Thursday, December 30, 2010

UNION HOME MINISTRY ADMITS MISTAKE IN SENDING LETTER TO BUDDHADEB BHATTACHARJEE


CLICK TO ENLARGE

FORWARD BLOCK: P. CHIDAMBRAM WRITES TO BUDDHADEB BHATTACHARJEE TO SHAMEFULLY APPEASE WHIMS OF MAMATA BANERJEE

CLICK TO ENLARGE

BUDDHADEB BHATTACHARJEE STRONGLY REFUTES CHARGES OF P. CHIDAMBRAM WHO NOW DEFENDS MAOISTS TO SAVE TAINTED UPA GOVERNMENT BY APPEASING MAMATA BANERJEE

D.O. No. 119-CM

December 28, 2010

Dear Shri Chidambram,

Kindly refer to your secret letter dated 21/22 December, 2010 which had been published in the media before it reached my office on 27.12.2010 at 11 A.M.

Your assessment of the situation in the State of West Bengal is surprising and is far from an impartial overview of the situation. Maoists have spread from across the bordering states and with the help of small section of local people are creating problems mostly in 28 police stations in three districts of West Bengal. They are trying to create their own areas of dominance. They are indiscriminately killing political opponents and even innocent people. They are attacking police stations, police camps and looting arms. They are also engaged in large scale extortions and other unlawful activities.

You are fully aware of these activities of the Maoists. The greatest challenge is how to contain the Maoists and defeat them finally both administratively and politically.

In recent times State and Central Police through their joint efforts have achieved major successes. Peace and normalcy have been restored in vast areas. People who were evicted earlier are going back to their homes. Govt/Panchayat office are functioning normally and so are the schools, markets and shops. Life is gradually coming back to normalcy in these areas but still we have problem in the areas bordering our state. Trinamool Congress which was earlier maintaining secret contacts with Maoist leaders and outfits are now openly organising meetings with them.

CPI (M) and it allies are trying their best to resist the Maoists by mobilizing people against them and in the process have lost more than 170 of their workers and leaders. Unfortunately, you are now blaming them for the present state of affairs. I am afraid it will divert the attention of all concerned who are struggling against Maoists, the greatest threat to our internal security.

As regards political clashes mentioned in your letter I would like to correct your figures. 32 Trinamool Congress supporters have been killed and 601 have suffered injuries while CPI (M) have lost 69 of their cadres and another 723 have been injured. Indian National Congress has lost one of their supporters and 111 have been injured during the period mentioned in your letter. I, however, agree that it is not a happy situation and I am doing my best to stop these senseless killings. I have repeatedly appealed to all the opposition parties to cooperate. All the parties except Trinamool Congress have come forward to cooperate. Trinamool Congress has refused to talk to administration. I am trying to disarm and demoblise all armed groups engaged in violence in some pockets of the state.

I strongly object to your using the word “Harmed” to mean the CPI (M) party workers without knowing the actual meaning of this nasty word coined by Trinamool Congress leaders.

More when we meet.

With regards,

Yours sincerely,

Sd/-

Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee

Shri P. Chidambram

Union Home Minister

New Delhi-110 001

Sunday, December 26, 2010

EGYPT PARLIAMENTARY POLLS - Yohannan Chemerapally

IT was a foregone conclusion that Egypt’s long ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) presided over by president Hosni Mubarak would once again win a thumping majority in the elections that concluded in early December. Ever since the NDP was founded in 1978, it has been consistently winning over two-thirds of the seats in parliament. This time, the NDP completely swept the board, decimating the opposition. After the NDP won 209 of the 221 seats in the first round of elections, the main opposition parties decided to officially withdraw from the second round. The turnout was said to be extremely low, even by Egyptian standards. Only one out of ten of eligible voters is said to have cast their ballots although the government is claiming a higher turnout. Many opposition supporters who bothered to turn out for the polls, according to reports, were prevented from exercising their ballots.

The biggest loser in this year’s elections has been the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) which despite boycott calls from some opposition parties and prominent Egyptian leaders like Mohammed ElBaradei, decided to contest. In the first round, it failed to win a single seat. In the last elections, the party had won most of the seats it was allowed to contest. On December 1, the MB along with the secular Wafd Party announced that they would not be participating in the second round of elections. The MB in a statement said that the elections were marked by “fraud, terrorism and violence carried out by the police and thugs”. The Obama administration has issued a statement saying that it “was disappointed” by “the numerous irregularities of the poll”.

WASHINGTON’S INTERFERENCE

According to Egyptian human rights groups, the elections saw a number of violations, including vote rigging, violence and obstructions against opposition candidates. The Egyptian government has criticised Washington for its interference in the “internal affairs” of Egypt. The Obama administration had initially called on Egypt to hold “a fair and free election” and allow international observers to monitor the polls. A senior Egyptian foreign ministry official was quoted as saying that “it is as if the United States has turned into a caretaker of how Egyptian society should conduct its own policies”. Washington has now accepted the results of the flawed elections without much of a murmur. Egypt, along with Israel, is among the largest recipient of American aid. But as the Egyptians went to the polls, the gap between the rich and the poor has only widened further. 12 million of Egypt’s poor live on less than $1 a day.

The electoral decimation of the MB could have a long term impact on Egyptian politics. The MB was the biggest opposition bloc in the last parliament, having won 88 seats in the 2005 elections. Most observers had said that the MB would have won many more seats if it was allowed to put up more candidates by the authorities. The elections of 2005 were relatively freer. The Egyptian government, like other government in the region, was under pressure from the Bush administration to embrace multi-party elections. One of the reasons, George W Bush had given to justify the Iraq invasion, was to spread democracy in the region. His secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, had famously said in a 2005 speech in Cairo that for 60 years the US had “pursued stability at the expense of democracy in the Middle East and we achieved neither”. But after the victory of Hamas in the only fair and free elections held in the region, Washington has apparently had a change of mind on the issue. The Hamas in Palestine is considered an offshoot of the MB. The Obama administration seems to be keen only on expanding the “circle of democracy” to Latin America and East Asia, to isolate countries like Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia and China.

Electoral results in Egypt have not been necessarily a reflection of popular will. Less than a quarter of the population turned out to vote in the last elections. Stringent electoral laws have ensured that a genuine opposition party is not allowed to challenge the monopoly of the NDP. In the elections held five years ago, the country’s largest opposition party—the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) was allowed to field their candidates in a larger number of seats. The MB still remains formally banned but is allowed to put up candidates without the party tag.

ELECTORAL MALPRACTICES

This time, most of the candidates put up by the MB were not allowed to register by country’s Higher Election Commission, handpicked by the government. During the 2005 elections, the elections were held under judicial supervision. But after a series of amendments of the Egyptian constitution, this year’s elections were held without judicial supervision. This fact, according to the opposition and independent observers, facilitated widespread electoral malpractices, which benefited the ruling party. The vote was shortened from three days to one, making it difficult to monitor electoral skulduggery. In the run-up to the elections, the Egyptian minister of state for legal and parliamentary affairs, Moufid Shehab, had predicted on several occasions that the MB would come a cropper in the elections. The NDP spokesman had said that there was no need for the Party “to rig elections” as it is “very strong”.

The MB wilting under government threats had scaled down the number of seats they wanted to contest to 135. In 2005, they had nominated 205. The Election authorities finally allowed the candidature of only 107 MB candidates despite the strength of the national assembly being increased to 508. A court in Alexandria had ordered that ten MB candidates who were debarred by the High Elections Commission should be allowed to contest. The Election Commission took no notice of the court order. 64 seats are now reserved for women. According to the MB spokesman, thousands of their workers and supporters were detained before the elections there were restrictions on the freedom of assembly. There were numerous clashes involving the MB and the police, many of them bloody with the authorities using rubber bullets. “We try to campaign in the streets, we get pushed into alleys. After we’re pushed into the alleys the police are waiting there to beat us”, a MB member of the outgoing parliament told an American newspaper. The Egyptian security establishment justifies its actions on the ground that the MB uses religious slogans like “Islam is the solution” to mobilise its supporters.

Most independent observers are of the view that the MB continues to be the most resilient party in Egypt despite having to function in a legal and political limbo for the last six decades. It is described as the world’s most influential Islamist party. In parliament, the party had played the role of a responsible opposition raising issues of concern to the ordinary man on the street. The MB led the opposition in the demands for the repeal of the draconian Emergency laws which have been in place since the assassination of president Anwar Sadat in 1981. The law allows the state to routinely arrest dissenters and political opponents. Most observers of the Egyptian political scene are united in their view that genuine democracy can only be achieved with the participation of the MB. The engineered results of the parliamentary elections may not augur well for the future, especially as the country seems to be on the cusp of a generational change of guard.

Presidential elections are scheduled to be held in early 2011. President Mubarak, who is 82 and ailing, has not yet announced his candidature for an unprecedented sixth term in office. The buzz in Egypt is that he is keeping his seat warm for his businessman son Gamal Mubarak. As Egyptians on the street joke, Egypt has been enjoying “Eid Mubarak” for the last thirty years continuously and could very well enjoy another thirty years of the same, if the transition blueprint is implemented. The 2005 constitutional amendments make it difficult for a non-NDP candidate to seriously make a bid for the presidency. Mohammed ElBaradei who was being viewed as a credible challenger has been virtually silenced by a barrage of innuendos in the state controlled media. According to Egyptian and Arab commentators, the results of the 2010 elections will make it easier for the NDP to foist Gamal on the presidency. The new national assembly is already being described as “Gamal’s parliament”.

Source: www.pd.cpim.org/

BUTCHERS AND RAPISTS PATRONISED BY MEDHA PATKAR, ARUNDHATI ROY, MAHASWETA DEVI BURN BOOKS AND MURDER INNOCENT PEOPLE

CLICK TO ENLARGE

Sunday, December 19, 2010

ON BIHAR ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS 2010 - Sarvodaya Sarma

THE Bihar state committee of the CPI (M) reviewed the results of the assembly elections 2010 in its meeting at Patna on December 6-7. Polit Bureau member S R Pillai and Central Secretariat member Hannan Mollah attended from the centre. This preliminary review is to be followed by a detailed review of results by district, local and constituency level committees and concerned branches before the state secretariat and state committee meets again for a comprehensive and concrete analysis and necessary corrective measures.

The meeting noted that the CPI (M) tried to present an alternative based on Left unity and the Left parties tried to arrive at an adjustment of seats. There was complete adjustment of seats between the CPI (M) and the CPI, and joint campaign was conducted in Begusarai district and a few other constituencies. But despite their best efforts, the CPI (M) and the CPI could have only partial adjustment of seats with the CPI(ML). The CPI (M) and the CPI (ML)contested against each other in seven constituencies whereas the CPI and CPI (ML)clashed in 17 constituencies. Also, this partial adjustment of seats was reached quite late, when the election process had already begun. Except for a joint appeal and a joint press conference, there was no joint campaign and the message of Left unity could not be taken to the grassroots level. So we were unable to get advantage though the coming together of the Left sent a good message to the people. The experiences of Kerala, West Bengal and Tripura suggest that Left unity is a result of long-drawn class struggles and mass movements along with a common political agenda. Bihar has not been able to reach this stage.

However, the state committee was of the view that the decision to align with other Left parties was correct and the CPI (M) will continue to strengthen the Left unity in future as well. The landlord-bourgeois parties have not been able to solve the basic problems of the people; in fact the situation is going from bad to worse. Left unity alone can give a concrete alternative in the concrete situation of Bihar. In order to strength the democratic movement, the CPI (M) and other Left forces will have to present themselves as genuine opposition in Bihar.

ELECTION RESULTS

The results of assembly elections were decidedly in favour of Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP combine and they got far more seats that than they had expected. The majority of 206 in a house of 243 is indeed a massive majority and there is little scope for parliamentary opposition in such a situation. The Laloo Prasad Yadav-led RJD-LJP combine could get only 22 and 3 seats respectively. Even the recognised leader of opposition needs the support of 10 per cent of seats in the assembly. So, with only 22 MLAs, RJD leader can only depend on the favour granted by the ruling parties. The former chief minister and leader of opposition, Mrs Rabari Devi, contested from two seats and convincingly lost both. The Congress was reduced to 4 from 9. The Left too suffered heavily, with only the CPI succeedingd on Bachchawara seat from Begusrarai where there was unity of the CPI (M) and CPI at the grassroots level. The CPI (M) could not save its lone seats of Bibhutipur (Samastipur). The CPI (ML)too failed to get a seat though it had 5 MLAs in the last assembly.

However, the victory of the JD(U)-BJP combine is not at all matched by the percentage of votes they obtained in these elections. The combine got 39.07 per cent votes as against 85 per cent of the seats. The JD(U) got 20.45 per cent votes and BJP 15.65 per cent in 2005 elections which increased marginally this time --- by 2.12 per cent votes for JD(U) and 0.84 per cent for BJP. But the JD(U) seats increased from 88 to 115 and the BJP seats 55 to 91. The alarming rise in the number of BJP MLAs in Bihar assembly will be a challenge for the secular forces. The BJP has gained more though the principal architect of the ruling combination is Nitish Kumar.

The RJD vote percentage has been reduced by 4.61 per cent to 18.84 per cent and LJP’s by 4.26 per cent to 6.74 per cent. Together, they lost about 9 per cent votes. In 2005, the RJD-LJP had 54 seats while now they have 25.

The Congress collected all the criminals and turncoats to contest all the 243 seats. It was able to increase its vote percentage for 6.09 to 8.37 per cent but its strength in the assembly got reduced to more than half.

Except the CPI (M), other Left parties lost in vote share by 0.95 per cent, as shown in Table I.

TABLE I

2005

2010

Votes

Seats

Vote

Seats

CPI (M)

0.68

1

0.71

CPI

2.09

3

1.69

1

CPI(ML)

2.37

5

1.79

Total

5.14

9

4.19

1

The BSP got 3.2 per cent, SP 0.55 per cent and NCP 1.82 per cent, but they all failed to get a seat. The independents’ vote share increased by over 4 per cent and they got 6 seats for a 13 per cent vote share.

The strength of various political parties in the new assembly in terms of contesting candidates, seats won, polled votes and vote share is as shown in Table II.

TABLE II

Parties

Contested

Won

Total Votes

Per cent of Votes

JD (U)

141

115

65, 61,930

22.58

BJP

102

91

47, 75,501

16.49

RJD

168

22

54, 66,693

18.84

LJP

75

03

19, 57,232

6.74

Congress

243

04

24, 30,623

8.37

CPI

56

01

4, 90,815

1.69

CPI (M)

30

00

2, 06,601

0.71

CPI(ML)

106

00

5, 18,415

1.79

BSP

239

00

9, 29,428

3.21

NCP

171

00

5, 28,241

1.82

JMM

41

01

1, 76,400

0.61

Independents

1342

06

13.00

Among the Left parties, the CPI (ML) contested 106 seats, CPI 56 and CPI (M) only 30. The CPI (ML) clashed with the CPI (M) in 7 seats and polled fewer votes than the CPI (M) in 6 out of 7 seats. The CPI (ML) also clashed with the CPI in 17 seats but polled less votes than the CPI in 14 out of 17. The hollowness of the CPI (ML)claim was thus proved beyond doubt. It is reported that the CPI (ML)also carried out anti-Left campaign in various constituencies. Some of their leaders were overheard saying that they only wanted to defeat the CPI (M) or CPI candidates because this will enable than to have the Left space. The smaller Left parties, such as SUCI-C, AIFB-Subhash and MCPI contested 12 seats and secured only 14888 votes.

WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION

The increased participation of women in this election was an important feature: 54.85 per cent of the women voted as against 50.77 per cent of the men. The average polling recorded was 52.71 per cent. In 2005, 47.03 male voters had participated as against 44.09 per cent female voters. Women voters outnumbered men in 23 out of 38 districts in Bihar. More than 60 per cent women voted in 9 districts. Some of the reasons are: reservation for women in panchayati raj institutions or in recruitments of teachers etc; girl’s uniform and bicycle scheme; welfare schemes for women.

The region-wise election results are as follows:

TABLE III

Total

JD(U)

BJP

RJD

LJP

Congress

Left

Ind.

Tirhut

49

24

21

2

0

0

0

0

Saran

24

10

12

2

0

0

0

0

Mithilanchal

30

11

11

7

0

0

0

0

Koshi

13

10

01

2

0

0

0

0

Patna-Bhoj.

43

20

16

6

1

0

0

1

Magadh

26

16

08

1

0

0

0

1

Munger

22

14

05

1

0

0

1

2

Bhagalpur

12

06

04

1

0

0

0

0

Simanchal

24

04

13

0

2

3

0

2

Total

243

115

91

22

3

4

1

6

The JD(U)-BJP gained substantially only after the first phases of elections as is evident from the fact that the RJD got 7 out of 30 seats in Mithilanchal and the fact that the JD(U)-BJP got only 4 and 13 seats out of a total 30 seats in Simanchal. The JD(U)-BJP leadership and mass base closed ranks, overcame their internal division and discord, and voted massively in favour of Nitish Kumar as soon of the chances of RJD-LJP appeared improving.

CONCERN FOR LEFT UNITY

The CPI (M), CPI and CPI (ML)had adjustment of seats for the first time in Bihar during the 2009 Lok Sabha elections. As the Jharkhand assembly elections approached, the CPI again went with the RJD. When the CPI (M) initiated talks for seats adjustment with the CPI for Bihar elections, they proposed an adjustment with the RJD also, which we rejected in the beginning itself. The CPI took a long time to decide to finally go with us. The CPI (ML) too took a long time to give up their sectarian line of going alone.

When the CAG reported against the Nitish government regarding the financial irregularity of 13,000 crore rupees, and the JD(U)-BJP assaulted the opposition members brutally in Bihar assembly and council, Left parties came together to launch a movement against it. In course of joint action, we initiated talks for seat adjustment for the coming elections. The Left parties took a long time to conclude the talks. The complete adjustments of the seats between the CPI (M) and CPI could be possible only when the central leadership prevailed. The dispute with the CPI (ML) continued as reported earlier. The electoral process had begun. So the Left unity remained formal and could not advance beyond a partial adjustment of seats, a joint appeal and a joint press conference.

The election results clearly show that Left forces are gradually declining in Bihar, which requires serious introspection. We have to launch struggles independently and jointly, build our organisation and raise the political consciousness of the people.

A new dimension was added by the Left during the elections. The questions of land reforms, bataidari laws, pro-people development, poverty alleviation and welfare schemes such as MGNREGA, food security, PDS, Indira Awas, etc were debated during the elections. All the major political parties were against taking pro-poor policies. The RJD took an anti-people stand on issues like land reforms, bataidari and reservation for women etc. But Bihar is undergoing a churning process today and people are looking for a radical alternative based on pro-people agenda.

Courtesy: People’s Democracy