[Reader-list] Are Tougher Laws The Answer?

Rakesh Iyer rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com
Sat Jan 10 14:20:58 IST 2009


On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Anupam (and all),
>
> I was very happy on receiving your reply. At least I must say someone
> replied to me. My issue is not of arguments, for they only lead to heartburn
> and nothing else. It's discussions, without involving any egos. I don't know
> whether you had an ego issue or not, nor can I say it. It's for you to
> answer, and I think it's always better to keep that answer to yourself. I
> had my doubts about such a thing happening, that's all I can say.
>
> Now to your arguments. As I said in the end, I am not a supporter of
> anti-terror laws. First of all, a law should serve the purpose it is meant
> for. As I said, and as Chidambaram himself stated, since any POTA or TADA or
> any UAPA or GUJCOC or MCOCA or any other act, will not stop a jihadi or any
> Sadhvi or any great pastor from committing a terror act, it is a useless
> act. After all, any law is supposed to help in social control (which means
> things run as per norm of the society, whatever those norms be), and thereby
> bring some kind of social stability. Secondly, laws are effective only for
> those people, who have respect for their own lives. Since terrorists have no
> regard for their own life, it's useless to expect that any anti-terror law
> can help in solving this problem.
>
> Secondly, my idea was not to compare traffic with terror. If that is what
> you wish to compare, then fine, I can also talk about dacoity, rapes and
> murders, which can be synonymous with terror as well. These are also
> activities which terrorise people. Riots are also something which terrorise
> people. The fact is that in India, as many cases show, the conviction rate
> would be abysmal for many crimes like dacoity, rapes and murders in many
> states in India. Even if not abysmal, it would certainly not be
> satisfactory. Does that mean we shouldn't have any laws for these things??
> No.
>
> It only means that laws are required, but provisions must be made to
> implement them properly. But of course, if the law is not serving the
> purpose it was meant to, or will not do so, then there is no use of the law.
> And here is where I oppose POTA, or any anti terror law. All things like
> arrests of innocents in the name of terrorism are of course massive defects,
> and instead of stopping terrorist from what they wish to do, they will only
> bring about creation of more alienated people, if not more terrorists.
>
> But what we wish to do now, will beg the question. Many say that people
> will be alienated, specifically Muslims being alienated. Let me ask all this
> question. Don't you think the middle class belonging to Hindu religion feel
> alienated by the so called 'appeasement' politics by parties across India?
> Isn't voting for the BJP, a right-wing party, itself an alienation from the
> secular and tolerant foundations upon which India was supposed to be built?
> And who will end this alienation? When I refer to appeasement, it doesn' t
> mean pleasing someone; it means pleasing someone for the sake of pleasing,
> for the sake of just gaining votes as the Congress and it's sister parties
> do, rather than doing something for them, as the Sachar Committee Report
> proves.
>
> But who is going to stop this alienation of Hindus? Today, anytime a
> general election is carried across India, BJP will definitely win at least
> 20% votes. Most of those vote for it in the name of religion. Aren't these
> people alienated as well from something? What about them? Will any solution
> for terrorism simply over ride their views?
>
> Finally, to your last two points. You mentioned Gujarat has a staff
> shortage. That was a problem in 2002 and still continues. If Modi wishes to
> solve the problem of terror through a law than police reforms, then it's no
> use. And definitely, if politicians are trying to stop any reform in police,
> then civil society should concentrate on agitations to pressurize
> politicians to introduce these reforms, rather than doing so to make them
> resign, like Patil or Deshmukh did, simply because mass resignations will
> also not solve the problem.
>
> And the last point. You asked me why fatwa? Because of two reasons. Most of
> the blasts are being done in the name of Islam, if not all. I acknowledge
> the fact that in many of the cases, the convictions are not being proved for
> majority of accused, or sometimes all of them. While this points to the
> incapability of the police to properly carry out investigation, it doesn't
> remove the perception from the public's minds that a section of Indian
> Muslims have carried out the blasts. I remember Digvijay Singh's statement,
> which he made as a CM, ' Only 1% of Hindus and Muslims are communal. Rest
> are secular'.
>
> It's these Muslims and Hindus who bring about Gujarat riots 2002, Mumbai
> riots 1992-93, Mumbai blasts 93, or others. It's these people who indirectly
> or directly support such things.
>
> The second reason is that Gandhi, the father of our Nation, had realized
> the importance of religion in Indian life. You can't remove religion from
> India. Hence the fatwa. I also ask here for all shankaracharyas in India to
> denounce so called RSS-BJP-VHP terrorism, and ask people to not support such
> parties in elections, which thrive on bloodbaths and riots.
>
> The Mumbai attacks were done to serve the cause of Indian Muslims. Hence, I
> would ask them to issue a fatwa for this purpose. It is a strong message.
> And it doesn't signify they are terrorists. It simply reinforces a known
> fact for us, but an unknown fact for those across the border who are
> indulging in malicious propaganda to serve their political ends, that we are
> all one and united. And nobody, ISI, Indian Mujahideen or the
> RSS-VHP-BJP-Bajrang Dal nexus can hinder us in the path of development, the
> path which could bring smiles on to the face of each and every person in
> India and around the world.
>
> Regards
>
> Rakesh
>
>
>


More information about the reader-list mailing list