the radical humanist - wordpress.com · 2018-10-04 · the radical humanist 3 ... please send your...

THE RADICAL HUMANIST 3

Indian Renaissance Institute is deeply grieved over the sad demise of veteran radical humanistSubhankar Ray who died on the evening of 2nd June 2015 at Kolkata. He was a dedicatedradical humanist and one of the main pillars of the radical humanist movement in the countryfor the last more than five decades. He was a great inspirational personality for the movement.He was a renowned scientist in his professional field. He was unanimously elected Presidentof the IndianRenaissanbce Institute in January this year. Indian Renaissance Institute has suffered a heavyloss by his demise. Though he is no more with us, the cause for which he lived and died, willremain with us.

Indian Renaissance Institute pays its homage to the deceased and expresses its sincerecondolence to his family.

N.D. Pancholi, Secretary, Indian Renaissance Institute

I regret to convey to you the passing away of our humanist friend Mr Subhankar. He devotedhis life to the promotion of humanist movement and participated lifelong in the humanistprograms to develop human values.Personally I lost a good friend. Of course for the Renaissance movement it is shock. He waselected as chairman of the Indian Renaissance Institute in January this year in Kolkata.

Innaiah Narisetti from USA

My condolences. Very sad to lose one more member of the group. - Sangeeta

Really sorry. He was a thoroughly gentle person. I cherish the fond memories of meeting himlast at Kolkata recently. It certainly is a big loss to the radicals. My condolences to all thefamily members, relatives and friends. - Mahi Pal Singh

It is a great loss to the humanist movement. I remember we met him when we were in Kolkata.

Muralidhar Isanaka

Sorry to know; a great loss. - Jayanti Patel

We are shocked to learn the premature death of our beloved Shri Subhankar Ray, Chairmanof IRI. He was a stalwart, beckoning light and strong pillar of our Institution IRI. Hiscontribution towards radical humanism is noteworthy and unforgettable and with his loss, theinstitution has undoubtedly suffered an irreparable loss. We convey our heartfelt sympathyand condolence to his bereaved family. May fortitude and strength be bestowed on his familymembers to face this irreparable loss. - N. Vyas

The passing away of the veteran Radical Humanist Shri Subhankar Ray, Chairman of IndianRenaissance Institute is a great loss to the community of radical humanists and rationalists ofIndia.

In this hour of grief, we at World Focus mourn for his passing away and wish that may hisfamily members have the strength to bear with the loss of this towering personality. We sendour sincere condolences to the bereaved family members. - Bhabani Dikshit

Obituary: Condolence Messages in Memory of the VeteranRadical Humanist Subhankar Ray, President of IRI

JUNE 20154

On behalf of Indian Renaissance Institute andIndian Radical Humanist AssociationCongratulations to Mr Andrew Copson, newlyelected president of Internationa Humanist andEthical Union. He succeeds Ms Sonja , thesuccessful chairman of IHEU. In 2005 AndrewCopson started working at the British HumanistAssociation as director of education and publicaffairs. In 2010 he became the BHA's youngestever Chief Executive, a position which hedescribed at the time as "obviously a dauntingone", saying that he felt "a huge responsibilityto build on the BHA's many successes."

He is also the first Vice-President of theInternational Humanist and Ethical Union, andwas formerly a director of the EuropeanHumanist Federation, trustee of the South PlaceEthical Society (stepping down at the AGM on10 November 2013) and chair of the Gay andLesbian Humanist Association.

Copson is a regular contributor to New HumanistMagazine, has written for The Guardian andNew Statesman, and has been interviewed onBBC News for non-religious opinions on topics

Andrew Copson Elected President of International Humanistand Ethical Union

Andrew Copson

such as religious symbols in the work place andeuthanasia.

Copson has stated scepticism in regards to"atheist churches", denouncing Alain de Botton'sidea of an atheist temple,and expressing doubtin regards to future success of The SundayAssembly.

Innaiah Narisetti

Articles/Reports for The Radical HumanistPlease note the change in the email ID and the postal address

Dear Friends,

Please mail your articles/reports for publication in the RH to:

[email protected] or post them to: G-3/617, Shalimar Garden Extn. I, Rose Park,Sahibabad, Ghaziabad- 201005 (U.P.)

Please send your digital passport size photograph and your brief resume if it is being sent for thefirst time to the RH.

A note whether it has also been published elsewhere or is being sent exclusively for the RH shouldalso be attached with it.

— Mahi Pal Singh, Editor, The Radical Humanist


Nations which do not remember their immediatepast are in danger of repeating the same tragedy.This thought comes to me when on randomquestioning of the significance of June 26th 1975(the Emergency Day) from the age group of 35and below (who constitute 2/3 population ofIndia) one draws an overwhelming blank look,and not so encouraging even from up to the ageof 55. Even newspapers never front-page it -some even do not even carry the information,and a few may just mention it casualtysomewhere in the corner of inner pages. Manyopposition parties which were the victims ofEmergency choose to keep low key. Even thoughPUCL and other civil liberties organizations, asusual hold protest meetings, but TV andnewspapers designedly avoid any mention,overwhelmed as they are with the Government'sneo-liberal policies. Or is it a sense of fearbecause the perpetrator of Emergency was theRuling party for most of the immediate pastperiod. And yet tragically it was a day whenIndia lost its democracy and the USA Presidentsarcastically boasted that USA was then thelargest democracy. It is a different matter thatthankfully because of the sacrifices made byIndian people under the inspiring leadership ofJayaprakash Narain (J.P.), the boast of USAPresident was to end, but only after 18 months.

It is not that there was no resistance to theEmergency. Thousands went to Jail whichincluded Ex-Central Ministers, Ex-ChiefMinisters, Governors, lawyers, legislators and afew brave journalists. Many Human Rightsactivists went underground but there is a limitbeyond which unarmed people can fight anintolerant and a near fascist State which Indiahad become those days.

Emergency (1975) a permanent scar on the soul of India.Rajindar Sachar

In times of crisis, judiciary is expected to act asbulwark against the excesses by the Executive,like during the Emergency. But to our shamefatal blow to freedom was struck by SupremeCourt judgment in ADM Jabalpur holding thatright to life does not survive during Emergency- this disgrace will continue to proclaim thepusillanimity of the Supreme Court in refusingto act as a sentinel to safeguarding HumanRights.

Supreme Court Ruling in (ADM Jabalpur casein 1976) which overruled the view of 9 HighCourts that the legality of detaining order passedby the governments could still be set aside forillegality - in fact in some cases the High Courtshad ordered release of detenues. Had this viewbeen upheld, by the Supreme Court theEmergency would have collapsed. But to ourshame the Supreme Court by a majority of 4judges against one honourable exception(Khanna J.) laid down thus;

"In view of the Presidential Order datedJune 27, 1975 no person has any locusstandi to move any writ petition underArticle 226 before a High Court for habeascorpus or any other writ or order ordirection to challenge the legality of anorder of detention on the ground that theorder is not under or in compliance withthe Act or is illegal or is vitiated by malafides factual or legal or is based onextraneous considerations."

The Supreme Court to its shame acceptedAttorney General's argument that if a policemanunder orders of his superior was to shoot aperson or even arrest a Supreme Court Judge, itwould be legal and no relief would be available.Naturally in this situation, no peaceful opposition

JUNE 20156

to the Emergency could continue. I am shockedhow the majority decision could rely onLiversidge vs. Anderson given during wartime in1942 by the House of Lords, (U.K.) but with amemorable dissent (by Lord Atkins) whenEnglish Courts subsequently felt so ashamed ofthat decision that a conscious effort was madeto throw that decision into a dung heap.

In 1963 Lord Radcliff (HL) referred dismissivelyto the very peculiar case in Liversidge vs.Anderson and said, "It should be confinedapparently to a war time context and that it isalready clear that the decision was regarded asan aberration." Law Quarterly Review (1970)clearly spelled out how embarrassing thedecision in Liversidge was becoming for theEnglish judiciary.

Some commentators have ironically describedmajority in Liversidge case as the court'scontribution to the war effort of England -similarly many in this country are inclined todescribe the majority in Jabalpur case asSupreme Court's contribution to the continuanceof 1975 Emergency. Had the Supreme Courttaken the same view as 9 High Courts, theEmergency would have collapsed immediately,because no court could possibly have upheld thedetention of stalwarts and patriots likeJayaprakash Narayan Ji, Morarji Desai, RajNarain, George Fernandes, Madhu Limaya and

brave journalist Kuldip Nayar and thousands ofothers on the ground that they were a danger tothe security of the country. The inevitable resultwould have been the immediate release of theseleaders leading to overwhelming oppositionmovement which would have swept away IndiraGandhi Govt. by mid 1976. Alas, how sometimesfate of nations can be influenced by thepusillanimity of a few individuals - in this caseembarrassingly by the highest judiciary which itcan never live down.

Soon after the change of Government in 1978,Justice Chandrachud and Bhagwati publicallyexpressed regret and conceded that theirdecisions were wrong and that they should havejoined Khanna Ji which would have been themajority. But this crying over their disastrousearlier view is like crying after havingdeliberately spilt the milk. So much distrust injudiciary had been generated that the Parliamenttook precaution of passing the 44th Amendmentto the Constitution (1978) which has taken awaythe power of the President to suspend Article 21,but still we must continue to remember that"eternal vigilance is the price a nation must payfor safeguarding the liberties of individuals".And the press should keep reminding the publicof this frequently.

Dated: 10/06/2015New Delhi

Readers' CommentsDear Editor,The Radical Humanist May 2015 issue is worthy for its choice of wide range of issuesboth national and international. As a researcher of freedom struggle I found article onRIN Rising full of facts which are not known generally. Thanks for adding to myknowledge. Moreover, a philosophical article titled 'What does Supernatural meanAnyway?' by Michael Shermer is worth sharing.Please continue publishing regularly on different facets of Indian freedom struggle andatheism. Wishing you all the best.Shamsul Islam


With each passing day I can't help but feel thegnawing sensation that the shadow ofauthoritarianism is reaching its tentacles deeperand deeper into our lives, eroding ourfundamental rights and freedoms and my mindgoes back to June 25th 1975.

That day was the last day of shooting of myfather, Pattabhirama Reddy's, film 'Wild Wind'[Chanda Marutha]. The 16MM reels werepacked in a trunk ready for processing. MBhaktavatsala, my mother Snehalatha, AshokMandanna and Huli Chandru, the main actors inthe film and the rest of the cast that included me,heaved a sigh of relief. As it was a 'no budget'film the schedules were gruelling and the theme- the insidious shadow of a dictatorshipstretching itself across a nation and graduallyenveloping her people - had taken its toll on theactors and the crew. Little did we know that thefilm was a prediction of things to come!

The signs were all there, but we did not want seethem. Could India really become a Dictatorship- a country that had nurtured a Mahatma - oneof the oldest and largest democracies in theworld? Would 'we the people' allow a PrimeMinister to violate all our fundamental rights forreturns such as 'trains running on time','bureaucrats being disciplined' and 'red tapeshortened'?

My parents had chosen to make this film as itshowcased the troubled times we wereexperiencing, the growing corruption,unprecedented price rise and appallinggovernance. But it was hard to imagine that wewould actually be victims of such a regime. JP'sMovement was gaining ground and with that theconfidence that India would remain free.

On the 26th we awoke to the terrifying headlinesin the newspapers 'President Proclaims NationalEmergency', 'Security of India Threatened byInternal Disturbances'. Other headlines screamed

Is India Emergency Proof?Nandana Reddy

'Preventive Arrests', 'Thousands Jailed' and 'PressCensorship Imposed'. This was followed byblank editorials. Several political activists andleaders had gone underground including GeorgeFernandes. Others like CGK Reddy of the Hinduwere maintaining their cover though drasticallyopposed to Indira Gandhi's authoritarianism.

I was in my early 20's and because of mypolitical upbringing was raring to join Georgeand contribute to the Underground Movement.I remember my mother asking me to wait outsidethe house where George was taking refuge whileshe had a private word with him. Sitting on thecompound wall I overheard the conversation. Mymother was arguing for non-violence, whileGeorge believed that the end justified the means.Finally, it was agreed that only selective violenceagainst symbols of State control [property] wouldbe used provided that it would not harm anyliving being. Only then did my parents - staunchbelievers in non-violence - consent to myinvolvement.

It was an exhilarating experience! TheUnderground Movement was a massive networkall over India and abroad. We edited, printed anddistributed underground literature, shelteredfugitives including George, JH Patil and MPVeerandra Kumar and escorted them on theirjourneys. Once I even disguised myself as ayoung Sardar, turban and all, to accompanyGeorge to Hyderabad who was also dressed thesame. I met with religious and political leadersincluding Dharmastala Veerandra Hegde andNambudripad to try and enlist their support forthe cause. We also planned and executedselective sabotaged and I was in charge oftraining the southern wing of the movement.

I was recently rereading 'The Anatomy of aDictatorship' authored by CGK Reddy butcirculated under George's name as CGK was stillwith the Hindu and needed to take it to Europe

JUNE 20158

to muster International support on the pretext ofattending a media conference. It records Indira'sactions that led to the declaration andcontinuance of Emergency and reads like a textbook with step by step instructions for a potentialdictator. It would appear that Mr. Modi and hisbackroom boys have studied this and have learnttheir lessons well and this time around havemanaged to usher in a dictatorial regimeseemingly within the Constitutional purview andwithout having to resort to Article 352, which inany case has been made more difficult to usesince its amendment in 1978.

MJ Akbar says that "now Indian Democracy istoo strong" for another emergency to bedeclared. This is a surprising statement for himto make when the present Government hasundermined every institution and dented everyvestige of democracy. But then as aspokesperson of the BJP, I guess he would.

Meanwhile, wooing the masses with emptypromises keeps the charade alive. People withnewly opened bank accounts wait for Modi tobring back the black money and deposit theirshare, while Modi travels the world makingfriends and promoting his 'image'. While millionswait for basic needs like water, housing andsanitation, Modi twitters his elite twitter buddiesin cyberspace. While communities are trying toresolve their differences, Modi's ministers spreadthe RSS ideology banning beef, telling ourMuslim brethren to go to Pakistan and spoutmedieval patriarchal comments against women.

There are many common factors between Mrs.Gandhi and Mr. Modi. The self promotion as acult figure; 'Indira is India' is now theModification of India; his wardrobe, his slogans,his international events, a cultism built aroundcatchphrase not actions. The other is the promiseof sops. Every household will have a toilet, theBeti Bachao Andolan and the Swacha BharathAndolan [that has resulted in the biggest garbagedisposal crisis we have seen in recent times] allreminiscent of Indira's 20 point programme and'Garabhi Hatao'. Both these Prime Minister's

hardly attended Parliament and while onemuzzled the media; our PM of today just ignoresthem! One jailed thousands of dissenters, whilethe other just cuts off their source of funding.Modi has systematically dented the check listthat defines a democracy - our right to dissent;freedom of association; freedom of speechincluding a free press; freedom to practice ourreligion, speak our language and enjoy ourculture.

Manmohan Singh's lament that our 'democraticinstitutions are under threat', rings true, but wemust remember that it was during his tenure thatthe erosion began and paved the way for theundeclared 'Emergency' we are nowexperiencing.

Unfortunately, few recognise the signs. Thepresent generation have no knowledge of theEmergency and history has not recorded it. Thereare only a handful of us left with memories ofthose dark days. Advani, one of the survivors ofthe Emergency feels that the 'forces that cancrush democracy are stronger' now. He is right,because the environment is weaker. But his hopethat having experienced 'Emergency' once, Indiacould have been inoculated against it is wishfulthinking. This may have been true 20 years ago,when those who had experienced both thestruggle for freedom and the State of Emergencywere still alive.

But 'we the people' still do have the power tooverturn dictatorships. We have done it in 1977and we will do it again. But for this we need tofirst acknowledge the presence of the beast. Wealso need to study the 'Emergency' of 1975 andlearn our lessons. Then we need to empowerourselves, not just by Constitutional provisions,but to know and feel that we hold the fragileheart of a participatory federal republic in ourhands. I have faith in India and her people - wethe people are the insulation against adictatorship.

Nandana Reddy is a Social and PoliticalActivistEmail: [email protected]


As a law abiding citizen, I have faith in the courtto rectify the wrong done to me. I have neverbeen cheated except when the Emergency wasdeclared and I was detained without any rhymeor reason.

The two-judge accepted my wife's habeas corpuspetition and released me. The reason for myrelease was that since I did not belong to anypolitical party and pursued my journalistic workprofessionally, there was no ground to detain me.Both the judges were, however, punished. Thesenior judge S. Rangarajan was transferred toSikkim and Justice R.N. Aggarwal was revertedto the Sessions Court from where he had beenelevated. Both the judges were sacrificed at thealtar of press freedom.

Never have I suspected influence, pressure ormoney coming in the way of justice. But the tworecent judgments have shaken my faith in lawcourts. In the first case, actor Salman Khan hasbeen released on bail without spending a minutein jail and, in the second, J. Jayalalithaa who hadto step down as chief minister of Tamil Nadu,has been exonerated from the charge of havingamassed wealth disproportionate to her knownincome.

Granted the lawyers must have argued well. BothSalman and Jayalalithaa can afford the best oflegal brains in the country. But the judges, whoheard their cases, too have to see that theydeliver justice however weak the prosecution is.

I am sorry that this has not happened. It is notbecause the lawyers had the better of judges, butbecause other considerations must have come in.My firm conviction is that influence, if notmoney, worked. These are fit cases for a SpecialInvestigation Team (SIT) to look into under theSupreme Court. It would be a travesty of justiceif the verdicts against Salman and Jayalalithaa

Courts Tilt Towards RichKuldip Nayar

are accepted and nothing else is done in thematter.

Take the case of Salman. The trial court doescome to the conclusion that he was driving thecar in a drunken condition and he killed thepeople sleeping on the pavement. Rightly, asentence of five years is pronounced because thatis the minimum the judge could have awardedunder the law.

However, the actor gets an interim bail beforethe case is taken up for a regular bail in BombayHigh Court. There, the judge suspends thesentence pending the hearing of Salman's appeal.True, it is his prerogative. But would he do soin the case of an ordinary citizen? The VIP statusof the culprit seems to have been the maincriterion for taking a lenient view of the crime.

I wish the judge had taken into consideration theorphaned families of the victims. He even doesnot recommend more compensation to the Rs. 19lakh which Salman had himself deposited andwhich the court had not distributed to the victimsfor 13-long years, the period for which the casewas not complete. Salman's influence or moneypower came in handy to delay the case as longas possible and the police were a willing partner.

Parliament should take note of it and ensure thatthe machinery of law does not move slowly andslovenly. There is no politics in it. Only moneyhas mattered. Surely, the system can devise waysto stop the well-to-do from committing a crimeand getting away with it. This can happenprovided the MPs act according to theirconscience, not the party whip which again ispolitics.

One exception that comes to my mindstraightaway is the Sanjeev Nanda's hit-and-runcase. Even after a protracted proceedings andinordinate delay, Nanda was convicted and sent

JUNE 201510

to jail. His father was the former naval chief andstill he could not save Sanjeev. On the otherhand, Salman uses his influence and escapes jaileven though it can be argued that his sentencehas been suspended. In the case of another actor,Sanjay Dutt, there were so many furores becausehe was released on parole many a time.

Coming back to Jayalalitha's exoneration, it isequally amazing. The luxury in which shewallows is not a matter of perception. It can beseen and assessed in terms of buildings and othervisible things. The judge is entitled to give aculprit the benefit of the doubt, but closing hiseyes to realities amounts to favouritism. Why theconcession will be the question askedstraightaway?

The judgment stated that the total income ofJayalalithaa was Rs. 34.76 crore. If Rs. 13.50crore, added by mistake, is deducted the incomewould come to Rs. 21.26 crore. But the assetsof Jayalalitha are Rs. 37.59 crore as accepted bythe judge. There is still a difference of Rs. 16.32crore between the assets and the actual income.But the judge stated that the difference came to

only Rs. 2.82 crore which is 8.12 percent abovethe income. However, the special publicprosecutor said that Rs. 16.32 crore translated toassets 76 percent above known income.Obviously, there was a mistake somewhere thatneeds to be rectified.

That the judicial system is tilted towards thehaves is a fact which cannot be denied. There isno provision of referendum in the constitutionand parliament will not be included to interferebecause both the main political parties, theCongress and the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP),will never agree to radical changes. Their realbase is the middle class, not prone to anythingdrastic.

The verdicts in the cases of both Salman andJayalalithaa may have shaken the nation. TheNarendra Modi government has still four yearsleft in its five-year term. Therefore the nation,however handicapped, has to wait for freshelections, which may be contested on differentissues altogether. Still some changes need to bemade so that the lower half has also access toremedies to get their due.

THE RADICAL HUMANIST SUBSCRIPTION RATESIn SAARC Countries:

For one year - Rs. 200.00For two years - Rs. 350.00

For three years - 500.00Life subscription - Rs. 2000.00

(Life subscription is only for individual subscribers and not for institutions.)

Cheques should be in favour of The Radical Humanist. For outstation cheques: Please addRs. 55.00 to the total. In other Countries: Annual subscription (Air Mail) $ 100.00; GBP 75.00

Note: Direct transfer of subscription amount from abroad may be sent to:The name of the account : "THE RADICAL HUMANIST"

Name of the Bank : Canara Bank, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi-110014 (India)A/C (Current) No: 0349201821034 IFSC Code : CNRB0000349

SWIFT CODE Number: CNRBINBBMHB (For Abroad)

Cheques and money transfer details may be sent to: Mr. N.D. PancholiG-3/617, Shalimar Garden Extn. I, Rose Park, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad- 201005. (U.P.)


A good friend's father died of old age recently.Uncle, as we called him, was a Maharashtrianfrom Pune and, in the early fifties when suchmatches were still unusual, married a girl fromKerala. While both were Hindu, they brought uptheir daughters in a secular environment,practicing no religion at home and conductingno rituals. Their daughters continued thetradition after marriage and managed secularhouseholds that, though not overtly atheistic,nonetheless followed no particular symbols ormarkers of any religion. One day, a few of uswomen friends sat around the dinner table andthe conversation drifted to how we got married.My friend recalled her own marriage accordingto Sanatan Dharma rites, and she ruefully wishedthat she had had a less clunky and artificialmarriage ceremony. After all, the family hadalways lived in a godless environment. Tosuddenly put on such a conspicuous display ofreligiosity felt completely hypocritical.

Unfortunately a few months later when Uncledied, I saw a practical example of this feeling.In the absence of an alternative, he was crematedwith full Hindu rites while my friend's familylooked on uncomfortably, following the priest'sdirections from time to time without any senseof exactly why they were what they were doing.One the most distasteful moments occurred whenthe priest called out for the son of the dead man,and a long lost nephew was pushed forward toconduct all the rituals while my friend and hersister watched from the sidelines, forbidden byreligion from giving their father the send-off hedeserved. Later, when things had settled down,I asked my friend if she would have preferred amore dignified funeral for her father, one wherehis life and achievements were remembered andhis life stance respected, and she answered with

Humanist CeremoniesSangeeta Mall*

a resounding 'Yes'.

There's a barely noticeable shift in Indian societywith the growth of media and economicliberalization. As a poor and vast country, ourcustoms were the umbrella against the storm ofchange and consequent loss of identity. Ourpoverty was balanced by the pride in our ironcladrituals. Our religion governed every aspect of ourlife, and its ceremonies in particular, with theirintricacies and embellishments, provided acheerful shelter against the rain clouds ofpoverty. Fortunately for these rituals, the systemof endogamy perpetuated religious customs andceremonies as each tiny community living in itsown cocoon, carried on in the same way forgenerations.

In the last two decades, two things have upsetthis narrative. The first, and most important, iseconomic liberalization and consequenturbanization. As people become moreprosperous and move to the cities, theirconnection with their community is loosening.Urbanization has also brought in its wake anepidemic of exogamous marriages. As people

JUNE 201512

move up the economic ladder and have more andmore external influences in their life, they tendto look for partners further afield.

The second upset has been caused by the floodof television channels, all of which arepresenting a world that's a kitschy representationof Indian society. The North-centric, vulgardisplay of customs as shown on television hascome to replace the original rituals of a place orcommunity, perhaps because they are gaudy,cheerful and inclusive and most of the time, farremoved from traditional practices.

So diversity in marriage and the dilution oftradition has taken a large swathe of Indiansaway from customary beliefs. While they maynot actively profess atheism, I believe that there'sa big opportunity for spreading Humanistthought in our midst.

Let us objectively examine the perception aboutHumanists from society's eyes. To put it mildly,they are considered odd. There's an aura ofrebelliousness around them, and a lot of peoplefind themselves intellectually ill-equipped to jointheir ranks. While there's a philosophical GreatWall between Humanists and others, there's alsoa practical barrier between the two groups. Oneway of breaching this barrier is by offering a'normal' and proactive agenda, in effectrecognizing that while a lot of people might notbe actively religious, they have nowhere else toturn to when it comes to rituals and ceremonies.The larger perception of society is that there isno such thing as Humanist ceremonies, there'sonly Humanist thought and the latter forestallsany development of the former.

Let us acknowledge that tradition is to life aswater is to soil. Each tradition attracts its ownset of adherents. While abjuring jingoism andsuperstition, isn't it time that we started taking aserious look at ceremony and symbolism as partof our own development? Shouldn't we, as

Humanists, aspire to a colourful, ornate lifeimbued with both meaning and substance?Shouldn't we think about the alternative toreligious ceremonies? If there can be a Bengaliwedding or an Arya Samaj Punjabi funeral,shouldn't Humanists also offer an equivalentfilled with meaning, solemnity and ritualism?Shouldn't we gratify the urge to bring meaningand a sense of occasion into our otherwisehumdrum lives?

It is a commonly observable truth that nowhereis the propagation of an idea more effective thanthrough a channel of mass communication.While it is important to create a bibliography ofHumanist writing, while it is important toaddress social injustice through a Humanistprism, while the struggle for human rights andcivil liberties is crucial for the progress of ourcountry and humanity at large, while the fightagainst superstition and for nurturing a scientifictemper remains vital especially in the face ofincreasing irrationality and militant atavism, Ibelieve that the gentler face of Humanism canbe presented to society at large throughceremonies, created especially for people forwhom Humanism is a potential, not current, lifestance.

Many young couples, filled with idealism, desirea wedding ceremony devoid of the mumbojumbo of their respected religions, one that isrelevant to present times and not derived from atime when human development was at a nascentstage. There are many couples that have startedcreating their own ceremonies, exchanging vowsin front of friends and family, abjuring a priestwithout necessarily giving themselves a differentlife stance label. I'm sure they'd grab theopportunity of having a celebrant take themthrough the steps of a ceremony, formalizingwhat they're fumbling through on their own.

Similarly when it comes to end of life, it seems


a pity that we have very little to offer to themultitudes who desire a dignified farewell fortheir loved ones. I still remember the irony of aHumanist of repute who was sent to his finalabode amidst chants from the Gita. Had aHumanist celebrant stepped forth at the time, I'msure the family of the deceased would havegrabbed the opportunity of giving a fitting tributeto a great man.

Ceremonies are a great way of inducting aperson into an alien life stance. They also affirmthe joy of life and give meaning to the mostimportant events in our life. In my opinion, India

has reached a stage where the Humanistmovement can use this avenue to introduce thepopulation to this philosophy. It's high time wegave thought to creating Humanist ceremoniesthat can then be introduced to anyone who isn'tactively looking for a religious ceremony.

* The author is former Managing Editor of theRadical Humanist and former editor of theInternational Humanist News. A novelist andfreelance writer, Sangeeta is at present workingon her third novel and writing for some not forprofit organisations.

An Appeal to the ReadersIndian Renaissance Institute has been receiving regular requests from readers, researchscholars, Rationalists and Radical Humanists for complete sets of books written by M.N.Roy. It was not possible to fulfil their demands as most of Roy's writings are out of print.IRI has now decided to publish them but will need financial assistance from friends andwell-wishers as the expenses will be enormous running into lakhs. IRI being a non-profitorganization will not be able to meet the entire expenses on its own. Initially, following 15books have ordered for print: New Humanism; Beyond Communism; Politics, Power andParties; Historical Role of Islam; India's Message; Men I Met; New Orientation; Materialism;Science & Philosophy; Revolution and Counter-revolution in China; India in Transition;Reason, Romanticism and Revolution; Russian Revolution; Selected Works - Four Volumes;Memoirs (Covers period 1915-1923).

Cheques/Bank drafts may be sent in the name of 'INDIAN RENAISSANCE INSTITUTE'to: Mr. N.D. Pancholi, G-3/617, Shalimar Garden Extn. I, Rose Park, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad-201005 (U.P.)

Online donations may be sent to: 'INDIAN RENAISSANCE INSTITUTE' Account No.02070100005296; IFSC Code: UCBA0000207, UCO Bank, Supreme Court Branch, NewDelhi (India)

We make an earnest appeal to you to please donate liberally for the cause of the spirit ofrenaissance and scientific thinking being promoted in the writings of M.N. Roy.

Thanking you.

IRI Executive Body;

Subhankar Ray N.D. Pancholi S.C. JainPresident Secretary Treasurer

Phone No. 01202648691

JUNE 201514

NEW DELHI: Prime Minister Narendra Modiand his government are getting ready for the oneyear in office. The Ministers who are generallyreticent are running around giving interviews,and creating the atmospherics for a 'governmentthat works." And for a 'nationalist' governmentthe prominent face at this stage becomes theDefence Minister who knew little about theRafale deal when it was re-struck in France bythe PM, but is on top of terrorism per se. Hisinterviews to the media now speak of targetingkillings---of course of terrorists only--- and of theArmy and the government being several stepsahead in containing terrorism.

But it is the Prime Minister who remains theshowpiece of this government for it revolvesaround him. PM Modi personally has come along way---from a pariah in Gujarat to a rah rahcelebrity with adulating Indians outside Indiasalivating around him for selfies, a look, a touchand of course the promises that even ifundelivered are not going to impact on themparticularly.

PM Modi is a recognised social media whiz. Heis a media whiz per se, and had demonstratedthis in Gujarat to some extent. But he came intohis own during the Lok Sabha elections, with hisgrand oratory, his vigour, his non-stop campaign,and his sheer showmanship that was lapped upby the cameras and the scribes bored and fed upwith the other faces in the fray. His campaignwas dramatic and exciting, he himself was thestar, and very soon his publicists were able toconvert Modi the candidate into Modi the PrimeMinister even before the votes were cast.

It was not long before the media started realisingthat all was not as it seemed. And Prime MinisterModi was not as friendly, in fact was not media

LIMIT-LESS: PM Modi's One Year of ShowmanshipSeema Mustafa

savvy in the way it had been projected. Heavoided one on one interviews, and whilehappily posing for the cameras atop a platform,avoided even brief interactions below. The mediawas not encouraged to walk into the PrimeMinister's Office, with the absence of a mediaadvisor making it more so. And very soonMinisters were told not to entertain thejournalists, and give statements unless dulyauthorised. He stopped carrying media teamswith him during his frequent visits abroad---agood thing actually----and ensured that allphotographs were taken by his officialphotographs that were released only after dueconsideration. The 'unguarded moment' was thustaken care of by simply ensuring it was not there,with the Prime Minister always in pose----withhis recent photographs from the TerracottaWarriors Museum in Xi'an being a case in point.

The Prime Minister calibrated his visits to 18countries in the first year carefully. While thesmall policy decisions were left to the Ministryof External Affairs and the PMO of coursealways in close supervision to work out, he wasmore interested in using the internationalplatforms to establish himself as not just a worldleader, but a leader sweeping the world. So hisvisit to the United States that had denied him avisa because of the Gujarat 2002 communalviolence, became a major demonstration of hispopularity. Madison Square Garden became thevenue for the comeback, as screaming andcheering Indian Americans gave him thelegitimacy that he so desired. And from then onthere has been no looking back, with multi-lakhsuits, an extensive wardrobe enabling frequentchanges of clothes during a day adding to thenew found confidence of the chai wallah, as heis so fond of describing himself.


No other Minister was in sight abroad. It was PMModi all the way. Foreign Minister SushmaSwaraj seems to have disappeared from view.And to think of it there would have been noMinister in sight in India as well, had it not beenfor the fact that many of them placed themselvesunder the spotlights with controversial commentsand hate speech, and of course the requirementsof Parliament that cannot have the PM alone inthe dock. It is no secret that all big decisions aresent to the PMO for clearance, and as journalistand BJP ideologue Arun Shourie said recently,files are piling up at PM Modi's desk forclearances. No one can speak unless he says, noone can take a decision unless he clears it, andwhile there is a Cabinet and a Council ofMinisters the powers to the incumbents flowdirectly from the Prime Minister himself. ThePMO is this huge swathe of bureaucrats, whowork around the clock while National SecurityAdvisor Ajit Doval keeps close watch on friendsand foes alike.

PM Modi is this larger than life figure, in hisown eyes as well. His speech to the IndianCommunity as Shanghai gave an indication ofhow he sees himself as the saviour, who waselected to bring Indians out of the depth ofdarkness. And that Indians were ashamed to callthemselves Indian earlier, but now with hisarrival as the Prime Minister all that haschanged. And Indians are taking pride in theirnation and their nationality. Of course thesecomments got him into serious trouble at home,for deriding India with the social media abuzz

with tweets and jokes about #ModiInsultsIndia.

In one year, PM Modi has established himself asthe sole man in the driving chair---abroad and inIndia. There is no collective responsibility, andthe Cabinet is there to carry out his directions.No one tells the PM what to do, they dare not,with many of his announcements across theworld catching his own minions by surprise. Thedecision to strike a new deal for 36 Rafaleaircraft with the French was his announcementthat had the officials scrambling to make sense;as was the e-visa in China that clearly theForeign Secretary knew little about as he had justbriefed the media saying no decision had beentaken on this issue; and perhaps even the India-US civil nuclear agreement where he directed theofficials to achieve a 'breakthrough' regardless ofthe bottlenecks. The Foreign secretary thenannounced 'the deal is done' although the detailshave still not been revealed.

The individual has taken over the collective. Theexecutive now rests in one man, the PrimeMinister. Good, bad or indifferent. He says'good', but given the fact that he is perhaps oneof the most polarising personalities to head India,the major opposition parties together insist 'bad'.It is true there are not many ticking the'indifferent' category. The real assessment will bemade in the subsequent years, when the dustsettles on the rah rah, and as the second witchin Shakespeare's Macbeth said, "when the hurlyburly's done, when the battle's lost and won…."

NEW DELHI: May 24, 2015(Courtesy: 'The Citizen')

Search for TruthTruth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth asone sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth.

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

JUNE 201516

Farmers' problem is not of weather; they haveno cushion to bear a crop loss in the absence ofadequate prices for his produce

Farmers lose if the production is more, becausethe prices collapse as is happening with potatofarmers these days. Farmers again lose if theproduction is less. In this case, they have onlystraw to sell. As a result, farmers are unable tosave money for a bad year and are forced tocommit suicide if a single crop fails.

Farmers in the entire North are committingsuicide in large numbers. Their crops have beendestroyed by untimely rain and storms. They areunable to repay loans taken from banks. The realproblem, however, is not of weather. It is thatfarmers have no cushion to bear a crop loss inthe absence of adequate prices for his produce.They lose if the production is more because theprices collapse as is happening with potatofarmers these days. The farmers again lose if theproduction is less. In this case, they have onlystraw to sell. As a result, farmers are unable tosave money for a bad year and are forced tocommit suicide if a single crop fails.

Modi's solution is to provide a Soil Health Cardto all farmers. The card will indicate thedeficiencies in the soil and help the farmersdetermine which fertilizers to use, and in whatquantity. So what? The price in the market willstill collapse and farmers will still lose. Modi'ssecond solution is to establish modern mandis.Good. But benefits of a better mandi may accrueto the urban buyer rather than the farmers. Thehomemaker may pay Rs 8 for a kilo of potatoinstead of Rs 10 at present, and farmers wouldstill get Rs 3. Modi's third solution is that farmers

Fooling the FarmerDr Bharat Jhunjhunwala

must use drip and sprinkler irrigation to savewater. But who will pay for these systems? And,once again, if the crops are good, who willensure that the prices do not collapse? Modi'ssuggestions are good but these are cosmetic.

Modi announced in Punjab that the governmentis working on a scheme to provide pension ofup to Rs 5,000 per month to farmers under aPublic-Private Partnership (PPP) model. PunjabCM Parkash Singh Badal clarified that the PPPmodel may be like the National Pension Scheme(NPS). Participation in NPS is compulsory forgovernment servants. They contribute 10 percent of their salaries to the NPS; and thegovernment contributes and equal amount. TheNPS is open to private individuals as well, butwith a critical difference. The matchinggovernment contribution is not available toprivate participants. They will get pension onlyfrom income earned from the money contributedby them. An individual may deposit money in aTime Deposit in a bank and get interest on thedeposit after he has attained 60 years of age; orhe may deposit with the NPS and get the samepension. The NPS works merely as a moneymanager for private subscribers. The PPP in NPSis restricted to government money managersgetting an additional opportunity to play withprivate participant's money.

The UPA government had initiated aSwawlamban scheme. A person would make acommitment to pay a premium of Rs 1,000 to Rs12,000 per year for a minimum 20 years. Thegovernment would make a contribution of Rs1,000 for the first three years in his account. Aperson contributing Rs 1,000 per month wouldcontribute Rs 20,000 over the 20 years and get


a government subsidy of Rs 3,000. Butindividuals did not find it attractive to place theirhard-earned Rs 20,000 in the hands ofbureaucrats to secure a subsidy of Rs 3,000! Thescheme was a failure.

Modi has made some changes in theSwawlamban scheme. He has renamed it AtalPension Yojana. He has removed the requirementof a minimum contribution of Rs 1,000 per yearbut retained the minimum period of 20 years.The government contribution now would be 50per cent of the participant's contribution subjectto a maximum of Rs 1,000 per year that will nowbe made for five years. Som, an individualcontributing, say, Rs 500 per month, for 20 yearsor total of Rs 10,000 will get a subsidy of Rs 250per year for five years or Rs 1250. Better, butnot enough. The government contribution is stillpaltry.

Moreover, the loss of income in running afterbanks and insurance agents and bribes to be paidto get the pension cheques would still beprohibitive. These schemes are designed tocreate an impression that Modi cares without himhaving to spend much. It is like Modi meeting atraveler to Mumbai at the Delhi Railway Station.Modi bought him a ticket up to Faridabad andtold him to buy the remaining ticket himself!Modi would take the credit for sending him toMumbai while the poor fellow would bear mostof the expenditures thereof! I am absolutelycertain that Atal Pension Scheme will follow thefootsteps of Swawlamban into failure.

The total agricultural production in the countrywas Rs 9,07,000crore in 2013-14. A small oneper cent increase in the price of agriculturalproduce would beget the farmer an additionalincome of Rs 9,070crore. Consider theexpenditures to be made by the government forthe farmer's pension scheme in relation to this.

The UPA government had made a budgetallocation of Rs 100 crore for Swawlamban.Modi may increase this to, say, Rs 200crore.Instead of providing a benefit of Rs 9,070croreby securing an increase of a mere one per centin the prices, Modi is pretending to be thefarmer's friend by spending a paltry Rs 200crore.Good publicity gimmick, maybe; but certainlynot a pro-farmer policy.

Modi must take three steps to help the farmer.One, he should push for a change in the WorldTrade Organization on the question ofagricultural subsidies. At the time of signing theWTO treaty, the developed countries hadpromised to work towards elimination ofagricultural subsidies given by them. This hasnot happened. As a result, developed countriesare subsidizing exports of agricultural goods,while the prices in the global and Indian marketsare low, and the farmer is suffering. Modi mustinsist that the developed countries remove allagricultural subsidies and he should impose ahefty import duty on agricultural goods until thisis done. That will lead to an increase in pricesin the Indian markets and provide relief to thefarmer.

Two, the government must establish a "HighValue Added Agricultural Export Corporation."This company must help farmers producecustomised fruits, vegetables and flowers andexport these. That will provide a new avenue forincreased incomes to our farmers. Three, Modimust start imports of straw and cow dung insteadof potash and phosphate fertilizers. Thesechemical fertilizers are spoiling the health of thesoil. Availability of cheap straw and cow dungwill help reduce the cost of production of thefarmer and make life easier for him.

The writer is a former Professor of Economicsat IIM Bangalore

JUNE 201518

Until January 2014, when the Right to FairCompensation and Transparency in LandAcquisition, Rehabilitation and ResettlementAct, 2013 (RFCTLA) came into force, Indianfarmers were at the mercy of the colonial eraLand Acquisition Act, 1894. Under the older law,the state could forcibly acquire private landunder a vaguely defined pretext of publicpurpose and while the land loser could go tocourt over rates of compensation, there was noquestion of her refusing to part with the landunder any circumstances, and the law did notleave any scope for democratic consultation withor participation of those whose lands were beingtaken over.

Most of independent India's big projects wereexecuted under the auspices of this law. Today,nobody can deny the state has failed repeatedlyand miserably to rehabilitate the vast majority ofthose displaced by development projects. Justpicking at random: farmers displaced by theTehri project have still not been rehabilitated;farmers displaced by the Sardar Sarovar Projecton the Narmada dam have still not beenresettled; farmers displaced by the dozens ofspecial economic zones (SEZs) have still notbeen resettled.

Acknowledging India's woeful record inrehabilitating project-affected peoples, aDecember 2013 parliamentary note circulated forthe reference of Lok Sabha members said,"Between 60 and 65 million people are estimatedto have been displaced in India sinceIndependence, the highest number of peopleuprooted for development projects in the world."

Land bill amendments: If only farmers were idiotsThe transition cannot take place if India's farming-dependant population is given the choiceto remain in rural hinterlands and practice agriculture

G. Sampath

Yet, there are intelligent people who wantfarmers to believe the two pillars of anymeaningful participation in harnessing landresources for development-informed consent andsocial impact assessment (SIA)-are no big deal.

In fact, India has already experimented with amodel of consent-proof and SIA-proof landacquisition for so-called development: the SEZs.The SEZ Act was passed by the UnitedProgressive Alliance (UPA) regime in 2006 andresulted in a series of mass agitations, fromNandigram in West Bengal to Raigad inMaharashtra, against the forcible acquisition offarm land for industry.

Today, 10 years later, we have evidence of whatthe land acquisition for SEZs has achieved. Twofindings stand out from the SEZ audit carried outby the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG)of India. One, land acquired for industry for theostensible purpose of setting up manufacturingfacilities and generating jobs were diverted toreal estate projects for making a quick buck.Two, private industry mortgaged governmentland for thousands of crores worth of bank loans.As per the CAG report, most of the SEZs werebig flops, failing to meet the projected targets inboth export revenue as well as job creation.

Clearly, recycling the same old arguments todaythat were trotted out for the SEZ Act 10 yearsago is unlikely to impress the farmers agitatingagainst the National Democratic Alliance (NDA)government's amendments to the new landacquisition act. Of all the misleading arguments,the most patently ridiculous is the promise of


employment. Batting for industry overagriculture may have other economic benefits,such as increasing the rate of capitalaccumulation, generating more employment isnot one of them.

Let us consider this for a moment.

Right now, agriculture's share in India's grossdomestic product (GDP) is only 13.9%. But itaccounts for 50% of national employment.Industry, which contributes 21.5% to the GDP,accounts for a mere 20% of employment. Theservices sector, which, at 65%, is the largestcontributor to the GDP, employs only 31% of theworkforce.

If we are talking about employment generation,no sector can match agriculture in terms of thepeople employed per percentage of GDP output.In other words, the argument that farmers shouldaccede to forcible acquisition of their land inexchange for jobs is bunkum. That it is bunkumis also evident from the history of industrialcapitalism.

When England, in the early days of the industrialrevolution, forcibly evicted farmers from theagricultural commons through the EnclosuresActs, it could absorb only a fraction of thedisplaced population in its mills and factories,where the erstwhile farmers experienced adramatic decline in their quality of life from whatthey were used to. The rest of the dispossessedpeasantry was packed off to colonies inAustralia, South Africa and North America,where they there found new lands to farm, oftenat the expense of the natives.

India has no colonial territories where it coulddispatch those it wants to wean off theagricultural economy. While the minority ofthose who actually own farmland may live offthe monetary compensation for a time, or start a

small business, the vast majority of the ruralworkforce would be forced to migrate to urbanlocations in search of insecure, exploitative, low-end employment, such as construction work,domestic work, as security guards, etc.

I have written elsewhere about how in a capitalistdemocracy, democracy will be forced to workwithin the limits imposed by capitalism. The twoclauses of the new land acquisition law that areat the heart of the current tussle-the consentclause and SIA requirement-are thus a dangerousexcess of democracy that could derail the smoothoperation of capital accumulation that the landacquisition process is meant to facilitate.

This brings us to the real reason why thislegislation is so critical for investors and hasbeen built up as the litmus test of the newregime's intent on economic reforms. Thisamendment bill is necessary to facilitateabsorption of capital surplus through large-scaleurbanization.

If the NDA government sticks to its guns andmanages to push through its amendments, Indiawould basically have an updated version of thecolonial era land acquisition law of 1894, fullyequipped to engineer what the economicgeographer David Harvey called accumulationthrough dispossession. The capital accumulated-through transfer of land assets from the poormany to the rich few-would then be absorbed inthe expansion of cities, construction of urban andrural infrastructure, and further concentration ofcapital in fewer hands before capital finds itselfhitting another limit, creating a new crisis thatcan again be resolved only through anotherround of creative destruction. The mid-20thcentury debt-financed sub-urbanization ofAmerica is one example of such surplusabsorption. A more recent one is the massiveurbanization of China, which has come about at

JUNE 201520

the cost of forcibly displacing more than 250million people from their land. China is not ademocracy and could therefore take over anyland by executive fiat, and yet, there weremassive protests.

For the past couple of decades, it is China'srelentless urbanization that has infused amodicum of stability into a crisis-prone globalcapitalism. Now, with the China growth storyshowing signs of stalling, the pressure ismounting on India to step up to the plate.

At a time when people in the developed worldare waking up to the importance of food securityand the rising threats to food sovereignty posedby climate change and desertification, India'seconomic mavens are hell-bent on systematicallydestroying its biggest asset-agriculture and foodsovereignty. And they have been succeeding, asthe quarter million farmer suicides over the pasttwo decades testify. A law that legalizes forcibledispossession of their lands is the coup de graceof this ongoing war on India's peasantry and foodsecurity. And food security, which is another

limit-defining clause (to do with the acquisitionof multi-crop farm land) in the existingRFCTLA, is not merely about welfarism for thepoor-in the context of climate change; it hasstrategic and national security implications aswell.

To sum up, in the scheme of things envisagedby the advocates of the amended land bill, Indiashould abandon its agrarian roots and rapidlymake the transition to a manufacturing andservices-based economy where the majority ofthe population would live in cities.

This transition cannot take place if India's vastfarming-dependant population is given thechoice to remain in the rural hinterlands andpractice agriculture. Such a democratic choicecan be granted only under the condition that itis not exercised. So, both the consent clause andthe SIA can be a part of the land bill, providedthey do not disrupt business as usual. So, whilefarmers are certainly not idiots, democracywould be more manageable if only they were.

Courtesy Livemint, 03 March 2015

THE RADICAL HUMANIST RATES OF ADVERTISEMENT/INSERTIONJournal size: 18cmx 24 cm- Print area: 15cmx20cm

Ordinary Special Ordinary Special

Second Back Cover Rs.2,500 Rs.3,000 Third Back Cover Rs.2,500 Rs.3,000Last Cover Rs.3,000 Rs.3,500

Ordinary page:Full page Rs.2,000 Rs.2,500 Half page Rs.1,000 Rs.1,500Quarter page Rs. 600 Rs. 900

For One year2nd Back Cover Rs.20,000 Rs.30,000 3rd Back Cover Rs.20,000 Rs.30,000Last Cover Rs.25,000 Rs.30,000

Ordinary page:Full page Rs. 15,000 Rs.20,000 Half Page Rs.10,000 Rs.15,000Quarter page: Rs. 6,000 Rs.9,000


When, a year ago, Smriti Irani was first chosenas the Union minister for human resourcedevelopment, I did not share in the generalscepticism about her appointment. I had seenHRD ministers in UPA governments, with astring of foreign degrees themselves, display aconspicuous lack of interest in their portfolio.Irani seemed energetic and articulate; perhapskeenness and interest would trump lack of formalacademic qualifications.

My optimism was misplaced. A year later, Iraniis by far the most controversial cabinet minister,and with good reason. Stories of her arroganceand rudeness are legion. Her own senior officialshave sought transfers to other ministries becausethey have found it impossible to work with her.Even more distressing has been her treatment ofdistinguished academicians such as the directorsof the IITs. She has come across as bullying andoverbearing, and as interfering in decisions thatlie within their domains of expertise.

Irani's lack of respect for intellectual excellencehas also been manifest in some key appointmentsshe has made. Early in her term, she appointeda certain Y. Sudershan Rao chairman of theIndian Council of Historical Research. Rao'sname was unknown to the community ofprofessional historians; not surprising since hehas not published one peer-reviewed paper in hislife. While his scholarly pedigree is obscure, Raohas been a longstanding fellow traveller of theRSS. Since taking office, he has assured us thatthe Vedas are "the best evidence" forreconstructing the past, and that the Mahabharatais the "anchor for the history of Bharat".

The HRD minister's anti-intellectual instincts arealso manifest in another of her appointments, this

Death by a Thousand CutsA year later, Smriti Irani is by far the most controversial cabinet minister, and withgood reason.

Ramachandra Guha

to the chancellorship of the Maulana Azad UrduUniversity in Hyderabad. University chancellorsare either those holding constitutional posts(such as governors and presidents) or seniorscholars of distinction. For instance, the greatsociologist André Béteille has been chancellor ofthe North-Eastern Hill University in Shillong.

The last chancellor of the Maulana AzadUniversity was Syeda Hameed, herself abiographer of Azad and an eminent literaryscholar. After the NDA came to power, she wasreplaced by Zafar Sareshwala, whosecontributions to scholarship are even harder toidentify than Rao's. Sareshwala is better knownas a dealer in luxury cars, and as being very closeto Prime Minister Narendra Modi. When hisappointment was announced, one senior scholartold the Hindustan Times that "now it seems youjust need the right political clout to head reputedinstitutions".

Over the years, the quality of universityeducation in India has been steadily underminedby political and bureaucratic interference. Thishas been especially marked in universities underthe control of state governments. Forty years ago,Calcutta University, Bombay University, andBaroda's M.S. University still had some excellentdepartments. This is no longer so. So long as theCPM was in power, all major academicappointments in West Bengal were in the handsof party bosses. The Shiv Sena played the samerole in Mumbai, and the BJP in Gujarat. Theuniversities were further damaged by parochial"sons of the soil" policies, whereby scholarsfrom outside the state were discouraged fromapplying for jobs.

While state universities have visibly deteriorated,

JUNE 201522

some Central universities have maintainedreasonable academic standards. Delhi Universityhas good departments of history, sociology andeconomics. Some of our finest film-makers arealumni of Jamia Millia Islamia's department ofmass communications. Both Jawaharlal NehruUniversity and Hyderabad University have topquality scientists, as well as social scientists ontheir faculty.

These departments and universities would beeven better were it not for the dead hand ofbureaucratic interference. For some years now,the University Grants Commission (UGC) hassteadily encroached on the autonomy of Centraluniversities.

A UGC chairman appointed under the UPAintroduced a "points-based" promotion schemethat all universities had to adhere to. This gavemore weight to organising student extracurricularactivities and attending seminars than publishingpapers in refereed journals.

One hoped that, when Irani took office, shewould work to make our best universities moreautonomous in their choice of curricula, studentsand faculty. For, the world over, it is only whenscholars are in charge of scholarship that realintellectual progress takes place. Instead, the newHRD minister has sought to further centralise analready over-centralised system of highereducation. Rather than let the best departmentsin the best universities design their ownacademic curriculum, the UGC now wants themto adopt a single uniform curriculum, thisdesigned not by scholars but by incompetent(and occasionally malevolent) babus.

Worse may follow. A diabolical scheme is afloatto have a single, centralised cadre of universityfaculty, whose members can be transferred fromplace to place at a moment's notice. Ifimplemented, this will seriously damage existingresearch programmes, which crucially depend onthe long-term involvement of the same set of

faculty members.

While uniformity is congenial to bureaucrats, itis deeply antithetical to intellectual work.Scholarship and research depend on innovationand creativity from within. Most academicdisciplines change rapidly. New discoveries, newmethods, new theories, should all lead tochanges in teaching and research. But how canthis happen if every change in curriculum, everynew addition to the reading list, has to be vettedby an array of babus sitting in the UGC's gloomyoffice in central Delhi?

The scheme to allow the transfer of professors,on the other hand, is most likely the work ofpolitical apparatchiks. Suppose an outstandingphysics professor in Delhi University (and thereare some) signs, in his capacity as a citizen, apetition chastising the government for its failureto adequately protect minority rights. This may,if the current scheme is implemented, lead to himbeing transferred to the Central University ofMizoram (which, given how many recalcitrantgovernors have been sent here, appears to be theNDA's preferred purgatory).

For some 40 years now, I have closely studiedthe Indian university system. I have seen someof India's best scholars battle cuts in funding,pressure from bureaucrats, populism,parochialism and worse, while bravelycontinuing to teach well and produce books andpapers based on original research.

University teachers in India suffer from hurdlesand handicaps foreign to their counterparts inEurope and North America - and even Singaporeand China. Past governments and ministers havebeen indifferent or interfering. But the presentgovernment and minister exceed them all in theiroutright contempt for scholars and scholarship.

The writer, based in Bangalore, has taught atYale, Stanford, the London School ofEconomics and the Indian Institute of Science.

Courtesy The Indian Express. May 20, 2015.


In order to gain larger legitimacy, RSS has beenmaking claims of sorts. One of that which wasmade few months back was that Gandhi wasimpressed by functioning of RSS. Now on theheels of that comes another distortion thatAmbedkar believed in Sangh ideology (Feb 15,2015). This was stated by RSS Sarsanghchalak,Mohan Bhagwat. Recently on the occasion ofAmbedkar's 124th anniversary many programswere held by RSS combine giving a pro-Hindutva tilt to presentation of Ambedkar.

There cannot be bigger contrasts between theideology of Ambedkar and RSS. Ambedkar wasfor Indian Nationalism, Secularism and socialjustice while the RSS ideology is based on twomajor pillars. One is the Brahmanicinterpretation of Hinduism and second is theconcept of Hindu nationalism, Hindu Rashtra.

Where does Ambedkar stand as for as ideologyof Hinduism is concerned? He called Hinduismas Brahminic theology. We also understand thatBrahminism has been the dominant tendencywithin Hinduism. He realized that this prevalentversion of Hinduism is essentially a caste system,which is the biggest tormentor of untouchables-dalits. Initially he tried to break the shackles ofcaste system from within the fold of Hinduism.He led the Chavadar Talab movement (right toaccess to public drinking water for dalits),Kalaram Mandir agitation (movement for accessto temples). He also went on to burn ManuSmriti, the holy Brahmanic- Hindu text sayingthat it is a symbol of caste and gender hierarchy.His critique of Hinduism, Brahminism wasscathing and in due course he came to the

Ambedkar's Ideology: Religion, Nationalism andIndian Constitution

Ram Puniyani

conclusion that he will give up Hinduism. In hisbook 'Riddles of Hinduism' published by Govt.of Maharashtra (1987) he elaborates hisunderstanding about Hinduism i.e. itsBrahmanical version. Introducing his book hewrites, "The book is an exposition of the beliefspropounded by what might be called Brahminictheology...I want to make people aware thatHindu religion is not Sanatan (eternal)...thesecond purpose of the book is to draw theattention of Hindu masses to the devices ofBrahmins and make them think for themselveshow they have been deceived and misguided byBrahmins" (from Introduction of the book).

Ambedkar had started moving away fromHinduism in 1935 itself when he had publiclydeclared that he was not going to die as a Hindu.In 1936, he had attended the Sikh MissionaryConference as he had toyed for some time withthe idea of embracing Sikhism. In 1936,Ambedkar also wrote and published Annihilationof Caste, his undelivered presidential address tothe Jat-Pat-Todak Mandal Conference at Lahore.At the end of his written address, Ambedkarreiterated his resolve to give up Hinduism. (http:// b i h a r . h u m a n i s t s . n e t /B.%20R.%20Ambedkar.htm)

He said "I have decided for myself. Myconversion is sure as anything. My conversionis not for any material gain. There is nothingwhich I cannot achieve by remaining anUntouchable. My conversion is purely out of myspiritual attitude. The Hindu religion does notappeal to my conscience. It does not appeal tomy self-respect. However, your conversion will

JUNE 201524

be both for material as well as for spiritual gains.Some persons mock and laugh at the idea ofconversion for material gain. I do not feelhesitant in calling such persons stupid." (http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/txt_ambedkar_salvation.html)

Lord Ram is the major symbol of CulturalNationalism propounded by RSS. Let's see whatAmbedkar has to say about Lord Ram, "The lifeof Sita simply did not count. What counted washis own personal name and fame. He of coursedoes not take the manly course of stopping thisgossip, which as a king he could do and whichas husband who was convinced of his wife'sinnocence he was bound to it." And further, "For12 years the boys lived in forest in Ashram ofValmiki not far from Ayodhya where Ramacontinued to rule. Never once in those 12 yearsthis model Husband and living father cared toinquire what has happened to Sita whether shewas alive or dead, ...Sita preferred to die ratherthan return to Ram who had behaved no betterthan a brute." The signals to the Dalits inHindutva cultural Nationalism are more thanglaringly obvious as the Lord demonstrates in hisown life, "...he was a Shudra named Shambukwho was practicing Tapasya with a view to goingto heaven in his own earthly person and withoutso much as a warning, expostulation or the likeaddressed to him, cut off his head..."(FromRiddles of Rama and Krishna).

Ambedkar envisioned 'annihilation of caste',which remains unfulfilled despite India gettingIndependence. Multiple factors have operated inthe society due to which caste still remains amajor factor in India. In contrast to Ambedkar's'Annihilation of Caste' the politics of RSScombine says that there should be 'harmonyamongst different castes' and so they have

formed an organization called 'Samajik SamrastaManch' (Social Harmony Forum). Contrastingapproach to social issues, Ambedkar and RSS!

Core of RSS political ideology is Hindutva orHindu nationalism. Ambedkar engaged with thisissue in much depth, particularly in his classicbook 'Thoughts on Pakistan'. In this book hedeals with the question of Hindu nationalism asrepresented by Savakar; the progenitor of RSSideology of Hindu nation; and Jinnah, leadingthe ideology of Muslim nationalism, Pakistan."Strange as it may appear Mr. Savarkar and Mr.Jinnah instead of being opposed to each other onthe one nation versus two nations issue are incomplete agreement about it. Both agree, notonly agree but insist that there are two nationsin India- one the Muslim nation and the other theHindu nation." he continues, "They differ onlyas regards the terms and conditions on which thetwo nations should be. Jinnah says India shouldbe cut up into two, Pakistan and Hindustan, theMuslim nation to occupy Pakistan and the Hindunation to occupy Hindustan. Mr. Savarkar on theother hand insists that, although there are twonations in India, India shall not be divided intotwo parts, one for the Muslims and the other forHindus; that the two nations shall dwell in onecountry and shall live under the mantle of onesingle constitution: that the constitution shall besuch that the Hindu nation will be enabled tooccupy a predominant position that is due to itand the Muslim nation to made to live in theposition of subordinate co-operation with theHindu nation." (Thoughts on Pakistan, Thirdsection, chapter VII)

He was for composite Indian Nationalism, "Isit not a fact that under the Montague Chelmsfordreforms in most provinces, if not in all, theMuslims, the non-Brahmins and Depressed


Classes united together and worked for thereforms as members of one team from 1920 to1937? Here in lay the most fruitful method ofachieving communal harmony among Hindusand Muslims and of destroying the danger ofHindu Raj. Mr. Jinnah could have easily pursuedthis line. Nor was it difficult for Mr. Jinnah tosucceed in it." (Thoughts on Pakistan, P. 359)

He was totally opposed to the concept of HinduRaj as well. In the section "Must There BePakistan" he says, "If Hindu Raj does become afact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest calamityfor this country. No matter what the Hindus say,Hinduism is a menace to the liberty, equality andfraternity. On that account it is incompatible with

democracy. Hindu Raj must be prevented at anycost." (http://ecumene.org/IIS/csss101.htm)

On all associated matters related to affirmativeaction for weaker sections of society, rights andstatus of religious minorities their positions aretotally contrasting. Even in the matters of thevery Constitution of India, Ambedkar was thechairman of its drafting committee while manya sections from RSS stable have called it as antiHindu and need to bring in Hindu Constitutionbased on Indian Holy books. This attempt by Mr.Bhagwat is like putting wool in the eyes ofpeople to achieve their political goals and to getlegitimacy from amongst the sections of peoplewho are deeply wedded to ideological values ofAmbedkar.

Readers' CommentsDear Mahipal JiI agree and support your views on the subject: "Absurd and Illegal Order of the NGTBanning old Vehicles."I feel there could be other ways to solve the problem, just to say, some way to upgrade ormodify old diesel or petrol vehicles to control pollution. In this technology driven worldmany such things are easily possible. You have rightly said that they seem to suggest cuttingthe head off for treating headache.Your argument appeals that the only beneficiaries of the old vehicle ban order are goingto be the vehicle manufacturing industrialists.Regards,J P Sharma

Correction in the Editorial note attached to 'M N Roy's first meetingwith Lenin' as suggested by Dr. R.M. Pal

Dear Mahi PalIn the article 'M N Roy's first meeting with Lenin' (published in the March 2015 issue ofthe RH) you have made one mistake. Please correct it. It is Naren Bhattacharjee who wentto Stanford University, where at the instance of his host Dhangopal Mukharjee he adoptedthe name of M N Roy and was introduced to Evelyn Trent, an unrecognized studentundergraduate of Stanford who fell in love with Naren and married him in New York inspite of his parents' opposition. From there they went to Mexico by train in order to avoidarrest by the US police.R.M. Pal

JUNE 201526

NEW DELHI: Noted academicians like RomilaThapar, Farida Khan and Janaki Nair todayaccused the HRD ministry of "recklessly"pushing the reforms agenda on centraluniversities, claiming that it will have a seriousimpact on the institutes which would reducethem into "teaching shops".

Highlighting anomalies in some of the proposedreform measures like Choice Based CreditSystem (CBCS), common entrance test andsyllabus and a central ranking system, they alsoclaimed that the decisions were being imposedarbitrarily, undermining the autonomous statusenjoyed by the central varsities.

"The spate of circulars sent by University GrantsCommission (UGC) quoting a period of monthfor working on the 'major reforms' is certainlynot a sensible approach to be adopted for highereducation by any country. The way these reformsare being pushed entire higher education sectoris at risk," Romila Thapar, eminent historian andEmerita professor Jawaharlal Nehru University,told reporters here.

The academicians came together to oppose theministry initiated reforms and released a 'positionpaper' which they said was their response to themany policy statements and directives issued bythe HRD Ministry and the UGC recently.

Statement :

HRD Ministry 'recklessly' pushing reforms agenda:Academicians

"The standardisation and centralisation ofeducation system would be a major casualtywhich will reduce universities and colleges intoteaching shops and coaching centres. Howsensible it is to talk of major reforms in theeducation sector and exclude the professionals,the teachers from the dialogue?" Thapar said.

Professor at Jamia Millia Islamia University'sSchool of Education, Farida Khan said,"Proposed reforms stress standardisationincluding a common syllabus for all centraluniversities, a common entrance test, faculty andstudent mobility and credit transfers".

"The jurisdictions offered for these sweepingchanges are enhanced employability, skilldevelopment and seamless nationwide mobilityfor students. The reforms fail to differentiatebetween curricula and syllabi.

"In India, student mobility is blocked not byvaried syllabi but by scarcity of qualityinstitutions, which is the key issue to be resolved.Instead of standardised syllabi and creditsystems, we propose intensive collaborationsamong universities that can enable wider accessto institutions via Inter University centres, shortterm exchange programmes for research studentsand related schemes," she added.

Courtesy The Economic Times, May 14, 2015

"The people of this country have a right to know every public act, everything, that is donein a public way, by their public functionaries. They are entitled to know the particularsof every public transaction in all its bearing." Justice K K Mathew, former Judge, SupremeCourt of India, (1975)


(In the context of the ongoing attempts of thepresent party in power at the Centre and invarious States in glorifying mythology andignorance, introducing Hindu religiousprayers like Saraswati Pooja in schools insome states, appointing mediocre academiciansin the seats of learning, and in view of thelatest episode of Nobel laureate Amartya Senbeing eased out of the Nalanda University andprohibiting environmental activist Ms. Pillai,from going abroad, I attach herewith belowexcerpts from a chapter 'Practice of Fascism'written by M.N. Roy during 1935-36 (CollectedWorks : Volume IV, Pages 451-454: OxfordUniversity Press) which gives a glimpse of howGerman Nazis were treating the intellectuals ofindependent thinking and what kind of rolethey had envisaged for their women whenHitler was in power. Some parallels may be ofinterest. - N.D. Pancholi)

In August 1934, a manifesto was issued to theworld over the signatures of a large number ofscientists, writers and leaders in other branchesof intellectual activity, calling for an internationalcongress to combat the cultural menace ofFascism. The following are extracts from thathistorical document:

We know that in the Fascist countriesmany highly respected scholars have beendriven from the scene of their activities,or have voluntarily quitted their home,because they refused to sacrifice theirlearning to the violent demands of thetotalitarian State. Specially the events in

From the Writings of M.N. Roy:

The Practice of FascismM.N Roy

Practice of Fascism: Ref. Amartya Sen and Ms Pillai episodes

Germany have evoked our most profoundconcern for the perpetuation of thefreedom of science. In that country, theexact sciences have been openly degradedto jobbing for war industries. Only suchinvestigations are favoured, as are likelyto bring about economic and technicalpredominance over the world. Allbranches of physics which cannot be madeto serve political and economicalimperialism are therefore hampered andrestricted. Studies which have contributedessentially to the broadening of ourconcepts of the physical universe arethrust aside openly as vain and fruitlessintellectualism. Verified scientificknowledge concerning heredity and raceis cast aside. In its place, appear newdoctrines, unverified by honest research,for the annihilation of hundreds ofthousands of human existences. Inaccordance with the National Socialistbelief that it is senseless to help the weakat the expense of the biologically strong,social hygiene is shorn of all justification.Colleges are forces to establish 'chairs ofnatural healing'. The gates are opened tosuperstition and deceit. Regardless ofhistorical truth, pre-historical and ancienttimes are so presented as to support thethesis of superiority of the nationconcerned and the inferiority of all others.Very often, purposeful mysticism issubstituted for an awkward historicaltruth. The suppression of free research andthe violation of truth are most clearly

JUNE 201528

revealed in the new jurisprudence whichis designed to give a theoretical basis forthe cruel and arbitrary practices found onlegal conceptions of the Middle Ages.Teaching and studying are enslaved alongwith pure science. Colleges suffer fromintellectual terror. Through the misuse andtempt for free research, there is animminent danger that the whole structureof scientific knowledge will be destroyed,and from the fragments of new series ofpseudo-science will be erected, which willbe harmful for the progress of mankind.

Within two months after Hitler's accession topower, more than two hundred eminent men oflearning were driven from their high academicpositions. The vandalism was committed on thepretext that those men were Jews. Many of themwere Jews, but their real crime was that theywere freethinkers, some were Socialists, most ofthem Liberals, and others guilty 'merely of theimpartiality and integrity of mind which in Nazieyes are the greatest of crimes'. (ManchesterGuardian, mid-May 1933) Those illustriousvictims of Fascist barbarism counted amongthemselves such men of world-historicalimportance as Albert Einstein, Professor Zondek,famous gynaecologist of Berlin, the greatestleading chemists, Richard Willstatter and FritzHaber, the famous Professor of Psychology inthe University of Heidelberg, Otto Meyerhoff,the economist of international fame MoritzBonn, and a whole host of others of equaleminence in different branches of science.Einstein was declared as the 'enemy No. 1 ofawakened Germany'. This fact alone is the mostdamaging testimony for condemning Fascism atthe bar of humanity as the mad enemy ofcivilization and culture. The testimony becomessimply overwhelming when it is known that allthe leading lights of the scientific, literary and

artistic life of contemporary Germany have beendriven out of the Nazi Third Reich.

The Nazis were not content with depriving theseats of learning in Germany of the brilliantlights who had made them famous. They wantedto inflict their vandalism upon the rest of theworld. Upon his leaving Germany, Einstein wasinvited by the College de France to honour it byaccepting the chair. Thereupon the Nazi pressclamourously demanded that in future thedismissed academicians should not be allowedto leave Germany, lest the 'enemies of Germanyinsulted her by honouring them'.

The burning of the Library of Alexandriaremains recorded as one of the most revoltingevents of history. The Fascists, at last, haveoutshone even that act of incendiarism. Theymade a bonfire of over twenty thousand books,written by great authors in all branches ofknowledge. The Library of Alexandria wasburned in the age of barbarism, which followedthe collapse of antique civilization. But thedeliberate destruction of a vast collection ofworks of science and literature by the Nazis tookplace, in the twentieth century, in the heart of oneof the centres of modern civilization. It was nota random act committed by fanatics in the heatof passion. It was a deliberate attempt to destroythe accumulated result of scientific research,cultural progress, and artistic achievementswhich did not fit in with the savage cult ofFascism. A long list was made of all such'objectionable' works, and they were collected byforce throughout the country and thrown to theflames in a number of places.

The world was horrified by that organizeddestruction of scientific and literary treasurers.'All the standards that civilization has created arebeing uprooted [The Nation, New York, 5 July1933']. Commenting on that incredible act of


vandalism, a famous German publicist,domiciled in America, wrote:

The burning of the works of ThomasMann, for example, damns them {Nazis}more deeply than anything else, since itmarks their repudiation of their ownhighest embodiment of human civilizationand a frank plunge into degeneratesavagery. It is to be noted that an attackof unrivalled strength and ferocity is beinglaunched against the life of the mind,against all intellectual values, against alldisinterestedness of thought of research, ofaspiration, against the slowly won rightsof human spirit, against every principleand every truth and every freedom thatmen have lived for and often died for,since the renaissance, against all that hadconstituted for long the very character ofhumanity itself. [Ludwig Levison in TheNation, New York, 21 June 1933.]

The Nazis are proud of their contempt for'intellectualism'. Indeed, glorification ofignorance is a part of their cult. 'The young Nazistoday make a virtue of being ignorant anddespising the learning and attainments whichgenerations of German culture slowly achieved.[Hamilton Fish Armstrong in the Foreign Affairs,July 1933]. This is not anti-Nazi propaganda.The Nazi Minister of Education, Rust, declaredthat 'National Socialism is not unscientific, butonly hostile to theories'. One could only smileto hear of science without theory, and wonderwhat that could be. The Minister, however, doesnot leave the world in doubt. In their culturalconviction, the Fascists are nothing if they arenot brutally frank. The Minister gave a definitionof science without theory, when he announcedthat 'philosophy and science must be reorientedin the spirit of the Storm-Troopers'. A description

of that spirit will be best given in official Nazijargon:

So stand the Storm BatallionsReady for racial fight;Only when Jews lie bleedingCan we be really free.

[National Anthem]

'They must try to make the world understandwhy Germany on 30 January 1933 had struck outthe word pacifism from its vocabulary [VonPapen, as Vice-Chancellor in Hitler's firstGovernment]'. On that day, Hitler became theChancellor of Germany.

'For the living, it is a holy duty to fulfill themission for which Germans gave their lives inthe war. They must be ready to redeem withblood a pledge written in blood [Goering].' Theman who best represents the spirit of the stormtroopers laid down the function of the women ina community inculcated with that spirit. 'Thewomen's place is in the home, her duty therecreation of the tired warrior.' And the Naziyoung womanhood, inspired with the spirit of thestorm troopers, responded, "There is no higheror finer privilege for a woman than that ofsending her children to war [Declaration of theWomen's Order of the Red Swastika]'. Finally,there is the oracle, the Minister of NationalEnlightenment and Propaganda, Goebels: 'Thewoman's task is to be beautiful and to bringchildren into the world. The female birddecorates herself for the male and hatches theeggs for him. In return, the male looks after thefood or else he stands on guard and scares theenemy away.' The new spirit of 'awakenedGermany' knows no difference between man andlower animals. The same instinct that guides thelatter, holds good also for the former. That isNazi reorientation of philosophy and science.

JUNE 201530

Whatever is born is certain to die. That is thelaw of nature. Death will not leave anybody -great and little, big and small, young and old. On13 December 1960 Ellen attended as the chiefguest in the celebrations establishment day of aschool in Dehradun. That evening sheentertained her friend Bansi Rani and dined withher in her house. With them was a German guestOtto Joseph. Sometime after dinner Josephretired to the guest room. Bansi Rani was withEllen upto 11 in the night. After seeing her offEllen came back to her drawing room and boltedit from inside.

The day 14 December 1960 broke out as usual,like any other day. But Ellen, who used to wakeup before dawn and before all others in thehouse, did not wake up. The servant maid whocame to clean the premises had just a wave ofthought why Ellen did not wake up that day. Shestarted sweeping the premises. When sheapproached the door of the drawing room shefound a patch of black on the floor. She just hadsome suspicion as to what it could be. When theidea came to her mind that it could be blood shetrembled with fear and cried aloud calling forhelp. She ran to the house of the cook who wasstaying a few yards away in the compound. Thecook Parson Lal came and verified the blackpatch. He too could not decide what it could be.But he had strong doubt that it could be blood.He tried to push the door open. But it was boltedfrom inside. He called out for Ellen. There wasno response. They suspected something seriouslywrong and went to the house of D.D. Sanyal, aretired army officer, across the road. Sanyal rangup the police and followed them to the house.The servant maid sent messages to some of thefriends of Ellen. Bansi Rani, Sangeet Kaur andManjari reached the house without delay. Theywere deliberating as to what could have

Mrs. Ellen Roy: 8. Death is CertainJawaharlal Jasthi

happened. Bansi Rani was particularly upset asshe was with Ellen late in the night and nothingshould have happened to her. Meanwhile anotherfriend Uttam Singh also joined them.

The guest room was by the side of the drawingroom and it opens to the other side of the house.The door of the room was open and the guest inthe room was not there. They entered thedrawing room through that room. They found thebody of Ellen lying in a pool of blood. The sightshocked them. The door was bolted from inside.The head of the body was towards the door. Thetable cloth was wrapped around her head. It wasalso puffed into her mouth and covered her eyes.There was blood everywhere in the room - onthe cloths, the carpet, furniture and frameshanging on the wall. It was obvious that bloodwas splattered all over the room with force.There were indications of a hard hit on the headthat caused the splatter of blood. In spite of theghastly scene Uttam Singh did not lose hope.She tried to test the pulse. But there was nothinglike that. The body was cold. All were silent intheir own thoughts. They know that they shouldnot disturb the room until the police arrive. Theyhave their own way of investigation into crimes.

When the news spread out people known andunknown started to gather at the house. Policecame and cordoned off the house. There werefoot prints in blood on the carpet. The body of

Ellen was in normal dress indicating that she wasnot yet ready for bed when the crime happened.Her hair was clustered and dried in blood. Afterverifying the room, police concluded that theculprit entered the house through the bath room.The light there was still on. The body was sentfor postmortem. There were no relatives. Friendswere thinking of cremating her by the eveningas the tradition goes. But they know she was acitizen of America even if she never claimed it.


Citizenship is not a thing to be disowned. Theyfelt it better to wait for the consent of the Consul.After the consent of the Consul was obtained theobsequies were performed next day. Cremationwas against the Christian traditions. But shenever claimed to be a Christian and Roy was alsocremated according to Hindu procedures. Therewas a memorial on the bones of Roy. A similarmemorial was built on her bones also.

Condolence messages started pouring in. Butwho was there to receive them? To whom werethey addressed? Nevertheless they came infloods. Dr. Rajendra Prasad, the President of theRepublic expressed his shock to hear the newsof Ellen's death. He sanctioned a pension of twohundred rupees per month for her. Intelligenceofficers came from the state and centralgovernment and verified the scene of murder.Photos were taken of everything that was in theroom and sent to forensic test. There was a stickof about three feet in length. Ellen used to takeit with her whenever she had to go out in thenight. Under the carpet they found a piece of ironshaft one foot long stained in blood. All thosethings were sent for forensic examination.

The forensic report confirmed that Ellen diedbecause of losing blood due to hard blows on herhead. She was hit five times on the head. Thecranium broke at two places. Four of the ribswere also broken. The iron piece with which shewas beaten was used earlier to crush coal,perhaps in a kitchen. It means it was broughtfrom a house, might be belonging to the culpritas such a weapon was not in use in the house ofthe victim. There was her hair also sticking onthat rod. The coloured threads of the carpet werefound on the gown worn by the victim. In spiteof all these clues, they could not form any ideaof the culprit. The German guest Otto Josephwho was there in the house for the last one weekwas not found and his whereabouts were notknown. Ellen had a long history of politicalactivity in Germany. It led to suspicion that it

might be a political murder by no other personthan the guest. Like all other intellectuals, Ellentoo was a communist for a long time initially.She happened to come out due to differenceswith Bolsheviks. Most of the communistsbelieved that she had truck with Trotsky. Likethat of Trotsky, the death of Ellen was alsobrutal. It caused doubts that it could be thepolitical murder.

Before her death there were fire accidents in theoffice of Survey of India in Dehradun. Nobodycould find any clue for them. The maps showingthe boundaries between India and China wereburnt in those fire accidents. Earlier to that therewere discussions between the two governmentsregarding the border without any conclusion. Inher essays Ellen severely criticised theexpansionist plans of China and expressed herdoubts that the spies of China could be behindthe fire accidents. She was trying to meet thePrime Minister in that connection. Could it bepossible that the murder was an attempt toforestall that effort? These were all just surmisesand nothing

could be proved conclusively. Prof. AgehanandaBharati stated that if such an offence occurredin a country like America, nobody would believeit was not a political murder.

One month before that, in the month of Maythere was a theft in the Renaissance Institute.Some papers were lost but nothing of anysignificance was missing. It was convenientlyignored. The investigators tried to build up howthe murder could have happened. Based on thefoot prints found on the inside and outside of thewindow leading to the bathroom, it was decidedthat the culprit entered and left through thatwindow. He might be hiding behind the curtainsin the drawing room and pounced on her afterthe guests left. He hit her on the head with theiron rod and silenced her by thrusting the clothinto her mouth. She was attacked even before

JUNE 201532

she closed the door of drawing room so that shefell down with her head outside the doorway.The body was pulled inside and the door boltedby the culprit and not by the victim.

There were two types of footprints on the carpetindication two people might have been involvedin the crime. But the investigator's report wassilent on that. They stuck to the position thatthere was only one person involved in it. Theculprit tore open the curtain cloth and used it towipe off the blood from his body. He lit it on fireand threw it on the sofa but it was not burntcompletely. He scattered the things in thedrawing room and dining room and washedhands with soap in the bath room. There wereblood stains in the bath room on the wash basin,on the floor and on tissue paper. There werefinger prints on the mirror. There wereindications that the mirror was rearranged tomake it convenient for a shorter person to havea look. Like Roy, Ellen was also a comparativelytall person. The culprit must have been a shorterperson, they concluded. The culprit opened allthe boxes and bags and scattered all the contents.He did not even try to open the Almiracontaining the books and papers and files. Hetook the cash and the jewels from the handbag,opened the door at the back of the drawing roomand exited. That was how they built up the sceneof crime. Obviously, it was not a sincere effort.They only tried to build a credible story to washoff their hands. Most of the findings werecontradicted by the culprit in his confessionstatement later. They could not find any clueregarding the identity of the culprit except thathe must be a person short in stature. As they didnot go for the papers, any political motive wasruled out. If it was only for cash and jewelry,there was nobody who could give an idea of howmuch was stolen. She was not used to keepheavy cash with her.

Police interrogated about fifty persons whofrequented the place while Ellen was alive. Otto

Joseph returned and explained his absence. Onthe early morning of 14 December, he left forHardwar according to his predeterminedschedule. Until he returned he was not aware ofwhat happened to Ellen. Naturally he too wasshocked at the ghastly murder.

Even after a month police could not find even asuspect. Then, a constable gave them some cluebased on which they arrested a boy namedBasant Kumar Kapoor on 30 January, 1961. Hewas a boy of 17 years, failed his matriculationin 1959, left his studies and whiling his time.They took him to police station applied theirusual techniques to extract confession. He tookthe police to his house and handed over thearticles which he procured from Roshan Baghafter the crime. There

were cloths, silver pendants studded with pearlsand chains of black beads. The police weresurprised to see there one person by name RamPrasad who worked as driver with Roshan Baghfor some time. But they did not think it necessaryto question him in any way proving insincere, ifnot negligent, investigation. He was the maternalgrandfather of Basant Kumar Kapoor, thesuspect.

On 7 February, 1961 Kapoor was presentedbefore the magistrate before whom he gave alengthy statement of confession that took manydays to record. There were blood stains on allthe things recovered from him. The colouredthreads that were found on the gown worn by thevictim were found also on the pant and coatsurrendered by him to the police. He alsoadmitted that his friend Suresh Chandra Khatriwas also with him in the crime. In fact it wascommitted to help him. When the police startedsearching for Khatri it was found that he escapedto Nepal. Police went to Kathmandu with theapproval of foreign ministry and arrested him inthe bus stand in Kathmandu with the help oflocal police and Indian authorities. He handed


over the rolled gold watch, with its chain, to thepolice. It was later confirmed it belonged toEllen. Acquaintances of Ellen also confirmedthat the pendants, jewels belonged to Ellen.

The charge sheet was filed in May,1961.

It was clear there were no politics in this crime.Even then people were anxious to see the boywho committed this ghastly murder of a noblelady of the locality. His statement revealed manysurprises. Kapoor and Suresh were friends sincetheir school days. Even after Kapoordiscontinued his studies, Suresh was continuingwith his education. But he failed to pay the feeto school as he misused the funds and so evadingthe school for some time. The fee due was Rs.24.37 The day before the crime they took a cycleon rent and returned it the next day. They atewell in a hotel and went to another hotel to booka room on false names. After just two hours theyvacated the room. They enjoyed cinemas andfriends. Next day, on 15 December,1960, Sureshwent to Rishikesh and boasted to his friends thathe would be going to Nepal and start living byhimself. In support of it he displayed a wristwatch, necklace, pendants and ring saying thathe brought them from house to be sold andencashed. His friends did not believe the storyand tried to dissuade him from going to Nepal.He came back to Dehradun with his friend andmet Kapoor there. Suresh returned all the thingsto Kapoor retaining only the watch and ring withhim. They had tea in a hotel. Kapoor purchasedgoods worth Rs.12 and gave them to Sureshalong with Rs.13 in cash. Suresh reached Nepalthrough Lucknow and Gorakhpur along with afriend. Both of them settled with some work ina hotel in Kathmandu. After a month his friendreturned to India but Suresh continued his staythere until he lost his job. Even then he did notthink of returning to India.

Basant Kumar Kapoor used to visit Roshan Baghfrequently with his maternal grandfather as he

was working as a driver there on and off. Heknows the situation in the house. He knows thatEllen was staying there alone. Five days beforethe murder Suresh told him about his plight thathe failed to pay the school fee and so he wasevading the school. He said that if he couldadjust

just Rs.30 he would be able to pay the fee andresume going to school. But Kapoor himself aboy and could not adjust that amount. Suresh hadan idea of stealing from somewhere andsuggested as target an old woman living in hisnative village. But Kapoor was not willing to gothat far. He suggested Roshan Bagh as the target.He told Suresh that the lady was staying alonethere and visitors were also rare. He knows thedetails of the and it would not be difficult toenter. He also expressed an apprehension that ifthey steal from there his grandfather might cometo trouble. But Suresh, being the one in need, didnot like to lose the opportunity. He prevailed onKapoor and made him agree.

While going on the venture Suresh picked up theiron rod used to break coal in the house ofKapoor. He said it would be useful to break openthe locks and also to silence the woman ofnecessary. They reached Roshan Bagh on thecycle in the night. They left the cycle and shoesin a bush and entered the premises. They peepedthrough the window and saw the three - Ellen,Bansi Rani and Joseph - sitting for dinner.Kapoor entered through the bathroom windowbut could not open the door to let Suresh inside.Then Suresh also entered through the windowand tried, but could not succeed. So both of themwent out again through the window. Afterfinishing dinner the three of them sat for a chatand after some time Joseph retired to his room.Bani Rani stayed for some more time and thenshe left. After seeing her off Ellen came back andentered the drawing room and bolted the doorfrom inside. Then she retired to the readingroom. The two culprits could not open any door

JUNE 201534

to enter and hatched a plan. They approachedthe door of drawing room and called aloud"Telegram". Ellen came and opened the door.Immediately Suresh hit hard on her head with theiron rod in hand. She fell down and tried to rise.He hit her again and she could not move further.They dragged her into the room and left her bodyon the carpet. They bolted the door from insideand started searching the house. They heardsome moaning sound from her. Suresh came toher, picked up the stool and hit her repeatedlyto silence her. He was not satisfied and kickedher in the stomach. They wrapped the table clotharound her head and thrust it into her mouthcovering the eyes as well. She was dead.

They searched all the rooms leisurely andgrabbed all the cash and jewels. They relievedher of the watch. They washed their hands in thebath room Suresh picked up the whisky bottlefrom the friz and was prepared with two glasses.But Kapoor objected to it and kept the bottleagain in the friz. Then Suresh took up the curtaincloth, lit it and threw it on the sofa. It did notburn completely. Having accepted his crime insuch detail before the magistrate, Kapoor turnedhostile at the time of hearing. He said that he wascompelled to give the statement under pressurefrom the police. He told that he was tempted withan offer to be considered an approver and not asan offender. All these things were beyond thecomprehension of the boy and it was obviousthat he was trained by a lawyer. Suresh admittedthat it was true that he failed to pay the fee andstopped going to school. All the other part of thestatement was false, he said. He did not go toNepal to run away from anybody but went therefor studies with consent of his parents. He deniedhaving any watch to the police in Kathmandu ashe never had any watch.

Added to the confusion, there was a questionraised by an advocate in the local newspaperabout the watch. He said that the people whocame after hearing the news of the murder saw

a watch on the wrist of the dead body, whichcould not be found when the police came. Itimplies that the culprits did not take the watch.He was called to the court and asked tosubstantiate his statement. He said that he got theinformation from an American lady who told himshe got the information from Uttam Singh andBansi Rani who were present at that time. Heagreed that he had no knowledge who that ladywas. Both Uttam Singh and Bansi Rani deniedhaving met with any woman in that connectionand have not seen the watch of the body of Ellen.The allegation made by the lawyer was justignored and no attempt was made to investigatewhy the lawyer made such an unfoundedstatement in the paper.

The District Court gave their final judgment on19 December,1961, that was, about one yearafter the crime was committed. It could beconsidered comparatively fast. The Judge statedthat "The allegations on the defendants are basedon indirect evidence. Basant Kumar Kapoor iswell acquainted with the layout of the house. Thefoot prints and finger prints available are provedto be of Basant. The blood stains on the goodstaken from his house are proved to be of thevictim. The jewels also belonged to the victim.There is no doubt that Suresh Chandra Khatri ishis friend. The fact that he fled to Nepal andavailability of the victim's watch with him provehis involvement. There is enough evidence toprove the confessional statement given byKapoor before the magistrate. There is nopossibility of retracting from the same. There isno doubt that this duo resorted to this crime formoney and valuables." He declared thedefendants liable to punishment.

The defendants approached the High Court atAllahabad. There was a different interpretationof the evidence and law in that court. They saidthat the confessional statement given by Kapoorbefore the magistrate is not credible as he triedto put the entire blame on Suresh, exonerating


himself. Except pointing to the house he has notdone anything else, he claims. It is not credible.There might be some truth in it; but there is someuntruth also mixed with it. It is not known towhat extent it is mixed. Because of this, it is notpossible to depend on this statement. Theallegations are based exclusively oncircumstantial evidence. Their friendship is notformed just for the purpose of this crime. Thesimilarities in foot prints could create a doubt,but it could not be the main evidence. It is notbeyond reasonable doubt. There is no basis toallege that the jewels available with thedefendants belong to the deceased person. It wasstated that they found a stick covered with bloodby the side of the dead body. But there was nomention of it in the evidences submitted to thecourt. Prosecution did not say anything about thefinger prints. So the defendants had to be givenbenefit of doubt. They said. The state took thecase to the Supreme Court, where the decisionof the High Court was upheld.

Usually, it is stated that there will be closurewhen the culprit is caught and punished. In thiscase it did not happen. If there are nay relativesto the deceased, they would fight for justice andclosure. But Ellen had no relatives in India inbiological sense. The state tried to do justice. Butwhat is just and reasonable to the layman neednot be so for a legal test. It is to be seen whether

the evidence submitted was really unreliable. Didit give scope for different interpretations?

Because some evidence is not submitted, can theevidence submitted be discounted? Whatever bethe evidence and whatever be the provisions oflaw, the judge has always an opportunity fordiscretion. Logically that gives opportunity fordifferent interpretations of law and evidence. Thefact that the defendants are juveniles also mightearn some sympathy. Whether the defendants arepunished or not, the dead person will not comeback alive. If we are prepared to think on thoselines, the only possibility would be to excuse andthen there would be no need of law and courts.

After the death of Roy, Ellen made a will of herown. What were her personal belongings that shecould bequeath? Whatever it be, she bestowedall of it on Justice Tarkunde. But there were nowitnesses for that document. Thus it was notvalid in law. Naturally, in the absence of a willthe properties fall on the blood relations. Ellenhad a brother and a sister living in America. Therights passed on to them. They, in turn, passedon all those rights to the Indian RenaissanceInstitute at 13 Mohini Road in Dehradun.Because of their magnanimity, the Institute isthriving as an organization and working.

When we think of what Ellen has given to Indiaand what India gave her in return, our consciencebleeds. Such a gruesome death to such a nobleperson! Can we reconcile it? Shall we try toforget it and forgive ourselves? Alas! What elsecould we do?

(Concluded)

"Where a society has chosen to accept democracy as its credal faith, it is elementary that

the citizens ought to know what their government is doing." Justice P N Bhagwati, former

Chief Justice, Supreme Court of India, (1981)

"Information is the currency that every citizen requires to participate in the life and

governance of society." Justice A. P. Shah, former Chief Justice, Delhi and Madras High

Courts, (2010)

JUNE 201536

……..Continued from the last issue

To conclude, in India, the freedom to practicereligion is conditional at best. The power tointerpret and exercise the conditionalrequirements is in the hands of Hindu leadersand nobody else. This is radically different fromwhat is in the United States where the practiceof religion is free, unconditional right.Conversely, in modern India, the practice ofreligion is a "politician-sanctioned" unreliableright.

Clause 2a of Article 25 is muddy at best.Considering the constitutional write-up, it seemsreligion is composed of economic, political, andworship activities. Anything other than worshipactivity is termed "secular." Therefore, inaccordance with the constitution, the Indian Statehas the right to interfere with those activities ofthe church it considers "secular." The church,structure included, is after all an economicventure. In a socialist country like India:Organized religions (Christianity, Islam,Sikhism, etc.) with large groups of peopleinteracting among themselves and othersamounts to nothing less than political activity.Any propagation of religion will require anumber of "secular" tasks: financial,organizational, and personnel activities (just toname a few).

The Indian State can constitutionally restrict anyone or all of these "secular" endeavors, therebyeffectively hampering genuine propagation ofany religion it desires. This has alreadyhappened, as illustrated in another fine book -Soft State: A Newspaperman's Chronicle of Indiaby Bernard D. Nossiter (Harper & RowPublishers, 1970). I suppose one way to besafeguarded from State incursion is for anindividual to worship in the open air (which will

"Bill of Rights" in the Constitution of India UpdatedG. B. Singh

insure no economic activity) or alone within theconfines of a house (which will insure nopolitical activity). How anyone worshipsindividually in these conditions may be beyondthe Indian State's intrusive nature! That's myhope!

Now, consider Clause 2b. What does freedom ofreligion have to do with social welfare andreform? This sub-clause contains a statementwith strange wordings that need some scrutiny.First, are Hindu religious institutions of a publiccharacter? This term is ambiguous and couldmean literally anything or absolutely nothing.My gut feeling is that it pertains to Hinduschools, the temples, and ashrams. Second, is areference to the "classes" of Hindus? This is aninappropriate western terminology in referenceto the Hindu society. Nonetheless, if the term hasto be used, the majority of the Hindu populationfalls into the low class while the minoritybelongs to the middle and upper classes. Third,what are the "sections" of Hindus? At the lowestcommon denominator, the bulk of Hindusections comprise the Vaishnava, Saiva, andSakti.

The State can regulate the opening of Hindutemples, schools, and/or ashrams to all high,middle or low Hindu classes irrespective ofwhether one is Vaishnava, Saiva, Saktia, or whathave you. This interpretation may be off themark if I am reading incorrectly because of theuse of terms that are vague. Unfortunately, theframers of the constitution missed the crux of theproblem.

The Hindu society is governed by caste (orvarna), and not just necessarily by the classes andsections. And certainly the caste is not the samething as class and section. If you feel that theframers of the constitution were themselves not


sure of what they wrote or its underlyingmeaning, they perhaps hoped that the readerwould be reassured in the offering ofExplanation I and II. At this juncture I amreminded of how abrupt the change is in thenarrative of Article 25. Hardly a surprise herehowever, but it triggers any thinking person well-read into Hinduism to chart the similarities thatone encounters after careful reading of the Hinduscriptures. For example in the Bhagavad-Gita, itis not uncommon to see that a transition fromone topic to another is often disconcertinglyabrupt. I am afraid this is clearly the case hereat this juncture in Article 25.

Explanation I and II are not even remotelyconnected with Clause 2b. The fact is thatExplanation I and Explanation II urgently call forexplanations of their own. Explanation Iacknowledge the existence of the Sikh religion.However, since the issue is the individualreligious rights (in Sikhism), the proper wordought to be "kirpan," and not "kirpans."Moreover, Explanation II is notoriously flawed.Its intent is obvious: the individual members ofSikh, Jain, and Buddhist religions will bereferred to as Hindus, and thus retroactivelySikhism, Jainism, and Buddhism are to beconsidered merely inseparable sects ofHinduism. Therefore, the State can interfere withtheir religious institutions as it sees fit, under theguise of procuring "social reforms."

Since the constitution refuses to delve further,one might ask: Is there a definition or anexplanation of what constitute Hinduism? Andwho really is a Hindu? Answering thesequestions has been anything but easy and clearin part because both these terms--Hindu andHinduism-are absent entirely from their variedscriptures and had been sponsored by theircolonial masters, both Islamic and Britishrespectively. Scholars over the years have triedtheir best but failed to address these termsadequately. Of lately the Supreme Court of India

has pitched in. For example in 1965, the Courtobserved that the term "Hindu" referred to "theorthodox Hindu religion which recognizes castesand contains injunctions bases on castedistinctions." By 1966, the Court stepped infurther. Rather than defining the issue, it issuedbroad guidelines--to be precise three different"standpoints"-- which require an art and gift ofapplication to the circumstances. They are worthreading:

First Standpoint: "We find it difficult, if notimpossible, to define Hindu religion or evenadequately describe it. Unlike other religions inthe world, the Hindu religion does not claim anyone prophet; it does not worship any one God;it does not subscribe to any one dogma; it doesnot believe in any one philosophic concept; itdoes not follow any one set of religious rites orperformances; in fact, it does not appear tosatisfy the narrow traditional [for traditional,read Western] features of any religion or creed.It may broadly be described as a way of life andnothing more."

This "guideline" confusing as it can be fails toascertain whether one is a Hindu or not. Toclarify further, the Court introduced the secondguideline.

Second Standpoint: Beneath the diversity ofHindu philosophy, the Court found, "lie certainbroad concepts which are treated as basic."

Those broad concepts are: (a) Acceptance of theVedas as the highest authority in religious andphilosophic matters. (b) The great worldrhythms. (c) Rebirth and pre-existence. Havingpinpointed the "unity" of the creed here, then theCourt proceeded to address the final guideline.

Third Standpoint: Addressing the often askedinsidious philosophic question as to what is the"ultimate goal of humanity," the Court answered,"It is release and freedom from the unceasingcycle of births and rebirths…."

JUNE 201538

Religious literature would call this goal as:SALVATION. But salvation as understood issomething pointing to an individual person andnot necessarily addressing the collective sense ofhumanity. Perhaps after recognizing that theCourt potentially might open a can of worms, itleft the burgeoning issue unanswered byagreeing "there is a great divergence of views…." Rather than adequately resolving the givenproblem of "Hindu" and "Hinduism," the Court'sinterjection actually complicated the matter andtherefore it needed a quick rescue. In searchingfor the "working formula," they found in theperson of B.G. Tilak (1856-1920), a fierypolitically-drenched fundamentalist Hindu, whoapparently had once prescribed: "the acceptanceof the Vedas with reverence, recognition, of thefact that the means or ways of salvation arediverse; realization of the truth that the numberof gods to be worshipped is large." In the end,thanks to the Court, when all is said and done,it boils down to this: "Hindu" and "Hinduism"are false terms bounded by the foundationalhierarchy-arranged caste, aided by the doctrinesof karma and reincarnation as its supportingouter boundaries. Inside this rather largehierarchical triangular entity, the framework issupported by myriad hosts of pillars that tightenand cement the construction from inside out:These include worshipping an army of gods andgoddesses, incredible loads of superstitions andrituals, yoga, ayurveda, corruption, immoralities,inflicting human-rights abuses, self-inflictedpsychology guaranteeing brain washing,totalitarian mode of life, real-politics, and war.The list actually is a long one. It's not toodifficult to imagine that separating oneself fromHindu conditioning is next to impossible. If youthink you have been let down by India's SupremeCourt to resolving this matter, then you may beeven heading further for a shock: Hindupoliticians and their followers continue to bewillfully negligent in their refusals to add anyneeded clarity.

Only recently in 2011, there has surfaced afurther insight into Hinduism--this time thePunjab and Haryana High Court pronounced itsverdict on a case filed by two Sikh petitionersagainst the misuse of the word "Hindu" applyingon the very personal identity of Sikh peopleportrayed within the charter of four namedHindu Code Bills, later enacted as laws: (1)Hindu Succession Act, 1956; (2) Hindu MarriageAct, 1955; (3) Hindu Adoption and MaintenanceAct, 1956; and (4) Hindu Minority andGuardianship Act. 1956. While denying thepetitioners their case, the Court definedHinduism as: "Hinduism, as we have been madeto understand by scholars and sages at differenttimes and different ages is not a strait jacketreligion; it is a way of life. It is a 'Dharma'.Hindus are not one people but many. Therein liesthe beauty of India." One can see howinsufficient and pathetic this definition ofHinduism is apart from being irrational andillogical.

Like the Sikhs, the Jain community too has beenvocal in their denunciation of Article 25.Recently it has come to my attention thatapparently the Jains sought an understandingfrom the then Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru.In response, Nehru's Principal Private Secretary,A.V. Pai, (writing for his boss) penned thefollowings words for the benefit of Jains, datedJanuary 31, 1950:

"This Article [25] merely makes a definition.This definition by enforcing a specificconstitutional arrangement circumscribes thatrule. Likewise you will note that this mentionsnot only Jains but also Buddhists and Sikhs. Itis clear that Buddhists are not Hindus andtherefore there need to be no apprehension thatthe Jains are designated as Hindus. There is nodoubt that the Jains are a different religiouscommunity and this accepted position is in noway affected by the constitution."


Again and hardly a surprise here to see howillogical and evasive the above clarification is!Why the educated Hindus placed high inpolitical positions speak from both sides of theirmouths? Why can't they simply amend thecontroversial Article 25 to reflect the religiousrights truly? Why would they continue toexercise deceptive means to declare non-Hindusas Hindus, and yet never define for us as to whatHinduism is in the first place?

In August 2005, continuing with the ongoingissue of personal religious identities affecting theJains per se, the India Supreme Court refused togrant any relief to religious minoritycommunities (in this case Sikhs and Jains) frombeing bracketed under the label of Hindu.

The word "secularism" is often invokeddiligently by the caste Hindus when describingthe Indian State in a spirit of nationalisticHinduism, with an underlying implication of theHindu expansionist quest to absorb otherreligions. The western definition of "secularism"is when the State and public policies takeprecedence over religious considerations. Inother words, in the West, there is a separation ofchurch and state. But most Indians, includingtheir leaders, have their own self-serving bizarredefinitions. One often cited goes like this: "equaltreatment of all the religions by the State." Is thata desirable goal? If it is then how can any Stateachieve such a goal?

In the Indian context, I suppose the easiest wayfor the State to treat all religions "equally" wouldbe to intrude into every religion equally and ifneed be, somehow proclaim all religions are oneand inseparable part of Hinduism -- thereforemaking everyone in India a Hindu. This isprecisely what is happening in India. Sinceeveryone is a Hindu, the leadership expects aresponse in kind. It usually shows in anintellectually flawed population which hasstamped itself with a bogus notion echoed in thebuzzword called sameness. This is an expression

erroneously viewed as synonymous withequality.

Under this framed scenario, the very thought ofdiscrimination or even persecution of onereligion by another need not arise since we areall the same, that is, Hindus. Obviously, this kindof an argument carries a heavy price tag. Whentold that India's sacred constitution exudes anegalitarian system, years of Hindu conditioninghave transfixed the populace to acquiesce to anycommuniqué coming down from the top. Fewwill ever fathom that India's egalitarianism is notthe same sort we know in a Western sense, butis of an entirely different substance. It is rootedin the infamous caste system, or in a moreprecise language, the Hindu Apartheid. While thecaste system is alive, thriving, and functional,India's Hindu leaders boast of an Indiandemocracy, ignoring its pervasive underlyingsegregation and inequality. This soundsmagnificently absurd. Many Indian leaders onone hand enjoy the fruits of being born into anelite caste (while the majority of the populationrots at the lowest levels of caste), while on theother hand mindlessly they sing the gospel ofequality.

The caste being a substructure of Hindu society,the talk of "equality," "democracy," and"secularism" reverberates only to mislead themasses. Not surprisingly, this kind of tacticalmaneuvering to deceive is clearly evident in theIndian Constitution and conspicuous in theState's public policy and internal propaganda.While Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists have alreadybeen "secularized" constitutionally, Christiansand Muslims are now also in the process ofbeing "secularized" through state-orchestratedpropaganda. A number of Indian leaders now callIndian Christians and Muslims as "ChristiHindus" and "Mohammadiya Hindus,"respectively. In addition, some provincial stategovernments inside India have already enactedanti-conversion laws while others are

JUNE 201540

contemplating ensuring the Hindu populationdoesn't slide away into something else.

Conclusion

Other amendments of the Bill of Rights in theU.S. Constitution guarantee the American peoplenumerous other fundamental rights. Theseinclude right to bear arms (Amendment II);protection against government officials whomight invade their homes and seize propertywithout legal permission (Amendment IV);protection against being "a witness againsthimself" in any criminal case or being "deprivedof life, liberty, or property, without due processof law" (Amendment V); the right of a personaccused of a crime "to a speedy and public trialby an impartial jury" (Amendment VI); andprotection against "cruel and unusualpunishments" (Amendment VIII). Can theConstitution of India match word-for-word theU.S. Bill of Rights? And, if it cannot, can itsintentions at least match those of the U.S. Billof Rights? If reading Articles 19 and 25 has left

anyone with a cause for concern, then theremaining portions of Part III of the IndianConstitution should not come as a surprise. Afterdue consideration, it remains unclear if theIndian Constitution guarantees fundamentalrights as is generally claimed, despite the endlessrhetoric from India's leaders, its intelligentsia,and its apologists.

P.S.: The above article is an updated versionfrom two articles originally published in:

1. August 2009 issue of New English Review,an online magazine.

2. March 11, 2112 issue of Eurasia Review underthe web address:

http://www.eurasiareview.com/11032012-bill-of-rights-in-the-constitution-of-india-analysis/

(Concluded)

G. B. Singh is the author of Gandhi: Behind theMask of Divinity (Prometheus 2004) and GandhiUnder Cross Examination (Sovereign Star2009).

THE RADICAL HUMANIST SUBSCRIPTION RATESIn SAARC Countries:

THE RADICAL HUMANIST SUBSCRIPTION RATESIn SAARC Countries :

For one year - Rs. 200.00 For two years - Rs. 350.00For three years - 500.00 Life subscription - Rs. 2000.00

(Life subscription is only for individual subscribers and not for institutions.)

Cheques should be in favour of The Radical Humanist. For outstation cheques: Please addRs. 55.00 to the total (Not applicable to Inter-city cheques).

In other Countries: Annual subscription (Air Mail) $ 100.00; GBP 75.00

Note: Direct transfer of subscription amount from abroad may be sent to:SWIFT Code: CNRB0000349, MICR Code: 110015012 in the Current Account Number

0349201821034 at Canara Bank, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi- 110014, India.

Cheques and money transfer details may be sent to: Mr. N.D Pancholi, G-3/617,

Shalimar Garden Extn. I, Rose Park, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad- 201005. (U.P.)


A controversial "Gujarat Control of TerroristActivities & Organized Crime" Bill was passedin Gujarat Legislature Assembly on 30th March2015. GUJCOC Bills were also passed in theyears 2004 and 2009 in the Gujarat LegislativeAssembly which are still pending before H.E. thePresident of India awaiting his clearance. Thiscontroversial bill was passed in the past for threetimes during last 12 years. H. E. the Presidents,A.P.J. Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Patil hadsuggested amendments in it and during thecorresponding periods, respectively, SundarsinhBhandari and Kamala Beniwal were Governorsof Gujarat. While Lal Krishna Advaniji was theHome Minister in the Centre during the year2004, the rationale for passage of this Bill againin the Legislature Assembly is notunderstandable.

Under the GUJCTOC Act, rampant powers havebeen vested with the Police. E-mail and phonetapping shall be recognized as proofs / evidence.Custodial arrest of the convicts shall beextendable up to 180 days whereas theconfessions made before the Police Officer shallbe treated as valid before the Court.Conversation, correspondence etc. have beenrecognized as evidence. Moreover, he will notbe granted anticipatory or regular bail. On theface of it, this Act is contrary to the laws of theConstitution and the Centre. Some of theprovisions, being inconsistent with the Articlesof the Constitution, amount to breach /violationof the Constitution. How can there be any lawwhich is contrary to the law of the CentralGovt.? If the rights of the judiciary are entrustedto the Police then it could result in fabricating

Passage of "GUJCTOC" Bill Strangulating theVoice of Dissent

Gautam Thaker

statement using third degree tactics over theinnocent people. Is it fair to entrust such powersto the Police? In this Act, provisions have beenmade which are contrary to the Transfer ofProperty Act, Indian Evidences Act and IndianCriminal Procedure.

It is said that this Law is being enacted becauseGovernment's priorities are for maintenance ofpeace, safety and security in Gujarat. Its purposeis to see to it that law-breakers by indulging inorganized crimes including terrorism and thosetampering with the safety and security of peopleof Gujarat by committing criminal acts are givendeterrent punishment and that none of theinnocent is penalized in any way. Necessity forenacting this law has arisen to ensure safety ofpeople of Gujarat especially in view of 1600 Km.long coastal area of Gujarat and areas borderingwith Pakistan. Aim of bringing in this Bill by theGovernment is to counter-act terrorism and tostrengthen and sharpen the teeth and claws oflaws.

In order to deal with the criminals sincerely andhonestly, adequate powers already vest with thePolice in terms of many laws of the present dayand by using it, peace and stability can beestablished in Gujarat. It will be enough if theexisting laws are strictly implemented. If lawsalone can check the terrorism, then terrorism inthe country could have been checked while thelaw of POTA was in force. Although, the presentAct is a step ahead of the POTA one wondershow it will be possible to prevent terrorism. Realneed is of sincerity to implement and enforce thelaws. Even with the honest implementation of thelaws currently in force, terrorism will have no

JUNE 201542

place anywhere. In the past, acts such as MISA,TADA and POTA had been introduced but theyhad succumbed to the rage of the people. Misuseof above three Acts was made bydiscriminatingly targeting against poor, minority,aggrieved and deprived sections of the society.At that point of time, 95 per cent of the peopleconvicted under those Acts were acquitted asinnocents. A fear has also emerged that this newAct will be used against the Activists and thecommon people too. Going by one report, underthe PASA, Police had arrested as many as 11,916anti-social elements during the period from 2009to 2014 in Gujarat, against which theGovernment could prove its actions to be true,before the Courts and the Advisory Boards, inonly 1,124 cases. The reason behind increase inanti-social activities in Gujarat is mainly due tohigher contribution of collusion among policeand the politicians. It is difficult to understandas to how the rights without any limit, beingvested into the hands of Police under this newAct will be in the interest of people of Gujarat.

Impartial implementation of the existing Acts isthe main testing tool of to-day's times. Noprovisions of the Articles / Clauses which areagainst civil liberties can in any way be givenany validity. Fight against terrorism is a nationalone, but at the same no ruler should wink at orlose sight of the concerns of civil liberties and

human rights. Instead of enacting laws under anew label which take away the right and libertyof an individual, Govt. should makeimplementation of the other existing laws withfirm will power and the same will bring outdesired results. Over a period of time, it has beenproved with such Acts that instead of theconvicts / criminals, innocent people have beenput behind the bars. Violence and terrorismcannot be dealt with merely by enacting laws. Ifsuch Acts become a permanent feature of ourregime then it is entirely against the spirit ofdemocracy and human rights. Really speaking,this may give rise to emergence of a "JungleRule" in the country. With such an Act, there willnot only be violation of rights of liberties but willsimultaneously give rise to corruption among thepolice department and the law enforcementagencies and due to that there will be upsurgein the obstacles in our economic progress.

No Act which aims at threats to the fundamentalrights of the people can survive in a democraticnation. All the peoples, concerned citizens,activist and human rights organization shouldjoin their hands together to non-violently, in aGandhian way, by arousing people's awarenessand constitutionally, in as much as possible,oppose "GUJCTOC" Act which aims atnullifying human values and principles ofdemocracy.

Please note the change in the email ID and the postal addressDear Friends,

Please mail your articles/reports for publication in the RH to: [email protected] post them to: G-3/617, Shalimar Garden Extn. I, Rose Park, Sahibabad,Ghaziabad- 201005 (U.P.)

Please send your digital passport size photograph and your brief resume if it is being sent forthe first time to the RH.

A note whether it has also been published elsewhere or is being sent exclusively for the RHshould also be attached with it. - Mahi Pal Singh, Editor, The Radical Humanist

the radical humanist - wordpress.com · 2018-10-04 · the radical humanist 3 ... please send your...

Documents