|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
[1] From: syed rahman <surahman2000@yahoo.com> Date: Wed Sep 19, 2007 Subject: Aligarh Muslim University: A microcosm of the Muslim community Aligarh Muslim University: A microcosm of the Muslim community Mirza A. Beg http://www.khabrein.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6410&Itemid=8\ 8 About five month ago Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) was in turmoil. Two students had been killed and the administration was moribund. The Vice Chancellor, Mr. Naseem quietly abdicated or felt forced to abdicate and skipped town through the back door. Alumni and well-wishers of AMU were abuzz with righteous hand winging and heartfelt advice. A month later a new vice Chancellor was ushered in with fanfare. He made much needed changes in the administrative staff. Most, who claim to be in the know, seemed to have approved. ---------- [2] From: Sukla Sen <suklasen@yahoo.com Date: Wed Sep 19, 2007 Subject: Action Alert: Pls. Mail / Fax to EGoM on Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation Dear Friends/Comrades, The second meeting of the Empowered Group of Ministers to review the policies regarding land acquisition and rehabilitation is meeting tomorrow, 20th September 2007, in New Delhi. Please endorse our statement below (letter to Shri Sharad Pawar) or write your own letters and urgently fax to the concerned ministers (names given far below), today itself if possible. (Given further below is the report of the meeting with Shri Sharad Pawar and Shri Raghuvansh Prasad Singh) To, Shri Sharad Pawar, Honorable Minister of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi SUB: Meeting with the representatives of Shangharsh 2007 on 14th August 2007, New Delhi Honorable Shri Sharad Pawar ji, We appreciate the patient hearing by you and honorable Minister of Rural Development, Shri Raghuvansh Prasad ji, during the meeting held on 14th August 2007 with the representatives of people??™s movements. This was a part of convention and Dharna held on 11-12 August 2007. Thank you for giving us your valuable time. Attached along with this letter is the note on the discussion for your reference. Most of the points during the discussion have been noted while a few other points have been added too, which could not be discussed in the meeting. Hope to get your decisions on the discussions we had with you. Both as Minister of Agriculture as well as being the Chairman of Empowered Group of Ministers to review the policies regarding land acquisition and rehabilitation, we hope that you would take pro- people decisions. You have shown your keenness to work on the proper policy on land acquisition and rehabilitation policy. For this, comprehensive consultations with the representatives of people??™s movements and the affected people will be crucial. Hope proper consultation meetings will be held soon in this regards. In anticipation??¦ Sincerely yours, Gautam Bandhopadhyay, Ashok Chaudhary, Medha Patkar, Shaktiman Ghosh, Rajendran, Shivram Bhanwar, Vijay Panda, Simpreet Singh, Vijayan M. J. (Coordination Committee Sangharsh 2007) ___________________________________________________________________ Delhi Office: Action 2007, 1-A, Goela Lane, Under Hill Road Civil Lines, Delhi ??“ 54 Tel: 011-2393330, Rajendra Ravi (0-9868200316), Vijayan MJ(0-9868165471) Mumbai Office: Action 2007, C/0 Chemical Mazdoor Sabha, 28-29, First Floor 'A wing' Haji Habib Building, Naigaon Cross Road, Dadar (East), Mumbai-400014, E-Mail: action2007@gmail.com Tel: 022-24150529 THE REPORT OF THE MEETING WITH MR SHARAD PAWAR AND MR RAGHUVANSH PRASAD SINGH ON 14TH AUGUST 2007, IN NEW DELHI A delegation of representatives of various organisations working on the issues of development and displacement met Mr Sharad Pawar, the Chairman of the Empowered Group of Ministers appointed to review the policies and enactment on Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation. This was a part of the three day program organised by Action 2007 on the same theme ??“ Convention on 11th and 12th August and a dharna (sit-in) at the Jantar Mantar on 13th of August, 2007. The meeting on 14th of August was planned and took place of 1?? hours and Mr Pawar had also invited Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, Minister of Rural Development. The delegation included 1. Shri Surendra Mohan, social thinker and activists 2. Gautam Bantopadhyaya, Nadi Ghati Morcha, Chhattisgarh 3. Manju Gardia, Rajimbahen, Ban Abhayaranya Visthapit Manch 4. Vimalbhai, Matu Jansangathan, Uttarachal 5. Bhupendra Rawat, Jansangharsh Vahini, Delhi 6. Vijaybhai, Adivasi Mukti Sangathan, M. P. 7. Vijayan, Delhi Forum/Delhi Solidarity Group 8. Shaktiman Ghosh, National Hawkers Federation 9. Satya, Anti-Vedanta Struggle, Kalahandi 10. Simpreet Singh, NAPM/Ghar Bachao-Ghar Banao Andolan, Mumbai 11. Shivram Bhanwar and others, Tata Dams affected and Sahyadri Bachao Andolan, Pune, Maharashtra 12. Rajendran, Anti-SEZ Sangharsh, Kakinada, A. P. 13. Medha Patkar, Narmada Bachao Andolan/NAPM The presentation by many a delegation member were co-ordinated and put forth as a united position supported by some documents. The main points were as follows: 1. We, the people's movements and organizations in many states, working with various sectors of the deprived and the disadvantaged including dalits, adivasis, farmers, labourers, women and the displaced across these, firmly believe that the UPA government must keep its promise and hold a national consultation on the issues and legal to constitutional framework on development, displacement and just rehabilitation of the affected. 2. There exists a National Rehabilitation Policy ??“ 2003, which was brought out by the NDA government with laudable objectives but many inadequacies and vague as well as weak provisions, which is never implemented, nor is the Monitoring Committee (of Central Secretaries) under this, even activated. Then came our draft of 'National Policy on Development Planning, Displacement and Rehabilitation' which was, with some changes, approved by the National Advisory Council with its Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, but kept aside by the Prime Minister's office and a new weak draft is brought up by the Ministry of Rural Development in 2006. We think the draft approved by NAC should be taken for further improvement, consultation and finalization. 3. We, based on the experience of last 60 years in India, firmly believe that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 needs to be abolished and radically changed and limited acquisition for the strictly public purpose projects, fulfilling preconditions of consent and rehabilitation may be incorporated into the Policy and Enactment on Development Planning which is due. 4. No other weak draft and decision by your EgoM may please be put forth before the Parliament. 5. Justice and true vision of development demands that no or minimum displacement should be aimed at, by the planners. This has also been the very first objective of the presently applicable NRP-2003 and the new draft NRP-2006, which is not followed by any ministry whether for industries, dams, mines or infrastructure or even sanctuaries. This must be a non-negotiable and the process to arrive at the best option as described in our draft s well in World Commission on Dams Report and other documents should be followed for the same. 6. The forcible acquisition by the state for private interests and plans must go at the same time, even for the private projects, purchase or otherwise diversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural must be based on preconditions and the protective measures for this should be not only for adivasis but all disadvantaged sections including farmers since there is no level playing field. Agricultural land should not be diverted for industries or airports or mines or other projects when there is an option which should not be choses only as the criterion of profit but based on social, environmental and equity criterion too. SEZ act and notifications (2000 to 2005) should be cancelled as industrialisation, if undertaken with right approach, labour intensiveness and an open land, with no unjustifiable concessions and benevolent special provisions to powers. There should be a ceiling on the land to be acquired/directed to non-agriculture by the land holding of a single corporate (This is as per Article 39 (c) in the Constitution which proposes ???No concentration of economic wealth???) 7. Consent of a community, gram sabha in the rural and ward sabhas in the urban should be one of the preconditions. This must be reconciled with the article 143 in the Constitution so as to make development planning truly democratic. All plans must evolve from lowest unit plans and anything proposed from outside should be sought consent for. 8. Choice of technology, similar to choice of site, should be towards no displacement. 9. The affected must have the first share in the benefits of the projects or provision of higher standard of living. 10. Rehabilitation of the already affected must be the first priority with moratorium on the further displacement till that is attained. New act also should be applicable with retrospective effect, covering those lying around the affected area, not rehabilitated, of even old projects 11. Rehabilitation also should be voluntary and acceptable neither forcible nor ex-parte. No force should be used. No cash compensation should be paid in lieu of source of livelihood unless the family is much above poverty line, with permanent source of livelihood already and all members of the family, including women, give informed consent. 12. PESA ??“ the act recognising gram sabhas should be strictly implemented but consent should be sought not only in adivasi areas but all to be affected areas. 13. Forest rights act 2006 and all legislations must be executed and land rights and records updated as per all acts and official policies and directives, before any change in the land use is planned, whether at the local or higher level. 14. Rehabilitation provision should be based on provision of alternative source of livelihood. (a) Land for every severely affected farmer which should be in command area, if the project is an irrigation project (b) Fishing rights in the reservoirs/ponds by the fisher communities (c) Support- not only financial ??“ for other occupational categories to establish alternative source of income. 15. Community resettlement with house plots and amenities must be the norm. 16. In no event should there be eviction or displacement without rehabilitation of the affected family and community. In case it occurs, full compensation for all losses at market values must be paid by the project authorities. 17. Preference in employment ??“ temporary and permanent ??“ should be given to the affected family so as to have one permanent source of livelihood following all labour laws, for each nuclear family. The necessary training for the same must be initiated for the family members as per their education, abilities, skills, at least 5 years before the impact occurs. 18. Land or alternative source of livelihood must be provided preferably two but at least one year in advance and minimum land holding to be allotted should be 5 acres with joint ownership of the husband and wife. Widows and women heads of the households should be treated as separate families for separate house plots and one source of livelihood, assessing feasibility of management. 19. If National Commission on Development, Displacement and Rehabilitation with state level commissions should be established with official (senior officials of Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Tribal Affairs, Forests, HRD and others) and non-official members, the latter coming from the social science faculties and organisations of the affected persons, working on the issues. 20. The State level and the National commission must have the powers to demand and receive detailed project plans in phases (related to the participatory inputs/consent of the communities) with the SIA and EIA (with equity analysis) along with other details such as financial viability and economic cost-benefit analysis. 21. The Commission at the appropriate level must have powers to approve the project (as per detailed guidelines to be set for the purpose) and subject to approval of the gram sabhas and ward sabhas. Suo motto publication and furnishing of all data and documents of any projects planned at any level, in a community (through local self government) to be affected by a project, in the regional language, with maps, reports, records etc should be compulsory task for the project authorities. 22. The Commission must have a National forum of eminent citizens, including social activists and scientists that should meet every six months to review the state and national level situation. The Commission should have powers to direct suspension of work on any project where unjust and illegal displacement occurs. The Commission should hold public hearings through members or their senior representatives as an impartial body and the verdict of the hearing, if it is within the legal framework, must be respected. The Union of India must propose to the Parliament and bring forth an enactment on development, displacement and rehabilitation and the rules forming a special committee for the purpose. The act should be in the concurrent list, specifying the scope and the limits of the jurisdiction of the state and central government without by-passing local governments. The Act must include, in its schedule, all labour acts, acts for SC/ST, acts for minorities, women and children and higher standard of living principle. The Act must have two sections, one for rural and tribal areas and another for the urban. Public purpose must be defined in the new act in the Constitutional framework of directive principles, fundamental rights and values and decision on paradigm to projects in any sector should be based on the same. This would be the basis for prioritisation, eg. unending expansion of airports can't lead to bulldozing of houses and communities. Gautam Bandhopadhyay, Ashok Chaudhary, Medha Patkar, Shaktiman Ghosh, Rajendran, Shivram Bhanwar, Vijay Panda, Simpreet Singh, Vijayan M. J. (Coordination Committee Sangharsh 2007) SEND FAX TO: Sharad Pawar Minister of Agriculture and Minister of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution. sharadpawar@vsnl.com Tel: 011-23014786, 23383370 spawar@sansad.nic, Laloo Prasad Yadav Minister of Railways Rail Bhawan New Delhi - 110001 Tel: 011-23388402, 23381213 Jaipal Reddy Minister of Urban Development. Tel: 011-23061166 P R Kyndiah Minister of Tribal Affairs. Shastri Bhawan New Delhi ??“ 110001 Tel: 011-23010595 Raghuvansh Prasad Singh Minister of Rural Development singhrp@sansad.nic.in Manishankar Aiyer Minister of Panchayati Raj, Minister of Youth Affairs & Sports and Minister of Development of North Eastern Region. Tel: 011-23386520 Meira Kumar Minister of Social Justice & Empowerment. min-sje@sb.nic.in Tel: 011-23381001 Kumari Selja Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation kumari.selja@sansad.nic.in Tel: 011-236091151 Prithviraj Chavan PMO office chavanprithviraj@sansad.nic.in pmosb@pmo.nic.in Tel: 011-23011149 Prof. Saif-ud-din Soz Minister of Water Resources Shram Shakti Bhawan New Delhi ??“ 110001 ssaif@sansad.nic.in Tel: 011-23014786 Shri Sushil Shinde Power Shram Shakti Bhavan New Delhi ??“ 110001 Shri Arjun Singh Human Resource Development Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi ??“ arjuns@sansad.nic.in Jairam Ramesh Minister of State for Commerce jairam@sansad.nic.in Ajay Maken Minister of State Of Urban Development, Government of India M . V . R AJASEKHARAN Minister of State for Planning and Ex-Officio, Member Planning Commission Government of India Office: Room No. 132, Yojana Bhavan, Sansad Marg New Delhi-110001. Telephone Nos: 91-11- 23096561/62/63 (Office); 91-11-23327879/23329141 (Residence) Fax: 2309 6713 (Office); 23712023 (Residence) E-mail: mvraja@yojana.nic.in Peace is doable. ---------- [3] From: kashif-ul-huda <kaaashif@gmail.com Date: Wed Sep 19, 2007 Subject: Study: domestic violence more common among Hindu families Study: domestic violence more common among Hindu families http://www.twocircles.net/2007sep19/study_domestic_violence_more_common_among_hi\ ndu_families. html By TwoCircles. net staff reporter Bangalore: The incidence of domestic violence is higher for Hindu women than Muslim or Christian women, during pregnancy, according to a study published in the latest issue of Journal of Affective Disorders. The study of 203 Bangalore women of different faiths was conducted by National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences. The study involved interviewing each woman to find out about violence against them when they were pregnant. Physical, psychological and sexual coercion by force was identified as violence that is detrimental to the physical and mental health of pregnant women. Therefore a study into factors that lead to this violence can help in protecting women against domestic violence. Various factors like age, education, income, religion, number of people in the household were considered in this study and except for religion, there were no significant differences in any of these sociodemographic variables among the abused and non-abused women. Study found that abuse was more common among Hindu families than Muslim or Christian families. 19% of Hindu women reported violence as opposed to 8% of other faith, a significant difference. No explanation was offered by the researchers which surprised them as well. Alcohol use by husbands was also common in families where women were abused. ----------- |
|
|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net |
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management |