Sadashiva panel indicts the Special Task Force of excesses committed in the hunt for Veerappan
By PC Vinoj Kumar
Chennai
The Justice Sadashiva Panel, which probed allegations against the Joint Special Task Force (JSTF) of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka during its Veerappan operations, has questioned the exercise of police powers by the JSTF, and the veracity of some of the encounters. In its report it has also confirmed the allegations of torture and rape. The panel observed, “Having regard to all aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that in the interests of justice, in six cases in which firing seems to have been done from very close range and the 12 cases in which the victims had been fired at from both sides, the families of the deceased victims deserve to be compensated suitably by payment of substantial monetary relief.” The report also notes, “The main point for consideration from the legal angle is whether the exercise of police powers was within the jurisdiction of the STF as formally determined under law. The two STFs in this case had merely functioned as armed forces and did not have formally notified jurisdiction for exercise of the normal police powers of arrest, search, etc.”
The panel pulled up the Karnataka and Tamil Nadu governments for not duly constituting the STFs. Observing that both the governments “seem to have erred in this aspect,” the panel notes, “Headquarters of each STF should have been formally notified as a police station under Section 2(s) of the Criminal Procedure Code and its area should have been specified suitably to cover the entire area of Veerappan operation.”
“When the commanding officers of the STFs and their personnel get the feeling that they have the power to act without any regard to legal provisions, it is likely to induce a certain measure of high-handedness in their work. This has to be guarded against.”
Allegations of illegal detention and torture against the JSTF have stuck. Citing the observations of the TADA Court, the panel notes that they “lend support to the general version given by most witnesses before the panel about their having been taken into custody by the STF on a much earlier date than mentioned in the record, kept in illegal custody for a long period when they were subjected to humiliating treatment and torture, and later produced in court on a false charge under TADA merely to legitimise their arrest.”
The panel has dwelt on the circumstances leading to the use of third-degree methods during interrogation. “Since Veerappan had successfully remained at large and was also active in the interior areas beyond the reach of the STF for a long time, the STF would have felt the pressure of public opinion besides professional directions from above to intensify their efforts to nab him. This would have naturally induced them to adopt pressure tactics to extract maximum information from the villagers under interrogation.”
“While some restraint on the movement of persons under prolonged interrogation is understandable in the context of the prevailing situation, excesses committed by the STF in the course of interrogation in brazen violation of human rights cannot be justified. In the absence of any in-built mechanism to guard against such excesses resulting from professional anxiety to secure results, it is believable that the STF personnel had committed some excesses.”
On encounters, the panel has opined, “The allegations made by some witnesses regarding the veracity of the encounters, as recorded by the police, cannot be totally brushed aside as baseless. It seems to us that the inquires made by the prescribed authorities in the two states immediately after the alleged encounters had perhaps not taken into account all the relevant evidence concerning the matter, particularly the version from the relatives of deceased persons, and the considered opinion of a ballistics expert as regards the gunshot injuries from the encounters.”
However, the panel has not identified personnel involved in the allegations. It has stated that “it is well nigh impossible, at this stage and distance of time, to fix the identity of the police personnel involved in the allegations which have been held as true as far as the injuries suffered by the victims are concerned, more particularly where it was admitted by some witnesses that they were kept blindfolded.”
The panel has also observed, “Whatever be the official disposal of such ‘encounters’, the fact remains that the villagers concerned cling on to their allegation that persons had been deliberately shot dead by the STF even while they were in the custody of the STF for interrogation.”
“Taking note of the psyche of the villagers in the affected area and their expectation of a fair and just mechanism to guard against such ‘encounters’ in future, we recommend the detailed procedure of a mandatory judicial inquiry in such cases, as recommended by the National Police Commission.”
In all, 193 people deposed before the panel as victims. Eleven women alleged that they were “taken into custody by Karnataka police, detained illegally for periods varying from 15 days to one-and-a-half years and were raped during detention and also tortured physically.”
The panel observes: “We find that excepting one instance, the evidence is not adequate to hold that they had been raped by the STF personnel, as alleged by them. Further, none of the witnesses could pinpointedly and convincingly identify the person who had committed the rape.”
The panel has recommended compensation to “victims of allegations of excesses that are held acceptable by the panel, TADA detenues who remained in jail for several years till they were acquitted in September 2001, whose cases had not been properly reviewed in time by the state review committee, and families of persons shown as killed in suspicious circumstances. It has left the quantum of relief in each case to be determined by the National Human Rights Commission.
Nov 12 , 2005
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Veerappan Taint Haunts Hamlets
Villagers in the brigand’s erstwhile stronghold continue to be hounded on what they say are trumped-up charges. PC VINOJ KUMAR reports
THREE YEARS after he was killed in an alleged police encounter, brigand Veerappan’s misdeeds continue to shadow his former stomping grounds in west Tamil Nadu’s Bargur, Sathyamangalam and Mettur forest areas. More than a hundred people from these regions are facing trial on charges of having helped the man who for 20 years was one of India’s most sought-after fugitives, pursued for scores of murders and kidnappings, and for large-scale sandalwood and ivory smuggling. Many of those accused of having helped him stand charged under sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Arms Act and the Explosives Act; some had been charged under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) as well, but the government later withdrew those cases. While some cases are more than a decade old, many defendants have still not been given copies of the chargesheets.
As TEHELKA found, most of these people are impoverished daily wage earners who live in remote areas that are up to 150km away from the courts in Bhavani and in Karnataka’s Kollegal where they are being tried. Shuttling between their villages and the courts can cost anywhere between Rs 50 and Rs 200 per trip. Not only that, with hearings in each case taking place at least once a month, the undertrials are forced to suspend their livelihood each time they make a court appearance. Absence at any hearing could result in arrest, as happened with A. Ponnusamy in 2004. “I didn’t have the money to go to court that day. So I stayed back, not realising the consequences.” Arrested under TADA in 1993, he was in jail for nine months before he could get bail. In 2004, he was jailed for another eight months. “He had no one to guide him at the time” says A. Asokan, an advocate with People’s Watch, a rights NGO which is providing the villagers legal assistance. “He should have surrendered in court and recalled the warrant. Had he done so, he could have avoided the second jail term.”
K. Sampath from Moolakadu, about six km from Mettur, spent a total of three years in various Karnataka jails. He has six cases against him, three each in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. “Every month, I need to spend at least 10 days making my trial appearances,” he says. “It costs me about Rs 200 for every trip to the Kollegal court.” Kollegal is about 150 km from Mettur.
R. Podaran Mathayan, a relative of Veerappan from Yemanur in Dharmapuri district, is the butt of local jokes. People here say he has a case against him in every district in the vicinity — three in Kollegal, two in Sathyamangalam, four in Bhavani and one in Pennagaram. In one case, he is accused of having received Rs 10,000 from Veerappan. He was also accused in four other cases but has been acquitted in those. Mathayan spends around Rs 1,000 a month, visiting the various courts.
Most of the accused claim the Special Task Force (STF) foisted the cases on them on false charges. The Justice AJ Sadashiva Commission has confirmed allegations of human rights violations by the STF. On the basis of the report, the National Human Rights Commission ordered the Tamil Nadu and Karnataka governments to provide compensation worth Rs 2.8 crore to 89 persons — 38 in Tamil Nadu and 51 in Karnataka. While the Tamil Nadu government has compensated all the 38 claimants, Karnataka is yet to grant compensation to 13 persons. “The Commission heard the testimonies of just 193 people. That is only a fraction of the STF’s rights abuse victims — we have identified at least 750,” says Henry Tiphagne, the executive director of People’s Watch.
ACCORDING TO activists, the STF routinely took people into custody at dates earlier than those stated in the official records. They were illegally detained in STF camps for many days before being produced in court. Mani, from Naicken Thanda, accused in a case that dates back to 1993, says STF personnel arrested her on a bus in Mettur as she was going home one night. “My husband was a truck driver. Someone told the police that he was involved in smuggling sandalwood for Veerappan. The police picked me up from the bus in full public view and detained me in the camp. After many days, they produced me in the court with a totally new story, claiming Iwas arrested when I was taking ragi flour to Veerappan,” she says. “I have never seen Veerappan. I have only seen him on television. I was in jail for 11 months for a crime I did not commit.” Her husband turned himself in soon after her arrest and was also jailed.
According to the FIR against her, Mani is implicated along with eight others in a case against two men, Chinna Ponnan and Appu, who are charged with having opened fire at a police party at Kallatty Kanavai. The police claim the accused were intercepted carrying food and explosives for Veerappan. Chinna Ponnan and Appu are alleged to have fired at the police when asked to surrender. The police say they later seized gelatine, ammonium nitrate and about 40 kg of ragi flour from the group. The explosives, the police claimed, were intended for use in landmines, meant to “blow up the police party”. The FIR says Mani was carrying about 20kg of ragi in a bag.
Chinna Ponnan, for his part, says the police picked him up from his home one night because they suspected him of selling chicken from his poultry farm to Veerappan’s gang. “They took me to the Mettur camp, where I was kept in illegal custody,” he says. “Later, we were produced in court with the police claiming that they had arrested me in the forests after I fired at them.” However, says Ponnan, life has recompensed him for the injustice he suffered — today, his son is a software engineer with Infosys. The case against him, however, is still pending at the court in Bhavani. His co- accused, Appu, says that after he spent a year in jail on TADA charges, he decided to become a police informer.
A similar case involves a “gang” of nine whom the police claims to have intercepted in Athimarathupatti Pallam in the Bargur Reserve Forest area. They allege the “gang” was fleeing after beating up villagers in Kongadai for passing on information to the police. The FIR says Veerappan’s brother Arjunan was among those intercepted but that he managed to escape along with four others. The police claim they seized single barrel guns, gunpowder, about 100 gms of iron balls, two crude bombs and about 80 kg of gelatine. According to A. Aruldoss, coordinator of the Rehabilitation Centre for Tortured Victims in Mettur, there is no substance to these allegations — the accused are merely victims of police attempts to spread terror to scare people off from helping Veerappan.
MANY OF those accused of having supported Veerappan complain that they were never given an opportunity to present their cases before the Sadashiva Commission. “Rotti” Munusamy from Kolathur says the STF ruined his life. “The STF took me into custody accusing me of supplying buns to Veerappan. I was detained in an STF camp for three years — they made me work as a cook there.” After his detention, his children — two daughters and a son — were no longer able to go to school.
Chellappan Muthu from Koonandiyoor used to work as a vehicle cleaner. He says he was washing a bus early one morning when he was arrested. He says the police tortured him in the camp.
“Tailor” Basuwan, a 44-year-old from Thevar Malai in Bargur forest, was arrested on suspicion of having supplied clothes to Veerappan’s gang. “But in the FIR they charged me with planting landmines to kill policemen.”
Malaiappa Gounder from Neethipuram near Mettur, says he was on his bullock cart carrying organic waste from the forest when he was arrested. “The police said I was returning after supplying food to Veerappan’s gang and took me into custody,” he says.
Veerappan’s widow Muthulakshmi believes that Veerappan’s immediate family members have suffered as much as anyone else and they should also be compensated. “I married Veerappan in 1990 and lived with him till 1993. After that, I met him only once. But the STF harassed me all through. They illegally kept my father in custody at one of their camps for more than a year and treated him like a slave.”
Says Tiphagne of People’s Watch, “Now that the Sadashiva Commission has established that there is truth in the allegations of atrocities by the STF, the NHRC should find a mechanism to hear the complaints from the estimated 750 people who have serious complaints against the STF.” Activists also plan to move the Madras High Court to quash the cases against the villagers who continue to pay for being residents of the wrong place at the wrong time.
From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 4, Issue 49, Dated Dec 22, 2007
THREE YEARS after he was killed in an alleged police encounter, brigand Veerappan’s misdeeds continue to shadow his former stomping grounds in west Tamil Nadu’s Bargur, Sathyamangalam and Mettur forest areas. More than a hundred people from these regions are facing trial on charges of having helped the man who for 20 years was one of India’s most sought-after fugitives, pursued for scores of murders and kidnappings, and for large-scale sandalwood and ivory smuggling. Many of those accused of having helped him stand charged under sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Arms Act and the Explosives Act; some had been charged under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) as well, but the government later withdrew those cases. While some cases are more than a decade old, many defendants have still not been given copies of the chargesheets.
As TEHELKA found, most of these people are impoverished daily wage earners who live in remote areas that are up to 150km away from the courts in Bhavani and in Karnataka’s Kollegal where they are being tried. Shuttling between their villages and the courts can cost anywhere between Rs 50 and Rs 200 per trip. Not only that, with hearings in each case taking place at least once a month, the undertrials are forced to suspend their livelihood each time they make a court appearance. Absence at any hearing could result in arrest, as happened with A. Ponnusamy in 2004. “I didn’t have the money to go to court that day. So I stayed back, not realising the consequences.” Arrested under TADA in 1993, he was in jail for nine months before he could get bail. In 2004, he was jailed for another eight months. “He had no one to guide him at the time” says A. Asokan, an advocate with People’s Watch, a rights NGO which is providing the villagers legal assistance. “He should have surrendered in court and recalled the warrant. Had he done so, he could have avoided the second jail term.”
K. Sampath from Moolakadu, about six km from Mettur, spent a total of three years in various Karnataka jails. He has six cases against him, three each in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. “Every month, I need to spend at least 10 days making my trial appearances,” he says. “It costs me about Rs 200 for every trip to the Kollegal court.” Kollegal is about 150 km from Mettur.
R. Podaran Mathayan, a relative of Veerappan from Yemanur in Dharmapuri district, is the butt of local jokes. People here say he has a case against him in every district in the vicinity — three in Kollegal, two in Sathyamangalam, four in Bhavani and one in Pennagaram. In one case, he is accused of having received Rs 10,000 from Veerappan. He was also accused in four other cases but has been acquitted in those. Mathayan spends around Rs 1,000 a month, visiting the various courts.
Most of the accused claim the Special Task Force (STF) foisted the cases on them on false charges. The Justice AJ Sadashiva Commission has confirmed allegations of human rights violations by the STF. On the basis of the report, the National Human Rights Commission ordered the Tamil Nadu and Karnataka governments to provide compensation worth Rs 2.8 crore to 89 persons — 38 in Tamil Nadu and 51 in Karnataka. While the Tamil Nadu government has compensated all the 38 claimants, Karnataka is yet to grant compensation to 13 persons. “The Commission heard the testimonies of just 193 people. That is only a fraction of the STF’s rights abuse victims — we have identified at least 750,” says Henry Tiphagne, the executive director of People’s Watch.
ACCORDING TO activists, the STF routinely took people into custody at dates earlier than those stated in the official records. They were illegally detained in STF camps for many days before being produced in court. Mani, from Naicken Thanda, accused in a case that dates back to 1993, says STF personnel arrested her on a bus in Mettur as she was going home one night. “My husband was a truck driver. Someone told the police that he was involved in smuggling sandalwood for Veerappan. The police picked me up from the bus in full public view and detained me in the camp. After many days, they produced me in the court with a totally new story, claiming Iwas arrested when I was taking ragi flour to Veerappan,” she says. “I have never seen Veerappan. I have only seen him on television. I was in jail for 11 months for a crime I did not commit.” Her husband turned himself in soon after her arrest and was also jailed.
According to the FIR against her, Mani is implicated along with eight others in a case against two men, Chinna Ponnan and Appu, who are charged with having opened fire at a police party at Kallatty Kanavai. The police claim the accused were intercepted carrying food and explosives for Veerappan. Chinna Ponnan and Appu are alleged to have fired at the police when asked to surrender. The police say they later seized gelatine, ammonium nitrate and about 40 kg of ragi flour from the group. The explosives, the police claimed, were intended for use in landmines, meant to “blow up the police party”. The FIR says Mani was carrying about 20kg of ragi in a bag.
Chinna Ponnan, for his part, says the police picked him up from his home one night because they suspected him of selling chicken from his poultry farm to Veerappan’s gang. “They took me to the Mettur camp, where I was kept in illegal custody,” he says. “Later, we were produced in court with the police claiming that they had arrested me in the forests after I fired at them.” However, says Ponnan, life has recompensed him for the injustice he suffered — today, his son is a software engineer with Infosys. The case against him, however, is still pending at the court in Bhavani. His co- accused, Appu, says that after he spent a year in jail on TADA charges, he decided to become a police informer.
A similar case involves a “gang” of nine whom the police claims to have intercepted in Athimarathupatti Pallam in the Bargur Reserve Forest area. They allege the “gang” was fleeing after beating up villagers in Kongadai for passing on information to the police. The FIR says Veerappan’s brother Arjunan was among those intercepted but that he managed to escape along with four others. The police claim they seized single barrel guns, gunpowder, about 100 gms of iron balls, two crude bombs and about 80 kg of gelatine. According to A. Aruldoss, coordinator of the Rehabilitation Centre for Tortured Victims in Mettur, there is no substance to these allegations — the accused are merely victims of police attempts to spread terror to scare people off from helping Veerappan.
MANY OF those accused of having supported Veerappan complain that they were never given an opportunity to present their cases before the Sadashiva Commission. “Rotti” Munusamy from Kolathur says the STF ruined his life. “The STF took me into custody accusing me of supplying buns to Veerappan. I was detained in an STF camp for three years — they made me work as a cook there.” After his detention, his children — two daughters and a son — were no longer able to go to school.
Chellappan Muthu from Koonandiyoor used to work as a vehicle cleaner. He says he was washing a bus early one morning when he was arrested. He says the police tortured him in the camp.
“Tailor” Basuwan, a 44-year-old from Thevar Malai in Bargur forest, was arrested on suspicion of having supplied clothes to Veerappan’s gang. “But in the FIR they charged me with planting landmines to kill policemen.”
Malaiappa Gounder from Neethipuram near Mettur, says he was on his bullock cart carrying organic waste from the forest when he was arrested. “The police said I was returning after supplying food to Veerappan’s gang and took me into custody,” he says.
Veerappan’s widow Muthulakshmi believes that Veerappan’s immediate family members have suffered as much as anyone else and they should also be compensated. “I married Veerappan in 1990 and lived with him till 1993. After that, I met him only once. But the STF harassed me all through. They illegally kept my father in custody at one of their camps for more than a year and treated him like a slave.”
Says Tiphagne of People’s Watch, “Now that the Sadashiva Commission has established that there is truth in the allegations of atrocities by the STF, the NHRC should find a mechanism to hear the complaints from the estimated 750 people who have serious complaints against the STF.” Activists also plan to move the Madras High Court to quash the cases against the villagers who continue to pay for being residents of the wrong place at the wrong time.
From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 4, Issue 49, Dated Dec 22, 2007
EXCLUSIVE: ANDHRA’S SECRET WARS
The Cobra Fields
Former Naxalites are being armed in Andhra Pradesh to take on underground Reds. Civil rights groups allege this is a covert war being waged by the State. PC Vinoj Kumar’s report
Civil rights activists are in the grip of terror in Andhra Pradesh. Scores of them are on the hitlist of killer gangs freely roaming the state. Operating in the names of Nallamalla Black Cobras, Kakatiya Cobras, Naxalite Victims Association and Narsa Cobras, these gangs have already killed four activists, made abortive attempts and issued countless threats to many others. Those targeted include lawyers, writers and left-wing intellectuals. The police is yet to make a single arrest in connection with the incidents so far.
The suspected assailants, former Naxalites, allegedly enjoy the support of police. “The attempt to create private militias to attack the activists of the legal fronts of the Naxalite parties and civil rights activists is nothing new. Initially, policemen in disguise carried out the attacks and threats. Now they are using former Naxalites to do the job. Some of them were encouraged to form paramilitary gangs after they developed differences and left the organisation. Some were contacted when they were still in the party and paid to kill their comrades and come out with weapons and form counter-insurgent gangs,” says K. Balagopal, general secretary of Human Rights Forum. The Forum has, in fact, made a fairly exhaustive study of the fratricidal war unfolding in the state. Similar tactics had been used overtly by the Jammu and Kashmir government to fight terrorism in the state when it created the Ikhwan force manned by surrendered militants.
Some of the former Naxalites are dreaded gangsters (see box). Kathula Sammaiah, for instance. He was a terror till he died in a plane crash in 2001. “He was one of those who could organise a press conference with a firearm in his hand,” says KG Kannabiran, national president of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), adding, “The situation in Andhra is as bad as Bihar, with mafia killings going on, but for some reason it has not caught national attention.” Nayeemuddin and Jadala Nagaraju are the most dreaded in the business now. Known to operate under bizarre names, activists suspect their hand in the recent murders and threats issued in the name of Cobras.
State Director General of Police (DGP) Swaranjit Sen however reportedly remarked that police were not snake charmers to catch cobras (see interview). His remarks have sparked angry reactions from activists whose lives are under threat. “All these gangs, whether they call themselves Cobras, Green Tigers or by any other name, are sponsored by the state. They are acting on instructions from state police,” says cultural activist and revolutionary singer Gaddar. In last few months, Gaddar has received letters from the Cobras asking him to stop praising the Maoists or face death. The letters have one message: “You escaped death last time. This time you will not be lucky. We will cut you into pieces if you don’t stop your singing.” In 1997, Gaddar survived an attempt on his life when unidentified gunmen shot at him. The Green Tigers owned up responsibility for the attack, but police have still not made any breakthrough in the case. This doesn’t surprise activists, who allege that Green Tigers is a front for policemen. They point out that Javed, a suspended police constable, was arrested in Warangal for threatening activists in the name of Haribhushan, leader of Green Tigers. He was arrested in 2004 around the time when the government and the Maoists were engaged in a dialogue. “It was the only action ever taken against any person associated with these gangs,” says Balagopal.
The talks, however, ended in failure and the government reimposed the ban on the Maoists in 2005. “The police did not want the talks to succeed. They were unnerved by the success of the Guthikondabilam public meeting of the People’s War (now merged with Maoist Communist Centre of India and known as the CPI-Maoist) in which over six lakh people attended,” says Kannabiran.
The recent spate of killings and threats against activists began as retaliation for Congress legislator Narsi Reddy’s murder on Independence Day last year by suspected Maoists. Two days later, a statement was published in the press in the name of Narsa Cobras containing a list of activists who have been marked for killing. A week later, K. Kanakachari, an executive member of the Patriotic and Democratic Movement, whose name figured in the hitlist, was hacked to death in Mahbubnagar. The Cobras warned activists to stay away from his funeral procession. Those who defied were included in a revised hitlist issued by the Cobras.
On September 10, Mannem Prasad, district president of the Struggle Committee for Annihilation of Caste, was murdered in broad daylight in Singarayakonda, Prakasam district. Nallamalla Black Cobras claimed responsibility for his murder. On September 14, Kilinga Rao was killed in Ambatipalli in Karimnagar district, and on November 28, Munaiah, a dalit activist of Democratic Teachers Federation (DTF) was brutally hacked to death at Alipur in Mahabubnagar district.
Though the murdered activists were all members of legal organisations, they were not in the good books of the police because of their vigilant human rights work. In its report on the series of murders, based on a field visit, the All India Fact-Finding Team, comprising activists from different parts of the country, notes that police had detained two activists while they were waiting to receive Mannem Prasad’s body. When the duo explained to police that they belonged to Mannem’s outfit, the cops reportedly shot back that their organisation was nothing but a front of the Maoists.
On November 23, at about 10.30 pm, unidentified persons attacked the house of Professor S. Seshaiah, general secretary of Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC) in Anantapur district and set fire to the car parked in the portico and damaged furniture lying on the verandah. Seshaiah and his family members had a narrow escape as the assailants could not break open the iron-grilled door. The police found a letter outside the house the next morning purportedly signed by the secretary of Rayalaseema Tigers claiming responsibility for the attack.
Seshaiah believes the police planted the letter to fend off allegations that they were behind the attack. “Several people visited my house the whole night and the following morning. None of them spotted the letter. Only the police team that arrived at about 11 in the morning found it. It was drizzling the whole night, but the letter was dry. All attacks against the activists are taking place under police guidance. I believe the police wrote the letter and planted it to show that they did not have any hand in the incident,” says Seshaiah.
Threats have been issued to several others. N. Venugopal, a journalist and literary critic, received threatening calls from the Cobras after he moved the Lokayukta — an institution for lodging complaints against public servants — against the home minister, DGP and the Additional DGP (Intelligence) for their failure to act against the Cobras. “The threat from the Cobras clearly established the nexus between public servants and them. There was no way anyone else could have known about my complaint,” says Venugopal.
He then wrote to cm YS Rajasekhara Reddy: “Nallamalla Cobras and Kakatiya Cobras, apparently sponsored and maintained by your government’s police department, seem to be after my blood, making three threatening phone calls within the last four days. I would like to propose to you that it would be better if they kill me right in your office to enhance the prestige of our state in maintaining law and order and dealing with difference of opinion.” Venugopal says the calls stopped coming after that.
The Cobras are not sparing women activists either. On August 28 last year, Rammohan Kobra, who claimed to be the secretary of Narsa Cobra state committee, in a press release demanded the activists of Andhra Pradesh Chaitanya Mahila Samaakhya (APCMS), a federation of women’s organisations, to resign from their posts or face execution. The next day, Sujatha, APCMS secretary, got a call on her mobile from one Ravi, who said he was calling on behalf of Nallamalla Black Cobras. When Sujatha asked him what he wanted, he replied, “Your death” and hung up. The calls persisted for some time. “We informed the police and the state human rights commission but to no use. Police could not nab the culprits, but the calls ceased,” says B. Jyothi, president of APCMS, another target of Cobras.
How the threat calls ceased to Venugopal and Jyothi remains a mystery. It has only reinforced the suspicion that the Cobras are actually doing someone’s missive, possibly the police’s. Balagopal has reasons to believe so. “Often, the abusive phone calls made by the Cobras has revealed awareness of facts that only the police know. Secondly, threats in the name of Cobras have been issued after injury or insult caused to the police or to their old favourites like Nayeemuddin. Thirdly, the police has been gleefully inactive in the face of blatant violence in the name of the Cobras.”
Civil rights activists had been targeted in the state earlier, but never in such gruesome manner. “The recent murders have been most brutal. Victims have been axed and the axe is left implanted in the victim’s body. Clearly, the intention is to terrify the activists, so that they would not stir out of their homes,” says Kannabiran.
T. Purushotham of APCLC, who had exposed several fake encounters, was killed in 2000, and a year later, Azam Ali of the same organisation was killed. In January 1985, Gopi Rajanna, an APCLC activist, was shot dead at Jagtial in Karim Nagar district. In September 1985, A. Ramanantham, APCLC vice president, was shot dead in his clinic at Warangal. In September 1986, J. Lakshma Reddy, state executive member of the APCLC was shot dead and in December 1991, N. Prabakar Reddy, convenor of Warangal district committee of APCLC met with the same fate. “Barring Gopi Rajanna, who was shot dead by RSS members, the other three were shot dead by policemen. No arrest was made in any of the cases, and the cases have now been closed as undetected,” says Balagopal. If the Cobras are not nabbed, more precious lives are sure to be lost, and as activists say, the state government will be held responsible for it.
Mar 04 , 2006
King Cobras in the jungle
Former Naxals Nayeemuddin and Nagaraju are running amok
By PC Vinoj Kumar
Most civil rights activists in Andhra Pradesh shudder on hearing two names. Nayeemuddin and Jadala Nagaraju. Former Naxalites who took to crime after coming out of the movement. Nayeemuddin, hailing from Bhongir in Nalgonda district, is said to be staying in or close to Hyderabad, with full police security. As a cadre of the People’s War (PW), Nayeemuddin allegedly shot dead KS Vyas, a deputy inspector general of police. An ‘encounter specialist’ in the force, Vyas was shot at while on his morning jog at Hyderabad’s Fateh Maidan. “The Vyas murder case is pending for around 13 years. It is ironic that Nayeemuddin, one of the accused in the case, is now being used by the police,” says KG Kannabiran, national president, People’s Union for Civil Liberties.
Some activists say Nayeemuddin developed differences with the pw leadership when they did not act against a cadre who had misbehaved with his sister. He surrendered to the government while in jail and was released when his bail application was not opposed by the state. “Today he is the most feared of the counter-insurgents. He has a gang of about 50 with him. One telephone call from him is enough to silence activists who have successfully resisted police harassment for years,” says K. Balagopal, general secretary of Human Rights Forum.
Nayeemuddin and some of his henchmen were arrested for the murder of APCLC activist T. Purushotham in 2000. In 2003, a trial court acquitted him of the charges. “There were no eyewitness to the murder and the case could not pursued,” says B. Jyothi, Purushotham’s widow and president of Andhra Pradesh Chaitanya Mahila Samaakya.
When reporters recently questioned home minister K. Jana Reddy about the government’s inability to get Nayeemuddin, the minister informed that the police was making efforts to nab him. “If anybody has knowledge of Nayeemuddin, he is free to give information,” he said.
The thickly forested northeastern part of Karimnagar district is believed to be Jadala Nagaraju’s hideout. According to activists, he had left pw after killing the district committee secretary of the organisation in 1998. “He is unique among the counter-insurgents because he operates partly through the elected bodies. He uses strong-arm methods to get his people elected though he himself is yet to join any party,” says Balagopal.
Two other former Naxalites, Kathula Sammaiah and Bayyapu Sammi Reddy are no more. Sammaiah died in Colombo in 2001 in an airplane accident. Despite his criminal record and pending cases, he was able to obtain a passport and was proceeding to Germany when he is reported to have fallen off the aircraft in Colombo airport, says Kannabiran. Sammi Reddy’s dead body was found in a water tank in Krishna district in 2003. “His wife alleged that it was Nagaraju who killed him. They had apparently taken opposite sides in some land or business dispute,” says Balagopal.
The history of private militias in Andhra Pradesh goes back to the late 1980s. Activists say it was Ashok Prasad, then superintendent of police at Karim Nagar, who first attempted to bring together victims of Naxalite violence with the idea of using them against the Naxalites. Later, in the mid-90s, a group called Kranthi Sena was involved in the murder of some militants, especially in Karimnagar district.
Mar 04 , 2006
‘If we had to, we could have had killers all over the state’
Andhra Pradesh Director General of Police Swaranjit Sen is an expert in dealing with Naxalites. Some of the other ‘Maoist-affected states’ seek his help in setting up anti-Naxalite commando forces or training personnel for anti-Naxalite operations. However, the inability of the state police to nab the Cobras, who are on a killing spree, has earned him the wrath of civil rights activists. They have accused the state police of connivance with the Cobras. Tehelka spoke to Sen on issues relating to the Naxal problem in the state and its lethal fallout, the Cobras. Excerpts:
By PC Vinoj Kumar
How have you dealt with the Naxal issue?
I firmly believe that we can root out Naxalism. This has been my attitude since the time I became dgp, and earlier too when I was home secretary. In my view, Naxalism cannot sustain for long. Times are changing very fast and nobody wants to remain in the forest and be deprived of the fruits of development. Highly qualified people are not joining the Naxal movement anymore. There are only a handful of them controlling the organisation. We estimate the total strength of the Maoists in the state to be about 850-900. Naxalism is definitely a socio-economic problem. This government is quite serious about improving the plight of the downtrodden. On our part, we are very careful about whom we arrest. We made a decision to arrest only hardcore Naxals and not those who might have helped Naxals by providing them food or shelter out of fear. In the last four months we have recruited about 3,000 tribals from Naxal-affected areas in the Andhra Pradesh Special Police Battalion. Physical and educational requirements were relaxed for them. Such measures would further dry up the recruiting ground for Naxals.
What about civil rights groups?
Civil rights groups are an absolute nuisance as far as Naxalites are concerned. They are doing a fine job otherwise. I’ll probably join them after my retirement from service. As for the Naxalite issue, they should back down a little, when they see the government is sincere in its efforts and police is acting with restraint. I am not saying that the police should be given an absolute free hand. But don’t discourage them by spreading false stories and glorifying the deeds of the Naxals. They should apply human rights equally to the police and Naxals. But they are not being objective. There are a number of organisations, which are actually fronts of Naxalites. VIRASAM (Revolutionary Writers Association) was one such outfit, which is now banned.
What about allegations of Police-Cobra nexus?
There is absolutely no truth in the charges. The police is a disciplined force. There is an established command structure in place. We, as leaders of the police force, can control the emotions of our men. But we have no control over the people. The so-called human rights groups find it convenient to blame the police for everything.
Why haven’t you made any arrests so far in the Cobra-related cases?
There were just four incidents (of murder) in a whole year (2005). Investigations are underway and they are proceeding on correct lines. We will make arrests once we gather evidence. It is not an easy thing. We have not apprehended the culprits in many murders committed by the Naxalites too. If we had to, we could have had Cobras all over the state.
A suspended police constable, Javed, was arrested in 2004 for threatening activists in the name of Green Tigers. How do you explain that?
In a 90,000-strong police force, you may find one person who is a deviant. It is like a drop in the ocean. You cannot paint an entire department with the same brush. There are so many good officers. It is neither fashionable nor profitable for the media to present the government or police in positive light.
Mar 04 , 2006
Former Naxalites are being armed in Andhra Pradesh to take on underground Reds. Civil rights groups allege this is a covert war being waged by the State. PC Vinoj Kumar’s report
Civil rights activists are in the grip of terror in Andhra Pradesh. Scores of them are on the hitlist of killer gangs freely roaming the state. Operating in the names of Nallamalla Black Cobras, Kakatiya Cobras, Naxalite Victims Association and Narsa Cobras, these gangs have already killed four activists, made abortive attempts and issued countless threats to many others. Those targeted include lawyers, writers and left-wing intellectuals. The police is yet to make a single arrest in connection with the incidents so far.
The suspected assailants, former Naxalites, allegedly enjoy the support of police. “The attempt to create private militias to attack the activists of the legal fronts of the Naxalite parties and civil rights activists is nothing new. Initially, policemen in disguise carried out the attacks and threats. Now they are using former Naxalites to do the job. Some of them were encouraged to form paramilitary gangs after they developed differences and left the organisation. Some were contacted when they were still in the party and paid to kill their comrades and come out with weapons and form counter-insurgent gangs,” says K. Balagopal, general secretary of Human Rights Forum. The Forum has, in fact, made a fairly exhaustive study of the fratricidal war unfolding in the state. Similar tactics had been used overtly by the Jammu and Kashmir government to fight terrorism in the state when it created the Ikhwan force manned by surrendered militants.
Some of the former Naxalites are dreaded gangsters (see box). Kathula Sammaiah, for instance. He was a terror till he died in a plane crash in 2001. “He was one of those who could organise a press conference with a firearm in his hand,” says KG Kannabiran, national president of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), adding, “The situation in Andhra is as bad as Bihar, with mafia killings going on, but for some reason it has not caught national attention.” Nayeemuddin and Jadala Nagaraju are the most dreaded in the business now. Known to operate under bizarre names, activists suspect their hand in the recent murders and threats issued in the name of Cobras.
State Director General of Police (DGP) Swaranjit Sen however reportedly remarked that police were not snake charmers to catch cobras (see interview). His remarks have sparked angry reactions from activists whose lives are under threat. “All these gangs, whether they call themselves Cobras, Green Tigers or by any other name, are sponsored by the state. They are acting on instructions from state police,” says cultural activist and revolutionary singer Gaddar. In last few months, Gaddar has received letters from the Cobras asking him to stop praising the Maoists or face death. The letters have one message: “You escaped death last time. This time you will not be lucky. We will cut you into pieces if you don’t stop your singing.” In 1997, Gaddar survived an attempt on his life when unidentified gunmen shot at him. The Green Tigers owned up responsibility for the attack, but police have still not made any breakthrough in the case. This doesn’t surprise activists, who allege that Green Tigers is a front for policemen. They point out that Javed, a suspended police constable, was arrested in Warangal for threatening activists in the name of Haribhushan, leader of Green Tigers. He was arrested in 2004 around the time when the government and the Maoists were engaged in a dialogue. “It was the only action ever taken against any person associated with these gangs,” says Balagopal.
The talks, however, ended in failure and the government reimposed the ban on the Maoists in 2005. “The police did not want the talks to succeed. They were unnerved by the success of the Guthikondabilam public meeting of the People’s War (now merged with Maoist Communist Centre of India and known as the CPI-Maoist) in which over six lakh people attended,” says Kannabiran.
The recent spate of killings and threats against activists began as retaliation for Congress legislator Narsi Reddy’s murder on Independence Day last year by suspected Maoists. Two days later, a statement was published in the press in the name of Narsa Cobras containing a list of activists who have been marked for killing. A week later, K. Kanakachari, an executive member of the Patriotic and Democratic Movement, whose name figured in the hitlist, was hacked to death in Mahbubnagar. The Cobras warned activists to stay away from his funeral procession. Those who defied were included in a revised hitlist issued by the Cobras.
On September 10, Mannem Prasad, district president of the Struggle Committee for Annihilation of Caste, was murdered in broad daylight in Singarayakonda, Prakasam district. Nallamalla Black Cobras claimed responsibility for his murder. On September 14, Kilinga Rao was killed in Ambatipalli in Karimnagar district, and on November 28, Munaiah, a dalit activist of Democratic Teachers Federation (DTF) was brutally hacked to death at Alipur in Mahabubnagar district.
Though the murdered activists were all members of legal organisations, they were not in the good books of the police because of their vigilant human rights work. In its report on the series of murders, based on a field visit, the All India Fact-Finding Team, comprising activists from different parts of the country, notes that police had detained two activists while they were waiting to receive Mannem Prasad’s body. When the duo explained to police that they belonged to Mannem’s outfit, the cops reportedly shot back that their organisation was nothing but a front of the Maoists.
On November 23, at about 10.30 pm, unidentified persons attacked the house of Professor S. Seshaiah, general secretary of Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC) in Anantapur district and set fire to the car parked in the portico and damaged furniture lying on the verandah. Seshaiah and his family members had a narrow escape as the assailants could not break open the iron-grilled door. The police found a letter outside the house the next morning purportedly signed by the secretary of Rayalaseema Tigers claiming responsibility for the attack.
Seshaiah believes the police planted the letter to fend off allegations that they were behind the attack. “Several people visited my house the whole night and the following morning. None of them spotted the letter. Only the police team that arrived at about 11 in the morning found it. It was drizzling the whole night, but the letter was dry. All attacks against the activists are taking place under police guidance. I believe the police wrote the letter and planted it to show that they did not have any hand in the incident,” says Seshaiah.
Threats have been issued to several others. N. Venugopal, a journalist and literary critic, received threatening calls from the Cobras after he moved the Lokayukta — an institution for lodging complaints against public servants — against the home minister, DGP and the Additional DGP (Intelligence) for their failure to act against the Cobras. “The threat from the Cobras clearly established the nexus between public servants and them. There was no way anyone else could have known about my complaint,” says Venugopal.
He then wrote to cm YS Rajasekhara Reddy: “Nallamalla Cobras and Kakatiya Cobras, apparently sponsored and maintained by your government’s police department, seem to be after my blood, making three threatening phone calls within the last four days. I would like to propose to you that it would be better if they kill me right in your office to enhance the prestige of our state in maintaining law and order and dealing with difference of opinion.” Venugopal says the calls stopped coming after that.
The Cobras are not sparing women activists either. On August 28 last year, Rammohan Kobra, who claimed to be the secretary of Narsa Cobra state committee, in a press release demanded the activists of Andhra Pradesh Chaitanya Mahila Samaakhya (APCMS), a federation of women’s organisations, to resign from their posts or face execution. The next day, Sujatha, APCMS secretary, got a call on her mobile from one Ravi, who said he was calling on behalf of Nallamalla Black Cobras. When Sujatha asked him what he wanted, he replied, “Your death” and hung up. The calls persisted for some time. “We informed the police and the state human rights commission but to no use. Police could not nab the culprits, but the calls ceased,” says B. Jyothi, president of APCMS, another target of Cobras.
How the threat calls ceased to Venugopal and Jyothi remains a mystery. It has only reinforced the suspicion that the Cobras are actually doing someone’s missive, possibly the police’s. Balagopal has reasons to believe so. “Often, the abusive phone calls made by the Cobras has revealed awareness of facts that only the police know. Secondly, threats in the name of Cobras have been issued after injury or insult caused to the police or to their old favourites like Nayeemuddin. Thirdly, the police has been gleefully inactive in the face of blatant violence in the name of the Cobras.”
Civil rights activists had been targeted in the state earlier, but never in such gruesome manner. “The recent murders have been most brutal. Victims have been axed and the axe is left implanted in the victim’s body. Clearly, the intention is to terrify the activists, so that they would not stir out of their homes,” says Kannabiran.
T. Purushotham of APCLC, who had exposed several fake encounters, was killed in 2000, and a year later, Azam Ali of the same organisation was killed. In January 1985, Gopi Rajanna, an APCLC activist, was shot dead at Jagtial in Karim Nagar district. In September 1985, A. Ramanantham, APCLC vice president, was shot dead in his clinic at Warangal. In September 1986, J. Lakshma Reddy, state executive member of the APCLC was shot dead and in December 1991, N. Prabakar Reddy, convenor of Warangal district committee of APCLC met with the same fate. “Barring Gopi Rajanna, who was shot dead by RSS members, the other three were shot dead by policemen. No arrest was made in any of the cases, and the cases have now been closed as undetected,” says Balagopal. If the Cobras are not nabbed, more precious lives are sure to be lost, and as activists say, the state government will be held responsible for it.
Mar 04 , 2006
King Cobras in the jungle
Former Naxals Nayeemuddin and Nagaraju are running amok
By PC Vinoj Kumar
Most civil rights activists in Andhra Pradesh shudder on hearing two names. Nayeemuddin and Jadala Nagaraju. Former Naxalites who took to crime after coming out of the movement. Nayeemuddin, hailing from Bhongir in Nalgonda district, is said to be staying in or close to Hyderabad, with full police security. As a cadre of the People’s War (PW), Nayeemuddin allegedly shot dead KS Vyas, a deputy inspector general of police. An ‘encounter specialist’ in the force, Vyas was shot at while on his morning jog at Hyderabad’s Fateh Maidan. “The Vyas murder case is pending for around 13 years. It is ironic that Nayeemuddin, one of the accused in the case, is now being used by the police,” says KG Kannabiran, national president, People’s Union for Civil Liberties.
Some activists say Nayeemuddin developed differences with the pw leadership when they did not act against a cadre who had misbehaved with his sister. He surrendered to the government while in jail and was released when his bail application was not opposed by the state. “Today he is the most feared of the counter-insurgents. He has a gang of about 50 with him. One telephone call from him is enough to silence activists who have successfully resisted police harassment for years,” says K. Balagopal, general secretary of Human Rights Forum.
Nayeemuddin and some of his henchmen were arrested for the murder of APCLC activist T. Purushotham in 2000. In 2003, a trial court acquitted him of the charges. “There were no eyewitness to the murder and the case could not pursued,” says B. Jyothi, Purushotham’s widow and president of Andhra Pradesh Chaitanya Mahila Samaakya.
When reporters recently questioned home minister K. Jana Reddy about the government’s inability to get Nayeemuddin, the minister informed that the police was making efforts to nab him. “If anybody has knowledge of Nayeemuddin, he is free to give information,” he said.
The thickly forested northeastern part of Karimnagar district is believed to be Jadala Nagaraju’s hideout. According to activists, he had left pw after killing the district committee secretary of the organisation in 1998. “He is unique among the counter-insurgents because he operates partly through the elected bodies. He uses strong-arm methods to get his people elected though he himself is yet to join any party,” says Balagopal.
Two other former Naxalites, Kathula Sammaiah and Bayyapu Sammi Reddy are no more. Sammaiah died in Colombo in 2001 in an airplane accident. Despite his criminal record and pending cases, he was able to obtain a passport and was proceeding to Germany when he is reported to have fallen off the aircraft in Colombo airport, says Kannabiran. Sammi Reddy’s dead body was found in a water tank in Krishna district in 2003. “His wife alleged that it was Nagaraju who killed him. They had apparently taken opposite sides in some land or business dispute,” says Balagopal.
The history of private militias in Andhra Pradesh goes back to the late 1980s. Activists say it was Ashok Prasad, then superintendent of police at Karim Nagar, who first attempted to bring together victims of Naxalite violence with the idea of using them against the Naxalites. Later, in the mid-90s, a group called Kranthi Sena was involved in the murder of some militants, especially in Karimnagar district.
Mar 04 , 2006
‘If we had to, we could have had killers all over the state’
Andhra Pradesh Director General of Police Swaranjit Sen is an expert in dealing with Naxalites. Some of the other ‘Maoist-affected states’ seek his help in setting up anti-Naxalite commando forces or training personnel for anti-Naxalite operations. However, the inability of the state police to nab the Cobras, who are on a killing spree, has earned him the wrath of civil rights activists. They have accused the state police of connivance with the Cobras. Tehelka spoke to Sen on issues relating to the Naxal problem in the state and its lethal fallout, the Cobras. Excerpts:
By PC Vinoj Kumar
How have you dealt with the Naxal issue?
I firmly believe that we can root out Naxalism. This has been my attitude since the time I became dgp, and earlier too when I was home secretary. In my view, Naxalism cannot sustain for long. Times are changing very fast and nobody wants to remain in the forest and be deprived of the fruits of development. Highly qualified people are not joining the Naxal movement anymore. There are only a handful of them controlling the organisation. We estimate the total strength of the Maoists in the state to be about 850-900. Naxalism is definitely a socio-economic problem. This government is quite serious about improving the plight of the downtrodden. On our part, we are very careful about whom we arrest. We made a decision to arrest only hardcore Naxals and not those who might have helped Naxals by providing them food or shelter out of fear. In the last four months we have recruited about 3,000 tribals from Naxal-affected areas in the Andhra Pradesh Special Police Battalion. Physical and educational requirements were relaxed for them. Such measures would further dry up the recruiting ground for Naxals.
What about civil rights groups?
Civil rights groups are an absolute nuisance as far as Naxalites are concerned. They are doing a fine job otherwise. I’ll probably join them after my retirement from service. As for the Naxalite issue, they should back down a little, when they see the government is sincere in its efforts and police is acting with restraint. I am not saying that the police should be given an absolute free hand. But don’t discourage them by spreading false stories and glorifying the deeds of the Naxals. They should apply human rights equally to the police and Naxals. But they are not being objective. There are a number of organisations, which are actually fronts of Naxalites. VIRASAM (Revolutionary Writers Association) was one such outfit, which is now banned.
What about allegations of Police-Cobra nexus?
There is absolutely no truth in the charges. The police is a disciplined force. There is an established command structure in place. We, as leaders of the police force, can control the emotions of our men. But we have no control over the people. The so-called human rights groups find it convenient to blame the police for everything.
Why haven’t you made any arrests so far in the Cobra-related cases?
There were just four incidents (of murder) in a whole year (2005). Investigations are underway and they are proceeding on correct lines. We will make arrests once we gather evidence. It is not an easy thing. We have not apprehended the culprits in many murders committed by the Naxalites too. If we had to, we could have had Cobras all over the state.
A suspended police constable, Javed, was arrested in 2004 for threatening activists in the name of Green Tigers. How do you explain that?
In a 90,000-strong police force, you may find one person who is a deviant. It is like a drop in the ocean. You cannot paint an entire department with the same brush. There are so many good officers. It is neither fashionable nor profitable for the media to present the government or police in positive light.
Mar 04 , 2006
Monday, February 1, 2010
"We need to make relations with states, not parties"
CP Gajurel, secretary of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), is a popular figure among Indian Maoists. Many pro-Maoist organisations fought against his deportation to Nepal (he was arrested in Chennai in 2003 while trying to flee to London using fake documents). He was jailed for three years in Chennai before he could return to Nepal. The senior Nepalese Maoist ideologue believes that Indian Maoists are a political force fighting for a just cause.
The CPN (Maoist) participated in last year’s elections to the Nepalese Assembly, where it emerged as the single largest party. Party supremo Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Prachanda, became prime minister, until his resignation following differences with the President. As head of the party’s international department till recently, Gajurel played a key role in shaping the party’s policies towards Nepal’s big neighbours, India and China.
In an exclusive telephone interview to TEHELKA, the 60-year-old Nepalese leader shared his views with PC VINOJ KUMAR on a wide range of issues, including Operation Green Hunt, New Delhi’s planned offensive against the Indian Maoists. And although he reiterated his party’s desire to maintain an equi-proximity in relations with both India and China, his pro-China tilt was obvious in his comments on how India has exploited Nepal. Excerpts from the interview:
What is the nature of your party’s relationship with the Indian Maoists?
The two parties have no working relations. We share similar ideologies of Marx, Lenin and Mao. We are both fighting against feudalism and imperialism. But the domestic situation in both countries is different. Capitalism has grown more in India than in Nepal. India is much bigger than Nepal and it is much stronger than the Nepalese State. Nepal has had a long history of mass movements and struggles. We (the Maoists) have a strong presence in all seventy-five districts in Nepal. In the elections to Nepalese Constituent Assembly, our party won 123 seats, whereas the second largest party, the Nepali Congress, won just 37 seats. Since India is a vast country, it is difficult for any communist party in Nepal to become an all-India party.
There were reports recently in a section of the Nepalese media that Indian Maoist leader Kishenji met some of your leaders at an undisclosed location.
It is wrong information. No such meeting took place. People are making this accusation since we are part of COMPOSA (The Coordination Committee of Maoist Parties and Organisations in South Asia). COMPOSA is a platform for some open organisations to support the left movements in the region.
We understand that representatives from both the parties — CPN (Maoist) and CPI (Maoist) — take part in meetings of COMPOSA. Is it possible that they may be attending these meetings in their individual capacities and not as members of the Maoist parties?
Since the last three years, this organisation has become almost defunct. After we entered the peace process, the situation has changed, and we are no longer participating in the meetings. If other organisations are functioning without us, there would be some activity and they would be issuing statements. Since no such statements are being issued, I think COMPOSA is not functioning anymore.
You seem to be distancing your movement from the Indian Maoists. Is it a conscious decision or is it a public posture?
We don’t want to get involve in political organisations, as it would definitely create problems for us. It is within our capacity to understand that if we have good relations with a party that has been declared as an internal security threat by the Indian State, how would India react? We have to take into account each and every aspect. Even in the past, we consciously did not develop a working relationship with the CPI (Maoist) because we didn’t want to provoke the Indian State, which is very powerful. We are in the higher stage of accomplishing the revolution in Nepal. At this stage, we need to make relations with states or governments and not only with parties.
Maoist sympathisers here are disappointed that Nepal Maoists have not done enough for comrades in India. Ideologically you are united, but you are not doing enough, not even extending moral support. How do you respond to this view?
As communists, we uphold proletarian internationalism. We are not deviating from that. But how do we define proletarian internationalism? The responsibility of any communist party is to make a revolution in their own country. Our main responsibility is to make a revolution in Nepal. That will be the best contribution to the international communist movement.
Every country has its own compulsions. Even the Chinese under Mao did not support the Nepalese communists when they were fighting against the monarchy. At the international level, China was supporting the Nepalese monarchy then. Since we are not openly or indirectly supporting the CPI (Maoist), it doesn’t mean we are deviating from our responsibility of proletarian internationalism. If we succeed in our revolution in Nepal under the leadership of our party, it will be the best contribution to Indian Maoists.
What are your views on Operation Green Hunt?
The Indian State has declared CPI (Maoist) as a terrorist organisation. We don’t agree with that. We think it (CPI-Maoist) is a political organisation. It has a comprehensive ideological and political line. They have support of the masses.
The Maoists believe in violence. So the Indian State feels it requires a military operation to take on the Maoist challenge.
Whether you adopt a violent form of struggle or a non-violent form, all depends on the situation. While we were leading a people’s war (there was violence)...We had and still have an army, which has been recognised by the United Nations. If we are not a terrorist organisation for the UN, how can the Indian Maoists be called a terrorist organisation?
How do you think the Indian government should deal with the problem here? Do you think it should hold a dialogue?
Since CPI (Maoist) is a political movement, you have to deal with it politically. The people’s war in Nepal was settled in a political way. Had our party not been recognised as a political organisation, then the war would have still continued.
Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram recently appealed to the Maoists to abjure violence. They have rejected his appeal and a spokesman said that the Maoists had taken up arms for defence of peoples’ rights and to achieve their liberation from exploitation and oppression. Do you agree with that?
Yes... You can understand how we did it in Nepal. Initially, the Nepalese government asked us to lay down arms as a condition for talks. We did not agree. When we negotiated with the government, we did not surrender our arms. If any state asks the rebels to surrender arms before going to the negotiating table, no rebel group in the world will agree to it.
How important is violence in the Maoist philosophy? Indian Maoist leader Ganapathi recently warned of unleashing a ‘tornado’ of violence if the government started its offensive against the Maoists. Is violence an effective tool?
Violence is the last resort of all Maoists. It is not first choice of any Maoist or communist revolutionary. We want to change society by non-violent means. Before we started our people’s war, we had put forward a charter of 14 points. The government simply ignored it. We gave them some period for negotiation. They still did not take it into account. After this, we were compelled to initiate the people’s war. For all communist revolutionaries, arms or violence is the last resort.
Talking of arms, people here are baffled at the kind of arms in the possession of Maoists and they are wondering where they are getting them. Some feel that arms could be coming from China. What do you think?
During the Chinese revolution, many people asked Mao that his enemy was very strong, had a lot of arms, and were getting arms from different countries. They told him he did not have arms, but was saying he would overthrow the government. So, they wanted to know how he was going to manage the arms?
Mao had an answer for them. He explained that arms were coming from different countries to the enemy, the Chiang-Kai-Shek government. He said the only thing that needed to be done was to capture the arms from the enemy. The revolutionaries get arms from different sources within the country.
Generally speaking, there are three ways of procuring the arms — capturing from the government forces, by manufacturing one’s own arms, and by purchasing. Purchasing would be difficult because it would require lot of money. It will be difficult to buy from other countries. It is not easy for the Indian Maoists to purchase arms from China. The Chinese government has good trade relations with India. Chinese leaders are not so stupid that by selling arms of few crore rupees they would spoil relations between the two countries.
A major grievance of the Maoists is that tribal people in the states like Jharkhand and Chattisgarh are facing exploitation, their land grabbed by Indian corporates. They also feel successive union governments have pursued an anti-tribal policy. Is this a justified grievance?
Definitely… so far as my knowledge goes, there is hidden treasure in the tribal belt. It is being sold to multi nationals and multi-billionaires. The tribals are getting nothing out of it. They definitely have the right to the wealth. They should be the masters of it. But they are being driven out of the area and prevented from even receiving a share of it. The tribal people will fight for their cause.
So far as I know, the Indian Maoists are raising this issue, which is just for the tribal people. The tribal people will definitely support the Maoists. The tribal area is a good area, a jungle area and is supposed to be best suited for carrying out guerrilla warfare.
As someone from a party that fought a long running war with the Nepalese state, how do you rate the capability of the Indian Maoists vis a vis the Indian armed forces?
It is difficult to predict whether they will succeed or not. Our country is a small country and we have a small army. India is a big country, with a big army. Any people’s war relies on people’s support. The basic question is how you can mobilise the masses. People are decisive. I am not saying the revolution is impossible. It happened in China, which is bigger than India. If it happened in China, and Russia, why can’t it happen in India? Theoretically, you could say that a revolution can succeed in any kind of country, big or small. But as far as revolution in India is concerned, nobody can say what will happen. I don’t have the knowledge to forecast what would happen.
How has your party’s transition from an armed rebel group to a political party in a democratic system been?
What we have learned is that you can’t make a photocopy of a revolution of any country and apply it to your own. When you make a revolution, you have to develop something new depending on the situation in your country. In Nepal, we have accomplished many things through the revolution. We have support of the masses, and largely get international support. We now want to write a new constitution for the country.
What would be your advice to the Indian Maoists?
We don’t want to dictate or advise any other political party to go this way or that way. They will decide their course.
Do you think the building of tension between India and China over Arunachal Pradesh is a cause for concern?
The border issue has been coming up time and again. But I don’t see an imminent conflict between China and India. Diplomacy will play a major role to resolve this problem.
What is your party’s stand on the Chinese claim over Arunachal Pradesh?
We have not taken any position. It is not necessary for us to take positions on the border issues of other countries.
Posted on Nov 13, 2009
The CPN (Maoist) participated in last year’s elections to the Nepalese Assembly, where it emerged as the single largest party. Party supremo Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Prachanda, became prime minister, until his resignation following differences with the President. As head of the party’s international department till recently, Gajurel played a key role in shaping the party’s policies towards Nepal’s big neighbours, India and China.
In an exclusive telephone interview to TEHELKA, the 60-year-old Nepalese leader shared his views with PC VINOJ KUMAR on a wide range of issues, including Operation Green Hunt, New Delhi’s planned offensive against the Indian Maoists. And although he reiterated his party’s desire to maintain an equi-proximity in relations with both India and China, his pro-China tilt was obvious in his comments on how India has exploited Nepal. Excerpts from the interview:
What is the nature of your party’s relationship with the Indian Maoists?
The two parties have no working relations. We share similar ideologies of Marx, Lenin and Mao. We are both fighting against feudalism and imperialism. But the domestic situation in both countries is different. Capitalism has grown more in India than in Nepal. India is much bigger than Nepal and it is much stronger than the Nepalese State. Nepal has had a long history of mass movements and struggles. We (the Maoists) have a strong presence in all seventy-five districts in Nepal. In the elections to Nepalese Constituent Assembly, our party won 123 seats, whereas the second largest party, the Nepali Congress, won just 37 seats. Since India is a vast country, it is difficult for any communist party in Nepal to become an all-India party.
There were reports recently in a section of the Nepalese media that Indian Maoist leader Kishenji met some of your leaders at an undisclosed location.
It is wrong information. No such meeting took place. People are making this accusation since we are part of COMPOSA (The Coordination Committee of Maoist Parties and Organisations in South Asia). COMPOSA is a platform for some open organisations to support the left movements in the region.
We understand that representatives from both the parties — CPN (Maoist) and CPI (Maoist) — take part in meetings of COMPOSA. Is it possible that they may be attending these meetings in their individual capacities and not as members of the Maoist parties?
Since the last three years, this organisation has become almost defunct. After we entered the peace process, the situation has changed, and we are no longer participating in the meetings. If other organisations are functioning without us, there would be some activity and they would be issuing statements. Since no such statements are being issued, I think COMPOSA is not functioning anymore.
You seem to be distancing your movement from the Indian Maoists. Is it a conscious decision or is it a public posture?
We don’t want to get involve in political organisations, as it would definitely create problems for us. It is within our capacity to understand that if we have good relations with a party that has been declared as an internal security threat by the Indian State, how would India react? We have to take into account each and every aspect. Even in the past, we consciously did not develop a working relationship with the CPI (Maoist) because we didn’t want to provoke the Indian State, which is very powerful. We are in the higher stage of accomplishing the revolution in Nepal. At this stage, we need to make relations with states or governments and not only with parties.
Maoist sympathisers here are disappointed that Nepal Maoists have not done enough for comrades in India. Ideologically you are united, but you are not doing enough, not even extending moral support. How do you respond to this view?
As communists, we uphold proletarian internationalism. We are not deviating from that. But how do we define proletarian internationalism? The responsibility of any communist party is to make a revolution in their own country. Our main responsibility is to make a revolution in Nepal. That will be the best contribution to the international communist movement.
Every country has its own compulsions. Even the Chinese under Mao did not support the Nepalese communists when they were fighting against the monarchy. At the international level, China was supporting the Nepalese monarchy then. Since we are not openly or indirectly supporting the CPI (Maoist), it doesn’t mean we are deviating from our responsibility of proletarian internationalism. If we succeed in our revolution in Nepal under the leadership of our party, it will be the best contribution to Indian Maoists.
What are your views on Operation Green Hunt?
The Indian State has declared CPI (Maoist) as a terrorist organisation. We don’t agree with that. We think it (CPI-Maoist) is a political organisation. It has a comprehensive ideological and political line. They have support of the masses.
The Maoists believe in violence. So the Indian State feels it requires a military operation to take on the Maoist challenge.
Whether you adopt a violent form of struggle or a non-violent form, all depends on the situation. While we were leading a people’s war (there was violence)...We had and still have an army, which has been recognised by the United Nations. If we are not a terrorist organisation for the UN, how can the Indian Maoists be called a terrorist organisation?
How do you think the Indian government should deal with the problem here? Do you think it should hold a dialogue?
Since CPI (Maoist) is a political movement, you have to deal with it politically. The people’s war in Nepal was settled in a political way. Had our party not been recognised as a political organisation, then the war would have still continued.
Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram recently appealed to the Maoists to abjure violence. They have rejected his appeal and a spokesman said that the Maoists had taken up arms for defence of peoples’ rights and to achieve their liberation from exploitation and oppression. Do you agree with that?
Yes... You can understand how we did it in Nepal. Initially, the Nepalese government asked us to lay down arms as a condition for talks. We did not agree. When we negotiated with the government, we did not surrender our arms. If any state asks the rebels to surrender arms before going to the negotiating table, no rebel group in the world will agree to it.
How important is violence in the Maoist philosophy? Indian Maoist leader Ganapathi recently warned of unleashing a ‘tornado’ of violence if the government started its offensive against the Maoists. Is violence an effective tool?
Violence is the last resort of all Maoists. It is not first choice of any Maoist or communist revolutionary. We want to change society by non-violent means. Before we started our people’s war, we had put forward a charter of 14 points. The government simply ignored it. We gave them some period for negotiation. They still did not take it into account. After this, we were compelled to initiate the people’s war. For all communist revolutionaries, arms or violence is the last resort.
Talking of arms, people here are baffled at the kind of arms in the possession of Maoists and they are wondering where they are getting them. Some feel that arms could be coming from China. What do you think?
During the Chinese revolution, many people asked Mao that his enemy was very strong, had a lot of arms, and were getting arms from different countries. They told him he did not have arms, but was saying he would overthrow the government. So, they wanted to know how he was going to manage the arms?
Mao had an answer for them. He explained that arms were coming from different countries to the enemy, the Chiang-Kai-Shek government. He said the only thing that needed to be done was to capture the arms from the enemy. The revolutionaries get arms from different sources within the country.
Generally speaking, there are three ways of procuring the arms — capturing from the government forces, by manufacturing one’s own arms, and by purchasing. Purchasing would be difficult because it would require lot of money. It will be difficult to buy from other countries. It is not easy for the Indian Maoists to purchase arms from China. The Chinese government has good trade relations with India. Chinese leaders are not so stupid that by selling arms of few crore rupees they would spoil relations between the two countries.
A major grievance of the Maoists is that tribal people in the states like Jharkhand and Chattisgarh are facing exploitation, their land grabbed by Indian corporates. They also feel successive union governments have pursued an anti-tribal policy. Is this a justified grievance?
Definitely… so far as my knowledge goes, there is hidden treasure in the tribal belt. It is being sold to multi nationals and multi-billionaires. The tribals are getting nothing out of it. They definitely have the right to the wealth. They should be the masters of it. But they are being driven out of the area and prevented from even receiving a share of it. The tribal people will fight for their cause.
So far as I know, the Indian Maoists are raising this issue, which is just for the tribal people. The tribal people will definitely support the Maoists. The tribal area is a good area, a jungle area and is supposed to be best suited for carrying out guerrilla warfare.
As someone from a party that fought a long running war with the Nepalese state, how do you rate the capability of the Indian Maoists vis a vis the Indian armed forces?
It is difficult to predict whether they will succeed or not. Our country is a small country and we have a small army. India is a big country, with a big army. Any people’s war relies on people’s support. The basic question is how you can mobilise the masses. People are decisive. I am not saying the revolution is impossible. It happened in China, which is bigger than India. If it happened in China, and Russia, why can’t it happen in India? Theoretically, you could say that a revolution can succeed in any kind of country, big or small. But as far as revolution in India is concerned, nobody can say what will happen. I don’t have the knowledge to forecast what would happen.
How has your party’s transition from an armed rebel group to a political party in a democratic system been?
What we have learned is that you can’t make a photocopy of a revolution of any country and apply it to your own. When you make a revolution, you have to develop something new depending on the situation in your country. In Nepal, we have accomplished many things through the revolution. We have support of the masses, and largely get international support. We now want to write a new constitution for the country.
What would be your advice to the Indian Maoists?
We don’t want to dictate or advise any other political party to go this way or that way. They will decide their course.
Do you think the building of tension between India and China over Arunachal Pradesh is a cause for concern?
The border issue has been coming up time and again. But I don’t see an imminent conflict between China and India. Diplomacy will play a major role to resolve this problem.
What is your party’s stand on the Chinese claim over Arunachal Pradesh?
We have not taken any position. It is not necessary for us to take positions on the border issues of other countries.
Posted on Nov 13, 2009
'I Am Not Sure Prabakaran Ordered Rajiv's Assassination'
'I Am Not Sure Prabakaran Ordered Rajiv's Assassination'
by PC Vinoj Kumar,
Former Foreign Secretary AP Venkateswaran is unsparing in his criticism of India’s foreign policy vis-à-vis Sri Lanka. In an exclusive interview to Tehelka, he says then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi disregarded advice and sent the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF). In early 1987, Venkateswaran quit as foreign secretary.
In the interview, Venkateswaran slammed the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987 and felt he might have continued as foreign secretary, if he had been a ‘yes-man.’ He comes down heavily on President Mahinda Rajapakse and believes the Sinhala leader is gearing up for a military solution.
What is your assessment of the present situation in Sri Lanka?
Asia Centre, the organisation I am with now, and the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis, conducted a joint seminar on the situation in Sri Lanka recently. The general assessment was that the situation in Sri Lanka was bad and getting worse. It seems the Sri Lankan government, despite its protestations, is not serious about finding a peaceful solution. On the other hand, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has been left to its own devices.
India, the only country which could exercise some restraining influence on the course of events in Sri Lanka, is keeping studiously away. India has to respond in some way to the situation in Sri Lanka. In 1987, Rajiv Gandhi concluded an agreement with the government of Sri Lanka and sent the IPKF there. He was advised that a civil war was going on in Sri Lanka and that it would not be advisable to send Indian forces, which were mainly intended to protect the frontiers of India and not the incumbency of the head of any foreign country. But that was the devious aim of (the then Sri Lanka) President JR Jayawardene in getting India involved in the Sri Lankan affairs at that time. He was under pressure from the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) in the South, and the LTTE in the North. He even appealed to Rajiv Gandhi that if India did not come to his assistance, his government would fall.
Eventually the IPKF had to be withdrawn ignominiously. Jayawardene’s successor, Premadasa, even helped the LTTE with arms and material to fight the IPKF. Perhaps this is why India is keeping away from Sri Lanka now. But human needs and human catastrophes cannot be ignored. Today, around two million Tamil people are left helpless and international agencies including states like Norway are speaking about the serious violation of human rights and killings by Sri Lankan government forces in renewed fighting in the North.
What role do you think India should play now?
That is very difficult to say, because I am afraid in New Delhi the concerns of particular states are not taken fully into account. I know it sounds very strange coming from me. I have worked in Delhi and I happen to know even at that time that concerns of certain groups engaged more attention in decision-making in Delhi than concerns of certain other groups. When the linguistic commission was set up many years ago, Sardar KM Panicker, a member of the commission, gave his view that Uttar Pradesh, the biggest state, should be cut into three smaller states. Of course, it was not heeded at that time because the decision-makers came from that state.
If I could take you back to the 1980s, do you think if Rajiv Gandhi had listened to you and not sent the IPKF, or had not signed the Indo-Sri Lanka agreement, the history of Sri Lanka would have been different?
I certainly think so. In fact, Rajiv Gandhi would still have been prime minister. He was a young man then, full of life. His life was cut short. It (the assassination) is ascribed to the LTTE, but I am not sure whether it was the head of the LTTE (Prabhakaran) who decided (to carry out the killing) or some lumpen elements. And that has alienated the decision-making authorities in India even more.
It was on Sri Lanka that you differed with Rajiv. Looking back, do you think you could have stayed on as foreign secretary, if you had been a “yes man”?
I imagine so. But Sri Lanka was not the only matter I differed with him on. There were many other issues, but I would not like to discuss them here.
But have you ever regretted giving your views on Sri Lanka?
Certainly not. I have no regrets at all about leaving the government. I gave my honest views.
Do you think you have been vindicated by the way events have played out in the subsequent years?
That is a strong word to use, because no one can determine the future shape of events. Not even your favourite astrologers.
Going back to the Accord, if you were to look at the Letters of Exchange, it seems India was more concerned about its own geopolitical interests. There was absolutely no reference to the Tamil question.
You may be quite right. One of the clauses of the agreement was directly related to the Voice of America broadcasting station in Sri Lanka. Today, the whole geopolitical situation has changed. We are having a nuclear agreement with the US, which had reneged upon its nuclear agreement for supply of fuel to Tarapore atomic power station in 1974. So, it is very difficult to go digging into the past. There is no point in digging up graveyards.
Looking to the future, do you get the impression that President Rajapakse appears to be gearing for a military solution to the ethnic crisis?
Certainly, I get the impression. I wished President Rajapakse success in his peace efforts when I met him during his visit to Delhi last December. I told him he had a good chance of success if he conducted himself as the president of all the people of Sri Lanka, instead of only a certain section of them. But I don’t think he has shown an all-inclusive spirit for finding a solution in his consequent actions.
During the Indira Gandhi era, India was perceived to be more sympathetic to the Tamil cause, but there was a sudden shift in approach after Rajiv Gandhi became PM. Was it because of a change in India’s perception of its own geopolitical interests or was it because of his advisers?
You are being slightly unfair to Rajiv. He offered to send Indian forces, as he said, to protect the Tamil people. He did not send the IPKF to fight the LTTE. In the first months there was a lot of bonhomie between the LTTE and the IPKF. Later on, for various reasons, the relationship between the two sides broke down.
But don’t you think he should have let the parties to the conflict come to an agreement (instead of India and Sri Lanka signing an agreement)?
It is a very valid point. The agreement should not have been between India and Sri Lanka. It should have been signed between the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE, with India, perhaps as a well-wisher, on the sidelines. On the other hand, the agreement was between the two governments and LTTE was not brought into the agreement directly, which is a pity. But all these are reminiscences in retrospect. Well, since you are asking me, I may say that before the Indo-Sri Lanka agreement was signed, I was still in Delhi after leaving my post as foreign secretary.
One evening, I bumped into N. Ram the present editor of The Hindu. I told him that the Accord, the draft of which was known, was very badly conceived. I felt the LTTE should have been made a party to the agreement, and the Indian government should not have been a direct party with the Lankan government. Ram said it was a bit too late to bring about any change in the agreement, which was happening in the next week or two. He was also travelling with the PM to Colombo for this “historic agreement”. The rest is history.
To wind up, let us have your opinion on the LTTE, because people have different opinions about the LTTE and its leader Prabhakaran. Prabhakaran emerged at a critical stage in the history of Sri Lanka after successive Sri Lankan governments reneged on the promises made to Tamils and Sri Lanka introduced a new constitution that discriminated against them.
I will tell you a story about the signing of the declaration of independence by the Americans in their struggle against the British government. The declaration was signed in 1776. Benjamin Franklin, one of the signatories, a respected leader, told the delegates from the 13 states, “Gentlemen, we must now all hang together or assuredly we shall all be hanged separately”. If the Americans had failed in their struggle for independence, the British would have hanged all of them as traitors. But they succeeded and we had the emergence of a country, which is today the most powerful country in the world. So it is a question of not trying to project things but looking at history as a whole.
November 4, 2006
by PC Vinoj Kumar,
Former Foreign Secretary AP Venkateswaran is unsparing in his criticism of India’s foreign policy vis-à-vis Sri Lanka. In an exclusive interview to Tehelka, he says then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi disregarded advice and sent the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF). In early 1987, Venkateswaran quit as foreign secretary.
In the interview, Venkateswaran slammed the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987 and felt he might have continued as foreign secretary, if he had been a ‘yes-man.’ He comes down heavily on President Mahinda Rajapakse and believes the Sinhala leader is gearing up for a military solution.
What is your assessment of the present situation in Sri Lanka?
Asia Centre, the organisation I am with now, and the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis, conducted a joint seminar on the situation in Sri Lanka recently. The general assessment was that the situation in Sri Lanka was bad and getting worse. It seems the Sri Lankan government, despite its protestations, is not serious about finding a peaceful solution. On the other hand, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has been left to its own devices.
India, the only country which could exercise some restraining influence on the course of events in Sri Lanka, is keeping studiously away. India has to respond in some way to the situation in Sri Lanka. In 1987, Rajiv Gandhi concluded an agreement with the government of Sri Lanka and sent the IPKF there. He was advised that a civil war was going on in Sri Lanka and that it would not be advisable to send Indian forces, which were mainly intended to protect the frontiers of India and not the incumbency of the head of any foreign country. But that was the devious aim of (the then Sri Lanka) President JR Jayawardene in getting India involved in the Sri Lankan affairs at that time. He was under pressure from the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) in the South, and the LTTE in the North. He even appealed to Rajiv Gandhi that if India did not come to his assistance, his government would fall.
Eventually the IPKF had to be withdrawn ignominiously. Jayawardene’s successor, Premadasa, even helped the LTTE with arms and material to fight the IPKF. Perhaps this is why India is keeping away from Sri Lanka now. But human needs and human catastrophes cannot be ignored. Today, around two million Tamil people are left helpless and international agencies including states like Norway are speaking about the serious violation of human rights and killings by Sri Lankan government forces in renewed fighting in the North.
What role do you think India should play now?
That is very difficult to say, because I am afraid in New Delhi the concerns of particular states are not taken fully into account. I know it sounds very strange coming from me. I have worked in Delhi and I happen to know even at that time that concerns of certain groups engaged more attention in decision-making in Delhi than concerns of certain other groups. When the linguistic commission was set up many years ago, Sardar KM Panicker, a member of the commission, gave his view that Uttar Pradesh, the biggest state, should be cut into three smaller states. Of course, it was not heeded at that time because the decision-makers came from that state.
If I could take you back to the 1980s, do you think if Rajiv Gandhi had listened to you and not sent the IPKF, or had not signed the Indo-Sri Lanka agreement, the history of Sri Lanka would have been different?
I certainly think so. In fact, Rajiv Gandhi would still have been prime minister. He was a young man then, full of life. His life was cut short. It (the assassination) is ascribed to the LTTE, but I am not sure whether it was the head of the LTTE (Prabhakaran) who decided (to carry out the killing) or some lumpen elements. And that has alienated the decision-making authorities in India even more.
It was on Sri Lanka that you differed with Rajiv. Looking back, do you think you could have stayed on as foreign secretary, if you had been a “yes man”?
I imagine so. But Sri Lanka was not the only matter I differed with him on. There were many other issues, but I would not like to discuss them here.
But have you ever regretted giving your views on Sri Lanka?
Certainly not. I have no regrets at all about leaving the government. I gave my honest views.
Do you think you have been vindicated by the way events have played out in the subsequent years?
That is a strong word to use, because no one can determine the future shape of events. Not even your favourite astrologers.
Going back to the Accord, if you were to look at the Letters of Exchange, it seems India was more concerned about its own geopolitical interests. There was absolutely no reference to the Tamil question.
You may be quite right. One of the clauses of the agreement was directly related to the Voice of America broadcasting station in Sri Lanka. Today, the whole geopolitical situation has changed. We are having a nuclear agreement with the US, which had reneged upon its nuclear agreement for supply of fuel to Tarapore atomic power station in 1974. So, it is very difficult to go digging into the past. There is no point in digging up graveyards.
Looking to the future, do you get the impression that President Rajapakse appears to be gearing for a military solution to the ethnic crisis?
Certainly, I get the impression. I wished President Rajapakse success in his peace efforts when I met him during his visit to Delhi last December. I told him he had a good chance of success if he conducted himself as the president of all the people of Sri Lanka, instead of only a certain section of them. But I don’t think he has shown an all-inclusive spirit for finding a solution in his consequent actions.
During the Indira Gandhi era, India was perceived to be more sympathetic to the Tamil cause, but there was a sudden shift in approach after Rajiv Gandhi became PM. Was it because of a change in India’s perception of its own geopolitical interests or was it because of his advisers?
You are being slightly unfair to Rajiv. He offered to send Indian forces, as he said, to protect the Tamil people. He did not send the IPKF to fight the LTTE. In the first months there was a lot of bonhomie between the LTTE and the IPKF. Later on, for various reasons, the relationship between the two sides broke down.
But don’t you think he should have let the parties to the conflict come to an agreement (instead of India and Sri Lanka signing an agreement)?
It is a very valid point. The agreement should not have been between India and Sri Lanka. It should have been signed between the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE, with India, perhaps as a well-wisher, on the sidelines. On the other hand, the agreement was between the two governments and LTTE was not brought into the agreement directly, which is a pity. But all these are reminiscences in retrospect. Well, since you are asking me, I may say that before the Indo-Sri Lanka agreement was signed, I was still in Delhi after leaving my post as foreign secretary.
One evening, I bumped into N. Ram the present editor of The Hindu. I told him that the Accord, the draft of which was known, was very badly conceived. I felt the LTTE should have been made a party to the agreement, and the Indian government should not have been a direct party with the Lankan government. Ram said it was a bit too late to bring about any change in the agreement, which was happening in the next week or two. He was also travelling with the PM to Colombo for this “historic agreement”. The rest is history.
To wind up, let us have your opinion on the LTTE, because people have different opinions about the LTTE and its leader Prabhakaran. Prabhakaran emerged at a critical stage in the history of Sri Lanka after successive Sri Lankan governments reneged on the promises made to Tamils and Sri Lanka introduced a new constitution that discriminated against them.
I will tell you a story about the signing of the declaration of independence by the Americans in their struggle against the British government. The declaration was signed in 1776. Benjamin Franklin, one of the signatories, a respected leader, told the delegates from the 13 states, “Gentlemen, we must now all hang together or assuredly we shall all be hanged separately”. If the Americans had failed in their struggle for independence, the British would have hanged all of them as traitors. But they succeeded and we had the emergence of a country, which is today the most powerful country in the world. So it is a question of not trying to project things but looking at history as a whole.
November 4, 2006
‘IT sector is not immune to caste bias’
A recent survey finds few employees from backward castes or poor families in the industry
PC Vinoj Kumar
Chennai
Has the Indian information technology (IT) industry become the preserve of upper castes? Sociologists who have studied the socio-economic profile of the industry’s workforce believe so. A study conducted by Carol Upadhya and AR Vasavi of the National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS), Bangalore, states that the IT “workforce is less heterogeneous than is commonly assumed, and that the large majority of IT professionals come from middle class, educated, urban backgrounds, and from the upper castes.” Of the 132 software engineers who were interviewed, 71 percent belonged to the upper castes. About half were Brahmins. Eighty-four percent of the respondents were from middle class families, while only 5 percent hailed from rural areas.
Other studies have arrived at similar conclusions. “Oomen and Meenakshisundararajan (2005), in their survey of 100 software professionals in Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Thiruvananthapuram, found that 12 percent were from rural areas. Three-fourths of their respondents were found to be from forward castes and the rest from backward castes. None were from the sc/st categories,” points out the NIAS report. However, the report concedes, “Like our sample, most of their respondents worked in the major IT companies such as tcs and Wipro, so the sample is biased towards the ‘cream’ of the IT workforce.” The report further states, “Fuller and Narasimhan’s (2006) smaller study of software professionals in Chennai also found that they come overwhelmingly from Brahmin or forward caste, middle class, urban backgrounds.”
The NIAS study found the socio-economic profile of bpo employees similar to that of those from the IT industry. Fifty-eight percent of the respondents were from metros, and 36 percent from tier two towns such as Mysore and Coimbatore. Thirty-two percent were Brahmins and 23 percent belonged to other upper castes. An earlier study done by Babu P. Ramesh of the VV Giri National Labour Institute, Noida, found that 96 percent of the 277 respondents from the bpo industry belonged to the forward castes.
In 2000, M. Vijayabaskar, a labour economist, conducted a study for the International Labour Organisation and interviewed 160 software engineers in Bangalore and Delhi. The study found that 80 percent of the respondents belonged to forward castes. Vijayabaskar, an assistant professor at the Madras Institute of Development Studies, argues that the scenario in the IT industry justifies the demand for reservations for other backward castes and dalits in central educational institutions like the IITs. “Leading IT companies recruit from top-notch engineering colleges like the IITs and the regional engineering colleges (REC),” he says.
IT companies conduct campus interviews in select colleges all over the country. They compete for talent from the top 50 colleges in the country. “The rankings of the top 50 colleges are more or less the same for all the companies, which means that they are competing for a limited pool of well-qualified engineering graduates. Campuses may be graded into three tiers: Tier one or a+ institutions include the IITs, iims, the Indian Institute of Science, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, and a few others. Tier two or a level institutions include the National Institutes of Technology (formerly RECs), and the top state campuses such as the Delhi College of Engineering and the Punjab Engineering College,” says the NIAS study. The recruitment process is tailor-made for people with a certain socio-economic profile. ‘Networking’ is a common practice in the industry. ‘Employee referrals’ are a popular form of recruitment. According to the study, “Many companies get about 25-30 percent of their new hires through employee referrals, although one mnc claimed that half of their people come through this route.” There is a flipside to IT. Says the study, “As in other fields of social life, social networks not only facilitate cooperation and exchange of information, they may also produce closure and exclusivity and strengthen the monopoly of members over social and economic resources.”
Candidates from rural backgrounds are at a great disadvantage because of the stress laid on communication skills, fluency in English, and ‘soft skills’ during recruitment. “There are several aspects of the recruitment process followed by it companies that tend to privilege students from English-speaking, educated, urban and middle class families.” According to the study, the companies insist on “a consistent average of 70-75 percent marks from the tenth standard onwards.” The study argues that this yardstick puts those from “poor, lower caste, and rural backgrounds” at a disadvantage. Another mechanism of exclusion are the group and human resources (HR) interviews that assess spoken English, communication and social skills, confidence and personality — elements of ‘cultural capital’ that students from urban middle class families are likely to possess and those from non-metropolitan and lower caste backgrounds might lack, says the study.
However, the study grants a reprieve to the IT industry by stating: “Of course, it is not the IT industry alone that tends to exclude lower caste and rural candidates, nor is this done deliberately; rather, this is a problem with private sector employment in general, which is why the question of reservations in the private sector is being sharply debated.”
IT companies were evasive when asked to comment on the findings of the studies regarding the socio-economic profile of its workforce. Padmini Sharath Kumar, Polaris’ vice-president, corporate communication, said, “We don’t ever capture any information on caste in any of our HR processes. So, we would not have any data in this regard as far as Polaris is concerned.” Vivek Punekar, HCL’s vice-president, HR, said, “HCL is an equal opportunities employer. Our recruitment policy and procedures strongly prevent any discrimination. We do not maintain any data on caste distribution, simply because we have not felt the need to differentiate people.” Infosys failed to respond.
The IT industry’s stand has few takers. Bangalore-based activist VT Rajshekar, author of Development Redefined, a book that argues for “caste as basic unit of planning”, says the IT industry would only benefit a few. “The IT industry has no use for the common people of the country. Three things are essential for an IT professional — knowledge of English, a telephone and a computer. How many people in this country have them? Fifteen percent have telephones, less than 2 percent know English, and still less people own computers.”
The NIAS report sums up the situation and suggests what needs to be done: “The IT industry insists that it must be left free to recruit only the best workers if it is to maintain its competitive edge in the global market, and for this reason it has consistently opposed the idea of job reservations in the private sector. However, some companies and industry spokespersons have acknowledged that the private sector must bear some responsibility for social justice and for creating greater opportunities for a wider section of the population, and the idea of evolving a voluntary affirmative action programme has found favour in some quarters. But barring only one or two, till date most companies have not taken substantial steps in this direction. This is a central issue for debate and policy formulation, either by the State or as a voluntary initiative by the industry.”
Jan 20 , 2007
PC Vinoj Kumar
Chennai
Has the Indian information technology (IT) industry become the preserve of upper castes? Sociologists who have studied the socio-economic profile of the industry’s workforce believe so. A study conducted by Carol Upadhya and AR Vasavi of the National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS), Bangalore, states that the IT “workforce is less heterogeneous than is commonly assumed, and that the large majority of IT professionals come from middle class, educated, urban backgrounds, and from the upper castes.” Of the 132 software engineers who were interviewed, 71 percent belonged to the upper castes. About half were Brahmins. Eighty-four percent of the respondents were from middle class families, while only 5 percent hailed from rural areas.
Other studies have arrived at similar conclusions. “Oomen and Meenakshisundararajan (2005), in their survey of 100 software professionals in Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Thiruvananthapuram, found that 12 percent were from rural areas. Three-fourths of their respondents were found to be from forward castes and the rest from backward castes. None were from the sc/st categories,” points out the NIAS report. However, the report concedes, “Like our sample, most of their respondents worked in the major IT companies such as tcs and Wipro, so the sample is biased towards the ‘cream’ of the IT workforce.” The report further states, “Fuller and Narasimhan’s (2006) smaller study of software professionals in Chennai also found that they come overwhelmingly from Brahmin or forward caste, middle class, urban backgrounds.”
The NIAS study found the socio-economic profile of bpo employees similar to that of those from the IT industry. Fifty-eight percent of the respondents were from metros, and 36 percent from tier two towns such as Mysore and Coimbatore. Thirty-two percent were Brahmins and 23 percent belonged to other upper castes. An earlier study done by Babu P. Ramesh of the VV Giri National Labour Institute, Noida, found that 96 percent of the 277 respondents from the bpo industry belonged to the forward castes.
In 2000, M. Vijayabaskar, a labour economist, conducted a study for the International Labour Organisation and interviewed 160 software engineers in Bangalore and Delhi. The study found that 80 percent of the respondents belonged to forward castes. Vijayabaskar, an assistant professor at the Madras Institute of Development Studies, argues that the scenario in the IT industry justifies the demand for reservations for other backward castes and dalits in central educational institutions like the IITs. “Leading IT companies recruit from top-notch engineering colleges like the IITs and the regional engineering colleges (REC),” he says.
IT companies conduct campus interviews in select colleges all over the country. They compete for talent from the top 50 colleges in the country. “The rankings of the top 50 colleges are more or less the same for all the companies, which means that they are competing for a limited pool of well-qualified engineering graduates. Campuses may be graded into three tiers: Tier one or a+ institutions include the IITs, iims, the Indian Institute of Science, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, and a few others. Tier two or a level institutions include the National Institutes of Technology (formerly RECs), and the top state campuses such as the Delhi College of Engineering and the Punjab Engineering College,” says the NIAS study. The recruitment process is tailor-made for people with a certain socio-economic profile. ‘Networking’ is a common practice in the industry. ‘Employee referrals’ are a popular form of recruitment. According to the study, “Many companies get about 25-30 percent of their new hires through employee referrals, although one mnc claimed that half of their people come through this route.” There is a flipside to IT. Says the study, “As in other fields of social life, social networks not only facilitate cooperation and exchange of information, they may also produce closure and exclusivity and strengthen the monopoly of members over social and economic resources.”
Candidates from rural backgrounds are at a great disadvantage because of the stress laid on communication skills, fluency in English, and ‘soft skills’ during recruitment. “There are several aspects of the recruitment process followed by it companies that tend to privilege students from English-speaking, educated, urban and middle class families.” According to the study, the companies insist on “a consistent average of 70-75 percent marks from the tenth standard onwards.” The study argues that this yardstick puts those from “poor, lower caste, and rural backgrounds” at a disadvantage. Another mechanism of exclusion are the group and human resources (HR) interviews that assess spoken English, communication and social skills, confidence and personality — elements of ‘cultural capital’ that students from urban middle class families are likely to possess and those from non-metropolitan and lower caste backgrounds might lack, says the study.
However, the study grants a reprieve to the IT industry by stating: “Of course, it is not the IT industry alone that tends to exclude lower caste and rural candidates, nor is this done deliberately; rather, this is a problem with private sector employment in general, which is why the question of reservations in the private sector is being sharply debated.”
IT companies were evasive when asked to comment on the findings of the studies regarding the socio-economic profile of its workforce. Padmini Sharath Kumar, Polaris’ vice-president, corporate communication, said, “We don’t ever capture any information on caste in any of our HR processes. So, we would not have any data in this regard as far as Polaris is concerned.” Vivek Punekar, HCL’s vice-president, HR, said, “HCL is an equal opportunities employer. Our recruitment policy and procedures strongly prevent any discrimination. We do not maintain any data on caste distribution, simply because we have not felt the need to differentiate people.” Infosys failed to respond.
The IT industry’s stand has few takers. Bangalore-based activist VT Rajshekar, author of Development Redefined, a book that argues for “caste as basic unit of planning”, says the IT industry would only benefit a few. “The IT industry has no use for the common people of the country. Three things are essential for an IT professional — knowledge of English, a telephone and a computer. How many people in this country have them? Fifteen percent have telephones, less than 2 percent know English, and still less people own computers.”
The NIAS report sums up the situation and suggests what needs to be done: “The IT industry insists that it must be left free to recruit only the best workers if it is to maintain its competitive edge in the global market, and for this reason it has consistently opposed the idea of job reservations in the private sector. However, some companies and industry spokespersons have acknowledged that the private sector must bear some responsibility for social justice and for creating greater opportunities for a wider section of the population, and the idea of evolving a voluntary affirmative action programme has found favour in some quarters. But barring only one or two, till date most companies have not taken substantial steps in this direction. This is a central issue for debate and policy formulation, either by the State or as a voluntary initiative by the industry.”
Jan 20 , 2007
DALITS NOT WELCOME IN IIT MADRAS
There are only a handful of Dalit students and faculty members at the elite institute, but they face widespread discrimination and harassment
PC Vinoj Kumar
Chennai
All the noise against extending reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in centrally-funded institutions might be a little irrelevant given that an institute like IIT Madras has parted with only a fraction of the 22.5 percent quota for students belonging to the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled Tribes (STs). According to information provided by the institute’s deputy registrar, Dr K. Panchalan, in September 2005, Dalits accounted for only 11.9 percent of the number of students. They were even fewer in the higher courses — 2.3 percent in ms (Research) and 5.8 percent in Ph.D. Out of a total of 4,687 students, Dalits made up only 559.
Activists who have been fighting for proper implementation of reservations for Dalits describe IIT Madras as a modern day agraharam — a Brahmin enclave. Located on a 250 hectare wooded campus in the heart of the city, the majority of the 460 faculty members and students here are Brahmins. According to WB Vasantha Kandasamy, assistant professor in the Mathematics department, there are just four Dalits among the institute’s entire faculty, a meagre 0.86 percent of the total faculty strength. There are about 50 OBC faculty members, and the rest belong to the upper castes, she says.
Vasantha says Dalit Ph.D scholars are routinely harassed. “They are forced to change their topic of research midway. They are unduly delayed, and are failed in examinations and vivas. It is a stressful atmosphere for them.” She says her support of Dalit students got her into the bad books of the management. (See Box)
There have been many agitations against the management in the past over not filling the Dalit quota and the alleged harassment of Dalit students. Activists say there were even fewer Dalit students and faculty members in the institute some years ago, and it was only because of efforts by parties like Paatali Makkal Katchi (PMK), Dravidar Kazhagam (DK), Viduthalai Chiruthaigal (VC) and Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam (PDK) that the situation improved. In 1996, K. Viswanath, general secretary of the IIT SC/ST Employees Welfare Association, remarked in a letter to the institute’s director that the institute was yet to have a professor from the SC/ST community even after 37 years of its existence. There were only two Dalits of the rank of assistant professor and there was just one Dalit scientific officer, he noted.
In 2000, the PDK published a book based on a study it did on the anti-Dalit attitude in the institute. The study noted that there were several departments at the institute where even after 41 years, “not a single Dalit student has been selected for doing Ph.D or has successfully completed his degree”. The study also stated that, “almost all M.Tech and ms Students in IIT were Brahmins.” The PDK is now demanding that the institute come out with a white paper providing details of the total number of Dalit students who have completed postgraduate and doctoral programmes. “The National Commission for SC/ST should closely monitor if reservation policy for Dalits is being strictly followed in student admissions,” says Viduthalai Rajendran, PDK general secretary.
The PDK is not alone in levelling such charges. Retired ias officer V. Karuppan, who is state convener of the National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR), recalls that in 2005 a “meritorious” Dalit student was denied admission to the Ph.D course in the Mathematics department. “They didn’t call him for an interview initially. But he was asked to appear for the interview after we argued his case with the authorities. But in the interview, they asked him irrelevant questions and failed him,” he says.
There have been many complaints of discrimination against Dalit students in the campus. The PDK study cites the case of a Dalit student Sujee Teppal, who had scored 94 percent in Maths, Physics, and Chemistry in the public intermediate exam. Sujee had also secured admission in bits, Ranchi and bits, Pilani but chose to attend IIT Madras, where in spite of her meritorious track record she was made to join the mandatory one-year “preparatory course” for Dalit students. According to the PDK study, “at the end of the course in which she only re-learnt her 12th standard syllabus, she was declared failed.” The institute refused to reverse its decision in spite of the intervention of the National Commission for SC/ST and the then state SC/ST minister Selvaraj in her favour.
Another serious charge against the institute is that successive directors have flouted rules in appointing faculty members, and do not advertise vacancies in newspapers. Former Congress MP Era Anbarasu has brought the issue to the notice of Human Resources Development Minister Arjun Singh in several letters. In the memorandum submitted to the minister on September 2, 2006, he states: “The ambiguity is apparent because even the number of vacancies is not announced. In order to broaden this arbitrariness, applications to the entry level position of assistant professor are invited for all the 15 departments at the same time. Norms and guidelines for selection are wilfully abandoned by the respective departments.”
Anbarasu wants a high-level committee to probe irregularities in appointments and the violation of reservation policies by the IIT management. He has levelled charges against director MS Ananth, whom he calls a “highly casteist man”. He says that disregarding all norms, Ananth has mostly chosen faculty members from his own community of Iyengar Brahmins. Of the six deans in the institute, four are from the Iyengar community.
In his memorandum to Singh, Anbarasu has demanded that the present director be replaced with someone from the OBC/SC/ST community as the institute has had only Brahmins as directors so far. “I met the minister (Arjun Singh) three or four times and discussed with him these issues. He promised to order a probe, but nothing has happened till now,” he says.
A PIL filed by Karuppan last year against the allegedly flawed selection process in IIT Madras was dismissed by the High Court. Karuppan has now filed a review petition. He also met the IIT director along with a senior leader of the CPI to discuss the reservation issue, and says the director told him that no policy of reservation for SC/ST was applicable to IIT Madras. Karuppan says there are several cases pending in courts against the institute’s selection and reservation policy. They include writ petitions by the IIT Backward Classes Employees Welfare Association, and the Vanniar Mahasangam.
An angry Thol Thirumavalavan, general secretary of the Dalit Panthers of India, says, “Dalits are only working as sweepers and scavengers in the institute”. He wants the IIT management to release a white paper containing details of appointments and admissions given to Dalits and OBCs. “The Tamil Nadu government should demand this information from the institute,” he says.
When Tehelka tried to meet IIT Director MS Ananth to get his views on the allegations against him and the institute, his secretary wanted this correspondent to send a mail stating the purpose for the interview. In the mail to the director, it was stated that the interview was needed “on the issue of SC/ST reservation policy in IIT, Madras.” His reaction on Anbarasu’s memorandum to the Union hrd minister levelling charges of corruption against him was also sought. However, his secretary said the director was not available for comments.
Jun 16 , 2007
PC Vinoj Kumar
Chennai
All the noise against extending reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in centrally-funded institutions might be a little irrelevant given that an institute like IIT Madras has parted with only a fraction of the 22.5 percent quota for students belonging to the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled Tribes (STs). According to information provided by the institute’s deputy registrar, Dr K. Panchalan, in September 2005, Dalits accounted for only 11.9 percent of the number of students. They were even fewer in the higher courses — 2.3 percent in ms (Research) and 5.8 percent in Ph.D. Out of a total of 4,687 students, Dalits made up only 559.
Activists who have been fighting for proper implementation of reservations for Dalits describe IIT Madras as a modern day agraharam — a Brahmin enclave. Located on a 250 hectare wooded campus in the heart of the city, the majority of the 460 faculty members and students here are Brahmins. According to WB Vasantha Kandasamy, assistant professor in the Mathematics department, there are just four Dalits among the institute’s entire faculty, a meagre 0.86 percent of the total faculty strength. There are about 50 OBC faculty members, and the rest belong to the upper castes, she says.
Vasantha says Dalit Ph.D scholars are routinely harassed. “They are forced to change their topic of research midway. They are unduly delayed, and are failed in examinations and vivas. It is a stressful atmosphere for them.” She says her support of Dalit students got her into the bad books of the management. (See Box)
There have been many agitations against the management in the past over not filling the Dalit quota and the alleged harassment of Dalit students. Activists say there were even fewer Dalit students and faculty members in the institute some years ago, and it was only because of efforts by parties like Paatali Makkal Katchi (PMK), Dravidar Kazhagam (DK), Viduthalai Chiruthaigal (VC) and Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam (PDK) that the situation improved. In 1996, K. Viswanath, general secretary of the IIT SC/ST Employees Welfare Association, remarked in a letter to the institute’s director that the institute was yet to have a professor from the SC/ST community even after 37 years of its existence. There were only two Dalits of the rank of assistant professor and there was just one Dalit scientific officer, he noted.
In 2000, the PDK published a book based on a study it did on the anti-Dalit attitude in the institute. The study noted that there were several departments at the institute where even after 41 years, “not a single Dalit student has been selected for doing Ph.D or has successfully completed his degree”. The study also stated that, “almost all M.Tech and ms Students in IIT were Brahmins.” The PDK is now demanding that the institute come out with a white paper providing details of the total number of Dalit students who have completed postgraduate and doctoral programmes. “The National Commission for SC/ST should closely monitor if reservation policy for Dalits is being strictly followed in student admissions,” says Viduthalai Rajendran, PDK general secretary.
The PDK is not alone in levelling such charges. Retired ias officer V. Karuppan, who is state convener of the National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR), recalls that in 2005 a “meritorious” Dalit student was denied admission to the Ph.D course in the Mathematics department. “They didn’t call him for an interview initially. But he was asked to appear for the interview after we argued his case with the authorities. But in the interview, they asked him irrelevant questions and failed him,” he says.
There have been many complaints of discrimination against Dalit students in the campus. The PDK study cites the case of a Dalit student Sujee Teppal, who had scored 94 percent in Maths, Physics, and Chemistry in the public intermediate exam. Sujee had also secured admission in bits, Ranchi and bits, Pilani but chose to attend IIT Madras, where in spite of her meritorious track record she was made to join the mandatory one-year “preparatory course” for Dalit students. According to the PDK study, “at the end of the course in which she only re-learnt her 12th standard syllabus, she was declared failed.” The institute refused to reverse its decision in spite of the intervention of the National Commission for SC/ST and the then state SC/ST minister Selvaraj in her favour.
Another serious charge against the institute is that successive directors have flouted rules in appointing faculty members, and do not advertise vacancies in newspapers. Former Congress MP Era Anbarasu has brought the issue to the notice of Human Resources Development Minister Arjun Singh in several letters. In the memorandum submitted to the minister on September 2, 2006, he states: “The ambiguity is apparent because even the number of vacancies is not announced. In order to broaden this arbitrariness, applications to the entry level position of assistant professor are invited for all the 15 departments at the same time. Norms and guidelines for selection are wilfully abandoned by the respective departments.”
Anbarasu wants a high-level committee to probe irregularities in appointments and the violation of reservation policies by the IIT management. He has levelled charges against director MS Ananth, whom he calls a “highly casteist man”. He says that disregarding all norms, Ananth has mostly chosen faculty members from his own community of Iyengar Brahmins. Of the six deans in the institute, four are from the Iyengar community.
In his memorandum to Singh, Anbarasu has demanded that the present director be replaced with someone from the OBC/SC/ST community as the institute has had only Brahmins as directors so far. “I met the minister (Arjun Singh) three or four times and discussed with him these issues. He promised to order a probe, but nothing has happened till now,” he says.
A PIL filed by Karuppan last year against the allegedly flawed selection process in IIT Madras was dismissed by the High Court. Karuppan has now filed a review petition. He also met the IIT director along with a senior leader of the CPI to discuss the reservation issue, and says the director told him that no policy of reservation for SC/ST was applicable to IIT Madras. Karuppan says there are several cases pending in courts against the institute’s selection and reservation policy. They include writ petitions by the IIT Backward Classes Employees Welfare Association, and the Vanniar Mahasangam.
An angry Thol Thirumavalavan, general secretary of the Dalit Panthers of India, says, “Dalits are only working as sweepers and scavengers in the institute”. He wants the IIT management to release a white paper containing details of appointments and admissions given to Dalits and OBCs. “The Tamil Nadu government should demand this information from the institute,” he says.
When Tehelka tried to meet IIT Director MS Ananth to get his views on the allegations against him and the institute, his secretary wanted this correspondent to send a mail stating the purpose for the interview. In the mail to the director, it was stated that the interview was needed “on the issue of SC/ST reservation policy in IIT, Madras.” His reaction on Anbarasu’s memorandum to the Union hrd minister levelling charges of corruption against him was also sought. However, his secretary said the director was not available for comments.
Jun 16 , 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
