modis-immunity-announces-10000-reward-for-serving-us-courts-summons/

US Federal Court allows AJC, Gujarat victims to challenge US Government’s “Suggestion of Immunity” to PM Modi
http://www.americanjusticecenter.org/us-federal-court-allows-ajc-gujarat-victims-to-challenge-us-governments-suggestion-of-immunity-to-pm-modi/

The Diplomat: US Federal Court Issues Summons Against Narendra Modi
http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/us-federal-court-issues-summons-against-narendra-modi/

REUTERS: Small-town U.S. politician emerges as unlikely foe of Modi
http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/09/27/modi-usa-visit-riots-lawsuit-idINKCN0HM01720140927

A look at state of higher education under Smriti Irani

by

The more things change…the more they remain the same. That seems to be the case of the new govt’s vision for higer education

smriti-irani

by Purushottam Agrawal

The minister for human resource development, Smriti Irani, along with her mandarins and the vice-chancellors of all central universities was in a two-day retreat in September in Chandigarh. It is not surprising that the electronic media neither reported nor discussed the event. After all, it has fast ‘evolved’ from infotainment to unabashed comedy and live cockfighting. But, it did come as a surprise that this meeting was not reported adequately even in large sections of the print media.

Well, in defence of our journalistic class, one has to say nothing dramatic or curious happened at this retreat. Given Modi’s ballistic campaigning and general pretence that his government is different from all regimes independent India has seen (after all, ‘nothing’ happened in 60 years), the media was probably looking for some dramatic departures, some important disjunctions from the UPA policy framework on education.

What we got instead was smooth continuity, informed by a mindless technocracy, as far as the higher education policy is concerned.

From the point of view of the future of our higher education, this continuity of perspective is very important. Departures would, of course, have been interesting, but continuity is curious, to say the least. One recalls the great detective who reminded Inspector Gregory, while working on ‘The silver Blaze’ case, that the fact that the dog did nothing in the night-time was in fact the curious incident.

The continuity of UPA and NDA policies in many areas is becoming increasingly clear. In case of education the consensus amongst the ‘forward looking’ ruling elite had become clear decades ago when the nomenclature of the ministry was changed from education to HRD. Now, the state is not looking at educating its citizens, it is not investing in human individuals; rather it is investing in a resource which happens to be human.

The liberal framework gave way to the managerial one even without a whimper in political circles, just as education was sought to be reduced to science, technology and management. In fact, there is little scope in such an approach even for science in its fundamental sense. There is hardly any enthusiastic encouragement from the official side for fundamental and ‘non-pragmatic’ research in science. For the ruling elite, corporate bosses and most of the middle class these days, science is nothing but a euphemism for useful technology.

Another shared trait between the NGO-friendly, ‘inclusive’ UPA government and the ‘no-nonsense’ nationalist one under PM Modi is the obsession with controlling everything and propagating the great ideal of ‘one size fits all’, in the sphere of ‘human resource development’. The present minister, while paying lip service to the idea of autonomy of universities, still got a draft ‘single Act’ for all central universities circulated for ‘suggestions’. This Act is based on the recommendations of the Pathan committee, which was formed in 2013 (when Kapil Sibal was the HRD minister) with the clear mandate of suggesting ways of implementing the ministerial motto of ‘one size fits all’ and had recommended, inter alia, doing away with the office of chancellor, and having in its place a council of vice-chancellors headed by, no prizes for guessing, the minister for HRD! There is not even the veneer of autonomy here: the government must control all aspects of university life.

Another brain wave, ostensibly egalitarian and democratic (and common to UPA and NDA dispensations) is to have common admission and common curriculum for all the central universities in order to facilitate student and faculty mobility. Again, the idea of only technology and management being worthy of any serious consideration is implicit here. In the field of humanities and social sciences, it will be an extremely harmful step. Even in science, technology and management, the inclinations and orientations of various departments do and should influence their research programmes and priorities.

In social sciences and humanities, at any rate, interpretations matter a lot, and institutions of higher learning make their distinct mark by offering different interpretations to the same or similar data. This diversity of views and approaches enlivens the field of knowledge and enriches the collective wisdom of society. In education systems the world over, individual teachers are encouraged to offer new courses and identify new focus areas in the ongoing teaching programmes every semester. In contrast, our political and administrative bosses want 40 central universities to teach the same text, same poets, same set of research questions, same priorities to each and every student. If, by ‘common curriculum’, something else is meant, I would love to be enlightened.

Sibal also has to his credit the great idea of appointing vice-chancellors through advertisements and interviews. There is a world of difference between someone being nominated without having applied, and someone getting through after an interview. The supreme court has categorically stated that notwithstanding the funding from government, the relationship between the government and university professors and vice-chancellors is not that of master and servant. Under the guidance of Sibal, for the newly established central universities, the nomination method was replaced with selection method in order to make the master-servant point in a subtle psychological manner to be followed with legal steps in due course. Once the idea of a single act and a council headed by the minister, governing the matters of all central universities is put to practice, the Sibalian dream of ‘one size fits all’ would be happily realised. The gods of efficiency and good governance would have slain the demons of independent and critical research and teaching.

If she wants to reform education, Irani would do well to break from this Sibalian mould. Participating in a couple of TV debates about her suitability as the minister of HRD, as she does not possess higher degrees, I had made two points. First, in any democracy, ministers are supposed to provide direction and perspective, and this has nothing to do with higher degrees. In fact, the question of formal qualification is more pertinent in the context of high-level bureaucrats, i.e., IAS officers, who having passed one examination in life supposedly acquire expertise on everything from agricultural policy to rocketry to the finer points of pedagogy. Incidentally, in the mid 1950s, the administration in the education ministry was headed by a professor. Maulana Azad, as education minister, had appointed the distinguished academic Prof. Humayun Kabir as education secretary. It would be interesting to know when and how the IAS lobby captured this position. Irani may look at the idea of reviving the practice of having experts run higher education in the country.

The second point was about the standards of education. I believe that no human being can create more drift and confusion in our education system than what has been achieved by US-trained top-class ‘intellectuals’ under the benign guidance of Manmohan Singh. Irani can only take things in a better direction, provided she chooses to act differently and see through the designs of control-freak bureaucrats.

But, given the convergence of thinking on higher education between UPA and NDA as reflected during the Chandigarh retreat, one is probably asking for the moon.

The story appeared in November 1-15, 2014 issue of Governance Now.

KNOW US

GET INVOLVED

PROMOTE

Archives