[Reader-list] NO CAVILING AT GUJARAT'S HARD FACTS

Fri May 28 16:36:11 IST 2010

Bipin which Ahmedabad camp have you visited recently? I am ready to go along
with you and would also like to show you some of these camps. Tell me which
day is comfortable for you Bipin? I am in Vadodara. Please respond. There
will be lot of others as well who can come along with us to show their
respective camps.

Anupam

On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Britta Ohm <ohm at zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:

> Wasted interest is an interesting term, I only know of wasted time.
> Off Relief Road in the old city (round the corner of the House of MG)
> you find the headquarters of the Ulema-e-Hind, a very accessable
> though delapidated place whose staff will be happy to take you to
> Madni Nagar, in Ramol, just South East of the city centre. Ask for
> Shaikh Bey, who I very much hope is in good health. If you want it
> more posh, go to Satellite and ask for the Janvikas headquarters, they
> have a meticulous documentation of all 69 camps that existed in
> Gujarat 2007, when I was there, and the six in and around Ahmedabad.
> I'm sure Gagan Sethi will arrange for you to visit the Haji Majid Kaka
> camp in Halol/Panchmahal, which is maintained by them, or Citizen
> Nagar, which is also in Ahmedabad, Bombay Hotel. I'm happy to go with
> you any time but would prefer to donate the money I would have to
> invest for a ticket to India at this point. So, do you think you can
> manage witthout me? It's easy, really.
>
> Am 28.05.2010 um 10:55 schrieb Bipin Trivedi:
>
> > Please come to Ahmedabad and show me 'semi permanent' camp practically
> > exists, we can visit together to verify it. Can you come along with
> > me? As
> > such no such camp practically exists. NGO's in Bombay keep it exists
> > on
> > paper just to take fund nothing else. THIS IS WASTED INTEREST,
> > Britta try to
> > understand.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Britta Ohm [mailto:ohm at zedat.fu-berlin.de]
> > Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 1:33 PM
> > To: anupam chakravartty
> > Cc: Bipin Trivedi; sarai list
> > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] NO CAVILING AT GUJARAT'S HARD FACTS
> >
> > And if you could also tell us, Bipin, how people that officially do
> > not exist can enter surveys and take part in elections? Or, for that
> > matter, file FIRs? Teesta Setalvad does not run any NGO in Gujarat but
> > a documentation centre in Bombay, the camps are maintained by a
> > thankfully long list of organisations, reaching from Janvikas via the
> > Sarvajanik Relief Committee, the Islamic Relief Committee to the
> > Ulema-
> > e-Hind. None of the relief and rehabilitation efforts has been
> > supported by the Gujarat government, of course, how can you support
> > what does not exist?
> >
> > Am 28.05.2010 um 08:06 schrieb anupam chakravartty:
> >
> >> Bipin,
> >>
> >> If you could tell us what was the alternative rehabilitation offered
> >> by
> >> Gujarat government? Are you referring to the speeches made by Modi
> >> during
> >> 2002 election campaign when he was asking Muslims to go back to
> >> Pakistan?
> >>
> >> Anupam
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Bipin Trivedi <aliens at dataone.in>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear Britta,
> >>>
> >>> Because few NGO's of wasted interest (for ex. Teesta NGO, proved
> >>> her wasted
> >>> interest) wants to keep this issue alive for ever want to maintain
> >>> these
> >>> camps for ever. Gujarat government offered them alternative
> >>> rehabilitation
> >>> far back, but they did not accept it and playing in the hand of
> >>> Teesta like
> >>> people. So, how can Gujarat government acknowledge it officially.
> >>> It is
> >>> absolutely baseless that they are not in any survey. Most of them
> >>> voted in
> >>> the elections.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> Bipin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: reader-list-bounces at sarai.net [mailto:
> reader-list-bounces at sarai.net
> >
> >>> ]
> >>> On Behalf Of Britta Ohm
> >>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:27 AM
> >>> To: Pawan Durani
> >>> Cc: sarai list
> >>> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] NO CAVILING AT GUJARAT'S HARD FACTS
> >>>
> >>> I also have a few questions:
> >>>
> >>> a) Numbers being as stretchable to the creation of myths as any
> >>> other
> >>> source, what about the displaced inhabitants of the 70 'semi-
> >>> permanent' camps scattered around Gujarat, not officially
> >>> acknowledged
> >>> by the Gujarat government and maintained by NGOs (a few of which I
> >>> visited in 2007)? The Muslim inhabitants' voter IDs and ration cards
> >>> have to a large degree never been replaced, which means they would
> >>> never figure in any 'proper' survey. Does the physical displacement
> >>> and statistical/legal erasure of nearly 200 000 Muslims not
> >>> constitute
> >>> a 'hard  fact'? Or is it precisely the necessary basis of 'hard
> >>> facts'
> >>> creation?
> >>>
> >>> b) At what political and psychological price has this numerical
> >>> mystery been achieved? How many legal cases have been withdrawn
> >>> under
> >>> what pressure? How many Muslims are imprisoned without seeing a
> >>> lawyer, or even knowing their case? What rights were sacrificed in
> >>> return for acceptance in employment? How many residential areas were
> >>> 'voluntarily' vacated (or not reclaimed) in order to not provoke
> >>> further exclusion? Which topics of learning and education have been
> >>> dropped so as to be admitted to higher education? What do the
> >>> numbers
> >>> of primary schools close to a 'Muslim area' tell about kids'
> >>> discrimination? Any minority that knows it can't do anything to
> >>> profoundly change its situation will cooperate to the best of its
> >>> abilities - and after a while, helped by the outer circumstances
> >>> that
> >>> play off 'cooperative' against 'non-cooperative' members - possibly
> >>> truly believe that it is doing really well and even start to
> >>> discredit
> >>> 'non-cooperative' members of the same community. After all, it's
> >>> their
> >>> fault if they do not progress and make their lives difficult, and
> >>> they
> >>> better learn to adjust lest they soil the new good reputation of
> >>> those
> >>> who cooperate willingly and see the advantages. The deal is
> >>> psychologically extremely straining but at the core dead simple:
> >>> inclusion for justice.
> >>>
> >>> The pogrom of Gujarat was not classified by the UN as an attempted
> >>> genocide because of the number of victims but because there was no
> >>> other way of doing categorical justice to the uncompromising will to
> >>> kill the Muslim minority. Everybody knew that it was, because of
> >>> their
> >>> numbers, impossible to 'get them all'. Modi's 'success' thus lies
> >>> not
> >>> in the pogrom itself but in having been able to employ it as a means
> >>> of ending the 'communal/minority problem' on another level. The
> >>> numbers of success and inclusion suggested here correspond with
> >>> claims
> >>> and imaginations of fair and supportive minority politics. Nice. But
> >>> how should this be possible after a genocidal attack and the same
> >>> government in power? There are just things that do not go together,
> >>> whichever way you turn them, because they are humanly impossible, so
> >>> there have to be found other, more human explanations. And looked at
> >>> the 'hard facts' this way, it simply is more likely that they
> >>> express
> >>> the 'actual' and realistically pursued outcome of the pogrom, namely
> >>> the renunciation or created sheer impossibility of democratically
> >>> claiming human and minority rights.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Am 26.05.2010 um 13:26 schrieb Pawan Durani:
> >>>
> >>>> Any idea of recent communal riot in Shahpur , Ahmedabad....I dont
> >>>> see anyone
> >>>> discussing that.
> >>>>
> >>>> pawan
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:43 PM, anupam chakravartty <
> c.anupam at gmail.com
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Bipin,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have a few questions for you: When was the Sachar committee
> >>>>> report filed?
> >>>>> Was there any such committee before Sachar to assess the condition
> >>>>> of one
> >>>>> particular community as mentioned in your post? Do you think a
> >>>>> comparative
> >>>>> analysis is required in ascertaining the conditions prevalent in
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> community now and then?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks anupam
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Bipin Trivedi <aliens at dataone.in>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> To an editorial published in the Indian Express on May 22
> >>>>>> titled "
> >>>>>> <http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hard-facts-to-face/622193/>
> >>>>>> Hard
> >>>>> facts
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> face" the Gujarat Government had sent a letter in response
> >>>>>> stating
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> factual position regarding the status of Muslim in Gujarat.
> >>>>>> <http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hard-facts/623677/0> A part of
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> letter
> >>>>>> was published in the Indian Express dated May 26, 2010. The
> >>>>>> complete
> >>>>>> version
> >>>>>> of the letter that was sent to the Editor Indian Express is
> >>>>>> enclosed
> >>>>>> herewith so that you will be conversant with the real hard facts.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Refer link:
> >>>>> http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hard-facts-to-face/622193/0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No caviling at Gujarat's hard facts
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> How do Muslims fare in Gujarat? They fare much better compared to
> >>>>>> other
> >>>>>> states. The objective study by the Prime Minister's high-level
> >>>>>> committee
> >>>>>> headed by Justice Rajendra Sachar, appointed by Prime Minister Dr
> >>>>> Manmohan
> >>>>>> Singh in 2006, indicates that Muslims in Gujarat perform and fare
> >>>>>> much
> >>>>>> better when compared with other states in several key indicators
> >>>>>> such as
> >>>>>> education, employment, income and access to critical
> >>>>>> infrastructure. The
> >>>>>> editorial in the Indian Express dated May 22, 2010 is mostly
> >>>>>> based
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>> perceptions and anecdotal evidences rather than hard facts.
> >>>>>> However the
> >>>>>> facts below speak for themselves.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In trying to make out a case for Muslim children being given a
> >>>>>> raw
> >>>>>> deal
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>> primary and upper primary school enrolment facts that has placed
> >>>>>> Muslims
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>> Gujarat on the top of literacy ladder have been totally ignored.
> >>>>> According
> >>>>>> to Sachar committee report the percentage of literacy of Muslims
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>> Gujarat
> >>>>>> is 73.5 per cent, the highest in India. It is pertinent to note
> >>>>>> that this
> >>>>>> is
> >>>>>> much higher than that of national average of 59.1 per cent and
> >>>>>> also the
> >>>>>> percentage of literacy of Hindus in Gujarat which is 68.3 per
> >>>>>> cent. Even
> >>>>>> Muslim women in urban areas of Gujarat have average literacy
> >>>>>> rate 5
> >>>>> points
> >>>>>> higher than the national average and rural Muslim women are far
> >>>>>> much
> >>>>> better
> >>>>>> with their literacy rate of 57 per cent as compared to the
> >>>>>> national
> >>>>> average
> >>>>>> of 43 per cent. If Muslim children are not provided education how
> >>>>>> can
> >>>>>> Muslims in Gujarat attain the highest literacy rate in the
> >>>>>> country?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> During 2009-10 the enrolment of Muslim children has been 6.45 per
> >>>>>> cent
> >>>>> (as
> >>>>>> against 4.7 per cent reported). It should be kept mind that this
> >>>>> percentage
> >>>>>> excludes the enrolment in Madarsas and also some of the private
> >>>>>> schools
> >>>>>> which do not provide segregated data. The very fact that Muslims
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>> Gujarat
> >>>>>> have the highest literacy rate in the country proves that they
> >>>>>> have
> >>>>> access
> >>>>>> to education much better than in other states. If you look at
> >>>>>> Muslim
> >>>>>> education attainment those who have passed the primary stage are
> >>>>>> 74.9 per
> >>>>>> cent way ahead of the national average 60.9 per cent. In the
> >>>>>> category of
> >>>>>> those who passed secondary education Gujarat at 45.3 is ahead of
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> national average of 40.5 per cent. Even in the category of those
> >>>>>> who have
> >>>>>> passed higher secondary level Gujarat with 26.1 per cent is ahead
> >>>>>> of the
> >>>>>> national average of 23.9 per cent. In the average years of
> >>>>>> secondary
> >>>>>> schooling provided between the age group of 7-16 once again
> >>>>>> Gujarat with
> >>>>>> 4.29 per cent is ahead of the nationa Your reference to Juhapura
> >>>>>> area of
> >>>>>> Ahmedabad lacking schools due to "gradual disentitlement and
> >>>>> ghettoisation
> >>>>>> of Gujarat's Muslims" is specious to the say the least as the
> >>>>>> facts prove
> >>>>>> otherwise. There are eight high schools out of which three are
> >>>>>> government-aided schools. In Juhapura and surrounding areas there
> >>>>>> are 13
> >>>>>> municipal primary schools funded by the state government and
> >>>>>> also 15
> >>>>>> private
> >>>>>> schools. Far from being ghettoized there is ample opportunity for
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> Muslim
> >>>>>> children to enroll themselves.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Secondly it has become a knee-jerk habit of secularists to pooh-
> >>>>>> pooh the
> >>>>>> good governance of the state of Gujarat. And as to your question
> >>>>>> if "his
> >>>>>> fabled governance genius translate into a better life for those
> >>>>>> his
> >>>>>> politics
> >>>>>> rejects?" the answer is clearly in the Sachar report which has
> >>>>>> called the
> >>>>>> bluff of those who have tried to besmirch Gujarat.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In the very social sectors which your editorial cites as the
> >>>>>> indicator of
> >>>>>> percolation of development to the minorities, Sachar Committee
> >>>>>> report
> >>>>>> reveals the performance of Gujarat is far better than many other
> >>>>>> states.
> >>>>>> The
> >>>>>> document also reveals Gujarat is far ahead in terms of providing
> >>>>> education
> >>>>>> facilities and health facilities. If we take the case
> >>>>>> availability
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> schools in villages where there is Muslim population Gujarat is
> >>>>>> far ahead
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> the national average. In the category of villages with
> >>>>>> population of
> >>>>>> Muslims
> >>>>>> more than 2000 all the villages have education facility as
> >>>>>> against
> >>>>>> 98.7
> >>>>> per
> >>>>>> cent national average. In the category of 1000 to 2000
> >>>>>> population,
> >>>>>> 99.9
> >>>>> per
> >>>>>> cent villages have education facilities as against the national
> >>>>>> average
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>> 95.4 per cent. In the category of less than 1000 population 98.6
> >>>>>> per cent
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> the villages have education facility as against the national
> >>>>>> average of
> >>>>>> 80.4
> >>>>>> per cent.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> When we consider the availability of medical facilities in
> >>>>>> villages,
> >>>>> where
> >>>>>> Muslim population is more 2000, 89.9 per cent of the villages
> >>>>>> have
> >>>>> medical
> >>>>>> facilities as against the national average of 70.7 per cent. In
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> category
> >>>>>> of 1000-2000 population, 66.67 per cent of villages have medical
> >>>>> facilities
> >>>>>> against the national average of 43.5 per cent. In the category of
> >>>>> villages
> >>>>>> less than 1000 population, 53 per cent of the villages have
> >>>>>> medical
> >>>>>> facilities as against the national average of 20.2 per cent.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Even in the case of other indicators such as road connectivity,
> >>>>>> availability
> >>>>>> of pucca approach road etc Gujarat is far ahead of national
> >>>>>> average and
> >>>>>> many
> >>>>>> other states. Even on per month per capita income of Muslims is
> >>>>>> more than
> >>>>>> the Hindus of Gujarat in rural areas. For Muslims it stands at Rs
> >>>>>> 668
> >>>>>> compared to Rs 644 for Hindus (SCs Rs 527 and OBCs Rs 594). This
> >>>>>> is much
> >>>>>> higher than many other states for example Andhra Pradesh (Rs
> >>>>>> 610);
> >>>>>> West
> >>>>>> Bengal (Rs 501); UP (Rs 509); Karnataka (Rs 532); MP (Rs 475) .
> >>>>>> The per
> >>>>>> capita income of Muslims in urban areas is also higher than the
> >>>>>> national
> >>>>>> average and many other states. (see Sachar report). The
> >>>>>> prosperity
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> Muslims in Gujarat when compared with other states is reflected
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>> terms
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>> the bank account wise average deposit. For instance Gujarat it
> >>>>>> is Rs
> >>>>> 32,932
> >>>>>> compared to West Bengal Rs 13, 824, Assam Rs 26,319 to cite a few
> >>>>> examples.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you take the employment of Muslims in critical departments of
> >>>>> government
> >>>>>> such as home department, state transport dept and even in public
> >>>>>> sectors
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> percentage of Muslims occupying high posts is higher in Gujarat
> >>>>>> when
> >>>>>> compared with other States. Just to cite an example in Gujarat
> >>>>>> where the
> >>>>>> percentage of Muslims is 9.1 the proportion of Muslims in high
> >>>>>> posts is
> >>>>> 8.5
> >>>>>> per cent whereas in West Bengal where the Muslim population is
> >>>>>> 25.2 per
> >>>>>> cent
> >>>>>> the proportion of Muslims is merely 1.2 per cent.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> To discuss on each and every parameter to establish that Muslims
> >>>>>> fare far
> >>>>>> better in Gujarat is neither required nor possible to enumerate
> >>>>>> in a
> >>>>>> letter.
> >>>>>> Your editorial mentions that Modi should be open to verification
> >>>>>> of his
> >>>>>> claims of inclusive development. The above mentioned facts
> >>>>>> clearly
> >>>>>> demonstrate that better governance in Gujarat has been translated
> >>>>>> into a
> >>>>>> better life for all the people in Gujarat, including the
> >>>>>> minorities. Your
> >>>>>> editorial recommends open verification of the claims. The high-
> >>>>>> powered
> >>>>>> committee appointed by the Prime Minister has to a great extent
> >>>>>> not only
> >>>>>> verified the claims but also clearly established that these
> >>>>>> claims
> >>>>>> are
> >>>>>> true.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _________________________________________
> >>>>>> 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/>
> >>>>> _________________________________________
> >>>>> 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/>
> >>>>>
> >>>> _________________________________________
> >>>> 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/>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------
> >>> Dr. Britta Ohm
> >>>
> >>> Institute of Social Anthropology
> >>> University of Bern
> >>> Laenggassstr. 49a
> >>> 3012 Bern
> >>> Switzerland
> >>> +41-(0)31-631 8995 (main office)
> >>> +41-(0)31-631 8997 (direct line)
> >>> britta.ohm at anthro.unibe.ch
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Solmsstr. 36
> >>> 10961 Berlin
> >>> Germany
> >>> +49-(0)30-69507155
> >>> ohm at zedat.fu-berlin.de
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _________________________________________
> >>> 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/>
> >>>
> >>> _________________________________________
> >>> 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/>
> >>>
> >> _________________________________________
> >> 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/>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------
> > Dr. Britta Ohm
> >
> > Institute of Social Anthropology
> > University of Bern
> > Laenggassstr. 49a
> > 3012 Bern
> > Switzerland
> > +41-(0)31-631 8995 (main office)
> > +41-(0)31-631 8997 (direct line)
> > britta.ohm at anthro.unibe.ch
> >
> >
> > Solmsstr. 36
> > 10961 Berlin
> > Germany
> > +49-(0)30-69507155
> > ohm at zedat.fu-berlin.de
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________
> > 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/>
>
> ---------------------------------------
> Dr. Britta Ohm
>
> Institute of Social Anthropology
> University of Bern
> Laenggassstr. 49a
> 3012 Bern
> Switzerland
> +41-(0)31-631 8995 (main office)
> +41-(0)31-631 8997 (direct line)
> britta.ohm at anthro.unibe.ch
>
>
> Solmsstr. 36
> 10961 Berlin
> Germany
> +49-(0)30-69507155
> ohm at zedat.fu-berlin.de
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________
> 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/>
>