Media must not ignore Chhattisgarh or else...
In April 2006, the Delhi-based People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) released a report critiquing the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2006, that came into force after receiving Presidential assent a month earlier.
By BIKRAM JEET BATRA, |
In April 2006, the Delhi-based People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) released a report critiquing the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2006, that came into force after receiving Presidential assent a month earlier. One peculiar point, PUDR pointed out, was that although this Act was ostensibly meant to combat growing Maoist violence, all the Maoist groups operating in Chhattisgarh were already banned and declared unlawful organisations after the 2004 amendment to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
An obvious question then follows — why was this law passed at all? The title of the PUDR report ‘Casting the net wider’ suggested the answer. The report warned that in the name of combating violent movements, the Chhattisgarh government was bringing in a legislation targeting people’s movements, civil liberties and democratic rights organisations, mediapersons and other groups who challenged the state’s human rights record and questioned the state’s anti-people development policies. PUDR concluded: “The use of the Act against such groups is inevitable given the growing discord between state policy and people’s interest.”
Prophetic words indeed, for barely a year later in a press conference in Raipur on May 11, 2007, the police announced that it has issued a warrant under the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act and UAPA for five persons, including Dr Binayak Sen, general secretary of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), Chhattisgarh, and also the National vice-president of the organisation. Two other activists — Rashmi Dwivedi, PUCL’s vice-president and Gautam Bandopadyay, executive member of PUCL’s state unit — are also included among the five persons named.
An alumnus of the Christian Medical College Vellore and former faculty member of Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, as a trained physician, Binayak Sen had also been actively involved in reaching healthcare to the otherwise cut-off adivasis as well as monitoring the health and nutrition status of the people of Chhattisgarh. The police version, however, ranges from Dr Sen hosting Maoists in his office to being a conduit for information between the cadres and jailed officials and even being a Maoist ideologue. Even though the local police were informed that he was in fact under medical treatment in Kolkata, they allege that he was absconding and avoiding arrest. Dr Sen was arrested upon his return to Bilaspur on May 14.
Most locals, however, are aware that this entire attempt to frame Dr Sen is a tactic to divert attention from the illegal detention of a businessman Piyush Guha as also the murder of 12 adivasis in Bijapur District on March 31, which the police had tried to pass off as an encounter killing. Dr Sen and the PUCL state unit had been instrumental in bringing both these incidents to light. PUCL has, in fact, been a thorn in the side of the Chhattisgarh administration for the past many years as it has regularly exposed fake encounters, disappearances and rapes that formed an integral part of the ‘anti-Maoist’ operations of state forces and the ‘Salwa Judum’ in Chhattisgarh.
Given the area’s relative insularity, few civil rights organisations or mediapersons operate there and PUCL was among the few dissenting and questioning voices. Dr Sen’s untiring work documenting atrocities and violations earned him the ire of the police who had also threatened him previously. This time around, they have carried out part of their threat by framing him on completely trumped-up charges under a law that is far more draconian than even POTA, UAPA or AFSPA.
Unfortunately the national press continues to ignore such cases. This is particularly short-sighted given that the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2006, also threatens mediapersons. Section 2(e) refers to ‘unlawful activities’ committed by communication — verbal, written or even by representation — and can be used against any individual who publish or telecast news or images relating to Maoist activities or report state repression. A number of local journalists have, in fact, already been threatened with such actions in the past.
Today, it is civil rights activist who are being targeted. If allowed to go unreported and unchallenged; it is only a matter of time before the Chhattisgarh administration will target the media. Once all watchdogs are ‘neutralised’, they will continue on their merry way displacing all the adivasi communities from their land for ‘development’ (and kickbacks!) at all or any cost. Perhaps all of us, including members of the fourth estate, would be served well by recalling Pastor Martin Niemoller’s chilling poem “First they came for the jews...”, and act, before there is no one left to speak out for us!
(The author is a New Delhi-based lawyer & researcher)
An obvious question then follows — why was this law passed at all? The title of the PUDR report ‘Casting the net wider’ suggested the answer. The report warned that in the name of combating violent movements, the Chhattisgarh government was bringing in a legislation targeting people’s movements, civil liberties and democratic rights organisations, mediapersons and other groups who challenged the state’s human rights record and questioned the state’s anti-people development policies. PUDR concluded: “The use of the Act against such groups is inevitable given the growing discord between state policy and people’s interest.”
Prophetic words indeed, for barely a year later in a press conference in Raipur on May 11, 2007, the police announced that it has issued a warrant under the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act and UAPA for five persons, including Dr Binayak Sen, general secretary of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), Chhattisgarh, and also the National vice-president of the organisation. Two other activists — Rashmi Dwivedi, PUCL’s vice-president and Gautam Bandopadyay, executive member of PUCL’s state unit — are also included among the five persons named.
An alumnus of the Christian Medical College Vellore and former faculty member of Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, as a trained physician, Binayak Sen had also been actively involved in reaching healthcare to the otherwise cut-off adivasis as well as monitoring the health and nutrition status of the people of Chhattisgarh. The police version, however, ranges from Dr Sen hosting Maoists in his office to being a conduit for information between the cadres and jailed officials and even being a Maoist ideologue. Even though the local police were informed that he was in fact under medical treatment in Kolkata, they allege that he was absconding and avoiding arrest. Dr Sen was arrested upon his return to Bilaspur on May 14.
Most locals, however, are aware that this entire attempt to frame Dr Sen is a tactic to divert attention from the illegal detention of a businessman Piyush Guha as also the murder of 12 adivasis in Bijapur District on March 31, which the police had tried to pass off as an encounter killing. Dr Sen and the PUCL state unit had been instrumental in bringing both these incidents to light. PUCL has, in fact, been a thorn in the side of the Chhattisgarh administration for the past many years as it has regularly exposed fake encounters, disappearances and rapes that formed an integral part of the ‘anti-Maoist’ operations of state forces and the ‘Salwa Judum’ in Chhattisgarh.
Given the area’s relative insularity, few civil rights organisations or mediapersons operate there and PUCL was among the few dissenting and questioning voices. Dr Sen’s untiring work documenting atrocities and violations earned him the ire of the police who had also threatened him previously. This time around, they have carried out part of their threat by framing him on completely trumped-up charges under a law that is far more draconian than even POTA, UAPA or AFSPA.
ADVERTISEMENT
Unfortunately the national press continues to ignore such cases. This is particularly short-sighted given that the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2006, also threatens mediapersons. Section 2(e) refers to ‘unlawful activities’ committed by communication — verbal, written or even by representation — and can be used against any individual who publish or telecast news or images relating to Maoist activities or report state repression. A number of local journalists have, in fact, already been threatened with such actions in the past.
Today, it is civil rights activist who are being targeted. If allowed to go unreported and unchallenged; it is only a matter of time before the Chhattisgarh administration will target the media. Once all watchdogs are ‘neutralised’, they will continue on their merry way displacing all the adivasi communities from their land for ‘development’ (and kickbacks!) at all or any cost. Perhaps all of us, including members of the fourth estate, would be served well by recalling Pastor Martin Niemoller’s chilling poem “First they came for the jews...”, and act, before there is no one left to speak out for us!
(The author is a New Delhi-based lawyer & researcher)
Download
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
Download
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
ADVERTISEMENT
