Opposing LTTE is not being Anti-Tamil: Time to apply some common sense

Often I have such a terrible feeling that if you say that you do not approve methods employed by LTTE towards achieving its goal of separate country, you can be sure that almost instantly you will labeled as ‘Anti-Tamil’. Oh! Come on. LTTE is a dreaded terrorist organization which was formed by a Marxist crook called V.Prabhakaran few decades ago. Long before the formation of LTTE there were genuine democratic voices which were representing SriLankan Tamils. Yes, there was no complete success but through reasonable means we were taking each step cautiously while simultaneously enduring the Sinhalese onslaught on our Tamil brethren, many atrocities were committed, I think one would be worth mentioning. If Tamil have to pass university/school exams they have to score more than the Sinhalese students, ie., if a Sinhalese scores 30/100 he is considered ‘Pass’ but if it is Tamil student he/she must score 50. This is undoubtedly a systematic discrimination.

Carving out a separate country in SriLanka’s North East was Prabhakaran’s pet peeve. And without no doubt his personal project where he dreamed of ruling that territory for decades to come and pass it over to his next generation ie., dynasty nasty ruling of communism type kleptocracy. Is this the expectation a normal Tamil citizen might have had in north east? As the time progressed the killing skills of LTTE also progressed so well that it was technically called as a successful killing machine. Shouldn’t we think that why he was never was interested in elections? He knows it very well that once he participates in election process he will be thrown out in the Indian Ocean. Also the Marxist crooks never believed in elections and/or democracy. How can a mass murderer think of ruling hapless Tamils? Recent revelations Daya teacher who worked with LTTE as Public Relations officer whose job was to mainly translating statements (transcripts) from English to Tamil and vice versa. He admitted that nobody could dare to speak against the will of VP. With that being the case what he would know about the consensus building, through which he could have secured much descent bargain for Tamils.

Take the case of LTTE massacre of TELO (Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization), it is said that he literally wiped out the whole organization by killing more than 1000 people. At the end of the day they are also Tamils, their cause was the same. Not to mention the assassination of our Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. Throughout this world where ever it may be if ‘armed struggle’ is used to fight discrimination, and going on a full scale confrontation with an elected government those movements failed miserably just like how LTTE failed, not only that, they cause severe damage and impose pain and hardship on their followers as it is happening with Tamils in Sri Lanka right now. If LTTE has really thought that it has the people support it should have formed a political party and won all seats send representatives to parliament and then could have demanded the world or international community that Tamils discrimination must be end, that would have been the statesmanship. And people would have been naturally inclined to believe him. But what he did? Smuggled weapons, drugs and was in touch with Jihadis and other Islamic militant outfits to sustain his killing machinery.

Let’s talk about his leadership skills. To ask a question to those die hard supporters this bloody LTTE and its arrogant leader what kind of examples he set? Forget the charisma, which was used to further his authority, often the uninformed confuse ‘charisma’ as the only aspect of leadership, but it is not and it only is an insignificant component of the whole gamut. At first he said tigers should not marry because their bondage with marriage life would distort their focus which is achieving Eelam. But see what he did, once he flouted the very principles which he created then he let others to marry. How shortsighted, self-centered is his leadership is ? It is alleged that he has been funding many parties in Tamil Nadu which have the romanticized ‘D’ word (Dravida) in preceded to their party names and also people in abroad. Who in turn actively lobbied for Eelam and once achieved done he would rule peacefully (peace only to Prabhakaran not to Tamils) for the rest of his life and continue with his drug smuggling. Let’s hypothetically agree that for a moment if Eelam is granted what plans he had for the new country? Its constitution, model economy and his priorities then source of livelihood for Tamils, he had nothing. The souls of numerous Tamils who were killed by LTTE & Prabhakaran will rest in peace after knowing that this mass murderer has been killed. It is alleged that more than 50 TAMIL leaders who were elected democratically were killed by LTTE, why should he kill them all? He is so feared for his life that even before drinking water he would test it by making others drink first to ensure that it is not poisoned. How can he be called a leader? He dumped the whole Norway peace process because he disliked democracy and expected the international community to offer the north east in platter to him.

There is no denying that Tamils have been suffering discrimination in Sri Lanka which was once a part of a Bharath and is currently separated from us because of arbitrary carving of boundaries done by British when they were rushing out of Indian sub continent. It has to be understood that Brits were so successful employing the concept of divide & rule that the benefits they reaped through it in North-India is enormous which they did by Hindu-Muslim divide, by picking up loop holes in Muslim psyche. And in south since the coin of Hindu-Muslim divide did not work, they picked up Aryan-Dravidian divide and pitted people of same country against each other. The whole Aryan V/S Dravidian debate is indeed farce. But the Marxists never wanted to let this theory die, because they needed a reason to further divide this great country.

To conclude, the whole debacle of 2009 conflict and the current death toll of Tamils which is over than 100,000 is primarily because of LTTE & Prabhakaran. As a citizen of India I do not approve this terrorist organization. I completely support Tamils and would intend to do something meaningful which would get equal rights for Tamils in SL, apparently to work on devolution of powers and autonomy to Northeast within the wider framework of democracy. All else in my opinion is gibberish.

Hue & Cry for Sanjay Dutt's Mercy: A Shameful Manipulation of Public Opinion

It is quite natural that if your favorite star goes to jail, you cannot agree. One such case in our recent memory could be "Salman Khan's" he might have few more cases pending on his name I am talking about Deer Hunting one ? Now what is the difference between a common man and him? Celebrity v/s non-celebrity? But in the eyes of law he is a citizen, that is the end of it. In a democratic society public opinion guides every move of the elected government. Else it could not continue to remain in the office. Rulers must heed to the popular opinion. And they have no option to label such public sentiments as good/bad or right/wrong.

Did we ever ponder over this question why celebrities especially film stars make good fortune in Politics? Do you think it is because of their good deeds which they do it off the screen? I am not talking about the exceptions anyway. Why Film stars go on to become ministers and Chief Ministers? MGR in TN and Rama Rao in Andhra Pradesh ? Few might argue that they have done some good work, ok then at least let me agree on these two names, yes, they appeared to be doing some good deeds at least publicly even though we have a disputed legacy on many aspects. But how about the huge list of film stars and sportsmen are in this business. Yes. Constitution allows the president to nominate the distinguished citizens to Rajyasabha and most of the time political parties often seek support from leading stars of industry so that their fans would vote en masse for the political party to which their favorite actor/actress extends support.

But when it comes to the eyes of law, she know no such distinction celebrity/no celebrity etc., we must solely go by the offence committed and what the involvement of the accused in said act.

In laymen terms lets de-construct Sanjay Dutt's involvement in the Mumbai Bomb Blast case. Firstly it is clearly established that he is a 'drug addict’, loves 'hunting' animals (hope only animals) and loves to own guns, apparently this is understood to be to hunt animals. At least in the public it is projected as if he is innocent and he was only pursuing his hobbies and another bizarre argument is for self defense he bought AK-56 guns from terrorists. Which is according to many neutral thinkers is a figment of imagination and nothing else.

And his romance with members of D-company - Which is run by Terrorist Dawood Ibrahim is notable and it is established beyond reasonable doubt. Please read the confessional statement by Sanjay Dutt below.

=======================================================================

Confesssional Statement of Sanjay Dutt (A-117)

 The confessional statement of A-117 was duly recorded under Section 15 of TADA on 26.04.1993 at 15.30 hrs. (First Part) and on 28.04.1993 at 1600 hrs. (Second Part) by Shri Krishan Lal Bishnoi (PW-193), the then DCP, Zone III, Bombay. The following extracts from the confession of the appellant are pertinent:

“(i) I am having three valid license for fire arms and possess 3 fire arms as mentioned below:

(a) 270 Rifle of BRUNO make;

(b) 375 Magnum Double barreled Rifle; and

(c) 12 Bore Gun of Double Barrel.

(ii) I purchased these weapons due to my fondness for hunting. I normally go for hunting with one friend of mine, viz., Mr. Yusuf Nullwala as he is an experienced hunter. I also know one friend of Yusuf Nullwala by name Kersi Bapuji Adajenia and met him three times.

(iii) In December, 1991, I had given dates for shooting to actor producer Firoz Khan for his film Yalgar. He had taken the whole unit for shooting in Dubai. During one of the shootings, Firoz Khan introduced me to one Mr. Daud Ibrahim and also to his brother Anees during another shooting session. After that, Anees used to visit us regularly during the shootings and also at the place of our stay. (iv) Since Anees used to come frequently, I become well acquainted with him.

(v) I also know the proprietors of Magnum Video, namely Hanif Kandawala and Samir Hingora. I also signed for acting in one of their film Sanam. Samir is treasurer of Indian Motion Picture Association (IMPA). Hanif and Samir used to come quite frequently to my house for taking dates for shooting from my Secretary.

(vi) Hanif told me that if I so desire, he would make immediate arrangements to provide an automatic fire arm to me for my protection. Initially, I did not show any interest but when Hanif and Samir started repeatedly telling me to acquire a firearm from them, I gradually fell prey to their persistent suggestion and expressed my desire to Hanif and Samir. They said that they would immediately provide me with an automatic fire arm.

(vii) One day, in mid Jan., in the evening, around 9.00 to 9.30 p.m., Hanif and Samir came to my house along with one person by name Salem. I had met this Salem once or twice earlier also.

(viii) Then these 3 fellows told me that they were coming tomorrow morning with the weapons to be delivered to you. Then they went away. (ix) Next day morning Samir, Hanif and Salem all three came to my house along with one other person who is not known to me.

(x) They came in a Maruti Van and parked it in a Tin shed which is used by us for parking our vehicles. One person was sitting inside the Maruti Van. After about 15-20 min., he took out three rifles and they said it is AK-56 rifles.

(xi) I got some cloth from my house and gave it to them. Salem and the person who has come with him wrapped those rifles in the cloth and gave it to me.

(xii) When I opened and saw it, there were three rifles some magazines and rounds, they have told me that there are 250 rounds. The rounds were kept in another hand bag fetched by me.

(xiii) On seeing three rifles, I got scared and told them that I wanted only one weapon. Then Hanif and Salem told me to keep it for the time being and in case it is not required, we will take away the rest of the two weapons.

(xiv) They have also shown me some brown coloured hand-grenades and asked me whether I want that also. I do not want these grenades and you may please leave my house immediately, I told them.

(xv) I kept these rifles and ammunition in the dickey of my Fiat Car No. MMU 4372 and locked it.

(xvi) On the same night, I removed the three rifles and ammunition, kept the same in a handbag which I kept in my private hall which was on the 2nd floor of our bungalow.

(xvii) Two days thereafter, since I had considerable mental tension, I contacted Hanif Kandawala and requested him to take away the weapons. He said that he would arrange to send somebody to collect the same. After two days, Hanif Kandawala and Samir Hingora along with Salem came to my house in the evening in a car. I returned two AK-56 rifles and a part of the ammunition to them but retained one AK-56 rifle and some ammunitions with me.

(xviii) Around Sept. 1992, during one of my shooting at R.K. Studio, one Kayyum, who is a member of Dawood Ibrahim gang, who had also met me in Dubai at the time of shooting of the film Yalgar approached me with a stranger. They offered me a 9 mm pistol with ammunition. When I saw it, I liked it and had a strong desire to purchase the same. They offered it to me for a sum of Rs.40,000/-. I paid the said amount in cash to them at my house and purchased the same. I do not know the name of that person who was brought by Kayyum. However, he was aged about 35-38 years, apparently, Muslim, dark complexion, height about 5’8”, fat built, moustache, medium curly hair, wearing shirt and pant. I will be able to identify him if brought before me. He also handed over 8 rounds of the said pistol.

(xix) On 2nd April, I left for Mauritious for shooting of the film ‘Aatish’. There I was informed by a casual contact that Hanif and Samir have been arrested by the Bombay Police for their complicity in bomb blasts.

(xx) On hearing the news, I got frightened as these fellows had given me the AK-56 rifles and they may tell my name to the police to involve me in the bomb blasts case. I contacted my friend Mr. Yusuf Nullwala on telephone and asked him that something is lying in a black coloured bag which is kept in my hall at the second floor of my house and it should be taken away immediately and destroy the things completely which are there in the bag, otherwise, I shall be in a great trouble. By this time, the news about my possession of AK-56 rifles had appeared in the press and on coming to know about this, my father asked me about the truthfulness of this news, but I denied the same. My anxiety about the whole episode became unbearable and I decided to return to Bombay in between. My father informed my flight details to the Police and I was picked up by police as soon as I landed at Bombay and I confessed the whole things to them.”

19) The abovesaid confession highlighted the crime for which the appellant-Sanjay Dutt has been charged. The following facts emerge from the abovesaid confession:

i) He was already having three licensed firearms. ii) He developed acquaintance with Anees Ibrahim - brother of Dawood Ibrahim during a film-shooting in Dubai.

iii) He expressed his desire to Samir Hingora (A-53) and Hanif Kandawala (A-40) to have an automatic fire-arm.

iv) They came with one Salem with whom Sanjay Dutt was already acquainted with and they assured him of the delivery of weapons the next day in the morning.

v) They came in the morning of 16.01.1993 with one other person and delivered 3 AK-56 Rifles and 250 rounds.

vi) After 2 days, he returned 2 AK-56 and ammunitions but retained 1 AK- 56 and some ammunition.

vii) In April, while he was shooting at Mauritius, he heard the news of the arrest of Samir and Hanif, on which, he got frightened and requested his friend Yusuf Nulwalla to destroy the weapons. 20) The appellant (A-117) not only implicates himself in the above said statement but also amongst others the appellant-Yusuf Nulwalla (A-118). The abovesaid confession has been duly recorded by PW-193 who has proved the compliance with the provisions of law while recording the confession. The abovesaid confession is a substantive piece of evidence and it has been held in a series of judgments that the confession can be the sole basis of conviction, if recorded in accordance with the provisions of TADA. Further, the confessional statement establishes the unauthorized possession of weapons in the notified area of Bombay.

Confessional Statements of co-accused:

21) The confession of the appellant (A-117) is substantiated and corroborated with the confession of other co-accused, namely, Samir Hingora (A-53), Baba @ Ibrahim Musa Chauhan (A-41), Mansoor Ahmed (A-89), Hanif Kandawala (A-40), Yusuf Nulwalla (A-118) and Kersi Bapuji Adajania (A-124) which are as under.

Confessional Statement of Samir Ahmed Hingora (A-53) Confessional statement of A-53 under Section 15 of TADA was recorded on 18.05.1993 (17:00 hrs.) and 20.05.1993 (17:30 hrs.) by Shri Krishan Lal Bishnoi (PW-193), the then DCP, Zone III, Bombay. The said confession reveals as under:

i) He started a Video Library and Mustafa Dossa @ Mustafa Majnoo (A-138) - brother of Mohd. Dossa (AA) was a member of his Video Library and he had 2-3 shops in the same market.

ii) Tiger Memon used to work with Mustafa Dossa and became a friend of A-

53.

iii) A-53 started film distribution and production business by the name of ‘Magnum’ in partnership with Hanif Kandawala (A-40 – since died). iv) Anis Ibrahim (AA) became a member of his Video Library and was referred to by everyone as Anisbhai since he was the brother of Dawood Ibrahim.

v) A-53 received a payment of Rs. 21.90 lacs from Ayub Memon sent through someone on 13.03.1993 (one day after the blasts) as advance for purchasing rights of films.

vi) A-53 had visited Dubai and met Anis Ibrahim many times and sold the rights of many films to M/s Kings Video, managed by Anis. Anis also controls Al-Mansoor Video Company through Chota Rajan. vii) On 15.01.1993, A-41 and A-139 met A-53 at his office. Anis Ibrahim called him from Dubai and said that A-41 and A-139 are his men and they have some weapons which have to be delivered to A-117 at his residence.

viii) A-53 and A-139 went to Sanjay Dutt’s (A-117) house where he hugged Abu Salem and asked him about the weapons. A-117 then told A-139 to bring the weapons next day at 7 am.

ix) On 16.01.1993, A-53 led A-139 and A-41 to the house of Sanjay Dutt. A-139 and A-41 were in a blue maruti van while A-53 was in his own car.

x) At the residence of A-117, A-53 saw that the blue van was containing 9 AK-56 rifles and hand grenades and they gave 3 AK-56 rifles and some magazines to A-117. A-117 also asked for some hand grenades which were put in a black bag by A-139.

xi) A-139 kept the rifles in a fiat car belonging to A-117. The hand grenades were kept in the car of A-53 and he left the car at A-117’s residence and took an auto rickshaw.

xii) A-53 collected his car from A-117’s residence after 3 days when he called him and said that grenades have been taken out. 

= =======================================================================

Once you listen in to his words then you will understand how farce the

arguments of hypocrites who argue for Sanjay Dutt's mercy. Most importantly
it is ludicrous to listen to former Judge Mr. Katju’s argument that he has been spreading Gandhi’s message. Does that mean after violating established laws if a cine star acts in appealing movies, it’s done he could be reprieved. This is certainly a cynical view.

At the end of the day if there is meaning to this article of Constitution - Equality before law: Article 14 of the constitution guarantees that all citizens shall be equally protected by the laws of the country.

It must be guaranteed that simply because someone has a fan following he can’t be let off by using the state authority. I want to be assured as an Indian, there is no difference between myself and Sanjay Dutt in the eyes of law i.e., when it comes to applying legal provisions. It should not matter if he is a cine star and acted in hit movies and I a citizen who have not abrogated my fundamental duties unlike Sanjay Dutt.

Read the Complete Judgement here - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/51738625/

Joint Parliamentary Committee : A Case to Re-structure

Introduction:

It has become a recent phenomena that whenever a bustling scam is unearthed by a government agency, media or by a public spirited citizen then immediately a demand arises to constitute a Joint Parliamentary Committee for an inquiry. This demand could either come from opposition or proposed by ruling dispensation but at the end of the day, government decides because it is assumed that it has the required strength in house. This paper dwells deep about what utility JPC’s served until this day. Reviews if it is really effective? If not why? Why the past probes failed to deliver what is expected out of them and it also looks in to the scope of reforming this whole institution and makes it more result oriented instead of just being used as a time buying tactic or distort a regular investigation carried out by an Investigating officer or an agency.

Contemporaries of JPC: 

Our parliamentary form of government is based on Westminster model of UK. Being a former colony may be we have had no choice but we have made enough room for Bharth i.e., India’s widespread diversity in our staggering written constitution. But why the committees are so ineffective when compared with those of UK. We can use the select committee appointed in UK to investigate Rupert Murdoch’s News of the World phone hacking scandal. From the time select committee released report since Feb 2010 and arrest of Rebekah Brooks, chief executive of News International in July 2011 all happened swiftly at the same with no haste. The close counter part of joint parliamentary committees in US could be independent commissions whose utility is unmatched by the Indian parliamentary committees.

Re-structuring the institution of JPC

But then what is the way forward? Does that mean all the members of JPC must be legal experts or they should have an efficient legal advisor? If we want to add some sanctity to this institution, involving a legal mind is the only option. It is taken for granted that most of the instances a break out of information on a mammoth scandal like the one’s of 2G Scam or Bofors etc., setting up JPC is the way out. It is assumed that here we are referring to the committees (JPC) which are formed especially to inquire in to scam, corruption and embezzlement of public funds on a massive scale.

The current exercise of JPC formation is widely considered as a political gimmick and wastage of taxpayer’s money, then it also gives a room for political maneuvers in its current form.

Formation is straight forward. A motion is raised in one house of the parliament and passed by both the houses or chairman of each house write to each other to initiate. Silver line is members of loksabha in JPC are double when compared to members from Rajyasabha. The chairman could be a member of principal opposition for eg: - Murali Manohar Joshi in the case of JPC on 2G scam. Please see - http://realityviews.blogspot.in/2010/11/know-and-understand-what-is-joint.html for the history of JPC’s and what the end result was? In no case we have had a logical conclusion. Party’s interest comes to the fore than the interest of nation itself which is treacherous. None of the JPC reports have been implemented till day.

The daily workings of JPC are more like mini parliament, now we can make a guess how it would function. Rather than spending energies to bring the truth to light the ruling clique would work hard to exonerate itself and the opposition members would intend to pin down the Government and the chairman is just like a speaker of parliament? And this is the aspect of JPC as an institution, where we should try and make it more meaningful and accountable.

1.      The chairman of the JPC must be a retired or sitting judge of either Supreme Court or High court.

2.      The single largest party/coalition in parliament must have only half the strength of the whole committee and the other half must constitute other political parties in equal proportion.

3.      Recording evidence and deciding on the admissibility of evidence will be strictly within the purview of chairman.

4.      The chairman must take in to account every independent argument of each member of the committee only if they are proved with facts/proof.

5.      The solicitor general/additional solicitor general, Advocate general, either any one of them or all of them, or any other govt. appointed legal luminaries could be ex officio members of the committee. Preferably not more than three. The strength must be  odd in number.

6.      The committee must be submitting the report within 6 months, it can be extended it should submit valid reasons to president.

7.      The government must implement this report within 6 months if it cannot, then it shall require parliament approval, approved by 2/3 members present and voting.

A judge as a chairman is certainly equipped with the ability to handle partisan rivalries. Legislation must be brought in to effect which mandates the parliament to ensure that report released is implemented as per the timeline mentioned.

Conclusion:

In light of our lessons learnt with the already appointed JPC’s we shall no more go for new ones as they are exercises in vain, instead of that inclusion of legal mind will help make this institution more just and reasonable. It is understood that still conspicuous government could block any moves which goes against it. But in a democratic government, democracy is the victim of ruling party’s whim.

References :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14124020

http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/committees

http://www.parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/intro/p21.htm

My comment on an article written by Jennifer Lind and Sumit Ganguly

My comment on " Why Cameroon Didn't Apologize to India " in http://thediplomat.com/2013/03/05/why-cameron-didnt-apologize-to-india/comment-page-1/#comment-56476 Written Proffessor Jennifer Lind -  Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth College and Sumit Ganguly - professor of political science and holds the Tagore Chair in Indiana University, Bloomington

=======================================================================

In a strictly political parlance as far as this specific instance is concerned, the gesture of British PM is to make sure that he earns some brownies for his business community in particular and to project British as a responsible/reasonable/sensible nation state, which it was not until recently. The dwindling fortunes have forced England to opt for such gestures even it meant to be a little blow on the domestic front, these are especially done when elections are not around the corner ? But the moot point is why it cannot afford apologies to any other colonial country but India ? The reason is straight and apparent " Business" . Why it is not doing the same to any of its former colony is again "Business".

When I asked a question to a Brit writer Partrick French (@PatrickFrench2 ) " Where all the plunder has gone which the brits looted from India ? " in the context of Cameroon's visit recently. His answer was " Hard to answer that in 140 characters " in twitter. How true it is. The amount of riches it looted from India is indeed enormous but still countries such as these are struggling to keep up in the current economic scenario. So it becomes all the more responsibility of a head of government to make sure he pitches for British Business.

There can be two views narrow and broader. Again there is a scope to debate on which is broader and narrower. For now lets deduce that the Narrower being that this whole gesture is for sake of business than a genuine remorse and the broader being a sincere apology. What ever be the case the world is already bracing itself to manage the RE-EMERGENCE of India as an inevitable global power. Such gestures of apologies of a former ruthless colonial master goes a long way in promoting its own interests.

Thanks
@paytriat