Online news channel!

Tag: teesta

Objectionable tweet case: Gujarat HC exempts Teesta Setalvad from personal appearance

Apart from exempting Teesta from appearing in person, the HC also asked the police to inform her seven days in advance to appear before them whenever she is needed here for the purpose of investigation.

In a relief to activist Teesta Setalvad, the Gujarat High Court on Monday exempted her from personal appearance before police every month in connection with a case in which she is accused of posting objectionable pictures of Hindu deities on a popular social networking site. Justice JB Pardiwala passed the order while hearing Setalvad’s plea seeking exemption from personal appearance. A lower court had imposed the condition of personal appearance on Teesta after an FIR was filed against her at Ghatlodia police station here in August last year.Apart from exempting Teesta from appearing in person, the HC also asked the police to inform her seven days in advance to appear before them whenever she is needed here for the purpose of investigation. The FIR was filed against Teesta by a VHP activist, Raju Patel, for allegedly putting objectionable pictures of Hindu god and goddess on Twitter. Ghatlodia police are investigating the case. <!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Teesta had later removed the objectionable posts following an outcry. She was booked under sections 153(a) (promoting enmity between two religious groups, and 205(a) (committing a deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings by insulting religion or religious beliefs) of IPC, besides various sections of IT Act. She was granted a pre-arrest bail by the city sessions court with a condition that she will have to appear before Ghatlodia police station on the fifth day of every month.Teesta then approached the HC in August seeking modification of the bail condition. Granting her an interim relief, the HC had in September allowed Teesta to appear at the police station on any day in the first week of every month instead of the fifth day. In the same case, she had filed a plea before the HC seeking setting aside of the case against her, which is pending.

SC tells Teesta to cooperate with CBI in FCRA probe, extends bail in another case

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday told social activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband that their failure to adhere to the conditions imposed by the Bombay High Court may lead to the cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to them in a case where they have been accused of misusing foreign funds.

The apex court asked Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand to cooperate with the CBI in its investigation in the case in which their company, Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Ltd (SCPPL), had received Rs 1.8 crore from US-based Ford Foundation allegedly without mandatory approval from the Centre.

Teesta Setalvad. AFP

Teesta Setalvad. AFP

It orally observed that their “anticipatory bail may be cancelled if they would not follow the conditions imposed by the High Court.”

A three-judge Bench headed by Justice AR Dave issued notice to the couple asking them to respond to the CBI petition seeking their custodial interrogation and charging them with failing to cooperate in the probe of misusing foreign funds received by them and posing a threat to communal harmony.

“It is expected that the respondents (Setalvad and her husband) will adhere to the conditions of anticipatory bail,” said the bench, also comprising Justices FMI Kalifulla and V Gopala Gowda, which also extended the interim protection from arrest till 5 December to the couple in another case of alleged embezzlement of funds for a museum at Ahmedabad’s Gulbarg Society that was devastated in the 2002 riots.

During the hearing of the FCRA case which is posted for 1 December, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the couple, denied the allegations of CBI that they were not cooperating in the probe and claimed that they have submitted all documents sought by the agency.

Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar had alleged that Setalvad and her husband were not cooperating in the probe and had marched to the CBI office in Mumbai in procession carrying placards and chanting all sorts of slogans.

Taking note of the Solicitor General’s submission, the bench said, “why do you (Setalvad and husband) want to go in procession? That is the allegation. Don’t go in procession.

“You (Sibal) advise your client that they don’t go in procession. You advise them to go with advocates/accountants,” the bench said.

The case of alleged violation of provisions of Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) was taken after the bench had extended the interim bail of the couple in the fund embezzlement case in which Gujarat Police in an affidavit accused them of misappropriating funds meant for charity for personal expenses, buying items ranging from wine to mobile phone, besides tampering with evidence.

A two-judge bench on 12 October had admitted that it was a mistake to consider extending the interim bail of Setalvad and her husband in the fund embezzlement case by them as it was referred to the three-judge bench.

Accordingly, a three-judge bench was constituted to consider the matter, which witnessed heated exchange of words between Gujarat police counsel Mahesh Jethmalani and others including senior advocate Dushyant Dave, who was one of the counsel along with Sibal appearing for Teesta.

While Dave was insisting that the interim protection from arrest to them be extended till further order, the bench said it can stay the order of Gujarat High Court ordering custodial interrogation till a particular time limit and granted the relief till 5 December.

However, when the FCRA matter came up, the bench first was of the view that it should be placed before a two-judge bench but Sibal and others pleaded that the matter be taken by the same bench.

In the FCRA case, the agency has come out with several grounds to challenge the 11 August order of the Bombay High Court granting anticipatory bail to Setalvad and her husband after it was denied by the sessions court.

CBI has sought cancellation of their anticipatory bail claiming that the high court had erred in giving relief after “prima facie” finding that FCRA provisions were violated.

While the couple has denied all charges saying they have been victimised for taking up the cause of riots victims, the agency said after ‘prima facie’ holding that there was misuse of funds they had received from Ford Foundation for which they were “undoubtedly answerable”, the high court ought not have granted anticipatory bail by using its extraordinary discretionary powers.

The high court had denied CBI the custodial interrogation of the couple saying, “prima facie this court holds that there has been violation under the FCRA. But where is the threat to national security and public interest?”

In the fund embezzlement case, the apex court court, on 11 September, had extended by four weeks the interim protection from arrest granted to Setalvad and her husband.

The apex court had on 16 April constituted the three-judge bench to hear afresh the anticipatory bail plea of Setalvad and her husband as a two-judge bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Adarsh Kumar Goel on 19 March had referred it to a larger bench and extended its interim order protecting them against arrest till the larger bench takes up the matter.

Setalvad and her husband, who have been fighting for justice for the riot victims, have denied all allegations contending that they have been implicated in the case and were victims of political vendetta.

PTI

SC issues notices to activist Teesta Setalvad on alleged illegal foreign funding

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice to social activist Teesta Setalvad on a petition by the CBI alleging that an NGO run by her received foreign grants from Ford Foundation which were prohibited under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA).

File photo. Image courtesy: AFPFile photo. Image courtesy: AFP

File photo. Image courtesy: AFP

Issuing notice to Teesta Setalvad and others, the apex court bench of Justice Anil R. Dave, Justice F.M.I. Kalifulla and Justice V. Gopala Gowda extended till December 8 the bail granted to Teesta and her husband Javed Anand in the alleged misuse of funds in the Gulberg society case.

Directing the listing of the matter on December 1, the court said that Teesta Setalvad will file her response to the CBI plea in four weeks and CBI will file its rejoinder, if any, thereafter.

CBI has challenged Bombay High Court order whereby while holding that the documents being sought by the CBI relates to accounts and therefore it does not require custodial interrogation as it granted her interim bail.

The CBI on Wednesday opposed the high court order granting interim bail to Teesta alleging that she was not cooperating with the investigating agency probing the allegation.

IANS

Gujarat High Court rejects Teesta Setalvad’s plea for defreezing bank accounts

Upholding the verdict of a lower court with this regard to an embezzlement case, the high court observed that the probe was at a serious stage

Teesta Setalvad

The Gujarat High Court has rejected the plea of Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand for defreezing of their personal bank accounts and to allow their two NGOs to operate.Upholding the verdict of a lower court with this regard to an embezzlement case, the high court observed that the probe was at a serious stage. Justice G.R. Udhvani in his order said the execution of a bond was not a justifiable solution when the investigation of the Gulberg Society embezzlement case was at a serious stage. According to the court, it was premature to consider as to whether the accounts were to be defreezed, and therefore, there was no question of executing the bonds.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The bank accounts of Teesta Setalvad, her husband Javed Anand and their two NGOs – Sabrang Trust and Citizens for Justice and Peace were frozen by the Crime Branch of Ahemdabad Police last year.Setalvad and others have been accused of embezzling over one and a half-crore rupees that was collected to convert the Gulberg Society, where 69 people were killed during the post-Godhra riots in 2002 into a museum in memory of the riot victims.

Gujarat HC reserves order on Teesta Setalvad’s plea for defreezing bank

The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday reserved its order on petitions of activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand for defreezing their personal bank accounts as well as those of their NGOs, Sabrang Trust and Citizens for Justice and Peace.

Teesta Setalvad

The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday reserved its order on petitions of activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand for defreezing their personal bank accounts as well as those of their NGOs, Sabrang Trust and Citizens for Justice and Peace.Justice GR Udhvani reserved the order after Setalvad’s lawyer Mihir Desai summed up his arguments against the action of Crime Branch of Ahmedabad Police. Citing rulings of various high courts, Desai contended that the probe agency was required to give a notice before freezing the accounts, which was not done.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The police should have allowed Setalvad to operate her account after obtaining a bond from her, which is the routine procedure in such cases, he said.”You could have frozen the accounts provided they are required to probe a crime which has been discovered. In this case they are running the probe in reverse gear,” Desai said.”Two of these accounts were FCRA accounts which cannot be frozen by the local police. (Union) Ministry of Home Affairs can do it, but the local police can’t,” he said.The Crime Branch froze the accounts last year soon after it started probing a case in which Setalvad and others are accused of embezzling Rs 1.51 crore collected to convert Gulberg Society — where 69 people were killed during the post-Godhra riots — into a museum for 2002 riots.A lower court had last November rejected their pleas seeking defreezing of the bank accounts, observing that the accused had not cooperated with the investigation. Setalvad and Anand have challenged this order before the high court. Setalvad, who pursued the cases related to the riots in various courts, has also sought anticipatory bail from the Supreme Court which has granted her temporary protection from arrest pending the hearing.

Silicon Valley will be laughing at the anti-Modi ‘moral advisory’ by academics

By Madhu Purnima Kishwar

Even if Narendra Modi doesn’t do any other good as prime minister of India, he has made one historic contribution to politics: he has exposed the hollowness, hypocrisy and sheer venality of what masquerades as secularism and human rights activism with regard to India.

Recently a moral advisory has been issued by a group of US academics to Silicon Valley professionals that they should boycott India as an investment destination because its current prime minister is allegedly a tainted man and is “almost certainly” going to misuse information technology for spying on its citizens (see full text of original letter here).

To quote the advisory in its own words, “As it stands, ‘Digital India’ seems to ignore key questions raised in India by critics concerned about the collection of personal information and the near certainty that such digital systems will be used to enhance surveillance and repress the constitutionally protected rights of the citizens.”

In a democracy everyone has a right to criticise, oppose and even hate politicians whose actions are out of sync with their expectations. Modi certainly deserves criticism on several counts. I myself have critiqued various acts of commission and omission of the Modi government. These academics are also welcome to critique or even display open hostility to Modi provided they don’t distort facts and masquerade their hatred of the man as defence of “academic freedom” and “civil liberties.”

Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Dubai. PTI

Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Dubai. PTI

Several signatories to this ridiculous appeal are my friends. Some of them have hosted my lectures in the US and offered me warm hospitality. Some of them have even contributed insightful articles to Manushi, the journal I edited. Knowing them well, I can only say that they seem to have signed this absurd appeal under peer pressure, without applying critical thought that is expected of academics in premier universities. To my old friends in this group, I can only appeal that they should do a reality check before they undertake political interventions where they end up being used by vested interests with devious agendas. The rest of my rejoinder is addressed to those who have made a religion out of nursing mortal enmity towards Modi and BJP at the behest of vested interests.

It is noteworthy that there is not a single scientist, engineer, lawyer or IT professional in this list of signatories. This campaign, and several other anti-Modi ones, have almost always come from the domain of feminist studies and the departments of South Asian studies which have been systematically nurtured by the US establishment to breed anti-India propaganda under the guise of upholding human rights and social justice. It is in the domain of science and technology that Indians have excelled and emerged winners in open competition with their American colleagues. Their relationship with India is far more constructive than that of academics employed in the ghettos of South Asian studies.

The Emperor has no clothes: It is hard to believe that this learned faculty does not know that they their own “Emperor has no clothes”. Residing in the US and bankrolled by its agencies or institutions, these “neo-Anglo-Saxons” choose to forget that the US and Britain have been running the equivalent of a worldwide police state for the past several decades, where almost any phone call or communication could be tapped by their intelligence agencies.

As pointed out by Prof K Gopinath of the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore, “the Silicon Valley honchos they appeal to have pioneered countless technologies that are routinely used for offensive and defensive intelligence operations. They petition technologists and businessmen in Silicon Valley to be wary of privacy violations (only in India?) when, for many of them, it is part of their daily bread and butter! As one of their tribe announced in 1999 (Scott McNealy, former CEO of Sun Microsystems), “You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it.”

“Note that this quote applies to US citizens; it goes without saying that non-US citizens are completely at the mercy of US/British agencies without any recourse! Microsoft, AT&T, Yahoo, Google and other companies have routinely assisted (under duress/subpeona sometimes) “US national security operations”. Many Silicon Valley companies have actively sought out customers among well-known autocratic regimes. A well-known video-calling product, Skype, though certified by a leading cryptographer as being secure, was revealed to have a backdoor that provided the Chinese authorities access to every conversation in real time with almost no effort. If they had dared meddle with American investors going to China or even Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, they would have been asked to go see a shrink and certainly ruled out of tenured jobs!

“Have these worthies already forgotten the National Security Agency (NSA) classified information leaked in 2013 by Edward Snowden, a former CIA employee and government contractor? These leaks revealed numerous global surveillance programmes, many run by the NSA and the Five Eyes with the cooperation of telecommunication companies and European governments. Any unbiased observer can see how persistently (across six decades or more) the US, Britain and Europe have been taking the rest of the world for a privacy/security ride with the active collaboration of Silicon Valley.”

Though their pious appeal is bound to be laughed at by Silicon Valley, it can’t be ignored because it seems to have been inspired by vested interests who wish to keep India mired in poverty, promote strife among its people, and keep it vulnerable to terror attacks.

Witch-hunting under the guise of piety: This coterie of Modi baiters reminds Silicon Valley entrepreneurs of their moral “responsibilities and obligations” but seems to be oblivious to their own “responsibilities and obligations” as academics, where they are expected to rely on facts rather than manufacture demonology around a leader whose popularity they cannot stomach. So blinded are they by their malevolent prejudice that they can’t tell the difference between hating Modi and hurting India. By calling upon the global community to go for an economic boycott of India and declare it an apartheid state simply because of their hatred of one man, they have more likely been acting as pawns – some of them knowingly and others unwittingly – in the hands of forces inimical to India. The investments that come to India are by no means going to Modi’s pocket.

This is not the first time American academics have crossed the Lakshman Rekha that divides honest, well-meaning criticism from witch-hunting for ideological reasons. They, along with their collaborators in Indian academia, had launched a similar campaign in 2005 addressed to the US government demanding that Modi be denied a US visa because they, not the Indian courts, consider him guilty of “masterminding” the massacre of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002. The fact that they launched this campaign three years after the riots and only after the Sonia Gandhi-headed Congress came to power indicates whose game they were playing, and whose interests they were serving.

Since the appeal had the backing of well-entrenched hardcore evangelical groups in the US who hate the BJP for opposing conversion drives in India, the US government readily obliged and announced a ban on Modi’s entry from 2005 and till he became prime minister in 2014. They wouldn’t even let him address a video-conference when invited by American universities or NRIs. It is noteworthy that not a single FIR had been registered against Modi at that time (or even till date), and no police station or court had registered any case against him. And yet the US academics began a McCarthy type witch-hunt against a popularly elected chief minister for the simple reason that vested interests in the US and India had failed to defeat Modi politically. They, therefore, began using patently lawless means to dislodge him from power.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the US establishment is uncomfortable with the rise of Modi and the BJP to power. Otherwise such hate campaigns would not have repeatedly emanated from American campuses. A majority of these academics are of Indian origin but the brains behind the whole move are undoubtedly white American. Rabid evangelical organisations are backing and funding anti-BJP hysteria because they find that, unlike the Congress Party, the BJP is unwilling to open up India for large-scale conversions to Christianity.

Absurd charges against Modi: The academics’ claim that Digital India is a Modi conspiracy for citizen surveillance, but are they so disconnected from reality that they are unaware that digitisation pre-dates Modi’s assumption of power as PM?

Digitisation is the magic wand that can help transform the face of governance in India, by making it transparent and more accountable. It is the only way the administration can deliver efficient and speedy services and welfare measures to citizens. The e-governance mantra has been adopted by all major political parties in India due to strong pressure from citizens to move in that direction. India has already lost precious time and fallen behind the rest of the world because leftist trade unions obstructed computerisation for nearly two decades. But now nobody in India is willing to brook delays and obstruction in this regard.

Yes, some of these technologies are bound to be used for surveillance, including crime detection, surveillance of hawala networks, monitoring terror networks and beefing up border security. But no one is complaining in India because people realise that India is among the most endangered countries in the world, thanks to its misfortune of having Pakistan as a next-door neighbour, whose self-declared policy is bleeding India to death through a thousand cuts! If these academics are genuinely bothered about the misuse of digital technologies for violating citizens’ right to privacy, let them first persuade the US to dismantle its global snooping systems. They rest of the world, including India, will gladly follow the example.

Incompetents in key posts: The academics also indict the Modi government for appointing incompetent people in key jobs. It is noteworthy that they cannot cite more than three cases. In each

Prime Minister Narendra Modi at Madison Square Garden. PTI image

Prime Minister Narendra Modi at Madison Square Garden. PTI image

of these three cases, the Modi government has indeed chosen very incompetent persons to head those institutions. But the list does not stop at these three. Many of us are dismayed that the Modi government has allowed too many incompetents and mischief mongers appointed by the Congress regime to either continue in key jobs or even be elevated to higher posts. These are far more glaring examples because they involve officers who were established cronies of the Congress Party and yet managed to get patronage even under the current regime. But such people don’t rankle the signatories of this ludicrous appeal because they are “secular crooks.”

I am sure there are plenty of such questionable appointments even in American universities. Did people stop investing in the US on that account? The merits of an appointment under any and every regime, in every country of the world, are often questioned and even challenged. This has happened during all regimes in India. But is it their case that before investing in India (and no other country) American investors must scrutinise all government appointments as per the norms set by these self-appointed guardians of academic excellence?

Most important of all, those critiquing the Modi government’s appointments should remember that none of them can beat the unsuitability of Gopa Sabharwal’s anointment as Vice Chancellor of Nalanda University by none other than the venerable Amartya Sen – who is well known to be the intellectual godfather of this academic gang. Gajendra Chauhan is no doubt a poor choice to head the FTII, but Sabharwal is by all accounts even less worthy of the job she was handpicked for in violation of rules, regulations and qualifying criteria. In fact, Sen himself may have been a celebrated economist, but he has earned a lot of ignominy by treating Nalanda as a personal fief, running its affairs through remote control and with little accountability. (Read some of the details here).

Sen’s mismanagement of the affairs of Nalanda caused former President APJ Abdul Kalam, who was the prime mover behind this project, to publicly dissociate himself from it. Sen went around complaining about “political interference in academic institutions” just because the NDA government did not renew his tenure in office when his term ended in July 2015. In fact, Amartya Sen landed this prestigious job only because of nepotism, as he is a personal friend of Manmohan Singh and a leading courtier in Sonia Gandhi’s durbar.

The truth of the matter is that a small coterie of leftist intellectuals and academics have been allowed total monopoly on prized institutions, and have thus come to expect such jobs as their birth right. Whenever this monopoly has been questioned or touched, they rise in outrage and make life hell for whichever regime dares bring in a different set of people. Eminent academics, artists and intellectuals whose credentials are widely respected have been hounded out of their jobs if they do not have the stamp of approval of this intellectually tyrannical coterie. Anyone who dares fall out of line with their agendas and ideological prisms has their careers marred for life.

As far as their charge of government interference in academic institutions is concerned, I wish the Indian signatories to this naïve petition had stayed on in India and launched a determined campaign to free educational institutions from statist controls which were institutionalised when regimes of their choice were in power! Have they forgotten that under CPM rule in West Bengal, leave alone a professor’s job, one could not get even a peon’s job without being a card-carrying member of the Communist party? But since these academics chose greener pastures for themselves, let them not waste their precious efforts fretting about the sorry fate of our educational institutions, for the rot began with the Congress party, which ruled India for over five decades. The Congress institutionalised the idea of political interference in institutions. They can rest assured that many of us in India are committed to changing the rules of the game in favour of academic freedom – a task these worthies failed to undertake when they had a chance to do so

NDA crackdown on some NGOs: The statement in their letter, that Modi’s first year in office has meant “bans and restrictions on NGOs” is product of paranoia. They are crying wolf simply because same of their allies among US-funded NGOs have been issued notices to explain why year after year they have knowingly avoided filing audited accounts for the hefty funds they received from western donor agencies, thus violating income-tax laws and FCRA regulations.

A handful of NGOs have had their FCRA registrations cancelled following enquiries which yielded solid documentary evidence of gross corruption, including siphoning of funds to personal accounts, as well as spending money for purposes that were different from the ones originally stated. The most notorious case is that of a Mumbai-based NGO, whose founders Teesta Setalvad and Javed Anand, are great favourites with this clique. These celebrities have been accused of using crores of rupees from a fund collected in the names of the victims of the 2002 Gujarat riots. Teesta and her family allegedly used the money for purchasing personal luxuries, beauty treatments, wine, branded clothes, feasts and foreign travel. It is noteworthy that the investigation into Teesta’s misdemeanors began only after the concerned riot victims filed a police complaint alleging fraud and misappropriation against this NGO. And yet they are being treated as victims of Modi’s wrath!

Is it their case that their favoured NGOs are above the law of the land? Don’t they know how people accused of fraud and non-compliance would have been treated in the US? Yes, Greenpeace has been deprived of FCRA registration. But adverse reports were filed by the Intelligence Bureau against this international NGO under the “secular” UPA regime. In any case, cancellation of FCRA registration only means it cannot receive foreign funds for its political activism. It is free to carry on its propaganda and advocacy campaigns with locally raised resources, as lakhs of NGOs in India do. The FCRA law enacted under the Congress regime mandates that political activity cannot be carried out with foreign funds. Even political parties are banned from doing so. In such a situation, if NGOs indulge in political campaigns for or against this or that party using foreign funds, it cannot by any stretch of imagination be treated as a crackdown on dissent. There is no bar on their activism, provided they abide by the country’s laws like the others. No self-respecting country can allow its politics and economy to be held to ransom by a coterie of organisations propped up by foreign powers, especially those that have a history of harming India’s interests.

As for the charge that Modi’s regime has brought in harassment and censorship of opinions critical to his government, even a casual glance at our newspapers, magazines, TV debates, news programmes and academic writings would show that Modi is under the harshest possible public scrutiny by both media and academia. Some of the criticisms levelled against Modi are well deserved but a good part of it is malicious. Not a single journalist or academic can claim to have suffered on account of Modi bashing. There is only one person in the Modi government who the media chooses not to criticise because he has been their loved one for many long years – much before Modi came to the national scene. The rest in BJP, including Modi, are easy prey!

Then there is the charge of violation of “religious freedom” under the BJP government. This is nothing but a sinister way of painting India as a rogue nation where religious minorities, meaning Christians and Muslims, are under grave threat and being forever massacred. They have mastered the Goebbelsian technique of endlessly repeating lies with vehemence till they acquire the force of truth.

This sustained propaganda has put India on top of the hit-list of jihadi terrorists and created prejudice and fear among global investors. They are thus endangering India by making Islamic terror groups feel justified in executing bomb blasts and other murderous attacks in India. Many among this worthy list had signed similar appeals to Indian voters to prevent Modi from becoming PM, alleging that under his reign India would be engulfed by communal riots and rivers of blood would flow. They are outraged that nothing of the sort has happened. Therefore, they are reduced to gross exaggeration and outright lies by presenting half a dozen minor cases of theft or vandalism of some churches by local hoodlums as proof of the NDA’s anti-minority policy. As per police records, in the same period, over 258 cases of theft and vandalism took place in Hindu temples of Delhi, without evoking any hysteria among Hindus or words of sympathy from the votaries of “religious freedom.”

Whatever be their other faults (and the BJP has many), none of the BJP-ruled states – be it Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan or Chhattisgarh – has witnessed communal riots that became the hallmark of Congress regimes. Even Gujarat, which was the most riot-prone state during Congress rule, became totally riot-free for 12 years after Modi understood and brought under control the forces that had instigated the 2002 killings. Since Modi became PM, communal riots have taken place in states ruled by “secular parties” such as the Samajwadi Party in UP and the Congress Party in Manipur and Assam.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Canada. Reuters

Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Canada. Reuters

It is no coincidence that this pious group of global conscience-keepers has never lobbied for apartheid or economic boycott of military-dominated Pakistan, a state well known for having decimated religious minorities – Hindus, Christians and Sikhs alike – and promoted the most hostile policies against the minuscule non-Muslim minorities that have survived murders, abductions, tyranny, extortion, forced conversions and lack of full citizenship rights. The Pakistani state doesn’t even spare Muslim sects like Ahmediyyas that are considered heretical by Sunni Muslims. At the time of partition, Hindus constituted over 28 percent of the population in the areas that became Pakistan. Today, Hindus constitute about 1.8 percent of Pakistan’s population and 8.2 percent of Bangladesh’s. By contrast, the population of Muslims in India has grown from 9.8 percent in 1951 to 14.2 percent in the 2011 census. Yet, it is India and not Pakistan that is consistently targeted by these self-appointed guardians of political morality. These worthies have never mobilised world opinion against Pakistan even though, in pursuit of its undying hostility towards India, Pakistan has made itself the fountainhead of global terrorism. Why? Because Pakistan’s regimes have been bankrolled by the US and act as its puppets.

Would these academics dare petition foreign governments to ban the entry of US presidents whose devious political interventions have wrecked numerous countries and caused mass slaughters in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria?

For the n’th time, they have raised yet again the charge that during Modi’s tenure 1,000 Muslims died in communal riots. However, for once they got their figures somewhat close to reality. Earlier they wouldn’t stop at less than 3,000 Muslim deaths. But they deliberately fail to mention that the total number of killings were as follows: 262 Hindus killed, either by Muslims or in police/army firing on riotous mobs, as against 863 Muslims done to death by Hindus or in police firing. Riots have taken place in several states of India under non-BJP regimes. How is it that their heart bleeds only for the victims of the 2002 riots? How come they have never grieved for the 58 Hindu men, women and children who were burnt alive in a train coach at Godhra by a Muslim mob – an incident that triggered off the retaliatory violence? Their harping on Modi’s complicity even after the Supreme Court of India found no evidence against him, after subjecting Modi’s handling of the riots to intense scrutiny for three long years, shows that their motive is not so noble.

Incidentally, the officers of the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigative Team (SIT) which grilled Modi and his administration were handpicked with due approval of the professional Modi-baiter, Teesta Setalvad. Yet Modi emerged unscathed. I would feel very privileged if these self-appointed guardians of Indian Muslims would care to challenge and rebut my detailed fact-sheet detailing day-by-day handling of the 2002 riots by Modi’s government, including his public statements. This has been published in my book Modi, Muslims and Media. (It is available on Amazon.com)

I can only conclude by telling the ‘Hate Modi’ Brigade, that the more irrational and malicious their rants against Modi, the more they strengthen public opinion in his defence. The vigorous protest on social media against this petition have not all come from Modi admirers. Many of us who signed the rejoinder to the Silicon Valley petition (read here) are fairly critical of the current functioning of the Modi government. And yet we feel compelled to rise in his defence because the ‘Hate Modi’ campaign has clear ‘Hurt India’ overtones and motivated by the desire to reinstall a scam-ridden regime which has been junked by Indian voters for being venal and harmful for the country.

Those who wish their criticism to be taken seriously have to earn the right by being visibly non-partisan. This includes having the courage to acknowledge the positive aspects and good deeds of the person targeted for scrutiny. There are as many serious lapses being committed by Modi government as there are attempts to improve things. But the petitioners’ blind prejudice is not tempered by reason or a reality check. Therefore, they are only damaging their own credentials and taking attention away from important issues.

The author is a Professor at CSDS and founder of Manushi

Home Ministry suspends Teesta Setalvad’s NGO’s license for 6 months

New Delhi: In fresh crackdown on an NGO run by social activist Teesta Setalvad, the Home Ministry on Thursday suspended its registration for six months accusing the organisation of violating Foreign Currency (Regulation) Act that invites termination of its licence.

Teesta Setalvad. AFP

Teesta Setalvad. AFP

In an order, the Home Ministry said exercising the powers conferred under Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, the registration of Sabrang Trust has been suspended for a period of 180 days with effect from 10 September, 2015.

The Sabrang Trust, run by Teesta and her husband Javed Anand, can make a representation against the order within 30 days. However, if the Home Ministry is not satisfied with the reply of the NGO, its registration will be cancelled.

Another NGO run by Teesta and her husband, Citizens for Justice and Peace, has already been put under prior permission category, thus making it mandatory for the organisation to take permission from the Home Ministry before accepting or utilising any foreign contribution.

Following a recommendation of the Home Ministry, CBI has registered a case and launched a probe against Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Limited, a commercial firm run by Teesta, for allegedly accepting and utilising foreign contribution in violation of FCRA.

Teesta has pursued the cases of post-Godhra riots victims in Gujarat when Narendra Modi was Chief Minister of the state.

Today’s Home Ministry order said that during the course of inspection of records of Sabrang Trust, it was noticed that both Teesta and Javed Anand are chief functionary or trustee of the NGO.

Both are also working as directors, co-editors, printers and publisher in the company namely Sabrang Communications & Publishing Pvt Limited (SCPPL) and published a magazine called ‘Communalism Combat’. SCPPL had accepted contribution from foreign source, thus violating FCRA, it said.

On inspection of accounts of Sabrang Trust, it was noticed that the Association has received total donation of Rs 48.42 lakh and Rs 49.10 lakh in 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively out of which they have spent Rs 30.97 lakh and Rs 27.07 lakh which comes to 64.23 per cent and 55.14 per cent respectively, on administrative expenses.

As per section 8 (1)(b) of FCRA 2010 requires approval of the Home Ministry before incurring expenses on administrative head exceeding 50 per cent limit. Thus, it is a violation of FCRA, the ministry said.

During the course of inspection of books and records of the NGO by the Home Ministry, it was noticed that payments of Rs 50 lakh were made by Sabrang Trust to Sabrang Communications & Publishing Pvt, Limited which seems to have been used for personal gain.

On review of vouchers of Sabrang Trust, it has been noticed that the Association has transferred Rs 2.46 lakh from foreign contribution designated account to Sabrang Trust’s domestic account without any logical reason.

This raises the suspicion of mixing of funds by the Association and it can be treated as non-utilisation of foreign contribution for the purpose for which it was received and mixing of foreign contribution with domestic contribution. This is violation of FCRA, the ministry contended.

On review of vouchers of the Association, it is found that Sabrang Trust has made direct payments of approximately Rs 12 lakh from FCRA designated account to Citi Bank and Union Bank of India on account of credit cards belonging to Teesta and Javed Anand respectively as payments.

The cards are issued in the name of individuals and the above mentioned payments appears that the foreign contribution has been used for personal gain and not authorised as per FCRA.

Sabrang Trust paid Rs 1,174 for purchasing an internal medical policy in favour of Anand for attending a conference in Lahore and Rs 4,227 was paid to Anand for purchasing books and travel expenses for attending the People Union for Civil Liberty meeting. The Home Ministry said that from the payments it appears that foreign contribution has been used for personal gain, thus violating FCRA provisions.

The Home Ministry said that during inspection of books and records of the NGO, it was noticed that payments of Rs 50 lakh were made by Sabrang Trust to SCPPL which appears to have been used for personal gain. SCPPL is not registered under FCRA and not entitled to accept foreign contribution by any means.

On review of the registration certificate of Sabrang Trust, the Home Ministry has found that it was registered under FCRA under the nature of ‘Education and Social’. On scrutiny, it was noticed that the NGO received Rs 1.52 lakh as foreign contribution under the nature of ‘Cultural’.

Further, this amount has been reflected in annual filing of return in two different columns — Rs 1.02 lakh as under ‘Maintenance of place of historical and culture importance’ and Rs 50,000 under ‘Other expenses’.

The Home Ministry said this indicates that the NGO has received the foreign contribution for the purpose which is not permitted as per mandate of FCRA registration certificate of Sabrang Trust.

It has been noticed that the NGO has transferred Rs 2.46 lakh from its foreign contribution designated account to Sabrang Trust’s domestic account without any logical reason. This may be treated as non-utilisation of foreign contribution for the purpose for which it was received and mixing of foreign contribution with domestic contribution violating the provisions of FCRA, the Home Ministry said.

PTI

Irfan Habib, Teesta Setalvad rail against right-wingers

“I won’t say the RSS or BJP are actual fascists but it is for a fact that they have never concealed their admiration of fascist forces. They want to ape Adolf Hitler and this aspiration of theirs is reflected everywhere including in our educational institutions.

Noted author Irfan Habib and social activist Teesta Setalvad launched a scathing assault on the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on the occasion of Teachers’ Day stating that they had ‘initiated a campaign to destroy educational institutions in the country’. While raising the issue of recent killings of rationalist authors in Maharashtra and Karnataka, the two also said that it is in fact the RSS that governs India and not the BJP. The two also criticised the decision of renaming Aurangzeb road to APJ Abdul Kalam road and accused the Union government of communalising the environment.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> “I won’t say the RSS or BJP are actual fascists but it is for a fact that they have never concealed their admiration of fascist forces. They want to ape Adolf Hitler and this aspiration of theirs is reflected everywhere including in our educational institutions. “Go to the textbooks during the time of previous NDA regimes where names like Nehru and Gandhi do not feature in the Independence movement at all. Instead there will be a lot to read about Savarkar and other RSS figures who had no worthwhile contribution towards the national struggle. RSS’s ire was not directed at their rulers but at their fellow subjects including Muslims whom they wanted to cleanse from Delhi,” said Irfan Habib. The author also said that renaming roads and places is a ‘longtime ambition of the Indian right wing’. “An aspiring legislator wanted to rename his constituency from Lucknow to Lakshmanpuri. Similarly Allahabad is supposed to be named Prayad and so on. These are the things that Nazis would do,” said Habib. Teesta, who has been at loggerheads with Prime Minister Modi ever since the Godhra riots, told dna that there was not enough of ‘resistance to the march of right wing forces into educational institutions of India’. “Back in 1999, we had reported about state educational policies in Gujarat and how the text books were being saffronised. This had been going on since 1989 and as of 2015 supplementary texts by right wing Shiksha Bachao Andolan Samiti are being taught in 400,000 government schools,” Teesta said. She along with Habib, advocate Anil Lauria and academician Prabhat Patnaik spoke at a conference in New Delhi on Saturday. Teesta also accused right wing groups for the murder of Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare in Maharashtra and M M Kalburgi in Karnataka. “On one hand you have murders of authors, educationalists and rationalists and on other hand you have appointments in FTII and other institutions. If these are not signs of growing intolerance towards rational thought then what is,” said Teesta. Patnaik said that the RSS wants to replace history with mythology. Lauria said the NRI’s who had supported the BJP in the 2014 general elections should also be held accountable for the choices they have made. “A person living in the United Kindgom or USA decides if people in India need a nuclear weapon without thinking of the repercussions of such activities. It is not fair and all this happened under the watch of the election commission,” said Lauria. He added that killings of rationalists is not new but ‘such assassinations in Karnataka and Maharashtra are a worrying sign’. All the panelists criticised the state police of not investigating the murders properly while taking pride in uncovering other crimes.

Bombay HC grants anticipatory bail to Teesta Setalvad, Javed Anand

In case of arrest Teesta and Javed can be released on a bail amount of Rs 20,000 and they are directed to cooperate with CBI during the investigation and make themselves available before the agency as and when required until the filing of chargesheet.

Teesta Setalvad

File Photo
Bombay High Court confirmed anticipatory bail to Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand in a case of alleged embezzlement of foreign funding by them in 2004 to 2006.HC refusing custodial interrogation as sort by CBI noted that the act of misappropriation may prima facie amount to violation and subsequent prosecution but it does not affect the national/state security and safety. In case of arrest Teesta and Javed can be released on a bail amount of Rs 20,000 and they are directed to cooperate with CBI during the investigation and make themselves available before the agency as and when required until the filing of chargesheet.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The CBI had on July 8 registered a case against Teesta and Anand alleging that her firm Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Limited (SCPPL) received around $2.9 lakh in foreign donations in violation of Foreign Contribution Regulation Act.According to the agency, SCPPL was not registered under FCRA for collecting money from abroad and the amount of nearly Rs1.8 crore ($2.9 lakh) was, therefore, received in violation of the Act as the organisation needed to seek prior approval from the Union Home Ministry.With agency inputs

Gujarat High Court condones Teesta Setalvad’s delay in filing plea

The Gujarat High Court on Monday condoned the delay in filing a plea by social activist Teesta Setalvad to defreeze her bank accounts in the alleged fund embezzlement case and fixed the next hearing on August 5.

The Gujarat High Court on Monday condoned the delay in filing a plea by social activist Teesta Setalvad to defreeze her bank accounts in the alleged fund embezzlement case and fixed the next hearing on August 5.Last month Setalwad had moved the plea to defreeze her bank accounts in an alleged embezzlement case wherein she had allegedly collected Rs 1.51 crore from national and international donors promising to convert Gulberg Society to a 2002 riots museum, but allegedly spent money for personal purposes. The city crime branch had frozen the bank accounts of Setlavad, her husband Javed Anand and two of their NGOs’ accounts after they began probe into the embezzlement case filed by a former resident of Gulberg Society last year.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>They had challenged the order of a city metropolitan court, which had rejected their pleas to defreeze the bank accounts in November 2014. However, as the plea was filed 90 days after the order was given, the applicant filed to condone the delay.During the hearing today, Teesta’s lawyer Kalpesh Shastri contended that the delay in filing the application was caused mainly because his client was busy trying for anticipatory bail from the Supreme Court.Justice Sonia Gokani took into account these explanations and admitted the application. The next hearing has been fixed on August 5.

Bombay HC rejects Teesta Setalvad’s anticipatory bail plea, grants interim relief from arrest until August

Mumbai: In a breather to social activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband, the Bombay High Court on Friday granted the duo 17-day interim relief from arrest in a CBI case alleging that her company received Rs 1.8 crore from abroad without mandatory approval from Centre.

Teesta Setalvad. AFP

Teesta Setalvad. AFP

Justice Mridula Bhatkar, while granting Teesta and her husband Javed Anand interim protection from arrest till 10 August, said the duo was already given protection by the sessions court.

Teesta and Anand moved the high court seeking anticipatory bail after a special CBI court on Friday rejected their pre-arrest bail pleas and also refused to extend the interim relief granted to them earlier on 17 July.

“At this stage I do not want to go into merits. Is there any chance of the accused persons absconding? If no, then interim protection can be granted for a period of two weeks,” Justice Bhatkar said.

The court directed Teesta and her husband to appear before the office of Economic Offences Wing of CBI on 27 and 30 July and on 3 and 6 August for recording their statement from 12 pm to 3 pm.

The court refused to agree to the CBI’s demand to direct the duo to appear before the agency everyday.

“They (Teesta and Javed) have been appearing before you (CBI) from July 17. You must have done some investigation. Everyday appearance is not required,” Justice Bhatkar said.

Public Prosecutor Sandeep Shinde, appearing for CBI, argued that the offence was of a serious nature and custodial interrogation was required.

The court has posted their anticipatory bail petitions for final hearing on 10 August.

Soon after the sessions court rejected her bail pleas, Teesta told the court that she was shocked and aggrieved.

“I am shocked and aggrieved by the verdict as this is a petty offence. My sympathisers feel that this is an attempt (by the government) to intimidate and possibly eliminate us by the powers (sic),” she said.

The CBI had on 8 July registered a case against Teesta and Anand alleging that her firm Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Limited (SCPPL) received around 2.9 lakh USD in foreign donations in violation of Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA).

PTI

Bombay High Court protects Teesta Setalvad, husband from arrest till August 9

Granting temporary bail to the couple till August 10, Justice Mridula Bhatkar directed them to appear before the office of Economic Offences Wing of CBI on July 27 and 30 and on August 3 and 6 to record their statements between 12pm and 3pm.

Social activist Teesta Seetalvad and her husband Javed Anand leave the sessions court after it rejected their bail plea on Friday. Later, they approached the HC, which granted them relief
Salman Ansari
dna
The Bombay High Court on Friday granted interim relief to social activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand from being arrested in connection with a case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation for allegedly misappropriating Rs1.8 crore from abroad without mandatory approval from Centre. Granting temporary bail to the couple till August 10, Justice Mridula Bhatkar directed them to appear before the office of Economic Offences Wing of CBI on July 27 and 30 and on August 3 and 6 to record their statements between 12pm and 3pm.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> Teesta and Anand moved the HC after a special CBI court rejected their pre-arrest bail pleas and also refused to extend the interim relief granted to them earlier on July 17. Public Prosecutor Sandeep Shinde, appearing for CBI, argued that the offence was of a serious nature and custodial interrogation of the couple was required. However, the court refused to ask Setalvad and Anand to appear daily before the agency as they have been regularly attending their office. The court has posted their anticipatory bail petitions for final hearing on August 10. The CBI had on July 8 registered a case against Teesta and Anand alleging that her firm Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Limited (SCPPL) received around $2.9 lakh in foreign donations in violation of Foreign Contribution Regulation Act. According to the agency, SCPPL was not registered under FCRA for collecting money from abroad and the amount of nearly Rs1.8 crore ($2.9 lakh) was, therefore, received in violation of the Act as the organisation needed to seek prior approval from the Union Home Ministry.

Activists extend support to Teesta Setalvad and Javed Anand

On July 14, the CBI searched four places in Mumbai, including the premises of Teesta Setalvad, her husband Javed Anand as well as the office of her firm, Sabrang Communications and Publishing.

Teesta Setalvad

File Photo
Activists from Gujarat, including a former Gujarat chief minister, extended their support to Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand on Wednesday, alleging the recent CBI action against her was an “open misuse of power” by the Centre. “We, the undersigned, express our profound dismay and disquiet at the continued official harassment of human rights defenders Teesta Setalvad and Javed Anand by the central government,” said a statement signed by rights activists from Gujarat, including former Gujarat Chief Minister Suresh Mehta.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”After the BJP-led government was installed in Delhi in May 2014, the country has witnessed open official efforts to foist a large variety of charges of financial irregularities on them, in order to harass them, tarnish their reputations and to secure their arrests,” the statement said. “Fortunately, interventions by the higher judiciary have protected them so far. However, the latest raids by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on their home and offices in Mumbai on July 14, 2015 are signs of continuing open misuse of official bodies to harass these human rights defenders,” the statement said.On July 14, the CBI searched four places in Mumbai, including the premises of Teesta Setalvad, her husband Javed Anand as well as the office of her firm, Sabrang Communications and Publishing. On July 8, the CBI had registered a case against all of them under sections of the Indian Penal Code, which are related to criminal conspiracy (Section 120-B) along with provisions of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, 2010 and the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, 1976. “It is well known that Teesta Setalvad and Javed Anand fought an unrelenting battle not only to bring criminals who committed gruesome hate crimes against Muslims during the 2002 carnage…,” the statement said.

Supreme Court adjourns hearing on Teesta Setlavad’s bail plea till July 24

On Monday, Teesta had recorded her statement before the CBI in connection with the case.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned the hearing on the anticipatory bail plea of activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand till July 24 in connection with the case against her firm for allegedly receiving foreign donations in violation of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA).On Monday, Teesta had recorded her statement before the CBI in connection with the case. The investigating agency had earlier registered a case against Setalvad for allegedly receiving funds from foreign entities without prior permission from the government. <!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>

CBI raids Teesta Setalvad’s Mumbai residence, office

The Central Bureau of Investigation had registered a case on July 8 against Teesta.

CBI raided the office and the residence of civil rights activist Teesta Setalvad in Mumbai, on Tuesday morning. The raid was reportedly conducted by 16 CBI officials.Teesta told news channel NDTV that she didn’t understand the rationale behind the raid despite offering full cooperation.The Central Bureau of Investigation had registered a case on July 8 against Teesta for allegedly receiving funds from foreign entities without prior permission from the government. The FIR also named Teesta’s husband Javed Anand, businessman Gulam Mohammed Peshimam and Sabrang Communications and Publishing. The CBI is currently examining Sabrang’s documents and bank account details.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Government had given temporary relief to Setalvad’s two NGOs, which allegedly violated Foreign Currency Regulation Act, by allowing her more time to reply to its showcause notices. Sabarang Trust and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), run by Teesta and her husband Javed Anand, were served the notices nearly a month ago following an on-site inspection of their records and books of accounts carried out by Home Ministry officials in April this year.Setalvad is known for championing the cause of 2002 post-Godhra riot victims in Gujarat.During the probe under Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), Home Ministry officials found that Teesta and her husband were running a magazine “Communalism Combat” as co-editors as well as printer and publisher of their company Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Ltd (SCPPL) and allegedly received foreign contribution. Under FCRA, no foreign contribution shall be accepted by any correspondent, columnist, cartoonist, editor, owner, printer or publisher of a registered newspaper.CJP, which has been fighting cases for victims of 2002 Gujarat riots, had received a total foreign contribution of around Rs 1.18 crore from 2008-09 to 2013-14. According to the notice, more than 80% or nearly Rs 95 lakh was spent for legal aid. While the entity was registered for ‘Educational and Economic’ purposes, it received foreign contribution for activities such as ‘Legal Aid’ which is covered under purpose ‘Social’. Hence, it violated FCRA rules, they contended.With agency inputs.

Modi government may order CBI probe against Teesta Setalvad’s firm

The government may ask CBI to probe alleged transfer of funds by the Ford Foundation to activist Teesta Setalvad’s Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Limited (SCPPL).

PTI
The government may ask CBI to probe alleged transfer of funds by the Ford Foundation to activist Teesta Setalvad’s Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Limited (SCPPL).Official sources said SCPPL had accepted a grant of US $2.9 lakh from the Ford Foundation despite being a private company not having clearance from the Ministry of Home Affairs under the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act (FCRA).This donation was, therefore, a serious violation of FCRA provisions, which mandate funding from a foreign source to only those recipients who have FCRA registration, they said.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The sources claimed the Home Ministry during its inspection of the company’s accounts found that an amount of Rs 50 lakh was allegedly transferred to it by Setalvad’s Sabrang Trust which also was in violation of FCRA norms.Gujarat government had asked the Home Ministry to take action against Ford Foundation, alleging that the US-based organisation was “interfering in internal affairs” of the country and also “abetting communal disharmony” through an NGO run by social activist Teesta Setalvad.The fund transfer from Ford Foundation, at present, has to be cleared by a nodal official in the Home Ministry. In April, the government had ordered that funds from the Ford Foundation should not be released by any bank to any Indian NGO without mandatory permission from the Home Ministry.The Gujarat government and Setalvad are embroiled in legal battles. While she has filed several cases against the state government functionaries including the then chief minister Narendra Modi in connection with the communal riots of 2002, the state police has filed a case of embezzlement of funds against her.The Gujarat police has been probing a case of alleged embezzlement of Rs 1.51 crore against Setalvad, based on a complaint by survivors of Gulberg Society.Setalvad, in her statement earlier, had said that Sabrang Trust had co-operated with the Home Ministry team which visited its offices. Her anticipatory bail plea is pending before the Supreme Court after the Gujarat High Court rejected her pre-arrest bail plea.

MHA serves notice to two NGOs run by Teesta Setalvad for alleged FCRA violations

Sources said during the probe it was found that they were running a magazine Communalism Combat as co-editors as well as printer and publisher of their company Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Ltd (SCPPL) and allegedly received foreign contribution.

Two NGOs run by social activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband have been served notice by Home Ministry for alleged violations of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) and asked to reply within 15 days.Sabarang Trust and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), run by Teesta and her husband Javed Anand, were served the notice two days ago following an on-site inspection of records and books of accounts carried out by Home Ministry officials in April this year.Sources said during the probe it was found that they were running a magazine Communalism Combat as co-editors as well as printer and publisher of their company Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Ltd (SCPPL) and allegedly received foreign contribution.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Under the FCRA, no foreign contribution shall be accepted by any correspondent, columnist, cartoonist, editor, owner, printer or publisher of a registered newspaper. CJP, which has been fighting cases for victims of 2002 Gujarat riots, had received a total foreign contribution of around Rs 1.18 crore from 2008-09 to 2013-14. According to notice, more than 80 per cent or nearly Rs 95 lakh was spent for legal aid.While the entity was registered for ‘Educational and Economic’ purposes, it received foreign contribution for activities such as ‘Legal Aid’ which is covered under purpose ‘Social’. Hence, it violated the provisions of the FCRA rules, they contended. “On review of vouchers of the association it was found that Sabrang Trust have made payment of Rs 12 lakh from FCRA designated account to Citi Bank and Union Bank of India on account of credit facilities taken through credit cards belonging to Setalvad and Anand.”This amounts to use of foreign contribution for the purposes not authorised as per the provisions of FCRA 2010. Thus association has violated Section 8(1) (a) of FCRA 2010,” the Home Ministry notice said. The Home Ministry investigation also found that Anand has taken international medical policy for visiting Lahore and debited the amount in the account of Sabrang Trust. Further, even book purchases and travel expenses incurred by him to attend meetings with People’s Union For Civil Liberties (PUCL) were debited in Sabrang Trust allegedly in violation of Section 8(1)(a) of FCRA.The Home Ministry’s inspection has also found that an amount of Rs 50 lakh was allegedly transferred by Sabrang Trust to SCPPL which is not registered under FCRA. FCRA rules prohibit transfer of foreign contribution to non-FCRA account unless such entity is also registered and had been granted the certificate or obtained prior permission under this Act.The investigation also found various alleged irregularities like administrative expenditure exceeding more than 50 per cent.Besides, different figures towards expenses incurred on legal aid in the books of accounts and in the receipts of payment accounts, closing balance of the proceeding year was allegedly not reported as opening balance and even the funds received from United Nations not found in the bank statement, the sources claimed.

India,Bangladesh settle boundary dispute; PM Modi announces US $2 billion credit

Noting that the two countries had accepted the settlement of the maritime boundary last year, he said, “it is evidence of the maturity of our ties and our shared commitment to international rules. So, we stand at a moment of huge opportunity in our relationship. Prime Minister (Hasina) and I recognise that.”

AFP
India and Bangladesh on Saturday opened a new chapter in their ties as they settled the 41-year-old boundary dispute and promised to do more in other areas amid Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s announcement of a fresh line of credit of US $2 billion to the neighbouring country.With West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee standing by his side, Modi, on his maiden visit here, also expressed confidence to have a “fair solution” to the Teesta and Feni river water sharing issues with Bangladesh “with the support of state governments in India”. After extensive talks between Modi and Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, the two sides signed 22 agreements, including on cooperation in maritime safety and to curb human trafficking and fake Indian currency.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Hasina, whose country is seen as a hiding ground for insurgents of north east India, also promised “zero tolerance” stance against terrorism. She said the two countries agreed to set up two Special Economic Zones to bridge the growing trade deficit. Modi promised to do “everything” to address it.He announced a fresh US $2 billion line of credit for Bangladesh and promised quick implementation of the earlier line of credit of US $800 million and full disbursement of US $200 million. The highlight of the Modi’s first day here was the exchange of documents related to the Land Boundary Agreement (LBA), which paves the way for exchange of territories to settle the 41-year-old border dispute which has been an irritant.Under the Agreement, 111 border enclaves will be transferred to Bangladesh in exchange for 51 that will become part of India. “The visit is at a historic moment. We have resolved a question that has lingered since Independence. Our two nations have a settled boundary. It will make our borders more secure and people’s life there more stable,” Modi said at a joint press interaction with Hasina.Land pact signed (AFP)Referring to the unanimous passage of the LBA by Parliament last month, he said it “reflects the consensus in India on relations with Bangladesh.” Noting that the two countries had accepted the settlement of the maritime boundary last year, he said, “it is evidence of the maturity of our ties and our shared commitment to international rules. So, we stand at a moment of huge opportunity in our relationship. Prime Minister (Hasina) and I recognise that.” Modi said connectivity between India and Bangladesh by road, rail, rivers, sea, transmission lines, petroleum pipelines and digital links will increase. “Today, we have unveiled some of the pathways to this future,” he said.In a major initiative to boost connectivity and enhance people-to-people contact, two bus services — Kolkata-Dhaka-Agartala and Dhaka-Shillong-Guwahati — were flagged off jointly by Modi, Hasina and Mamata Banerjee.During the talks, it was decided that Indian Missions would be opened in Khulna and Sylhet while Bangladesh Mission will be opened in Guwahati. Referring to the Teesta water issue which remains unresolved, Modi said “our rivers should nurture our relationship, not become a source of discord. Water sharing is, above all, a human issue. It affects life and livelihood on both sides of the border.”Image courtesy ReutersHe mentioned the settlement of boundary issue to say that “we have shown political resolve and goodwill” with it. “We will work together to harness the rich potential of our relationship. And, we will address our challenges in a spirit of friendship and from a position of mutual trust and confidence,” Modi said, adding the agreements signed reflect this “vision and commitment”.Hasina, while describing India as a “very important neighbour”, said Modi’s visit has given “us a renewed hope and would provide growth” to our relations. “The deals that we signed today would open new doors in the areas of trade, investment,” the Bangladesh Prime Minister said but underlined that “the most important is to translate the agreements into a reality.”She said she believed that “collectively we can work and ensure the prosperity of this region that was Mujib’s dream.” Modi said the future he dreams for India is the future he wishes for Bangladesh.”As we deepen our political engagement and celebrate our rich inheritance, as our economies get more integrated and our people better connected, our nations will become more prosperous,” he said, while observing that “our growing cooperation is a picture of my deeply-held belief in the shared prosperity of neighbours”.Contending that the two countries have added new dimensions to the economic ties, the Indian leader said the coastal shipping agreement will boost bilateral trade while the Indian Economic Zone will promote Indian investments in Bangladesh. “The new border haat at Kamalasagar will reinforce traditional economic links. And, the agreement on blue economy and maritime cooperation opens a new area of economic opportunities. We should now extend our frontiers of cooperation to space,” he said.Modi said he was “conscious of the huge trade imbalance, despite duty free and quota free access to Bangladesh in India on all but 25 items” and had “assured Prime Minister (Hasina) that we will do everything we can to bridge the deficit.” Indian investments in Bangladesh will help, he said, adding “I will also try to make trade smoother and easier, including at the border.”The agreement on standards and testing is a step in that direction, the Indian Prime Minister said. He said power supply from India to Bangladesh will grow from 500 MW to 1100 MW within two years. “The 1320 MW Rampal power project is making progress in accordance with your (Bangladeshi) laws and regulation. We can do more together in power sector, here and in India,” he added.Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi (L) hands over the steering wheel of INS Vikrant to Sheikh Hasina (AFP)Hasina said India’s growth in economy, education, innovation and technology is praiseworthy. “Even Bangladesh has achieved a lot in the last six years.” Citing the flagging off of two bus services, Hasina said she and Modi had agreed on the importance of connectivity between the two nations and for the overall development of the region. “I am sure we would be able to usher in a society sans discrimination.” In her remarks, Hasina credited Modi for passage of the constitution amendment bill in Parliament to Modi decisive leadership. “We are extremely happy that the land boundary issue has finally been resolved. I appreciate Prime Minister Modi’s leadership in achieving it. We also thank the people of India and all political parties in India for their unequivocal support to the pact.”In a reference to long-pending Teesta pact, Modi said, “We should also work together to renew and clean our rivers. Teesta water is crucial for Bangladesh, especially in the leanest period from December to March when the water flow often temporarily comes down to less than 1,000 cusecs from 5,000 cusecs. Calling his visit a special moment for him, Modi said, “We have the emotional bonds of shared struggles and sacrifices that bring us together as sovereign and equal nations.””Now, we are successful fellow travellers on the road to development,” he said. The MoUs signed today include renewal of Bilateral Trade Agreement and renewal of protocol on Inland Water Transit and Trade, MoU between Coast Guards of the two countries, a pact on Prevention of Human Trafficking and another on Prevention of Smuggling and Circulation Fake Currency Notes.(Image courtesy PTI) Both the countries signed a coastal shipping agreement which will provide for movement of Indian ships to various ports in Bangladesh. Under provision of another MoU, Indian companies will be allowed to set up Economic Zones in Bangladesh.The two countries also signed an MoU on Blue Economy and Maritime Cooperation in the Bay of Bengal and the Indian Ocean. Another MoU was signed on use of Chittagong and Mongla Ports. Opening its insurance sector, Bangladesh handed over Consent Letter by Insurance Development and Regulatory Authority (IDRA), Bangladesh to Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) to start operations in the country.The annual trade between Bangladesh is around USD 6.5 billion out of which India’s export is around USD 6 billion while Bangladesh exports to India is around US $0.5 billion.

Confident of fair solution to river water sharing issues: PM Modi

He was speaking at a joint press interaction with Prime Minister Hasina after their extensive talks on the entire gamut of bilateral issues.

AFP
Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday exuded confidence of reaching a “fair solution” to the long-pending Teesta and Feni rivers water sharing issues with Bangladesh.The Teesta issue was understood to have figured during a brief interaction between Modi, Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee here. “Our rivers should nurture our relationship, not become a source of discord. Water sharing is, above all, a human issue. It affects life and livelihood on both sides of the border.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”We have shown political resolve and mutual goodwill with the Land Boundary Agreement. I am confident that with the support of state governments in India, we can reach a fair solution on Teesta and Feni Rivers. We should also work together to renew and clean our rivers,” Modi said.He was speaking at a joint press interaction with Prime Minister Hasina after their extensive talks on the entire gamut of bilateral issues. The Teesta deal was set to be inked during the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Bangladesh in September 2011, but was postponed at the last minute due to objections by the West Bengal Chief Minister.Banerjee was today present with Modi and Hasina during signing of the protocol to ratifify the historic Land Boundary Agreement. The Teesta water is crucial for Bangladesh, especially in the leanest period from December to March when the water flow often temporarily comes down to less than 1,000 cusecs from 5,000 cusecs every year. In her comments, Hasina said the issue of sharing of water of 54 common rivers figured in the meeting.

Euphoric reception awaits PM Modi in maiden visit to Bangladesh

The capital is decked up with big hoardings carrying his photographs of Modi besides life-size cutouts of him, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

PTI
Bangladesh is all set to roll out a red carpet welcome to Prime Minister Narendra Modi when he arrives in Dhaka on Saturday on his maiden visit amid expectations that the two-day trip will open new vistas in bilateral ties.The capital is decked up with big hoardings carrying his photographs of Modi besides life-size cutouts of him, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.As signing of the land boundary agreement (LBA) between the two countries would be a major highlight of the visit, hoardings carrying the photographs of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Bangladesh’s founder Sheikh Mujibur Rahman inking an agreement in 1974 to settle the vexed border issue have also been put up in various key areas of the city. Also, large cutouts of Gandhi and Rahman could be seen on the streets as a token of an age-old relationship between the two countries and India’s role in the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971.<!– Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Earlier this month, the Indian Parliament had passed a historic constitution amendment bill seeking to settle India’s 41-year-old border issue with Bangladesh. The bill will operationalise the India-Bangladesh Land Boundary agreement that provides for exchange of 161 enclaves between the two countries. The two sides will sign a pact to implement the historic agreement in presence of Banerjee. Interestingly, posters and banners, carrying her photographs have also been put up along the around 14-km stretch from the Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport to the main city, along with Modi’s.Various localities of the city have been decorated to welcome Modi and security across the city has been tightened as gun-totting personnel could be seen in all the prominent areas. Ahead of his visit, Modi on Wednesday said in New Delhi that he was looking forward to it with a great sense of “enthusiasm and delight” as the two sides readied a host of pacts to be signed, including one on enhancing connectivity. “It is with a great sense of enthusiasm and delight that I visit a nation with which India’s ties have been very strong,” Modi said in a statement.Lauding role of Prime Minister Hasina for playing an “important role” for making the bilateral ties “strong”, Modi said: “I am certain my visit will be beneficial for the people of both our nations and in the larger good of the South Asian neighbourhood.” Referring to the LBA, Modi said it marked a “watershed moment” in India’s ties with Bangladesh.The Prime Minister will have a tight schedule here as besides holding detailed talks with his Bangladesh counterpart Hasina, he will attend several programmes and pay a visit to the Memorial of the 1971 liberation war.Besides signing pacts to improve connectivity between the two countries, there will be efforts by both the sides to enhance trade. Bangladesh is an important trading partner for India, with two-way trade in 2012-2013 standing at US $5.34 billion and India’s exports to Bangladesh accounting for US $4.776 billion besides imports of US $0.564 million. Modi and Hasina will flag-off the bus service between Kolkata and Agartala via Dhaka and the Dhaka-Shillong-Guwahati bus service.The two countries are keen to strengthen railway connectivity, particularly to revive railway links which were in existence prior to 1965. The two countries are also set to sign a coastal shipping agreement to facilitate sailing of small vessels from India to various ports in Bangladesh which now go through Singapore.India will also push for involvement of Indian companies in setting up of ports in that country. The issue of Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal (BBIN) Motor Vehicle Agreement is also likely to figure in the talks Modi will have with Hasina.India feels improving connectivity with Bangladesh will help linking the Northeastern region with Southeast Asia. On the trade front, there will be efforts to spur Indian investment in Bangladesh and an MoU may be signed to facilitate setting up of Special Economic Zones by Indian companies in that country. The current volume of bilateral ties between India and Bangladesh are on an upswing ever since the Hasina government came to power in January, 2009 and the Indian side will make every effort to strengthen the relationship considering its strategic interests.Bangladesh and India share a 4,096-km-long border, most of which is porous, and both the countries are likely to try and find ways to enhance security cooperation, particularly to further contain northeast insurgent groups. The Hasina government has taken steps against northeast militants who used to take refuge in Bangladesh.There has been perceptible decline in activities of Pakistan-backed fundamentalist elements in Bangladesh, and Modi would like to further cement bilateral ties with the Hasina government considering India’s strategic interests. India has already announced that the long-pending Teesta water-sharing pact with Bangladesh will not be signed during the visit.The Teesta deal was set to be inked during the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Bangladesh in September, 2011 but was postponed at the last minute due to objections by Banerjee, who had also dropped out of the Prime Ministerial delegation. Teesta water is crucial for Bangladesh, especially in the leanest period from December to March when the water flow often temporarily comes down to less than 1,000 cusecs from 5,000 cusecs.

Why Modi should offer Sheikh Hasina a win-win deal on illegal immigrants

<![CDATA[#bottom_popup{width:344px;background:url(http://s3.firstpost.in/wp-content/themes/firstpost2.0/images/promo/bottom_popup.gif) repeat-x;border:3px solid #6b6565;position:fixed;z-index:99;bottom:-130px;right:-350px}#bottom_popup .contbox{padding:5px 6px 25px 6px;position:relative;background:#F1F1F1}#bottom_popup .bptitle{border-bottom:1px solid #d3d3d3;font:19px/30px ‘FPfont’;color:#000;text-transform:uppercase;padding-bottom:5px}#bottom_popup .bptitle span{color:#F00}#bottom_popup .bptitle span.dot{color:#F00;font-size:30px}.f_flash_icon{background:url(http://s1.firstpost.in/wp-content/themes/firstpost2.0/images/promo/f_flash_icon.png) no-repeat 0 0;width:29px;height:29px;display:inline-block;vertical-align:bottom;margin-right:3px}.close_bottom_popup{background:url(http://s3.firstpost.in/wp-content/themes/firstpost2.0/images/promo/clost_bottom_popup.png) no-repeat 0 0;width:13px;height:13px;position:absolute;right:5px;top:5px}.bottom_infobox{font:14px Georgia, “Times New Roman”, Times, serif;color:#333;border-top:1px solid #FFF;padding-top:10px}.bottom_infobox a{color:#333}]]> <!– FP CRONTAB –>

Ford Foundation and Modi sarkar’s paranoia: Are emergency days back?

The paranoia of foreign hands that began with the offloading of Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai and blocking funds to the NGO has now reached an organisation that is almost as old as Independent India and whose imprint is indelible on many national programmes and institutions.

On Thursday, when the Modi government put the Ford Foundation on a watch list primarily because it funded human rights activist Teesta Setalvad’s NGO fighting for the rights of Gujarat riot-victims, and asked the Reserve Bank of India not to pass on foreign funds to the organisation without its clearance, it has sent out a strong message that it doesn’t trust anybody other than those who parrot its views.

The original author of this paranoia was nobody but former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, who was extremely wary of NGOs that she thought had been puppeteered by foreign agencies. In fact, Foreign Contributions Regulation Act (FCRA), the tool that controls the flow of overseas funds to NGOs in India, was established by her during emergency. In 1984, when it was further tightened, funding to 142 organisations were blocked. The Ministry of Home Affairs currently has several NGOs on its watch list and the “iconic” Ford Foundation is the latest.

Ford FoundationFord Foundation

Ford Foundation

It’s not the money that matters. In its report on its 50th anniversary in India in 2002, Ford Foundation said that it had spent $500 million for various projects in the country. That was really short change, but the impact was huge. What’s probably disconcerting for the present government are the causes Ford supports such as democratic governance, which include increasing political participation, civil society activism and transparency; human rights which includes the rights of minorities, marginalised communities, Dalits and adivasis; freedom of expression; sexuality, LGBT rights and women’s rights among others. The central themes of its programmes are rights, equality and transparency which are ideas that challenge authoritative governments.

Ford’s grant-making programmes, which include both organisations and individuals, therefore can be a problem for the government because if it supports the welfare of Dalits and adivasis, the Home Ministry might view it as support to Maoists (in fact, Nobel winner MSF was recently accused of supporting Maoists because it worked among tribal communities who are otherwise unreached by government systems). Similarly, if it supports minority rights, as perhaps they have done by funding Teesta’s NGO, it can be seen as being partial to Muslims and any support to freedom of expression may be interpreted as fostering internal trouble.

By targeting the Ford Foundation, the Modi government has also made a clear political statement that it doesn’t care for the legacy of the organisation while facing dissent. Ford is no ordinary NGO. It was Nehru’s favourite and had played an important role in his vision of India by co-authoring India’s agricultural revolution and family planning programme, capacity strengthening of the erstwhile Planning Commission, establishment of IIMs and institutions such as the National Institute of Design (NID) in Ahmedabad, IRMA in Anand and the Institute of Economic Growth (IEG) in Delhi. In fact, in the initial years, it worked with the government and had a team of nearly 100 overseas experts at its Lodhi Road office in Delhi. What’s more interesting is that bulk of the UN in India now operates from the Foundation’s building. Perhaps Ford was the face of overseas development assistance in India’s initial years after independence.

It was in the 1970s, the Foundation shifted its focus to civil society organisations and individuals. Many celebrated Indian NGOs such as SEWA and DISHA and public policy institutions such as
National Centre for Applied Economic Research (NCAER), the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) and the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) owe its genesis to the Foundation.

The influence of Ford in public policy is incontestable and probably irreversible. Since it started as early as India’s independence and had the complete trust of Nehru, its ideas had been wired into India’s social and economic development processes. However, what’s less known is its influence on civil society action and politics. Many of India’s prominent civil society leaders, who later successfully dabbled in politics had been funded by Ford – Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia (through their NGO Kabeer) and Yogendra Yadav (through ICSSR of JNU). If one considers the Rockefeller-Ford umbrella, it has more interesting names such as Kiran Bedi and Anna Hazare. The Magsasay award, considered to be the Asian Nobel prize, had been established by Rockefeller Foundation and queerly several Ford grantees have been honoured by this award. They are all active in various spheres of civil society engagement, politics and public policy. In fact, Arvind Kejriwal is a success story of Ford’s grant making programme in India.

Interestingly, in its move against Ford, Modi government and some of his severe critics are on the same side – the Left, and public intellectuals such as Arundhati Roy. For both, Foundations such as Ford and Rockefeller represent the capitalist interests of America and even the CIA.

Modi government seems to be unsparing when it comes to handling dissent. It’s noteworthy that besides Teesta, Ford has also supported one of his fiercest critics, Mallika Sarabhai. Throttling funds is an easy option to suppress opposition as many autocratic governments have attempted time and again. In 2014, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association, Maina Kiai highlighted three general principles to protect civil space. The ability to seek, receive and spend money is one of them.

Ironically, when Indira Gandhi clamped down on NGOs, what she targeted was Gandhian organisations because she thought they were out to destabilise her. In Modi’s regime, the targets seem to be human rights organisations. With increasing suspicion of civil society organisations and fund flows, Modi’s India can be proud that it’s in the august company of (Rajapakse’s) Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Hungary, Egypt, Sudan, Russia and Venezuela.

Ford Foundation and Modi Govt’s paranoia: Are the emergency days back?

The paranoia of foreign hands that began with the offloading of Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai and blocking funds to the NGO has now reached an organisation that is almost as old as Independent India and whose imprint is indelible on many national programmes and institutions.

On Thursday, when the Modi government put the Ford Foundation on a watch list primarily because it funded human rights activist Teesta Setalvad’s NGO fighting for the rights of Gujarat riot-victims, and asked the Reserve Bank of India not to pass on foreign funds to the organisation without its clearance, it has sent out a strong message that it doesn’t trust anybody other than those who parrot its views.

The original author of this paranoia was nobody but former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, who was extremely wary of NGOs that she thought had been puppeteered by foreign agencies. In fact, Foreign Contributions Regulation Act (FCRA), the tool that controls the flow of overseas funds to NGOs in India, was established by her during emergency. In 1984, when it was further tightened, funding to 142 organisations were blocked. The Ministry of Home Affairs currently has several NGOs on its watch list and the “iconic” Ford Foundation is the latest.

Ford FoundationFord Foundation

Ford Foundation

It’s not the money that matters. In its report on its 50th anniversary in India in 2002, Ford Foundation said that it had spent $500 million for various projects in the country. That was really short change, but the impact was huge. What’s probably disconcerting for the present government are the causes Ford supports such as democratic governance, which include increasing political participation, civil society activism and transparency; human rights which includes the rights of minorities, marginalised communities, Dalits and adivasis; freedom of expression; sexuality, LGBT rights and women’s rights among others. The central themes of its programmes are rights, equality and transparency which are ideas that challenge authoritative governments.

Ford’s grant-making programmes, which include both organisations and individuals, therefore can be a problem for the government because if it supports the welfare of Dalits and adivasis, the Home Ministry might view it as support to Maoists (in fact, Nobel winner MSF was recently accused of supporting Maoists because it worked among tribal communities who are otherwise unreached by government systems). Similarly, if it supports minority rights, as perhaps they have done by funding Teesta’s NGO, it can be seen as being partial to Muslims and any support to freedom of expression may be interpreted as fostering internal trouble.

By targeting the Ford Foundation, the Modi government has also made a clear political statement that it doesn’t care for the legacy of the organisation while facing dissent. Ford is no ordinary NGO. It was Nehru’s favourite and had played an important role in his vision of India by co-authoring India’s agricultural revolution and family planning programme, capacity strengthening of the erstwhile Planning Commission, establishment of IIMs and institutions such as the National Institute of Design (NID) in Ahmedabad, IRMA in Anand and the Institute of Economic Growth (IEG) in Delhi. In fact, in the initial years, it worked with the government and had a team of nearly 100 overseas experts at its Lodhi Road office in Delhi. What’s more interesting is that bulk of the UN in India now operates from the Foundation’s building. Perhaps Ford was the face of overseas development assistance in India’s initial years after independence.

It was in the 1970s, the Foundation shifted its focus to civil society organisations and individuals. Many celebrated Indian NGOs such as SEWA and DISHA and public policy institutions such as
National Centre for Applied Economic Research (NCAER), the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) and the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) owe its genesis to the Foundation.

The influence of Ford in public policy is incontestable and probably irreversible. Since it started as early as India’s independence and had the complete trust of Nehru, its ideas had been wired into India’s social and economic development processes. However, what’s less known is its influence on civil society action and politics. Many of India’s prominent civil society leaders, who later successfully dabbled in politics had been funded by Ford – Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia (through their NGO Kabeer) and Yogendra Yadav (through ICSSR of JNU). If one considers the Rockefeller-Ford umbrella, it has more interesting names such as Kiran Bedi and Anna Hazare. The Magsasay award, considered to be the Asian Nobel prize, had been established by Rockefeller Foundation and queerly several Ford grantees have been honoured by this award. They are all active in various spheres of civil society engagement, politics and public policy. In fact, Arvind Kejriwal is a success story of Ford’s grant making programme in India.

Interestingly, in its move against Ford, Modi government and some of his severe critics are on the same side – the Left, and public intellectuals such as Arundhati Roy. For both, Foundations such as Ford and Rockefeller represent the capitalist interests of America and even the CIA.

Modi government seems to be unsparing when it comes to handling dissent. It’s noteworthy that besides Teesta, Ford has also supported one of his fiercest critics, Mallika Sarabhai. Throttling funds is an easy option to suppress opposition as many autocratic governments have attempted time and again. In 2014, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association, Maina Kiai highlighted three general principles to protect civil space. The ability to seek, receive and spend money is one of them.

Ironically, when Indira Gandhi clamped down on NGOs, what she targeted was Gandhian organisations because she thought they were out to destabilise her. In Modi’s regime, the targets seem to be human rights organisations. With increasing suspicion of civil society organisations and fund flows, Modi’s India can be proud that it’s in the august company of (Rajapakse’s) Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Hungary, Egypt, Sudan, Russia and Venezuela.

Home ministry puts Ford Foundation on watch list in ‘national interest’

Trouble is brewing for one of the foremost funding agencies in the world, Ford Foundation, as the Ministry of Home Affairs has placed it under the watch list in “national interest and security ” of the country.

Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh. AFPUnion Home Minister Rajnath Singh. AFP

Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh. AFP

However, later in the evening today, according to a NDTV report, the Ford Foundation had issued a statement saying, ” We have not been contacted directly by MHA and have no information about latest news reports.”

The action against Ford Foundation comes days after another foreign NGO – Greenpeace India – earned a negative report from the Intelligence Bureau. The IB reportedly advised the finance ministry to remove any income-tax exemption citing alleged financial irregularities.

Putting Ford Foundation on prior permission list, MHA has ordered that all the funds coming from Ford Foundation, US, for any agency or NGOs in country will first need to be cleared by the ministry. The action has been taken under section 46 of the FCRA,a report in The Economic Times said.

As per the new directives from the Home Ministry, RBI will notify all banks and their branches in India that any transaction executed by Ford Foundation through its bank accounts should have prior approval of the ministry. The Centre has already blocked around $5 million in grants in the last few months, The Economic Times report said.

On 15 April, the Gujarat government sought a probe into the role of activist Teesta Setalvad’s NGO alleging that it misused funds received from a foreign donor (Ford Foundation) to create ‘communal disharmony’.

“We learnt that the funds which they received, especially from the (US-based) Ford Foundation, were actually used for disturbing the communal harmony and carrying out anti-national propaganda against India in foreign countries,” Gujarat Minister of State for Home Rajnikant Patel told PTI. “We have written a letter to Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh seeking probe into the role of Setalvad’s NGO (Sabrang Trust) after we found out funds given to the NGO were misused.”

“During the investigation of Gulberg Society museum funds embezzlement case, these things came to light,” Patel said. The Ford Foundation had given more than $500,000 to Setalvad’s NGO, he said.

According to The Indian Express, the Gujarat government said in its letter to the Union Home Ministry, “It is revealed during the course of investigation (in the riot relief fund embezzlement case) that Ford Foundation, established with the stated goal of promoting communal harmony, democratic principles and social justice, has been indulging in covert activities of promoting interests that are completely contradictory to the said goals.”

The Gujarat government and Setalvad are already embroiled in legal battles.

Few days ago, Greenpeace India also faced the ire of the Centre, as the government froze the NGO’s bank accounts on the grounds that it was encouraging anti-development campaigns. The government also temporarily suspended the registration of Greenpeace India Society under the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act 2010 (FCRA).

Rejecting that Greenpeace India was working to protect the environment, the home ministry felt to the contrary saying that it was “hurting our national interest”. Seven bank accounts of Greenpeace in IDBI Bank, ICICI Bank and Yes Bank were frozen with immediate effect and the NGO was told that it can appeal against the order in 30 days.

Teesta Setalvad bail case: A bizarre case of the Supreme Court’s exceptionalism

By Kartikeya Tanna

The case against Teesta Setalvad, based on a complaint filed by residents of Gulbarg Society on allegations that she and her husband Javed Anand, trustees of Citizens for Justice and Peace and Sabrang Trust, for forgery and criminal breach of trust of the 2002 riot victims has taken a bizarre turn.

The complaint, in essence, alleged that funds collected by the two trusts in memory, and with the help, of Gulbarg Society victims for certain promises (construction of a museum and reconstruction of their homes) were instead used for personal expenses of the two.

In what should have been a simple case of whether or not to grant anticipatory bail to the two to avoid arrest by the Gujarat Police, the two-Judge bench of the Supreme Court has instead referred the matter to a larger bench. The full text of the judgment can be accessed here.

File image of Teesta Setalvad. AFP imageFile image of Teesta Setalvad. AFP image

File image of Teesta Setalvad. AFP image

First, some history.

Following a complaint filed by residents in March 2013, the Gujarat Police registered an FIR after almost 10 months of verifying the details of the complaint. Apprehending arrest on the filing of the FIR, Teesta and Anand filed an unsuccessful application for anticipatory bail in the city sessions court. Their appeal to the Gujarat High Court was also unsuccessful, thus allowing the Gujarat Police to detain Teesta and Anand for custodial interrogation.

It is useful to state here that the applications and appeals by Teesta and Anand were for anticipatory bail – which is different from regular bail. The purpose of the former is to approach the courts to grant relief from custodial arrest even before a case is made out. Regular bail is when the process of prosecution has commenced or, at times, when there is an appeal to a higher court after a lower court’s conviction is pending. The considerations in either case are substantially different.

Supreme Court jurisprudence on anticipatory bail indicates that such bail must be granted only in exceptional cases where it appears that a person might be falsely implicated, or be subject to a frivolous case, or if there are reasonable grounds for holding that he/she is not likely to abscond or otherwise misuse liberty while on bail.

The Gujarat High Court felt custodial interrogation was necessary because, among other reasons, Teesta and Anand never remained present before any investigating agency and have, in the High Court’s words, “employed every means to avoid the due process of law”.

The judgment cites “stock replies” given by the two – either feigned loss of memory, or had asked the investigating authorities to give questions in writing. On a couple of questions relating to the production of vouchers, IT returns and other documents, they replied that it is “neither necessary nor desirable” to respond and this information was being sought only to “harass and defame us”.

It is critical to point out here that it was only one week after arguments were concluded and judgement was kept reserved that Teesta’s counsel tried, unsuccessfully, to produce vouchers and other documents on the court’s record, perhaps apprehending that the High Court would be rejecting their application for anticipatory bail. The court particularly noted some materials on record which indicated that the two may have exerted pressure or influence on auditors (based out of Mumbai) who did not cooperate with the investigation.

The 63-page Gujarat High Court judgement, a must-read, can be accessed here.

Perhaps unprecedented in recent history, within hours of the Gujarat High Court judgment (12 February), Teesta’s counsels before the Supreme Court got it to stay her arrest until the next day by mentioning the matter before a bench led by the Chief Justice of India (most likely, hearing another matter), citing the emergence of an “extraordinary situation”.

A regular bench then heard the matter the next day giving time to Teesta’s counsel Kapil Sibal to file additional documents and staying the arrest for a week. However, the bench reportedly made oral observations that the allegations against the two were “grave” and made it clear the Supreme Court would not let them make it a “political issue”.

Come 19 February, news hit the stands that the bench that heard the matter on 13 February, which discouraged Teesta’s counsel from making it a political issue, was replaced by a new bench headed by the CJI. According to this Times of India report, an inquiry with the court registry revealed that none of the judges on the earlier bench had recused themselves.

The Supreme Court registry later clarified, although only partially, giving rise to greater doubts. While the registrar said that one of the judges had recused himself, he did not inform the press which judge sought a recusal. As the Times of India reported, both judges had told the newspaper that they had neither orally nor in writing conveyed their desire to recuse themselves.

When the new bench did hear the case, it told the Gujarat Police that it will tell Teesta to produce the documents regarding the case while staying the arrest till it pronounced its judgement. Again vital to note here that, although every media report stated this direction from the court to Teesta to cooperate with the Gujarat Police, the written order does not contain a single thing about ordering Teesta and her husband to cooperate.

Finally, when the judgement came out last week, there is only one word to describe it – bizarre. It cited Bolingbroke, Edmund Burke and John Adams, the second President of the US, on the importance of liberty. It then stated that because there was an assertion by the Gujarat Police about the non-cooperation of Teesta and Anand, the Supreme Court thought it appropriate that the matter be heard by a larger bench.

Why a larger bench? There is absolutely no explanation for it. The Supreme Court may well disagree with the Gujarat High Court’s findings and grant Teesta and Anand anticipatory bail. Of course, in doing so, it has to explain why it disagrees with the High Court’s elaborate rationale.

A matter is referred to a larger bench if there is a complex issue of constitutionality or if there is a conflict between a former two-judge bench’s order and the one sought to be pronounced by the current bench. None of these were at play here. It just has to take a stand that, based on the facts and circumstances, it does or does not think it fit to uphold the Gujarat High Court judgment.

Yet, the Supreme Court, in its wisdom, decided on something inexplicable. This view is confirmed by senior advocate KK Venugopal. Crucially, however, while the process of reference to a larger bench remains pending, the stay on Teesta and Anand’s arrest would continue to be in force.

How the Supreme Court has dealt with the Teesta case since the time Kapil Sibal intervened in an ongoing case to have the court urgently ponder over Teesta’s liberty is judicial exceptionalism of the most perplexing kind.

Fund embezzlement case: SC refers Teesta Setalvad’s bail plea to larger bench

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday referred to a larger bench the petition filed by Teesta Setalvad and her husband seeking anticipatory bail in the case of alleged embezzlement of funds for a museum at Ahmedabad’s Gulbarg Society that was devastated in the 2002 riots.

The apex court, however, said that the interim order providing protection from arrest to Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand shall be extended till the larger bench takes up the matter.

Social activist Teesta Setalvad. AFPSocial activist Teesta Setalvad. AFP

Social activist Teesta Setalvad. AFP

While referring the matter to a larger bench, a bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Adarsh Kumar Goel said the matter in hand raises several issues pertaining to concept of liberty in view of the offences enumerated in the case.

The bench also said that among the issues that needed to be discussed included supremacy of law, value of liberty, concept of regulated liberty, anticipatory bail and issue of non-cooperation during investigation by the accused.

The two-judge bench had on February 19 reserved its order in the anticipatory bail plea of Setalvad and her husband who had challenged the Gujarat High Court order denying them the relief.

The High Court in its February 12 judgement had observed that Setalvad and her husband were not cooperating in the probe and that “they cannot be armoured with full-fledged anticipatory bail when applicants did not cooperate with the investigation”.

Hours after the High Court had denied them the bail, they had moved the apex court and the bench headed by Chief Justice H L Dattu had granted stay of the order and posted the matter for next day.

A bench of justices S J Mukhopadhya (since retired)and N V Ramana had asked some tough questions to Setalvad and her husband for seeking anticipatory bail.

It had extended the protection from arrest till February 19 when a new bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Adarsh Kumar Goel further extended the stay and reserved the judgement.

Setalvad and her husband have been booked by the Crime Branch of Gujarat Police on charges of cheating, breach of trust and under the IT Act, in a matter relating to the construction of “Museum of Resistance” in the Gulbarg Society in Ahmedabad which was hit by communal riots in 2002.

The bench headed by Justice Misra had clarified that non-cooperation by Teesta a social activist, and her husband into the investigation would give liberty to Gujarat police to move application for cancellation of bail.

It had also directed the accused to hand over the list of documents sought from them by the Gujarat police to carry forward its investigation into the case.

On February 28, 2002, in the aftermath of the Godhra train burning incident, armed rioters had swooped on the Gulbarg Society and killed 69 people, including former MP Ehsan Jafri.

One of the riot victims from Gulbarg Housing Society, which was burnt during the 2002 post-Godhra riots, had lodged a complaint with the Ahmedabad Police against Setalvad, Anand and two NGOs run by them – Citizens for Justice and Peace and Sabrang Trust – alleging misappropriation of funds to the tune of Rs 1.51 crore.

According to the complaint, the accused persons had collected funds in the name of converting part of the Gulbarg Society into a museum and had allegedly misappropriated funds worth Rs 1.51 crore.

The accused had contended that they have been implicated in the case and were victims of political vendetta. They claimed that they were being targeted by the perpetrators of the riots.

In 2006, the social activists decided to build the ‘Museum of Resistance’ at the site of the Gulbarg Society. Accordingly in 2009, a part of the plot was sold to Sabrang Trust.

However in 2012, the idea of the museum was dropped as the prices escalated. The same was communicated to the society.

But, according to the complaint filed against Setalvad, funds were collected by her despite the idea being dropped.

PTI

HRD ministry sets up panel to probe misappropriation charge against Teesta Setalvad

New Delhi: The HRD Ministry has set up a committee to probe alleged misappropriation of funds received under the Sarva Siksha Abhiyan by an NGO run by activist Teesta Setalvad, who is facing heat along with her husband in a separate case of embezzlement.

Teesta Setalvad. AFP

Teesta Setalvad. AFP

The three-member committee is to be headed by Supreme Court lawyer Abhijit Bhattacharjee and comprise Gujarat Central University Vice Chancellor SA Bari and senior HR Ministry official Gaya Prasad as its members.

The panel will look into allegations against the NGO Sabrang Trust based on a complaint received by the ministry about “mis-utilisation” of funds by it, officials in the HRD Ministry said, confirming the setting up of the committee.

The two members of the committee, however, said they were yet to receive any communication in this regard.

Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand are also involved in the Gulbarg society embezzlement case.

Supreme Court recently directed Gujarat Police not to arrest the duo in the case while asking them to cooperate in the probe.

The case pertains to funds for a museum in Ahmedabad’s Gulbarg Society, which was devastated in the 2002 riots.

Meanwhile, sources in the ministry said that Setalvad could also be dropped from the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), which is being reconstituted after NDA government came to power.

CABE is the highest decision-making body on education in the country.

PTI

Family of British victims killed in 2002 Gujarat riots slam acquittal of six accused

London: The acquittal of six people in a case related to the killing of three British nationals of Indian origin during the 2002 Gujarat riots was on Friday described as a “failure of justice” by the victims’ family.

Three British nationals were killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots. Reuters

Three British nationals were killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots. Reuters

Citing lack of evidence, a special trial court in India on Friday acquitted all the six accused of killing three British nationals near Prantij town in Sabarkantha district of west Indian state of Gujarat in 2002.

“The tragedy, something that the family has to live with on daily basis, is that the mob responsible for killing their loved ones are still loose on the streets.

“The family will not rest until the Indian government fulfils its legal duty and responsibility of bringing the real culprits to justice,” said Suresh Grover, spokesperson for the Dawood Family Justice Campaign set up in London in the wake of the tragedy.

On 28 February, 2002, as riots engulfed Gujarat a day after the Godhra train-burning incident, Imran Dawood and his UK-based uncles Saeed Dawood, Shakeel Dawood and Mohammad Aswat were attacked by a mob on the highway near Prantij.

Saeed, Shakeel, Mohammad Aswat and their car driver Yusuf Piraghar, a local were burnt alive while Imran managed to save himself with the help of police.

The deaths of the British nationals had prompted the UK government to take a policy decision not to have active engagement with Gujarat government. Britain resumed the engagement only in October 2012.

The forum also hit out at India for failing to “hold rule of law” and taking long duration to deliver legal verdicts.

“How can a country continue to claim that it promotes rule of law when it can take 13 years to deliver a verdict in a case that should have been completed within 12 months, and, as importantly, fail to deliver justice for victims?” a statement said.

It also criticised Gujarat’s police authority for their inability to “identify, interview and support crucial witnesses” in the wake of the incident.

“Unfortunately and sadly the verdict does not come as a surprise. It is an established fact that the Gujarat police failed to investigate the murders properly and thoroughly.

“This negligence was especially noticeable in two key aspects of the investigation: the police’s unwillingness to identify, interview and support crucial witnesses and their apparent inability to collect forensic evidence,” read the statement.

PTI