[Reader-list] Jamia Millia should be prosecuted
iram at sarai.net
iram at sarai.net
Mon Sep 29 23:05:26 IST 2008
Dear Nazo
I think everyone on this list would have understood by now that you dont
want individual responses from list members. Meanwhile there are other
conversational threads on the list regarding 'protocols'. I would love to
read your suggestions.
Coming to the Encounter - Blast - you have very effectively stated your
position (at least I have understood) and I need no further elucidation on
that - certainly not dictionary meanings.
Regarding the legal aid decision by the Jamia VC, there are various
opinions floating around on various forums. Ultimately it was a matter of
choice for the VC - and as far as inviduals like me or you are concerned,
we can agree with him or disagree - AS i said before, I have no desire to
convince you or any body that my way was the 'only' way. I have stated my
position, as have you. (I await examples of precedents where a UNiversity
has supported students accused of 'terrorist' activities - just as a matter
of curiousity).
Best
Iram
On 8:24 am 09/29/08 "Nazneen Anand Shamsi" <nazoshmasi at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Iram,
>
> Thank you for your reply. I deeply appreciate your thoughts. I had a
> rewarding time reading them. Now that it seems we are exchanging our
> thoughts on two threads simultaneously, please allow me, first to reply
> to your response regarding public/private conversations between list
> members, followed by Jamia 'Blasts'.
>
> 1. On public/private conversations-
>
> Does it not always takes us a while to understand things?
>
> I am fine with your Johnny Come Lately understanding on this issue.
> You may recall that in a mail I posted on the reader-list on the 23rd
> of Sept 2008, I wrote in a clear, concise and precise language, about
> my intention to interact only publicly with all list members. (Kindly
> allow me to quote- I intend to have only ON LIST conversations with all
> or any members of this list. I do not wish to hold any private
> conversations with list members.) Having stated this, as clearly as, a
> not so literate person like yours truly could, I had hoped that my
> message was unambiguous. Clearly, that was not the case. I beg your
> pardon for that error.
>
> For your sake, I repeat again- I do not want or desire 'different
> rules of engagement'. I just want a public dialogue. Am I asking
> for too much for anyone to handle? Is it too complex a form of
> communication or engagement?
>
> In all my humility Iram, I accept your apologies. I offer mine in
> the same spirit. I hope you shall forgive me if I had caused you any
> distress. Thank you for sharing with me your theoretical formulations
> with respect to reader list. Now that you have spoken we can rest
> assured that reader-list is indeed a -public space-. But I beg to
> differ, for as I understand 'public-spaces' are
> non-discriminatory spaces open to all without any reservation to caste,
> class, ethnicity or gender. Reader list, in this regard discriminates
> its participants on the basis of language. Reader-list, therefore, may
> be loosely termed as a 'closed' public space as it could be
> termed a privileged space in its broadest sense. The reader list
> closes its public-ness especially if viewed from the perspective of a
> non-English speaking person of course, who is perhaps desirous of
> sharing this space. Having said that, I, as always, stand corrected
> and will look forward for your refined thoughts on the nuances of
> definitions regarding 'public-spaces' and its relationship to
> reader-list.
>
> I do not have any hesitation in sharing with you my list of
> regulations but like a responsible list member I want to make sure that
> a sufficient threshold is achieved first in terms of a consensus that,
> yes we need regulations, before we could address the question-what kind
> of regulations-. In this respect, you may have noticed that on a recent
> thread with subject header-On Sarai Postings- which was initiated by
> Radhakrishnan, there are only five posts. I would like to invite you
> and others on the list to join this debate, of course, if you have time
> and inclination, and let us think together on this very crucial issue.
> I would be extremely happy to hear your kind views, if you have any, on
> regulation, conduct, content and modalities of engagement on the reader
> list.
>
> Before I respond to Jamia 'Blasts' debate, let me say that we
> could do away with the practice of copy/paste jobs on the list. A link
> would suffice. I think all of us here are net savvy enough to follow a
> link. As I reader I am most interested in understanding how people
> think and what they think and how they articulate their thoughts. If
> they want to share some literature with me I welcome that gesture but I
> would rather that a link be given.
>
> 2. On Jamia BLASTS!
>
> -it would be great if you do not refer to the 'case' as
> 'jamia blasts'! There were no blasts in Jamia.- There was an
> encounter in Batla House-
>
> I don't blame you Iram for your painful insistence to adhere to
> categories given to us by the mass media. We are all bowling alone here
> aren't we, to allude to that classic by Putnam. Numbing down.
> Dumbing down. The loop is hypnotizing us. In an Orwellian sense, the
> Squealers are on the job again. Giving us language. Making meaning. And
> we consume. Like a psychedelic drug. And dance trance like. Blast.
> Encounter.Blast. Encounter. Blast. Encounter. Legs apart. Hands in the
> air. Head floating. Eyes turned upward. Sweat breaking all over. News
> just coming in There is a blast at CP. Blast at GK. Blast at CP. Blast
> at GK. News just coming in There is an Encounter at Jamia. Encounter at
> Jamia. Encounter at Jamia. And the dance begins. Blast. Encounter.
> Blast. Encounter. Blast. Encounter. Lets go LIVE. Lets hear from our
> correspondent. Legs apart. Hands in the air. Head floating. Eyes turned
> upward. Sweat breaking all over. Till we are reduced to just a
> creature. And Orwell says 'The creatures outside looked from pig to
> man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was
> impossible to say which was which.'
>
> But we are not creatures, are we? We seem to know which is which
> don't we?. The loop has not hypnotized us. Has it?
>
> Blast and Encounter.
>
> Let's look at these words closely.
>
> Encounter. A dictionary informs us encounter is a verb-
>
> (used with object) to come upon or meet with, esp. unexpectedly: to
> encounter a new situation. to meet with or contend against
> (difficulties, opposition, etc.)to meet (a person, military force,
> etc.) in conflict: –verb (used without object)to meet, esp.
> unexpectedly or in conflict: –noun a meeting with a person or thing,
> esp. a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting: Psychology. a meeting of
> two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of
> married couples (marriage encounter), conducted to promote direct
> emotional confrontations among the participants, esp. as a form of
> therapy (encounter therapy). (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q
> =encounter)
>
> For me what happened that day at CP, GK and Karol bagh was nothing
> less than an encounter. People encountered their death. They met with
> their death 'unexpectedly'. That meeting was 'casual, and
> brief'. May be we have become so tired of translating and
> interpretating that we have given up our faculty to questions these
> words. We do not know now that it was a blast or an encounter. We just
> want to blend in. Speak the lingo. Yet I refuse to accept their word. I
> will not imagine what they want me to. I refuse to not to not question
> their semantics.
>
> Blast. The same dictionary says Blast may be a noun, a verb or an
> adjective-
>
> a loud, sudden sound or noise,
> the sudden death of buds, flowers, or young fruit.
> to show to be false, unreliable, etc.; discredit to hit or
> propel with great force
> to shoot
> (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=blast)
>
> Let us for the sake of argument re-phrase, what happend at Jamia that
> day. There was a blast. A loud sudden noise. Followed by sudden death
> of young men. Bullets flew with great force. Two students and a police
> person was killed. Though now many people think that what happend was
> unrealible.
>
> What happend at Jamia that day was clearly a blast!
>
> A blast in the truest sense of the word. But who is bothered about
> truth here. Perhaps in this mesmerising psyshedelic dance of live TV
> truth is the first casulty. We will never know whether it was a blast
> or an encounter. Although we would like to remember it as an encounter,
> because 'Times of India' says so. Aaj Tak says so. We will
> insist on maintaning those categories. Separate and distinct. Clear. We
> will confirm. We will not question. And if someone does we shall
> correct her. May be she is on psychedelic drugs. She insists on a
> dictionary. How crazy. A mere creature who does not know which is
> which. And look at her. Legs apart. Hands in the air. Head floating.
> Eyes turned upward. Sweat breaking all over. Dancing trance like.
> Blast. Encounter. Blast. Encounter.
>
> 3. On possible options after the Jamia blasts!
>
> Iram, frankly speaking, for me the issue is not about
> 'options', per se, rather it is the act. I applaud Prof.
> Hasan's act in the event of non-occurance of other acts or may be,
> perhaps OPTIONS for providing immediate relief in some form to
> students. When one feels about something. One acts. One does not
> necessarily explore options. May be Prof. Hasan felt strongly about
> giving legal aid to students. And he acted.
>
> -Parallels to caste based aid were drawn because you gave Salman
> Khurshid's exmaple and impled that Jamia University should
> provide legal aid becuase the students are from middle class
> backgrounds-
>
> Let me state again what I implied- I find Prof. Hasan's
> spontaneous act of offer to give legal aid to students who were clearly
> in need courageous. I would like to consider this act unique. I am in
> no way none whatsoever in favor of comparing or correlating this act to
> other 'ROUTINIZED/INSTITUTINALIZED' acts of disbersal of funds.
> Period.
>
> 4. On possible precedents to VC's act/option to provide legal
> aid.
>
> Even if there weren't any precedents, one has to make a beginning
> some where. I would regard any form of decision making process that
> relies on occurance of prior events as the sole criteria for present
> optons prohibitionary. It takes courage to go against the grain, even
> when one knows that one could be wrong.
>
> Best
>
> Nazo
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 7:10 PM, wrote:
> Dear Nazo
>
> I have understood your terms. There would be no personal emails from
> me - at least. Of course it took me time to realize that you dont
> want any interaction with a list member except on a public forum. My
> deepest apologies! I hope my individual/ personal email didnt cause
> too much distress.
>
> The reader list is a 'public space'. Hence my request to my
> co- members to send mails with 'content' and to think before
> clicking the send button. My email was not 'precribing' codes
> for email excahnge between individuals - I think people have to
> arrive at their individual codes themselves- such as the two of us
> have. No emails! Anyway, a private email exchange between two people
> doesnt concern others. There are different rules of engagement on a
> public forum with about 1400 members. You seem to be pushing for
> 'regulations' on the list. Why dont you suggest some? The
> reader list is as much your space as mine or the list admins. I am
> sure if list members see value in them, the list admin will respond.
> No hard feelings Nazo (I am tempted to make a smiley!) but I look
> forward to your suggestions for 'regulations'.
>
> Now regarding the unfortunate series of events under discussion, I
> have a request - it would be great if you do not refer to the
> 'case' as 'jamia blasts'! There were no blasts in
> Jamia. There were blasts in CP, GK and Karol Bagh. There was an
> encounter in Batla House and a couple of students from Jamia
> University have been arrested.
>
> Nazo, are you trying to suggest that the best possible way that
> Mushirul Hasan, Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, had, to help
> the accused of various blasts in the city, was to provide 'legal
> aid' on "behalf" of the University? The autonomous body
> that emerges from the University system - to provide legal aid to
> students accused of 'crimes against the state' was one
> suggestion - I find it difficult to believe that the VC had no
> options. Parallels to caste based aid were drawn because you gave
> Salman Khurshid's exmaple and impled that Jamia University should
> provide legal aid becuase the students are from middle class
> backgrounds. I am still as unconvinced by that logic as I was before.
> I know that needy/ meritorious students are provided scholarships. I
> didnt realise we could extend that to court cases involving
> 'terrorist activities'. Anyway, as far as I know Manjunath
> Shanmugam Trust fought the case for the the former IIM- Lucknow
> student. IIM lucknow did not fight the case directly. But these are
> facts gleaned from newspapers, so I could be wrong. However, I am not
> looking for a precedent where a University was directly involved in
> providing legal aid to students accused of 'terrorist'
> activities but nonetheless I would be curious to know if this has
> ever happened before, in other parts of the world if not in India.
>
>
> I am sure that the decision to provide legal aid falls within the
> purview of the VC office. I wonder if it was the correct decision.
>
> With All Respect
> Iram
>
>
>
> On 1:35 am 09/28/08 "Nazneen Anand Shamsi" wrote:
> >
> > Dear Iram,
> >
> > What a pleasant surprise! I was not expecting yourresponse until
> > later, since you mentioned something aboutunavailability of email
> > access. Anyways!
> >
> > I would rather skipyour passage about list admin and
> > &#39;prescriptions&#39;, I just wanted tomake a point
> > which was this- that just as you want other members ofthis list to
> > &#39;desist from clicking send&#39;, because you want them
> > torespect some un-written modalities of engagement, so would I, in
> > mypersonal capacity want others to at least acknowledge some
> > writtenmodalities of engagement. It seems, all of us here- the
> > writers, theresponders and the readers fail sometimes to
> > appreciate this. We wouldalways want to engage with others on our
> > own terms don&#39;t we. Please bepatient before sending those
> &#39;desist&#39; mails if you in your personalcapacity cannot
> > resist from engaging others on their terms. Justbecause a
> > particular address is available on an internet search engine!
> > Precisely the kind of attitude demonstrated by some of our
> > co-membersjust because there are no argument-filters on reader
> > list. Please showsome respect first and then expect.
> >
> > Otherwise chart out clear, no-nonsense rules of engagement. I am
> > all for a regulatory code of conduct for Sarai Reader-list.
> >
> > I just want to make a point. No bad feelings. Consider it white
> > noise and lets move on.
> >
> > Unless you wish to take this exchange forward...
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > Regarding your response-
> >
> > Let me rephrase your position- you &#39;suggest&#39;
> > concerned partiesinvolved with the unfortunate Jamia blasts to
> > &#39;consider&#39; an option tomake autonomous committees
> > on lines of All India Defense Councilconstituted for a fair trail
> > for SAR.
> > To quote you
> > -I feel that an autonomous body (perhaps with University support -
> > Jamia, JNU and DU) should be set up - that provides legal aid and
> > counseling to students. The Universities can provide financial
> > support to such a body, the students can contribute and raise
> > independent funding. This is a tentative proposition which has had
> > precedent in various forms of Committees for Defense for people
> > accused of &#39;crimes&#39; against the
> > &#39;State&#39;-
> > Hypothetically if the three universities of Delhi need to
> > cometogether to form an autonomous set up, then, I would think that
> > theycould do so only by, exploring options available to them under
> > the UGC.No university can spend its money other wise. Even if UGC
> > grants themsuch a permission then it would result in creation of a
> > formal institution. Because every single paisa has to be accounted
> > for. Properprocedure needs to be put in place, issues related
> > tohierarchy, settling disputes etc needs to be dealt with. This
> > institution, I would imagine, would be asautonomous as CBI ! This
> > is common sense insofar as any dispensationof monies with respect
> > to a state institution is concerned. Even thoughyou may not have
> > wanted this, but unfortunately the wordings of yourargument
> > suggest otherwise.
> > Regarding Salman Khurshid. Let&#39;s enumerate what does he
> > signify.First he is a politician, second he is muslim, third he is
> > a practicingsupreme court lawyer, fourth he is rich, and fifth he
> > exercises a farmore social influence as compared to a son of man
> > from azamgarhwould. Financial status is just one of the many
> > aspects of his life. That is why perhaps, I was in total agreement
> > to dispense aidvis-a-vis social position in this instance. I still
> > do.
> > With respect to my opinion regarding the use of same logic
> > todispense aid based on social position and not on caste, I would
> > suggestthat we talk about it. Because I find the use of categories
> > to classifycaste problematic. I think there needs to be more
> > debate before wecould even begin to explore this issue. However, I
> > will not persuadeanyone to universalize one&#39;s thinking,
> > insomuch as one is blind to themerits of a case which is as
> > particular as Jamia blasts. I believe the caste issue,
> > particularly in India, isa separate issue and cannot be in any way
> > compared to Jamia blasts. Hencean overarching common argument does
> > not hold.
> > Regarding Chandramohan&#39;s argument. You will recall that in
> > my firstresponse to your mail on this thread, I had specifically
> > mentioned thenames of Satyendra Dubey and Manjunath. Both were
> > ex-students oftheir institutions, both were involved in activities
> > that lay outside thepurview of their institutions and both of them
> > were killed. Yet thedirectors of their former institutions took an
> > initiative to help set upformal bodies to advocate justice for
> > them. Just as Prof.Hasan hasdecided to do so.
> >
> > I have no objections, none whatsoever, if bodies like AIDC are
> > setup to defend and insist on a fair trail for Jamia blasts
> > accused.However, in the non-event of setting up of such a body, I
> > welcome theinitiative taken up by Prof.Hasan and wish that accused
> > will be given afair trial. I send you and everyone else on this
> > list good wishes for festivities next week.
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Nazo
More information about the reader-list
mailing list