[Reader-list] Reply to Rajen's Concerns

[A.K. Malik]

Dear Mr Qadar,
               Each one of us is entitled to have his views/beliefs the way we want to keep up.Certain Inquiries are known to be farce but somewhere there has to be an end to the controversies.Some even didn't have faith even in the Supreme Court verdict on Parliament attack accused even disputing the legal process.Differing with the Reports/Inquiries is a matter of individual opinion,even the judges of the SC differ with each other for the same facts of the case, but making farce of each and everything not suitable to the individuals is another thing.In a democracy everyone is entitled to have his views/opinion and to profess the same as well.
Once I had a bet with one of my friends and he lost but would not agree on any proof given by me. He said he would lose only when he accepts the proofs given by me and he would never accept anything so he had never lost any bet.Mr Kadar and Mr Rajen can keep their views/opinion and I see a similarity on the anology given.None would ever lose.
Regards,

(A.K.MALIK)


--- On Wed, 7/22/09, ambarien qadar <ambarien at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> From: ambarien qadar <ambarien at yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: [Reader-list] Reply to Rajen's Concerns
> To: "ambarien" <ambarien at gmail.com>
> Cc: "reader list" <reader-list at sarai.net>, "vikalp" <vikalp at yahoogroups.com>, "cac delhi" <cacdelhi at yahoogroups.co.in>
> Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2009, 11:39 PM
> Dear Rajen,
> In response to my mail on The Batla House Encounter, your
> query was:
> 'now that National Human Rights Commission has given clean
> chit to the
> encounter and the deaths as a result of that encounter at
> Batla
> House,Delhi,  what is the response from all the rights
> activists who have
> always different take on different "faiths" and religions."
> and the human if
> belonged to different faiths.?
> Here is what we think:
> No to Farcical Enquiries; Shame on the NHRC for its
> Partisanship
>  Jamia Teachers’ Solidarity Group rejects the NHRC’s
> report on the Batla House ‘encounter’, which gives a
> clean chit to the Delhi Police. The NHRC claims that on the
> basis of the “material placed before us, it cannot be said
> that there has been any violation of human rights by the
> actions of police”.  Indeed, we would like to know what
> material was placed before the NHRC for inspection. The NHRC
> enquiry into the case, one will remember, came far too late,
> and that too at the insistence of the High Court. For
> months, the NHRC refused to take any initiative to
> independently enquire into the ‘encounter’ which several
> civil rights groups, including JTSG, deemed suspect.  The
> NHRC enquiry was carried out in an inexplicably secret
> manner; even applications by residents of Azamgarh to depose
> before the Commission were not acknowledged by the NHRC. If
> people of Azamgarh, the family members of the accused and
> killed boys, civil rights groups
>  who have been working and campaigning on the issue were
> never heard by the Commission, we wonder what was the
> material that was placed before the Commission. It appears
> that NHRC, like the Lieutenant Governor prior to this, was
> satisfied by hearing the police version alone.  The JTSG
> Report, Encounter at Batla House: Unanswered Questions, a
> damning indictment of the police version had been submitted
> to the Commission earlier this year. By ignoring all
> contrary voices, the NHRC has proved itself to be a brazenly
> partisan body, and damaged its own standing and independent
> credibility.In its bid to carry out the dictats of the
> State, the NHRC even chose to forgot that the Delhi Police
> had consistently violated even its own guidelines about
> encounter killings. Worse still, a body which is supposed to
> act in the interests of the human rights of the country’s
> citizens, pronounces that an ‘encounter’ did not involve
> any human rights violation only
>  tells us about its flawed and distorted understanding of
> human rights and subverts the very basis of its
> guidelines. Manisha Sethi and Adeel Mehdi on behalf of the
> JTSG, July 22 09.Your other query was:
> 'The hue and cry raised for the youths for detention was so
> immense, but not even a whimper for Prajna Thakur who is
> detained with false "accusations"? Why the human rights
> activists who were hoarse in crying for Binayak Sen have
> lost the voice for the detention of these 11 humans without
> evidence, is it because the faith do not teach violence but
> relifion and men who are religious have a role to impose
> their will on others in any guise, be it"human right" or
> vote bank.? Is the rights of the terror accused different
> from those involved in
> terror.?'
> I don't think I shall ever frame the question as broad and
> general as you do. But yes, we should all think and decide
> what we consider worth fighting for.
> CheersAmbarien Al Qadar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the
> city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net
> with subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list 
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>