|
First Pakistan-India Peoples' Convention on
Peace and Democracy,
New Delhi, February 24-25,1995
Proceedings and Recommendations
Contents
Introduction
Recommendations adopted by the plenum
Report of the opening day's proceedings
Working Group on War, Demilitarization,
Peace Dividends
Working Group on the Kashmir dispute
Militarization of Pakistan-India Relationship
Working Group on Politics of Religious
Intolerance in India and Pakistan:
Imperative for a Joint Initiative
Working Group on Issues of Governance
Underlying Relations between Pakistan and India
What is to be done? Plenum recommendations
Public meeting
Appendix A - Need for Indo-Pak cooperation
and collaboration in science
and technology. - Prof. A. Rehman
Appendix B- Bridging difference for
art and cultural dialogue - Krishen Khanna
Appendix C - Defend peace and democracy
- Santosh Kumar
Appendix D - Press release
Appendix E - List of delegates: Pakistan
Appendix F - List of delegates: India
[...]
Appendix I - India Secretariat
Introduction
The Pakistan-India People's Convention on Peace and Democracy, in which more than
two hundred Pakistani and Indian delegates participated, has been hailed as a major
breakthrough. For two days, the delegates freely discussed the contentious issues
of Kashmir, demilitarization, and the politics of religious intolerance which have
locked the ruling elites of the two countries in conflict. The delegates demonstrated
that at the people's level the area of agreement on all these issues, is much larger
than the area of conflict.
Initially, the Pakistan, press was rather critical of the hundred citizens of Pakistan
who came to Delhi to attend the convention. However, subsequent press reports and
editorials which appeared in a significant section of the Pakistani press indicate
a definite change in their attitude towards the convention.
The Indian press largely ignored the efforts of the Forum before the Convention.
Most people were sceptical about it being held at all.
The Pakistan Chapter of the Organising Committee of the Forum initially received
135 nominations from its constituents all over Pakistan. They had to request some
of the nominees to voluntarily withdraw to keep within the limit of 100 delegates,
decided at the joint meeting of the Organising Committee in September 1994. The names
of Pakistani delegates were submitted to the Ministry of External Affairs in New
Delhi by the India Secretariat of the Forum with a request for grant of visas. The
Ministry accepted our request and all the Pakistani delegates were given non-reporting
visas for the convention.
The Indian delegates numbered 117. They came from Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat,
Karnataka, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur, Nagaland, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu,
Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal-from all over the country representating trade unions
and mass organisations.
The Convention itself received countrywide coverage from the Indian Press and the
electronic media. Within a fortnight after the Convention, the India Secretariat
received nearly 80 letters from fellow citizens all over India seeking more information
about the Convention and the Forum. They have asked for the report and recommendations.
Many want to joint the Forum and take up this work in their own areas.
This response from our fellow citizens and the media strengthens our resolve to bring
even larger numbers of peace loving people in Pakistan and India together in an open
forum to continue the dialogue for peace and democracy. We are convinced that through
such efforts we shall be able to pursuade the two mutually suspicious governments
to listen to the growing demand for peace and enter into meaningful negotiations
that will would eventually pave the way to lasting peace and friendship in the subcontinent.
The idea of holding a people's convention on peace and democracy as a dialogue between
representatives of people's movements, mass organisations and committed individuals
was conceived more than two and a half years ago at a meeting in Vienna between human
rights activists of the two countries. Actual work however, was initiated in March
1994. In the beginning there were about two dozen persons on both sides of the border
who were willing to spend their time on this "impractical idea".
Apprehensions were expressed that the time was not ripe and an effort like this would
not be able to withstand the pressure of the "mainstream". On both sides
of the border we were warned by friends that at this stage any talk of "peace"
would be seen as an act of capitulation to the "enemy" a section of by
a section of the media and political parties.
After informal discussions with academics, human rights activists and trade unionists
in Lahore and Islamabad in May 1994, the two groups met formally in Lahore in September
last year. By then we had grown in size, enough designation to give ourselves modest
of "Core Group".
At Lahore, the Core Group felt that at times it was necessary to challenge the misconceived
notions of "patriotism and national security" and that this was one such
occasion to call for "outlawing war and war hysteria in the subcontinent".
When the Indian Core Group took the message of the Lahore mini-summit to people in
Bombay, Bangalore, Calcutta, Hyderabad and Madras we found many ready to join us
in this effort. In Delhi, at a mass meeting in November 1994, more than a hundred
organisations and individuals signed the statement calling for outlawing war in the
subcontinent. Similarly in Pakistan organisations of doctors, academics, journalists,
lawyers, trade unions, artists, writers, theatre persons and social activists from
all the provinces came forward to endorse this peoples' peace initiative.
From a modest beginning in March 1994 to the February Convention in 1995 we have
taken a few significant steps together. With the support of citizens of Pakistan
and India, the Forum will march on towards its objective - peace in the subcontinent
and true democracy - where every individual without distinction of gender, religion,
class, caste and creed shall be able to live with dignity, without fear of exploitation,
hunger and violence.
The India Secretariat received contributions from many individuals, business houses
and other institutions both in cash and in kind. The Indian Express sponsored the
press advertisements and a dinner. The Confederation of Indian Industries (CII) provided
transport and an advertisement for the brochure, the Church of North India, Gandhi
Peace Foundation and the Aurobindo Ashram provided free accommodation to delegates;
Sriram Industrial Enterprises Ltd paid for one lunch while other NGOs and individuals
contributed towards the cost of accommodation and food. SANCHAL FOUNDATION Produced
a special film on nuclear devastation for the convention. The delegates from Pakistan
and India paid for their own travel.
The staff of The Other Media worked day and night for months. Naga People's Movement
for Human Rights, National Council of the YWCA and Vidya Jyoti sent volunteers who
worked tirelessly during the three days of the Convention to make it a success.
We thank them all for their contribution and cooperation.
- India Secretariat
Pakistan-India Peoples' Forum for Peace and Democracy
The recommendations adopted by
the plenum of Pakistan-India Peoples'
Convention on Peace and Democracy were as below:
A. On War, Demilitarization, Peace and Peace Dividends the Plenum endorsed
the following objectives: - There should be no resort to war to resolve bilateral
disputes.
- India and Pakistan should take steps for a mutual and balanced reduction of conventional
forces and move systematically towards maximum transparency in regard to force levels,
deployments, programmes, exercises, etc.
- Both countries should restrain nuclear preparations and move towards regional disarmament
independent of the control of other Nuclear Weapons States as well as participating
in and promoting all efforts regarding the crucial issue of global nuclear disarmament.
- India and Pakistan should conclude their own Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty without
waiting for a global treaty.
- The Nuclear Weapons States must accede to a treaty on "No First Use"
of nuclear weapons and to a commitment on "No Use Ever" against non-nuclear
weapons states.
- All states must commit themselves to cease production of additional fissile materials
for nuclear weapons and other explosive purposes.
To bring about these results the Plenum adopted the following recommendations:
1. Pakistan-India People's Forum for Peace and Democracy should encourage scientists
from both countries to come together to formulate perspectives which will make the
governments of India and Pakistan responsive to the above objectives.
2. The Forum should also encourage the establishment and sponsorship of groups of
artists, professionals, trade unionists, women, etc. to facilitate various citizen's
initiatives (such as a simultaneous peace march in the two countries) so as to promote
and create a climate of opinion for the pursuit of the stated objectives.
3. The Forum should request the human rights organisations of India and Pakistan
to declare that the pursuit of nuclear weapons and the threat of their use are in
violation of human rights, in particular the right to life without fear, as enshrined
in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
B. On Kashmir
the Plenum adopted the following recommendations:
1. The two governments should recognise that Kashmir is not merely a territorial
dispute between India and Pakistan but concerns the lives and aspirations of the
people of Jammu and Kashmir on both sides of the Line of Control (LOC).
2. What is required is a peaceful democratic solution which involves the people of
Jammu and Kashmir. Such a solution is essential for promoting peace in the subcontinent.
3. The governments of India and Pakistan must take positive steps to promote peace
and tranquility and establish democratic process in Jammu and Kashmir on both sides
of the LOC so that preconditions are created for moving towards a just people-based
solution.
4. The Forum appeals to all human rights organisations and people's movements in
India and Pakistan to mobilise public opinion to exercise pressure on their respective
governments
a) in India to stop violation of human rights in Jammu and Kashmir and
b) in Pakistan to take all possible measures to stop the supply of arms by all forces
which lead to violations of human rights of the civilian population of Jammu and
Kashmir.
C. On Religious Intolerance in India and Pakistan the Plenum called for ending
hostilities between India and Pakistan. This will enable both countries to build
a more tolerant and just society.
The Plenum adopted the following recommendations:
1. Citizens' organisations should put constant pressure on both governments to
reduce harassment of ordinary people and grant visas with greater ease and reduce
the costs of telecommunication and postal exchange between the two countries.
2. The legislative, judicial and executive organs of the state in both countries
should be free from religious influence and diktats.
3. The Forum should disseminate, in whatever fashion possible, the alternate voices
from Pakistan and India to combat the misinformation and propaganda perpetrated by
governments and sections of the media.
4. Easy access to information on secular, democratic struggles and initiatives across
the border should be promoted.
5 Removal of myths and prejudices perpetuated in our respective education systems,
especially in the social sciences, is a vital step in this direction.
6. Education in religious institutions must include a secular curriculum. This is
vital to inculcate a spirit of openness and enquiry.
7. Information on the strategies adopted by communal and fundamentalist ideologies
- specifically how they feed on the stereotypical and demonising images of the "other"
- also need to be shared on a regular basis.
8. Pakistan-India People's Forum for Peace and Democracy should facilitate a free
exchange of journals and information on various subjects.
9. This could be a first step towards jointly prepared resource books, pamphlets
and other literature compiled on the basis of shared information.
10. Reforms in the discriminatory personal laws being the common need for women in
both Pakistan and India, joint strategies should be worked out towards this objective
on the basis of pooled experiences.
11. Setting up of an alternate people-to-people television channel that produces
joint documentaries, plays and telefilms to counter the hostility generated between
the two countries.
12. Thousands of letters must be exchanged between India and Pakistan every week
to pressurise governments to open up channels of communication and telecommunication.
D. On issues of Governance Underlying Pakistan-India Relations the following recommendations
were adopted by the Plenum:
1. Demilitarization of domestic governance in both countries must begin with reducing
the oppressive role of the police and the military in dealing with democratic movements,
repealing anti-democratic laws and restoring law and order to protect the common
citizens.
2. Democratization of domestic governance by strengthening the institutions of a
federal nature, moving towards greater decentralization of power, increasing the
accountability of politicians to the people, empowering civil society vis-a-vis the
State, through which people become the principal actors in decision-making.
3. Both governments must pay serious attention to breaking up the politician-criminal
nexus and reactivate the institutions to deliver justice to the citizens.
4. Both Governments must undertake not to foment the forces of hatred and animosity
that are currently at work in the two countries which aggravate tensions between
the two.
5. Both Governements must urgently work to withdraw visa restrictions so that citizens
of the two countries can invite each other and also travel without restrictions.
The goal must be to achieve freedom of movement of people, information and service
between the two countries by a fixed deadline.
6. Existing direct and indirect trade relations must be formally recognised and enhanced.
7. State-controlled media should be given more autonomy and made accountable to the
people.
8. That a vigilance group of citizens, able to move freely across the borders, should
be set up in order to monitor violations by the border forces of both countries.
An important case in point is that of the fisherfolk of both countries who are periodically
detained by the coastguards of Pakistan and India for the so-called violation of
the "economic zone", which is yet to be marked by the two Governments.
9. The right to livelihood and basic needs and social security be central to governance.
Proceedings and recommendations
of the two day Pakistan - India Peoples' Convention on Peace and Democracy.
Arrival of delegates:
More than 200 delegates-92 from Pakistan and 117 from India arrived in Delhi to attend
the first ever Pakistan -India Peoples' Convention on Peace and Democracy between
February 22 and 24 1995. A majority of delegates represented various national and
regional organisations of workers, artistes, scientists, professionals, academics,
industrialists and traders as well as other mass organisations working in the area
of human rights, gender rights, minority rights, ecology, disarmament and denuclearisation.
A small percentage of the delegates comprised eminent individuals known for their
commitment to peace and democracy in Pakistan and India. The delegates were registered
and accommodated at various hostels in Delhi.
Cultural programme
On the evening of February 23 Shyam Benegal's latest film, "Mammo", was
premiered at the Mavlankar Hall for delegates and other invited guests from Delhi.
The programme began with a welcome address by Nirmal Mukarji on behalf of the Organising
Committee of the Convention. Welcoming the delegates. Mr. Mukarji said that this
was the largest gathering of its kind till now. The delegates from both sides were
wholly non-governmental - what had brought them together was a shared concern for
peace and democracy. Consequently the agenda of the convention was squarely political.
Mr. Mukarji pointed out that the initiative for holding the convention was taken
by a small group of twenty-four concerned citizens of the two countries who met in
Lahore in early September, 1994. They agreed on four basic formulations on contentious
political issues. The aim of the present convention was to reaffirm what was agreed
upon then and hopefully to advance beyond that by extending the area of agreement.
The number and representative character of the delegates showed that the people on
both sides wanted peace. Public opinion had now to play its part to press the two
governments to heed the voice of the people. The constituency for peace and democracy
in both countries had to be widened and made articulate through sustained effort.
The present convention was an important first step in the "peace process".
The film "Mammo" was introduced by Shama Zaidi, the scriptwriter of the
film. The film is about the story of Mehmood Begum, lovingly nicknamed Mammo by her
sisters. After the partition of the subcontinent in 1947 she and her husband became
citizens of Pakistan and settled down in Lahore. However, after her husband's death,
Mammo became homeless. She came to Bombay to live with her sister, her only surviving
relative. As a Pakistani citizen she could stay only for a limited time. After several
extensions of her visa, she was told that she had to go back. She bribed a local
"tout" in Bombay to get her name removed from the records of Foreigners
Registration Office to escape deportation. Unfortunately the unauthorised removal
of her name was discovered by the authorities. The tout was arrested and she was
deported to Lahore.
Mammo came back to her sister in Bombay after some time. This time she was determined
to stay on with her sister. She and her nephew hatched a plot. Mammo's "death"
was staged and her "death certificate" was deposited with the authorities
in Bombay who removed her name from their record. The "dead" Mammo could
now live on with her sister's family in Bombay. Through this poignant tale filmmaker
Shyam Benegal exposed the inhumanity inherent in the visa policy of the two countries
which stood in the way of the reunion of families.
Day 1 : Opening Session
Chair : Nirmal Mukarji
Facilitator : Tapan K. Bose
Speakers : Zohra Segal, A. Rehman, Krishen Khanna, Santosh Kumar
Response : I. A. Rehman
The Convention was formally inaugurated on February 24, at 10:00 a.m. in the Speaker's
Hall of the Constitution Club of India in New Delhi. Nirmal Mukarji in his opening
remarks said that 80 per cent of the objective of the Convention was already achieved
by the fact that the it was being held at all. He expressed the hope that the Delhi
Convention would go beyond the foundation laid at the mini Pakistan-India meet in
Lahore in September 1994.
Zohra Segal, India's well-known stage and cine personality, spoke with deep feeling
about what peace between India and Pakistan would mean for the common people of the
subcontinent. Describing herself as the epitome of Hindu-Muslim and Pakistan-India
partnership, she appealed to the delegates to endorse an agenda for peace. Reciting
from verses of Allama Iqbal and Ali Sarder Jafri she pointed out that there were
no real enemies but old friends separated by the cruelty of circumstances.
Prof. A. Rehman, an eminent Indian scientist, pointed to the absurdity of the policies
of the ruling governments of India and Pakistan which forced scientists of Pakistan
and India to look to the advanced industralised countries of the West for help rather
than their own scientific expertise and technological resources for the mutual benefit
of the two countries. He added that as a result of the prevailing political situation
resources which were urgently required to remove illiteracy and poverty, to develop
education, to provide employment and to protect the environment, were being diverted
to defence research and military build-up.
Speaking on behalf of the painter's community, Krishen Khanna said, "... I,
as an artist feel that, given one life time, I should be free to roam and tread the
earth, unimpeded by fortuitous political lines. To be sure there are differences
which would make the interactions so much more interesting and real." He concluded
by pointing out that, " Those who are involved in values which abide are not
armed men. We have seen what armed men achieve and it is time, high time, for the
voices of civilisation and sanity to be heard."
Speaking on behalf of the working class movement of India, Santosh Kumar, the delegate
of the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) said, "We are happy to note that
the Pakistan delegation includes a number of trade unionists. We accord them a special
welcome. Quite recently, Indian and Pakistani trade unionists spent some days together
at the Damascus World Conference of World Federation of Trade Unions. They displayed
maturity and understanding. We highly appreciate their role. We would like to hear
from the Pakistani delegates on the issues of peace and democracy." Recalling
the glorious past of the All India Trade Union Congress and its links with the city
of Lahore which was the trade union centre of the subcontinent in the thirties, Mr.
Kumar informed the audience that AITUC's Founder President, Lala Lajpat Rai and two
other Presidents, Mohammad Daud and Fazal Elahi Qushan belonged to Lahore.
Second session: Issues before the convention
Co-chair : Justice Dorab Patel (Pakistan) Kamla Prasad (India)
Facilitator : Tapan K. Bose
Speakers : I.A. Rehman, M. B. Naqvi, Dinesh Mohan, Sumanta Bannerjee
The second session began with Tapan K. Bose reading out messages of solidarity received
from, recently held third South Asian NGO Summit in Kathmandu, (Nepal), South Asia
Research and Resource Centre (CERAS) Montreal, (Canada) and Women Living Under Muslim
Laws, Montpellier, (France).
Justice Dorab Patel cautioned the delegates that in the absence of tall leaders like
Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah, fundamentalists and fanatics were holding sway and there
was utmost need to see that we did not drift into conflict.
Making his presentation on the Kashmir dispute, I. A. Rehman, Director, Human Rights
Commission of Pakistan, emphasised the centrality of the Kashmir dispute in militarizing
the polities of both countries and inciting the politics of religious intolerance.
Kashmir involved grave human rights violations by the army and paramilitary forces
on the Indian side. There were also very serious complaints of Pakistani interference
in the valley. The fear of "outside" parties finding fertile ground in
Kashmir only increased the urgency to find a solution. "Any settlement that
perpetuates hostility or leaves a party so greatly aggrieved that it will nurse its
grievance in future, will not be a healthy settlement," he said.
On the issue of militarization, Prof Dinesh Mohan, a senior faculty member of IIT
Delhi, insisted that the people must demand that war be outlawed. He pointed out
that between India and Pakistan we have failed to rule out war. Repeatedly creating
a war psychosis was very dangerous and could develop a dynamic of its own and result
in a war by misperception and miscalculation. Peace in the subcontinent could only
be achieved by giving up the nuclear option, he said. Militarization means not only
mounting defence expenditure and armaments, it has a fallout on the militarization
of the domestic polity through legitimisation of the use of force to respond to political
problems, and the erosion of democratic values and fundamental rights.
Senior Pakistani journalist and an active supporter of the peace movement in the
subcontinent, M.B. Naqvi emphasised that in both countries fundamentalist forces
were seeking to set the agenda for society and the State. He explained that in both
India and Pakistan as these forces gained in strength, it was the weaker sections
of society, the minorities, women and the underprivileged, who suffered the most.
"The empowerment of the Hindu in India saw a dilution of democracy and secularism.
In Pakistan we've suffered a great deal as a result of the upsurge of fundamentalist
forces in attacks on minorities like the Ahmediyas, Christians and Hindus and in
the escalation of sectarian violence. It is the nature of fundamentalist groups to
strive to assert their hegemony," he warned.
On the issue of governance, senior journalist and human rights activist of India,
Sumanta Banerjee, pointed to the commonalities in the problems that the people of
India and Pakistan were facing in relation to their governments. In Pakistan and
India, there was a growing centralisation of political administration as reflected
in the official backing for policies of intolerence and repression of political dissent.
This, he said, had led to an increasing tendency to empower the coercive machinery
of the State with extraordinary laws that violate the fundamental rights of citizens
- in India there was TADA and in Pakistan the blasphemy law and Hudood Ordinance.
Problems were mirror images of each other.
These presentations were followed by discussions and interventions from the house.
Kamla Prasad pointed out that as the delegates were to deliberate on all four issues
in greater detail there was no need for speakers to clarify any specific point at
this stage. He said the objective of the presentations was to establish a minimum
common understanding on all these contentious issues so that during the Working Group
Sessions, the delegates would be able to enlarge upon this consensus and come up
with joint recommendations and suggestions for common action by citizens.
Third Session Working Groups:
During the post-lunch session on February 24, the Convention broke up into four working
groups to discuss the four main issues in depth. This session was for registered
delegates only.
1. War, Demilitarization, Peace
and Peace Dividends
Venue : Indian Women's Press Corps
Co-chairs : I.A. Rehman (Pakistan), Atul Setalvad (India)
Co-rapporteurs : M.H. Askry (Pakistan), Achin Vanaik (India)
Participants:
A. Rehman, Abdul Baseer Naweed, Abdul Rehman Siddiqi, Abid Hasan Minto, Ghulam Nabi
Mughal, Hilal Uddin Javwid, Irfan Engineer, Irfan Mufti, Krishen Khanna, Latif Ahmed
Khan, N.D. Jayaprakashan, Prof. Latif Ahmed Khan, Sultan Shahin, Ranabir Samaddar,
Rao Amjad Ali, Tahir Hasan Khan, Tasneem Minto, Shimreichon Luithui, Wasim Ejaz,
Zafar A. Chaudhari, Zareen Hasan, Seema Kazi
Report of the Working Group
The discussion in this working group revealed a strong consensus opposing the pursuit
of security for one country at the expense of the other. A distinction was made between
defence and militarization, in that greater militarization does not mean greater
defence or security but promotes greater insecurity, as well as militarising the
internal society and polity of the two countries. There was a consensus that war
must not be resorted to in order to resolve bilateral disputes. There was also broad
consensus regarding the nuclear dispute with some difference regarding the degree
of emphasis to be placed on by the two countries on global disarmament initiatives
even as the principle of such initiatives was heartily endorsed. It was commonly
agreed that by promoting further trade and business contacts the two countries could
more appropriately respond to each other's economic needs, and in the process create
a powerful lobby with a real commercial interest in normalising, expanding and demilitarising
relations between the two countries. It was also felt that India as the larger, more
confident country could more easily take the initiative to improve bilateral relations.
The Group felt that the following objectives were of importance to the very existence
of the people of India and Pakistan, and that these were of far greater importance
than any considerations of official policies of either government, particularly in
the light of the enormous diversion of resources badly needed for vital social purposes,
and the extreme dangers of nuclear research as well as the calamitous consequences
of nuclear war:
1. There should be no resort to war to resolve bilateral disputes.
2. India and Pakistan should take steps for a mutual and balanced reduction of conventional
forces and move systematically towards maximum transparency in regard to force levels,
deployments, programmes, exercises, etc.
3. Both countries should move towards nuclear disarmament in the region.
4. The Nuclear Weapons States must accede to a treaty on "No First Use"
of nuclear weapons and to a commitment on "No Use Ever" against non-nuclear
weapons states.
2. The Kashmir dispute - Militarization
of Pakistan - India relationship
Venue : Speaker's Hall, Constitution Club
Co-chair : Justice Dorab Patel (Pakistan) Sumanta Bannerjee (India)
Co-rapporteurs : Tahir Mohammed Khan (Pakistan) Gautam Navlakha (India)
Participants:
Ali Nawaz Dahri, Aamir Zia, Arshad Khan, Asad Iqbal Butt, Aslam Rahi Khan, B.D. Joshi,
B.M. Kutty, Balraj Kumar, E. Deenadayalan, Gul Rehman, Gulzar Ahmad Chaudhari, Iftikharul
Haq, J. Shrivastava, James, Kamal Mitra chenoy, Kamala Prasad, M. Obaidullah Bhutto,
M. Abbas, Madhu Kishwar, Perin Chandra, Navmta Chanda, Mani Mala, Mazhar Abbas, Mubashir
Hasan, Mohammed Tahir, Muhammed Irshad, Muhammed Yaqub, Nayab A.U. Khan
Nirmal Mukharji, Nuzat Abbas, Praful Bidwai, Perin Chandra, Rita Manchanda, Saba
Parvez, Santosh Kumar, Satyendra Ranjan, Seema Mustafa, Tapan K. Bose, Zafar Aslam
Report of the Working Group
A lively and frank discussion ensued after the initial outlining of the developments
leading to the current situation in Jammu and Kashmir. After several interventions
by the delegates which took up general and specific points, the discussion took on
a recommendatory character. The issues covered the multi- lingual and multi-religious
reality of Jammu and Kashmir as well as its bearing on the larger questions related
to the situation in India and Pakistan. But all interventions, irrespective of their
differences, focused on the need for ascertaining the will of the people of Jammu
and Kashmir; for ending violence, cessation of hostilities, and creating conditions
whereby a search for a democratic solution to the Jammu and Kashmir issue could begin.
While there was difference of opinion on the manner of ascertaining the will of the
people of Jammu and Kashmir, living on both sides of the LOC, it was felt by many
that the political process had become identified with arbitrary and unilateral measures
by the respective governments, and that it did not inspire confidence. However, there
was unanimity that a solution was only possible by involving and consulting the people
of Jammu and Kashmir on both sides of the LOC on the basis of the fundamental principles
of democracy which should include the following:
1. Violation of human rights by Indian security forces and militant groups must
come to an end. Extra judicial killings must stop immediately. India should release
all Kashmiri prisoners held for political reasons and the various groups of militants
operating in the valley should agree to stop their military actions.
2. India must agree to withdraw its armed forces from anti-insurgency duty and roll
back repressive laws.
3. Pakistan must simultaneously agree and try its best to put an end to transmission
of arms, ammunitions and other material support to militants in the valley by various
forces through its territory.
4. Opportunities must be created for frequent meetings of leaders of public opinion
living on both sides of the LOC.
5. Opportunities must also be created for dialogue between various ethnic and religious
communities of the people of Jammu and Kashmir living on both sides of the LOC.
6. Those forced to leave their homes during the hostilities must be allowed to return
and live in peace.
3. Politics of Religious Intolerance
in India and Pakistan: Imperative for a Joint Initiative
Venue : Indian Women's Press Corps
Co-chair : Haroon Ahmed (Pakistan)
: Keshav Rao Jadhav (India)
Co-rapporteurs : Zahida Hina (Pakistan) Teesta Setalvad (India)
Participants
A.S. Verma, Aimal Khan, Amrita Chhachhi, Anees Haroon, Ali Hasan, Alinawaz Dahri,
Atiya Khan, Dr. Mubarak Ali, Durai, Feruzan Mehta, Firdaus Hyder, Ghaznafar Abbas,
Hamid Akhter, Harsh Kapoor, Mohammed Hanif Baloch, J. Banaji, J.K. Bannerjee, K.M.
Kutti, Khokan Das, Khwaja Zaki Hasan, M.B. Naqvi, M.M. Thomas, Mary Khemchand, Meghanath,
Mohammed Waseem, Naushaba Zuberi, Nirmalendu Das, Peter Jacob, Prani Desai, R.M.
Pal, Rao Abid Hamid, Ratneshwar Sarkar, Saleem Asmi, Sheen Farrukh, Sobhana Barve,
Sophia Khan, Syed Ahmed, Zaman Khan, Zohra Naz
Report of the Working Group
The Group recognised that on the world stage, religious chauvinism has erupted in
the form of bitter ethnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia, or in the re-emergence
of the authoritarian Christian right in the United States of America. At the heart
of these bitter, intolerant battles lies an acute struggle for the assertion and
dominance of religious and ethnic identities. Advanced capitalism accompanied by
cut - throat competition has in some of these situations, provided the justification
for a harking back to positions that seem medieval. But why is the subject of religious
intolerance of such vital importance to any joint dialogue between the peoples of
Pakistan and India today? The peculiar religious division of the two countries has
had its implications for the religious minorities within India and Pakistan. Whenever
there are hostile exchanges the flames of false patriotism, xenophobia and chauvinism
are sought to be fanned. Unfortunately, but inevitably, the local sufferers are the
minorities, Muslims in India or Hindus in Pakistan, who are held to ransom for the
acts of their chauvinistic co-religionists across the border. In recent times, there
can be no more graphic description of this state of affairs than the events on the
subcontinent after the pre-planned demolition of the Babri Masjid by frenzied kar
sevaks in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992. Temples were destroyed in Pakistan and Bangladesh
in a crude bid to settle scores. There is also a close connection between the rise
in religious intolerance and the denial of democratic rights to other oppressed groups,
i.e. class exploitation, gender, ethnic and caste oppression. Women in societies
where religious intolerance is on the increase are also subjected to heightened degrees
of violence and denial of rights in family property, during marriage or after divorce
or in inheritance. This phenomenon is particularly evident in the uphill struggle
over the inherent injustices against women prevalent in various family or personal
laws, where talk of reform or reinterpretation takes a back seat when faced with
the wider assault on religious and cultural identities.
India
When over two lakh kar sevaks, mobilised by various wings of the militant Hindu right
and ideologically fuelled by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) demolished the
Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992 in full public view, in blatant violation of the
country's Constitution, while both the Central and U.P. governments watched silently,
it was clear that independent India's secular constitution had suffered a serious
setback. Three years later, although the political wing of the Hindu Right, the Bharatiya
Janata Party (BJP), has suffered electoral set-backs in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh,
Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, there is still enough for worry secular and democratic
forces to worry about.
While the people might have rejected the Hindu right wing parties at the polls, unfortunately
the government, legislature, judiciary and the law and order machinery have been
shown to have been suspect secular credentials. This was evident from the virtual
amnesty granted to the mass murderers of Sikhs in 1984 and the Supreme Court's refusal
to put former BJP Chief Minister of UP, Kalyan Singh and Shiv Sena chief, Bal Thackeray,
on trial. The decade-old TADA (Terrorist and Disruptive Activities {Prevention} Act)
has come to be used as a weapon to perpetrate human rights abuses, targetting religious
minorities, trade unionists and social activists. The demolition of the Babri Masjid
did not stop at "the avenging of past wrongs".
It was immediately followed by systematic nationwide violence and brutalisation of
Muslims living in Ayodhya, Kanpur, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Ahmedabad, that culminated
in unspeakable outrages in Surat and Bombay. But even before December 6, increasing
bouts of "communal violence" targetting minority life and property had
occurred.
Vocal sections of society unfortunately remained silent. Even trade unions, educational
institutions, business associations, women's organisations and other mass organisations
by and large were found lacking and unequal to the task of combatting deeper questions
of religious and ethnic identities.
For example, the debate on much-desired reforms in personal laws to make them more
gender-just has been marginalised into a pro and anti-uniform civil code debate.
The issue of reform for Indian Muslim women is being used relentlessly by the Hindu
Right as yet another stick to beat the minority with. Simultaneously, a section of
the Hindu Right is reinforcing traditional and modern forms of gender oppression
against Hindu women. Ironically, the assertion and struggle of lower caste Hindus,
deprived for centuries of any place in the political and social mainstream, was transformed
into anti-Muslim riots by the active proponents of Hindutva as evident in the upper
caste agitation in Gujarat in the late Eighties which quickly and violently got transformed
into an anti-Muslim riot.
Other forms of discrimination in different sectors against disadvantaged sections,
and discrimination against Dalits too, in government jobs continues. All this shows
both the erosion of secular and democratic space in India over the past decade and
a half, and the inability of Indian democracy to grant equity to all its citizens.
Pakistan
Despite the indisputable fact that in all elections held in Pakistan since its birth,
political parties representing the voice of religious extremism have never managed
to win more than three per cent of the vote, the writ of the fanatical mullah still
fires individuals and some sections to frenzy and brutality. Although born as a nation
for Muslims, Pakistan's Consitution grants equal rights to all, irrespective of religion
or gender. But unfortunately it has failed to give equal protection to all. All governments
in Pakistan, especially since 1956 when the first indigenous Constitution was adopted,
have been constitutionally bound to bring existing laws into conformity with the
injunctions of Islam and not to enact any law which is repugnant to these injunctions.
Until the military coup by Zia ul Haq in 1977, the scheme of the Council of Islamic
Ideology (as written into the Constitution of 1973) envisaged the Islamisation of
laws as the result of deliberations not only by religious scholars but also between
them and some secular authorities (at least one member had to be a woman). General
Zia made significant changes in the provision governing the composition of the Council
of Islamic Ideology. He introduced the powerful agency of the Shariat Courts, and
finally the Federal Shariat Court. Associating clergy with high judicial authority
has had disturbing implications. The Shariat Court has often directed governments
to amend sections of criminal and civil law if these were found to be "in conflict
of Islamic injunctions". For criminal justice, it meant that murder has become
a compoundable offence, where the offender goes scot free by paying a certain amount
and "earning forgiveness" from the victim's family. However, in the case
of offences related to blasphemy, if convicted, the accused has to be hanged since
no party exists to grant forgiveness. The inability or lack of desire of all existing
political parties to openly challenge and sideline the voices of intolerance contributed
significantly to the legitimisation of these rigid and discriminatory diktats.
The blatantly discriminatory blasphemy laws - a legacy of the process of Islamisation
of laws set into motion by Prime Minister, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and consolidated under
the military dictatorship of Zia - provided a regular tool to target the minorities.
Similarly, unwilling to displease religious parties and desirous of earning their
support, it was the Nawaz Sharif government, with a comfortable majority in Parliament,
that was responsible for enacting sections of the law related to blasphemy (until
then an ordinance), into law, ignoring the advice of the provision and Justice Committee.
The Benazir Bhutto government has been unable to adhere to its electoral promises,
and repeal either this law or the Hudood Ordinance. The Hudood Ordinance and the
Law of Evidence enacted under Zia are symptomatic of oppressive laws against women,
justified in the name of religion. One of the most damaging effects of this Law of
Evidence is that it is virtually impossible for a woman to prove a charge of rape.
At least 387 of the 789 women in prison in Punjab province alone have been charged
with adultery. The victim of rape thus stands guilty of adultery by default. Rape,
kidnapping, killing (stove-burst killings over dowry) and public humiliation of women
(stripping, disfiguring a woman's face with acid because she "dared" protest
against eve-teasing) are common forms of violence. Among the various religious and
ethnic minorities, the Ahmediyas are the worst victims of the country's anti-blasphemy
laws. They are strictly barred, even today, from public performance of their religious
rituals.
Human rights violations against Christians, using the discriminatory blasphemy laws,
have been common. Members of the public being spurred on to kill individuals after
allegations of charges of blasphemy are hurled through the inflammatory rantings
of some Mullah. Against Hindus too, discrimination has meant instances like the confiscation
of their only cremation ground in Rawalpindi. The violence is not only directed against
religious minorities but also perpetrated against different sects within the same
religion like the Shias. Violence between different Muslim sects as well as different
ethnic groups such as Mohazirs, Sindhis, Baluchis and Pathans usually exceeds the
violence against religious minorities. Threat to Democratic Freedoms
It is important to distinguish religious intolerance at the level of political use
of religion by political parties (and fear the nexus between opportunist politicians,
arms dealers and drug mafia and the fanning of ethnic violence is significant) on
one hand and the existance of religious intolerance at the level of civil society.
Although in general common people in Pakistan and India are not communal, the escalation
of riots, pogroms and discrimination against minorities in both countries can lead
to positions which become exclusivist and intolerant. This attitude is then justified
in religious terms even though all religions are based on humanist principles.
The struggle against religious intolerance therefore requires citizens to counter
the long term communal agenda of certain political parties as well as mobilise against
the culture of violence which has permeated every - day life in both countries. In
the multi-cultural, pluralistic societies that the modern nation states consist of,
any growth or rise in religious intolerance -an expression of majoritarianism - is
primarily a threat to the dignity, life and property of minorities and disadvantaged
sections. At a basic level, what is under threat is the guarantee of protection of
life and livelihood to all citizens, by the state. The unchecked growth of religious
intolerance in both countries is also accompanied by a curb on the freedom of expression.
Implicit in this proposition is a stifling of any right to dissent from the officially
held majoritarian view. Ironically, just as the rise in intolerance and violence
is accompanied by a denial of free expression and equality, the phenomenon is almost
always accompanied by attempts to control women, physically and through their sexuality.
Rationale of joint initiative
Religious intolerance anywhere in the world poses a threat to basic democratic freedoms.
In the case of Pakistan and India, the subject assumes greater urgency, due to the
division of the subcontinent on religious lines. The fate of minorities in both countries
(as recent events have shown) is unfortunately dictated by the behaviour of the fanatical
fringe of their co-religionists across the border. Joining hands to share information
on the efforts of individuals and groups fighting for the rights of minorities in
Pakistan or India and exploding fundamentalist myths would go a long way in boosting
the democratic struggle. Joint strategies to pressurise the state in Pakistan and
India to protect minority rights as well as joint initiatives to exclude fundamentalist
myths, heal wounds internally and externally in each country and transform people's
consciousness are essential to diffuse the tension in both countries.
4. Issues of Governance Underlying
Relations Between Pakistan and India
Venue : Indian Women's Press Corps
Co-Chair : Afrasiab Khattak (Pakistan), M.M. Thomas (India)
Co-rapporteurs : Karamat Ali (Pakistan), Anuradha Chenoy (India)
Participants:
A.G. Lodhari, Asam Munish, Bharat L. Chamdia, Chittaranjan Sarkar, Damu Bandra, Dunu
Roy, Harikrishna Debanath, Harish Gazdar, M.A. Malik, Maja Daruwala, Nirmal Das Roy,
P.V. Khokari, Pratap V. Khade, Ramesh Dhuri, Sarafat Ali, Saradindu Ray, Smitu Kothari,
Sujit Das, Suman Sahai, Tahir Mohammed Khan, Vikheho Swu, Zeba Beena Sarwar
Report of the Working Group
Although Pakistan and India have adopted divergent courses of development and institution
building, a number of common factors in the governance of both countries are impinging
on our people, which in turn are accentuating division and animosity between the
two countries. These factors have much to do with the manner in which both governments
operate while dealing with their people in their respective countries, as well as
the activities of certain Opposition parties and sectarian groups which influence
governance in both. Pakistan and India have inherited a system of governance which
was devised by the British to keep a conquered people under subjugation for its economic
exploitation. The structural stranglehold which it provided for the civil and military
bureaucracy to trample on the human rights and basic needs (like food, housing and
medical care) of the common people, continues to dominate governance in both Pakistan
and India. As a result, despite the different political systems adopted by India
and Pakistan, governance in both countries is marked by certain common features.
Since, for the most part governance, whether by Islamabad or New Delhi, seems to
be moving in directions that are common, it is necessary for representatives of movements
which are fighting the problems created by such governance in both countries to explore
possibilities of a common strategy to find solutions. The immediate domestic political
and foreign policy constraints which prevent the governments of India and Pakistan
from taking steps to outlaw war and usher in an era of peace, tranquility and civilised
neighbourly relations and to make progress towards regional arms control and security
building, are: a) the belief of the political governments that they cannot afford
the risk of taking any step that can by their domestic political opposition be made
to look like a concession to the "enemy" country; b) the belief of the
political governments, inculcated by politically motivated and doctored intelligence
reports that the situation in the "enemy" camp is deteriorating; c) the
belief that the corner is about to be turned, and soon the problems of the home government
will start diminishing, indeed, the situation is "already" getting better;
d) the belief that the country can and must bear the political, economic and social
costs of policy of confrontation.
Fortunately, the premises of these beliefs are either untrue or only partially true.
They rest on a nebulous sense of insecurity and paranoia for which it is not easy
to find a rationale. The problem of convincing the political leaderships is not merely
of presenting a sound logical case based the on facts of the situation. Intelligence
reports with a bias, partially on account of vested interests and media blitz with
emotional content often succeed in generating insecurity, even hysteria. Nonetheless
a recognition of the premises which make politicians act the way they do, helps to
define the task before academics, business organizations, human rights bodies and
other concerned citizens; namely, to work for disabusing the minds of the governments,
the intelligence agencies, the media and some sections of society for incorrectly
held premises. To take first the issue of direct governance. In both Pakistan and
India there is a growing centralization of the political administration (as reflected
in their official policies of intolerance and repression of political dissent, and
assertion of regional, ethnic, linguistic and other minority community rights in
their respective countries).
This has led to an increasing tendency to empower the coercive machinery of the State
in both countries with extraordinary laws that violate the fundamental rights of
citizens and contravene the various provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (like the notorious TADA and NSA in India, and the Hudood and Anti-Blasphemy
laws in Pakistan). The recourse to these draconian laws and repressive actions in
the governance of their respective countries is justified by both New Delhi and Islamabad
by attributing the outbreak of popular discontent - whether for economic causes or
ethnic or regional grievances - to 'external' factors (conveniently branded by India
as ISI, and by Pakistan as RAW). These developments have led to a growing erosion
of the democratic process of governance.
State institutionalization of suppression of dissenting opinions has grave implications
for the sovereignty of the two countries. They can pave the way for the transnational
corporations - who are already being invited for investments and collaborations under
the new liberalization policies - to make use of these laws to deny their employees
in india and Pakistan their basic rights (like that of unionization).
The Opposition parties in both countries - which were expected to provide alternative
norms of governance and sustain the democratic process - appear not to have come
up to popular expectations. They invite, in common with the ruling parties in both
India and Pakistan, the same allegations about corruption, nepotism, and gangsterism.
This brings us to the other issue relating to governance-the activities of powerful
forces operating in both countries outside the administrative framework, but influencing
decisively the administrative policies and practices of the two governments. In India
and Pakistan over the last four decades, politicians of a certain type have emerged
who derive their support either from influential industrial and business houses,
or from the equally powerful underworld mafia, and in Pakistan from big feudal and
tribal lords.
This criminalization of politics has begun to corrupt all the institutions - the
police, the civil administration, tax collectors as well as the judiciary - thus
posing a grave threat to the safety of citizens. The increasing hold of the armed
mercenaries of politicians over decision-making has paralyzed the institutions of
governance, as evident from the unabated violence in urban metropolises of both countries,
where there is a virtual collapse of law and order (whether in Karachi or Bombay).
The politician-criminal nexus also boosts the religious fundamentalist groups which
are mounting an offensive against democratic and secular forces in both countries.
Strong arm methods are increasingly replacing political debates. This decline in
humane governance in both countries has been aggravated by
- and in turn has aggravated - the India-Pakistan divide. While militarization of
domestic polity has to a great extent been brought about by the increasing hostilities
between the two countries, the growing fragility of the democratic process and the
hold of elitist, anti-working class forces on the governments also contribute to
the hostilities. Similarly, religious intolerance is more often than not a result
of purely internal factors, caused often by the challenge thrown up by the rise of
the lower strata, whose stake in adopting secular and egalitarian measures and approaches
leads to a reaction from the upper classes which takes on a religios colour and form.
But here again, the latter is often legitimized by reference to external threats.
The opposition parties in both countries have quite often fuelled the bellicosity
that sustains the India-Pakistan divide. Even if - and when - the ruling governments
in Islamabad and New Delhi take the slightest step to improve relations, domestic
opposition parties brand it as a concession to the 'enemy' country. All of this leads
to the clear conclusion that improvement and normalisation of relations between India
and Pakistan depend in large measure on the improvement of domestic governance in
the two countries. The Group notes with satisfaction in this context the debates
taking place in both countries on the need for change and on the question of decentralization
and devolution of social and political power.
The Group felt that the Pakistan-India People's Forum for Peace and Democracy should
examine and analyse the question of the nature of the State and the socio-economic
structures. The relationship of the State and society with international capital
and institutions thereof such as the IMF, World Bank, etc., be properly understood.
The real task is to mobilize public opinion and ordinary people to effect real democratization
of the State on one hand as well as that of the international institutions. The role
that regional co-operation can play in promoting peace and democracy between the
two countries has to be fully appreciated, and in this context strengthening the
process of regional co-operation under SAARC should be seriously addressed and promoted.
Evening Session Cultural Dialogue
Venue : Sapru House Auditorium
Opening : Mubashir Hasan (Pakistan)
Facilitator : Kamla Bhasin (India)
Presentation : Usha Ganguli (India)
Sheema Kermani (Pakistan)
Vidya Rao (India)
The evening session began at 6.30 p.m. at the Sapru House Auditorium.
It was a Pakistan-India cultural dialogue. Dr. Mubashir Hasan in his opening remarks
emphasised the importance of art and cultural dialogue. Referring to the film "Mammo"
he said it was of special significance to him as it was the story of one Mammo from
the town of Panipat where his family had lived for six hundred years. He said he
knew a Mammo in real life who also belonged to Panipat. This Mammo did not wish to
return to Panipat and spent the rest of her life in Lahore. His own mother, however,
always wanted to go back to Panipat so that she could be buried with her ancestors
in their family grave. Dr. Hasan said that it was only after he informed her that
their old ancestral grave in Panipat did not exist any longer that she reconciled
herself to being buried in Lahore. Gulzar, a well known poet and film maker from
India read out two of his poems in a sptonaneous response to the new spirit of the
Convention. The evening's cultural presentations comprised a one act play on the
complicity of silence in the custodial death of "Ulrike Meinhoff" enacted
by Usha Ganguli of Calcutta; Odissi and Bharatnatyam performance based on "
Kafi" by Bule Shah and verses of Faiz Ahmed Faiz by Sheema Kermani of Karachi;
vocal rendering of Bule Shah and Kabir by Vidya Rao of Delhi.
Day 2 : February 25
First Session : Presentation of reports by co-rapporteurs of the report of the Working
Groups
Co-Chair : Abid Hasan Minto (Pakistan)
A.K. Dunu Roy (India)
The reports of the Working Groups were presented to the plenary by the co-rapporters
of the four groups. There was animated discussion on all four issues. About 22 delegates
from Pakistan and India participated in the discussion. The plenary, after considering
the reports of the Working Groups, resolved to adopt a set of recommendations on
all four issues discussed by the delegates. (The recommendations of the convention
appear on pages 1-6 in the beginning of this report).
Second Session : What is to be
done?
Co-chair : Dr. Mubashir Hasan (Pakistan) Prof. Rajni Kothari (India)
In this session delegates discussed the immediate and long term measures to be taken
up by the Forum in order to realise the objectives of the Convention and the recommendations
which were adopted by the Plenum during the previous sessions. The Plenum adopted
two types of recommendations: One set which was addressed to the Governments of Pakistan
and India, and a second set which was addressed to the representatives of people's
movements and mass organisations. It was decided that in relation to recommendations
addressed to governments, campaigns to put pressure on the governments should be
planned by members of the Forum in their own countries. In relation to non-government
organisations, work shall be undertaken for mobilisation of public opinion through
actions like;
- One day peace meet to be held simultaneously in both countries.
- February 24 and 25 to be observed as Pakistan-India Peoples Solidarity Day.
- Enlarging the support base for the peace movement by involving other organisations.
- Regular meetings in all states/provinces of Pakistan and India on issues discussed
at the New Delhi Convention.
- Publication of campaign materials and literature on the peace movement and other
on-going struggles for democracy, demilitarisation and for the empowerment of the
common people in Pakistan and India.
- Sectorwise collective programmes and joint actions to keep up the momentum generated
by the convention, e.g. Pakistan-India womens, caucus.
- Organising joint cultural programmes to strengthen the process of common understanding.
It was declared that all the delegates who participated in the New Delhi Convention
are the founder members of the Pakistan-India Peoples' Forum for Peace and Democracy.
In Pakistan and India the Forum should form national and regional bodies. However,
there should be a Joint Pakistan-India Council of the Forum comprising members elected/nominated
by the national level bodies of both countries. This Council shall be the policy
planning body and recommend joint programmes to be taken up by the Forum. It was
also decided that in October 1995 a second Pakistan-India Peoples' Convention be
held in Pakistan. At the second convention, in addition to the four issues already
discussed in Delhi, additional issues like business and trade relations, cooperation
between human rights organisations, trade unions, ecologists and environmentalists
should be taken up.
Public meeting to announce the
recommendations of the two-day Convention
Venue : Speaker's Hall, Constitution Club of India
Co-chairs : Zaki Hasan (Pakistan)
Kamla Bhasin (India)
Facilitator : A.K. Dunu Roy
The public meeting began with the screening of a short documentary entitled "Deadlock".
The video film on nuclear devastation was specially made for the Convention by the
Sanchal Foundation. It was directed by Peggy Mohan. >From the perspective of children
the film depicts what nuclear war would mean to India and Pakistan. This was followed
by screening of video images of religious fanatism in Pakistan. These were shown
by Madeeha Gauhar of Lahore. The visuals were part of a film being made by the well
known T.V. producer, Shahid Nadeem of Pakistan. A book entitled Other Voices from
Pakistan compiled by the India Secretariat of the Pakistan - India People's Forum
for Peace and Democracy was introduced by Ritu Menon on behalf of the committee of
editors. Ms. Menon said the ruling powers of Pakistan and India have tried their
best to keep their respective populations apart through a variety of restrictive
measures. Arbitrary curbs on movement of people across the borders have prevented
who share a cultural heritage from coming together. Sanctions obstructing trade and
free flow of information have created an atmosphere of suspicion, where official
misinformation is able to brainwash the common people into believing the other as
the "enemy". Yet behind this smokescreen of official propaganda there exist
millions of ordinary citizens on both sides of the border, who think differently
from their respective governments.
The present collection, 'Other Voices From Pakistan' was a selection of essays, news
reports and literary pieces by Pakistani writers, reflecting a wide diversity of
opinions and activities that did not conform to Islamabad's official policies - either
domestic or foreign. As a matter of fact, in this collection Indian readers would
find echoes of their own concerns and a belief in causes which they shared - defence
of democratic freedom, protection of the cultural identity of minority communities,
curbing religious intolerance, reduction in defence expenditure, and peace and friendship
between India and Pakistan. She said that the Forum hoped that Other Voices From
Pakistan would contribute to greater mutual understanding and lessening of tensions
between India and Pakistan, and enable the two peoples to learn from the experience
of each other's struggle for democratic rights, secular values and peace. The book
was formally released by Dr. M.M. Thomas.
It is published by M/s Wiley Eastern Limited on behalf of the Forum. Asang Machwe
of Wiley Eastern Limited said, "A body of literature needs to be created which
furthers the ideals and values of the Pakistan-India People's Forum. To further this
objective Wiley Eastern Ltd will be happy to publish at least 50 books in two or
three years, at its own cost, authored by writers and scholars from Pakistan."
Dr. Zaki Hasan presented the key recommendations of the Convention to the assembled
public. While speaking on the highlights of the Convention,. Kamla Bhasin said one
of the most heart-warming features of this Convention was the fact that the areas
of agreement between the delegates from Pakistan and India on all the contentious
issues were much larger than the areas of disagreement. The Convention concluded
with the vote of thanks presented by Tapan K. Bose.
Appendix A
Need for Indo-Pak Cooperation and
Collaboration in Science & Technology
(Statement of Prof. A. Rehman at the Inaugural Session)
A cursory glance at the organisation and structure of science and technology activities
in India and Pakistan would reveal that both countries have similar organisations.
This could not be otherwise because of the similarities of the problems they have
to tackle as well as due to historical factors. However, the scientists of the two
countries are allowed little contact, even though both would gain by exchange of
literature, experience, and each other's expertise. This would have enabled both
to come together to make a joint effort in solving common problems. Many of the scientific
and technical problems faced by the two countries are common, and science and technology
should have no frontiers.
A few examples: problems of flood control, use of water resources, problems of water
logging, increase of salinity in soil, desertification and its consequences, meteorology,
health, transportation and problems of environment. In all these areas both countries
have considerable expertise and both are likely to gain by pooling in their expertise.
Both countries have been importing technology from highly industrialised countries
and trying to adapt it to their own conditions. They have also been developing processes
and products based on their own research and development effort. In the former case,
a number of technologies available in the neighbouring country could have been more
amenable to local conditions and less expensive.
While in the latter case, a joint effort could be less time consuming, less expensive,
and more successful. A number of problems, which require urgent scientific and technological
effort for their solution, get neglected due to paucity of resources, lack of infrastructure,
or lack of availability of manpower. It has been realised by highly advanced countries
that research requires joint efforts with other countries, pooling in resources,
and infrastructure facilities, for scientific and technical manpower to have any
possibility of success. Unfortunately, India and Pakistan are setting up facilities
without thinking of pooling in their resources and facilities even in the advanced
areas of science and technology.
India and Pakistan have a large number of collaboration agreements, joint science
and technology commissions for scientific and technological cooperation, with both
advanced as well as other developing countries, but continue to ignore each other.
This is despite the fact that both stand to gain by cooperation. In the absence of
such efforts our dependence on advanced countries is increasing, who are using their
resources, both natural and otherwise for their own advantages. As a result of the
prevailing political situation resources are being diverted to defence research and
development and military build-up.
Resources are urgently required to remove illiteracy and poverty, to develop education,
to provide employment, and to solve problems through scientific and technical effort
to protect the environment. This also increases our dependence on advanced countries.
In order to explore avenues of cooperation and to promote collaboration in the field
of science and technology the following measures are necessary:
1. An Indo-Pak Association of Scientists and Technologists must be formed.
2. The governments of the two countries must:
a) Allow free exchange of published scientific literature
b) Allow scientists to communicate with each other
c) Organise meetings of scientists of the two countries on trans-border problems
d) Establish a joint commission for cooperation in science and technology
Appendix B
Bridging Differences for Art and Cultural
Dialogue
(Statement by Krishen Khanna at the Inaugural session)
Quite apart from the fact that I was born and brought up in what is now Pakistan
and spent my formative years there, and since I don't suffer from amnesia nor has
my emotional umbilical cord snapped, for me and the likes of me, the most natural
desire is to frequent old haunts, to meet friends with whom I spent the first twenty-one
years of my life. Political amputations, whatever their historic reasons, do not
block out the forces of memory nor do they succeed in disinheriting the past, at
least not for those unfortunates who suffered the trauma and are still alive. Future
generations will not know any of this and may be spared the pain of memory and if
I may add, also be the losers of a great humanist past. But, quite apart from my
case and that of the many like me who were displaced, I as an artist feel that, given
one life time, I should be free to roam and tread the earth, unimpeded by fortuitous
political lines. And treading begins in areas nearer to where one is. No matter what
others might say, I and my kind would feel cultural affinities in this enormous area
of the globe. To be sure there are differences which would make the interaction so
much more interesting and real. The point is that even such differences would be
understood with the background of a common historic past. This is not so when one
steps into continents, the cultural traditions of which are rich but alien. Artists
from this part of the world have ventured and made small inroads into the West. Yes,
there have been individual faces, but that is about all. Artists in this subcontinent
are now thinking about this situation. Without cultural agreements between governments,
artists manage to exhibit their work. There is an exchange of sorts, why can't it
be allowed to amplify and if anyone needs to be reminded at this point, art and cultural
dialogue is basic and not peripheral. Those who are involved in values which abide
are not armed men. We have seen what armed men achieve and it is time, high time,
for the voices of civilisation and sanity to be heard. The easiest thing is to be
sceptical and to go on singing the hym of hate. Where has it got us or anyone? It
is a perpetuation of misery that is wanted then: three cheers for the secular bomb.
Appendix C
Defend Peace and Democracy
(Statement on behalf of Working Class Movement of India by Santosh Kumar, AITUC,
at the Inaugural Session)
We are grateful to the blessed few whose high spirits and remarkable resourcefulness,
coupled with the untiring efforts of volunteers has made this memorable day possible.
Friends: On behalf of the tradeunion movement of India I welcome the delegates from
Pakistan to this Convention. They have come to further the cause of peace and democracy,
the cherished ideals of humankind. We wish them all success. Likewise the working
class movement welcomes the delegates hailing from and representing different organisations
operating in this vast country. They have come to join hands to further the cause
of peace and democracy. We welcome them all. The All India Trade Union Congress is
proud of its glorious past. Its Founder, President Lala Lajpat Rai belonged to Lahore.
Two more presidents, Com. Mohammad Daud and Com. Fazal Elahi Qushan also belonged
to Lahore. The latter's elder brother, Ehsan EIlahi was the editor of the Urdu daily
Ehsan. Among the general secretaries of AITUC, Dewan Chaman Lal, the brilliant barrister
and parliamentarian belonged to an illustrious family of Lahore. At the time of the
establishment of Pakistan, Lahore was a rising and expanding trade union centre.
Amongst the railway workers, Mirza Ibrahim reigned supreme. Let us remember that
we are here to take up a big task - to defend peace and democracy. We wish this Convention
all success and offer our services in the hope that this process will set a trend
of cooperation instead of confrontation. Let this Convention give a new lead.
In the accomplishment of this noble task we offer our cooperation.
Appendix D
Press Conference
Venue : Speaker's Hall, Constitution Club of India Facilitator : Rita Manchanda
Speakers : Justice Dorab Patel (Palistan) Mubashir Hasan (Pakistan)
Nirmal Mukarji (India)
Teesta Setalvad (India)
PRESS RELEASE
The two-day Pakistan-India people to people meet concluded today with a follow-up
proposal for a larger gathering in October in Lahore this year. The Lahore meet is
expected to take up two additional issues, business and trade relations and ecology
and environment. An exchange of literature and views, especially on human rights
and secular struggles, environmental and people's movements to enable the committment
of this Forum to Peace and Democracy, is to be disseminated to a wider cross section.
Exchange of professional groups and students on a systematic basis. All sports activities
between India and Pakistan to be resumed. Future such people to people meetings should
include Indian and Pakistani diaspora. This first-ever people to people dialogue
between 92 citizens from Pakistan and 117 from India is an independent initiative
financed by contributions from groups and individuals in India. Delegates from Pakistan
came to the Convention at their own cost. Delegates, especially from India, felt
that statements in a section of the Indian press suggesting that it is "government
backed two track diplomacy" are misleading and false. The video film "Deadlock"
was screened for delegates today. Directed by Dr.Peggy Mohan, the film is an "offering
from children, the people most at risk from nuclear militarization in South Asia".
The Pakistan-India People's Forum also released a copy of the book Other Voices From
Pakistan, a collection of alternate writings from Pakistan. There were animated discussions
on four issues
-Kashmir dispute, militarization, religious intolerance and governance.
On Kashmir, the Convention condemned the human rights violations by the Indian security
forces and the militants. The Pakistan-India people's meet made the following key
recommendations:
1. Kashmir is not merely a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan but
concerns the lives and aspirations of people of Jammu and Kashmir living on both
sides of the LOC.
2. What is required is a peaceful, democratic solution which involves the peoples
of Jammu and Kashmir. Such a solution is essential for promoting peace in the subcontinent.
3. The governments of India and Pakistan must take positive steps to promote peace
and tranquility and establish democratic process in Jammu and Kashmir on both sides
of the LOC, so that pre-conditions are created for moving towards a just, people-based
solution.
4. Ending hostilities between India and Pakistan will enable both India and Pakistan
to build more tolerant and just societies. Religious intolerance poses a serious
threat to peace and stability .
5. Religious intolerance and hatred among ordinary people in civil society also exists
and needs to be tackled. a) Removal of myths and prejudices perpetuated in our respective
educational systems, especially in the social sciences, is a vital step in this direction.
b) Information on the strategies adopted by communal and fundamentalist ideologies
needs to be shared through a regular newsletter.
6. Reform in the discriminatory personal laws being the common need for women in
both Pakistan and India joint strategies should be worked out on the basis of pooled
experiences.
7. There should be no resort to war to resolve bilateral disputes.
8. India and Pakistan should take steps for a mutual and balanced reduction of conventional
forces and move systematically towards maximum transparency in regard to force levels
and depolyments.
9. Both countries should restrain nuclear preparations and move towards regional
disarmament independent of the control of other Nuclear Weapons States, as well as
participating in and promoting all efforts regarding the crucial issue of global
nuclear disarmament.
10. India and Pakistan should conclude their own comprehensive test ban treaty without
waiting for a global treaty.
11. The Nuclear Weapon States must accede to a treaty on "no first use"
of nuclear weapons and "no use ever" against non-nuclear weapon states.
12. All states must commit themselves to cease production of additional fissile materials
for nuclear weapons and other explosive purposes.
13. Both governments must urgently work to withdraw visa restrictions so that the
citizens of the two countries can invite each other and also travel without restrictions.
14. Communication and telecommunications barriers should be removed and the cost
of exchanges between the two countries must be rationalised.
15. That a vigilance group of citizens, able to freely move across the border and
monitor violations by border forces of both countries should be set up to ameliorate
hardship of ordinary working people caught in the web of national conflicts (e.g.
a few hundred fisherfolk from both India and Pakistan are at present languishing
in prisons.)
Released by the Press Committee,
Organising Committee of the Pakistan - India Peoples' Forum for Peace and Democracy
Appendix E
List of Delegates - PAKISTAN
A. Baseer Naweed - Journalist, Secretary Sindh Forum, Karachi Abdul
Latif Kapadia - Stage and T.V. artist, Karachi Abdul Rahman - Editor, Defence Journal,
Karachi Siddiqui Abdur Rashid - Businessman, Faisalabad
Abid Hasan Minto - Senior Advocate, Lahore Afrasiab Khattak - Advisor, Pukhtoonkhwa
Qaumi Party, Peshwar Afzal Malik - Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, Lahore Aimal
Khan - Businessman, Peshwar
Ali Hasan - Director Public Relations, Hamdard Foundation, Karachi Ali Nawaz Dahri
- Gen. Secy., Alnoor Board Indus- tries Workers Union, Karachi Alia Imam (Dr.) -
Writer, Peace Activist, Karachi Aamer Mirza - Political Activist, Lahore Amir Zia
- Journalist, Karachi
Anees Haroon - Women's Action Forum, Karachi Anwar Kamal - Advocate, Lahore
Arshad Khan - Provincial President, Pukhtoonkhwa Qaumi Party, Peshawar Asad Iqbal
Butt - Sindh Trade Union Federation, Karachi Atiya Khan - Social Worker, Lahore
Atha-Rehman - Advocate, Multan.
Khan Asad Khan - Lahore
Awais Sheikh - Ex-Gen. Secy, Lahore Tax Bar Association, Lahore B.M. Kutty - Central
Information Secretary, Pakistan National Party, Karachi Bakht Zamen - Gen. Secy.,
Pakistan Committee, MNC Trade Unions of South Asia Justice Dorab Patel - Retired
Judge of Pakistan Supreme Court and Chairman Emeritus, Human Rights Commission of
Pakistan, Karachi
Firdous Hyder - Journalist, Karachi
Ghayurul Islam - Economic Editor, Dawn, Karachi Ghazanfer Abbas - Coordinator, Child
Workers Centre (PILER) Karachi Ghulam Nabi Mughal - Bureau Chief, The Frontier Post,
Hyderabad, Sindh. Gul Rehman - President, Pakistan Workers Confederation, Peshawar
Gulzar Ahmed - Gen. Secy., All Pakistan Trade Chaudhary Union Federation, Lahore.
Hamid Akhtar - Writer, Former Editor, 'Imroz', Lahore Haroon Ahmed - President, Pakistan
Association of Mental Health, Karachi Hilaluddin Javaid - President, Parke-Davis
Employees Union, Karachi I.A. Rehman - Journalist and Director, Human Rights Commission
of Pakistan, Lahore Iftikharul Haq - Engineer, Independent Planning Commission, Lahore
Ijaz Ahmad - Industrailist, Faisalabad
Irfan Mufti - South Asia Partnership, Lahore Karamat Ali - Trade Unionist, Director,
Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (PILER) Karachi Khadija Gauhar
- Writer and Human Rights Activist, Lahore Khurshid Ahmed - Chief Organiser, Indigenous
Khan People's Organisation of Pakistan, Tando-Allahyar, Sindh Khwaja Zaki Hasan -
Vice Chancellor, Baquai Medical University, Karachi Latif Ahmed Khan - Political
Scientist, Karachi M.B. Naqvi - Senior Columnist for Dawn and foreign papers, Karachi
M. Nadeem Qayyum - Member, Pakistan Socialist Party, Lahore. Madeeha Gauhar - Theatre
and Social Activist, Lahore Mansoor Saeed - Writer and Actor, Dastak Theatre Group,
Karachi Maulana Obaidullah - President, Jamiat-Ul- Bhutto Ulamai Sindh, Ubaro, Sindh
Mazhar Abbas - Journalist, President Karachi Union of Journalists Mirza Hasan Askari
- Political Columnist, Daily Dawn, Karachi Mishka Zaman - Social Activist, Sungi
Development Foundation Islamabad Mohammad Hanif - SK&F Employees Union, Karachi.
Baloch Mohammad Tahir - Senior Vice President, Pakistan National Party, Baluchistan
Mohammed Aslam - Former Member of Central Naru Executive Committe, PPP, Rahimyar
Khan Mohammad Abbas - Social Worker, Oxfam, Islamabad Mohammed Iqbal - Social Activist,
Lahore Mohammed Irshad - Senior Vice President, Sanjha Soch, Lahore Mohammed Waseem
- President, Punjab Lok Rehas, Lahore Mohammed Yaqoob - President, All Pakistan State
Enterprises Workers Action Committee, Lahore Mubarik Ali Khan - Historian, Director,
Goethe Institute, Lahore Mubashir Hasan - Former Federal MInister, Author and Political
Activist Lahore Muhammad - Bureau Chief, Frontier Post, Zaman Khan Faisalabad Mujahid
Ali Barelwi - Editor, Sunehra Daur, Karachi. Nadeem Fazil Ayaz - Human Rights Commission
of Pakistan, Lahore Naushaba Zuberi - Journalist, Karachi
Nayab Ali Khan - President, Roche Pharmaceutical Employees Union, Karachi Nuzhat
Abbas - Social worker, Oxfam Islamabad Peter Jacob - Human Rights Activist, Multan
Rao Abid Hamid - Businessman and Human Rights Activist, Lahore Rao Amjad Ali - Journalist,
Lahore
Riffat Husain - Trade Unionist, (PILER) Karachi Saeed Ahmed Khan - President, Pakistan
Kisan Committee, Multan Safdar Hasan Siddiqi - Chairman, Institute of Learning, Lahore
Saba Parvez - T.V. Artist, Lahore
Saleem Asmi - News Editor, Dawn, Karachi Sardar Amanullah - Political Activist, Lahore
Niazi
Sharafat Ali - Pakistan Institute of Labour Education & Research, Karachi Sheema
Kermani - Stage Artist & Classical Dancer, Tahreek-e-Niswan Karachi Sheen Farrukh
- Journalist & Writer, Karachi Tahir Hameed - Social Activist, Lahore
Tahir Hasan Khan - Secretary, Karachi Press Club, Karachi Tahir Mohammed - Former
Federal Minister, Human Khan Rights Commission of Pakistan, Quetta Tahir Naqvi -
Researcher, Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI), Islamabad Tasnim Minto
- Social Worker, Lahore
Wasim Ejaz - Social Worker, Lahore, Yunus Rahi - Social Worker, Lahore
Zafar Ahmed - Former Chief of Pakistan Air Force, Council Member H.R.C.P., Lahore
Zafar Aslam - Political Activist, Karachi Zahid Hussain - Pakistan National Party,
Multan Gardezi Zahida Hina - Editor, Roshan-Khyal, Columnist, Jung, Karachi Zehra
Naqi - Cancer Research Foundation of Pakistan, Lahore Zarreen Hasan - Social Worker,
Karachi
Zeba Beena Sarwar - Journalist & Human Rights Activist, Lahore
Appendix F
List of Delegates INDIA
A.G. Lodhari / Gujarat, Abdul Jabbar Khan Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila
Udyog Sangathan / Bhopal M.P.
Prof. Abdul Rehaman, New Delhi , Achin Vanaik, New Delhi
Fr. Allwyn D'silva, Justice And Peace Commission, Bombay
Amrita Chhachhi, New Delhi , Anand Swaroop Verma / Teesari Duniya Adhyayan Kendra,
Noida
Anuradha Chenoy, J.N.U., New Delhi , Apam Muivah / Rain Forest Alliance, Imphal
Asang Machwe, Wiley Eastern Ltd., New Delhi, Ashok Aggarwal, Committee For Information
And Initiative On Punjab, New Delhi, Ashok Chaudhury, Vikalp Social Organisation,
Saharanpur
Atul Setalvad, Sabrang Communication And Publishing Pvt., Bombay
B.D. Joshi, All India Trade Union Congress, New Delhi , B.L. Chamdia, Shree Porbunder
Machi Mar Boat Association Porbunder , Balraj Kumar, Hind Mazdoor Kissan Panchayat,
New Delhi
Balraj Puri, Jammu, Chittaranjan Sarangi / Chilika Bachao Andolan, Khurda
Chittaranjan Sarkar, Fish Workers Forum West- Bengal, Manikpala
Damu Bandra, Jharkhandis Organisation For Human Rights, Chaibasa
Darlena David, Christian Medical Association, Of India, New Delhi
Dhirendra Sharma, Committee For Sane Nuclear Policy, New Delhi
Prof. Dinesh Mohan, New Delhi , Dunu Roy / Vidushak Karkhana, Distt Sahdhol
Durai, Tamil Manilakattida Tholizar Sangam, Madras
E.Deenadayalan, The Other Media, New Delhi , Feruzan Mehta, Bombay, G.L. Dhar / All
India Trade Union Congress, New Delhi , Gautam Navlakha, Committee For Initiative
On Kashmir, New Delhi
Girish Karnad, Bangalore , Gonsalves Eric, Delhi
Harekrishna Debanath, National Fish Workers Forum, Manikpala
Harsh Kapoor, New Delhi, Hemchandra Basappa, Centre For Disarmament Information,
Bangalore
Hiralal Das Roy, National Fish Workers Forum, Calcutta , Imrana Qadir, New Delhi
Indu Agnihotri, Janwadi Mahila Sangathan, New Delhi, Irfan Engineer, Institute Of
Islamic Studies, Bombay
Jairus Banaji, Trade Union Solidarity Committe, Bombay
Jaishree Kandhari, Y.W.C.A., National Council, New Delhi , Jaya Srivastava, Ankur,
New Delhi
Jill Carr-Harris, South-South Solidarity, New Delhi , K.K. Niyogi, AICCTU, Central
Committe, New Delhi
Kamal Chenoy, J.N.U., New Delhi , Kamla Bhasin, New Delhi, Kamala Prasad, New Delhi
Prof. Keshav Rao Jadhav, Hyderabad Ekta, Hyderabad
Khokan Das, Calcutta, Krishen Khanna, New Delhi , M. Abdul Matin, Howrah
M.James, Tamil Nadu Union Of Journalists, Tamil Nadu
Dr. M.M. Thomas, Thiruvalla , Kerala, Madhu Kishwar Manushi, New Delhi , Maja Duruwala,
New Delhi
Mani Mala, Citizens For Democracy, Delhi , Prof. Manoranjan Mohanty, Delhi University
, Delhi
Mary Khemchand, Y.W.C.A. Of India, New Delhi , Mazher Hussain, Deccan Development
Society, Hyderabad
Meenakshi Gopinath, Lady Shri Ram College, New Delhi., Meghanath, Akhra, Ranchi
N.C. Nigam, Indian Institute Of Technology, New Delhi
N.D.Jayaprakash, Delhi Science Forum, New Delhi , Nabnita Chadha, Centre For Policy
Research, New Delhi
Nikhil Wagle, Mahanagar, Bombay, Pandurang, Bombay
Nirmal Mukarji, New Delhi , Nirmalendu Das / Dakshin Banga Matsyajibi Forum, Chakla
Nitya Ramakrishnan, New Delhi , P.K. Sahi, I.F.T.U., New Delhi ,
P.V. Khokharu / Shree Porbunder Machi Mar Boat Association, Porbunder
Pakrisamy, Karnataka State Construction Worker's Federation, Bangalore
Dr. Peggy Mohan, New Delhi , Perin Chandra, All India Peace & Solidarity, Delhi
Praful Bidwai, New Delhi , Pratap Kharade / National Fish Workers Forum, Sindhudurg
R.M. Pal, Peoples Union For Civil Liberties, New Delhi
Rabiul Mallik, National Shelter For The Homeless, Calcutta
Prof. Rajni Kothari, Noida, Ramesh Dhuri, Dhuriwada Malvan.
Ramji Rai, Janmat, New Delhi , Ranbir Samaddar, Calcutta
Rati Bartholomew, New Delhi, Ratneshwar Sarkar, P.B. Sankayalaghu Kalyan Parishad
P.O. Bamangachi Distt. , Rita Manchanda, New Delhi
Ritu Menon, Pakistan-India People's Forum For Peace And Democracy , New Delhi
Ruth Manorama, Women's Voice, Bangalore
S.K. Bandhopadhaya, Gandhi National Memorial Fund, New Delhi
Sadhana Ganguli, Y.W.C.A. Of India, New Delhi
Sahida Farid, Sewa, Ahmedabad, Sanat Dasgupta, Sanat Dasgupta Productions, Calcutta
Santosh Kumar, All India Trade Union Congress, New Delhi
Saradindu Roy, Calcutta , Satyendra Ranjan, People's Union For Civil Liberties, Delhi
Seema Mustafa, People's Movement For Secularism, New Delhi
Shama Zaidi, Sayadhuri Films, Bombay , Sheomangal Siddhantkar, AICCTU, New Delhi
Shimreichon Luithui, Naga People's Movement For Human Rights, Imphal, Manipur
Shree Shankar Sharan, Awami Ekta Manch, Patna
Smitu Kothari, Hyderabad, Sobhana Barve, Moral Re-Armament, Bombay
Sophia Khan Pusfan, Ahmedabad Women's Action Group, Ahmedabad
Subhash Bhatnagar, National Campaign Committee Of Construction Workers, Delhi
Suhasini Mulay, New Delhi, Dr. Sujit Das / Drug Action Forum West Bengal, Calcutta
Sultan Shain; Journalist, New Delhi, Sumanta Bannerjee, New Delhi
Sunder Lal Bahuguna, Save Himalaya Movement, Tehri
Surinder Mohan, New Delhi , Swami Agnivesh, Bandhua Mukti Morcha, New Delhi
Fr. T.K. John, Vidya Jyoti, Delhi
Tapan K. Bose, New Delhi, Teesta Setalvad, Bombay , Tripurari Sharma, Alaripu, New
Delhi
Usha Ganguli, Rangakarmee, Calcutta, V.T. Joshi, Bhopal Madhya Pradesh
Vani Subramanian, Saheli, New Delhi , Vikheho Swu, Naga Students Federation, Kohima,
Nagaland
Walter Fernandes Indian Social Institute, New Delhi
[...]
Appendix I
Pakistan-India Peoples' Forum for
Peace and Democracy
Organising Committee:
India
Mr. Nirmal Mukarji, Prof. Rajni Kothari, Ms. Kamla Bhasin, Dr. M.M. Thomas, Mr. E.
Deenadayalan, Mr. Sumanto Banerjee, Mr. Gautam Navlakha, Mr. Kamla Prasad, Ms. Rita
Manchanda, Ms. Teesta Setalvad, Dr. Kamal M. Chenoy, Dr. Anuradha Chenoy, Mr. Praful
Bidwai, Mr. Achin Vanaik, Mr. K.G. Kannabiran, Prof. Dinesh Mohan, Mr. Tapan K. Bose
(Co-Chairperson)
Pakistan:
Prof. Dr. Haroon Ahmad, Mr. Karamat Ali, Dr. Mubarak Ali, Prof. Mehdi Hasan
Prof. Eqbal Ahmed, Dr. Shahid Kardar, Ms. Madeeha Gohar, Mr. Hussain Naqi, Mr. B.M.
Kutti, Ms. Anees Haroon, Mr. Iftikharul Haq, Prof. Rashid Ahmad
Dr. Mubashir Hasan, Mr. I. A. Rehman
(Co-Chairperson)
Delhi Convention Secretariat
Publications:
Mr. Sumanto Bannerjee, Ms. Ritu Menon, Ms. Amrita Chachhi
Press And Liaison:
Ms. Rita Manchanda, Mr. Amit Prakash, Dr. Anuradha Chenoy
Hospitality:
Mr. E. Deenadayalan, Ms. Maja Daruwala, Ms. Mary Khemchand
Travel and Receiption:
Dr. Kamal M. Chenoy, Mr. A. Ruban
Cultural Programmes:
Ms. Kamla Bhasin, Ms. Suhasini Mulay, Ms. Rati Barthelomew
Visa: Mr. Nirmal Mukarji, Mr. Tapan K. Bose
Nominations: Mr. Kamala Prasad, Prof. Dinesh Mohan, Mr. A.K. Dunu Roy,
Ms. Jaya Srivastava, Mr. Santosh Kumar
Finance: Mr. Gautam Navlakha
Drafting Committee: Mr. Achin Vanaik, Ms. Teesta Setalvad
Regional Committees:, Mr. M. Subbu (Madras), Mr. David Selvaraj (Bangalore),
Ms. Teesta Setalvad (Bombay), Mr. Saradindu Roy (Calcutta), Dr. Ranabir Samaddar
(Calcutta), Mr. K.G. Kannabiran (Hyderabad)
Office Facilities:
Ms. Anita Poovathingal, Mr. K.M. Jolly, Mr. B.R. Sastha, Mr. Prakash Chandra, Mr.
Vijay Awasthi, Mr. Jai Prakash
|