GYANOPROBHA

DR. ILINA SEN'S INAUGURATION SPEECH AT THRISSUR INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL

On February 15, Binayak's wife Dr. Ilina Sen, who is a sociologist and professor of Gender Studies at the Mahatama Gandhi International Hindi University at Wardha, was invited to open the VIBGYOR International Film Festival 2009  at the Sangeet Natak Academy at Thrissur, Kerala.

Here is the speech she gave at the inauguration of the film festival. Within its very short compass, the speech manages to raise questions about the quality of justice in the state of Chhattisgarh and indeed in the country and the pattern of development that we as a country have chosen for ourselves.

The thematic focus of this year's festival was food sovereignty, an issue that has been close to both Binayak and Ilina's work with Rupantar since its founding.

Meanwhile, another session of Binayak's trial has come and gone. Once again the witnesses appeared and failed to support the case for the prosecution. This time, yet another jailer came forward to confirm what his colleague had confirmed last month - that it would have been impossible for Binayak to carry documents from Narayan Sanyal out of the jail without the knowledge of the jailers. Why one needs a witness to confirm this is beyond me, when it was already clear since Binayak's arrest that all meetings had occurred with the approval of the highest police authorities, and all documents handled by Binayak from Narayan Sanyal already had the stamp of aproval of the jail superintendent. In relation to charges in the second charge sheet regarding Binayak receiving large sums of money into his account from suspicious sources, the deposition of the bank officials failed to substantiate this charge.

This trial is expected to go on indefinitely until all the charges - including frivolous one relating to phone calls Binayak is supposed to have made to our mother (for goodness' sake!) - are shown to be without foundation. By which time, the state would no doubt have come up with a third charge sheet....

And so it goes. That's 21st century Indian justice for you.

The differences between the American Guantanamo system and ours are that (a) in Binayak's case, they have not waterboarded or otherwise tortured him; and (b) the Americans had to devise legal fictions such as illegal alien combatants and create special presidential edicts that do not apply to American citizens to entrap foreign citizens into a carceral trap from which release would be extremely difficult, whereas we Indians have gone one better - we manage to put our own citizens who are dissidents and suspects or just plain innocent into a Kafkaesque judicial trap, within our own existing system of laws. The only prospect of release, if it is permitted at all, is through the never ending charade of a legal process.

My, aren't we clever!

Over to Dr. Ilina Sen...

Dear friends,

I feel greatly privileged and  suitably humbled to be with all of you today and to inaugurate the fourth edition of the Vibgyor International documentary film festival. We have all  worked and  waited for this day; personally for me this represents a recognition of the work  of Binayak Sen  and his comrades  in Chhattisgarh  to be able to build a better world for the tribals and toiling people of the region. I am grateful to the human rights activists in Kerala who have agreed  to step up the campaign for Binayak’s release.

Binayak Sen has today become an icon for the right of people to hold dissenting political and public opinion, to have the right to chose the kind of development model they want for themselves, and  for the rights of  all to basic legal safeguards in accordance with the constitution. He is in jail now for over 20 months because he was a vocal  opponent of the Salwa Judum, a state sponsored  vigilante militia  let loose on the people of South Bastar in the name of curbing Naxalites. The fact that he visited  a Maoist prisoner in jail has been used to fabricate a case alleging that he was involved in anti national and seditious activity. While we strive for the freedom of Binayak, it  is important to remember that  he is not the only one imprisoned in this way under the draconian Chhattisgarh Special  Public Security Act. Over one thousand persons are languishing in the various jails of Chhattisgarh, labelled as threats to Public Security, under this Act. It is symptomatic of the malaise of our system that the first arrest under the act was of a class 12 girl student, whose  male friend is supposed to have had unsuitable  political views. These large number of arrests and the general repression has driven much of the public dissent underground, and many people live in fear of speaking their minds. However, whatever is happening to the intelligentsia  is being felt and lived many times over by the tribal people of our state.

The Adivasi people of Chhattisgarh are the inheritors of great natural resources and a rich cultural life. However, with the creation of the new state and its push to ‘develop’  the mineral resources and open them up to world markets, a  saga of loot and plunder has begun. Lands are being acquired for ‘projects’ in total circumvention of constitutional safeguards like the mandatory consent of the gram sabhas under the fifth schedule  operative in these areas. Once again it is symptomatic of the malaise that  it was the  now ill  reputed firm of Price Waterhouse  Cooper which was invited to draw up the Vision Plan for the state of Chhattisgarh, and not the spokespersons of peoples’ organizations in the state. Our government showcases adivasi culture through its presentations of tribal music and dance at the Republic Day Parade; however, this will not by itself save the adivasis from extinction, which the salwa judum and the policies of the government seem determined to achieve.

I want to end with saying that the situation I am describing  is not only  limited to  Chhattisgarh. Many indigenous areas, in India and all over the world, are facing a similar situation. Documentary film makers have in the past played an important role in sharing the stories of these areas with the world. The challenge for them to continue to do so, and to remain the keepers of our conscience remains.I am sure the challenge will be accepted frontally  not only by the established documentary film makers, but also by the younger generation waiting to grow with the times.

DIALOGUE ACROSS THE DIVIDE

Scanning the news channels during my trip home in the short vacation that we get at the end of January, I found this discussion on NDTV, with a group of Pakistani journalists and human rights workers.

Amidst all the other depressing news about Ram Sena and functionaries within the Indian judiciary publicly abjuring their duty to uphold the constitution by denying human rights to those accused of terrorism, this discussion affirmed my faith in the ability of people (as opposed to governments) to struggle for peace.

Many politicians and their disciples in the media nowadays seem to have the least interest in promoting positive peace. Why should they promote peace, when defending their countries to the last drop of someone else's blood pays such rich dividends for them - at least temporarily? The politicians are able to grandstand, and the media enjoy good circulation as their columns reverberate with the patriotic thunder of polarized opinion. Even though one can detect the influence of right-wing nationalist ideas on public opinion, it's clear from this discussion that the Indian government has not acted, as the US government did after 9/11, out of fear and rage. Indeed, it is constantly attacked in the press and media for showing restraint in the face of the gravest provocation. Perhaps this restraint is a virtue born out of necessity, as it comes from a sober assessment of our capacity to sustain a military confrontation with Pakistan. Army commanders in India apparently were wary of the battle readiness of the armies they command. But the restraint has actually allowed for a more successful and calibrated reaction to the Pakistani involvement in 26/11 than would have been possible if we had gone in for a precipitate military reaction.

The representatives of the right raise some sensible points as well. Chandan Mitra asks which Pakistan should the Indian government be negotiating with - the civilian government, or the military, or the ISI? It's clear from his reaction that if he were in power, he would assume that the Pakistani government is run by the Lashkar-e-Toiba, and act accordingly. And indeed, it's been clear at least since the Kargil confrontation that the Pakistani state does not speak with one voice, or even act as one agency, on matters concerning India.

Some of the most sensible and conciliatory comments in the discussion come from Air Marshal Tipnis, the former chief of the IAF at the time of Kargil. The spirit that prevails in the discussion, and that captures what I most remember about this discussion, is summarized by Mahesh Bhatt's declaration at the end. I was also impressed by the courage of the Pakistanis in speaking so critically of their own state in what their government, and much of Pakistani public opinion, still considers to be enemy territory.

View it, and hope that there are no more terrorist attacks from across the border.