Money Can’t Buy Loyalty: Opposition to the government’s decision to payimams has come from a surprise quarter: Muslims themselves.

The Congress government in Karnataka has touched a raw nerve by deciding to give honorariums to pesh-imams (chief imams) and muezzins (who call people for the congregational prayer). While the government claims that it is following a Supreme Court directive, the move has raised concern and confusion in the community. Some Muslim scholars and activists have decried the move as “internal meddling” and “against the principles of Islam”.

Interestingly, the idea of giving honorariums to pesh-imams and muezzins serving mosques that fall under the state wakf board was mooted when the BS Yeddyurappa-led BJP regime was in power. However, the scheme did not take off due to budgetary constraints. But, the Siddaramaiah government has now allocated Rs 47 crore, helping the scheme to take off.

In a public announcement, Qamarul Islam, the minister for minority affairs, Haj and wakf, informed that the government intends to give a monthly honorarium of Rs 3,100 to pesh-imams and Rs 2,500 to muezzins after the completion of every three months. The minister added that the scheme would be applicable to those wakf institutions whose income is less than 1 lakh per annum. He also informed that the wakf board would obtain the attendance certificate from respective institutions of serving imams, scrutinise them as per rules and send the proposal to the government for the sanction of the honorarium. “The honorarium then would be released to their respective accounts via online banking,” he added.

But Muslims have strongly opposed what they consider interference in their religious affairs. A section of Muslim activists and scholars, who had earlier opposed the BJP government’s move to implement the scheme, are dismayed that the Congress regime has gone ahead with the scheme despite their opposition. They are adamant that the state should have no role in the registration of madrasas, the formation of a Madrasa Board or defining the role of a priest.

Community leaders worry that once the imams start getting salaries from the government, they will be subordinated by the state as they will be accountable to the government as public servants. They believe that such a move will hinder their entitlement for free speech against the ruling party or lackeys of the party who would ultimately have a final say on who should be entitled for the salary and who should not; leaving the priestly class at the mercy of local corporators or MLAs. Some even worry that this move would give the right-wing groups an issue to rally against the minorities in the name of appeasement politics.

“Once they take the money, they will be working under the government or at least feel obliged to the government,” says Masood Abdul Khader, convener of the Karnataka Muslim Muttahida Mahaz, an umbrella organisation of Muslim bodies. “Imams are forbidden to take money from the government.”

Echoing similar sentiments, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind state president Atharulla Sharief says, “For centuries, the Muslim community has been managing mosques and madrasas on its own. This practice should continue. Keeping in view the dignity of the imams and muezzins, such financial aid is undesirable.”

However, Sharief says that if the state government is insistent on providing aid, it should follow the Tamil Nadu model where retired imams and muezzins get pensions from the wakf board. It is estimated that chief imams and muezzins serving nearly 7,000 mosques are eligible under the scheme. “These mosques fall under the category of the prescribed income limit (under Rs 1 lakh per annum),” says Karnataka Wakf Board CEO Mir Anis Ahmed.

Even though the scheme was announced three weeks ago, the wakf board is yet to receive applications from districts other than Bengaluru. But Ahmed has an explanation. “The scheme insists that the mode of payment is through online banking. Most of them are finding it difficult to open a bank account. Once it is done, I am sure the applications will come,” he says.

Ahmed also rubbishes the fears of the state gaining control over these imams. “They have some apprehensions that once money is given by the government, local managements will lose their grip and the state will interfere in their administration,” he says. “I need not give answers to such hypothetical situations. We are acting purely based on the recent SC directive.”

Read More

Al Ummah Arrests: The Big Catch That Never Was

Left in the lurch Husna and her husband Malik used to sell kitchenware. Photo: Imran Khan

• 
• 
  
  

But for the fact that it is less than an hour’s road journey from the historic Hindu shrine at Tirupati, Puttur in Andhra Pradesh is a forgettable dusty town one drives through in minutes on the way from one city to another without even noticing it. Earlier this month, however, national news networks stopped over there after the police arrested two terrorists reportedly on the run for years and hiding lately in this sleepy town of 55,000 residents.

Since their arrests on 5 October after a nightlong siege of their rundown rented house in Puttur, Bilal Malik, 25, and Panna Ismail, 38, are said to have confessed to murdering local BJP leaders in neighbouring Tamil Nadu as well as to planting bombs two years ago in a failed bid to assassinate BJP leader LK Advani. The police said the duo have been members of an Islamic terror group named Al Ummah.

But, as with most police narratives about terrorists, the story of Puttur’s fugitives throws up too many contradictions when held up to scrutiny. Over the past two weeks, TEHELKA has investigated police claims of the antecedents of the men (along with that of a third who was arrested in Chennai a day before their arrest), examined the previous terror cases against them, met their families, and visited Puttur to verify the events of the arrest.

First, the story of their dramatic arrests. Just after midnight following 4 October, the police quietly began to evacuate hundreds of residents from a low-income locality in Puttur. After all houses but one had emptied out, the police surrounded it and challenged its occupants to give themselves up. But, according to the police, the men inside attacked them leading to an “encounter” in which Ismail was shot. Malik’s wife sustained a gash on her face. Because no one saw the alleged encounter, there are no independent witnesses.

The police claimed that Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, an absconding terrorist they arrested on 4 October, led them to the duo at Puttur. Explosives, bombs and a pistol were also reportedly recovered from a locked house nearby allegedly owned by Ahmed. Initial reports claimed a policeman died in the encounter. But the Andhra Pradesh DGP later denied that. News reports also spoke of a “10-hour gunbattle”, which, too, turned out to be untrue as there had been no exchange of fire. This reporter found no bullet marks in that house.

Immediately after the arrests, the police said the men were responsible for the July murders of S Vellaiyappan, who belonged to Hindu Munnani, a fringe right-wing outfit, and the BJP’s Tamil Nadu general secretary V Ramesh. Police said the men had also plotted to kill Advani during a political rally in 2011 near Madurai.

The Karnataka Police, too, claimed it was Malik who had planted a bomb on a motorcycle that went off in front of the BJP office in Bengaluru in April.

The police made it appear as if the arrested men were a “big catch”. But the truth is the police have known the men for years during which, according to their counsel, authorities filed bogus criminal cases on terror charges. In many cases, the men have already been acquitted.

Malik was first arrested along with three others in 2005 for the murder of Kalidas, anRSS activist, in Madurai. The victim’s son had named two men, both of whom were later convicted, but not Malik and the other three. The trial court acquitted those three. But as Malik was a minor, a juvenile court heard his case. Later, the police booked him in two more cases, including for assault. “They would pick him up any time, search the house and grill him for hours,” recalls Ghazni, Malik’s brother. In 2008, Malik absconded, which is why his case is still open.

Malik’s family says the police have given no evidence of his involvement in Kalidas’ murder. And yet, the constant harassment and false charges forced Malik, the third son of a Madurai scrap merchant, to become a fugitive. “We gave him a good education as we didn’t want him to face poverty as we had, but his life has been ruined,” says Ghazni. But why would the police pick specifically on Malik? Ghazni says his brother’s only misfortune was being related to one of the other three accused, who were subsequently acquitted.

After absconding, Malik married a woman named Husna, who is 20 now. They have three children. According to their neighbours in Puttur, the couple sold kitchenware to low-income households, bartering them for old clothes. On and off, they also sold vegetables on a cart. At other times, Malik also engaged in the scrap business. “The police have warned both my parents and in-laws against helping me and my husband,” Husna told TEHELKA at Ghazni’s residence, where she has temporarily moved in.

Ismail, who was arrested along with Malik on 5 October, also has a somewhat similar story. Working as a small-time property broker, he first came on the police radar for the murder of an RSS activist named Muthukrishnan in Tamil Nadu’s Tirunelveli district in 2000. With five others named in that case, Ismail was eventually acquitted. The police then charged him with assaulting a Muslim man. In that case, too, Ismail was acquitted.

Once again, Ismail’s family says it was his misfortune to be related to a number of men who had been accused of carrying out a bombing in Coimbatore in 1998, which killed more than 50 people ahead of a rally that Advani was to attend. Nearly 170 activists were booked and 41 were convicted for life imprisonment. After an appeal in the high court, 24 of them were acquitted in 2008, including People’s Democratic Party leader Abdul Nasar Madani. Of the acquitted, four of them were re-arrested this year in the BengaluruBJP office blast case. The appeals of 17 persons are pending before the Supreme Court.

Fakhruddin Ahmed, the third man whom the police arrested in Chennai on 4 October, had dropped out of school after Class III. As his father had been an assistant sub-inspector, Ahmed earned the nickname ‘Police Fakhruddin’. His father passed away when he was five. His mother left to become a housemaid in Qatar.

Growing up without parents in a rough neighbourhood, Ahmed’s first brush with the law came at the age of 15 when he quarrelled with a milk vendor, according to Ahmed’s brother, Dervesh Muynuddin. In 1995, he was charged for setting a bus on fire. In the same year, the police accused him along with three others of planting a bomb inMadurai’s Meenakshi temple. But the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) later found the real culprits and admitted that their inclusion in the case had been a “mistake”. After six months in jail, all four were freed without being named in the chargesheet.

To escape further entanglements with the police, Ahmed left Madurai and settled at Karur city, about 150 km away. Nevertheless, the police accused him in 1998 for the murder of yet another Hindu right-wing activist named Paramasivam in Madurai and put him in prison. It would be nearly three years before he would be acquitted and freed from prison. But not for long. In 2001, Ahmed was accused of helping a local Muslim leader named Imam Ali escape from police custody. Just months later, the police shot Ali dead in Bengaluru.

Although only a police inspector testified as a witness, the trial court sentenced Ahmed to seven years in prison. Even the FIR did not name him. His appeal against his conviction is now pending at the Supreme Court, his counsel, Abdul Kalam Bahadursha, told TEHELKA. Ahmed served out his term and was freed in 2008. Not taking any chances after more than a decade of police frame-ups, Ahmed decided not to settle down in Madurai.

Do the police have any evidence against the three arrested men in the July murders and the bombing conspiracies of Madurai and Bengaluru this year? A closer examination shows that the question can only be answered in the negative.

On 29 July, BJP general secretary V Ramesh, 52, was murdered in his office in Salem. The prime witness, a 71-year-old watchman, could not identify two suspects out of three as the streetlights were out. The suspect he identified could not be nabbed. A sketch made from his description matches none of the accused.

Similarly, Hindu Munnani leader S Vellaiyappan, 45, was murdered in Vellore on 1 July at around 4 pm. No witnesses came forward and no theories were cited. More than three months later, however, the police suddenly claim that the three men it arrested on 4-5 October were responsible for that killing.

Earlier, on 28 June, a 35-year-old milk vendor named B Suresh Kumar was stabbed to death at his stall at around 10.40 pm in Madurai. Though CCTV cameras caught the gruesome murder, the police were unable to identify the killers due to the video feed’s bad quality. Later, two persons named Taufeeq and Abdullah were produced as co-accused in this case, who apparently confessed to the police that Ahmed was the main accused.

In 2011, before Advani was to arrive at Madurai as part of his nationwide political roadshow named Jan Chetna Yatra, a villager noticed a suspicious wire, which led the police to discover a bomb under a bridge. The police arrested two men, Abdullah and Ismat, and accused them of providing motorcycles and an autorickshaw to Ahmed and Malik to carry out the crimes. But the police themselves have said Ahmed was seen using Abdullah’s motorcycle at a place that is 30 km from where the bomb was found.

As for the 17 April bomb blast in front of the BJP office in Bengaluru, in which 16 people, including 11 cops were wounded, the police’s claim that Ismail, Malik and Ahmed were behind that bombing flies in the face of the facts of the case. The police had earlier arrested 17 Muslim men for the blast. But it was found that a SIM card used to trigger the blast had belonged to an RSS leader. The police then said it had been stolen from him a day earlier. Interestingly, the RSS leader failed to report the theft to the police. Yet, the police did not call him to verify how his SIM card had landed with the accused.

When questioned about the lack of evidence against the accused, CB-CID IGP MK Aggarwal said: “There is enough evidence against these men. But as the investigations are under process, I cannot reveal anything at the moment.”

Like the earlier times, the case against the three men may already be weakening. On 12 October, Ahmed told a judge in Vellore that the police had forced him at gunpoint to confess to his involvement in these recent cases. The police will need to do some hard work if they must prove the charges of terrorism against these men.

imran@tehelka.com

Read More

Beyond The Rainbow Stereotype

Me, Myself and my Gender, a documentary which explores the life of male sex workers in Karnataka is headed for the international gay film festival in Slovenia. Directed by the husband-wife team of G K Vasuki and Maya Jaideep, both journalists hailing from the state, the film is the first look at communities of male sex workers and other MSM (Men having sex with men) communities in the state, which are slowly starting to emerge from the confines of social stigma and trying to carve out a place for themselves in the social mainstream.

The film is based on a research project by an NGO called Ashodaya Samithi, a street-based sex workers collective based in Mysore, which documented the lives of the MSM community in the districts of Mysore, Belgaum and Bellary. The twenty three-minute-documentary, narrated in a matter of fact style, revolves around a set of interviews with men in these districts who talk about their difficult journey, which commenced when they came to terms with their desire for men while living within a traditional and conservative milieu. With no social legitimation available for same sex desire, most of them chose the only options available: sex work, sex-change operations and religion. The documentary explores the role of religion, especially the Jogappa cult, a variant of the devadasi system prevalent in north Karnataka, in giving social sanction to sexual taboos like same sex desire and transgender identity.

“Jogappa is a ritual through which the male is allowed by the society to don the form of a female. In this case, this ritual is performed for them to take on the female form and only after this ritual is over, do they lead the life of women, most of them undergoing the process of sex change. This is prevalent in north Karnataka and is also known as the Yelamma ritual in the Belgaum region where females are dedicated to the god and they get social sanction to be sex workers. It is a ritual where they are wedded to the god and are thereby deemed to be in “the service” of the god,” says Maya Jaideep.

For all the protagonists in the film, the most difficult part of the journey of transformation from the sexual and gender identity they were born with and the one they have fashioned for themselves was the friction with their families. Unlike bigger cities, there was no counselling available and there was no gay community they could turn to for support. But once they joined traditionally accepted communities like Jogappas, Kothis or transgender communities like hijras their families have come around to accepting them. And with the intervention of NGOs like the Ashodaya Samithi, these men are struggling for a larger social acceptance, for the right to a life with dignity and an understanding of their own identities and desires. Many of them are involved in raising awareness about HIV and other communicable sexual diseases and the risks involved for sex workers. The activism not only helps them bolster a sense of community, but allows them to contribute to society in a way that can be recognised by others.

“I find myself giving lectures on HIV and how to combat it, and policemen who formerly used to harass me come to my classes and learn from me now. It is quite a change,” says Prakash, a male sex worker in the film who has been actively involved in the anti-HIV campaign.

The film which sets out to deconstruct the western myths and concepts of gays by bringing vivid aspects of their lives is also primarily a film about love and celebration of their identity. As Nagendra, one of the MSM interviewed in the film, says, being a sex worker and a lover was initially a conflict but he was able to negotiate with the support of his lover. “When I fell in love, for a year, I did not do sex work. My lover convinced me to do sex work; as sex is common but you can have intimate love with only one person’’. Nagendra and his partner now dream of together adopting a child.

Read More

Karnataka government’s war on journalists continues

The Karnataka government’s war on journalists continues

The Karnataka BJP has chosen to hit back at the journalist who reported the infamous homestay attack where a few partying girls and boys were roughed up by more than 50 Hindutva goons. The images of the brutal attack captured by Kasturi channel reporter Naveen Soorinje created an outrage at the national level forcing the BJP government to invoke the Goonda act against them. A vengeful district administration and police responded by including Naveen in the charge sheet, alleging that he orchestrated the attack collaborating with the Hindu Jagaran Vedike (HJV) activists. A magistrate court, which is hearing the homestay attack case, has given a warrant for his arrest.

On July 28, around 50 activists of the HJV barged into the Morning Mist homestay located on the outskirts of Mangalore, and attacked a few boys and girls who were celebrating their friend’s birthday. The activists of the HJV not only beat up the boys but also stripped and molested the girls for not adhering to ‘Indian Culture’. While instances like these are an everyday affair in Mangalore – considering the hindutva factory in Karnataka; the presence of Kasturi TV Channel reporter Naveen Soorinje, however made the issue a national headline.

The BJP government stung by the exposé, initially, made claims to go hard on the perpetrators of the crime by invoking the Goonda Act which specifies harsh treatment and gives police the power to shoot on sight. However, in the recently filed charge sheet, no such act has been invoked. In 2008 too, during the infamous Mangalore pub attack case, the state administration had claimed they would come down hard on the Sri Ram Sene activists. However, even after three years, the trial hasn’t started in the case. In fact, one of the attackers in the July 2012 attack, Subhash Padil had also taken part in the 2008 incident.

Since the beginning of the investigation, Naveen Soorinje held that the local administration and the cops were doing their best to protect the perpetrators. And he cites the recently filed charge sheet as proof of their collaboration which contradicts the events which took place on that day.

According to the charge sheet, the police received the information of the attack around 9PM that day. However, the camera recordings show that, Ravish Nayak and Manikantha Neelswany of the Mangalore rural police were with the attackers while the attack was taking place. Tearing apart the police version, images captured on that day, even show, investigation officer TR Jagannath arriving at the spot at 19:28 and taking a local corporator into custody “which means the police before hand had the Information; not as claimed in the charge sheet. There is even video evidence of the assaulters being escorted to a safe place by the police,” says Naveen.

Even though, there were other reporters including those from channel TV 9, Sahaya Tv (local right-wing channel in Managlore) and a reporter from the newspaper Jaya Kirana, the police have registered cases against only Naveen (accused number 44) and Sharan of Sahaya TV. This despite the fact that Naveen did not film the incident (as their camera man was sick that day), and had obtained the video from the other news reporters. However, he was the first to relay it on Kasturi New channel under the headline “Taliban Culture”. So far the police have arrested 27 persons in the case out of the 50 accused. They have been booked under section 120 (b), 143, 147, 148, 447, 448, 114, 341, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506, 509, 354 and 358 of the Indian Penal Code. The police have not yet arrested Naveen.

Local civil society groups are of the opinion that due to Naveen’s consistent reportage on the activities of the communal forces in the district and his regular reports on human rights violations on the part of the police, he had come under their scanner. “In the last two and a half years with Kasturi News 24, some of my reports have brought shame and legal actions to the police and communal forces. Hence I was made the target,” claims Naveen.

Corroborating Naveen’s statement, TV 9 reporter Rajesh Rao says, “former Mangalore Police Commissioner Seemanth Kumar had called him in the middle of the night and had told him that he was angry with Naveen and he would see to it that he is booked under stringent laws.” Rajesh however said that he doesn’t know why his name didn’t crop up in the charge sheet.

Local civil society groups however are angry over the fact that Naveen is being punished for just doing his job; and a prime witness to this case is being eliminated. Says Vidya Dinker- coordinator of Citizens Forum for Mangalore Development “they have added an additional charge of indecent display of women on him, whereas, he was displaying the indecency of the Hindu Jagran Vedike and the state BJP government which was stripped due to the exposé. By targeting him, they are shooting the messenger.”

It’s not the first time that the Karnataka BJP government has targeted journalists. In the past four years, the state administration has intimidated reporters who went out of their way to report a story. In 2009, a reporter of Prajavani (a local kannada daily) did an interview of the commander of the banned Maoist party. Immediately, the police issued a notice to him to depose before the jurisdictional station C and reprimanded him for reporting on such issues. Though the reporter was objective in his reporting, his organisation, buckling under police pressure, transferred him to a desk job and later asked him to move out of the Bangalore bureau.

Noted political writer and columnist TK Thyagaraj has been harassed and cases have been filed against him for writing an article on The Gita. A similar fate has been meted out to another famous social commentator Sanath Kumar Belagali.

In Tehelka’s case too, a former reporter of this organisation Shahina KK was not only intimidated by the Karnataka police for writing an article on Kerala PDP leader Abdul Nasir Maudany, but cases were filed against her, due to which, once in every 15 days, she has to be present in Bangalore to depose before the state CID. She has been doing this for the past one year.

While the above cases do not reflect the extreme fate of some other journalists who had to pay with their lives in order to bear witness to a truth or report a story, it shows an increasing trend of intolerance on the part of the state against those who refuse to toe the official line.

Note: This post was first published in the Tehelka blog. 

Read More

The ‘Koodankulam Conflict’ Map

Koodanlulam Nuclear Plant 

	Anti Nuke	Pro Nuke
Actors	Fisherfolk, farmers, workers, Dalits, Muslims, women, children etc.   Supporters in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and rest of India.   Supporting political parties, Social movements, Human rights groups etc.   Some sections of Media   Some international friends	Government of India   Government of Tamil Nadu    Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, CISF, Tamil Nadu Police, Central and State intelligence agencies etc.    Atomic Energy Commission, DAE, NPCIL, AERB etc.   Political parties such as Congress, BJP, DMK, AIADMK etc.   Indian Bureaucracy   Much of Indian Media   US, Russia, France governments   MNCs of these countries   Spy agencies of these counties   IAEA etc.
Positions	Nuclear power is bad, ugly and expensive.   Nuclear power plant is dangerous and unwanted.   Let us think like a creative leader and look beyond thermal and nuclear energy.   Let’s consider ‘New Energies’.   Let’s put Indian citizens’ interests first.	Nuclear power is good, clean and cheap.   Nuclear power plant is safe and badly needed.   Let us continue our colonized thinking and persist with thermal and nuclear energy.   Let’s consider nuclear energy.   Let’s put foreign countries’ and their MNCs’  interests first.
Interests	Safeguarding India’s natural resources such as sea, seafood, land, ground water, air etc. Protecting ordinary people’s livelihood and sustainable development.   Ensuring everyone’s food security, nutrition security, water security etc.   Avoiding health problems of ordinary people; and protecting the progeny.   Protecting Nature, Life, Future	Producing more electricity and ensuring energy security and national security. Promoting the development agenda of the rich and famous and powerful.   Ensuring the power brokers’ profits, commissions and kickbacks.   Ignoring such hidden costs and persisting with short-term gains.     Money, Money, Money
Gain	A few menial jobs   Low income from shops, services	Lots of good jobs   Lots of contracts, sub-contracts   Money, Power, Prominence   Electricity   Good life
Loss	350+ serious cases and legal hassles   Police action and harassment   Loss of income and wealth   Loss of public money on pro-nuclear campaigns   Loss of privacy and governmental intrusions   Natural resources   Livelihood   Displacement   Health   Wellbeing of children and grandchildren   Future
Attacks Faced	Dangerous false cases such as sedition, waging war on the State etc.   Arrests, imprisonment, torture.   Imprisoning women, juveniles, and children.   Legal hassles, refusing bail.   Police searches, attacks and harassment.   Having anti-social elements vandalize private properties and homes with police connivance.   Attack on negotiating team.   Intelligence departments’ psychological warfare.   Tear gas attack, lathi charge, firing.   Murder by police.   Aerial harassment of Coast Guard planes.   Death threats.	Nonviolent and peaceful siege, processions and agitations (for a few hours).
Slanders Faced	Instigated by opposition parties.   Small group’s protest.   Fishermen struggle.   Christian struggle.   Foreign countries’ and agencies’ plot.   NGO-funded struggle.   Missionaries’ and priests’ protest.   Struggle promotes smuggling in the sea and coasts.   Undertaken to harass governments.   Struggle promoted by incentives such as Rs. 500, biriyani and alcohol.   Misguiding innocent people.   Stubborn and unwilling to listen.   Receiving foreign money.   Using human shield.   Character assassination of leaders, casting aspersions on leaders’ integrity etc.   Accusing of using violence.   Publishing leaders’ addresses, contact numbers, emails in a newspaper.   Doubting people’s sanity and sending psychiatrists.   Arresting foreigners and connecting with struggle.   Linking us with Naxalites, terrorists, ISI spies etc.   Insulting women and questioning their morality.
Machinations		Telling half-truths and non-truths to people.   Dividing people with the help of immoral media persons.   Setting up corrupt media persons against the struggle.   Spreading rumors and  harassing people.   Dividing people along caste and religious lines.   Trying to instigate violence in the protest programs.   Trying to ‘buy’ weak protestors.   Splitting people by creating gangs and planting goons.   ‘Buying’ media and media persons.   Instigating businessmen and industrialists against people.   Using scientists and experts to confuse people.   Setting up proxy protesters against the struggle.   Setting up religious leaders to influence people’s opinion.   Distributing freebies.   Canvassing students and youth in colleges with government influence.   Doing campaigns with government influence.   Creating artificial power cuts.   Sending in spies and agents to endanger peace.   Promising houses, roads and other “development” projects.   Promising crores of rupees and wooing panchayat leaders and local leaders to the government side.
Favored Solutions	Abandon all NPPs   Focus on ‘New Energies’	Start more NPPs   Produce nuclear energy
The Way Out	·         Announce a moratorium on all nuclear activities all over the country. ·         Present a Cost-Benefit-Procedural Impact analysis of NPPs. ·         Do financial, energy, environmental, social audit of the existing NPPs. ·         Set up an “empowered and independent” regulatory authority. ·         Ensure transparency, accountability, and popular participation in nuclear installations. ·         Facilitate a national debate on nuclear deals, Uranium mines, reactors, waste dumps, and nuclear bombs. ·         Let people decide what they need!

Read More

A house for Mr. Narayan

                                                    

The Karnataka government's plan of converting English fiction writer RK Narayan's house into a museum has created a storm in the state's literati circles. Calling the well-intentioned move on the part of the state government a wastage of tax payer's money, well known Kannada authors have branded one of India's most loved English writers a non-Kannadiga and an outsider of Tamilian origin.

Though Narayan lived most of his life in Mysore and spent most his writing life at his Yadavgiri home, a group of well-known Kannada writers and intellectuals have taken umbrage at the state government promoting a non-Kannadiga writer while allegedly ignoring regional ones. Their September 18 petition released to the media says that, ''Narayan was from Tamil Nadu. He was born in Madras (now Chennai) and received his education there.  All his novels were in English and most of them were published from America. He did not acquaint himself with the Kannada language and never had any relations with the local Kannada people’’. The signatories to the petition included noted writers like SL Bhyrappa, GS Shivarudrappa, LS Sheshagiri Rao, DA Shankar, G Venkatasubbiah, M Chidanandamurthy, GS Siddalingiah and Sumathindra Nadig.

Addressing press, DA Shankar, retired English professor from the University of Mysore and one of the signatories to the petition said, "Why should the government spend taxpayers' money? How relevant is it linguistically and culturally? Narayan didn't relate to Kannada". Echoing similar sentiments, noted Kannada writer GS Shivarudrappa says, "RK Narayan, though he stayed in Mysore, didn’t socialize with the people here. He didn’t participate in any of the movements which tried to empower the Kannada language and neither did he promote the language in any platform."

The writers are particularly miffed over the fact that the state government is spending more than Rs 2 crore to convert Narayan's house into a heritage site, and are purchasing the house at the current market price from the author's family. They have questioned why the government has not undertaken similar projects in the case of Kannada writers like Masti Venkatesh Iyengar, DR Bendre and Kuvempu, who they feel have contributed much more to literature than Narayan. The writers have demanded that if the government still wants to go ahead with the plan, Narayan’s family should donate donate the house, instead of selling it to government.

While there has been opposition, there has also been outpouring of support for the government’s initiative. Liberal writers and intellectuals in Karnataka have severely criticised Byrappa and others and feel that labeling Narayan, who’s famous Malgudi days achieved nation-wide popularity when it was televised on Doordarshan by actor and director Shankar Nag, a non-Kannadiga, smacks of linguistic chauvinism. Noted playwright and theatre personality Girish Karnad has rubbished the idea of Narayan being an outsider, saying that he is as much a Kanndiga as anybody else. When contacted Jnanpith awardee and noted Kannada writer UR Ananthamurthy said, "RK Narayan is a great writer. He was as much part of Mysore and the state as anybody else. To say that he does not belong here shows the mean-mindedness on the part of those who are opposing the government’s initiative. It doesn’t matter whether wrote in urdu, Konkani or Marathi, as long he lived the state, he belongs Karnataka."

Ananthmurthy however is not sure that the idea of converting writers' houses into memorials is a good one. Citing his reservations, he says, "It is a bit of a risky step. Our experiences have shown that, it is easy to buy a house but to maintain it is the difficult part and our government is not good at that’’. Meanwhile the government has reiterated that it would go ahead with the project.

Read More

Water Wars

The Cauvery issue

The recent order of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as head of the controversial Cauvery River Authority (CRA) asking Karnataka to release 9,000 cusecs of water to Tamil Nadu till October 15 has brought out once again the century old debate of sharing of Cauvery river water between the two states. While both states claim that justice has not been meted out in the recent order, several farmer groups in Karnataka are up in arms against the prime minister’s decision as they feel the recent order is not only unjust towards the state but that which threatens their share of water for agriculture. With Supreme Court ruling in favour of the CRA decision on September 28, emotions are running high in the state, the battle for control of water, like in the past, threatens to spill blood in the coming days.

Sharing of Cauvery water has always been a contentious issue between both the states. The heart of the conflict is a century old agreement signed between the erstwhile Madras presidency and Mysore princely state in 1892 and later at1924 — which talks of interstate water sharing and development of irrigation in the Cauvery river basin which is 800 kilometres long. With power resting in the then British government, Karnataka has always maintained that, it suffered discrimination at the hands of the colonial government wherein the right to irrigate land and build dams could not have been done without the prior consent of the British masters, while no such restrictions were imposed on Tamil Nadu which was then under the Madras Presidency.

Even after India became independent, these agreements were not made obsolete in 1947. They continued to remain till 1974, when the 50 year agreement came to an end; which led to Karnataka taking initiation in constructing dams and increasing its irrigation area. This resulted in a situation where in total availability of water was just sufficient to cater to the existing projects leading to periodical altercation and violence with the neighbouring Tamil Nadu, which over the period has become an emotional issue as Tamil Nadu does not control the Cauvery headwaters (as it is in Karnataka) it controls tributaries Bhavana and Moyar. There is relative peace when both the states receive ample rainfall, but daggers are drawn, when the monsoon fails. And that happened in the failed monsoons of 1995 and reached a height when the current external affairs minister SM Krishna was in power in 2002, wherein due to continuous three year drought, the problem complicated due to displacement of local farmers in Karnataka who were dependent on the Cauvery river for their livelihood. Tempers were inflamed when a farmer ended his life by jumping into the Kabini reservoir over the Cauvery water sharing issue. A mass movement erupted, drawing even film stars, resulting in violent attacks on the sizeable minority Tamil population in Bangalore. Subsequently Tamils attacked Kannadigas in their state and vehicles with Karnataka license plates entering or leaving Tamil Nadu were burnt.

The matter came up before hearing several times in the Supreme Court with both parties going for endless round of appeals whenever a judgment was given not to their liking. The Supreme Court finally set up a tribunal to address the issue, which gave a judgment in 1991 asking Karnataka to release 205 thousand million cubic (tmc) of water every month to Tamil Nadu, which was not seen as favourably by Karnataka. The tribunal while delivering the judgement remained mum on the issue of sharing of water when there is a shortage of rainfall, which has become a bone of contention between the states till today. In the meanwhile, Cauvery River Authority (CRA) was constituted in 1998. The CRA was chaired by prime minister and had the chief ministers of the four contending (including Kerala and Pondicherry) parties as members. On 8 September, 2002, CRA ordered Karnataka to release 0.8 tmc ft of water to Tamil Nadu, which Karnataka refused to comply. The matter was again referred to the tribunal which after full seventeen years finally announced its final ruling on February 04, 2007. The tribunal allocated Tamil Nadu 419 tmc ft of water as against its demand of 562tmc, Karnataka was awarded 270 tmc as against its demand of 465 tmc ft. Kerala and Pondicherry were awarded 30tmc ft and 7tmc ft. The Karnataka government has again filed a review petition with the tribunal.

In the recent CRA order too, Karnataka initially refused to release 9,000 cusecs of water to Tamil Nadu. Karnataka contested that; it cannot release waters overlooking the interests of its farmers. Recent drought and deficit of south west monsoon rain were the reasons cited for refusing to comply. However, in the meanwhile, Tamil Nadu approached the Supreme Court, which reprimanded Karnataka government for refusing to comply with the prime minister’s orders. Finally, reluctant state government had to release waters.

Last Saturday, Chief Minister Jagadish Shettar, who convened an all party meet announced that the state government would appeal to the PM to grant an interim stay on the original order of the Cauvery River Authority (CRA). “If the PM had revised the order, we would not have had this problem. We will shortly file a petition,” said Shettar.

Meanwhile, in a repeat of 2002, a mass movement has erupted again with religious mutt leaders, film stars, Kannada cultural organisations and farmers threatening to hit the streets if the CRA order is not withdrawn.

Note: The above post was first published in the Tehelka blog. 

Read More