Like every other religious festival, Eid al-Adha is one of the most important and symbolic Islamic festivals to commemorate the sacrifice of Prophet Ibrahim and his son Prophet Ismail. Billions of Muslims across the world celebrated the religious festival by sacrificing animals and meeting their family members and also by wearing new clothes, jewellery and shoes.
In Balochistan, Eid has a totally different meaning than the rest of the world. Since 2006 almost every Eid brought more pain and agony to the people of Balochistan. For the last 10 years on every Eid, the families of Baloch missing persons have been protesting on the first days of Eid to remind the Pakistani state, its judiciary, its media and military and the international human rights organisations that thousands of Baloch missing persons are still languishing in the secret torture cells of Pakistani army and their secret services.
One woman cries during protest against missing Baloch people in Quetta
Similarly, on this Eid al-Adha when the people of Punjab were shedding the blood of the animals on the streets to remember the sacrifice of prophet Ibrahim and his son Ismail. The people of Balochistan, the families of Baloch missing persons were on the streets of Quetta, demanding the immediate release of their loved ones or at least an answer whether they are still alive or not. It seems that Pakistani military and the elite of Punjab enjoy when they see the Baloch women on the street crying and telling their heart wrenching stories and urging them to “Please release our loved ones or at least give them a chance of a free trial”.
Likewise, the people of Sindh were also on the streets of Karachi and demanding immediate release for their abducted family members who were abducted by the Pakistani state forces.
Images from the protest against missing Baloch people in Quetta
Instead of listening to the voices of the protesters, the Pakistani state forces and other state machinery were busy in more abduction and killing the innocent abducted people even on the time of the Eid.
On the eve of the Eid al-Adha, five previously abducted Baloch men of Bugti tribe were killed by the Counter Terrorism Department (CTD) Punjab in Rajanpur area in a fake encounter. All five men were previously abducted by the Pakistani security forces from different places. The victims were identified as Dost Mohammad Bugti was abducted eight months ago from Karachi, Ghulam Hussain Bugti was abducted five months ago from Kandhkot, Master Ali Bugti abducted on 6th, Nov, 2019 from Rajanpur, Ramzan Bugti was abducted a year ago from Patfeedar and Atta Mohd Bugti was picked up by Pakistani security forces a year ago from Bahawalpur city of Punjab.
On the other hand, one Baloch woman was also abducted by the Pakistani security forces from Awaran region she was identified as Shalli Baloch. Her whereabouts remain unknown to this time.
The Pakistani (Punjabi) extremist state has no morality or humanity left. The Punjabi dominated army call themselves Muslims and shed tears for Kashmir and Palestine. Surprisingly when someone talks about the injustices and humanitarian crisis of Balochistan, Sindh and KPK the same Pakistani army starts picking up these people and their whereabouts remain unknown for years and many return as mutilated dead bodies.
On this Eid, the daughters, mothers and sisters of Baloch and Sindhi missing persons urged the international community and the free media to show solidarity with them and become their voice in their struggle, supporting their cause globally.
Since the Pakistani judiciary and media and other institutions have failed the Families of the abducted people. Now this is the responsibility of the United Nations and other major global organisations and civilised countries to ensure that these women and children who are protesting against these inhumane actions will get the justice and their loved ones will return home from the dungeons of Pakistani security forces.
Twitter user Sunaina Holey, who had recently received bail following her arrest for allegedly making ‘offensive’ comments against Maharashtra CM Uddhav Thackeray and Environment Minister Aaditya Thackeray on social media, has been arrested yet again. This time, she has been arrested by the Tulinj Police.
Vivekananda Gupta, lawyer of Sunaina Holey, has dubbed the arrest illegal. He has said that without notice for appearance before the police under section 41A, she cannot be arrested as per law. He said that the arrest was in violation of Supreme Court guidelines. The law also mandates that a woman cannot be arrested after sunset.
The lawyer said that as per the bail order she was to visit the Bandra Kurla Complex Police Station for three consecutive Fridays. At 3 pm today she went there as per the bail order to cooperate with the investigation. But police officers from Tulinj PS were already there and they took her into custody. Sunaina Holey will be produced at the Wasai Magistrate Court tomorrow.
It is double jeopardy since she is being arrested in the same offence, the lawyer said. According to 41A(1) of the CrPC, any offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, police have to issue a notification for an appearance at the police station instead of arresting such a person. Moreover, as long as a person is cooperating, the police can not arrest the said person, as per section 41A(3). The lawyer said that in both cases, notice under section 41A was not served.
Sunaina Holey released by Mumbai police
After Vivekananda Gupta pointed out multiple irregularities by Mumbai police again after she had obtained bail in the same case, she was released by police. The news of hew second arrest had caused an outrage on social media, accusing the Maharashtra government of being intolerant and misusing police force to shut down criticism. Moreover, Mumbai police also served a notice to Sunaina Holey under 41A of the CrPC, as required under the law.
Shiv Sena against Sunaina Holey
Maharashtra Police had arrested one Twitter user Sunaina Holey, who goes by the ID @SunainaHoley, on Thursday after a complaint was filed against her by Rohan Chavhan, a leader of the Shiv Sena’s youth wing Yuva Sena. In his complaint, Chavhan wrote that Sunaina had posted objectionable content on the microblogging website against CM Uddhav Thackeray and Environment Minister Aaditya Thackeray.
The complaint was filed at Tulinj Police Station, Nalasopara. The user also runs a backup account @NidarNaari, and both these accounts were mentioned in the complaint. Chavhan mentioned that Sunaina used extremely offensive against the Shiv Sena chief and his son to defame their image on social media. He urged police to take action against her under section 294 (using obscene language in public place), 499 (defamation), 506 (criminal intimidation) and other relevant sections of the IPC and Section 66A of the Information Act 2000 within 48 hours.
Sunaina Holey was granted bail after first arrest
Sunaina Holey was granted bail after the BJYM intervened in the matter. Advocate Vivekananda Gupta arranged for the bail of Sunaina Holey. BJP spokesperson Hitesh Jain also helped in the matter. People on social media were outraged by the highhandedness shows by the Shiv Sena. The party was criticised heavily for attempting to curtail an individual’s right to freedom of speech and expression.
The memoir of late Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar – ‘Chandra Shekhar And The Six Months That Saved India‘, written by Roderick Matthews has made some interesting revelations regarding the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute. The shocking disclosures made by the author could now stir up fresh controversies, exposing Congress party’s vile intentions and dishonesty in dealing with Ram Janmabhoomi dispute.
According to the yet-to-be-released book, the excerpts of which has been published in Jansatta, the then Prime Minister Chandrashekhar had almost resolved the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute and had even proposed a plan to settle the dispute between Hindu and Muslim groups, with Muslims giving up their claim over the site. However, the settlement did not come to fruition, thanks to Rajiv Gandhi, who withdrew Congress party’s support to the Chandrashekhar government leading to its collapse.
The book reveals that Rajiv Gandhi did not want the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute to be resolved as he did not want Chandra Shekhar to take credit for the same. The author writes that Rajiv Gandhi played ‘petty’ politics by denying Chandra Shekhar government to peacefully settle the Ram Mandir issue.
“He thought that if Chandra Shekhar settles the Babri Masjid, he’ll become so popular in the country. He didn’t want the credit to go to him. Very petty, if you ask me. Had that thing been settled, Hindu-Muslim relations today would have been much better,” Roderick Matthews writes in his book according to the Print report.
The settlement of the temple dispute by others, according to Matthews, would have threatened to damage Rajiv politically. The author writes that Rajiv Gandhi could not stand by and let others boost their prestige. Resolving the dispute was a card he still hoped, one day, to play for himself, the memoir recounts.
Chandra Shekhar had carried out confidential negotiations
The book states that PM Chandra Shekhar had, in fact, started a series of confidential negotiations with both the parties as a process to resolve the age-old dispute. The tough negotiations between the leaders of Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas (RJN), a trust formed by the VHP to supervise the construction of a temple at Ayodhya and the All India Babri Masjid Action Committee (AIBMAC) began, which was supervised by Sharad Pawar, who spoke to the Hindus, and Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, a personal friend of the PM, and considered a BJP moderate, who dealt with the Muslims.
These confidential meetings were held in the PMO, with Prime Minister meeting leaders of both the community, in his attempt to find a solution to Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute.
“First, these VHP people came. So Chandra Shekhar starts off very casual—he’ll put you off guard, actually. He asked them: ‘Tell me, what is to be done about this Ayodhya?’ This question is so casual that the [VHP] fellow took it that he could bully him. He replied: ‘Ayodhya—what is the issue? It is a Ram mandir, everybody knows it. It’s already a Ram mandir’,” the book states.
Cover of the book
To which, Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar said, “OK. Now, let’s be serious. I am prime minister today, I don’t know how long I’ll be here, but while I am prime minister nobody will touch that structure…I am not VP Singh, who will depend on the state chief minister. I will give orders to shoot anybody who touches that mosque. India is a poor country. We are spending so much money on this—we can’t have it. And why should you bother? If 500 sadhus die, they are dying for God’s cause and going to heaven.”
Days later, the Muslim delegation met Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar. He said, “Listen, I have told them. Your structure is safe, till I’m sitting here. But, there are five lakh, six lakh villages in the country. There are Hindus and Muslims living side by side everywhere. If tomorrow there are nationwide riots, I don’t have enough police to control them. So, tell me what you think.”
Muslims wanted to hand over site to Hindus, claims author
Two days later, both Hindus and Muslims were prepared to settle. According to the memoir, Chandra Shekhar made some ground rules before starting the negotiations.
“Bhairon Singh and Sharad Pawar will sit with you. Whatever you two sides and they agree [on], my government will implement. This is my promise. But there are conditions. About the negotiations, nothing is to be told to the press, except that we are talking. No contents to be leaked to the press till the final agreement.”
The talks, however, went on for about fifteen-twenty days. According to the book, Chandra Shekhar had expressed hope, saying that both the sides were saying that the matter can be settled, but raised concerns regarding how supporters of both sides would react to such a huge development.
“Both the sides are saying that the matter can be settled, but they are worried they have pumped up their supporters so much, now they don’t know how to bring them down!” Bhairon Singh Shekhawat said to Chandra Shekhar.
Days later, the two sides came up with a settlement. The broad agreement was this. The Muslims said, “We agree to hand over the structure to the Hindus, in keeping with their sentiments. But this structure we hand over on two conditions. First, you give us some other land, to make our masjid. Second, you pass a law, that after this no other issue will be reopened. As of 15 August 1947, what is a masjid is a masjid, what is a temple is a temple.”
It may be noted that in the historic verdict awarding the site to Hindus, the Supreme Court had granted 5 acres of land at an alternate site to the Muslims to build a mosque, and accordingly the UP govt has allotted land to the UP Sunni Waqf Board. And, the The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 was passed by the P.V. Narasimha Rao government in 1991, which seeks to maintain the “religious character” of religious places as it was at Independence. Therefore, both the conditions put forwarded by Muslims in 1990 have actually been fulfilled.
Sharad Pawar leaked confidential information to Rajiv Gandhi
The author claims that both sides had agreed to these conditions. However, once news of the discussions got leaked from the PMO, political pressures began to surface.
Sharad Pawar, one of the negotiators, had apparently leaked information to Rajiv Gandhi. Pawar had updated Rajiv Gandhi on the progress of the talks and told him that a deal was about to be done.
“Sharad Pawar told Rajiv, so Rajiv rang up Chandra Shekhar. I am very happy that you have done this. Give me two days. He wanted two days to read the deal and think about it. And then he brought down the government in two days. He thought that if Chandra Shekhar settles the Babri Masjid, he’ll become so popular in the country. He didn’t want the credit to go to him. Very petty, if you ask me. Had that thing been settled, Hindu-Muslim relations today would have been much better,” the author Roderick Matthews wrote in his book.
The book is scheduled to be released on 10th August on both printed and e-book formats. Roderick Matthews is a London based writer specializing in Indian history.
At first, it may seem that the Hagia Sophia, a historical site of a dispute between Muslims and Christians all the way in Turkey is of little relevance to India. But it most certainly is. There are certain sympathies that extend well beyond national boundaries. Which is why Muslim majority Turkey wants to intervene in Kashmir. And the All Indian Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) talks about the Hagia Sophia even as it wags its finger at the Supreme Court.
On a side note, one wonders what would have happened if a common citizen had dared to describe a Supreme Court judgement as “unjust, oppressive, shameful and majority appeasing.”
On the face of it, Hagia Sophia seems like a typical symbol of Islamist triumphalism. A Christian emperor built a church there. Then, a medieval Muslim emperor converted it into a mosque. As Turkey remained relatively secular (by standards of the Muslim world) for most of the 20th century, the site became religiously neutral, serving as a museum. Now, Turkey has reclaimed the Hagia Sophia as a mosque.
One may therefore be confused by the comparison drawn by the AIMPLB between the Hagia Sophia and the Ram Janmabhoomi case. The Hagia Sophia used to be a church. Those who converted it by force are getting to keep it. In the case of Ram Janmabhoomi, the Hindus are taking back one of their most sacred places. How then are they similar?
To understand, you must read the reasoning of the AIMPLB carefully.
“…where a mosque comes up once, it remains a mosque till eternity“
Get it? It is not about natural justice, not about right or wrong. Once a mosque, always a mosque. End of argument.
The Hagia Sophia case is relevant both for the reasons that everyone is talking about and for reasons nobody is talking about. We already heard about the church vs mosque dispute. But what they don’t tell you is that there is a third party to the Hagia Sophia dispute.
Except that the third party is not around to argue its case either in Turkey or elsewhere in the world. They are unseen. They are forgotten. And it is this unseen third party that is most relevant to the Hindus of India.
Britannica topic
One side says the Hagia Sophia is a church. Another side says it is a mosque. But the reality is that the Hagia Sophia is built on a pagan temple.
Where are those pagans who originally worshiped at the spot where Hagia Sophia stands today? What became of their culture?
Today the two powerful Abrahamic religions, Islam and Christianity are clashing over who owns the site. The elephants are fighting. The grass has been forgotten.
This is where we have to realize something. We Hindus are the last standing major pagan culture in the world. Many centuries ago, a project began to bring all of humanity under the God of Abraham. One by one, the inheritors of the world’s great ancient civilizations: the Greeks, the Mesopotamians, the Egyptians, the Romans, fell under the swoop of this imperial project. They signed a truce with Communism, which mimics the structure of Abrahamic religions by replacing “one true god” with “one true state.”
We Hindus are still here, worshiping our land, the forces and bounties of nature, our ancestors. Our beliefs and practices are diverse and colorful.
We are building a temple for Ram, but we have temples for Ravana too. In Uttar Pradesh, in Madhya Pradesh, in Rajasthan, in Gujarat, in Andhra Pradesh, everywhere. There are temples where Lord Ayyappa is worshiped as eternally celibate. Young women are not allowed in there. There are also temples where Lord Ayyappa is worshiped as a householder, with not one but two wives. And there are also temples where men are not allowed to enter.
The imperial project sees us as people who should not exist. Our loosely organized religion, infinitely adaptive to local and personal beliefs, free from moral absolutes, is anathema to them. And above all, they see it as weakness.
They want that we should be broken up and made to surrender to one of the brands of Abrahamic religion.
At this point, you will inevitably come up against some standard objections from Indian liberals. First, how could a billion Hindus ever be wiped out? What do we have to fear?
You should turn that argument on its head. There are one and a half billion Muslims in the world and they control 57 countries. How could 1.5 billion people with 57 countries under their control be marginalized? Then, how come we have to deal every day with the sob story about this thing they call Islamophobia?
Second, they will say : Muslims did not convert all of India in 800 years of rule. How can you say they will do it now?
Well, Hindus of India just happen to be the exception. The Abrahamic religions have wiped out pagan cultures all across Europe, the Middle East and Africa. These cultures were not extinguished in a day, but step by step. We Hindus of India are the last remaining step. Don’t forget that the imperial project has already swallowed up Pakistan and Bangladesh. The tiniest remnants of Hindu culture have been scrubbed from there.
But the most important question you would face would come from within. The empires of the past are all gone. India is a secular democratic republic today. You have rights. What do you have to fear as a Hindu?
This is where you must come to the most devastating conclusion of all. Secularism is a scam and it does not protect you.
What is secularism? Secularism is the principle that establishes a free market of religion. It insists that all exchanges and trades in religion should be voluntary. And it puts the state in charge of making sure that nobody can use force.
It sounds great. But only if your religion is similar to a for profit corporation. You have these rules to ensure fair competition, to protect your profits and secure your investments.
But what happens if your religion has an altogether different orientation? What if your religion is not about delivering dividends to existing shareholders in terms of the quarterly number of new converts? What if your religions measures its success in terms of celebrating a cultural identity, history and traditions to be passed to the next generation?
I used the word “orientation” very deliberately. Here is a thought. What if I told you that every country in the world, including Saudi Arabia, already gives gay people the right to get married?
Think about it. Saudi law already allows all men (including gay men) to marry women. And Saudi law already allows all women (including gay women) to marry men. Fair enough?
No, not fair at all. Because gay people have an altogether different orientation. They have no use for their rights under Saudi law, which is fair in a literal sense but not in a meaningful sense. It’s the same thing when Indian secularism offers Hindus an equal right to convert members of other religions. We have no interest in it and no use for it. This “equal right” is a joke.
Secularism was set up for Abrahamic monopoly religions to carve out territory for themselves. Secularism does not protect the Hindu way of life.
You can observe this phenomenon easily. In secularism, the iron clad protections are reserved for the freedom to spread religion. It took decades for the judiciary to decide that a Ram temple could be built at Ayodhya. But if you want curb ways in which people celebrate Holi, Diwali, Janmashthami, or a practice such as Jallikattu, you can get a judgement on your PIL in a few afternoons.
It is important to divorce your feelings about individual cases from the general principle here. You may well be concerned about pollution caused by Diwali crackers and be happy that the courts are clamping down on them. That’s not the point. The point is how easy it is for the Indian legal system to curb practices of Hindu religion. Today it may be a practice you don’t like, tomorrow it could be something that is close to your heart. The Hindu religion is a diverse bundle of cultural practices. And the scary thing is that none of these is protected by law. That’s why secularism is a scam.
Let me make this formal. There is a legal term called “essential practice of religion,” which the judiciary uses to test whether some form of religious expression is protected by secularism. The Supreme Court defines it as “the core belief upon which a religion is founded.”
Do you see the problem here? What is the core belief upon which Hinduism is founded? Does Hinduism have one god, one book and one prophet? Can you show me something that actually qualifies as “essential practice” of Hinduism?
So which aspect of Hindu religion does secularism protect? In short, nothing.
Let’s say that again. Secularism does not protect Hindu religion in any way, shape or form. Secularism is a scam.
A month after denying bail, the Kottayam Additional Sessions Court on Friday granted bail to the rape-accused Bishop Franco who is the prime accused in the nun rape case in Kerala.
According to the reports, the court granted bail to the rape accused Bishop after he furnished fresh bail sureties. The court will now hear the case on August 13, 2020, when the charge-sheet will be read out in the court.
The rape-accused Mulakkal was also present in the Court on Friday. The courtalso directed him not to leave the state until the charge-sheet is read out to him on August 13. The court has also ordered the rape-accused to be present court on the dates of hearing of the case.
The prosecution also submitted that the accused, who had allegedly tested positive for coronavirus in July in Jalandhar, Punjab, had not submitted a coronavirus negative certificate before the court. The court directed that the issue be looked into by the health department.
Supreme Court dismisses Bishop Franco’s petition
On Wednesday, in a big setback for the Bishop Franco Mulakkal, the Supreme Court had also dismissed his petition seeking to clear rape charges against him. Bishop Franco, who is accused of raping a 44-year-old nun will now have to face trial in the rape case.
Bishop Franco Mulakkal had filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking to quash Kerala High Court’s order that had dismissed his discharge plea in the rape case. The Kerala High Court had ruled that the rape-accused Bishop must face trial in the case after the prosecution had argued that there was enough evidence against him.
Franco Mulakkal had moved Supreme Court after a trial court in Kottayam had cancelled his bail on grounds that he had failed to appear before the court several timings despite several warnings. Earlier, on July 13, the Additional Sessions Court had cancelled the bail granted to the rape accused Bishop Franco of failing to appear for the trial and had issued a non-bailable warrant against him.
Franco Mulakkal’s counsel had claimed that the accused had tested positive for coronavirus and hence was not able to appear before the court.
Franco Mulakkal, Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Jalandhar, was accused of raping a 44-year-old nun at a guest house in Kuravilangad in May 2014 and subsequent sexual exploitations afterwards. The nun had registered a complaint in June 2018 and has also claimed that despite her complaints, the church took no action on the bishop.
The Modi government has taken yet another step to make the government free from activists and experts who know how to pontificate without really making any impact on the ground. Just like the garden variety activist who pontificates about poverty in the slums while sitting in air-conditioned parties, the Handloom Board, which was abolished by a notification on the 27th of July, had ‘activists and experts’ who sat in Delhi, enjoying the social status of a prestigious position without really working with the weavers.
The move inspired some amount of outrage from expected quarters that wished to turn this into a move that supposedly hampered the growth of the industry and also the interests of the weavers. The loudest criticism came from ‘activist’ Laila Tyabji.
Who is Laila Tyabji and is her criticism valid?
Laila Tyabji is reportedly an Indian social worker, designer, writer, and craft activist. She is one of the founders of Dastkar, a Delhi-based non-governmental organization, working for the ‘revival of traditional crafts in India’. Unsurprisingly, she was awarded by the UPA government in 2012 with a Padma Shri.
Laila Tyabji, chairperson of Dastakar — a not-for-profit NGO working to support traditional Indian craftspeople – reacted to the decision and said: “Strange things happen quietly in COVID times – without even a whisper of warning. The news that the almost 70-year-old All India Handicrafts Board, established in 1952 by Pupul Jayakar and nurtured by Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay, has been abolished came as a complete surprise.”
Tyabji expressed her shock in a Facebook post. She wrote: “All these years on, it remained the one official forum, however, watered down, where the voices and views of weavers and craftspeople could be expressed directly. One place where representatives of the sector were present in considerable numbers and were actually empowered to advise the Government in policy and sectoral spending… The spaces where people themselves can interact directly with Government, or be part of their own governance, are certainly becoming leaner and increasingly few in number. It is worrying.”
Essentially, Laila Tyabji insinuated that the Handloom Board was the one true voice of the artisans and craftsperson and the abolition of the board meant that the government would work in isolation and not really hear the real voice of the people, christening herself as their representative.
It is important to note that people in the know say that the Handloom Board was nothing but a group of advisors who wished to pontificate without doing making a substantial impact. “The board has existed for 4 decades. What is their impact?”, an individual close to the board said. Essentially, the board was started to give political patronage to friendly faces by the previous regime and thus, served no substantial purpose in furthering the interests of the weavers over the past 4 decades.
The criticism that has come from Laila Tyabji gives one the impression that voices of the downtrodden, which were heard through these activists are now being suppressed by the government. However, did Laila Tyabji actually make any substantial impact while working with the ministry to give the Ministry the required inputs?
People in the know have now questioned the commitment of Laila herself citing another example. Vide on order in 2016 was passed for the up-gradation of Weavers Service Centres and for the creation for Design Resource Centres.
The composition of the committee was as under:
The composition of the committee was as under:
(i) Ms. Laila Tyabji, Designer and founder of Dastkar, New Delhi.
(ii) Ms. Jaya Jaitley, Founder & President of Dastkari Haat Samiti,New Delhi.
(iii) Mr. Sabyasachi Mukherjee, Designer, Kolkata
(iv) Mr. Gaurang Shah, Designer, Hyderabad
(v) Ms. Anavila Misra, Designer, Mumbai
(vi) D.C (Handlooms) (Ex-officio) – Member Convener
The 1st meeting of the committee was held on 08.11.2016 under the chairpersonship of Hon’ble Minister of Textiles, in which policy decisions regarding revamping of WSCs were taken. On the basis of inputs received from WSCs along with the requirement of additional physical infrastructure & manpower, a draft report was submitted by the expert committee. Thereafter, the 2nd meeting of the expert committee was held on 27.02.2017 for discussing the draft report and to make final recommendations for upgrading WSCs.
In the meeting, it was decided that the expert committee members shall indicate their preferences for visits to various WSCs and such visits will be facilitated by the ministry.
Interestingly, only Jaya Jaitley visited the WSC and submitted her report to the Ministry. Laila Tyabji, who is now outraging about the Handloom Board being abolished and that her work being the “voice of the voiceless” will be compromised, did not only not bother to visit any WSC but also did not bother to submit a report to the Ministry.
Thereafter, it was decided to abolish the board and work towards the upliftment of the weavers and craftsmen through NIFT.
The Modi government then decided to set up DRC in all 28 Weavers Service Centres (WSCs) through NIFT with the following objective:
• To build and create design-oriented excellence in the Handloom Sector.
• To facilitate weavers, exporters, manufacturers and designers for creating new designs.
According to sources, an amount of Rs 3.5 crores has already been released to NIFT to work with weavers within the framework of this program and students and faculty, together, would be working with the Ministry.
The same objectives that were meant to be met by the committee and the board is now working effectively through the NIIFT.
Thus, it is evident that Laila Tyabji herself was hardly interested in representing the voices of the downtrodden to the Ministry. If she was, she would have visited the WSC and given her inputs to the government.
What people said about the Handloom Board
Essentially, the Handloom Board was an advisory council that made little to no impact on the ground. The members thus used their position as a status symbol without really contributing to the development or welfare of the weavers through their position in the board.
Many in the know expressed their opinion on the board, however, wished to stay anonymous. One person in the know said, “How can they claim to be the voice of the weavers of Bhagalpur and several other areas sitting in their AC rooms in Delhi? None of them bothered to visit the weavers personally and they wish to pretend as if they were the sole voice of the downtrodden. This is just them being disgruntled at losing a ‘prestigious position’ that they can show-off in parties”.
Essentially, people in the know said that the Board was hardly of any consequence and more work is certainly being done after the Ministry’s association with NIFT as compared to the board giving “gyan” on what the weavers and artisans needed without even meeting them.
Handloom Day
7th August 2020 marks the 6th National Handloom Day in India. August 7 was chosen as National Handloom Day to commemorate the Swadeshi Movement which was launched on this day in 1905 in the Calcutta Town hall to protest against the partition of Bengal by the British Government. The Handloom industry in India is of prime significance since it not only symbolises the culture of India but also gives employment to thousands of women.
The Modi government decided to abolish the much-hyped and ornamental Handloom Board. The notification to abolish the Handloom Board was issued on the 27th of July. The notification read, “‘Minimum Government and Maximum Governance’, leaner government machinery and the need for systematic rationalisation of government bodies, the Government of India have abolished All India Handloom Board with effect from the date of this resolution.”
On Thursday, Bollywood rapper Badshah was reportedly summoned by the Mumbai police crime branch in connection to the fake followers’ scam. As per reports, the rapper reported to the crime branch office on Friday at 12 pm where he was quizzed on 238 important questions.
Badshah is the first Bollywood celebrity who has been summoned by law enforcement in connection to the scam. Reportedly, there has been a drastic rise in the number of Badshah’s un-followers. As such, the Crime Branch has asked him to furnish a list of all his followers. Although Badshah is popular for his rap music, his videos on Youtube witness millions of views but only and a handful of comments. This has led the Mumbai police to interrogate him on this regard.
The rapper had reportedly claimed that his song ‘Paagal’ has garnered 75 million views in a day, a claim that has now been rejected by Google. The Crime Branch will now investigate his claims as well as the reasons behind the disparity between views and comments. Besides, there are 175 other high-profile stars who have allegedly paid to gain fake followers on social media. The racket came to light after Bhumi Trivedi discovered a fake profile of hers online.
Fake followers scam
The Mumbai Police had last month unearthed the fake-followers scam after discovering that a number of celebrities had ‘bought’ fake followers. A racket was burst in which they unearthed more than 50 companies that were involved in selling social media followers, likes and comments.
On 14th July, Central Intelligence Unit (CIU) of the crime branch had arrested one Abhishek Davade who provide such services. The 21-year-old service provider was using bots or fake profiles to increase engagement of his clients. To provide such services, Davade was using more than 170 accounts in which he allegedly added more than five lakh followers to make them look genuine.
The Centre responding on a petition filed by the Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind in Supreme court seeking action against media reports “spreading hatred” over the Nizamuddin Markaz congregation of Tablighi Jamaat, came out in defence of media’s right to report facts on Friday.
In its response, the Centre told the Supreme Court that the attempt to seek a blanket “gag order” against the entire media will effectively take away the journalistic independence and the rights to information from the citizens.
“Attempt to seek a blanket gag order against the entire media…will effectively destroy freedom of the citizen to know about the affairs of the respective sections of the society in the nation and the right of the journalist to ensure an informed society,” the Centre told the court.
Centre slams unregulated ‘fact-check’ websites, questions its credibility in court
Slamming the ‘fact-check’ portals and websites, based on whose reports, the Islamic organisation, Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind had submitted its petition in the apex court, Centre said: “They are unregulated websites and are mostly based on perception, conjecture, surmises, suppositions of the individual writing them.”
Questioning the credibility of such “non-accredit fact-checking agencies” the centre asserted: “Furthermore, the bonafide of such non-accredit fact-checking agencies and extraneous considerations being crept into such fact-checking reports cannot also be ruled out.”
Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind moves SC against “fake” media reports on Tablighi Jamaat
The Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind had on April 6 moved the Supreme Court asking the court to give directions to prevent the “communalization of Nizamuddin Markaz” issue. In its petition, the Jamiat had said that “sections of the media, instead of exercising restraint, reported the entire incident with a communal flavour”. It accuses some media houses of using terms such as “Corona jihad”, “Corona terrorism”, “Islamic insurrection” and “corona bombs”.
The petition had alleged that such “demonisation of the entire Muslim community in India” was leading to violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.
Tablighi Jamaat members emerged as the Coronavirus super-spreaders
During the initial outbreak of the coronavirus in India, the Tablighi Jamaat event at the Nizamuddin Markaz in Delhi had wreaked havoc in the country. In the last week of March, initially, 200 people linked to the event were reportedly admitted to various hospitals in Delhi. Subsequently, thousands of cases began to erupt across the country with links to the Tablighi Jamaat and the country stood horrified as the magnitude of the Islamic Missionary organization’s transgressions became known.
Despite it being a well-established fact that the Tablighi Jamaat had gone on to become the sole reason for the Chinese virus to spread at an alarming rate across India, Islamists and their sympathisers had collectively rushed to shield the Tablighi Jamaat super spreaders and theirchief who had incited Muslims to defy lockdown.
‘Activist’ Rehana Fathima caused widespread outrage when she shared a video on YouTube where her children could be seen painting on nude upper-body. Following the outrage, a case under POCSO was registered against her. In connection to the matter, The Wire has published an article on the 29th of July where it is claimed that the perverse actions of the activist ought to be celebrated and not punished.
Author V. Venkatesan, formerly a senior associate editor at Frontline, claimed that “her activism has the potential to challenge not only patriarchal stereotypes prevalent in conservative Kerala and elsewhere, but also the judicial attitude towards allegations of obscenity.”
Headline of The Wire article
In her defence, Venkatesan wrote, “She contends that she only allowed her body to be used as a canvas by her children to paint on, and only perverts would be aroused to sexual desire by seeing the nature of the work. Her message accompanying the uploaded edited video makes it clear that she intended to normalise the female form for her children and not allow distorted ideas of sexualisation to pervade their minds.”
Throughout the article, the author goes to great length to justify the brand of activism espoused by Rehana Fathima. The author relied on the statements made by the activist to claim that the sole intention of the activist was to further the cause of gender equality without pondering to elaborate on whether children should be made to engage in morally questionable actions at such a young age.
Venkatesan said further, “In Kerala, body painting on men is an accepted tradition during Pulikali festivals in Thrissur. When Theyyam and such other rituals are performed at the temple, painting is conducted on the bodies of male artists. If these acts are not assumed to be obscene or indecent, it is not clear why a similar act performed by a woman should be so considered, merely because she happens to be a woman. Fathima has also participated as the only female in the male-only performance at Pulikali at Thrissur in order to convey her message of gender equality.”
The Wire also expressed “hope” that the Supreme Court will “render justice to Rehana Fathima”. Rehana Fathima had been booked under the Juvenile Justice Act and the section 67 of the Information Technology Act (Electronically transmitting sexually explicit content) for non-bailable offences by the Thiruvalla police of Pathanamthitta district in Kerala. She was later denied anticipatory bail by the Kerala High Court.
Rehana Fathima, the controversial ultra-left wing activist who has attempted to desecrate the Sabarimala Temple in the past, on June 19 took to her YouTube channel to post a 2:00 minute video where she is seen lying on bed wearing only a pair of red shorts, while her children attempt to paint on her naked torso. She also uploaded the same on her Facebook page with hashtag #BodyArtPolitics.
Past Transgressions of Rehana Fathima
Rehana Fathima was sacked from her job in May 2020 after BSNL authorities after a probe found that her Facebook messages had incited communal tension and she had violated service rules. For the previous 18 months, she was under suspension after BSNL had received complaints from the public about her abusive pictures and videos, which had hurt religious sentiments.
In 2018, the Pathanamthitta police had registered a case against activist Rehana Fathima against a complaint filed by Sabarimala Achara Samrakshana Samithi for putting up social media posts that were “communally divisive” in nature. The self-proclaimed activist was also ‘expelled‘ from the Muslim community by the Kerala Muslim Jama’ath Council for her activities.
A model of sorts in the past, Fathima has been a part of the ‘Kiss of Love’ campaign in Kochi in 2014 against the purported moral policing. Rehana Fathima was also convicted in a cheque-fraud case and awarded a fine of Rs. 2.1 lakh and one day of imprisonment in the year 2014.
An FIR has been filed against miscreants for attacking Lord Ram devotees in Uttar Pradesh’s Sultanpur, for celebrating the Bhoomi Pujan ceremony of the Ram Mandir to be constructed in Ayodhya. The assailants also attacked a businessman, thrashed his family members and vandalised his shop in the Hanumanganj market of the town.
The incident pertains to August 5 when villagers gathered in the market started distributing sweets to celebrate the completion of Bhoomi Pujan ceremony of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. However, this did not sit well with a particular community in the village, who arrived with a dozen people, and attacked the house of one Siyaram Modanwal and beat up his family members.
When police rushed to the spot to control the violence, they were welcomed with brickbats and stones by the assailants. Siyaram was injured in the attack. The miscreants, on the other hand, were arrested by the police.
With the tensions flaring up, police teams from the nearby police stations were deployed at the spot. The sub-Divisional Officer Lambhua Vidhesh Kumar and CO Lalchandra Chaudhary reached the spot on Thursday morning and took stock of the situation.
According to SP Shiv Hari Meena, Kuldeep Modanwal’s bike had hit a pedestrian named Saddam after which clashes erupted between the two sides. Meena further added that a case had been lodged against the errants and an investigation is underway.
OpIndia tried reaching out to Sultanpur police but couldn’t get through. We shall update the story once we get more details about the case.
Bhoomi pujan ceremony of the Ram Mandir in Ayohdya
Amidst much fanfare, the Bhoomi pujan ceremony that marks the construction of Ram Mandir was performed in Ayodhya on Wednesday, August 5. PM Modi had graced the occasion and participated in the ceremony before laying the ceremonial cornerstone for the soon-to-be constructed Ram Mandir.
